Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-13-2004 Council PacketAGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 13,2004,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (•) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Publie Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/Amend COn^!''" **=PTING SEP t 3 2904 CITY OF ORONO RECOGNITION 2. Jean Mabusth - Resolution APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 3. Regular Council Meeting of August 23,2004 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Rick Rice, Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Roland Jurgens III, Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS — (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 4. James Render, 1335 Tonkawa Road - Building Height - Appeal of Administrative Decision 5. #04-3010 Theodore C^ra, 3534 Ivy Place - Variances - Resolution 6. #04-3044 Jennifer Simon, j925 Cherry Avenue - Variances - Denial Resolution 7. #04-3046 Robert and Brenda IvlacDonald, 2480 Old Beach Road - CUP/Variance - Resolution MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 8. Purchase of Brush Chipper 9. Request For Final Payment - Stubbs Bay Project CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 10. Adopt Preliminary 2005 Tax Levy and Budget - Resolution 11. Selection of Dates for Truth in Taxation Hearings 12. Donation Acceptance - Orono Police Department CITY ATTORNEYS REPORT LICENSES • 13. Kennel 14. Special Event - Hope Chest For Breast Cancer & Lawful Gambling - Resolution 15. Special Event - Long Lake Fire Department - Steak Fry 16. Temporary Liquor License - Orono Lions • 17. BILLS AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 13,2004,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 2m 09/14 - Primary Election, Tuesday, 7:00 a.m. - 8:00 p.m. 09/20 - Planning Commission Meeting, 6:00 p.m. (Council Liaison - Jim Murphy) 09/27 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 10/04 - Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. (Council Liaison - Jim White) 10/06 - Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m. 10/07 - Council Woric Session, Thursday, 5:30 p.m. 10/11 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 10/18 - Planning Commission Meeting, 6:00 p.m. (Council Liaison - Mayor Peterson) 10/25 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. : iI r 1 i L Public A ttendance Meeting D ate C ouncil □ Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other Please fill outthe information requested BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 1.. 2.. 3.. 4.. 5. 6.. 7. 8. 9. 10. U.. 12.. 13.. 14. IS. :\AdM4nlMrsti«« SnppncfHFnrmipf nBlk AitrmianM.wpd I S ;1 ■■ I 4 !! 'M i r i 1; M A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO JEANNE MABUSTH FOR DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION NO. MPCTING SEP 1 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO WHEREAS, Jeanne Mabusth has serv'ed this community with distinction during her four and half years as a member of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, she provided outstanding leadership to the Commission as Chair from April 12,2004 to June 30,2004; and WHEREAS, her years of service have been marked by exemplary' dedication to the best interests of the community; and WHEREAS, she has earned the admiration and high regard of those with whom she has worked; and WHEREAS, the performance of her duties and responsibilities as a member of the Planning Commission has been characterized by excellent and constructive contributions to the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Orono docs hereby express its sincere appreciation and thanks to Jeanne Mabusth for her distinguished service to the community and does also highly commend her for the manner in which she has carried out her duties and responsibilities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council extends to her best wishes for continued success in her future endeavors. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 13ih day of September, 2004. ATTEST: i Rachel Dodge, Deputy Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 23,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. COllMru n^pPTiMr: SEP 1 3 2004 CITY OF Ohun O ROLL The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Acting Mayor Jim White. Council members Jim Murphy, Lili McMillan, and late arrival Bob Sansevere; City Attorney 'fhomas Barrett; Representing staff were. Planning Director Mike Gaffron, Planners Melanie Curtis and Janice Gundlach, Public Service Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Kristi Anderson. Mayor Barbara Peterson, City Administra.or Ron Moorsc, and City Engineer Tom Kellogg were absent. Acting Mayor White called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/Amend Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. Regular Council Meeting of August 9,2004 Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to approve the Minutes of August 9,2004, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Paul Pesek Pesek had nothing new to report; however, commented that coyote problems are increasing. Pesek questioned how to handle the animal control problem. Murphy indicated that the Council would take the problem under advisement and direct staff to speak to the police and DNR regarding the best w'ay to handle the issue. Pesek added that a small trail accessing Lowry Woods along the fence line from the Luce Line has come to his attention as a way for the City to gain access to the park property. He indicated that he would investigate this further. Ha\ing received a recent phone call from a resident in the area. Acting Mayor White asked whether the LMCD still parks its harvesting haulers at Lydiard Beach or whether the pnvate haulers parking there have permission to be there. Gappa stated that the private haulers do not have permission to park at Lydiard Beach and have, in fact, been chased out of the area on numerous occasions. He stated that since the gate has been opened, the haulers have been parking there without permission. PAGE 1 of9 I * '« k I’ MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 23, 2004 7:00 o ’clock p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Jim Leslie Leslie indicated that he had no report but would remain tor questions. LMCD REPORT - Debora Halvorson The LMCD report was removed as Representative Halvorson was not prc.sent. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 3. #04-3029 MICHAEL KEAVENY, 3423/3425 SHORELINE DRI\’E - COM3IERCIAL SITE PLAN AND VARIANCES - DENIAL RESOLITION NO. 5218 Gundlach explained that the applicant had submitted an application for a conunercial site plan review in order to conduct improvements to the existing building. She :iu;*cated that the Planning Commission voted 7-0, at their July meeting, to deny the applicant’s request due to the proposed new use not being a permitted conditional or accessory use within the B-1 zoning distnet, and also based on not wanting to allow expansion of the existing non-conforming bowling alley use. Gundlach stated that staff would recommend the Council uphold the Planning Commission position for denial. Keaveny stated that he wished to amend his application, which would eliminate the construction of a new entrance or an expansion of the building, but instead would remodel the intenor of the bowling alley utilizing a storage garage w ithin the existing structure for further expansion of the bow'ling alley. Keaveny stated that these changes to the proposal would eliminate some of the original variance requests and. as he was told when he first approached the City, a remodel could be granted approval more readily. While remodelmg would likely be acceptable, Gundlach stated tha; the remodeling changes Mr. Keaveny mentioned should be submitted in a new application process and would need to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. She was hesitant to comment on the game room, since this use would require an amendment to the existing code. Since the applicant was abandoning his original request. Attorney Barrett suggested that the City Council vote to deny the original application and allow him the opportunity to go back to staff to discuss the remodel submittal. Murphy thanked Mr. Keaveny for his efforts to improve the property; however, suggested he align himself with an attorney who would be able to advise him on what might be appropriate for the neighborhood. Having seen several proposals from Mr. Keavcn> in the past, and wanting to support a viable proposal. Murphy w ished Mr. Keaveny luck in developing a new plan. Murphy moved, McMiUaa sccooded, to adopt RESOLI TION NO. 5218, a Rcsolatioa deayiag a commercial site plan review for 3423/3425 Shoreline Drive. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0 PAGE 2 of 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 23,2004 7:00 o ’clock p.m. *4. #04-3034 ROBKRTP. MACK, 1580 SIXTH A VEMTE NORTH-CONDITIO AL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 5219 Morphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLIITION NO. 5219, a Resolution granting a conditional use permit in order to construct a berm consisting of approximately 5,600 cubic yards of fill at 1580 Sixth Avenue North. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *5. #04-3037 WAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB, 430 OLD I.ONC LAKE ROAD - VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 5220 Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLIITION NO. 5220, a Resolution granting an accessory building area variance and conditional use permit for Wayzata Country Club’s Grounds Department at 430 Old Long Lake Road. \’OTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *6. #04-3040 DEAN AND SHERRY LUNDBLAD, 1290 ARBOR STREET - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 5221 Murphy moved, .McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLUTIO.N NO. 5221, a Resolution granting a 21.2’ side street setback from an unimproved right-of-way where a 50’ setback is required in order to construct a detached garage at 1290 Arbor Street. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *7. #04-3041 REBECCA HOLZEM, 3407 EASTLAKE STREET - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 5222 Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLUTIO.N NO. 5222, a Resolution granting 0-75' setback hardcover and 75-250' setback hardcover, lot width, lot area, lake, creek rear street, and side street setback variances fur the property at 3407 EastLake Street. VOTE: Aves 3, navs 0. *8. #04-3043 JOHN C. HOL.M AND SUSAN .M. KERBER, 1485 BAY RIDGE ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 5223 Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, adopting RESOLUTION NO. 5223, a Resolution approving the average lakeshore setback and side setback variances for the residence located at 1485 Bay Ridge Road. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. PRESENTATION 9.2003 COMPREIIENSI\'E ANNUAL FINANCTAL REPORT - KEN .MALLOY Ken Malloy, of the ('ity’s auditing firm, presented an overview of the 2003 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. He indicated that the audit was completed in June and provides the City with a tool for reviewing its financial records and testing its compliance w ith state law s and regulations. Other than one minor finding, w hich was the use of public funds for employee recognition, Malloy complimented the City on its great job of keeping on top of state rules and regulations. PAGE 3 of 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 23,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. Council member Sanscvcrc arrived at 7:25 P.M. With regard to the management report, Malloy pointed out that the City has relied little on State paid Local Government Aid, or property tax credits, which is good, since the State is struggling with huge deficits, resulting in levy limits at the City level and cutbacks in Local Government Aid. Malloy indicated that Orono’s tax as applied to tax capacity is less than half of the state average tax rate as compared to other cities, but pointed out that Orono has a higher lax capacity. In addition, Malloy noted that Orono’s general fund revenue including property taxes is more than the slate average. The City’s overall expenditures per capita appear to be less than the state average. Malloy pointed out that although safety expenditures are greater than the average; this is due to providing service to other cities. These expenditures are off set by revenues from the shared services. He commented that the General Fund appeared to be in good condition. On the other hand, Malloy urged the city to keep an eye on the golf course operations, since they had been operating at a loss for the past few years, not unlike other municipalities. With regard to the audit itself, Malloy stated that the Cit\'’s financial records arc well kept and in need of few adjustments. He added that the compliance testing has been positive and noted that the only recommendation he might suggest would be that the audit process begin earlier in the year to allow for implementation of recommendations the current year. San.severc asked when this should be performed and whether it would be a hardship for Fmancial Director Kuehn to begin the process earlier. Malloy suggested the audit process be performed in April for presentation in May. Kuehn pointed out that additional hours would be necessary to implement the new ‘GASB 34 reporting model’ for the next year and indicated that the City strives to begin the audit in Apnl but is short handed. Murphy asked how the expiration of le\7 limits in 2005 would impact cities, and what other cities are doing. He commented that some residents suggest a tax increase in the current low tax rate Malloy stated that he had not seen an increase in taxes to offset the State Aid cuts in most cities; however, certain ser\ iccs and expenditures have been cut back. He pointed out that cities must find more effective and efficient ways of sharing costs and ser\iccs and cauUoned the Council not to rely on the State to turn things around. Murphy asked Malloy or Kuehn to explain the ‘under run’ on the City’s expenses and questioned whether this was a good idea. Kuehn explained that the under run was due in part to public safety positions that were unfilled for a portion of the year. In addition, the paving budget was cut in half and the superintendent of public works retired which lefi an opening there as well. PAGE 4 of 9 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 23, 2004 7:00 o ’clock p.m. Acting Mayor White pointed out that, based on the expenditures per capita, Orono appeared to be in line with state averages, albeit lower on parks and higher on public safety. PltBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT - moved to proceed item #10 II. ACCEPT QUOTATIONS FOR BIRCH LANE IMPROVEMENTS Gappa explained that ba.scd on the uncertainty of obtaining easements required for project construction in a timely manner, and two quotes returned to the City that came m at $75,000; the plan will be split into two phases. Without review'ing the entire project, Gappa stated that the l” phase to be completed this year would be to reconstruct Birch Lane with concrete curb in order to provide improved drainage of the water to Baldur Park Road intersection. Completion of the second phase next year will allow for drainage from the north and south sides of Birch Lane to North Ami Bay by the installation of a 10" pipe in the City right of way on the west side of Baldur Park Road. McMillan a.sked what the timeframe for completion would be if approved and how long the project would take. Gappa indicated that the first phase could be completed by the end of October and would take approximately 3-4 weeks to complete once started. Betsy Nusbaum, 34SO North .Shore Drive, raised a concern expressed to her by one of her neighbors, Ed Engler at the top of Birch Lane, who inquired how long he would be inconvenienced to access his driveway. Although the road would be drivablc, with the City focusing on one side at a time, Gappa stated tliat parking would be dif ficult and encouraged neighbors to share driveways during portions of the work. Sansevere found it offensive that the neighbor appeared to be blaming the Nusbaums for the redevelopment project along Birch Lane. He suggested the Nusbaums encourage any neighbor's to contact the City or Gappa with their questions and not force them to be the go between. Sansevere commented that, if neighbors’ concerns have not been addressed they should ’ve considered attending one of the numerous public meetings held on this project thus far. .Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, io accept the quotation from Midwest Asphalt, Hopkins Minnesota, io the amount of $49,997.60 for construction of the Birch Lane Drainage Improvements. Project to be funded from the Stormwater I'tility Fund with a budget adjustment to the 2004 Stormwater I'tility Fund budget to reflect this expenditure. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT - CONTINUED 10. #04 .30.19 CITY OF ORONO, 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY - REVISIONS TO ORONO ZONING CODE: FLOODPLAIN AND WETLANDS MANAfiEMENT - ORDINANC E NO. lb..!'" SERIES PAGE 5 of 9 J r p MnsrUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 23, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. Curtis revicw'cd the history regarding the mandatoiy revisions to the floodplain regulations within the Floodplain and Wetlands Management Ordinance to be adopted by September 2, 2004 by local governments. If Council finds certain elements of the ordinance in need of further study, Curtis suggested that the Council consider removing those for review over the next few weeks. Sansevere asked if staff had any concerns regarding the proposed changes. Curtis stated that the Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the draft ordinances. Sansevere moved to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 16, 3*''* SERIES , revisions to Orono Zoning Code: Floodplain and Wetlands Management as presented. White seconded. Murphy had several questions regarding the wetland portion of the regulation changes and suggested the Council hold a work .session to discuss the ramifications of this piece of the ordinance should the City choose to adopt the MCWD version regarding buffers. He was concerned that by adopting the MCWD descriptions, as opposed to becoming its own LGU, the City might inadvertently be painting itself into a comer. He preferred to gain an understanding of exactly what the City' was buying into relying on the MCW’D, before agreeing to the terms. Gaffron suggested the Council separate the floodplain and wetland codes into two separate issues. He agreed that this would be the City’s opportunity to separate out wetlands from floodplains and analyze the impacts of the MCWD’s interpretations of the code’s language. Gaffron stated that, although the City needed to adopt the Floodplain ordinance this evening, wetland options might be to impose a moratorium on wetland work until the City holds its discussions or adopting the ordinance within the packet this evening and then taking time to review and amend it after the fact. Murphy reiterated that he felt the Council must understand what they are approving before endorsing the MCWD wetland ordinance. He was concerned with the way the watershed ordinances were going in their interpretations of the code and wanted to spend more time discussing options to move w ater. He was fearful of items #3 and 4 of the summary of the w etland Ordinance changes that allow staff or individual MCWD member, at their discretion, to impose a slop work order on a project if they think it may be posing an adverse effect on a w etland. McMillan felt the ordinance took a positive step in applying the ordinance to new development and redevelopment. Murphy pointed out that there is an issue w-ith the Morrie’s lot at the intersection of Highway 12 and Old Crystal Bay Road, w'ho has lost developable land after having been given approval two years ago, and been cited w ith a stop work order by the MCWD due to a ditch that they believe is a wetland now. Acting Mayor White agreed that this is a serious issue and should be discussed further. Peter Johnson, Mome’s Mazda Attorney, intetjected that two years into theu" project the MCWD has decided to call a publicly maintained ditch, that was an engineered water channel created to move water, a wetland. PAGE 6 of 9 Hi- , . . T.* MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 23,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. ’Sansevcrc asked whether the entire MCWD body had decided to label this ditch a wetland, or if an individual has taken it upon themselves to determine this. Peter Johnson stated that the wetland const-n ation act itself states that if it is a cnan made condition created to improve water flow, it is not a true w-etland. Charlotte Lipa, 3490 North Shore Drive, stated that she was interested in leamH;p about the process the City uses to determine wetlands and setbacks. Murphy repeated his as.sertion that the Council must look at the MCWD or staffs ability to look at a land use application and determine whether it has adverse affect on a wettand and the philosophy behind this assumption. Gappa agreed that it is oflen difficult to determine where the MCWD ‘.■.iands on development when they refuse to become part of the proress until late in the developmenv game. Marphy amended the earlier motion to adopt the Floodplain-partion of the Ordinance only. Sansevere seconded the amendment to the motion. McMillan urged staff and the Council to hold the work session to discuss the wetland issues soon as they pertain to new and rc-dcs<lopmcnt. She agreed furth-R' exami'-ation was necessary’, but also felt that the City must be respectful of maintaining its wetla»jd>; and w jtcr quality. Sansevere asked whether thr had the ability to ovemde the MCWD authority regarding the Mome’s judgment. Gaflron stated that, until the City takes away the authcTity that it gave the MCWT), the City must abide by their rules. Attorney Barrett concurred, stating that the City delegated the MCWD with independent jurisdiction. In addition, he suggested that sections 1 and 2 of the summary of the Floodplain Ordinance be included in the motion Marphy added Section 1 and Section 2 from the Summary of Ordinance No. 16, third Series, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 78 of the Orono Municipal Code by Deleting Sections 78- 1100 through 78-1176 and by Adding New Sections 78-1100 through 78-1140, regarding Floodplain Management, to his earlier motioa. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Gaffron questioned whether the City Council saw the need to impose a moratorium on writing permits for wetland work during the discusMons. Murphy moved, Mc.Millan seconded, that due to the lack of a wetland management Ordinance, Ordinance No. 17, 3'^ Series Is adopted establishing a moratorium on activity involving wetfands as they are defined in the w'etland conservation act, will be imposed until the C'ity Conncil is able to adapt a new wetland management plan. \'OTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PAGE 7 of 9 ■I , i iMdi MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 23,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. MAYOR/CITY COUNCIL REPORT Sansevcrc stated that a Lydiard Beach resident had contacted him regarding an adjoining neighbor to the beach who has been infringing too much on City property. He suggested that staff review a recent survey and make a determination. Murphy stated that, while the improvements are appreciated, it is the fact that this neighbor has gone so far as to yell at residents to get off the grass and put in a sprinkler head on public property that is offensive. Acting Mayor White suggested Gappa speak to the neighbor and mark the park boundaries with signage. Murphy stated that he received an anonymous letter which questions how the funds that Orono is paying to the City of Excelsior for Fire serticc are being used. He indicated that the City ol Otono has no jurisdiction over the Excelsior Fire Senice and no authority over how these fees are spent. McMillan stated that the Stubbs Bay feasibility study was complete and the LMCI) would be contacting the City to schedule a presentauon. In addition, she invited other interested Council members to Join her for a meeting Thursday at 9:00 a.m. with a Bayside Road resident who has expressed a desire to conU'ibute a portion of their property to aid in stormw ater management. Acting Mayor White commended the Planning Commission on managing its w’ork load well and running effective meetings. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 12. APPOINT PARKS, OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS COMMISSION MEMBER The Council agreed that the candidates were a quality group and acknowledged that a second Commissioner would be appointed from this group at the next City Council meeting. Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to appoint Michael lluddy as the new Park Commission member to the unexpired term that expires on December 31, 2005. VOTE: Aves 4, Navs 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT Attorney Barrett had nothing to report. PAGE 8 of 9 fi MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 23, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. *13. LICENSES CLUB FIREARM USE PERMIT 1. Annual Permit for Trap Shooting Park Gun Club 3660 Sixth Avenue North RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE 2. Irene Silbcr 4625 West Branch Road SPECIAL EVENT 3.Applicant: Dan Lang Homes Event: 2004 Fall Parade of Homes Date: September 11 - October 10,2004 Time: Noon - 6:00 p.m., Thursdays - Sundays 4.Applicant: National MS Society Event: MS Challenge Walk Location: Route through Orono, coordinated with Orono Police Department Date: Saturday, September 18, 2004 Time: 8:30 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. Murphy moved, McMUIan seconded, to approve all licenses. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *14. BILLS Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADJOITRNMENT McMillan moved, Murphy seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council .Meeting of August 23, 2004 at 9:05 P.M. VOTE: Aves 4, Navs 0. ATTEST: Linda S. Vec, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor PAGE 9 of 9 COllMr'tf MCFTtMrS SEP 1 3 2004 AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2004,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, (DE0r0^,dMi)i;(f:SOTA (•) 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 are available in the Publi Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. .ROLL CALL CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/Amend ^ RECOGNITION 2. Jean Mabuslh - Resolution APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 3. Regular Council Meeting of August 23, 2004 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Rick Rice, Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COM.MENTS - Roland Jurgens III, Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 4. Janies Render, 1335 Tonkawa Road • Building Height - Appeal of Administrative Decision 5. #04-3010 TheodorcCapra, 3534 Ivy Place-Variances-Resolution 6. #04-3044 Jennifer Simon, 3925 Cherry Avenue - Variances - Denial Resolution 7. #04-3040 Robert and Brenda MacDonald, 24S0 Old Beach Road - CUP/Variance - Resolution MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT 8. Purchase of Brush Chipper 9. Request For Final Payment - Stubbs Bay Project CITV ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 10. Adopt Preliminary 2005 Tax Levy and Budget - Resolution 11. Selection of Dates for Truth in Taxation Hearings 12. Donation Acceptance - Orono Police Department CITY ATTORNEYS REPORT LICENSES * 13. Kennel 14. Special Event - Hope Chest For Breast Cancer & Lawful Gambling - Resolution 15. Special Event - Long Lake Fire Department - Steak Fry 16. Temporary Liquor License - Orono LioriS • 17. BILLS Cl MEMORANDUM To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mayor and Council From: Date: Subject: Mike Gaffron, Planning Director »/<pmNG S£P 1 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO September 10,2004 Appeal of Administrative Decision - James Render, 1335 TonkawaRoad - Measurement of Building Height Attached please find the following Exhibits for this review: A - September 2, 2004 Staff Memo & Exhibits B - September 2,2004 Letter to James Render C - September 8,2004 Letter from Applicant ’s Attorney Allen Barnard D - September 9, 2004 Supplementary Staff Memo COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Determine whether staffs interpretation of the City’s ordinances and policies is valid and appropriate. MEMORANDUM A To;Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mayor and Council * - ^ From: Date: Mike Gaffron, Planning Director September 2, 2004 Subject: Building Height Issue, 1335 Tonkawa Road - Jim Render Summ?:y of Issue Mr. Render is appealing staffs inteipretation of the City’s building height ordinances and policies as they have been applied to his proposed new residence at 1335 Tonkawa Road. A building permit has been applied for, but not issued because staff believes the proposed building height exceeds the 30' height allowed by City codes. The primary issue is the intequetation of the tenninology “average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof, and how the City has interpreted it from a policy standpoint. A secondary issue, but equally important in relation to tliis specific application, is whether the low point of measurement must be the current existing grade or a grade proposed when the subdivision was approved but never created. The peak as proposed is 49.0 feet above existing grade at thcNW comer of the relevant portion of the house. From staffs perspective, using our standard and consistent methods (codes and policies) of delennining building height for zoning puiposcs, the defined heinht of the pi opo.scd house is 36.6 feet, or 6.6 feet higher than allowed by code. However, merely cuttingoff6.6 feet from the peak will still result in a defined height of 33.3 feet. In fact, from staffs perspective, the peak would have to be lowered by 12.2 feet, i.e. be no more than 4.8' above the top of the upper level windows, in order to meet code. A re-design is obviously necessary. fhe applicant's architect wants us to go by the strict wording of the code and ignore our policy. If we do that, then staff finds the defined hciglit is still 32.4 feet, or 2.4 feet liiglier tlian allowed by code. Tliis means that 4.8' would have to be lopped off the peak in order to have the defined height be 30*. List of Attachments A • South Facade Submittal B - Applicant ’s Height Analysis C • ConcepUial Grading Plan from Original Subdivision D - Proposed Contours, Proposed Spot Elevations E • Submitted Survey Indicating Existing and Proposed Grades F • Staff Analysis; Defined Height Based on City Policy G - Staff Analysis: Defined Height Based on Literal Interpretation of Ordinance H • 11/25/02 Policy Handout 1 • Photos of Site 1} • r 1335 Tonkiwi - Height Issue September 2,2004 Page 2 Code Deflnition The building height definition in the code reads as follows: ^BuUdhtg height means the vertical distance between the highest adjoining ground level at the building or ten feet above the lowest ground level, whichever is lower, and the top of the cornice of a flat roof, or the deck line of a mansard roof, or the uppermost point on a round or other arch type roof, or the average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof. Topographic changes which elevate the adjoining ground level above the existing terrain shall not be considered in determining building height.’’ Property History This property was the middle lot ofa three-lot plat created in 1998. The 3 lots were then replatted a year later to relocate lot lines and incorporate additional land, expanding tlie two westerly lots. A grading plan proposing the creation ofa built-up building pad for this lot was provided with the initial subdivision (Attachment C) but no revised grading plan was required or provided at the re-plat stage. Based on applicant’s current submitted survey (Attachment E) the initial grading plan to raise the grade to 939.5' for the middle lot was never fully accomplished, either as part of tlte subdivision or later. The existing grade at the east end of the site is approximately 936.2 ’ where it tapers away from the home next door. The existing grade where the house will be placed ranges from 932.9' to 936.4' per the submitted surv ey, which suggests that portions of the lot were filled 2-3' when the home to the east was built. Proposed House The proposed house plans rely on applicant bringing in additional fill, resulting in a final grade along the street side of the house ranging from 943.2 ’ to 943.7', i.e. as much as 7' of fill above the highest current grade, 9' above the original highest grade, and 4’ above the liighest grade proposed with the subdivision (see Attach meat D). The applicant’s intent is to create a walkout situation fr'om what was originally a flat lot. The house incorporates a pyramidal hipped roof system at the east end that encloses the first story as well the half-story above it. This roof system includes a number of dormers. The very peak of the roof is proposed at elevation 981.9’, approximately 49 feet above the existing grade of 932.9' at that location. Height Measurement Codes & Policies The City’s building height definition clearly specifies tlte lower point for measuring building height (see definition above). However, in terms of the highest point, the determination of what constitute the “highest gable” has become extremely difficult with the complex roof systems being deigned by architects today. This topic has been a part of the Planning Commission ’s review of the issue of bui Iding heights, bulk and massing that has been ongoing since 2001. As early as February2001 staff indicated in a memo to Council and Planning Commission the policy being followed regarding determination of upper height measuring point: 133S Tonkawa - Height Issue September 2,2004 Page 3 (In regards to height dcfmition) "...this definition has been only slightly revised since its first appearance in the 1967 zoning code; the "10* above lowest ground level" provision was added in 1992, along with the sentence regarding topographic changes. See Sketches A&B. It should also be noted that this definition is sometimes difficult to interpret based on the intricate roof designs found in new homes today. For instance: In a home with multiple gables, it is sometimes difficult to determine which gable should be considered the highest. In determining the average height, staff has as a matter of policy considered that the ceiling of any usable space within a gable that contains a window, will be considered as the low point of the highest gable for height determinations. This effectively increases the defined height of such buildings and acts as a limitation on e.xcessive height for homes with steeply-pitched roofs with living space in the roof area. See Sketches E and F. There could still be an issue with how uv would treat an A-frame home, which technically might be as high as 60' to the peak and still meet code... see Sketch D." (Staff memo to PC/Council 2-14-01) While this policy has been in place and administered as noted above for many years, it has neither been fonnal ly added to the Code nor adopted as part of a Policy resolution, since staff intended that it would eventually be fomialized as a result ofihc building height, bulk, and massing discussions. It was added to the B&Z Department Policy Manual and has been our consistent inteipretation and enforcement of the ordinance for at least three years, hi Fall 2002 we also infonnally adopted a definition of half-story, since that tenn is not defined in the code. That definition and the height measuring policy are documented in a handout dated 11-25-02. The Code definition stales we measure to “the average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof. The Code does not define ‘gable ’ or ‘highest gable ’. Webster’s defines gable as “the pointed end ofahousc ”or “thetriangularpartofthecndof ahouse ”. The l.histratcd Rook of Development Definitions (Center for Urban Policy Research, 1981) defines Gab'- Roof as a . idvouf forming a gable at both ends of the building" and a Hip Roof as “a roof with sloping c: ...u sides”. None of these definitions yield a clear indication of how we should determine the highest gable of a roof The intricate roof patterns devised by architects today often do not yield an obvious “higliest gable ”. For many years (at least the past 5 yeais and we believe signi ficantly longer) City staff have considered that a roof with windows in it via dormers or end gables, that create habitable space, or the appearance of habitable space, has the impact of adding visual height to a building. Therefore, we have from a policy standpoint considered that tlie topof the windows of such an upper space will define the low point of the highest gable. This has been discussed on many occasions with the Planning Commission through the >ears, at work sessions and during public hearings at their regular meetings in relation to zoning applications. This policy was \s ritten down in conjunction with proposed definitions relating to the “half-story ” concept, in November 2002, added to the Building and Zoning Dept. Policy Manual, but never formalized. 133S Tonkawa - Height Issue September 2, 2004 Page 4 B&Z staffare quite regularly asked by architects to discuss the City ’s height measurement policy in relation to houses they are designing. We have encouraged architects to ask questions before they start design work. Application of Codes & Policies to Proposed House Lower Measuring Point 1. A strict interpretation of the ordinance would establish the lower measuring point at the highest point where currently existing grade abuts the proposed foundation. This point was initially determined by staff to be elevation 93 3.3'directly below the peak, although the elevation at the extreme west end of the foundation appears to be 936.4'. A majority of the foundation will be on ground currently at 933'-936' elevation. Tlie highest existing grade abutting the portion of the house with the high peak is 936.3' which seems to be the most appropriate low measuring point. 2. The code definition of building height is specifically worded to disallow situations where fill raises the grade to allow for a higher house. It comes into play here with the effect that the applicant ’s proposed high-side grade of 943.7 ’ cannot (and should not) be used for the lower measuring point. Staff has considered a second option for defining the lower point for measuring. We could use the proposed liighcst intended grade of939.5' shown in the conceptual grading plan at the time the original subdivision was approved. How'ever, this grade w as never created, and 1 would argue that this past approval not used is no longer valid. In discussions with applicant in early August staff had given the applicant the benefit of the doubt and had used 939.5' as the lower measuring point. Upon more in-depth review, staff no longer believes tliis is appropriate. If the applicant had graded the site as proposed when the subdivision was approved, the existing height today would be at 939.5'. It was only filled to 936.3 ’. It is what it is, for zoning purposes. It would be totally inconsistent with staffs past practice to deteimine building height based on elevations proposed on paper but never existing. It would be inappropriate to use the 939.5' elevation as a low measuring point. Therefore this analysis uses 936.3' as the low measuring point. Upper Measurine Point I. The proposed house has what might be described as a ‘pyramid ’ hip roof system that in itself spans a vertical height (from lowest point of the overhang to the peak) from elev ation 949.5' to elevation 981.9'; i.e. a rise of 32.4 ’. rJ 1335 Tonktwt - Height Issue September 2,2004 Pages 2.In reviewing the proposed roof system, it became immediately clear that there are windows and habitable spaces within the pyramidal roofsystem, along with a variety of sizes and shapes ofdonners and incorporated gables. Using the policy we have consistently followed, the upper measuring point was taken as a point halfway between the top of the upper level windows and the peak. This yields an upper measuring point 9 ’ above the window edge and 9' below the peak, at elevation 972.9. (See Attacbmeot F) Height Calculation The defined height then is the difference between the upper measuring point (972.9') and the lower measuring point (936.3'). The defined height is then 972.9 - 936.3 = 36.6 ’, exceeding the 30' limit. If the 939.5' low point is used, 972.9 - 939.5 ’ = 33.4'. hi cither case, the 30' height limit is exceeded Applicant ’s Argument The applicant is basically stating that because the City’s height measurement policy is not in ordinance or resolution form, his architect was not aware of it, and it’s unfair that hi.s architect spent considerable time and money designing a house in reliance upon his own interpretation of the code, winch design City staff now find to be out of compliance with City requirements. Applicant requests that Council allow the height measurement as depicted in Attachment B. StafPs Response to Applicant ’s Argument If we adhere strictly to the literal language of the ordinance, we should use the defined lower measuring point based on existing grade (936.3') and the average height of the “highest gable ”. It is stafT s position that the highest continuous gable must be reasonably considered as that gable on the nortli side of the house that starts 26.4 feet below the peak, at elevation 955.5' (see Attachment G). The average height of that gable is then 13.2 feet below the peak, at elevation 968.7'. The heiglit going strictlyby the Code definition is then 968.7 ’ - 936.3 ’ = 32.4 ’. This still exceeds the allowed height by 2.4', and the peak will have to he reduced by 4.8' in order to meet the 30'height limit. Staff does not agree with this method of calculation, as it docs not match the long-standing policy, but it is presented to illustrate that even when the policy is not used, the building height is non-compliant. Options Tlicre is no valid hardsliip to allow the excess height, in staff s opinion. Applicant has suggested changing the peak to a ‘cupola ’ design, which might qualify for a Conditional Use Permit under Section 78-1 366 if the Council concludes any negative impacts of the excess height can be suitably mitigated. Staff is very reluctant to support such an application, based on a past history of fielding complaints by residents. Planning Commissioners and Council members about excessive residential building heights in the City. r 1335 Tonkawi - Height Issue September 2, 2004 Page 6 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Determine whether staffs interpretation of the City ’s ordinances and policies is valid and appropriate. Provide direction to applicant in regards to options he may be considering (revise design and reduce hei^t; variance; CUP; other). R e s i d nee Tonkawa Road Orono, Minnesota A -»*~V -*iS*—•“ •••• ••• ^ •■- • •%. •• ••■ .«• •• •• «•*•••, • #» X * ;— .-J , ., ..- . • A - - «— % -y V!— f,:.... r— .. «. ^ «.. , — • ^ -. . . • -to .,...--••.•■•• •< • • - - • • •• ■T • — X . ,t , . . *■» • .. . - - ^ •. • - f ff * r j •*->-4 j. irj;x: r???7' 3v /.'X - I I .,1 I irrTj -• ■ * IT • .[• N* ■—* • » i*.**'* J . ...... ,..S...» . •,. t-«- ... . .^ . _______ .^:7zv^.rr:J.v*:nr\'C.v ~. r. - • *.*: ••‘.: --V,‘.;.:V: ^!.:.;.''i’.:.-.^ [V. MAyr-*f- .": r£zC.': r. ^.'*:n: \C--4r:: • . J* ... - . - ,. ....A '• f .. , .'.«.l ^ • ..- # VT ’ ••■ ■ * - *••» • ♦,••.» r • \ =l a □ □ •- V • . • '•"•TTS.tisf ■•* • . ' t3=r» - •, ' trri-■;♦ ;•: r:j,:. .-. IX*r; '..'1. V ^ :• i . f. ..'. ..... . •• ____•___r________ teto^ •ftS2B tOH fflffl T7^Fffll ^ aWSij-lipJter;-' :l}4 'kr--pH+, I :P-, JUI- i-»Li|-'Kj;53^^^^ ffiicny3*jwTy.-J'tej; ®L SrfjiHrIhf^inS 'v'-X • -^fej^rcp RRIRP ■r«rTT ^ —y • ' r^rtrt;V-v-^ ’ I • _____ . __________________________ II ! ___•III.____________p--f.*----------------1________Tj^-----------------------------------------------1 $OWVH r A,C^.U^ {^Coo^l (hfv,\ f^u:C \“ :j . . f / w»»S // / / //w .................................... / ./ / i /^•••••••••••••••••••••••••************* • * 4 / / /■ / / # / «••••••••••••• • • • • % m4''^ ?VERlPt_l -—'' # / 954- GRAOe 9 walkout LEVEL--------- L.-1; \{ / y y’ W ............................................................................ _________________9asj» ■••' = 79 W.........................................................................../- • • • -■ — ■------------------------------------------- I mi - ^ 99353 Mu N fORCH.* li '..................-"-.....................^ I --------------ni-------------------II-----------------iT ! ■•; fI II*. II II II*. r............. *\i 11. i\. OfNER*$ III , , CEEAT I , lOOM I I I' IfTT7?3^ / V• •••••••••• •••••••••••••• ^ 955.55 y^-ryr?>r:L\'; «raa». Krrr cUrr ROOH/ LAUNDRt DO *.*-• wU. ••» fc» • W w A •.< '■ II I I I ; 1 II II I I • I I I I I I II I I I * I II I I I I 1 * ' I . -F ~ ] »* * ^ - » ‘ I I It II I 1. I < II _______II_______________I _______ ^____ii IJ ■ ^ ;• - - -, ^^'i-t5 - ^1 *• 1^*1 hall *s^JII, l^^l i'll ,lj i|V|* ••••••• •*« jll| |l|| • Ij ||| : i';! i'll :ii —r -■‘•zT i^c-c-r-c-^e'-cvi A^ •«. «« .1 I .4I A I k J' f* "m L... ^r.. s ^ I I I I . t I tbigJ_____—1--1- ^ ■ ' M ' i; :»•» ••••••••••••• •••«» ^ • —r -■‘•zT ,f ‘cc-s. - -s. -s.«. *s>t^ --S z I:. : : = r : z.rz : :S cs> Ui • i| !'i i.-'i I" ' '956 \ STAIR KALI v-rrJ-'1____________1 1-p____crzm »t«»U miAHi _______“1 II II .-J L-_______I • ••••••« CARACl / A /f V‘> /- T7yT\ i-p & Kr*;.TA *«*• 'Vi INTRT -I - .^*"i •". DlHIMC.*\i ,n. »oo«- „ , S .-■ 1'’l^ ' 1' ‘ h. ,11, H I( 1' I. > 0 945.7 !•••«•»• •« • • -J *. .1 'I i"i « * 1 -I '' f t' 1 • ••••••• • \ znjL—£ ' w c. J- I •■ <^4 0 lATM I «UI M \ X •••••• \ / »4Mt \ 945 i^. teKs^ifK CLOSETS Trrrrrrri^^ HERS i, 1^,* I'V •>. 4* ■.*, i • a ' Wf A«Vl-*r -7 -................ ..945-- >'V» f «.y.!w 4U vA|> . ------------- p7?: :*.'• » y-^. I • « • • • • I u • ••••# ------7^ o^rn * "• *« * '^■S' •>•?* -f*'*** ' 4| •. ^' “ »r,* _O tK'v -i-------U .1.^rrTTT;::• r / .......■•‘'t:;;*- r »* . A.‘ r-;t / / CoA jtoolp -^ 1 Ct , - \ .* \ \ / r ,y OP . ■ O? :■ • '*- * t'‘ fcJi-iO'y' = I OP HIPPED ROOP r. f v::-'*1 *1 • Ji •* •£■ <T5rCfr /-i / J,*v L '-f r. < I ■a/^^e U r>i '. .C-<'.,•/■-A.-...L. C •- -K ' f :0F DORMER & DINING RM WOWS T*>. ROOF PITCH ASOVE )W ARCHED SOFFIT TO BLEND INTO TYPICAL ROOF PITCH RAIN DIVERTERS ^ ^ .1- ♦,* • f ::: .' \/ v-. • «-• ?.. .4, ^ •f r* ■ •. • ^ i¥iiMriM[kifi4« >■ERmSSKSIR w PTO WO PTO WO STILES - . -J-r -PTD WO 0 DORMd >-A <^e>u9 MIO-ROOf’ V£NT wcoppEc flashing asphalt ■ SHINGLES-TYP. ~ < I r.I f ,. • ’ANEL50 WALL- FLAT PANELS W/ RAILS = 1LASTER TRIM RS-TYP. METAL P4N i FLASHING •TYP. 9 FORMERS •CCRMER jlOEV/ALL W/ V;0 PANt L FLAT PANEL W/ STILES i RAILS-TYP CTinrt;;:;S^':.ar., •;•• { ^_v __> ’ '. < ' - ‘TilL*‘’ A " --- j 1 ( fOW. K p. > PLK fieOKMS n mu. ^51S'.< r RM msM wows ^w. !/3» ___TTO:il ;t J4.fl iuePLR t tsr PtR TTPJUJil.0, - '•C‘/ ‘1 > ' ^T.4.-;;* r. 32.*^' D*( '^»rL_ Hr-; •OF HIPPED ROOF 4»-8* i^F-eORM HIPPBP ROOF, EYEBROW WOW, 1ST FLR & BASEMENT WOW GROUPINGS. <: OF DORMER, •wow GROUP t 1ST FLR & wow t BASEMENT f, f *r •»/ ,* / - i * :* C ’* ' ^ ••'**/ *\ •Xil^ ■\t r>f. -iyspWJU4i.A^ ^ L.^ .4*. V S3 :t£ YEBROWCASe- J6N MULL ,-. WITH INT WOW ; flu> >T fif. fii/.n f ‘irr A^TJrf ....j I - —, MJ... *■■ ■ - ----------------------------------------------------- issieta.vixxf.Tt, SSr^"- Sf !^=sS?i.D:gSJ!ai£ gg^miuy^^gs tfi^^ rMi KtTwkoil im^m IP-^^ SJE t^S s ^V^SW i!^ HksS. (l V * ** ^^"T* tojrrr ••' Jf' Wr::? Vr’^--VrL'.-iLL^^ rr »~'*^ T—I • . L-jjLt.'-p; CUT STONE SILL> ^3^.5 • r .r-. -*• . * . V ^ •• ► » » .» MCCH EQUIP. •-■<• J •■ <^4l«*;. -----;..r .. ,.w .. r:.>;*„. r /TT! I Eiis3 •TrCiT « I aJz yrr ggjlifllMEipy] ■IB! Hi Hi lil 37^ -4i^^ *LH r -^-^t£-Jte ia. - L.yl 'V-"• Jj I ‘%:cL„J]>^'gri?T-{ m^\ r<3B r<i3' tmi z<n>rim>i 111 lil njiLQ • ^ • m W IX wo V iRTICAL TRIM IX WO V :RTICAL MULLS -TYP. IX WO ( ORNER MULL ., -.A, • ’•;:*••••/ •* ’•;:*•• •*.• /i.; *. .i: *• .* V ■' ‘7- /* ••• / '. ' “ :/j •: />."r.; ** •« -.♦•I* f -• • a •/•«•# ,r.. vaj»^/., ., --•T •-* „.K:i;-':r... ^.m t, •(•, • .,4.'.. J •. ... .i-% 7* • -• .*. * t, , f ^ • »|« i:^ *• *j‘ • il y ptt cpar^-4TT-. 4^r-fi / □ \?:5 ______ 'aWframra] 1 luji K2) Z j. J —/v'^^rsi.T f i- -f TAPBRBO STONE PIER -SEE A2.4 M|l 7' y :•.y I-----JL-,Xr- z ! p r t ili H City of Orono 11-25-02 REVISED POLICY ON BUILDING HEIGHTS 1. 2. 3. 4. Where Orono Zoning Code limits the height of a building to “2-1/2 stories or 30 feet“, the building must meet both the story and footage limitations. The Zoning Code does not define “half-story". For administrative purposes, "half-stor/ will be defined per the following definition until this definition is added to the Code: Half Story. The uppermost floor of a building in which (i) the intersection of the exterior wall and the roof is not more than three feet above the floor elevation, and (ii) not more than 60 percent of the floor area within the exterior walls of the uppermost floor exceeds five feet in height as measured from the floor to the rafters. Floors not meeting this definition shall be deemed a story. If a property contains a living level above the second story, that living level will be defined as either a half-story or a story. If this living level meets the definition of a half-story, then the building complies with the 2-1/2 story limit. If this living level is so expansive that it exceeds the parameters to be defined as a half-story, then it is a full story and the building does not comply with the 2-1/2 story limit. When the highest living space in the building is a half-story, if the half story contains windows of any kind, including skylights, the upper measuring point for defining building height shall be the average height of the top of the highest window and the highest peak of the roof. If sdrat. • ♦ -1 I*;*? ^W.*.; r«*^.v#-, h^ . n*f y r/jirdKyi^ V), .. V '■ '■' ■' r '■ 'V,.- -'ii.'^ ■- ' 'i"* • *». * * Wv »/^v4 ‘ m ■•r-k V V/Y , Mr • C^*'*•^. *c;___ r " ■! • . ^ ■ • ** ^ •?P--iro I t « V - ..^.'.M./V j: '•‘ stev:.'. • * ; ♦ ? »* W: • “ • t/'i ’’' •' •• •• s ^ / ■■ *'" ' ^ 4 * T' L* *'• ■*' /'* ' ' ■ ‘ • • - • f mfi»K-"':V^ \ 2. o o ^ 7<5./'5V %' i CITY of ORONO Municipal Onices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Otono, MN 55356 Mailine Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 September 2, 2004 James D. Render 1315 Tonkawa Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Re: Building Height Issue Dear Mr. Render: Enclosed is a memo to the City Council providing the City staffs analysis of your building height issue. Note that one of our conclusions is that the proper low point for measuring the height is the currently existing grade (936.3') rather than the 939.5' elevation which was proposed at the time of subdivision but never realized. In order for your appeal to be heard by the Council on September 13 as Ron Moorse discussed with your attorney, your infonnation must be submitted by the cr.d of the day on Tuesday September 7. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 952-249-4600. Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffron Planning Director end. cc: Ron Moorse Tdephooe (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.ci.oroiio.iiui.us c BEST & FLANAGAN LLP attorneys at law 225 South Siiih Sirccc, SuiK 4000 MinncApolU* Minntfoti 55402-^690 Telephone 612 339 7121 ruc»trnile 612 339 5827 Mnurvt. bc'ilu\».c 0 • n LcoHofd M. Aid'ifictan N WJt«rCi(^rr AUf n 0. Pnwikfd Fnirk Vofl |ilf w. Puili'il. If. Mpmt E. Knopf John A BjftMV. Jr ]vnf9 C. Oirecici n«srf R. Rgc. If. D uu 'H L. Piotp^n R«h<n L- ]f. Judith A. 5o»itD. Ellff Charles C B«rqui«l Jume* M. Cbillltnpon E. J««eph LnV’att Cf«pry D S«uU C*il7 fL. Cntlm Piiii.ek IS. Ucnneity Timtihy A. SuUiVnii Dunn) n.^- Nclion D«fid J.2uhke tiictcn H> Krugcf ToulE Knmiiiski Roti C. FufituU Coryit S. Clovcf Mury E.Slicotcn CfttiMfo M. Ko«« CotUhne J Couimr) SofM Cnppcn Mudiaan Kobrn D. Mnhur 04i«.«J H. JehfH«n Chmiopher 0. Johnson Jill B. Uoa D»nM4 A. KpptpA Ia .»» >♦ A. SohcfTri Bttti'cjf F. Willtumt Cynihlu I- Hr^;un| Muliku) R. WwtKcf Oo« d C. Mufphy MHnn C IVdj Rclfccii A ChiJTco Ttu'niM G. Ov'ty Dtf.iJ c. 5thc)iri Dufiicl L Npicy J Kniv*eh ]o*»nr.Sc r'ff Ri'uioDej'r Donut 0» COUNVI John R. C >rr«l) Rotieii L- C«u«Ly R.«KurTl A Tourron Scott P Mom HichurlH P.Mk J4M«» I. Bt»l 1^ lOfi. Rob«n j. nufta^ttn l«%|UT4 invNorn 1020 Writers Direct Dial No. (612) 341-9715 E-Mail Address; abaroard/ffhgstlaw.com September 8, 2004 BY FACSIMILE (952-249-4616) AND MAIL Mayor and City Council c/o Ron Moorsc City Administrator City of Oror. 2750 Kelly i ^rkway p. O. Box 66 Orono, Ml"! 55323 RE; Application of James D. Render for building permit Lot 2, Block 1, Tonltavva Shores Second Addition, Hennepin County, MN Dear Mayor and City Council; I am ^^Titing to outline the situation involving my client’s application for a building permit, James D. Render ONsns Lot 2, Block 1, Tonkawa Shores, Second Addition, and wishes to build a new home on the property. Approximately five years ago Mr. Render applied to replat four lots he owiied (including the subject property) and reduce them to three lots. He now lives in the house next door on Lot 3. When he rcpiatted the property he prepared a plan that was accepted by the City showing the elevation of the portion of Lot 2 in question at 939.5 feet. When he was talking with staff a few weeks ago, they advised him that that would be the “agreed upon” lower elevation for measuring the height of his proposed home - not the 943+ elevation which would be tlje actual ground level around pan of the house. At the time of the platting there was an agreement with City personnel that it would be wise to not fill Lot 2 up to the contours shown on the plan because it probably would be necessary at the time of construction to either place additional fill or haul dirt away from the property. The City agreed that to haul fill twice would be disruptive to the neighborhood and to wail to build the elevation up to 939.5 when construction of the home on Lot 2 was undertaken. Mayor and City Council Page 2 September 8,2004 Mr. Render and his wife Denise have been working with the architectural firm of TEA2 Architects located in Minneapolis, Minnesota for the last 15 months designing a home for Mr. Render’s family. Over that 15-raonth period of time tlie architects for Mr. and Mrs. Render worked with the Uniform Building Code and the zoning and other regulations of the City to insure that the plans met all requirements of the law. In ±c process of developing the oesign for the home, Mr. and Mrs. Render spent approximately $100,000.00 in architectural fees and costs. A few weeks ago when Mr. Render’s builder, Steiner-Koppelman, applied for a building permit from the City, they were told that everything was in order except that there was a “problem ” with the height of the house. Mr. Render, his builder and architect met with City officials and for the first time were advised that there was a “policy ” which contravened City law on building height. The City ’s reliance on this “policy,” rather than the lawr of the City raises some interesting questions which are outlined below. 1. Issuance of a building permit is not a discretionary act. In general, if a person has complied with all of the laws that relate to development of a site, such as the building code, the zoning code and so forth, he or she is entitled to issuance of a building peimit. It is refen ed to as a “ministerial act ” by the City. Applicants for permits are entitled to rely on the law in preparation of their building plans and not be refused based on a discretionary policy of the City*. 2. The requested permit complies with Orono Zoning Code. The zoning code defines the highest elevation to which one measures from, among other things, as the “average height of the highest hipped loof.” Section 78-1, Orono Code. However, the “policy ” provides a different upper measuring point when the highest living space in the building is a half story. This policy contravenes existing law in the City of Orono. People are entitled to rely on the law in preparation of tlieir building plans — not on tmdisclosed policy. The Renders' proposed house complies with City Code - the law for purposes of this matter. In addition, the zoning code provision applicable to Mr. Render’s property, which 1 believe is Section 78-305 of the City Code, provides that the heigiit of any building on his * Widi respect to zoning marsas, in Chase v. Citv of Minneapolis. 401 N.W.2d408,413 (MInnApp. 1987) the court held that a city is not afforded discretion in reviewing a pctmiited use application “became approval of a project complying with the zoning code 'follows as a matter of right ” With respect to the issuance of building pomits, the courts have held that a city has no discretion to refhse to issue a peimit if the application conforms to alt requirements of the city code because issuance is a ministerial act. Snvdcr v. Citv of MiniiMnalis. 422 N.W. 2d 747 (A?p. 1988); afbn ’d 441 N.W. 2d 781 (1989) and State v. LiadouisL 214 M.W. 260 (Minn. 1927) Mayor and City Council Page 3 September 8,2004 property shall not exceed “2-1/2 stories or 30 feet” in height. The “policy*’ dated November 25,2002 indicates that where the Orono zoning code limits the height to a building of ‘2-1/2 stories or 30 feet’* the building must comply with tlic story and footage limitations. In other words, the “poUcy” changes the word “or ” to “and.” Again, this “policy ” contravenes the City Code and results in a lower elevation point for purposes of measuring. 3. Conditional Use Permit on height of structures. The City Code in Section 78-1366 provides that the height limitations imposed by other provisions of the chapter may be increased by conditional use permit by 50% when appUed to a number of structures including church spires, belfries, cupolas, and domes which do not contmn usable space, etc. The high peak on one portion of the proposed Render house is similar in nature to a cupola, a church spire or similar items which rise to a high peak, but do not contain usable space or impose a massive stmeture on the neighborhood. Included with this letter is a drawing which shows the nature of tlic proposed house and the fact that the peak of the one section of roof does not amount to an intrusion on the neighborhood. The peak or spire in the roof is ornamental in nature and an added amenity rather than a detraction. Under the c.xisting regulations the Rend'^ could have designed a house with a much more massive height and intrusion into the neighborhood. However, this peak is only omaroenial in nature and should not constitute grounds for denial of a building permit. Accordingly, we respectfully request that the City Council review the administrative decision of staff and issue a building permit for the Render home. Thardt you for your consideration of this matter. Very truly yours, Allen D. Barnard adbVrys Enclosure James D. Render Thomas J. Banetl cc: P.S. After dictating the above letter, 1 received a copy of Mike Gaffiron ’s September 2, 2004 memo to Mr. Moorsc, the Mayor and Council. I was very surprised by the negative, adversarial tone of the memo. Mr. Render thought be was woddng this out with the City and thought that it was merely an interpretation issue for Mayor and City Council Page 4 September 8,2004 consideration by the City Council - not an adversary matier. In addition, he was very surprised tiiat Mr. Oaffron now would argue for a lower measuring point than die 939.5 feet previously agreed on and contained in Mr. Render’s plat. We look forward to a full consideration of these issues by the Council and a fair and reasoned approach to them. I note that on page 5 of Mr. Gaf&on ’s memo he discusses applicant ’s argument If he were to use the 939.5 elevation as the low point, which he earlier agreed to, Mr. Render’s plan would comply even with the policy. Thank you. ADB •# * t. J .Vwr' ^ Sl.liT TELECOPIER TRANSMITTAL FORM BEST & FLANAGAN LLP 225 South Sixth Street Suite 4000 Minneapolis. MN 55402-4331 Phone (612) 339-7121 Telecopier (612) 339-5897 Date: Deliver to: From: September 8,2004 Orono Mayor and City Council c/o Ron Moorse Alien D. Barnard 952-249-4616 Message; Tliis facsimile consists of _6__pages, including this cover sheet. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ANY OF THE PAGES PLEASE CALL OUR OFHCE AT (612) 339-7121 All documents and/or infonnaiion contained in this facsimile transmission ar e confidential and intended ONLY for the recipient named above. If you are not the intended recipient, PLEASE deliver to the recipient. If you have received this facsimile in cnor, PLEASE notify us immediately by telephone to arrange for the return or disposal of tlie information. Thank you. Original to follow by mail: Yes __xx No _______ Client Number: 9410 Matter Number: 920903 Telecopier Operator: Renee MEMORANDUM ‘T-/0' V To;Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Mayor and Council From: Date: Mike Gaffron, Planning D*rector^y' |^^ a September 9,2004 Subject:SUPPLEMENTARY MEMO - Building Height Issue, 1335 Tonkawa Road My memo to Council of September 2 was prepared prior to the actual appeal letter submitted on September 8 by Mr. Render’s attorney, Allen Barnard. This memo is to respond to a number Mr. Barnard’s points, paragraph by paragraph. 2) 5) It is important to clarify that Mr. Render did two re-plattinas. The first, in 1998, re-platted parts of Lots 13-14-15, Lydiard Park into Lots 1-2-3, Tonkawa Shores. A conceptual grading plan was submitted and approved with that plat. The second re-plat, in 2000, rcplatted Lots 1 -2-3 Tonkawa Shores and part of Lot 16, Lydiard Park, into Lots 1-2-3, Tonkawa Shores Second Addition. No supplemental grading plan was submitted nor approved with this second replat, wluch significantly changed the shape and size of the two westerly lots, and functionally rendered the original grading plan obsolete. City staff do not recall, and are unaware of, any fonnal or infomial agieement to allow the fill within Lot 2 to be left lower than the originally approved grading plan. We agree with the logic, that liaving tv. o cpisotlcs of fill hauling will be more disruptive to the neighborhood. Wc don’t ha\c any basis to state that there was an agreement with regard to this. No comments. Wc disagree that the City policies on hciglit detennination “contravene” the City ordinance. Wc believe that they intemret and clarify a very gray area within the ordinance; spccifically, they help to define what is the highest gable. Re; Line Item 1. Wc don’t dispute that issuance of a building pcmiit is a ministerial act. City staff arc hired by the City to administer the ordinances of the City. When the ordinances are unclear, or can be intcq)reted in more than one way, it is the stafTs responsibility to interpret them, subject to confirmation by the City Council when necessary, in detennining whctlier the ordinances have been complied with. We believe that interpretation and administration of our ordinances in a consistent manner, as wc believe wc have done here, is clearly ministerial and does not comprise a discretionary action. i September 9, 2004 Page 2 Re: Line Item 2. The coaect quote from the ordinances is that height is measured to “the average height of the higliest gable of a pitched or hipped roof. Again, we do not believe that the policy “contravenes ” the ordinance; we believe it clarifies the ordinance. For example, aside from application of the policy, we apparently do not even agree with the applicant ’s architect ’s version of what is the Tiigltest gable’. He’s using a low point of the roof at the front of the house, elevation 952.9’±. I would use a low point of the roof at the rear of the house, elevation 955.5'+, i.e. 2.6 feet higher. If the orduiance is so unclear that we can ’t agree on where the low point of the highest gable is, it begs to be interpreted... We believe tliat the code section limiting heiglit to “2-1 /2 stories or 30 feet” has been consistently interpreted and administered for the past two decades, to require that both standards must be met. The policy statement of November 25,2002 merely clarified the interpretation that had been in use for many years; the only need for the policy statement was that in recent years architects and others have been pushing the ordinance interpretation envelope on neatly every new project that comes in the door. We disagree that tliis policy statement changes the intent or consistent administration of the code. Wc disagree that the word “or” as used in the ordinance gives an applicant the choice to meet one standard but not the other. Re; Line Item 3. If the applicant chooses to apply for a CUP for a cupola, and i f the Council finds that the peak as designed or modified can be considered as acupola, and ifCouncil finds tliat either there are no negative impacts or any negative impacts can be suitably mitigated by attaching reasonable conditions to an approval, then a CUP may be an option. The drawing attached to Mr. Barnard s letter shows an elevation view of the south facade of the proposed house. It does not allow staff to reach any conclusion about how this house relates to tlie neighborhood. For the record, staff provided Mr. Render with the September 2 staff memo prior to receipt of t^e letter of appeal, specifically because we wanted the applicant to be awaie of our revised position on tlie “existing grade” measuring point in time for him to address this issue. As to that memo being ‘negative’ or ‘adversarial ’ in nature, I would submit that it strives to clearly inform the Council of the background regarding this appeal and how City codes and policies have been and are being administered. y TONKAWA HHUKtib /?■>» i j,4 ’ iT^ •« Ul IS «it^ Mm Int itMt on pitl •I •LY0U»‘ S PAm* 100 200 I TONKAWA SHORES SECOND f • iV-* jA fjr _ ■%) .?> \• 'o ' V V v\ 'A V ' <<bL s\^*v.^ V \ ) V \ \.\.■■yy ^ ^ ^ ..i'/ dfek^ ^ -1a j'* •& V .. i!|4-# » P ■J‘ »^'! i i^'JI t Hi I ^W:1 ; ;r t i*\ 1- - ^ 1:- . ; ife34i «< te"'' ^uriar.lliiriS. |f4i LT^ * ‘ • i *> te V •.!' 1 i ^n.; ; * TE Addmicr Mty2.1998 1 of 1 Monday, September 13,2004 Jim & Denise Render 1315 Tonkawa Road Orono, MN 55391 RE: Render Residence, 1335 Tonkawa Road llie Render Residence has been designed in a traditional European cottage style. Some of the elements of this style include very low roof eaves, steeply pitched roof forms, utilizing the roof attic for bedrooms, and the use of deep>set dormers to provide l^t to these rooms as well as animabng the roof form. The massif^ of the house was a critical element m the design^ A primary goal was a desire to minimize the overall bulk and the visual impact of the second floor bednxxns on the exterior expression of the house. This is evident in the final design of the house through the use of very low eave lines (typically 7*-4** above the first floor) and the single story expression of the front of the house. Starting the roof expression at a low elevation does dramatically scale down the houses bulk while lending a human scale to the desiga The steep pitched roof of the design allows the second floor liedrooms to be contained completely within the roof form. An alternate design could have utilized a bwer pitched roof on top of a true secoiKl story. However, it should be noted that even though the peak of a steep roof like this may exceed the height of a lower pitched roof over a second story, the overall bulk is still reduced comparatively when the steep roof is brought down to a lower one-story eave line. An alternate design for this home could have utilized a true second floor, higher eave lines, and a roof form with a higher ridgclinc over the entue house while still complying with the Zoning Regubtions. Such a design would in fset be much bulkier than the proposed house. 1o reiterate, the final desigp for the Render Residence has resulted in a house that has much less bulk impact than most new suburban houses with second floors, llie design does conform to the pubibhed height restrictions in the Zoning Regulations of the Gty of Orono as well as to the definition of buddu^ height as set forth in the International Residential Code. Sincerely, Stephen Nord|gMrd. AlA 11iA2 Architects i Architects riiuott Nepp J714 4«r«| fltrr^t. M M»m <• •!•«« Its. 44410 PI J400 PI >•QIO- 14 30 fill !••«> f»««•••• fVt*«iii •«••••>■ tiii^H #!•••'ttl «lt9^«*«l#%^| W,9M Mltt«f •§«•••• •••••#« • .^•«« tl»M«» !•••••#• •#«#•#•'Mill •>••••••«•• I #ii«iit«iiai«ii»«>m«t9it«««f«i (ill ••t^tl* ••lltM MI0tr ••tllMW till r, ••••i«f #•!•( 1*1 if ••ri • • M •• »^KrB ••tiiM i^^HI lit ■»i«i«i• i*f #•••••# .............................. • !••• fiviiii' «tf««tt •#•••»#• (■•■••• (t«»iM •«•■••• •••««*•■ ••••••t latast '■*■ ••••««• •«••■•••»•••••••••• ■••! ••••••' ii ■•t»«ii ••tr*«i •■•■•!• •••••*' •■••«>! ■■■■II ■■•■III ■••■•■ >■•••• ••*'••• ■•>•••• ••■•*•• •••>••• ■•••••• ••••«■• ••••i*i •••,'. ^1 •*•• •••^•^ '^ ••••«■’•••••••l••^ ■■•■••■ ■■■•«* •••••■•■■■. ■•• ■■••••' •■••••I •■•••• •■•■•M «••■•• ■■■> - - - - j ^ . ?.v:.v.v.^ , '■•••ti ■■•.^ • •V* »<*••• Mt H^P^'****** **'****' ••••• •• •••■•• •»ll•••• •••*••• •••••«• ••*•• •••••«••• • I **•■»«I,■■■■^^^H »*•■■•*■•••••• .•!••»• ••»«••••••• ■••••• ■•••••• ••••III- l••■•l• •••••. I Ml»^» •• ^^^•••■•*ii~ ^a*. ttt^*ai •■•••■• •»» •■#«• •aaaait ^»t^t'tiata«#'f«*aaa> l••aa••M■a» r.a* •■■#••» ia» •■••••. •■••■• ■■•■••< ■■• •aiai«i •aat««t aatiiai •■••■■■ ••••' - •■•••• . .... .>....._•••••• . l•l•■t• •■••••■•■«■••• •■••«••■l■• ********** ■•■a■l•■••a v.%. rM*«*i ■■■'■■-. ' - ■—-a.... ........ II ••• 11 •“.•••.■^ lll•■ta •■••■•■ •■«■••? ••••«••••■» •»• ******* ■■•■••• •*••l••< !•••••• ••••••• •••> ••• ••■■II••• ••••». aa*aati.*#a'^« ;:wP.rj ■ l<••a•■l••« l«l■••■■■•«•^ ••■•> •■■»••• gc^|gS£i|Kg5£||^ i, Dale Application Received: 4-21*04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 6-9-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 8-8-04 extended to 10-7-04 ••cctinG SEP 1 5 2004 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: September 9.2004 Item No.: ^3 Department Approval: Name: Janice GundlachJ^ Title: Cit> Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning item Description: #04-3010, Theodore L. Capra, 3534 Ivy Place - Variance - CUP Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - IC, One Family Lakeshore Residential District ('/i acre minimum) 0.50 acres (21,926 s.f.) 104 feet ((h shoreline; 101 feet @ 75' setback List of Exhibits A - PC Action Notice dated 8-17-04 B - PC Memo & Exhibits of 8-12-04 C - PC Action Notice dated 6-22-04 D - PC Memo & Exhibits of 6-17-04 Application Summary: Applicant requests the following in order to construct a new residence on an existing lot; 1 Hardcover variance to permit 32.86% hardcover within the 75’-250* zone where 25% is normally allowed and 49% currently exists. 2. Conditional use permit to allow land alterations within the 0-75’ zone. Staff Recommendation: The lot is confonning with respect to width an area. Staff recommends denial of the hardcover variance as the project is a rebuild and should be held to the 25% hardcover limitation and no valid hardship has been demonstrated. Staff also recommends denial of the conditional use permit to allow grading within 75' of the lake. The slope at the lake is minor and not in need of any restoration. F-xisting vegetation is well established and sufTicient to protect the slope. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission has heard from this applica*it on two occasions. Both requests were for a hardcover variance and a conditional use permit for land alterations w itl in 75' of the lake. At the June 21 “ meeting the applicant requested 33% hardcover within in the 75'-250’ zone and a land alteration CUP. The Planning Commission tabled both the hardcover and CUP request and directed the applicant to reduce hardcover and work with staff and the Cit\’ Engineer for the lake yard restoration. The applicant again appeared before the Planning Commission at the August 16. 2004 meeting requesting 30% hardcover within the 75 ’-250 ’ zone (a reduction of 370 s.f. from the original plan). The applicant explained to the Commission that he had tried a number of different site plans including a detached garage and moving the house closer to the road, however could not reach the 25% hardcover allowed, at least not with a plan that would meet his needs. The Planning Commission denied the 30% hardcover request and tabled the CUP for land alterations within 75* of the lake to allow the City Engineer to conduct a site visit. The applicant now requests Council review of the original 33% hardcover site plan. The applicant has decided that the 30% hardcover site plan does not fit his needs and he must therefore again request a hardcover variance for 33% hardcover in the 75'-250* zone when 25% is allowed and 49% currently exists. Staff Recommendation Deny the hardcover request as the lot is conforming in size and should be held to the 25% hardcover limitation. Also, denial of the conditional use permit request as the City Engineer has indicated no need for grading within 75 ’ of the lake. COUNCIL AC'TION REQUESTED Several options exist for which action may be taken; 1.Table the application to allow the applicant to work towards reducing hardcover. Staff would suggest that the applicant be given a target amount as numerous plans have already been considered and rejected by the Planning Commission. This action would al.so table the CUP request. Refer any revised proposal back to the Planning Commission. 2. Direct staff to draft a denial resolution of the hardcover variance ar ' CUP request, or 3.Direct staff to draft an approval resolution for the requested 33% hardcover within the 75 ’-250* zone and denial of the CUP request, or 4.Direct staff to draft an approval resolution for the rcque.stcd 33% hardcover within the 75 ’-250* zone as well as approval of the CUP request to grade within 75 ’ of the lake. This approved grading would consist of the grading shown on attachment D of Exhibit D (proposed site plan in PC Report dated 6-17-04) upon which Planning Commission has not yet made a recommendation. w I CITYOFORONO ZONING FILE: 04-3010 p!a Box 66 **“*^'^'^*^ NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 249-4600 ^ DATE OFNOTICE:_ Aug^t lJ, 2004____ TO: Theodore L. Capra COPIES: 2849 1 lO'” Avenue NE Blaine, MN 55449 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Hardcover_Varmnce,_CondjUo^^ Use Pemit_____ DATE OF MEETING: Augus* 16,2004 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Denial of the hardcover variance request to allow 30% hardcover within the 75 ’ - 250 zone as the project is a complete rebuild, the property is conforming in area and width, and therefore should be held to 25%. Table of the conditional use permit request to allow the applicant and engineer to meet on site to discuss the proposed grading within the 0-75’ lake setback zone. VOTE: 6 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, August 23,2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m,^............ If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. It you have questions, please call Cits Piunre: Janice Gundlach at 952-249-4623. 'f r i M04-3010 August 16, 2004 Page 1 of 3 Date Application Received: 4-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete; 6-9-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 8-8-04 extended to 10-7-04 To:Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Janice Gundlach. City Planner Date:Auaust 12. 2004 Subject:#04-3010, Theodore L. Capra, 3534 Ivy Place - Hardcover Variance, Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - IC, One Family Lakeshore Residential District ('/- acre min ) 0.50 acres (21,926 s.f.) 104 feet Shoreline; 101 feet @75' Setback Application Summary: Applicant requests the following in order to construct a new residence on an existing lot; . , 1. Hardcover variance to permit 30®/o hardcover within the 75 -2a0 zone where 25% is normally allowed and 49% currently exists. 2. Conditional use permit to allow land alterations within the 0-75 zone^ Staff liecommeiulation: Staff recommends denial of the hardcover varia:ice as the project is a rebuild and should be held to the 25% hardcover limitation and no valid hardship has been demonstrated. Staff also recommends denial of the conditional use permit to allow grading within 75' of the lake. Only one poition of the slope requires restoration, which can be accomplished without grading the entire lake yard or constiucting any retaining walls. The applicant is encouraged to investigate the use of deep-rooted plant material like prairie grasses and/or wildliowers, other than turf grass, in an effort to stabilize the existing slope.___________________ _________________ List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Revised Survey Exhibit B - Revised Hardcover Calculations Exhibit C - Revised Elevations Exhibit D - Revised Floor Plans Exlribit E - Photographs Exhibit F - 60-Day Extension Letter Exhibit G - PC Meeting Minutes of 6-21-04 Exhibit H - PC Action Notice of 6-22-04 Exhibit I - PC Report of 6-17-04 Background The applicant and the applicant’s architect have met with staff numerous times since the June Planning Conunission meeting to discuss alternative site plans in an attempt to d 1^04-3010 August 16, 2004 Page 2 of 3 reduce hardcover. The applicant has reduced the size of the garage, however increased the size of the house footprint slightly. The appliezmt has also explored moving the house towards the road but doesn’t want to give up any lake views. Lastly, applicant has tried a smaller attached garage as well as a detached garage in an effort to reduce driveway hardcover. All the exercises have led the applicant to the attached revised plan. The applicant is still proposing to remove the shed located at the lake and the detached garage located at the road, as well as retaining walls within 75 ’ of the lake. The new plan consists of 30% hardcover when 33% was previously proposed and 25% is normally allowed. Tlie applicant is also still requesting a conditional use pennit in order to re-grade the lake yard. The City Engineer has reviewed this plan briefly, however has not provided any written conunents at the time this report was drafted. His verbal comments relate specifically to whether or not the slope is indeed in need of restoration. He will conduct a site visit and provide written comments, although he maintains that only the portion of the slope between the 934 elevation and the 944 elevation are in need of slight repair and the repair can be done without tlie need for retaining walls. The applicant should explore replanting the area between the 934 elevation and 944 elevations with prairie grasses and/or wildflowcrs as those plant types provide much deeper root systems than turf grasses. The Plamiing Commission should come to a consensus on whether extensive grading within the lake yard should be permitted given the City Engineer’s preliminary comments, the conditional use permit standards outlined in the previous staff report, and historically what residents have been approved to do within their lake yard. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET (changes from the previous plan have been bolded and italicized) Lot Arca/Width LR-IC Lot Area Lot Width Required 21,780 s.f (0.50 acres)100’ Actual 21,929 s.f (0.50 acres)104’ Shoreline lOr (S 75 ’ Setback Sctoacks LR-IC Required Existing Proposed Front 30 ’N/A N/A P.ear 30 ’ 99.6’ - house 11.5’ - detached garage 68 • (71’ was previously- proposed) Left Side (north)10’ 23.2 ’ - house 1.3’ - detached garage 13* (28 ’ was previously proposed) I V ^04-3010 August 16, 2004 Page 3 of 3 Right Side (south)10 ’ 26.2’ - house 73 ’ - detached garage ir (10 ’ was previously proposed) Lakeshore -------------------f 75’ 91.5 ’ - house 18.5 ’ - shed 88 ’ ( previously 90 ’ - house ) Average Lakeshore 71.5’ -98.5 ’ (going north to south) 110 ’ -94 ’ (conforming) 5.?’ (94 ’ previously) .^triicturAl Covera2<\ -----------------------------—--------------------------------------------------- Total Lot Area Total Struct irni Coverage 21,926 s.f. (0.50 acres)Allowed; 3,2S9 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 3,128 s.f. (14.3%) Previouslv Proposed: 3.208 s f. (14 6%! Hardcover Calculations , r (A ivpo was made on the on the previous repon regarding the square fooiages in euch however this typo did not affect the hardcover levels proposed. It is nowzone, concciea.; Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75 7,698 s.f.0 s.f (0%) 320 s.f.* (4%) 0 s.f. (0%) 75-250 14,228 s.f. 3,557 s.f. (25%) 7,032 s.f.* (49%) 1__ __ J ^ ^ A . A 1 A • 4,306 s.f. (30%) Previous: 4,676 s.f. (32 S6%) 1 f* t ^ r-% 1 1 o 1 driveways never approved by the City. Issues for Consideration 1 . Should this conforming lot be granted a hardcover variance? 2. What level of ground disturbance should be allowed within the 0-75’ lake yard? 3. Should the applicant be encouraged to reduce the footprint of the house, which is cuiTcntly proposed at 2,288 square feet, not including the garage even though the structural coverage requirement is met? Staff Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the hardcover variance and conditional use permit request. The applicant should be encouraged to reduce the size of the house and/or garage. Staff also recommends denial of the conditional use permit request as currently presented. Following a site visit from the City Engineer the applicant will be directed to an alternative solution for restoring the slope located between the 934 and 944 elevations. BPWr -r—"-^r-^^trr^-irrfiiiniL^ iw^Tif- ir^^TTi^M p* r—- fo Be neMovep • ..-t ? . ............... .......... ro/«-"v-sa V5iw«,VvS;«£" «c- «:^'>'V\- V- «n3*2l ^ V' 24.93 \>^V^ • lA' I#' .Nii :; ‘ .ao^ ^1• exhibit a SlrTCl 5i 5^ve•D<^ ^ VJAt/t' li <0 06 set to ptMOV^SD £XlSPNCjD^‘-rR?«/ mmm I ![ I BASDCovm^m^'no^oBSSi^, SETBACK zorm: (CmOEOm EXHIBIT B 500-1000' S.F. A. Bouse Length WUbJt X X ■ X SI es S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway X X S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk ^*Te>X X S.F. S.F. E. Patio/Dedc X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape f2g>T- Underiain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. C. Other --- S.F. TOTAJ. HARDCOVER IN ZONE - TOTAL PROPmTYAREA IN ZONE " ^ __S.F. • A % ^2^ pk OPOSED fTARDCOVF.R, IB ZQHh A. House S.F. Length Width X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway X X S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. Patlo/Dedc X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastis Or Fabric h 4 X X X ar tn S.F. S.F. S.F. A it G. Other S.F. !>.<■ total hardcover in zone - total PROPEiar AREA IN ZONB^ ^ A __ xJCO - h S.F. A S.F. *7' B ______^ IP SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE)0-75' EXISTING mrnvnit IN ZONE . A. House •X ljtne± X X •X B. Ccrage • X C. Dmewcy •X X jy. Sidewalk X X £. Padc/Deck X X F. Landscape X Underlain X By Plastic Or Fabric X G. Other X ^bsseeet 250-500'SOO-IQOO* ron^S.F. WtdOi S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ST. S.F. S.F. 5.r. total HARDCOVER mZONE - total PROP^REAJNZONn^ ^ ^ 1 o32»“ 5.F. 5.F. a' rtncovER IN zom A. House X Length X X X B. Garage X C. Drtteveoy X X D. SidcAialk X X E. Patio/Deck • X X F. Lardsct^e Underlain X X By Plastic Or Fabric O. Other X X •^2-&a> S.F. Width S.F. S.F. S.F. ■ IZ-C* S.F. lDS0'g!a^5.r. S.F. S.F. S.r. S,F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. total EARDO)VER IN ZONE - — S.F. A Tii^‘2^ S.F. B ~ ^ % I I MIR in?nfis Lake TkJLev^motA ^^/a-pp^A O CFf^^'^ a.S'S'^ IVV VV/-^ZATA ' R«v/.S-*"®^ 5rr*-etrT Gioe" : 4 P. cn o l!> m X X m H o JjlL r A C li \ 5VcaA« I I u 7 t-O ,4riei-t rLcx’e- r*' 2Z8S^ Houst'.{fTJ^PX 1 <6.0 • 3^0^’r4i TbT/*(— X k laiHtMitaMi^iAiiMliik HiM ' >, I j cr r f Vf- \* , V * w' > s • V 'V .rr«4^ ■^'1/ -'v^ »fvl vlliV »> r ,^r ^ > W, ■ • ‘ . ^4/ '' V S > • . ty * * KiA^r. /•X- • P-- V' ,-r^. <f < ■ * .' ^« " '^-f-V I'S., If.' *, »i '//• t ,t < r'r,N : ic '• r •'■ r- ■a % --i 'tt'-i'' jjfe-. •T«..» t* = *Ti^ ITiw^-v 'vL* •' ^ I 4' ,V'iii r < \ 'r. 'V V^' \ '=" * ■i<i.tf^»4 m s. '■■'fKx•'* fr. -5, - V^ j.- •>• ■. r;0- *• >‘4f r’H , 0 >^i‘ _»-s.4fi<f'..^ i<<, ^rt: :>• (fe) '• ^'V "^V" : -jr-}' ' M *? y' j ^• >.. *' ♦' v.i-! r '-T- ;kc»i33^ y ? W ^ m^ ^ A *v>*ii*»Mip»«:* $ : . ^ * ^ *41 Bj5: ?■:'• p^'' Vl^.W Of SLCPE r'p-oM H(t>t'‘>r 1^ • Tibr X T- 'V >(“4.? l-<^~ —I - -. >^ ■ ^ V * ;y>>v ^ ®'"^' ^ '■'.*^fA '1^"^~!SS8ftaaasa^ • • ’ z. V '•?4r MHRBnVTKk^' . •» , n I EXHIBIT F o o CITYof ORONO ^ & Municipal Offices Street Address; 2750 Ke’.iey Parliway Ofonc, MN 55356 Mailing Address: F 0. Bo* 66 Crystal Bay MN 55323 0065 July 1, 2004 Theodore L. Capra 2849 1 lO''’ Avenue NE Blaine, N-TN 55449 RE; Variance Application 04-3010, 60-Day Review Period Extension Dear Mr. Capia: State law provides that Cities shall make decisions on zoning requests within 60 days complete on June 9, 2004. The 60-day review period will end on August 8, _004. Because your application was tabled by the Planning Commission at the June 21 meeting, and you arc not able to submit plans for the July 19 nieetmg, the earliest potential date for final Council action falls after the 60-day period enas^ 60-day review period is hereby extended an additional 60 days to October 7, 200-f. Your application is scheduled to appear before the Planning Cci^ussion at the August 16, 2004 meeting. Revised plans must be received by August 11 in order to remain on this meeting. Thank you for your cooperation, and if you have further questions please do not hesitate to call at (952) 249-4623. Sincerely. City of Oiono Janice Gundlach City Planner telephone (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.cl.oronojnii.U8 ORC MINUTES OF THE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEEl MONDAY, JUNE 21.2004 6:00 o ’clock p.m. EXHIBIT G (2. #04-3009 JAMES AND DARCY LOFFLER, 1690 SHADWVOOD ROAD, VARIANCE REVISED PLAN, PUBLIC HEARING (6:09-6:15 p.m.) Leslie moved. Chair Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval of Application #04-3009 James and Darcy Loffler, 1690 Sbadj'vvood Road, granting variances needed for the revised plan: 1. Lot area (0.39 acre where 0.50 acre required; does not meet 80% rule) 2. 75-250’ Hardcover (Proposed = 3,557 s.f. /10,780 s.f. in zone = 33.0% where 25% is allowed.) 3. Subject to City Engineer acceptance of grading and drainage plan VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Fritzlcr urged the applicants to adhere to tne approved variances arid discouraged the applicants tionr enlarging hardcover surfaces, i.e. backup apron and deck, in tire future. Gaffrou advised the application would be sclreduled for the June 28, 2004 City Council niee.i.tg Mr. Loffler thanked the Plaiming Commission for their sendee to the community. NEW BUSINESS 3. #04-3010 THEODORE L. CAPRA, 3534 IVY PLACE, VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PUBLIC HEARING (6:15-6:32 p.m.) Theodore Capra, applicant, was present Gundlach presented the application for a proposal to tear down the existing house and rebuild, removing approximately 2,356 s.f. of hardcover, although the applicant is still requesting a variance to pcnnh4,676 s.f. of hardcover, or 32.86%. The applicant is proposing to remove 320 s.f. of existing hardcover within the 0-75’ zone and would then comply with the 0% hardcover standard for the 0-75’ zone. The lot meets the '/i acre standard as well as the width standard Gundlach pointed out the proposed house plans leave only 349 s.f. for allowable non-stractural hardcover and if the applicant were to construct the proposed 3+stall garage al the road, l,36S s.f. of driveway hardcover would not be necessary. In summary, she stated the applicant s property is confoiTning in area and width, and the proposed application meets all other setbacks, including removal of the non-conforming detached garage at the road and the non-conforming shed located at the lake. She stated staff finds that no valid hardships inherent to the land to warrant approval of tl hardcover variance. le Further, Gundlach advised the applicant requests a conditional use pennit to allow grading all the way down to the shore. Proposed site grading would consist of a substantial fill amount on the street and side of the home, which does not require a CUP unless it exceeds 500 cubic yards. Gundlach referred to the City Engineer review comments in Exhioit F of the staff report, dated June 17, 2004, Page 3 of 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSIOI lEETING MONDAY, JUNE 21. 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. (3. #04-3010 THEODORE L. CAPRA, 3534 IVY PLACE, VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PUBLIC HEARING - continued) Gundlach recoiranended denial of both the hardcover variance and conditional use permit request. She indicated the applicant has an option to revise his plan to incorporate a smaller detached garage or reduce the total foot print in order to achieve 25% hardcover within the 75’-250’ zone. Also, the applicant could revise his plan to incorporate minimal grading only as needed to remove the existing retaining wall, noting the proposed amount of grading is unnecessary to achieve a walk/out style house. Mr. Capra, applicant, pointed out his proposal decreases the hardcover fiom 49% to 32.S%. He indicated that he thought rock retaining walls were undesirable so, instead, proposed substantial lakeside grading. If it were possible, he wished to install two rock retaining walls instead of grading the entire slope. Mr. Capra commented that he believed his new house would greatly enirance the property instead of the existing old house. He explained he had already installed a shoreline riprap wall. Chair Mabusth asked to see Mr. Capra’s photos of the shoreline riprap wall. Mr. Capra provided the photos to members of the Plaruring Commission. Chair Mabusth inquired of staff if there were signs of erosion on the property Gundlach replied that the proposed retaining walls were not on the applicant’s grading plans and she had not observed any slope failures. Chair Mabusth asked if lakeside gi'ading would be necessary if the house were moved further back from the lakeshorc. Gundlach explained that the City Engineer and the applicant’s architect think the proposed house can be built without grading in the lakeside yard but fill would be required for the streci and side yard. Mr. Capra explained that after re-consideration of the substantial amount of lakeside grading proposed, he now would like to pursue installation of retaining walls. Chair Mabusth recommended tabling the conditional use permit request for grading in the 0’-75’ zone until Mr. Capra finalizes his grading plan. She stated it was difficult for her to approve of a hardcover variance on a property that meets the width and area standards for its zoning district. Rahn concurred w'ith Chair Mabusth’s and staffs denial recommendation, pointing out that it is a conforming site and he did not see any valid hardship. Mr. Capra commented that Ivy Place is very narrow and has no on-street parking He also wanted the larger garage space for inside storage of sports equipment, Kempf remarked that on-street parking is better tlian some other streets because Mr. Capra’s property is located nearly at its end. Also, the property has other options like a detached garage or a reconfigured house footprint. Jurgens added that Mr. Capra purchased the property as is and therefore the narrow road does not create a valid hardship.______________________________________________________ Page 4 of22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, JUNE 21, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. (3. #04*3010 THEODORE L. CAPRA, 3534 IVY PLACE, VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PUBLIC HEARING - contiaued) Leslie moved, Rahn seconded, to table Application «04-3010, Theodore L. Capra. 3^34 Ivy Place. VOTE: .Ayes 7, Nays 0. 4. tt04-30l9 WENDY SULLIVAN, 325 CRESTVIEW AVENUE, VARIANCES. PUBLIC HEARING (6:34-6:40 p.m.) Wendy Sullivan, applicant, was present. Gundlach presented the application for a teardown of the existing vacant, old and dil3j5idated. house and to construct a new house. Site remediation would be required prior to issuance of a building permit. She stated the lot is located wuhm a small neighborhood zoned for 2 acre lots and that maiy of the lots on Ci estview Avenue and Tonka Avenue arc substantially under the required 2 .acres and require variance approval to do vinually any improvement Gundlach indicated that .5 acre standards have been applied in the past. When applied to this lot, .5 acre setback standards are met or exceeded. The applicant’s plan meets all other requirements for hardcover and structural covei Gundl&ch vcconiiiicndcd ''4pproval of the lequcstcd vaiiauccs. :i3ge Chair Mabuslh invited comments from the applicant. Ms Wendy Sullivan asked for clarification of the remediation requirement. Gundlach explained it was a requirement from the Minnesota State Health Department due to the prior mcthampheiainines found there when the piopcrty was rented out. Chair Mabusth asked for any public comments. There were none. Jurgens requested pool and patio setback requirements from staff. Gundlach provided the infonnatioii, concluding the proposed pool and patio are compliant with City standards. Chair Mabusth inquired if there were any lot coverage issues. Gundlach stated there were none as the proposed application meets the 15% standard. Jurgens moved, Kempf seconded, to recommend approval of Application /f04-3019, Wendy Sullivan, 324 Crestview Avenue, granting .approval of the following variances in order to construct a new residence on an existing lot: 1. Lot area variance in order to construct a new resideucc on the existing 0.43 acre lot where 2 aces is normally required. ^ 2. Lot width variance in order to construct a new residence on the existing 150 "tde lot when 200’ is normally required. 3. Front yard setback variance to allow the new house to be setback 30’ from the front property line when 50’ normally is required. 4. Side yard (south) setback variance to allow the new house to be setback 19’ from the side property line when 30’ is normally required. VOTE: .Ayes 7, Nays 0. Gundlach stated Application #04-3019 would be referred to the June 2S, 2004 City Council meeung Page 5 of 22 t t ^ EXHIBIT H CITY OF ORONO ZONING FILE: 04-3010 p!a Box 66 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ........................DATE OF notice,_ Ju.o_J2, 2004.......... TO: Theodore L. Capra COPIES: 2849 no"' Avenue NE Blaine, MN 55449 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Hardcover_Vari_ance,jCondhi^ Use Peniiit _ DATE OF MEETING: June 21.2004 Planning Commission recommended as ’.ollows: Tabic. The applicant was directed to revise the proposal to meet the 25“/o hardcover allowance for the 75’-250’ zone. The applicant was also directed to finalize any grading or retaining wall plan for the 0-75* zone and submit the plan to staff and the City Engineer for review prior to review by the Planning Commission. VOTE: 7 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant’s next meeting is tentatively scheduled as: Planning Commission - Monday, July 19,2004; meeting starts jit 6:00 p.m.^_ If you desire certified copies of the official Plaiuiing Commission or Council minuics, they arc available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Conunission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach at 952-249-4623. - \ A...- ■ EXHIBIT I 3 W04.3010 ------ May 17,2004 Page 1 of 6 Date Application Received; 4-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 0-9-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 8-8-04 To:Chair Mabusth and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator From:Janice Gundlach, City Planner^&J Date: Subject: June 17,2004 #04-3010, Theodore L. Capra, 3534 Ivy Place - Hardcover Variance, Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR - IC, One Family Lakeshore Residential District ('/i acre mm.) Lot Area: 0.50 acres (21,926 s.f ) Lot Width: 104 feet @ Shoreline; 101 feet @ 75’ Setback. Application Summary: Applicant requests the following m or ier to construct a new residence on an existing lot; . . • -.e* tc/v -,««« 1. Hardcover variance to permit 32.86% hardcover within the 75 -—0 zone here 25% is normally allowed and 49% currently exists. 2. Conditional use permit to allow land alterations within the 0-75 zon«.. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the hardcover^ variance as the project IS a rebuild and should be held to the 25% hardcover limitation and no valid hardship has been demonstrated. Staff also recommends denial of the conditional use permit to allow grading within 75 ’ of the lake. The applicant can still ac icve a wa -out style home without requiring the extensive grading. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections tdia to See 78-282. Lakeshorc hard cover and land aileraticn regulations. In any LK-lA, LK- IB, LR-IC or LR-lC-l district, within 75 feet of shoreline, there shall be no excavating, fiilinz, hard cover, temporary or permanent structures except as permitted under section 78-281. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover Within 250 feet to 500 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 30 percent hard cover. Within 500 feet to 1,000 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 35 percent hard cover. See. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) No hard cover or impervious surface shall be placed, located cr constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. * #04-3010 May 17.2004 Page 2 of 6 Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWL, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be nr greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the OHvVL there shall be no greater than 33 percent hardcover. Section 78-1286. Topographic alterations/grading and filling. (b) Grading, filling or excavating of more than ten cubic yards is prohibited within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of the public waters enumerated in section 78-1217. Grading, filling or excavating of ten cubic yards or less shall require city staff review and permit and be subject to other pei-tinent sections of this chapter (addressed in the conditional use permit section of this report). List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applications Exhibit B - Hardship Documentation Form Exhibit C - Existing Survey Exhibit D - Proposed Survey Exhibit E - Hardcover Calculations Exhibit F - City Engineer Comments Exhibit G — Front & Rear Elevations Exhibit H - Floor Plans Exhibit I - Adjacent Property Owner’s Acknowledgement Form Exhibit J - Photographs Exhibit K - Property Owner’s List Exhibit L - Plat Map Background The applicant has met several times with Planning Department staff to discuss construction of a new residence on his existing lot. The Planning Department has advised the applicant that new construction has consistently been required to meet all standards established by the Zoning Ordinance, including hardcover. The applicant has attempted to work with staff to determine if any hardships exist to warrant approval of hardcover in excess of 25®/o. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Areai^idth LR-IC Lot Area Lot Width Required 21,780 s.I. (0.50 acres)ICO’ Actual 21,929 s.f. (0.50 acres)104’ @ Shoreline lOr @75’ Setback A04-3010 May 17, 2004 Page 3 of 6 Setbacks LR-IC Required Existing Proposed Front 30 ’N/A N/A Rear 30 ’ 99.6 ’ - house 11.5 ’ - detached earaze 71 ’ Left Side (north)10 ’ 23.2’-hcuse 1 1.3 ’ - detached garage 28’ Right Side (south)10 ’ 26.2 ’ - house 73’ - detached earage 10 ’ Lakeshore 75 ’ 91.5 ’ - house 18.5 ’ - shed 90 ’ - house Average Lakeshore 71.5 ’ -98.5 ’ (going north to south) 110 ’ -94 ’ (conforming') 94* Structural Coverage ----- Total Lot Area -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Structural Coverage | 21,926 s.f. (0.50 acres)Allowed; 3,289 s.f. (15%) Proposed; 3,20S s.f. (14.6%) Haracover Hardcover Z«oiie liaUULl^ Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 6.978 s.f.Os.f 320 s.f.*Os.f. 0-75 (0%)(4%)(0%) 75-250 14,948 s f. - --- 3,737 s.f. (25%) 7,032 S.f.* (49%) 4,676 S.f. (32.86%) Hardcover Variance . , -.j -ri. • .•_The applicant is proposing to tear down the existing house and rc„uild^ The o^isUng house has approximately 7.032 s.f. or 49% hardcover withm the 75 -250 zone. The applicant is proposing to remove approximately 2,356 s.f. of haracover, a.tnough is sail requesting a variance to permit 4,676 s.f. of hardcover, or 32.86/a. Also, the property currently contains 320 s.f. of hardcover within the 0-75 zone or 4% (the rock wall at the shore docs not count towards hardcover). The applicant is proposing to remove this hardcover and comply with the 0% hardcover standard for the 0-75 zone. r (<04.3010 May n, 2004 Page S of 6 Because the applicant can achieve a -walk-out style home -without grading to the shoreline, the possibility of the above criteria can be avoided. b.The visibility of structures and other facilities as viewed from public waters is limited; From staff's perspective, the proposed grading will not make the proposed home any more visible f-om the lake than the existing home. The applicant is proposing to merely even out the grade. c.The site is adequate for water supply and on-site sewage treatment, and This site is served with public sanitary sewer. The types, uses and numbers of watercraft that the project will generate are compatible in relation to the suitability of public waters to safely accommodate these watercraft. N/A. The applicant will continue to use his lakeshore for personal boat storage and lake accessibility. Conditions attached to conditional use permits. The city council upon consideration of the criteria listed in subsection (1) above and the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance, shall attach such conditions to the issuance of the conditional use permits as it deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance. Such conditions may include but are not limited to the following; a. Increased setbacks from the ordinary high water level. N/A. b.Limitations on the natural vegetation to be removed or the requirement that additional vegetation be planted The existing vegetation on the lake side of the home consists mainly of underbrush Should the Planning Commission determine that some amount of grading on the lake side of the home is appropriate, additional vegetation implementation could be required. c.Special provisions for the locations, design and use of structures, sewage treatment systems, watercraft launching and docking areas, and vehicle parking areas. The applicant is proposing to remove &2 shed located at tne lc<e in an effort to reduce hardcover. Issues for Consideration , . • « 1. Does the applicants desire to have an attached garage create a hardship? 2. Can a lakeshore property handle a 3-stall + garage? «04-3010 May 17,2004 Page 6 of 6 3. Would it be inconsistent to grant a hardcover variance when the property meets the required area and width? 4. Should the applicant be allowed to grade all the way to the shore when a walk-out style home could be achieved without the grading 'vithin 75’ of the lake. 5. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Denial of both the hardcover variance and the conditional use permit request. The applicant should revise his plan to incorporate a smaller detached garage or reduce the total foot print area in order to achieve 25% hardcover within the 75’-250 ’ zone. The applicant should also be advised to revise his plan to incorporate minimal grading only needed to remove the retaining wall constructed by the previous owner. City of Orono Variance Application EXHIBIT A Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Main; 952-249-^500 fax; 952-245-4616 Mailing Address: . P.O. Boxes Crystal Bay, MN 55323-005S Apoiication P O Date Received. 4//^^ I ql/ Amojnt Paid. /JCrOu' O 'C.' IMJCSStaff: Fee; ___ Renewal; S330 5530 After-the-fact; $1.200 Doupie Fee 1^10^0^;°^ Ranning'Sommfrsiln PROPERTY INFORMATION: _ Site Address; ------------------------------------^ ------------------------------- Property Identification Number (PlNy? ____~ i^'~] -t-S,-—PL, J-t (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year); _________ □ Yes. I ovm the adjacent parcels. Present use of property; CS Residential O Otner______________________________________ Zoning District; ^ jZ -1 6^_________ applicant INFORMATION: (Complete legal nar-es and marital status required for each mteresteo party) Name; ___Lj------C.'i\ --------------r--------—=777"^—------------ Address: .gfrcgT^ir.'■■O /A-c.'L. K Email: 1^ _________________________-?r-bO OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names ard marital status required for each interested party) Name; TH L_.___CA --------------------------— -----^ ■■ Phone (home); ~7>^. A-_ Phone (work):-7^-b Address; 1 1 (~> -A*! 'ly IV ^ . Email; njj _________ ______________! T=SlA I rUE ■ r'n A ^ H Fax; 7 (.A- "7 L\3 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: ' Estimated Project Cost; SoGO^ Describe the reouesl in detail (attach additicnal sheets if necessai^)- -------------=rt=r~—^-----rc:— l^ DtW IS V1 tViCm l^tuLr) tl\X:xS. | \\U—U >T T ,.f -. hpiLlbc.c.-OL^ . loc^ulA L-\5L.rro ------------- D^c-j^FALf TO .AaJ>7> J^llLLD—----- ifOcTiLu rwOgliOA^ ALL f I ^ *^1t 1 V:jv\ /J REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your' application to be processed. □□□□ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. Completed Application Form - /(>ri Completed Hardship Documentation Form • Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150’ of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Depailmeni_c£_FinanceLisi, laoeis ana map may oe ooiainea rrom nennepin uounty ue £artment cf Fina.nr Government Center, A-603 300 South 6"’ Street, Minneapolis. telephonef6l2-348-5£10 ^.^95 □ □□ Original Oertificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all tne requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" X 17" for reproduction. Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11’’ X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17"). Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. ’ APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planninc Department agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/o'r consultant expenses Incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject It until it Is complete or to recommend the request ' denial of the request regard^^j^ of its potential rnerit. ‘^Applicant’s Signature: 'rfy i __ Date; ^ {) / Applicant's Signature: - y Date; ' ' ' OWNER’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT; The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonabl entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members fc purposes of investigation and verification of this req^st. Owner ’s Signature; ^ v Date; Jo ‘ Owner's Signature; __________________________/ Date: ^ ^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Plan.ning Corr.missic Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each mont Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission ar Council, if an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please ma'Ke arrangements have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planr assigned to your project. %,5 L S y. 1 ... /j I '^i\ h 1 F [ ! I City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form _______(This form is to be completed by a City Planner dunnc ycur pre-acci:cat!on tr.getipg/^ ESHITn 5S323.006S Main; 952-249-4600 Fax; 952-249-4616 procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify pohc.es or regtlai.ons tha. creav. opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION: nj ■ ^ Site Address; ^ Property Identification Number (PIN); - \ \H - ^ 7 '- O Zoning District; Size of Property; __^ Wg. ------ l-l=.r* ss“r^ g sr— Mother; ------- < ___________________________________________—---------------------------------------------------------------D\J±8<1 Applicant's.^-^7 Initials; * / ; ' HARDSHIP: Applicant has rece'ved the Hardship Documentation Fo^'m, understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it must be completed and submitted in conjunction with their form.al variance application. OTHER INFORMATION: •Pleaso note: Your variance application will NOT be accep^d without a pre-applicaticn rill'Slgntutr" .r / fv . F=V <\ ‘h: ^ h :4 ii.--' ■ .k' •“tI Vjr>v ft V if EXHIBIT B Page I of 3 Minnesota State Statue Section ^ unique to the Htbr°c'o=of a demonstrated, tdo'lss all Ihe relevant po.nts l.sted below and answer them as clearly as possible. denial or approval recommendalion. II you leave something out it wi.l no. be considered. Please address each o( these hardship criteria as they relate to the reguest (some may not apply)'. 1. "The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." Oavs <15^ __<9 1 7-Se^ -------L» 'n>r N ^. .t; ^ ^ ■ /v-Vc m: -/>-/■> V C: , I t>T tsS u^c.^_S _ ' y^ri (iVuia 'rtAaSHiE 2. "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property net t >\7V-VdV»vt C AiA.S>fOf> tjr—tf2AVTi_C ----------------------------- 3 "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essentagharacter of the locality." rr LO'I UL rJiTt ACT^ua. if\) Ivj12lL-^.^A- ■T.T rsUiO-iLO —\J1 — ------------------------ 4.■Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zon.nu, Chapter. (\)(rf i\yuQA6 ‘ ^ ri3 S S r bJr’-0.oL % \ Page 2 of 3 5."Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for eaah sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." 1V77K "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located." 7. 8, 10. r\s<\roc- qiniuu (7- us^t. or- ^ "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a tv/o-family dwelling." A//A “The special conditions applying to the structu'e or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." K)0___________ 9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." “The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." 11. "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zonino Code." ^ ^ (L09S6iO\- ■i.i _ * * NN. .••’..r ‘"ii ic^'-r u-., v\ •i-i, \ HUBS HIM! Pll I Page 3 of 3 "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the ine yia v a __________-»«^«r>e*rahlo harrtshin or difficuUv."The granting of such variance win noi merely »e.vc =» = “•^7- applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship •/gX'An r-iCAr OP gOA D TOjfflraCL Should loufellThe"hardsW cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach adduional sheets i. necessary); |T CAJlll<iVJi <£yt&T4. '^r- .s!-'5i^5g Lovo. •-1 T VA ________ =r^/h> ^__ A-T-t^oi-V7 S OAJ-iC> iX'f-uQ t-vono f,. 1 rLU<.^>^Q Th>- . rC -ri-tirog:. THii—io^Vu-v-Q— T VA > ^ <Ct>.A TtLt rvn?-iMr>r5u g»L-U\ -------------------------------—— Arm pTs^PiiU^;^T O S-H-dul Ott-li^'r'V=H TfeoJ ' ‘4. pVW^.C'AV^^nt-T\fVi'^. 7 ••'•iii->;■•■» V 1: C .•' !■■ \A /% 9 r •\ 4 \ i I » ••• • •••EXHIBIT C V;Ti-ir-: j'i .S3 V.W' . V V'*’’* ' ■* V::- hai bAH! REVISIONS — CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY SURVEY for ; Ted Capr . »4.19 \ -y • : , fi^ t"^^^'*^>‘‘'- v-'" Ted CAPRA Smvi y HAUDCOVE SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) CULATION WORKSHEET 75-250' 250-500' EXHIBIT E SOQ-IQOO EXISTING jrAItnCOVEff IN ZONE A. House •____________ S.F. IK*' X X ■X O S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage C. Drivovcy S.F. X X S.F. S.F. X S F. S.F. E. Patio/Deck X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain ______________ By Plastic ________ Or Fabric X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. C. Other —S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE xioo • ~3. ^__S.F. X-fcQS>. A S.F. % S.F. A. House ______________ Length X Width m X m X ^* ti i"inrn - - X - X f'l Cl X ■i X * • P Piiftn/Dprk - X 1C* f X [ /n/fjfrl/iin X s »y Plastic X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. Or Fabric G. Other S.F. total HARDCOVER Df ZONE - TOTAL PROP^TAREAIN ZONE^ ^xlGO - ____S.F. A B HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 25Q-S00*500-1000 EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ________S.F. Lingth Width X X r s ss S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Gcrage C. Driveway S.F. X X S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. Pctio/Deck X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plasric Or FaDric d^e,PC*. X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. C. Other S.F. TOTAL HARDCO VER IN ZONE - TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE . « - ^ A To32-_ -s- B ( xlOQ •7 052. S.F. A S.F.B cr/O PROPOSED NARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____ _____S.F. Length Width X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway S.F. X X S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. Patio/Deck X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other S.F. total HARDCOVER IN ZONE - TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE . > A ^ B ^2»g> S.F. A S.F.B xlOO - ^/li^Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik &wTw: Associates Engineers & Architects 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, mm 55113 Office: 651-636*4600 • Fax: 651-636-I3H WWW bonestroo.ccm EXHIBIT F June 14,2004 Ms. Janice Gundlach Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re; 3534 Ivy Place File No. 139-04-000 Plat No. 04-3010 Dear Janice; We have reviewed the plans for the proposed improven-.ents to 3534 Ivy Place. The proposed improvements include removing an existing residential home and garage, constructing a new home and regrading the entire lot. We have the following comments with regards to engineenng matters; • The proposed grading plan shows a swale along the south lot line that will convey drainage onto tne neighboring property to the south. Plans should be revised so storm water is conveyed around the house on the subject property. • The plans propose to regrade the slope between the new home and the lake. This does not appear to be necessary and should be strongly discouraged, Any grading within 75-feet of the lake should be avoided if at all possible to preserve the stability of the slope and prevent erosion into the lake. • The grading plan should be revised so that swales arc incorporated along both the north and south sides of the home. This may require relocating the home to provide adequate room to construct the swales. • The revised plans should include existing contours and topography both on the site and extending to at least 50-fcel beyond all lot lines If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4S63. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg Cot Greg Gappa, City of Oiono i;• St. Pau-. St. Cloud. Rcchetter. Willmar. MN « Milwaukee. Wl « C^lcaga. AffifmfUvt Actior/EquiJ Oppartynity Imployir i lake &Ee'"''T'°'-' nttOIffi ■----------------------------—1ui■ g - £-,^prL.ft iz-er.ioeHC^e- %S’J4 I'/V W/'X’ZaT-* ■ • ^ . s (Tvj m o • > • > 2 H o 1 r |r*^ !*■ . Irir-'.T rt‘>‘’P' r**^' ^rSo^^lou<.e-AP>‘»\ %,op I 6ft <■ poB^H ru ToT-*!— m Xffi od*-^ H X dL.liMifiM VAUttcP t'*^.-Jor<i ft/.a r ■ > ..^». ■* «>■. ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM I (we) C-AR>< CA«tx-e^ of rvs-rsaf DtACg EXHIBIT I (print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the^Ians for the proposed improverr.ent or proposed use of the property located at 3534 also referred to as Land Use Application No.-----------------. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement. 1 (we) am (are) not a^<ed to1 (we) understanc tnat in execuung inis acNnowieuycmci u. i ..w. _ declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the C*ty Council ♦Hat I am ra^o^ p\A/are of the imorovement plans and that the proposed neighbors project O'* I (we) (print name(s7r 0 •iA-O ___of A T-n.r' (print address] ^ have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No.__________. f I (we) understand that in executing tnis acknowledgement. 1 (we) am (are) not asked to Declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that 1 (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. -r Properly Owner q nU ' / 'Darie Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting dale. M, ri) fv* v.V AV * f o 1 1! :F £-4 i S7in !6 .ICV^-F FfLOM LAKF r,;j. ‘ Y‘ '. s’i^i *M y«^ ■"'^ ^ nitHtKk S5Si> - 'f?\i:.r i' •»'''.041 L'';-wmife ^V.y>> . ‘j;:N' jr**A#?sv i .- nV;‘.- t : \^j k-r'v^ * >. • \ * W* » ■ * *^ *^*:‘ •• • '* '•’i Li•, r' •/«•.. 4v #fT^ > • *' ' ^ , ••r«x- *j;7' ■. fV'**' ♦ ’ •- '” ■:^T-:-:r\^ /'• T?%H 1.i> "'ll e ■^/ .' f '• 1 .^.v i-• e'J .w,, • a: .^.^■^*^^^ i‘r , ^ £i3^ mMn. »f^ ""t£^;r-. »^wgt—B»>yg?M —sTr'^^■glgfliy liiWk7 ■A r/- f 7 ’>- A "ii'-: -i^ i‘%# V. ^*1*^ &».'*• >1 • . J-Jii Vi ^^ ■'Vjk V . , ^ si m - f^^-^r^mmm^marnmL^-;/ ;iv \v' cv pn><>n i> .\T ac.AT^^ tr i^i A^rv'FD '•■K /V“ * * r • X > \ r ^"*2^ ‘Sr^* # •♦ S'v --------------------- 'k ^ ^T ■' •?• vv *Y. .*? Lk X ' i>:.—\ ss I”? »-JK' ■ f."Sam-h ^Sk'^ -. Hi .r #fsf. ; • - . «* b r w* • t*^ n*»-|iSU.r; n •.& «rti»» V<»' . / ■:- '^'SI ' ^6 l\C I’St - .'it ^:v,^'i4'-iisfje£’’ .. * r- ■■'. V ■. - ----- I !■ ■lltl I ■ • . -4 ns ^,. «; •«• " - — - ♦ “AT # • -^.^* %<'••■Sft. • »•* ' ^ * ;1-. -*• .*<•'4 * • * ;-• »*•> * ••• • * • yi ^ ' - •«. ^ . . ■V4’^'-- — s • I • •« ‘ .' * ^ C*iir . y ' > V .:/ •■' ^ •(,‘1 *• • * \'<P!Wg!2Sr~Ai^ ?S ^ 9 A::\k •V • J 9, >r.: *-'vN . ■■Rl'i'-.-" :--■"^ ^• • f' ‘ Wr ^ ’*‘^z- •'* 1• . *. • . . ’ • . y C j ^ « -/ V ^ .s f ^ £‘ i*•41 S' < Jl • J =-. n4 *, 'th I . • » ^ \>4 :V: _ .,' 4- • ••J viy ’>'.*■■ ■• - ■ ^iij ■M • 'Hi:ii'- v;* ''^*1 & x;<y-’*yp»*: I r UNDATE;- 31 IOII713«OOI« NAME/ADOR JJJy"TAMN^5J9l 3B 2OU1IM20®'’ NAME/ADDR ^^^y^^TAMN S5J9I PROPADDR OWNER NAME taxpayer namiyaddr 38 JOin2J««W3J 3532 IVY PL 0 A CAUI-E ft S M CABLI. GARY A ft SUSAN M CAHLfc 3532 IVY PL WAYZATAMN 35191 PROP ADDR OWNERNAME taxpayer name/addr 38 2011721410054 3509 WV PL LEISEL A MARK PFLECUAAR LOISELAMARXPFLtOIIAAR 3509 IVY PL WAYZATAMN 55191 „onnepinc«//,<S. .information SYSTEM .<S LIST 38 2011721420017 PROP ADDR 15« 0/YPL OWNER NAME CAS PYLE T«i.*vw SImh »»■ PROPADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER MAME/ADDR 31 20M12M200IB 3546 IVY PL M F DRAZAN a M DRAZAN MARY F ft MICHAEL DRAZAN 3M6 rVY PL WAYZATAMN S539I PROP ADDR OWNER NAME taxpayer name/addr 38 2011771470027 3516 IVY PL IAS WHITE JAMES M ft SHERRY DWHHE 3516 (VV PL WAYZATAMN 55191 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER name/addr 18 70II7214200J9 3525 WYPL 01 CUMMINGS ft M M CUMMINGS DANIELLa MARTHA M CUMMINGS 3525 IVY PL WAYZATAMN 55191 PROPADDR OWNERNAME taxpayer name/addr 38 2011723420034 3545 IVY PL jErrREYADEDIW'’^'^"^^^ JEFFREY ft DEORA DANUERRY 3545 IVY PL WAYZATAMN 55)91 38 2011721420015 «DL».DOMN*P»U»K.-~ rv»TA«N »». , amriPY THATTHE PACK PEPPPSIWED/«E ^ SSISS WCC?V SaVEE SERVICES « OP MY KNOWLUOGE AND DEL L O / by — .3 PAGtj I c V. .J>> V • • f•V ; • P •» CO H EXHIBIT L i-'^Hennepin County;^ Taxpayer Services Departrnerit^^^ r Date Applicatinn RcccivcJ: 7>2t>04 Dale Application Considered as Complete: 7-21-04 t)0-Day Review Period Expires: 9-19-04 COl'M/'ii s 'cp TING SEP \ 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO request for council action Rate: September 9. 2004 Item No.: (/7 Department Approval: Name: Janice Gundlach ' Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Title: City Planner Item Description: t/04-3044, Jennifer A. Simon. 3925 Cherry Avenue - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: I.R - 1C, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (Vi acre minimum) 0.39 acres (17,195 s.f.) 119.80 feet List of Exhibits A - Re.solution per Planning Commission Recommendation B ~ PC Action Notice 8-17-04 C - Withdrawal Request Letter dated 8-26-04 D - PC Memo and Exhibits of 8-11-04 Application Summary: Applicant requests a rear yard setback variance to permit an addition to the principal residence where the proposed setback is 20 feet from the rear property boundary when 30 feet is normally required and the existing house encroaches approximately 15 feet into the setback. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the application as the addition can be shifted 10 feet east in order to meet the 30 foot required setback. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission voted 5-1, Commissioner Kempf dissenting, to recommend denial of the rear yard setback variance request. The Planning Commission determined that the applicant would need a variance to either the rear yard or the side street yard dependent on whether Miruue Avenue or Cherry Avenue were considered the front, and therefore a re-design would be necessary to alleviate the need for a variance us there is ample buildablc area on the lot. Staff Kccoinmendatioii Denial per the attached Resolution. The applicant stated at the Planning commission meeting that she did not wish to appear before the Council to appeal the Planning Commission's denial i. recommendation. Staff has tried repeatedly to get the applicant to formally vdthdraw the request, however this has not occurred. As such, staff does not anticipate the applicant to appear at the meeting but would still recommend that the application be denied. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution denying a rear yard setback variance for 3925 Cherry Avenue. ’r I,;*/ I J A RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-350 (B) FILE #04-3044 WHEREAS, ihc City of Orono is n municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State Statutes 412 et. seq. and 462 ct. scq., the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted zoning regulation for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, Jennifer A. Simon (hereinafter “the applicant ”) is the owner of the property located at 3925 Cherry Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter “the City ”) and legally described as follows: Lots 1 & 2, & in Lot 21, HICKORY HILL, Hennepin County , Minnesota (hereinafter “the property ”); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a variance to permit construction of an addition, requesting the following approvals; 1.Section 78-350 (b); To allow a rear yard setback of 20 feet when 30 feet is nonnally required. WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application; the recommendation of the City staff and Planning Commission; and the comments and written statements submitted by the applicant. NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono. Minnesota hereby denies the requested variance as described above based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning this property: 1, Tlie property consists of 0.39 acres, or 17,195 s.f. in land aa’a. 2. The Zoning Ordinance specifically states in Section 78-1 that the front lot line on a corner lot “shall be the shortest dimension on a public or private Page I of3 street." I’he lot line abutting Minnie Avenue is therefore the front lot line, and the wcslerlv lot line is the rear lot line. 3. The granting of the requested variance would be contrary to the provisions of Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-123 with which the applicant must first comply in order that the variance be granted. The Council finds that: a. The p: «jcrty in question can be put to a reasonable use if used under the con. ilions allowed by the official controls if the proposed variances were granted. b. 'fhe pliglit of the landowner was created by a misinterpretation of what is considered the front lot line for zoning purposes. However, even if the applicant has interpreted the ordinance correctly variances would still be required under this current proposal. c. Granting of the proposed variance would appear to serve as a convenience to the applicant and the applicant has not demonstrated a reasonable hardship or practical difficulty acceptable to the City Council. d. The conditions of the Zoning Code limits imposed and existing on this property generally apply to all other land and structures in the zoning district in which this property is located as well as in adjacent residential zoning districts. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 3 I Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on this 13* day of September, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13* day of September, 2004, by Barbara Peterson & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 3 ;4 i CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 ZONING FILE: 04-3044 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 DATE OF NOTICE: August 17,2004 TO: Jennifer A. Simon 3925 Cherry Avenue Mound, MN 55364 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Rear Yard Setback Variance DATE OF MEETING: August 16,2004 Planning Commission recommended ns follows: Denial of the request to allow an addition to be setback 20' from the rear property line when 30 ’ is normally required and a re-design could achieve the required 30 ’ setbaek. VOTE FOR AGAINST (Commissioner Kempf dissenting) Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, August 23,2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they arc available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach at 952-249-4623. / i % s CITYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 553S6 Mailing Address: P 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 0066 August 26, 2004 Jemiifer Simon 3925 Cherry Avenue Mound. MN 55364 RE: Variance Application #04-3044 Dear Ms. Simon; The Planning Commission reviewed your request for a rear yard setback variance on August 16, 2004. You were notified of the denial recommendation in a letter dated August 17, 2004. During the Plaiming Commission meeting and during a telephone conversation you indicated that you did not wish to appear before the City Council for a final decision regarding your variance. The City requested a withdrawal letter from you at that time. As of today’s date the City has not received a formal withdrawal letter. If your intention is to withdraw your request please sign this letter below and return it to City Hall in the enclosed postage paid envelope. Otherwise, your request will be heard at the September 13,2004 City Council meeting. Thank you. Sincerely, City of Orono J/juoc Janice Gundlach City Planner I wish to withdraw my request for a rear yard setback variance at 3925 Cherry Avenue. Jennifer Simon, Property Owner TUephone (9S2) 249-4«D0 • Fax (952) 249-4416 www.ci.orofMMnn.ut j M04-3044 August 16, 2004 Page 1 of 4 Date Application Received: 7-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 7-21-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 9-19-04 To:Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Janice Gundlach, City Planner August 11,2004 #04-3044, Jennifer A. Simon, 3925 Cherry Avenue -Rear Yard Setback Variance -Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - 1C, One Family Lakeshore Residential District ('/i acre min.) 0.39 acres (17,195 s.f.) 119.80 feet Application Summary: Applicant requests a rear yard setback variance to permit an addition to the principal residence where the proposed setback is 20 feet from the rear properly boundary when 30 feet is normally required and the existing house encroaches approximately 15 feet into the setback. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the applieation as the addition ean be shifted 10 feet east in order to meet the 30 foot required setback. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-350. Area, height, lot width and yard requirements, b) Lots. The following minimum requirements : Lot Area (acre)Lot Width (fed)Tronl Yard (feel)Side Yard (feet)Rear Yard (feel)Side Yard Adjacent lo Slrccl (feel) 0^100 30 10 30 15 List of Exhibits Kxhibit A - Applications Exhibit B - Hardship Documentation Form F,xhibil C - Adjacent Property Owners ’ Acknowledgement Form Exhibit D - Survey of Existing Conditions Exhibit E - Proposed Survey Exhibit F - Proposed Survey w/Topography Exhibit G - Hardcover Calculation Worlbheets Exhibit 11 - Existing and Proposed Elevations Exhibit I - Existing and Proposed Floor Plans Exhibit J - Existing and Proposed Cross-Sections Exhibit K - Existing and Proposed Roof Lines ttamon f^04-3044 August 16,2004 Page 2 of 4 Exhibit L - Photographs Exhibit M - Aerial Photograph Exhibit N - Property Owner’s List Exhibit O - Plat Map Background The applicant’s representative met with staff to discuss the proposed improvements to the property. It was determined at that time that the applicant would require a rear yard setback variance in order to construct an addition to the existing house. This was a direct result of misinterpretation of what frontage was considered the front. By Code definition, on a corner lot the lot boundary with the shortest street frontage is designated as the front line for zoning purposes. Although a substantial amount of improvements are proposed, staff has determined that because much of what is existing will remain, the project would not be considered a rebuild. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET LR-IC Lot Area Lot Width Required 21,780 s.f. {Vi acre)100 ’ Actual 17,195 s.f. (0.39 acres)119.80 ’ Setbacks LR-IC Required Existing Proposed Front (Minnie Avc)30’84’62 ’ Rear (west)30’15’20 ’ Left Side (south)10 ’62 ’43’ Right Side (Cherry Ave)15’21’16.5 ’ Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 17,195 s.f (0.39 acres)Allowed: 2,579.25 s.f (15%) Proposed: 2,262 s.f (13.2%) I m-3044 August 16, 2004 Page 3 of 4 Hardcover Calculations Hardcover Zone 75 - 250 250-500 Total Area in Zone 17,135 s.f. 60 s.f. Allowed Hardcover 4,284 s.f. (25%) 18 s.f. (30%) Existing Hardcover 3,362 s.f. (20%) 0 s.f.* (0%) Proposed Hardcover 3,622 s.f. (21%) 0 s.f. (0%) After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Rear Yard Setback Variance The applicant has proposed to remove the existing screened porch and porch overhang located in the rear yard. Included for removal are the rock on plastic in the rear yard, some wood rail-road tie retaining walls, pavers, planter areas and some concrete patio areas on the north and south side of the home. The existing 1.7’ x 5.7’ encroachment is a chimney shaft that will remain and is an allowed encroachment. The applicant is proposing to add a garage and master suite addition to the cast side of the home and a covered entry on the north side, all meeting the required setbacks. The applicant is also proposing to construct a kitchen addition to the south side of the home in line with the current house. This requires a rear yard .setback variance because the lot line jogs to the ea.st 10 ’. 'I'he applicant is also proposing a deck to the ca.st of the kitchen addition, which will meet all setback requirements. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis_________________________________________________________________ In conshlering applicationx for variance, the Planning Connnmion shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger offire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property In the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will he In keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds that there are hard.ships inherent to the land. For example, the jogged rear property line and the sloping topography, all somewhat restricting the applicant from meeting the required 30' rear yard setback. Further, the Zoning Ordinance defines the front on corner lots as the shortest frontage. In this case that being Minnie Avenue even through the applicant ’s front door faces Cherry Avenue and the property has a Cherry Avenue address. If Cherry Avenue were considered the frc.it only a 10 ’ setback to the west would be required, allowing the applicant to proceed ' ithout variances. Adding to all mentioned above is the layout of the existing hom j .id what best fits within that envelope. a «^04-3044 August 16,2004 Page 4 of 4 However, hardship also references “reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by the official controls ”; this being the 30 ’ required rear yard setback. It is staffs opinion that the property owner has reasonable use, especially since the addition can be achieved within the 30 ’ rear yard setback, recognizing the layout of the existing and proposed improvements will not fit together as well or grading may be required. The hardships mentioned above may hold more validity if the applieant had no other options for placement of the proposed addition, bearing in mind that the layout of the existing house is not considered a valid hardship as it isn’t something inherent to the land. Issues for Consideration 1. Are the hardships mentioned valid enough to grant variance approval, even though the applicant could meet the 30 ’ required setback if grading were done and the interior spaces were re-designed? 2. Does the sloping topography, by itself, offer a valid hardship? Or, could the grading necessary to meet tlie 30' setback be minor enough to require it? 3. Should it be relevant that the jogged rear property line was caused by separate acquisition of the east 10 feet of the neigliboring lot (the most western 10 ’ in the rear yard was not a part of the original platted lots)? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Denial of the requested variance as the addition could be moved 10 ’ to the east in order to meet the 30 ’ rear yard setback. Approval of the requested variance only if you find that the sloping topography alone constitutes a hardship restricting the applicant from moving the addition 10 ’ to the cast in order to meet the required rear yard setback. 1 EXHIBIT A City of Orono Variance Application Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Main; 952-249-4600 fax; 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 Application # V Date Received. *7- Z.I ~ Amount Paid: fjQ Q- _____ Staff; 3a n i'- Fee.S600 Renewal; $300 After-the-fact; Si.200 Double Fee This application form must be completed in full. App'cant v/ill be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications wilt not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMA-nON: ^7 ^ Site Address: 7/4^^ Y 4-'‘C Property Identification Number (PIN): f S- //?■ ^ ^ - I (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): //-o'Z. □ Yes, 1 own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property; '^Residential □ Other __________________________ Zoning District: ____________________ APPLICANT,INFORMAT^N: (Complete legal ns.-ss and marital status required for each interested party) Name; S/ _______ Phone (home); ^ y/- 6 0 7/ Add'ess: \9'ZT Email; Phone (work): ^ /Z- Fax; OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names e*d marital status required for each interested party) Name: \ Phone (home); Address; rhemJ Arr^. Email- ^ Phone (work): Fax- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST; Estimated Project Cost. Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): $ ^ h:n(Ltr\n I'yCr KC fZH.cUi'r^ ^ iis rr rLx.cf'tU nr\^l-rh\ (jur'urhh)-i IS-ww* ^ppLtiLA J iLfiii hf_ a~ /6,/Cla3=0 #30 44 r REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: i All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your ■ application to be processed. 5□ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150 ’ of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, Government Center, A-603 300 South Street, Minneapolis telephon(^^^-348-5^T^ Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). meetingatHhen^rprements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" X 17" for reproduction. Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8.5' x 11" or 1 1" X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17"). Additional items may be requested by City Starf depending on the scope of the project. * APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject u until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit. Applicant ’s Signature: L OWNER’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner ’s Signature: Owner's Signature;r Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must bo present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. I "4. Vi- %' I /a 9 » Zl. kMS City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting,*) Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 For Office Use Only. City Planner J^ Main: 952-249-4600 Fax 952-249-4616 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Meeting Date/Time; _ PC Date: What is the purpose of a pre-application meeting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them of the procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION:^ Site Address: Property Identification Number (PIN): /) // ) - 'y j ' 00,9 C> Zoning District: ____Size of Property: _________ ^ DESCRIPTION OF RE^pST: □ Average Setback pTsIde Yo d Setback jsRear Yard Setback □ Hardcover — - - _ . . . □ Other: fPlV/TUJ □ Lot Area □ Front Yard Setback □ Lot Width / □ Lot Coverage --------------, --------------- - 'slnfciV/'-l Applicant's Initials: HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form, understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it must be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance application. OTHER INFORMATION; } *Please note: Your variance application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this form will be completed by City staff. Applicant Signature:OO Date: i EXHIBIT B Page 1 of 3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. Minnesota State Statue Section 394.27, Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance is justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not bo considered. Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may not apply): 1."The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." - ^ M "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." / a /J __created by the landowner." / jt . Tyrt. 4.rf-j4C /ftL s ^ _Oy*-Ml 3.The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality " . 'Tyt4. /T^yV7y<»\y’ <^>=y/«/C.5 y^ j z. J^4L S'_____________________________________________________ ________________________.___ - _ ^yPA-SSv>^yyy^ <Z^AytAc 7"* Op- yZMAJi.A-\y /i>^yy>yyyy^ "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." QyV't 'Ty^yf-r- AyL^S P>/c7" ^y9-P-^C> TpM'. /^A^?4P-Ty. f: .. J.. nr c % • 'V- C? \’- ..» /. » / /-n*•« 4- '>}. Ill I ■| I %I . . .. VU-,i Page 2 of 3 5. 'l 7. 8. 9. "Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." 'The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affectecLperson’s land is located. " ^ ^5 the affectect,p ^ A A ^ . "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling," "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar t9.such property or immediately adjoiningoroperty." ___ ^ /t-T'r-y ________________________ "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." /k <^-2.______^____________________________ 10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." _ ^ /#U At/C- */*»■ 2. 3^/^^. ‘7 b 'Ti+A. /O^ A/y ^ . Li J/TM >»*■/• /^7'K^^S yA-i 11. "The granting of the proposed variance wiil not in any way impair healtn, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect bo contrary to the intent of the Zoning 05 ,r .$ \J1 3.. A%" <LJX« Page 3 of 3 12.■The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the aoDlicant. but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable h^ship or difficulty." ^ c ■n, cutU-ii> y-w Ti —'7P* rTi^^r Hardship statement ^ ^ u ,u Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary); JJ.. (T^-r-f* ~ .7/ £•: // f/utl -Vv /» ■.V / f i r EXHIBIT C 1 (we) ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM Ay/ ___of / ^ ^ IPSprint name(s)l (print address) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No.----------------. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor s project or I (we) (print name(s)l (print address) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No_________. 1 (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asker to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Propeny Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. rr ’•‘i * • ,J f t ^■'iL * * ■ tn » ' ««M r< - ci M X SB H a >a'p./•» r 153.47 0 ro...o" '•PK- NAL ..-SET IN ' BLACKTOP I SWAUS 1-10.0 WOOD /fence ! j PROPOSED BLACK OP DRIVEWAY iiXtjrtAja aa\/€l) PROPOSED SIDEWALK 143.63m£asureo 144.33hckory mu • ••> 500' FROM MEA Q RE61U\R\a 16 (Zt yar \a /^c€ approval feP^SlVIuW MJU N 88°36'25" W 1 4v3.i:^5 vEASUStEO 1 44.33 >«CKC«r HU SBTbAOi^ )/i c I i'RiOM = 1 o' ir» i no A i PvCCr^DlOTinM o' 3 ^^*-ts T> 1^ 0 t.'*’ ’’^* / HOUSE #Z925 3e.o ).6S-: / O ^ O'^ /■ PROPOSED /ADDITION N S <p 16.0 J 100 /' X A ^ ^ y y y ^ ^ PROPOSED p ADDITION / 24.0_________'4- / WOPOSEO soewa Lk PROPOSED'OTa CKTOP DRIVEWAY o (jlXtjrtA/a oq f /I 143.63m£asureo 144.33ncko ^ mil // / / 4 oo•o in \ ^ 500'^ETBACK LI.ME Fj»0M HALF-SECTION MAP IDm o-joo O (/) / \\ N 88°36'25" W 0 PP d)m \ 14'3.95 measweo 144.33 mckory Hii. 40 EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION : r-z.o' n Xs DO H ■5J exhibitg \r\iCl<o<ZY MILL S-ZS- Of \A\cKofiY Uiuc HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZOr^: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House __________ 0-75' X Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA FN ZONE A + B PROPOSED liARDCOVEU IN ZONE A. House ___ Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabnc 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _______ + B lAiCMi riftiiliiMillSi 75-250* 250-500* (1^-1000^ WidUi s IT X 100 Width m B X 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. O_______S.F. >0 ' s F. n % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S . S.F. SF. SF. SF. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. V. A U A D A 1>«l Al Pf Al irwt •’“•’•“•SI mvatmh LIFTBJVATV3N tCMMt W nniT 'Mina ,^-^f ^ mmmtm -----------------^.TAjar* pdtrm fgyr BirvATicn flLCMTA^^ Ill S) i.i r*5 X X S H 1^ taroii*^'^ I - . n«imc» AM irrr Ai •mCTMAt 0MI ItCMMU a^AnoMi ACOJMCT A* M>( SmSmuImiii tUCTWH AM> AFPUCAflW 9 •’^SSt^SSSni m1« >0H . HAM Motmm nm •9 -MW^ BxMrm moftir uvaticn •CAM. »«*■ »M West (,?-ewi) fp^hi /V#>w. -tawt* — •/----------- ---3^ tPOitm Wy BJVATIflM -rase* — •CAM. p«t0PffL tHCH mWU (SIO^") fr.^MTiNC-ie i I h 5 3S A»-aA« rr"--------■"-------i! ^s^mjcAnoMc^mMwtmmnm 4i®«ii n« wn» ’•mSmmiffS n^jjjjpcM u •T0HA4e <s nil IMAA1U Nssm i i I i ift 9n Pi Xs a H ■rao ,^, aam ’o*^ •»->»-«4 1 Cl , r.* . ■ ♦-»<•______*-r , NOTlii n«puM aSmtv IT ST A •rmicnjuL .rrri •N«LL»aw A/JUo I I I t lA 9 tt\ i 55 JdTTT- '■■-Tia'TrTTTJ T-w F S^wwtS—T wr SJSSSliS^SSNoS ^ai^ »ow e*«icruiUL rvt 9CJUD rm cennucTomVB^ M 0«CK 4IX m m^^AnoA MCTVMi M€> ^JOtMis?ssi£S^‘s:mSSmiSj:^7!Sr cFOMYwcrm no ^p(tAT^^4a Mouee egcrngj SI «A »< «sasi«i ftl «A»«S 2%-‘S* oi ; CMk tPAC« / V’l Qs ADpmoN Moueg etcnoN i^pom^ «3U6e egcncH §5 P5 X R H r »H >Q r>s ommnom i >&: lOOOO* NLia. p;ag CMk«TO40t \ lA: OOCKX «4 % t 4 .. » 1 - 'L - ’ • -^ r • ■ . ;•>■ *’ * * ‘t '* **.^^*^ A ‘iTA^l *r.V ^ '» '.' ^ V- • ; ■■ w 4' * • ;Y W'^-N*:j^| >‘ - • . *•' i » ^-. r' 1 V* • *x nLLT^ ► • . * * 'X ‘••i' V* '.r' * ' **-r ' • ■ ' 41 ‘A/ . .. , ... ■T: V... ■'' •.’■.a Si^J f- VIEW PIkOM MlKlWl^ |WE. Xz S H r ■ * .V W V' j ,vrv * "^J‘* •^'‘'^^ 2?Si ‘. *--,<,4. , • ^/-' <« • * -'• ''- 'v^d ^^PH b &b ■•-. *‘i* ■ JS^ ^ ■'vW. s ;;r » K {\K/ <« •4' i_[ r mi. (iii V' li> • i ^ .v: * . . . ■ • '.‘;^ • ^ , t I f ? * • VIEW fWM 1HE SotrTrt .! i U • t^'.l • tj ^ -,»i. • i" twr < • .#Rr n'' --- a '< .-i . ^ «•*1^«,r,'' . ** * •’^i•-., "i ^ • * »** # nillat * • I • . . • • » • ■ view fftJDM CMEP-RY AVE ■ TT r..':.::v^#? ^ '* - *>*'' 1* j Jr VTi^r* f K* ^et£y ''■^i if :#.! f *fv r. V • ! \ ■'.. \ . j\. \ ^yh >r . y"; uv ‘ *•■' '' ^ *'. •‘^’ '- >£s' / IT W / «( 4* T- 4. ^ > \ V -«•. ’ \»• f * ' r \ ■ "*‘ • -^1} ot,/ ^4 V r LV'Ji 1^ 4. •Jlk V A m iSr'k’^ji - r ? :-i i >i ► li 1 f f * ► 4 ^ •; v.i., ' »* * ^ St7' • >V^ ' h 4 Jl : i 9^ i t ' * » ■'* S • «•'r -V. »- i #.-•ari*-y-'^.f twr* RUN DATE: 7/2/2004 31 0811723330018 »OP ADDR 3921 CHERRY AVE WNERNAME DONALD R O’REILLY A WIFE DONALD R O’REILLY AME/ADDR 3928 cherry AV MOUND MN 5J364 38 0811723330026 30P AODR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONED WNERNAME JAMES A PURVEY ETAL ^^^py^YER JAMES A PURVEY AME/ADDR southmore dr BLOOMINGTON MN 55437 38 0811723330063 ROPADDR 1525 MINNIE AVE WNER N/OklE DAVID S INGRAM AXPAYER DAVID S INoRAM AME/ADDR 1525 MINNIE AVE mound MN 55364 38 0111723330075 ROP ADDR 1540 NORTH ARM DR IWNERNAME EDDIE A LINDCREN AXPAYER EDDIE A LINDGR£N JAMF7ADDR 1540 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 0811723330078 •ROPADDR 1510 NORTH ARM OR 3WNFRNAME PETER S DUNLAVY •AXPAYER PETtR S DUNLAVY 4AME/ADDR •S'® NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 LL PACE: I 38 0811723330019 PROP ADDR 3926 CHERRY AVE OWNER NAME ACPURVEY A DJMARKUS taxpayer ANTHONY PURVEY NAME/ADDR DENISE MARKUS 3926 CHERRY AVE MOUND MN 55364 38 0811723330027 PROP ADDR 3907 CHERRY AVE OWNER NAME GERALD M CLARK III TAXPAYER GERALD M CLARK III NAME/ADDR 3907 CHERRY AVE MOUND MN 55364 3S 0811723330064 PROP ADDR 1515 MINNIE AVE OWNER NAME TI. & L H MANWARREN TAXPAYER TONY L& LISA H MANWARREN NAME/ADDR 1535 MINNIE AVE MOUND MN 55364 38 0811723330076 PROP ADDR 1530 NORTH ARM DR OWNER NAME ROBERT W VEITCH TAXPAYER ROBERT WVElTCH NAME/ADDR 1530 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 0811723330079 PROP ADDR 1510 NORTH ARM DR OWNER NAME PETLR S DUNLAVY TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PETER S DUNUVY 1510 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 •> / r . V • .1 1.1 i' fr PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 0811723330020 3908 CHERRY AVE RICHARD H NELSON RICHARD H NELSON 3908 CHERRY AVE MOUND MN 55364 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 0811723330028 1520 MINNIE AVE MARK WM JENSEN ETAl. mark W JENSF.N 1520 MINNIE AVE mound MN 55364 38 0811723330065 PROP ADDR 1335 MINNIE. AVE OWNER NAME T LA LH MANWARREN TAXPAYER tony L A LISA H MANWARREN NAME/ADDR 1535 MINNIE AVE mound MN 55364 r*i X X 38 0811723330077 PROP ADDR 1520 NORTH ARM DR OWNER NAME DORITMCOCEN TAXPAYER DORITHCOGEN NAME/ADDR 1409 7TH STS E MPLSMN 55414 s H 38 0811723330086 PROP AODR 3925 CHERRY AVE OWNER NAME JENNIFER A SIMON TAXPAYER /ENNIFER A SIMON NAME/ADDR 3925 CHERRY AVC MOUND MN 55304 RUN DATE :7/22/MB4 MEhWEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFO^ATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST oJ TH^HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT; TO BECT )-------- OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND > ,b// j / ^ y^O L// / *• . T i- fir ■f \'V. rf. .•4 % * \ f- / / •V. 7 PAGE: 2 ’ - K . - Hennepin EXHIBIT O Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department 157.08 (25) 8 172.71 76^ ■t\(18) .\ . icherBYAY^ 168.65 (79) XT • 165.2 144.65 159.23 (77) 1“ 2i 153 27 16 150 29 (74) 155 1± / / m g ***** I e^ to cri CM to / 3 CM JF^ 2 1 (28) jr # (27)^ • • m ■ 60 70 15 180 (29) 180 8 (30) 180 (87) ir 30 Parcel Information larcel ID 0811723330086 Hous« NMmber 3925 Str««t Name CHERRY AVE This is not B legally reconied map. K represents a compHabon of information and data from CUy, County, and State road authorities and other sources. I * . ( f r V- I aOiftliaiNiii Date Application Received: 7-21*04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 7-21-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 9-19-04 COn^f^ti mcctimq SEP 1 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Pale: September 7, 2004 Item No.: 1 Department Approval: Name: Janice Gundlaclxl'v Title: City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-3046, Robert & Brenda MacDonald, 2480 Old Beach Road - After-the-Fact Side Yard Setback Variance. Amended CUP, Resolutions Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: Ll< - IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre minimum) 2.356 acres (102,624 s.f.) 190’ @ shoreline; 197 ’ @ 75 ’ setback List of Exhibits A - Resolution per Plamting Commission Recommendation n - Proposed Hardcover Removals C - Amended CUP Resolution from 8-2003 D - PC Action Notice 8-17-04 E - PC Memo and Exhibits of 8-11-04 Application Summary: Applicant requests an after-the-fact side yard setback variance to pcrmil the detached garage to remain 8.4 feet from the side lot line when 10 feet is normally required. This garage was recently reconstructed without the required building permits. Ihe applicant has also requested that the original conditional use permit granted in .‘\ugust of last year be amended to reflect the non-rental guest apartment that was recently constructed w ithout permits._________________________________________________ Initial Staff Recommendation: Staff had recommended that the Plamiing Commission discuss whether the improvements made to the detached garage qualify as maintenance or a rebuild. If the Commission determined the improvements were merely maintenance, then staff reconunends approval of the side yard setback variance request. If the Planning Commission determined that the garage was rebuilt, staff recommended denial of the side setback variance request and the garage must be moved to meet a 10* setback and undergo a hardcover variance review. Staff concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation stated below and also recommends approval of the amended resolution granting a conditional use permit for a non-rental guest apartment above the attached garage. __________________—------ Background ■ ^ j- The applicant received variance approval in August 2003 to allow several improvements including replacing the existing detached garage with a larger building. Included in that August, 2003 request were two conditional use permits for plumbing in an accessory building and a non-rental guesi apartment above the existing attached garage, a variance for a separate utility meter for the non ­ rental guest apartment and a hardcover variance for the 75 ’-250* lake setback zone. The approval was conditioned on removal of 1,036 s.f. of driveway hardcover as the property s 75 -250 hardcover level was 35% when only 25% is allowed. In late June of this year staff performed a site inspection as the variance noted above was about to expire and staff had learned that the work had already been completed. Following the site inspection and inquiries with the Inspections Department it was discovered that many improvements were made without permits, including improvements to the detached garage 8.4 feet from the side lot line. An after-the-fact side yard setback variance is now required in order to approve the changes made to the detached garage. The applicant has also requested that the previous resolution approving two conditional use permits, a variance to one of the CUP’s, and a hardcover variance be amended to approve only the CUP for the non-rental guest apartment, as that work was also conducted without a permit. This is the resolution set to expire this month. Staff has agreed to do this as there is no basis to deny the CUP request for a non-rental guest apartment as all the conditions can be met and the review was already completed. All other CUP’s and variances approved will become null and void with the amended resolution. This revised resolution will appear before the City Council for approval. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the after-the-fact side yard setback variance to permit the garage to remain 8.4 ’ from the side lot line when 10’ is normally required, stipulating that 800 s.f. of hardcover is removed from the 75 ’ - 250’ lake setback zone. The Planning Commission determined that the garage was rebuilt and the property must therefore undergo a hardcover review. The Planning Commission stated that the hardship for the side yard setback was the existing slab’s location to the lot line, being the applicant’s reused that slab in an effort to raise the garage and that the encroacliment was at one comer rather than an entire side. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolutions. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED 1. Adopt the attached Resolution granting an after-the-fact side yard setback variance for 2480 Old Beach Road. 2.Adopt the attached Resolution for an amended CUP for the non-rental guest apartment. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1405 AND 78-1288 FILE NO. 04-3046 WHEREAS, Robert W. MacDonald and Brenda Zoe MacDonald, husband and wife (hereinafter “the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 2480 Old Beach Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City”) and legally described as follows: Lot 3 and all that part of Lot 2, “SHORE HILLS” lying southerly of a line running from a point in the westerly line of said lot, distant 24 feet northerly of the southwesterly comer thereof to a point in the southeasterly line of said lot, distant 263.4 feet northeasterly of the southwesterly corner thereof, according to the plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “property”); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-1405 and 78-1288 to allow a rebuilt detached garage to remain 8.4 feet from the side lot line when 10 feet is normally required and to allow a hardcover level of 32% within the 75 ’-250’ zone where 25% is normally allowed and 34% currently e.xists. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File <<04-3046. »>The property is located in the LR - IB zoning district, which requires a minimum lot area of 1 acre. The applicant’s property is in excess of 2 acres. \ * Pai;e 1 of 5 3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on August 16, 2004 and recommended approval of the after-the-fact side yard setback variance request based on the following findings: a. The location of the new garage at the same location as the previous garage, being setback 8.4 ’ from the side lot line, has no impact on visual density in the neighborhood nor any impact on adjoining property. b. The 1.6 ’ encroaclunent exists at one corner, rather than an entire side. c. The previous slab was reused in an attempt to raise the grade of the new garage to prevent water damage. d. The total amount of hardcover on the property will not increase above the current non-conforming level, and as a stipulation of approval the applicant has agreed to remove 800 s.f. of hardcover from the 75'-250 ’ zone which is out of compliance. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the public, and the effect of tlie proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property arc peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-1405 and 78-1288 to Page 2 of 5 allow a rebuilt detached garage to remain 8.4 feet from the side lot line when 10 feet is normally required and to allow a hardcover level of 32% within the 75 ’-250' zone where 25% is normally allow'cd and 34% currently exists, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as F.xhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in confonnity with City codes will require furtlier Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. Hardcover in the 75-250 ’ zone shall be limited to 12,455 s.f. or 32% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit A. Applicant is advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. Applicant shall remove all plastic or fabric liner material from the decorative land.scape beds on the property to ensure their permeability as non-hardcover surfaces. 4. The applicant shall apply for and receive the appropriate after-the-fact building permit and inspections and complete any changes required to comply with the building code within 60 days of this approval. 5. Required removals of hardcover (800 s.f. in the 75 ’-250’ zone) shall be completed by the after-the-fact building permit inspections. 6. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within 60 days of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (November 12, 2004). 7. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority grunted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 8. The undersigned applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants ’ heirs. Page 3 of 5 successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 13*'’ day of September, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Cleric Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) 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 instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public fe.'i Page 4 of 5 State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Heiuiepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me tliis__day of by Robert W. MacDonald, husband of Brenda Zoe MacDonald, husband and wife. ,2004 Notary Public Stale of Mimtesota ) ) ss County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this __day of __________, 2004 by Brenda Zoe MacDonald, wife of Robert W. MacDonald, husband and wife. Notary Public Page 5 of 5 lUiiaiiiMii ro 66 C*>w T^KUPn'-A «.*m .X ' ■' •• 'J W^i W !k 'Vj «■:> A ■ .» wm V > V .. ^ ■; i' t A V 1.: FS' ^5 '; »o , ■...»; 4, V T * ^ f*<.r hr r rr • :•%■• ■•jvr.-.-v :-.T % X / c 1^ . < • •_ A-. * t V . '. I £«•«•) \ rim lUMMN • \ \ ncMC»«iAim ^^»IMQ, Jin«»«iu oM IS (M IS J Av: :■ • ■'.^ ■ ■• ■-: . "O««•• I r..-x') ♦ •» i OM !• GID !• p« C?‘ <y • v V r>cr* nfi i«05^ fi^ JM It \ Usl IIA ift ^o| t tn 1 ! ij HARDCOVER ARI BUHOmc BlTUMNOUS CONCfKTC root fIflAMNC WAUS MOOO orcM PAVCR HAIMS PlAXnNG ARCAS RIPRAP lOTAl HAROCOVTR 7% LFGtNO 11-^.76^^ >\“ “o^L, 'A <Til>7 •« l« I r iM It oH It GCNERAL NOTES I far fhc purpoif of Ifiis lAnvty. IH«I p«rlkulo» :<i 7 «««i.Mr««l«r1y line pi t«| 3, Ho«Pl9 o rWOMi tfItItMCt •! **«% «n otswmcM s*«>«xq «l N 21*21 bf' L \ ICCAL description 2 Th« oddrttt •< the tbovt prop«*tf ?4i0 OlO 9f AO* ROAO. ORONO. UN. 5SMI r" •* *• MAIS’ IiMm '.v;?'. *•. • ^r* *«• oi lAid iti. di«i»ii '•* *••* ®‘ •»*« sculhvctltrlt rorn«r |H«rtol.•ICPrtfM^ le lAt p*ol th««to4 3 tAf lititf tufvty ol tMt tilt «0« complfltd »>i AAy 10 2003 • foifnd Iron Monwmt«il •• OtAo’tt S«1 Mon Monument - CoUli fkivn • Oenolvt SoAtlOTf ^«*r MorxHol# - Dtnoitt Storm S««tf Monholt - Otno'.tt »olt» Vo<«t - Dtnotft ftt H|4ran| - Oonoitt Cot Mttof - Oenoltt HtclfiC tron»torm*r - Otnotfft At Cond*lionttq |Jn«l - Ctnoitt ON'ty Rd# - Otnoltt t«S^t Rd# - Oonotet Stonf Rotor *oiA - 0*nol»t Pood Oott - Dtnoitt RlonlP»9 Arto Oooottt R<p Mop Shorvltxt - Oonottt B lwmmovs Swrtoct - Dffiotts Concrtlt Swrioct ------*• — — - Otnoltt Von'tory StoB « . tl — — - Oonoitt Storm So»t# .. ■■— > , — - Donotto Hclormoti 0-7S 75- 2»* 7SO>SOO’ TREE LEGEND NomOtr loiioot>9 ofcH»t**«tiort <|fr«lts otfimoltd ditARtf « inchet. iMroo loot oboto froond lf»d Tho MCOnd nwmbor (:i m*f) donotot Iho nomMv ol tnmtt ol »»Ol locot^ (I dtnotot o dootf I'to). MurTtbor kdoolnf thriibt donolot ilo domotor in loot 1 Otnolo* otedoowt w«o CT^ 0o»*ol»» thrub Oo«»ol0« COiMlorOwt Woo. 4 Rored Aroo «l.2|Oi SO ft (2 U Ac ) S BonchmorA. R«n doMition of «on<iory monhoit locaiod lAb Itot (oti et oi'tlmg houM • 135 «2 li«i *f2IJ — —t — — - Oonotot CotmoM — ----------- Otnoitt Otorhootf UlMiot — — I------------ Ooootos Urtdorsround tdopMor«o --------■ . ■— - Oonoitt Itnct (t|PO 0« Noltd) P>*M - Donolot Net fo Sedo U«M|p) - Donolot Rttord Ortlonct P#» R»Ol Ml It on - Donoitt I'dd Utoowrod O'tlonco A Donolot Ad« BA Oor«eiot Botfood BE Donolot Boo Cldor CH Donolot Chorry El Donolot Elm IB Donolot Wonoood M Donolot Mopfo Q Donolot Odk PI Donolot Rdo to Donolot hto OocidWoot Donolot Woo CtdfftBir O" ■» Mi SCHOELl & MADSON. INC.HQ IIT REVISIQN»u Ql S( RBMK« A CKO [NONfCRS • SUtVlrONS • riANNCR's to* ItSlINC • CNMtONWrMUl SIRMUX 1 Ol *Odi» % »- ».*, ‘VO 1 - ---------------------------------------------------------— CCRTinCATiON I hfifby COflily Ihol IH»S turvoy mo% prepornd i>r>dor my topermiion oruf Ihol I om O Irfpntod lend Survoyo* uftdPf IHf Inpt r>l Ihn **lnln nl Mmnotnlfi CL'INT Robe S 0^ ^ 0 mtata HAROCOVCR AfW Bun DING BttUMMOUS CONOKU POOL fIClAIMNC WAllS WOOD OCCM pavcb malics PlANTMC AREAS RIPRAP 10IAL HAROC(n€R \ • a* ;•< } *a«t. no BTAC n •M AAf HA >909 *mt9*99 urn >t/fg - i»on - S#l Wo« MofHimanl - Drnoi«« CoicA Be»<n - 0«no<*« Soa»lo»y S*«#< M«AAfltar - SlO»m %999f > 0«*W,M Rttitr Vol«« - Oa^<t« r«t My«tfanl - 0«<v>i»« Cm m#i«* - Ovnole* lifcUiC > Ot'H>l»« Atf Can4«liO<'««9 VM^I - 0«rml«« Pci# D#not*« 11^1 Pol# - D#n«le« Sion# Pov#r VNAk - #004 0#t»i - D#OOI#« Ptooli*i9 Ai#o ' 0#AO(C» R#) Rop S4or#<«^ •* 0#fM>l#« 0 lvm«o«w« Wloc# * OfoQiti Concrftc Su^tocf O#nol#ft Son<lar> S#o#t « . «i ~ - 0#o<M#« Sl#»m S«o#i ——» - D#ool#« Helcwno#! ^ - OtoeU# CotmoM - D#ool«« 0«o»*'to4 Uliili#* ^ t - - D#oo4#« Uotfor^ound lc«#pi»OnC ~— »■.'■— - Dvoolct »#rvcf (1y»# #• Holt#) P#«l - 0#A0l«« Hot f« Sc<4# won PI - 0#ool#« R#cw4 0*»loo(# Pp Plot M« »• PI - i»*i4 M^otu^c# Otvlo^t P 0 IKXn 'Ell!G^r«T*3 onin t:^i CT-J 0-75 75- 750' 750-500* TREE lECENO NuitHi#* loMooot^i obRftwotKKi Oioolct tttimaittf (Btinil in inch#*, lh*#« «##l obo## brownd l#v#l th# ttcPHi mtmb9* (»f onf) d#not#« Ih# ol l*w«k* #• IMI loco(*on (I d#n«l#« o 4«od lr#«). Ni#nb#« icAfooioR tfwtib* 4«nol#« «l'* tfom#tP Wi f##l 0#Aol#« 4#ci4uou* If##. O#not#t Conit«>#if* If## A O#nol#« Agh RA O#noi#t Bo#to#od BE O#nol#« Bo# Cldt« CM O#nol«« Ch#*«f Cl O#nol#t Cim iB 0#««ol#« Ifonoood M O#nol#t M«pi« 0 op«out omi PI O##ol#t Pin# TO 0#n«!tt If## OtcitfMtft 0#nol#l •hrwi . .V".' -; V, r t * 09 i * _ I < ''“I ' *>/*' ■ ‘ 1^“' f /■ i ; t r, t VX: \'*is > . kr^ f> .y I VN • V. /J? r.i I * i.tM Jik^m- m jf* N7,. 5i2? * r.^H mm K'V 7 r i . t’ p i>s -S. * \ " ■* ^ N «c* .3^ ^ V I ■* .'w ^ -I-'SS i 1 /*!S J V 1%.i'l »• jf > ■.■ ’r •» . ^ .,^1 >■ i -V;’ .<■% V‘ r - ■ 3p^ XIC A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-328 (7) (B) FILE NO. 03-2933 WHEREAS, Gary Nece on behalf of Robert W. MacDonald and Brenda Zoe MacDonald (husband & wife), (hereinafter “the applicants”) are the owners of the property located at 2480 Old Beach Road w'ithin the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City ”) and legally described as follows: Lot 3 and all that part of Lot 2, “SHORE HILLS" lying southerly of a line ruiuiing from a point in the westerly line of said lot, distant 24 feet northerly of the southwesterly corner thereof to a point in the southeasterly line of said lot, distant 263.4 feet northeasterly of the southwesterly corner thereof, according to the plat thereof, Hennepin County, Mirmesota (hereinafter the “property ”); and WIIERJ.AS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a conditional use permit per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-328 (7) (B) to allow a non-rental guest apartment above the e.xisting attached garage. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1.Tliis application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2933 and amended as Zoning File #04-3046. 2.The property is located in the LR - IB which requires a minimum lot area of I acre where the subject property is 2.356 acres. Page I of 5 r 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on August 18, 2003 and August 16, 2004 and recommended approval of tlie conditional use permit based on the following findings: a. The applicant has amended the request, file #04-3046, not requiring separate meter for utilities serving the non-rental guest apartment. b. The non-rental guest apartment will not be provided with a separate street address. c. An access to the non-rental guest apartment from the interior of the principal residence has been provided and is the primary access to the apartment. d. Adequate parking is provided for on-site. e. The applicant’s property is provided with City sewer. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effects of the proposed conditional use permit on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district, that granting the conditional use permit would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely ser\e as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or dil^ficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit ^nd intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional use permit to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-328 (7) (B) to allow a non-rental guest apartment above the existing attached garage subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 5 i 1.Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the conditional use permit will expire on that date (September 13, 2004). 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The undersigned applicants have read understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants ’ heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 25"' day of August, 2003 and amended on the 13"' day of September, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mavor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instniment was acknowledged before me on this __ day of _______, 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal cor]X)ration and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument wzis acknowledged before me on this _ day of _______, 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 r STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2004 by Robert W. MacDonald, husband of Brenda Zoe MacDonald, Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2004 by Brenda Zoe MacDonald, wife of Robert W. MacDonald. Notary Public Page 5 of 5 Mlili CITY OF ORONO ZONING FILE: 04-3046 p!a Box 66 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION STm® ♦W?'* ....................?ATE OF NOTICE, TO: Robert & Brenda MacDonald COPIES: Matt Seltzer / Tim Kelley 2480 Old Beach Road Leonard. Street & Deinard Orono, MN 55391 150 South Fifth Street Suite 2300 Minneapolis. MN 55402 TYPE OF APPLICATION: _ .Atter-die^Fact ______ DATE OF MEETING: August 16.2004 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval of the side yard setback variance to allow the rebuilt detached garage to remain 8.4 ’ from the side lot line when 10’ is normally required based on the following condition; l- i 1 . The applicants agree to remove 800 s.f. of hardcover, of their choosing, within the 75 ’-250’ lake setback zone. A plan illustrating where the hardcover removals will take place must be submitted prior to City Council review. VOTE: 6 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant ’s next meeting is tentatively scheduled for: Cilv Council - Monday, August 23, 2004; meeting slarl.s nt 7:00 p.m, If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach .at 952-249-4623. M04-3046 August 16, 2004 Page I of 3 Date Application Received: 7-21*04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 7-21-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 9-19-04 To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Janice Gundlach, City Planner' A August 11,2004 04-3046, Robert and Brenda MacDonald, 2480 Old Reach Road - After-the-Fact Side Yard Setback Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width; LR - IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre min.) 2.356 acres (102.624 s.f.) 190’ @ shoreline; 197’ @ 75’ setback Application Summary: Applicant requests an after-the-fact side yard setback variance to permit the detached garage to remain 8.4 feet from the side lot line when 10 feet is normally required. This garage was recently reconstructed without the required building pennits. Sla/f Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission discuss whether the improvements made to the detached garage qualify as maintenance or a rebuild. Should the Commission determine the improvements were merely maintenance, then staff would recommend approval of the side yard setback variance request. If the Planning Commission determines that the garage was rebuilt, staff would recommend denial of the side setback variance request and the garage must be moved to meet a 10 ’ setback and undergo a hardcover variance review.__________________________________________ Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-1405. Nonencroachments. (6) In side yards only, no accessory structure shall be closer than ten feet from any side lot line. List of Exhibits Exhibit y\ - Applications Exhibit B - Applicant ’s Narrative Exhibit C - Hard.ship Documentation Form Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Photograph of Old Garage Exhibit F - Photographs of New Garage Exhibit G - Resolution Exhibit from Aug. 2003 Variance Approval Exhibit H - Property Owner’s List Exhibit I - Plat Map #04-3046 August 16,2004 Page 2 of 3 Background The applicant received variance approval in August 2003 to allow several improvements including replacing the existing detached garage with a larger building. Included in that August, 2003 request were two conditional use permits for plumbing in an accessory building and a non-rental guest apartment above the existing attached garage, a variance for a separate utility meter for the non-rental guest apartment and a hardcover variance for the 75 ’-250 ’ lake setback zone. The approval was conditioned on removal of 1,036 s.f. of driveway hardcover as the property ’s 75 ’-250 ’ hardcover level was 35% when only 25% is allowed. In late June of this year staff performed a site inspection as the variance noted above was about to expire and staff had learned that the work had already been completed. Following the site inspection and inquiries with the Inspections Department it was discovered that many improvements were made without permits, including improvements to the detached garage 8.4 feet from the side lot line. An after-the-fact side yard setback variance is now required in order to approve the changes made to the detached garage. The applicant has also requested that the previous resolution approving two conditional use permits, a variance to one of the CUP's . and a hardcover variance be amended to approve only the CUP for the non-rental guest apartment, as that work was also conducted without a permit. This is the resolution set to expire this month. Staff has agreed to do this as there is no basis to deny the CUP request for a non-rental guest apartment as all the conditions can be met and the review was already completed. All other cup ’s and variances approved will become null and void with the amended resolution. This revised resolution will appear before the City Council for approval. Non-Conforming Structures Because the detached garage doesn ’t meet the required 10 ’ setback, it is considered non- conforming in location. There are two different ways staff typically reviews non ­ conformities; 1. Routine maintenance not altering the existing building envelope, and 2. Rebuild, including changes to the building envelope When the improvements meet #1 above the non-conformity can remain. When the improvements go so far as to constitute the structure being rebuilt, then staff recommends tltat the structure be brought into conformance, which in this case would require the garage meet a 10' setback from the side lot line. After-the-Fact Variance Analysis In order to make an informed decision on whether a variance should be granted and under what circumstances, it is important to understand the improvements made to the detached garage in question. The applicant has indicated that the improvements consisted of the following; 1. New roof, pitch and orientation change within required 10 ’ setback, added dormers, 2. New floor, raised and poured over the existing floor, I r «^04-3046 August 16,2004 Page 3 of 3 3. 4. Complete wall replacement. Re-use of all mechanical systems, including sprinkler system, heating and electrical Staff would normally request to see building permit plans if there is some uncertainty as to the amount of work conducted. No formal building plans have been submitted for staff to analyze as the structure is already complete. In order for after-the-fact building permit plans to be approved, building plans of what was done will need to be submitted, however they are not ready at this time. If the new garage met what is considered maintenance, a side setback variance is justified as every property owner has the ability to maintain their non-conforming structures. Under this scenario only the side setback variance would be required and staff would recommend approval. If the new garage's improvements met the rebuild threshold, a side setback variance is not justified. The garage could have easily been rebuilt to meet a 10’ setback. However, under this scenario a hardcover review would be required as the applicant’s property is at 35% hardcover within the 75’-250 ’ lake setback zone. Staff Recommendation Staff would recommend approval of the after-the-fact side yard setback variance request should the Plaiuring Commission determine that the improvements made to the building qualify as maintenance. Staff would recommend denial of the requested after-the-fact side setback variance if the improvements made to the building met the threshold of a rebuild. The applicants under this scenario must move the garage to meet a 10’ setback from the side lot line and undergo a hardcover review and ultimately variance approval process. If the Planning Commission determines this is the correct course of action, the applicant must move the garage to meet a 10’ setback. The applicant could be given guidance as far as the required hardcover variance review and what the Commission may approve (i.e. approval of 35% hardcover as no new hardcover is proposed or a reduction in hardcover, and to what level). 1 EXHIBIT A City of Orono Variance Application street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Application U C^-l ~ '■^)Ly(c_ Dale Received: 'yfPJjVH Amount Paid: 2C'C>, Staff J AV/df Fee: S600 Main: 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 Renewal. S300 After-the-fact: S1.200 Double Fee This application form must be completed in full. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to iho status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION; Site Address: 2480 Old Beach Road Property Identification Number (PIN): ^ 117-23-22-0004 (Atlsch legal description to application if not included on the survey.) r.^ . r-.______^ _____:_____I /__4QQODate Properly Acquired (month/year): April 1998 Present use of property: IS Residential O Other Zoning District: LR-1B___________________ Q Yes. I own the adjacent parcels. APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal names and marital status required for each interested party) Name: Robert W. MacDonald _______________ Phone (home): 952-471-8116 Phone (work): Address: 2480 Old Beach Road. Orono. MN 55391 Email:__________________________________Fax: OWNER INFORMATION; (Complete legal names and marital status required for each interested party) Name: Robert W. and Brenda Zoe MacDonald Phone (home): 952-471-8116 Address. 2480 Old Beach Road. Orono. MN 55391. Phone (work): Email:Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost; S SQjOOO Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): Reconstruction of .original 2 car delated oaraoe in onamal location with a raised floor to solve moisture problem and an enhanced roof design to .rna ke the aopearanre r.omolementarv to the mam house. A variance is required because o ne corner of the .or iq inp l qaraao was 8 4 feet from the side orooertv line rather than 10 feet as required by the current zoning -------------- // Ij /a 61!w V 2505726vl REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be processed. IS El El El □ NA□ NA El□ NA Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150' of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, Government Center. A-603 300 South 6''’ Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 0.5" x 11" or 11" X 17" for reproduction. Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). Topographic survey • including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8.5" x 11 or 11" X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17"). Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. APPLICANT'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it tfnTn~mtr-eoqiptete or to recommend the request for denial of the itc poWaj^merit. Date: Date: __________ Applicant's Signatur Applicant's Signature: OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the_Ci£P6£ty by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of invesUgig^^I^HtJ^tt^fication of<JHT^e?JD69t>-.^^ wwner 3 .-.i^naturfi ^ _____________ Date: Owner's Signatur^f^Date: -? V Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized repiesentative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project .i--. ■ ft * .* • V'•.? • / 2303726vl lit REQUIRED SUBMITTALS; ^ , All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date m order tor your application to be processed. (3 E E □ NA□ NA E□ NA Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150' of the subject property, labels and plat map List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, Government Center. A-603 300 South S'*' Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11“ X 17" for reproduction. Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). Topographic survey • including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 1 r X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8 5" x 11“ or 11" x 17”). Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. APPLICANT'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered m the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upoi^fail^uro to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it it !:»—so *''' Date;__________Applicant’s Signatur Applicant's Signature; OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto thejiroperty by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of invesUg^^^^^H(Ji(Cnfeation of^hiS^reqUeatr-.,.,^^^ Owner's Signature. Date. — Owner's Signaturi Date; V Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project V * / * *• •. r/ A . >* *•: 2503726VI liiiifniinii I I jTh City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form is form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-appiicat'on meeting.*) Street Address: Msiling Address: For Office Use.Only ^ 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O.Box 66 City Planner: Janice------------- Orono MN 55356 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Meeting Date/Time: —7/06/0,4 ' PC Date: August Meeting 3:30 p m Main: 952-249-4600 Fax: 952-249-4616 What Is the purpose of a pre-application meeting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them of tne procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION; Site Address. 2480 Old Beach Road Property Identification Number (PIN); 21-1 17-23-22-Q0Q4_ Zoning District: LR-1B Size of Property: 2 356 acres DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST; r-i r. . v, ^ e .h l □ Average Setback S Side Yard Setback □ Rear Yard Setback □ Front Yard Setback □ Hardcover □ Lot Coverage □ Lot Area □ Lot Width Q Other; _______________________________________________________—---------------------- Applicant’s Initials;__ HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form, understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it must be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance application. OTHER INFORMATION: 'Please note; Your variance application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this formcwilLbe completed by City sjafL Applicant SignatuCi^Date 2505799vl / -•r‘ 1 ‘-1 ■. f.- • ■ I V-w. " .1 EXHIBIT B LEONARD, STREET AND DEINARD July 21,2004 PROFESStONAl. ASSOCIATION Matthew B. Seltzer 612-335-7116 matthew.seltzer@leonard.com Via Personal Delivery Citv of Orono Attn: Janice J. Gundlach City Plamier 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Re: Robert IK MacDonald Application for Variance, 2480 Old Beach Road Dear Ms. Gundlach; Enclosed please find the following in support of Robert W. MacDonald’s application for a set' back variance. 1. o 3. 4. 5. 6. Pre-Application Meeting Fomi. Application Fomi. Hardship Documentation Fonn. Certified property owner’s list, labels and plat map. Photographs of elevation views of reconstructed garage. Check payable to the City of Orono for $1,200 after-the-fact application fee, I understand that you already have a suiwey and a photograph of the original garage on file and that there is no need to resubmit these items. As we discussed, I understand that you will also process an amendment to resolution number 5032 on the conditional use pennit for the non-rental guest apartment. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments, or if I can be of assistance in any way. Thank you very much. Vei7 truly yours, Leonard, Street and Deinard, P.A. Matthew B. Seltzer MBS/kaa Enclosures cc: Robert W. MacDonald (w/encls.) 150 South Fhtm Stiut Suiti ijoo Minkeapous , Minnesota isaoi Tel 6ii-u$*isoo Fax 2508493V1 lAW OlllCti IN MINNEAPOili, lAlKT PAUL, MANKATO* SAIN. CLOUD AND WASHINGTON* D C. r7 _ill WWW.L10NAKO.COM ^ I ,, •t,' im "1 \ *• * I ♦ EXHIBIT C HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City._____________________________________ Minnesota Stale Statue Section 394.27. Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be demonstrated m order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance is Justified. The information tho City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered. Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may not apply): 1."The property in question cannot be put lo a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls.” The undue hardship standard requires a showing that the landowners wou'd lit<e to use their property in a reasonable manner that is r)rohibited bv ordinance. Here, the landowners propose to continue to use the property in the same manner as it was when they purchased it The proposed use is reasonable because it is consistent .n character with the surrounding neighborhood.________________________________________________________________ 2."The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique lo his property not created by the landowner." The original detached q.3raoe was m existence prior to the acdL'isitipn of the property by the current owners.,_____________________________________________________________ "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." Tho purpose of the variance is to replace the original carace in its original location. There is no change to the character of the locality "Economic considerations alone shaii not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." fir 250S832vl 5."Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for properly in the zone where the affected person's land is located." A detached private oaraoe is a permitted accessory use in this zone________________________ The Board or Council may permit as a variance tne temporary use of a one-famiiy dwelling as a two-family dwelling." 8 "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question arc peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." The corner of the original detached oarace was constructed less than 10 feet from the side property line, and this condition was in existence for many years.___________________________ "The conditions do not apply gencally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." This application is based upon the fact that the corner of the oncinal detached garage was constructed less than 10 feet from the side property line This condition does not apply generally to other land or structures In the district._________________________________________________ "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." The detached oarace is an important component of the property that adds value and contributes to the enjoyment and desirability of the property. The original oarage had deteriorated duejo moisture problems and become unsightly. Reccnstruct.on of the garage with a raised floor, a sound structure, and an attractive extenor that complements the main house helps to preserve the value of the property and the aopl cant's property rights and enhances the neighborhood "The granting of the proposed variance will not m any way impair health, safety, comifort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zonmg Code." The orantina of the variance to reconstruct the original oarace in its original location does not change anv conditions in the neighborhood or harm any neighbor or member of the public The oaraoe is screened from the neighboring property by means of an existing fence The encroachment upon the setback is very small, consist no of only one corner of the ga^ace and only 1.5 feet. Reconstruction of the oaraoe in its original location w th its oriqonal dirr.ensior.s does not add any new hardcover. Reconstruction of the deteriorated structure improves public health and comfort._______________________________________________________________ !J[!:*• ^ V —• * ok r • t .r-** /V/ 'Ai •• />' 0 * i*»iJ •J' i:-\J> 2565832VI 12."The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." changes to the site o r its layout ------------------------------------——-----------------------------------— Sho^fd^you fee! the"hardship cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary). Th« undue hardship standard do es not prohibit the qrantinq of set b^k variances if.the ^^ahance jsjn knaoing with the spirit and int ent of the ordinance. This application reasonably and within t^^^ minor variance M .5 feet) of a corner of the oarage into theand intent of the ordinance because It Is for a or inconsistent with realization of the goals of the comprehensive plan and the iSpninq prP't iaDce,--------- r r 4 e- *• •« 1 , » V • * .5 .* M .1 rf. .• ■>. V--‘ ' •• -• tL'U V- 1 EXHIBIT D / ^SOUCMrASTCa-.v ^ L?.£ Of ’CT : 07.>7 ■ E - 251^ / 265. rtwct >/ 7 Ct*.C»fTl <£5*^'.c - ... ■•T olJIiyCl/* •*'1 /o" ^ A ^ '* ’ ^ / •?* ^ V 1 4\ S ' \ 1 "s V '\i '1 \ ?s Si. < \ '• .V •H ''I'o*:' AW.-r^"k! \ \ 0£NCHJb>AfI< tWM O AV.tnCJ %> •%\. i> \ BltUM^NOuS 0«ltvt ttlM, •«••««) n •SV.BIB i« CONCWf ft •AiVS 'e I ..®»?• .( '• \i •26^^“ w M I 499- ! I \ L LEGCNO \ /I /s n<0; 'o°'„ ■^5?r \ LECAU DESCRIPTION Col 3 on l»«ot P9fl o* Lot 2. *V<O0C PiUS* ItOUlHofty ol e Im# runninq from o polot in tH« otfltr^y l^t o> Se*0 lot. Oittoot 2* toot norfitorty O* IM tOuthattltrly COrntr t»««'«of 10 0 peir»t in int oowtHootiCfiy of 9C*d «ol. Oistom 203 * ftti rtOftHoettorty of tht Mulfiveottriy corngr thereol. oceord^nq In th« plot thorcof. general notes t for IHt pMfpoto of IhtO lUfiTOy. t^Ot pOrfIculor lonqonUol Wotiffiy !•«# of Lot 3. hov»ng o rotord dioioneo oi 261.2 loti, fiot on OBOumod btorinq qI N 2t*2l*S7* C 2 7h# oddrcso of Iho ebo»o o^opoftr 2«aO OcO BEACH BOAO. OROHO. MN. 3539t 3. Th* fi«!d lurvtjr Of IN* *ilf wo* COmplftfd on JUty 10. 2003 4 Pprctt Af*o: 91.7B01 SO- n. (2 li Ac) 5 Bt'fC^orL: R.m otovotion o* »on«lory monhelt >OCOt*d ±65 ffft Celt Df tisi«4q houio • 933.12 ffdl. (NCVO 1929) # - Otnole* round tron Monum*n| O • Oonote* Sot iron Monyment « • - Oenolcs Colch Bos«n ». -2 ** Omolt* SonUory Sfmtr Monho^t fifr.O - Oonotcs Storm Sooor Monhtft « - Otnolct Woltf Volwt O,^ - Oonott* firt O*^ - Oonott* Co* Woitf vS “ • OtnoltS Cloctric Tron*form«r C£ - Oonott* Air Condilfono^g Unit ^ - Oonoto* Utiiily Pofo O - Oonoto* Light Poi# - Oonoto* Sion* Povcr Won ^ - Oonoto* Wood Oocii • Oonoto* Plontu«q A/OO - Oonoto* P>a Pop Shorotino ' ■ i ~ Oonoto* Bitwmo^ow* Surloco .i»Trf - OtnolOi Concrott Surfoco — - M — — - Oonoto* Son.tvy So«Or .•*!.... « Ocneto* Storm So»or _ . Oonoto* Wotormom . . . C • Oonoto* Cotmom •* - - Oonoto* Ovorhfod Utl.t^o* • — - Ctnotos Undrqround Totophono “■■ - Oonoto* foneo (T|po 0* Noltd) .<T*l - Oonoto* Hoi To Scolo - Oonoto* Pocord O ttonco Por Plot *A'*«P*f - Oonoto* fitld Uooswrod Oi*t9lCC LAKE MINNETONKA IlC vai Oh • a;9 57 Oh juir tO. 2003 •coot or WATCP 30 (SCALE :n feet ) HARDCOVER AREAS BuitOihC 5 »2« «r. B i'uminou S n.072 CONCRCTC 2.585 Poa 69C PCT ajhinc walls 351 WOOO OCCK 627 PAVtR WALKS 2.265 PlAHTihc areas 144 RlPRa P 839 total hardcover 23.502 » I (25 6%) 0-75’ 73-250’ 250-500- 639 * t 13424 9439 (4 2%) (34.4X) (25 1%) TREE LEGEND Humbor loflomnq ob^rciriQtion dtnote* o«timofc4 d*omolfr O' oichf*, Ihreo tool ooe«o 9rewnd toiref The fOcend nymber (.f ony) doneto* IhO nympor of trynh* o| tndt locot on (1 donolo* o dcod ifoe) HyTf»t*r rghoanq *hfybt dmoief .1* d'Cmctcr m loot. Oenolo* dccidyows IfOO Oonoto* eor>iforOw* tfOO A Conolo* A*H BA Oonslo* 8o**neod BE Oonolos Boa EldO' CH Oonoto* Chorry El Oonoto* Elm IP Oonoto* ifonwood M Oonoto* Mopio Q Oonoto* Ook Pi Oonoto* Pm* TO Oonoto* Troo Ooc dyout Oonott* shryb '' Oonoto* Irto line £tO«npic 0®T • T This drowng hos been checked and renewed Ihis ________ doy of JOB BOCK NUMBER: (126-92) field bock . 591 PAGE; 56 SCHOELL Sc MADSON. INC. engineers • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS SOIL testing • environmental SERVICES 10580 WAY2ATA boulevard . SUITE 1 MINNETONKA. MN 55305 (952) 546-7601 Tax.(952) 546-9065 CO'YR,CHT 20C2 REVISIONS 1 2 3 i 4 , .. n , j 5 6 i CERTIFICATION i hereby certify (hot thig survey wos prepored under my supervision ond thol I om 0 Licensed Lond Surveyor under the lows of the Stole of Minnesota THEODORE 0 KEMNA Dote. License No 17006 CLIENT Robert MacDonald 2480 Old Beach Road Orono, MN. 55391 S.M.I. PROJECT NO. 64C05-001 f *...3»J /* '*»." ** Py>CTO Cf CLP PeWf4fD 0-*^A<'nEr •>:x * •a V v ^« »*• pw4 -N • ^ *» • ** ••L *1 rr *> tf ii- ■// ■ ■ \'\\ ^ •_• %> ^2rt»5? #* f.», ikm LX: m '1 ,tJ^^ r. • ife-^, »• t'- / V* f, ' ^ k >’*VTI5J^ •V .. t? iU'.:a:'. n%. >‘- ¥ la ;T,?7.- J^^.- r’r;. £sr^tAk:',ir!:j!32^2M S^TSrv^^'vv;^--::r<—•: v’s ' > ■■•».' >. ■•', r V^ ip ,1^'' ^ *"1 >" 31H 1: . >■ 7^ • 0jt ^A \ »' ^* f' > - ■m .T Pt^ ■K^i? 5 i V* It I .^»-tA* tkV* ' . a UDFS •‘'.«. ^ *j . . ■-» >"-.1 '4%. • ^/: ■ V. 'D-2if-^i l3.is% ri^ I'*''*..,mIw^ *' ^ . rlL k- if* i. 4* f * ■ V -Y oHT*'* - - -i^-.flfV • ■ * - •>“S^ ” -V T(. #3i>Vi^?»,'5?!l ,^-*sr-'^';--f ^ *■ ^ « • A '.Y •V If*/ UN- #in i .5^. V ^p/ iT-Y ,'^ *1 ^ " /'' ' > ^ • i ‘: ii^: «?\M: T7I-, *' f\A-* 7 ,•!>, ■\r' 4 1 i ‘ KKf'-'v - • "v.^,^ •■>- '*1 '■ *.-^ \ ^’5;":^ .' •''ftW k Wr ti '^rsiSm r.,., i 1- ■m n^lr ' fe f /t' fr ^ * s jvtS If’^ > ' . .11^::J I ^ r ■ ‘ * i :^l .'xs:--;^ »■' ■ 'V I: Ik .’*r > ,«?■ tm JL ■-M .."V - aK'S f% •.>"*■'' ■'! r » * rf- • * t i , ' /• I . ; r ■ 'lJ ■•'^ IIM W . ‘ '?^A -ju . f 4T» 'X V •- - ^ %’Wf? 9 V . f r r orsr Li<E ni*JNL fcw<A im U-Hlito Af(AA) 22* «'^5'. Ms/loM-crHamn^oTv roorv\-6Up-fo /JO kV»* i aost-vs £|Tt PL^>* NQTS5 ________________■- ______ *u« »•«• wj er’-r-i •-—. *• . '- >.*r I-’ *»•«. c*B- f^TMMU.TT 4*0 IM • ; »'i«' £.• ' Srg fii A»l <;T NQTSS________ itmmi t««c El i k • ..^ 1* ii.nt« •«•#>«• (•kill «M MM ) «M CM* ««« I « Mr* MI V* "mS «M »»lil «/*AM 0)C(Sf ing (241 s.-f.) /TV k- t -».o «r*c.i ♦ltd'll* c* n:-4 • ■ i'MI'* '<• • 4 ' •'•<• -;«» frl**>r> •^1% i-.to ♦.♦-!!# c,(r<y«*i •’ /7i c* M •*^ w to r%**C Mil** 0 mO OMiKitS* l44rOTMAtO ICSCXNCf: __I • m SHE PLAN REVBED HARDCOVtR LAYOUT 12 AIO-R-2 f mT *i MX NW s H RUN DATE ; 7/1WOM 38 2111723220003 PROP ADDR 2440 OLD DEACH RD OWNER NAME LA BARBETTA & J K BARBLTTA -|*^^P^Y£R LAWRENCE A BARBEITA N/ME/ADOR 7^® OLD BEACH RD WAYZATAMN 55391 31 21 1 1723220010 PROP ADDR 2560 OLD BEACH RD OWNERNAME JAMES RKREY TAXPAYER JAMES R KREV N/M4E/ADDH 7560 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 211172)220019 PROP ADDR 2535 OLD BEACH RD OWNER NAME T M & A A CODUTE TAXPAYER 7 ' lOMAS M & ALICIA A CODUTE NAMt/ADDR 2535 OLD BEAOI RD WAYZATAMN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPER'n' INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 2111723220004 PROP ADDR 2180 OID BEACH RD OWNER NAME ROBERT W MACDONALD ROBERT W MACDONALD NAME/ADDR 2480 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 2111723220005 PROP ADDR 2490 OLD BEACH RD OWNER NAME R A LUZAICH & O L LUZAICH TAXPAYER RICHARD A & GAIL L LUZAICH NAMI7ADDR 7490 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 2111723220017 PROP ADDR 2455 OLD BEACH RD OWNER NAME L LUNDQUIST& D LUNDQUIST TAXPAYliR LARRY & DONNA MAE LUNDQUIST NAME/ADDR 7455 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 2111723220018 PROP ADDR 2505 OLD BLACH RD OWNERNAME K DSHERMAN&J DSHERMAN TAXPAYER KIRK D/JACQUEUNED SHERMAN NAME/ADDR 7505 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATAMN 55391 SISa VER services DEPARTMENV.O THLM.EST ^ oi mv'knowledoeanddcuep ^^^^ by PACE: I • • . -(■ \1 ........... „ / c. 1 «i 1. J- ’ t*1 s 5H s EXHIBIT I r. Hennepin Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department jLP t... "1 V-,jiL Parcel Information reel ID 2111723220004 bus# Number 2480 Street Name OLD BEACH RD This Is not a lagaHy recordod map. It raprasants a compilation of Information and data from City, County, and Stata road authontias and other sources. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COllMrii ^4FF:TING SEP 1 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO DATE: September 13,2004 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Titk Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: yj Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Approve Purchase of Replacement Public Works Brush Chipper The 2004 Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund budget includes $30,000 for the replacement of the 1991 Vermeer Model BC1250 Brush Chipper. We have been very satisfied with the performance of our existing chipper and our rec- ' amending the purchase of another Vermeer brush chipper. This equipment will be purchased thrju. ’h the State of Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Program. Vermeer BCI400 XL Brush Chipper, State Bid Price $24,210 Existing Brush Chipper Trade in Allowance ~$5,000 6.5% Sales Tax $1,250 Total Cost $20,460 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approve purchase of Public Works replacement brush chipper from Vermeer Sales & Service, Burnsville, Minnesota at a total cost of $20,460 to be funded from the year 2004 Improvement and '3quipment Outlay Fund budget. SEP 1 3 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO DATE: September 13,2004 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Adminbtrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Request for Final Payment Stubbs Bay/Watertown Road Erosion Project We have reviewed the information submitted by the City's engineering firm and recommend approval of this Request for Final Payment. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Request for Final Payment Stubbs Bay/ Watertown Road Erosion Project to Minnesota Native Landscapes Inc. in the amount of $3,168.35 f 1 ^ I Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & |\ I Associates Engineers & Architecti Owner; City of Orono. P.O. Box 66. Crystal Bay. MN 55323«0066 Date: July 23. 2004 For Period: 11/5/2003 to 7/23/2004 Reauesl No 2 AND FINAL Contractor: Minnesota Native Landscape. 29734 131st St NW. Princeton. MN 55371 CONTRACTOR’S REQUEST FOR PAYMENT STUBBS BAY ROAD EROSION IMPROVEMENTS BRA FILE NO. 139-03-124 SUMMARY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Original Contract Amount Change Order - Addition Change Order • Deduction Revised Contract Amount Value Completed to Date Matehal on Hand Amount Earned Less Retainage 0% Subtotal Less An>ount Paid Previously Liquidated damages - AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. 10.889 00 S $ 0.00 000 2 AND FINAL $. $ S s $ s s s $ 10.869 00 10.889 00 0.00 10.88900 0.00 10.889.00 7.72065 0 00 3.168.35 Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO. ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Approved by Owner. CITY OF ORONO Specified Contract Completion Date: October 31.2003 Date: No.Item Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Current Quantity Quantity to Date Amount to Date 1 STUBBS BAY ROAD EROSION IMPROVEMENTS: CLEAR. GRUB. EXCAVATE EXISTING CHANNEL.LS 1 1000.00 1 $1,000.00 2 REMOVE DEBRIS. AND ADO TOPSOIL AS NEEDED CREATE RIFFLE POOLS AND/OR SETTLING AREAS EA 5 275.00 5 $1,375.00 3 WIDEN. SHAPE AND COMPACT CHANNEL BY DESIGN LS 1 2500.00 1 $2,500.00 4 ADO AND PLACE FIELOSTONE TYPE RIP RAP FOR CY 75 15.00 75 $1,125.00 5 DRAINAGE AND/OR SETTLING POOLS PLANTINGS AND LIVE STAKES EA 348 6.50 348 348 $2,262.00 6 SEEDING AC 0.1 5000.00 0.1 0.1 S500.00 7 SILT FENCE. MACHINE SLICED LF 100 4.00 100 $400.00 8 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET MNDOT 3082 CAT.3 SY 200 2.50 200 $500.00 9 EROSION STABILIZATION MAT MNDOT 3888 CL 3 SY 150 8.18 150 $1.227 00 Total STUBBS BAY ROAD EROSION IMPROVEMENTS: STUBBS BAY ROAD EROSION IMPROVEMENTS: - Bid Amount Total - S10.889.00 S10.689.00 Total STUBBS BAY ROAD EROSION IMPROVEMENTS:$10,889.00 Total WorH Completed To Dale $10,889.00 ...A PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS OWNER CITY OF ORONO BRA FILE NO. 139-03-124 CONTRACTOR MINNESOTA NATIVE LANDSCAPE CHANGE ORDERS No.Date Description Amount Total Change Orders PAYMENT SUMMARY No.From To Payment Rctainage Completed 1 11/03/2003 11/04/03 7.720 65 406 35 8.127.00 2 AND FINAL 11/05/2003 07/23/04 3.168.35 10.859 00 Material on Hand Total Payment to Dale S10.889.00 Original Contract $10,889.00 Retainage Pay No. 2 AND FINAL Change Orders Total Amount Earned $10.889 00 Revised Contract $10,889.00 4 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: September 10,2004 ITEM NO: fQ ''fTirTllyjQ SEP 1 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO Department Approval: Name Ronald J. Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Preliminary 2005 Budget and Tax Le>y Attachments: 1. Tax Levies—Actual 2004 vs. proposed 2005 2. Tax Capacity, Local Levy, and Tax Capacity Rates 3. Effect of 2005 Tax Levy on Property owners 4. Resolution Adopting the preliminary 2004 Tax Levy collectible in 2005 5. Resolution adopting the preliminary 2005 Budget Proposed 2005 Budget Tlie proposed 2005 budget reflects an effort to address a number of deferred needs, as well as to fund a number of special projects, while managing the impact of the tax levy on property owners. Go als of the 2005 Budget The following is an outline of the goals of the 2005 budget • To improve service delivery and customer service ■ To provide a sustained drug enforcement effort • To increase the City’s capacity to use information technology ■ To improv e the maintenance of the City’s infrastructure • To take advantage of the opportunity to re-think the design and function of current Highway 12, in preparation for the turnback of this roadway from the State to the County. ■ To begin to address long term public improvement needs Opportunity To Address Deferred Needs Over the past 10 years, the tax levy has been increasing at an average rate of 3.98% per year. This has been an important factor in enabling the city’s tax rate to remain one of the lowest in the County. Over the past several years, a number of priority needs have been identified. However, conservative caution regarding potential State budget problems, and then the actual unpacts of the State budget problems, including State Aid cuts and levy limits, have caused these needs to be deferred. The 2005 budget is the first opportunity the City has had to address the deferred needs, in order to have a substantial impact on the level and quality of services provided in the areas of Police, I-irc, Streets, Stormwater Management, Sewer, and Water, as well as substantially su^ngthening the City’s ability to use and manage technology to improve productivity and customer service. Tax Capacity Rate Reduction Results in Minimal Property Tax Impact on Property Owners Based on the proposed budget and tax levy, and the substantial increase in the City’s tax capacity (tax base), the City’s share of the property tax bill for Orono property owners will increase by 1,1%. Tlie City's lax capacity has increased by approximately 17.9%. Applying the proposed tax levy to the estimated tax capacity results in a tax rate of 16.22%, which is a substantial reduction from the 2004 level of 17.641 %. Using this tax rate, the City’s share of the property lax bill on a home valued at $300,000, assuming a 10% value increase, will increase by $6.03, or 1.1%. For a home valued at $800,000, the City’s share of the property tax bill will increase by $16.08, or 1.1%. Tax Levy The total tax levy required to fund the proposed 2005 budget is $3,461,670. This is an increase of $263,740, or 8.25 % over the 2004 levy. The breakout of the use of tax levy revenues by fund is shown on the attached chart titled Tax Levies. The General Fund expenditures have the greatest impact on the proposed tax levy. In addition, the Infrastructure lev'y in the PIR Fund (for street rehabilitation) has been increased from $35,450 to $69,950. The tax levy required to fund the proposed 2005 General Fund budget is $3,005,470. This is an increase of $354,240, or 13.36% over the 2004 levy amount. Of this amount, $80,000 is not a levy increase, but rather is a shifting of tax levy from the Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund to the General Fund. Excluding the $80,000 of expenditures shifted to the General Fund, the levy increase is $274,240, or 10.3%. General Fund Budget Expenditures Tlie proposed expenditures in the General Fund are having the greatest impact on the tax levy. The proposed 2005 General Fund expenditures are $5,132,950. This is an increase of $431,460, or 9.18% over the 2004 budget. The main items causing the General Fund expenditure increase include the addition of a police investigator and a narcotics investigator, the addition of a part- time Finance Clerk, annual compensation adjustments, Navarre Fire Station operating costs, funding for consultant assistance related to the turnback of current Highway 12 from the State to the County, and the transfer of vehicle replacement funding from the Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund to the General Fund. Police Staffing The proposed 2005 budget reflects the addition of a police investigator position, and a narcotics investigator position. The Department’s current investigative caseload is too large for one officer. Other Departments of Orono’s size (and smaller) have two investigators. The Department’s greatest criticism from citizens during the past three years has been about poor follow-up on case reports. The investigator is much more effective when he has a partner who can back him up on some interviews and investigations. When the School Liaison Officer was available during the summer to assist in investigations, the clearance rate increased and many more cases received investigative attention. The addition of the Investigator position is the best way to substantially improve responsiveness and customer service. The joint drug task force with Hennepin County, Medina, Mound, and West Hennepin Public Safety requires a full-time narcotics investigator. A current full time patrol officer has been assigned to the narcotics investigator position. Initially, the patrol position will be back-filled by a part-time officer. The tax levy will fund a substantial portion of the narcotics investigator position in 2005. A number of funding options for the remainder of the costs arc cujrentiy being pursued. Finance/Information Tecluiology (I..T.) Staffing As the City has expanded its information technology capabilities, both in terms of the number of computers available and the number of applications available, the workload related to maintaining the computers and the applications has increased. As we continue to expand our information teclmology capabilities, this need will continue to increase. Also, we need to ensure the expansion of our l.T. capabilities occurs in a well-planned man.icr. This requires a coordinated effort to develop a multi-year l.T. plan. The City currently has one staff person who is responsible for the bulk of the l.T. responsibilities. This is the Assistant Finance Director/I.T. Coordinator. As the title indicates, a substantial portion of this position’s time is spent on finance-related tasks. There is not sufficient time to adequately address all of the l.T. needs. It is proposed that a part-time finance clerk be hired to take on a significant portion of the Assistant Finance Director/I.T.Coordinator’s finance- related workload. The Assistant Finance Director would continue to carry out tlic higher level finance tasks, but would have a substantial amount of additional time to handle l.T. tasks. Highway 12 Turnback Consultant The Cities of Long Lake and Orono are working through a joint task force to develop a plan for the design of current highway 12 when it is turned back from Mn/DOT to Hennepin County. The turnback is an opportunity to re-think the function and design of the roadway. The task force has detennined that it needs the assistance of both a transportation planning consultant and a landscape dcsign/urban plamiing consultant. These consultants will first assist the task force in addressing the key issues regarding the design of the roadw ay, and secondly, w ill assist the cities in working with 1 Icnnepin County to ensure the County’s final design of the roadway matches the cities’ desired design as closely as possible. Funding for Street Rehabilitation In order to balance the 2004 budget within the levy limit, the amount budgeted for street rehabilitation was reduced from $97,000 to $30,000. The 2005 budget restores $34,500 of this reduction. 1 his is reflected in the increase in the Infrastructure lev^ from $35,450 to $69,950. The City has a number of local roads, thut are not eligible for State funding, that w ill need major rehabilitation in the coming years. It is important that we increase the funding that is being provided for these types of projects. New Public Works Staffing Due to a reorganization, a public works maintenance position has been added without increasing costs. With the elimination of the Public Works Superintendent position, the Public Works Department has been operating with a Public Works Director and two interim working foremen. This structure has resulted in substantially increased productivity, and has facilitated much discussion about priority public works maintenance needs. The needs in the areas of stormwater drainage, improved maintenance of the water system (i.e. initiating a regular program of hydrant flushing and repairs of water shut-off valves) and improved maintenance of the sewer system (i.e. increased monitoring of lift stations, and increased cleaning and televising of sewer lines) are well beyond the capacity of the current staffing level. At minimum, an additional full-time maintenance position is needed. The cost of a full-time maintenance position, and of the additional pay level of the two working foreman positions, is equivalent to the cost of the former Public Worlu Superintendent position. The additional maintenance position can be added without increasing costs. Adoption of Preliminary Budget and Tax Levy The City is required to adopt a preliminary budget and tax levy, sc that the levy can be certified to the County by September 15, After adoption of the preliminary levy, the levy cannot be increased, but can be reduced, prior to adoption of the final budget and levy in December. Resolutions adopting the preliminary 2005 budget and tax levy are attached for Council adoption. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED 1. Motion to adopt a resolution approving the preliminary tax levy to fund the 2005 budget 2. Motion to adopt a resolution approving the preliminary 2005 budget CITY OF ORONO TAX LEVIES Actual 2004 vs Proposed 2005 TAX LEVIES General Fund General Ix5vy General A Jd Back 60% of aids reduction Genera’ Fund - PERA Rate Increases Genenl Fund - COPS Grant Decrease General Fund - Capital Equipment Cert. Total General Fund l.cvy Infrastructure (PIR) Park Land Acquisition and Development Imp & Fxjuip Outlay • Capital Equip Cert 1997 Improvement Bond Debt Service 1999 Improvement Bond Debt Service 2003 Imp Refunding Bond Debt Service 1998 I IRA Refunding Bond Debt Service 2003 Fire Facility and Equipment Bond Debt Service Total All Other Levies TOTAL TAX LEVIES FOR ALL PURPOSES Proposed 2005 Increase (Decrease) Actual Proposed l*rom Actual 2004 _2004 _2005 Amount _Percent $2,509,684(a)$3,005,470 38,216 (»)- 5,540 — 14,790 - 83,000 — -------—---------—----- — -------— 52,651,230 $3,005,470 5354,240 ____y.36y^ 35,450(a)69,950 34,500 97.32% 5,000 (a)5,000 0 0.00% 125,000 (125,000)-100.00% 18,000 18,000 0 0.00% 5,000 5,000 0 0.00% 35,000 35,000 0 0.00% 250,000 250,000 0 0.00% 73,250 73,250 0 0.00% $546,700 $456,200 ($90,500)-16.55% S3,i?7,?^_S3,461,670.5163,740 ___ 8.25% Total "levy limit"_2^8^350 (a)A7A r II i iT ftltOl CC • M l}l City of Orono Tax Capacity, Local Levy, & Tax Capacity Rates TAY CAPACITY Real Estate Personal Property Deduct Tax Increments Deduct Contrib Fiscal Disp Add Distribution Fiscal Disp Net Tax Capacity (To calculate rate) 1 .OCAL LEVY Total levy all funds rAPAClTY RATES General Revenue PIR Infrastuciurc-Storm Sewer / Roads Parks - Land Acquisition & Development Improve & Equip - Capital Equipment Debt Service HRA Building Bonds Fire Facility & Fxjuipment Bonds Debt Total Local Tax Capacity Rale tioenviMTM ever iM 2W^OvcjrXUndcr) 2004 Actual Estimated ?004 2005 /\mount $18,108,033 $21,341,620 $3,233,587 120,534 132,587 12,053 (60,625)(66,688)(6,063) (279,146)(307,061)(27,915) 219,720 241,692 21,972 ____$18i!P8Ji6_____$2L3,42,15J^$3,23^635. $3^197^93^$3,46lj6t0.$26^740^ 14.624%14.082%-0.542% 0.196%0.328%0.132% 0.028%0.023%-0.005% 0.690%0.000%-0.690% 0.320%0.272%-0.048% 1.379%1.171%-0.208% 0.404%0.343%-0.061% 17.641%16.220%_•L421%. Percent 17.86% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 17.86% 8.25% -3.70% 67.22% •16.33% 15.07% 15.06% .8.06% • r *p •-n »v; v* -*• Effect of 2005 Tax Levy & Budget on Homes p««imated Value Tax Capacity (Ncl) * Tax Capacity Rate Net Tax $ Increase (Decrease) from 2004 % Increase (Decrease) from 2004 $300,000 $8OO.O00 2004 2005 5% incr 2m 10% incr 2M 2QQ5 5% incr 2m 10% incr $100,000 $315,000 $330.000 $840,000 $880,000 3,000 3,150 3,300 8,000 8,400 8,800 17.641%16.220%16.220%17.641%16.220%16.220% $529.23 $510.93 $535.26 $1,411.28 $1,362.48 $1,427.36 —($18.30)$6.03 ($48.80)$16.08 mm -3.5%1.1%-3.5%1.1% •jnna Tn« Tanacitv fnct) = 1% of first $500,000 market value, plus 1.25% of all value over 5500,^ 2005 Tix Capacity (net) - 1% of first $500,000 market value, plus 1.25% of all value over $500,000 MMreMODGCTUOOSVTiiftnc.l» A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PROPOSED 2004 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 2005 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the following sums be levied for the current year, collectible in 2005 upon the taxable property in the City of Orono, for the following purposes: General Fund - Operating PIR Fund - Infrastructure Replacement (Road) Park Fund - Land Acquisition and Development G.O. Improvement Bond 1997 Public Facilities Revenue Refunding Bond 1998 - HRA G.O. Improvement Bond 1999 G.O. Improvement Refunding Bond 2003 Public Facility Revenue Fire Hall/ Equipment Bond 2003 - HRA $3,005,470 69,950 5,000 18,000 250,000 5,000 35,000 73,250 TOTAL ALL LEVIES $3.46L67D The City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held September 13,2004. ATTEST;Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Rachel Dodge, Deputy City Clerk TomVWoftfMlMolkiUoniVPrepofttd 2003 L«vy rat A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED 2005 GENERAL FUND BUDGET BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the Proposed 2005 General Fund budget is determined to be as follows: ESTIMATED REVENUES Taxes - General $3,005,470 Licenses and Permits 368,530 Intergovernmental 225,850 Charges for Services 1,383,550 Fines and Forfeits 98,850 Interest Income 31,000 Miscellaneous 19.700 TOTAL 15.132,950 APPROPRIATED EXPENDITURES General Government $1,047,420 Public Safety 3,065,140 Street Maintenance 494,950 Parks and Recreation 53,550 Recycling Program 90,800 Engineering - Unallocated 11,300 Reimbursable Expenditures 73,790 Special Projects and Contingency 55,000 Capital Outlay 116,000 Traitsfers To Other Funds 125.000 TOTAL Adopted by the City Council of the City of Oiono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held September 13, 2004. ATTEST; Rachel Dodge, Deputy City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor KOI Oti N OOI IMc>ii "'^‘^TfNG Sfp I J 2004REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITy OF orono DATE: September 13,2004 ITEM NO; /( Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: Selection of Dates for Truth in'Taxation Hearings Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report All local taxing jurisdictions arc required to hold both an initial hearing regarding their annual budget and a subsequent hearing at which the final budget is adopted. These hearings are held in late November or early December. Because the hearings cannot conflict among the various taxing jurisdictions, there are only a small number of potential dates available to the City. The dates are shown on the attached ealendar. it is recommended that the initial hearing be set for S:30 p.m. on Monday, December 6, and the continuation or subsequent hearing be scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on Monday, December 13. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to set the Truth in Taxation Initial I tearing for S:30 p.m., Monday, December 6, and the Continuation or Subsequent Hearing for 7:00 p.m., Monday, December 13, with both hearings to be held in the Council Chambers. Wmd ActimAIOCMNTNT IlMrii« Diim wp4 n I j »1 r ■y, I December 2004 December 2004 lanuary2005 s M T W T F S S H T W T F S T 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 12 i:i 14 IS 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 19 20 21 22 21 24 ?S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Tom Kuehn 9/8/20W 3:26 PM 4 ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION »#rrcTirg(3 SEP 1 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO Date:09/09/04 Item No: 1 ^ Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name: Title: Kurt Erickson Sergeant Item Description: Donation Acceptance Exhibits: DISCUSSION: Dr. Patricia Waples, a veterinarian that runs the Excelsior Animal Hospital has offered to obtain a Shearing, Universal Microchip Reader, and donate it to the Orono Police Department. She became aware that Orono did not have a reader through her contact with our CSO officer Chris Pharo. She has donated a similar device to South Lake Minnetonka in the past. The device is used to check an animal to detennine if an owner has had a microchip implanted to aid in identification of the animal should it be lost. Chris Pharo estimates he would use the device at least once per week a'l .i oficn it could be more. The device cost about S250. It will give a reading that will give us an owner’s name, address and phone number. VVe arc finding more and more that pets are having microchips implanted. Dr. Waples became aware that we did not have this tool after we had impounded her dog which did have a microchip implant. We have had several other cases where we found out after the fact that pets we have taken into custody could have been identified and returned to their owners sooner had we had tins tool. COUNCIL ACTION PEOUESTED: A motion to approve the donation of a Shearing Universal Microchip Reader by Dr. Patricia Waples of the Excelsior Animal Hospital for use by the Orono Police Department and thanking her for the generous donation in the interest of pets and their owners. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL >» CTION SEP \ 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO • KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION Effective January 1, 200 to December 31, 200 V- A 01/ Owner:V. J A yvy f... II Property Address:/ ?~;r, CA f 1/p/ci C c (include city and zip) Mailing Adaress (if different): Phone: (home) 2-Ql I ' (work) 7/? ' ^ ^ RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Fee: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time: ^____________________ (over 6 mooths of age) Principal Breed:_______P_____________________________________________ Purpose for more than 2 doss: S'k o.j / k o,.t -h n \u i u ^ Dogs normally kept: ____inside kennel structure COMA'IERCIAL Kennel License Fee: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: Business Activities: (example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours: __ After Hours Contact: (name) (phone) Dog runs/exercise areas are:inside outside both The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigned hereby grants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. Date V-/- oy mm •«fTCT||SJQ i)£P 1 3 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cm y OF ORONO DATE: September 13, 2004 ITEM NO: jLf Department Approval: Name Rachel Dodge Tide Deputy Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT 1. Applicant: Hope Chest For Breast Cancer Event: Private Party Location: 38S0 S. Shoreline Drive Date: September 30, 2004 Time: 6:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the above listed licenses, with conditions if desired. I CITY OF OPONO SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT Date Issued: Date of Event: September 13, 2004 Thursday, September 30, 2004 Type of Event: Time: Location of Event: Private Party (Food, beverages and gambling for approximately 125-150 guests) 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. 3850 S. Shoreline Drive, Hope Chest For Breast Cancer Name of Pcrson(s) And/or Organization Sponsoring this Event: Barbara Hensley Hope Chest For Breast Cancer 3850 S. Shoreline Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 952-471-8700Phone: The following documents are required and on File at the City Administrative Offices: • Approval from Orono Police Department • Approval from Orono Building and Zoning Department The following conditions have been placed on this event: • By acceptance of this special event permit, the permit holder, on behalf of any and all organizations and private persons, grants authority to operate under the special event permit, agrees to, indemnify and hold hannless the Cit v of Orono from all claims arising from said event. The permit holder, all organizations and private persons exercising authority under this permit, do waive and release all claims against the City of Orono, its officers or employees for any damage to person or property arising from the exercise of privileges granted by this permit and agrees to hold harmless the City of Orono, its employees and officers from any such claim. • The Orono Police Department and its officers are empowered to revoke this special event permit at any time for any safety concerns that are not immediately resolved by the permit holder or a representative of the permit holder. This revocation shall cause the immediate cancellation of the event originally authorized by this permit. • liquor service is to comply with statutc/ordinance (no service to minors - recommend ID under 35 policy) • gambling is to comply with statute/ordinance • if there is to be any parking on the south side of Shoreline - traffic control persons be retained to assist pedestrians crossing any persons assisting in pedestrian crossing are to wear OSHA approved safety vests contact Hennepin County Public Works about using the parking lot for overflow parking • area is to be cleaned of any event generated debns/signs at end of event Approved at City Council meeting on: September 13, 2004 (City Seal) Ronald J. Moorsc, City Administrator 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66, Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phone: 952-249-4600 / Fax: 9S2-249-4ul6/www.ci.oiono.tnn.us JL A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION OF HOPE CHEST FOR BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION FOR A ONE DAY MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING EXCLUDED RAFFLE WHEREAS, the Hope Chest for Breast Cancer Foundation has applied to the State of Minnesota Gambling Control Board for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Excluded Raffle to conduct lawful gambling activities; and WHEREAS, an excluded raffle may be conducted by this organization if the total market (retail) value of all raffle prizes awarded in a calendar year does not exceed $1500; and WHEREAS, the Hope Chest for Breast Cancer Foundation proposes to conduct a one day gambling activity (raffle) as part of a private party to be held at 3850 Shoreline Drive on September 30,2004; and WHEREAS, the Hope Chest for Breast Cancer Foundation is required to obtain approval of the gambling activity from the city in which the activity will occur. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVEthe Orono City Council does hereby approve the application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Excluded Raffle for the Hope Chest for Breast Cancer Foundation to conduct a one day gambling activity (raffle) at 3850 Shoreline Drive on September 30,2004. 2004. Adopted at a regular meeting of the Orono City Council this 13 th day of September, ATTEST:Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Page I of 1 0 «Ui ClMK M • COi SEP 1 3 2004REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: Septeni£e9'?9,'^04 ITEM NO: Depsriment Approval: Name Rachel Dodge Title Deputy Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT 1 . Applicant: Long Lake Fire Department Fundraiser: Steak Fry with Live Music 340 Willow Drive, Orono, MN 55356 Saturday, September 25, 2004 5:30 p.m. - Midnight Event: Location: Date: Time: The Long Lake Fire Department, in conjunction with the Orono Lions Club, is planning to hold a fundraising event at the Long Lake Fire Station on Saturday evening, September 25. The event will include a steak fry with wine and beer, and a live band. The Orono Lions Club has applied for a temporary liquor license to enable them to handle the wine and beer sales. The Police Department has had discussions with the Fire Department regarding special event permit conditions to enable a safe and well-managed event. The conditions are reflected in the attached permit. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the above listed licenses, with conditions if desired. CITY OF ORONO SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT Date Issued: Date of Event: September 13, 2004 Saturday, September 25, 2004 Type of Event: Time: Location of Event: Fundraiser - Steak Fry with Live Music (Alcohol Permit Taken Out By Orono Lions) (Approximately Guests Unknown) 5:30 p m. - Midnight; Mu.sic Inside From 5:30 p in. - 11:30 p m. 340 Willow Drive Name of Person(s) And/or Organization Sponsoring this Event: Long Lake Fire Department 340 Willow Drive Orono, MN 55356 Phone: 952-473-9701 The following documents are required and on File at the City Administrative Offices: • Approval from Orono Police Department • Proof of insurability for liability issues 'flic follow. Ing conditions have been placed on this event: • By acceptance of this special event pernut, the permit holder, on behalf of any and all organizations and private pcisons, grants authority to operate under the special event penrut. and agrees to indenuhfy and hold haimless tlic City of Orono from all claims aiising from said event. The permit holder, all organizations and private persons exercising authority under tins permit, do waive and release all claims against the City of Orono, its officers or employees for any damage to person or property aiising from the exercise of privileges granted by this pernut and agrees to hold harmless the City of Orono, its employees and officers from any such claim. • The Orono Police Department and its officers arc empowered to revoke this special event permit at any lime for any safety concerns that arc not immediately resolved by the pernut holder or a icpresciitalivc of the pernut holder. Tlus revocation shall cause ihc immediate cancellation of the event oiiginally authorized by tlus pcniut. Pol.jc may issue citations for any city or state ordinance or statute violations live band is to be located inside the fuc station beer sales arc to end by 11:15 PMm people may remain at the station until midnight music IS to end by 11.30 PM parking may be in city owned lot to cast of fire station - fire department may mow ..s needed no parking is to be allowed on Willow Drive - fire department is responsible to post - signs may be bought fiom police the south road to the fire station is to be kept open for access any persons serving liquor are to refrain fiom consunung alcoholic beverages ID are to be check with an ID under 35 policy being enforced by alcohol scrvcis some ty^pc of food is to remain available when alcohol is being sold non alcoholic bevetages arc to be available up until the station is closed any event sponsored debris is to be cleaned up by the followuig day Orono Police arc empowered to revoke this permit at any t'me and close the event for unresolved safety problems or alcohol violations which can include but are not linutcd to under age sales, selling to intoxicated persons etc. Ccnditioiu Continued On Next Page 2750 Kelley Parkway. P.O. Box 66. Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Phone: 952-249-4600/Fax: 952 249-4616/ www.ci.orono.mn.us 1 Condttioiii Continued For Long Lake Fire Department Fundraiser: Steak Fry with Live Music - September 25,2004 The following conditions have been placed on this event: a copy of the insurance policy covering the alcohol sales liability and event activities shall be provided to the City of Orono prior to the event showing the City of Orono as an additional insured A minimum of one Orono Police Officer is to be hired by Long Lake Fire Department/Orono Lions to ensure public safety at the event; hours can be limited to 1900 to midnight Approved at City Council meeting on: September 13,2004 (City Seal) Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator ► 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66, Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phone: 952-249-4600 / Fax: 952-249-4616/www.ci.orono.mn.us noi 5fp 1 3 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Y OF ORONO DATE: September 13,2004 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Rachel Dodge Title Deputy Clerk Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval TEF.IFORARY ON SALE LIQUOR LICENSE 1. Orono Lions Long Lake Fire Department - Fundraiser: Steak Fry with Live Music Saturday, September 25,2004 Location: Long Lake Fire Department 340 Willow Drive COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the above listed licenses, with conditions if desired. state of Minnesota County of Hennepin City of Orono o o \ I License No: j 2004-13 Amount: | 25.00 Liquor License Temporary On Sale Liquor License Upon investigation and satisfactory evidence of the qualification of the licensee, this license is granted and pursuant to application and payment of fee thereof, and is subject to all tha provisions and conditions of the laws of the United States, the laws of the State of Minnesota, the regulations and ordinances of the City of Orono, and the rules and regulations of the Liquor Control Commissioner, pertaining to such; and subject to revocation according to law for violation thereof. This IK^cnse is not transferable except by consent of the issuing authonty. Granted To: Business Name: Business Address: Commencing: Terminating: Business Description: Orono Lions Long Lake Fire Department 340 Willow Drive September 25, 2004 September 25, 2004 Fundraiser - Steak Fry Issued by authority of the City Council of the City of Orono. Minnesota on: September 13, 2004 Barbara A. Peterson. Mayor Attest: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk 2790 Keitty PtOnny. P.O. Box 66. Oystat Bay. S5323 Plwna: (BS2) 240.4600 / Fax: (092) 240-4616/XMmv.cl Ofaw mn.ua > 1 I CITY OF ORONO 1’-check register 09/10/04 2:23 PM Page 2 Check Pay Check Check Number Employee Name PeHod Amount Date Check Status 003664 CURTIS. MELANIE 18 $1.142 84 9/1/2004 Outstanding 003665 GAFFRON. MICHAEL P.18 $125.00 9/1/2004 OutSianding 003666 GAPPA, GREGORY A,18 $1,810 50 9/1/2004 Outstanding 003667 GUNDLACH. JANICE J.18 $1.25361 9/1/2004 Outstanding 003668 OMAN. LYLE E.18 $1,400.00 9/1/2004 Outstanding 003669 DEBAERE. DONALD L 18 $1.18425 9/1/2004 Outstanding 003670 HANSEN. STEVEN 18 $775.00 9/1/2004 Outstanding 003671 OBERAIGNER. SCOTT G.18 $1,252.53 9/1/2004 Outstanding 003672 OBRIEN. RANDY L.18 $500.00 9/1/2004 Outstanding 003673 PALMER. GREGORY A 18 $350.00 9/1/2004 Outstanding 003674 RATHBUN. BARRY J.18 $200.00 $63,603.24 9/1/2004 Outstanding if CITY OF ORONO 09/01/04 7 11 AM Page 1 Check Detail Register© SEPTEMBER 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment 10100 Prlmaiy Cash Paki Chk# 079078 ' 9/1/2004 FIRST NAflONAL BANK OF LAKES G 101-21701 Federal Withholding $9,652 00 G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholding $4.386 52 G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholding $4.366 52 Total FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES $18.425 04 FEDERAL W/H FICA & MEDICARE W/H FICA & MEOCR CITY SHARE Paid Chk# 079bre 9/1/2004 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 G 101-21705 Other Retirement $951 62 Total ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST • 457 $951 62 Paid’Chk# 079086 ‘ 9/1/2004 LAW ENFORCMENT UbOR SER^^^ G 101-21707 Union Dues $0 0 0 Total LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE deferred COMP-302030 .. ^ ^ * UNION DUES #40 & #168 $0 00 Paid Chk# 079081 .....9/1/2604 ' MN DEPT OF'rEVE^ ........ G 101-21702 State Withholding $3,955 70 STATE TAX W/H Total MN DEPT OF REVENUE $3,955.70 P^d Chk# *079082 9/1/2604' MN STATE R^^^ ‘ G 101-21718 Post Employment Health $29205 post retirement Tout MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM $292.05 Pa'd Chki” 679083 ’" 9n‘/2604 NATfONWIDE RETFrEM SOLUTION G 101-21705 Other Retirement $1.902 00 G 101-21705 Other Retirement Total NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION $143 16 USCM - ENTITY 2339 OBRA «2343 $2,045 16 ■paid Chk# 079084 “ 9/1/2064 ' “ bRCHARb TRUST Cb: TRUSTEE/CUSf G 101-21705 Other Retirement $3.562 68 MN STATE RETIREMENT Total ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEBCUST $3.562 68 Paid ChW»'‘079085 ” ’ 9/i/2b04' '‘PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREM G 101-21704 PERA G 101-21704 PERA Tout PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT $6,983.77 $5.41235 PERA CITY SHARE PERA EMPLOYEE W/H $12.39612 Paid Chki'679686 9/i72004 ' UNITED WAY G 101-21706 United Way $70 00 CHARITY DONATIONS Total UNITED WAY Paid Chk# 079007 9/1/2004 WISCONSIN SCTF G 101-21712 Other Deductions $7000 $184 62 JOHNSON # 0002756898 Tout WISCONSIN SCTF $184 62 10100 Primary Cash $41,882.99 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 10100 Primary Cash $41.882 99 $41,882 99 CITY OF ORONO check register 09/08/04 6,57 AM Page 1 Check Pay Chack Check Number Employee Name Period Amount Date Check Status 054453 PETERSON.BARBARA 9 $32322 9/13/2004 Outstanding 054454MCMILLAN. ELIZABETH T.9 $269.36 9/13/2004 Outstanding 054455MOORSE. RONALD J.9 $369.40 9/13/2004 Outstanding 054456 SANSEVERE. ROBERT K 9 $269.36 9/13/2004 Outstanding 054457MURPHY. JAMES L.9 $269.36 9/13/2004 Outstanding 054458 WHITE, JAMES M.9 $269.36 $1.77006 9/13/2004 Outstanding CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 09/10/04 2 19 PM Page 1 SEPTEMBER 2004 Check Amt___Invoice Comment 10100 Primary Cash Paid Chk# 078626 '6/28/2004'’* ASLET E 101-42110-433 Memberships & Subscriptions Total ASLET ($45 00) 2004DUES Void/2004-05 membership ($4500) Paid Chk« 079077 8/25/2004 ROCKVAM BOAT YARDS INC. E 101-42400-415 Other Equipment Rentals $105.44 8/25/04 Total ROCKVAM BOAT YARDS INC. $^5 44 Annual Lakesho^e Inspection Pa d Chk# 079088 9/10/2004 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE G 101-15998 Non-Employee Health Ins $1 65 96234 G101-21710 Life Insurance G 101-21710 Life Insurance Total PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE $710 55 96234 _$897q^ 96234 $801.90 Life Insurance - 8/2004 Life Insurance • 8/2004 Life Insurance • 8/2004 PaJ Chk# 079089 ' ‘‘9/13/266V A1A CONTAT n ERS CLE^^^^^ G 101-19999 Suspense Account $713 38 12120 Junk Removal-1345 Rest Point Total A1A CONTAINERS & CLEANUPS "Paid Chk# 079090 9/13/2004 ‘’a CCL a TmBEN^^^^ $713 38 E 101-41900-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges E 101-41900-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges Total ACCLAIM BENEFITS $101 50 345282 $10000 345283 COBRA Adm - 8/2004 FSA - 8/2004 $201 50 PaidChk# 079091 9/13/2004 ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS E 101-41900-413 Office Equipment Rental $917.03 25940164 Copier 8/15-9/15 Total ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS ’Paid Chke 679092^ ’ 9/1*3/2664 ‘ ANCHOR PAPER $91703 F 101-41900-201 Office supplies Total ANCHOR PAPER $609 93 153992601 copier paper $60993 PaidChk# 079093 9/13/2004 ANDERSON. KRISTI E 101-41300-319 Other Professional Services L 101-45200-319 Other Professional Services Total ANDERSON. KRISTI $165 00 9/7/04 $165 00 9/7/04 $330 00 CC Minutes - 8/23 Pk Minutes - 9/7/04 Paid ChkU 079094' *' 0/13/2004'“*' ANDERSON-CRANE* “ E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment & Parts Total ANDERSON CRANE $ 13^32 MP16217301 bearings f/mower $138 32^ PaidChk# 079095 9/13/2004 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES I C 101-41900 20) Office supplies E 101-41900-201 Office supplies E 101-42110-201 Office supplies E 101 41900 201 Office supplies Total ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES $61 95 6013 405221 coffee supplies $59 95 6013-412912 Coffee-PW $226 51 6013-412913 Coffee - PO $114 95 6013-412914 Coffee-Adm $463 36 PaKtChk« 079096 9/13/2004 AUCIES MOBILE CHEF E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Resale-Tsbl Total AUGIES MOBILE CHEF Pm Chki 079097 $62 16 6426 Hot Dogs. Cheesburgers $62.16 9/13/2004 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS CO. E 602-49450-403 tAepairs/Mamt-Misc Equip E 602-49450-406 Repatrs/Maint-Swr iines/lifts ToUl AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS CO. 1388.00 16154 $222 00 16211 LF Station i1 • Fuse SCADA - Disk $61000 r CITY OF ORONO 09/10/04 2:19 PM Page 2 Check Detail Register® SEPTEMBER 2004 Check Amt invoice Comment Paid ChKA 079098 9/13/2004 BEARCOM E 601 •49400*223 Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Total BEARCOM $164 22 2664286 radio mounts f/trudts $16422 Paid ChK# 079099 9/13/2004 BFI OF MINNESOTA. INC E 101-45200*404 Repairt/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds E 101-45200*404 Repairs/Maint-Bidgs/Grounds E 101-41900*404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds E 613-49830*404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds E 101-42260-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total BFI OF MINNESOTA. INC $8301 $69.33 $262 16 $76.16 $56 18 1307115 1307214 1307420 1307461 1347632 Garbage Sen/ice • Bedenvood Garbage Service - LL Rd Garbage Service • Kelley Garbage Service • GC Garbage Service • Nav Fire $546 84 Paid ChK# 079100 9/13/2004 BIFFS INC. E 101 -45200-415 Other Equipment Rentals E 101*45200*415 Other Equipment Rentals E 101-45200-415 Other Equipment Rentals E 613*49830-415 Other Equipment Rentals E 101 *45200*415 Other Equipment Rentals E 101 *45200*415 Other Equipment Rentals Total BIFFS INC. $111 85 $140 89 $164 82 $62 41 $82.41 $25891 W229978 W229979 W229980 W229981 W229982 W229983 biff rental biff rental/summit biff rental/ hackberry biff rentat/GC biff rentat/CB biff rental/Navarre $821 29 PaidChk# 079101 9/13/2004 BONESTROO ROSENE B ASSOC. E 402-48039*304 Engineering-Consulting $13,815.15 110928 Lee Carlson Ballfield Tr G 602-16500 Fixed Asset-Const in progress $371.75 110929 Old LL Rd Swr Ext 06/04 E 651-49910-304 Engineering-Consuiting $198.00 110930 645 Tonkawa Rd drainage E 651-49910-304 Engineering-Consulting $352.00 110930 Willow View Rd drainage E 101-43170-303 Engineering-Retainer $100 00 110930 Council Mtgs June 2004 E 101-43280*304 Engineenng-Consulting $129 00 110930 Boyers Bldrs 02-2639 E 101-43280-304 Engineering-Consulting $129 00 110930 Maxwell Bay Estates plat 04-30 E 101-43280*304 Engineering-Consulting $135.15 110930 Blount Plat 04-2969 £651-49910*304 Engineering-Consulting $227.93 110930 Mileage & Misc Exp June E 601-49400*304 Engineering-Consulting $5200 110930 Nav Wtr Tower-KLM Float E 651-49910-304 Engineering-Consulting $198 00 110930 Morries Auto drainage G 602-16500 Fixed Asset-Const in progress $1.039 50 110930 Hwy 12-Golf Dome-Morries Sewer E 651-49910-304 Engineering-Consulting $198 00 110930 847 Tonkawa Rd drainage E 101-43280-304 Engineering-Consulting $668 52 110930 440 Stubbs Bay Rd Plat 04-2968 E 651-49910*304 Engineenng-Consulting $198 00 110930 2590 Countryside E drainage E 651-49910-304 Engineering-Consulting $146 50 110930 2930 Casco Pt Rd Drainage E 651-49910-304 Engineering-Consulting $148 50 110930 1625 Bohns Point Rd E 101-43280-304 Engineering-Consulting $3,290 16 110920 Stonebay Plat 02-2789 E 101-43170-304 Engineenng-Consulting $979 50 110930 Woodhill Ave/Rd Traffic Counts E 101-43280*304 Engineering-Consulting $193 50 110930 3534 Ivy Place Plat 04-3010 E 101-43280*304 Engineering-Consulting $526 66 110930 Stonebay Marketplace Plat 04-2 £ 101-43260*304 Engineering-Consulting $17800 110930 Stonebay 02-2789 Signal Rev Paid ChK# 079102 9/13/2004 BUDGET PRINTING E 101-42110-201 Office supplies Office supp!*es Equipment Parts & Accessories Office supplies E 101-42110-201 E 101-41410-221 E 101-42110-201 E 601-49400-322 Postage E 101-42110-322 Postage Total BUDGET PRINTING $355.27 499 $47 66 509 $119 62 544 $152 06 614 $8.41 6/10/04 $17.25 855 impound forms Business Cards voters receipt Envelopes Shipping • Water Samples Shipping Charges $700.27 PSidlEhki'ofeToS «/13/20M BURNSVILLE, city op CITY OF ORONO 09/10/04 2:19 PM Page 3 Check Detail Register® SEPTEMBER 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 101*42110*437 Training & Development E 101*42110-437 Tralnlfrg & Development E 101*42110*437 Training & Development Total BURNSVILLE. CITY OF $550.00 Cornick $55G.CC Fdiniok $550.00 Ruseth Cr Scene Investigation School Cr Scene Investigation School Cr Scene Investigation School $1.650 00 >aid ChkV^079l64 Q/fsbOOi'" ’ CARGICC sALT' E 601-49400-216 Chemicals and Chem Products Total CARGILL SALT $1,883 64 1097436 Solar Salt $1,863.54 « 9^ i • - 01 Paid Chk# 079105 9/13/2004 CARQUEST E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment & Parts Total CARQUEST $18 65 N37807 fuel fillers $18.65 Paid Chk« 079106 9/13/2004 CECE'S SIGNS E 101-45200*404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds E 101-41900-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Total CECE'S SIGNS $101.18 1695 $79.88 1850 Signs - New Seeding magnetics/ Orono Council $181.06 Paid Chk# 079107 9/13/2004 CENTERPOINT ENERGY E 10142110-381 Gas & Electric E 601-49400-381 Gas & Electric E 10142260-381 Gas & Electric E 60149400-381 Gas & Electric E 101-41900-381 Gas & Electric E 613-49830-381 Gas & Electric E 602-49450-381 Gas & Electric E 60249450-381 Gas & Electric E 10141900-381 Gas & Electric Total CENTERPOINT ENERGY $44 44 $8 15 S62 39 $149.85 $48.94 $15 98 $12 18 $24 45 $54 32 060006750600 Gase Service 060006750600 Gase Service 060006750600 Gase Service 060006750600 Gase Service 060006750600 Gase Service 060006750600 Gase Service 060006750600 Gase Service 060006750600 Gase Service 060006750600 Gase Service $420.70 •— Paid Chk# 079108 9/13/2004 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO E 231-45650-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $617.05 25853 Stablizers. Wiper #202 E 101-42110402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $47.32 25858 Oil Chg, Speaker #198 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $134 44 25868 Battery #196 E 10142110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $34 42 25878 Relay #196 E 10142110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $230.75 25911 Diagnostics, Fan #188 E 101 42110402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $590 86 25915 Bat. Drakes. Oil #197 E 231-456504 02 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $97.26 25920 Sway Bar Bushing #202 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip S496 12 25940 Exhaust Converter #188 E 10142110-402 Repairs/Mamt-Auto Equip $32 92 25948 Oil Chg. #200 E 101-42110402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip S213 84 25953 Wheel Bearings - Trailer Total CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO $2494 98 Paid Chk# 079109 9/13/2004 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH E 10141300489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $6 00 9/10/2004 Petty Cash Reimbursement E 10141110439 Meeting Expenses $24.00 9/10/2004 Petty Cash Reimbursement E 10141110439 Meeting Expenses $2400 9/10/2004 Petty Cash Reimbunerrient E 10141110439 Meeting Expenses $11 85 9/10/2004 Petty Cash Reimbursement E 10141900-322 Postage $11 10 9/10/2004 Petty Cash Reimbursement E 10142110-331 Travel Expenses $1000 9/10/2004 Petty Cash Reimbursement E 10143000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $3.07 9/10/2004 Petty Cash Reimbursement E 1014ifX>0-322 Postage SI.48 9/10/2004 Petty Cash Reimbursement E 10141900-322 Postage $0.12 9/10/2004 Petty Cash Reimbursement E 10141300489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $30 54 9/10/2004 Petty Cash Reimbursement E 10142110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $2.96 Police Petty Cash Reimbursement E 10142110439 Meeting Expenses $21 48 Police Petty Cash Reimbursement 1 1 CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register® 09/10/04 2:19 PM Page 4 SEPTEMBER 2004 Check Amt liwoice Comment E 101-42110-322 Postage E 101-42110-331 Travel Expenses Total CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH SB4.05 Police $10.50 Police Petty Cash Reimbursement Petty Cash Reimbursement $221.15 Paid ChWT)79nO ' 9/T^ ‘Ci'l^lEW>LU¥BrNG^^^ E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $204 36 25079 E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total CITYVIEW PLUMBING & HEATING $133 83 25178 toilet repairs Toilet Repair - CH $338 21 Paid Chk# 079111 9/13/2004 COLLISION CORNER E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip Total COLLISION CORNER $1,176.07 5594-1 Repairs - Sqd 193 (LL Fire) $1,176.07 «m • Paid Chk# 079112 9/13/2004 CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN E 402-48039-352 Printing & Publishing E 402-48039-352 Printing & Publishing __ Total CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN $127.97 2612816 $127.97 2616428 Carlson Ballfield Trail Carlson Ballfid TrI - Adv $25594 Paid Chk# 079113 9/13/2004 COUNTRY CAKE CUPBOARD E 101-41110-439 Meeting Expenses $24 00 103 Total COUNTRY CAKE CUPBOARD $24 00 PakI Chk#‘079114 *9/13/2004 COVElttLLOF^rffE^fw Pies - Budget Work Session E 101-42260-407 Janitorial Services E 101-41900-407 Janitonal Services E 101-42260-407 Janitorial Services Total COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES $186 38 87840 $2,644.40 68718 $186 38 88719 Janitorial • Nav Fire 8/04 Janitorial - 9/2004 Janitorial • Nav Fire 9/04 $3,017.16 PaWChk#‘079T16 ^** '9/13/2004 DAHLKE TREE SERVICE E 613-49830-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total DAHLKE TREE SERVICE Paid Chk# 079116 9/13/2004 DCA -'WIRE ONlY'*‘ G 101 -21719 DCA/Spending Accounts Total DCA-WIRE ONLY $625.00 8/20/04 $625 00 Stump Chipping - GC $2,264.51 9/7/04 FSA - 8/2004 $2,264 51 Paid Chk# 079117 9/13/2004 DEPT OF ADM - INTERTECH GROUP E 101-42110-311 Data Processing Communication E 101-42110-321 Telephone E 101-41900-321 Telephone Total DEPT OF ADM - INTERTECH GROUP Paid ChiT# o*79i’i r 'hn 372664 '‘bOBb ’S ^ E 101-41110-439 Meeting Expenses Total DOBO*S $37 00 DV04070301 $48.93 W04070607 $114.18 W04070607 phone service 7/04 phone service 7/04 phone service 7/04 $200.11 $57 15 6187 MeatA:heese-7/26WS $57.15 Paid Chk# 079119 9/13/2004 E-Z RECYCLING E 101-43270-316 Contract Recycling Pickup Tout E-Z RECYCLING $6.518 20 7062 $6,518.20 Receycting Service 9/2004 Paid Chk# 079120 9/13/2004 EGAN MCKAY ELECTRICAL CONTRCTR E 101-43000-408 Contracted Street Maint. $222.50 JC3015213 Total EGAN MCKAY ELECTRICAL CONTRCTR $222 50 Hwy 12 8CQ6 >aid Chk#'079121* 9/'lW004‘‘^’'EHXEiCil AND^ASSdCIATESVNC. E 415-48930-319 Other Professional Services $150 00 22706 Prepare 2003 TIF Reports r-WF CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 09/10/04 2 19 PM Page 5 SEPTEMBER 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment Totai EHLERS AND ASSOCiATES INC. Paid Chk#*07912^ '"‘‘9/1*3/2064'*’ ESCHEilON E 101-42260-321 Telephone Total ESCHELON PaidrChk#'079123’' '“9/TV2604 EXPRESS‘mESSE^^^ E 101-41900-321 Telephone Total EXPRESS MESSENGER $150 00 $353.82 081504 phone S353B2 $40 04 8-336717 Deliveries -DSU $4004 PaidChk# 079124 9/13/2004 FORTIS BENEFITS G 101-21713 LTD Insurance ToUl FORTIS BENEFITS Paid Chk# 079125 9/13/2004 Q A K SERVICES E 613-49830-226 E 101-43000-226 E 602-49450-226 E 601-49400-226 E 602-49450-226 E 101-41900-404 E 613-49830-226 E 101-43000-226 E 601-49400-226 E 101-43000-226 E 601-49400-226 E 602-49450-226 E 613-49830-226 E 101-43000-221 E 601-49400-226 E 613-49830-226 E 602-49450-226 E 101-43000-226 E 101-42110-404 E 101-41900-404 E 101-41900-404 Clothing & personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Equipment Parts A Accessories Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Mamt-Bldgs/Grounds ToUl GAKSERVICES PaidChki 079126 ‘ 9/13/2004 GENUINE PARTS CO. t 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Eqjipment A Parts E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment A Parts E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment A Parts E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment A Parts Total GENUINE PARTS CO. Paid Chk# o79127 **9/13/2004 GOLF CAR MIDWEST E 613-49630-379 Insurance Deductibles ToUl GOLF CAR MIDWEST $842 50 4019825-1 LTD Insurance • 9/2004 $842.50 $6.02 1006194224 Uniforms $72 14 1006194224 Uniforms $36 09 1006194224 Uniforms $1203 1006194224 Uniforms $3906 1006200637 Unifroms $98.96 10062C0637 Unifroms $602 1006200637 Uniforms $7808 1006200637 Uniforms $1302 1006200637 Unifroms $72.14 1006207116 Uniforms $12.03 1006207116 Uniforms $3609 1006207116 Uniforms $6 02 1006207116 Uniforms $62 81 1006213622 Shop Towels $1203 1006213622 Uniforms $602 1006213622 Uniforms $36 09 1006213622 Uniforms $72 14 1006213622 Uniforms $154.40 1006226513 Mat Service • PD $57 65 1006226514 Mat Service • Adm $6518 $95402 1006226515 Mat Service • CC $22 41 801639 Hose end. Fitting. 1 $12 77 802128 Mtsc Supplies $0 95 802141 O-Rings $3893 802271 Couplers. Peak $11 69 602483 Outlet $1702 8O44G0 Wiper Blades $52 97 804482 Filters $156 74 $^2 28 401561 $192 28 Cart Repair Paid Chk# 079128 9/13/2004 GOOD. STEPMANY £ 101-42110-439 Meeting Expenses E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessoret E 101-42110-439 Meeting Expenses $49 90 8/24/04 $40 25 8/24/04 $14 94 8/24A)4 Pizza • Officer Recogn Water-Miaaing Person Meal -Oembouski CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register® 09/10/04 2 19 PM Pages SEPTEMBER 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 101-42110-437 Training & Oevelopn>ent E 101-42110-439 Meeting Expenses E 101-42110-437 Training & Development Total GOOD. STEPHANY $12.76 8/24/04 $7.58 8/24/04 $666.16 8/24/04 Food • Firearms Tming Food - Interview Cmtee Lodging - FOINAA Conference $791.59 Paid'Chk#'*079129 9/13/2004 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL E 601-49400-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges E 602-49450-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges ___ Total GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL $235.75 4070651 $235.75 4070651 Locates 7/2004 Locates 7/2004 $471.50 PaidChk# 079130 9/13/2004 HENNEPI n COUNTY E 602-49450-441 Licenses & Taxes Total HENNEPIN COUNTY $50 00 UTIL00422 UUIity permit $50.00 Paid Chk#"07913r ^ *^13^CK)4 HENNEPIN COUNTYI n ^ E 101-42110-414 EDP/Communications Equip Rent $51.39 24078063 E 101-42110-414 EDP/Communications Equip Rent $1.539 41 24088028 Total HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH DPT radio tease Radio Lease - 8/2004 $1.590 80 H'ENffE>TN7:OiJ^^PaidChk# 079132 9/13/2004 E 101-43290-800 Special Projects, Contingency Total HENNEPIN COUNTY TR-PROP TAXES $13 36 9/2/04 Tax 06-117-23-24-0003 $1336 Paid dhk«"079i33 9/13/2004’"HENNEPHTcoWfY E 602-49450 441 Licenses & Taxes $50.00 32111 Total HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS • TRANS Permit - 645 Tonkawa $50.00 PaidChk# 079134 9/13/2004 HUMANE SOCIETY OF WRIGHT CO E 101-42110-317 Animal Care $998 80 2ndqtr2004 impound fees -2nd qtr Total HUMANE SOCIETY OF WRIGHT CO Paid Chk# 079135* ^9/1S2004 * ‘ JOHNSONTJEFF G 101-21707 Union Dues $998.80 G 101-21710 Life Insurance G 101-21713 LTD Insurance G 101-21710 Life Insurance G 101 -21710 Life Insurance ToUl JOHNSON. JEFF $18 50 9/10/2004 $12 00 9/10/2004 $9.50 9/10/2004 $0 97 9/10/2004 $8 00 9/10/2004 Union Dues 9/2004 Supp Life 9/2004 LTD 9/2004 Basic Life 9/2004 PERA L-fe 9/2004 $4897 ?aid ChM 079136 ’9/i3/2064” ‘ JOHNSTON FARGO CULVERT.'lNC. E 651-49910-227 Utility System Maint Supplies $83 73 132995 CUtvert parts Total JOHNSTON FARGO CULVERT. INC. $83 73 1>8id*Chk# 079137 * ‘*'‘9/1*3/2004....kENNETH*NV'p‘dns7PA E 101-41600-306 Legal-Piosecution $2.50000 9/1/2004 Total KENNETH N. POTTS. PA Protecutlons - 8/2004 $2.500 00 Paid Chk# 079138 9/13/2004 KLM ENGINrERING. INC E 601-49400-319 Other Professional Services ToUl KLM ENGINEERING. INC Paid'Chl«i‘’d791 3T "9/13^^ 'T<USTOMl5iGNALri^ E 101-42110-403 Repairs/Memt-Misc. Equip ToUl KUSTOM SIGNALS INC $4.200 00 2599 Water Tower Insp-Nav $4.200 00 $88 34 206417 repair recorder $88 34 >V»d CK'k#'d7fl40 ■”9/13/2604 ' LACAL EQUIPMENf INC £ 101 -43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accetsontt $274.58 25021-IN mower parts CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register® 09/1(V04 2:19PM Page? SEPTEMBER 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment Tout LACAL EQUIPMENT INC $274.58 PaidChktf 079141 9/13/2004 LAKE AREA POWER EQUIPMENT E 101-43000-240 Small Tools and Minor Equip $39.83 54603 Total LAKE AREA POWER EQUIPMENT $39 83 chain saw parts ■paid Chki 079V42 9/13/2004 LAKE SHORE DELI E 101-41410-439 Meeting Expenses Total LAKE SHORE DELI $479 79 5230 Lunches • Primary Election $47979 'Paid Chki 079143 mv2004 ' T aw en76rcement ^^^^^ E 10M2110-228 Training Supplies $130 22 51138 Targets Total LAW ENFORCEMENT TARGETS. INC Paid Chk«"b>9144 ' 9/1*3/2004 ‘l OE'S’^OIL COMPANY*^ E 101-43000*221 Equipment Parts & Accessories ToUl LOE'S OIL COMPANY PaidChk# 0791*45 9/73/2064 LOGIS E 10 1 -41900*329 Other Communications E 101*42110*329 Other Communications E 101*42110-310 LOGIS Applications E 101*41900*311 Data Processing Communication E 101*41900*401 Repairs/Mamt-OfTice Equip E 101*42110*401 Repairs/Maint-Office Equip Total LOGIS $130 22 $65 00 34897 Oil filters $65.00 $196 50 $196.50 $1,876 00 $30.00 $484 00 $484 00 24358 24356 24356 24356 24416 24416 Internet • 7/2004 Internet - 7/2004 Police Records • 7/2004 Henn Cly Connection*7/04 AntiVirus AntiVirus $3.267 00 PaidChka 079146 9/13/2004 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT E 601-49400-403 Repnirs/Maint-Misc Equip Total MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT $1.399 67 S-04429 tanks f/vactor truck $1.399 67 PatdChk# 0/9147 9/13/2004 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI & CO E 101*41500*301 Auditing and Accl'g Services L 601-49400*301 Auditing and Acct'g Services r 425-4894S-319 Other Professional Services E 316 47000-319 Other Professional Services E 602*49450*301 Auditing and Acct’g Services E 101*41900*301 Auditing and Acct'g Services L 613 49830-301 Auditing and Acctg Services E 101 41900-301 Auditing and Acct'g Services E 101 41900*301 Auditing and Acct'g Services $3.820 00 13843 $27300 13843 $1.160 00 13643 $420 00 13843 $374 00 13843 $9,880 00 13843 $234 00 13843 $90 00 13843 ($386 00) 13843 Audit RFP #3 Final Reimb Expenses Nav Fire Lease Bonds 2003 Refunding Bonds Reimb Expenses Audit RFP #3 Final Reimb Expenses Prep Publishing Statements Remb Expensrs Tout MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI & CO $15.865 00 f»aKl ChK# 079148 0/13/2004 MCLEOD USA • PHONE BILLS E 601-49400*321 Telephone E 601-49400-321 Telephone E 602-49450-321 Telephone E 602-49450*321 Telephone E 101-41900*321 Telephone E 101-42110-321 Telephone Total MCLEOD USA - PHONE BILLS P'»id tuktWi\l§ &15/2004'" MEDIA COM E 613-49830-415 Other Equipment Rentels Total MEDIA COM $22 77 6393433 $42 9 5 6393433 $39 4 5 6393433 $53 14 6393433 $478 20 6393433 $204 94 6393433 $841 45 Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service %22y2 838392162003 Cable Box (4 months) $k32 ■paid ifhia'b;9150 'iVinOOA ‘ MEO'iCA r CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register® 09/10/04 2 19 PM Page 6 SEPTEMBER 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment G 101-15998 Non-Employee Health Ins E 101-42110-135 City Benefit Contribution G 101-21706 Hospitalization/Medical Ins G101-21706 Hospitalization/Medicat Ins O 101-21706 Hospitalization/Medical Ins G 101-21706 Hospitalization/Medical ins Tout MEDICA Paid Chk# 079151 9/13/2004 METRO FIRE E 425-48945-222 Vehicle Equipment & Parts Tout METRO FIRE Paid Chk#'0791W"* '*9/73/20^^^^ SToWEST ASPHALT * E 601-49400-227 Utility System Maint Supplies E 101-43000-224 Street Maint. Materiats/Suppiy E 601-49400-227 Utility System Maint Supplies ToUl MIDWEST ASPHALT $1,175.12 $37475 $11,474.97 $1,760.70 $10,090.32 $731.11 $25,606 97 104245102552 Medica High - 9/2004 104245102552 Medica High - 9/2004 104245102552 Medica High - 9/2004 104245122585 Medica Low - 9/2004 104245125486 Medica Elect 9/2004 104245134225 Medica - Essentails 9/2004 $1.37253 16016 $1,372 53 Tempest Gas Fan $29.29 56004MB $149 40 72401MB $222.46 72437MB $40115 Paid ChK#’C79153' ’ 9/13/2004' 'MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO ‘ ” E 613-49900-092 Soft Dnnks For Resale $236 00 82445039 E 613-49900-092 Soft Drinks For Resale ($167.50) 82445047 ToUl MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO $68.50 5 gal tac patch mixture patch asphalt pop for resale pop return Paid Chk# 079154 9/13/2004 MIDWEST FENCE E 601-49400-405 Repairs/Maint-Watermains/ptant Total MIDWEST FENCE $400.00 111429 $400.00 fence repair Paid Chk# 079155 9/13/2004 MIDWEST FUELS E 101-43000-212 Motor Fuels & Lubricants G 101-14101 Gasoline Inventory Total MIDWEST FUELS $907.15 10272 $3,685 97 10272 653 diesel 2167 gal gas $4,593.12 Paid'Chk# 1)79156^ ' 9/T3/2064 ’ 'miNNEAPOUSOXYGEN C E 101-43000-224 Street Maint Matenals/Supply $162 91 JA790732 E 101 -43000-224 Street Maint. Materials/Supply E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories ToUl MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Paid Chk#^079157 ^9/r3^2bb4 ^ uHi CMIEF OF POUCE^ASStt' F 101 -42110-437 Training & Development Total MN CHIEF OF POLICE ASSN $3368 RI070040864 $16 64 R108040866 $21343 welding supplies oxygen Cylinders $50 00 28 Data Practices $50 00 Paid Chk# 079158 9/13/2004 MN NATIVE LANDSCAPE G 651-20600 Contracts Payab'e $406 35 G 651-16500 Fixed Asset-Const in progress $2,762 00 ToUl MN NATIVE LANDSCAPE $3,168 35 RFP#Z/F St Bay Rd Erosion RFP#2/F St Bay Rd Erosion Paid Chk# 079159 9/13/2004 MN STATE BAR ASSOCIATION E 101-42110-208 Books & Periodicals $46 66 149733 ToUl MN STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ““ MN Judges Benchbook Paid ChK# 079160 9/13/2004 MN/SCIA E 101-42110-437 irammg & Development E 10142110-437 Training & Development ToUl MN/SCIA Chiu»^79TST ^97iMd04 iMOiOROiLA $46 80 $150 00 Corr.ick $150 00 W ttke 2004 Fall Conference 2004 Fall Conference $300 00 CITY OF ORONO 09/10/04 2:19 PM Pa0«9 Check Detail Register® SEPTEMBER 2004 Check Amtt invoice Comment E 425-46945-580 Other Equipment Tout MOTOROLA $10.099 20 13379652 BOO Mhz Radios $10.099 20 Paid ChK# 079162 9/13^2004 NATIONAL WATERWORKS E 601-49400<405 Repairs/Maint-Watermains/plant E 601-49400*227 Utility System Maint. Supplies _ Total NATIONAL WATERWORKS ($173 36) 1435059 $1.84209 1624649 Credit on Account Hydrant Parts $1,668.73 f^aidChk# 079163 9/13/2004 NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS 0 101-21710 Life Insurance _ ToUl NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS $320 00 061904 life ins 9/04 $32000 9/13/2004 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONSPaidChk# 079164 E 101-42110-321 Telephone ToUl NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS $1.069 84 506573311-03 Police Cefl Phones $1,069.84 Paid Chk# 079165 9/13/2004 NORLING'S E 101-45200-223 Btdg/Grounds Maint. Supplies E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-BkJgs/Grounds E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds ToUl NORLING S $525.00 19308 $1,191.93 19386 $365 50 19368 $1.890 00 19423 general landscape/CB Park\ CH LarKiscaping CB Park Landscaping general main/6-24-04/CB $3,972 43 Ipiw Chk#'079iM “ ■■ 9/13/2004 OCCUPATIONAL MEOlciNEO^^ LTD E 101-42110-319 Other Professional Services $265 00 129700 Fitness for Duty-Schoenhoff ToUl OCCUPATIONAL MEDICINE CONS LTD "Paid Chki* 679*167 9/1 3/2004 OFRCE DEPof E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $265.00 E 101-41900-201 Office supplies E 101-41900-201 Office supplies E 101-42110-201 Office supplies E 101-41900-201 Office supplies E 101-41900-201 Office supplies E 101-42110-201 Office supplies E 101-41900-201 Office supplies ToUl OFFICE DEPOT $26.12 254471195 00 office supplies $26 11 254471195-00 office supplies $85 57 254482161-00 supplies $85 58 254482181-00 supplies $142.39 255176796-00 Supplies - Elections $90 21 255178796-00 Office Supplies $90 22 255176796-00 Office Supplies $16 09 255179286-00 Stamp - Elections $564 29 Paid Chk« 079168 9/13/2004 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. E 613-49900-C93 Concessions For Resaie-Txbl E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Resale-Txbi ToUl OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. $5 04 103210 $1932 103325 chips for resale Chips for Resale $2436 Paid Chk# 079169 9/13/2004 OLSON, RON E 101-41410-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories ToUl OLSON. RON $3648 9/10/2004 $26 64 9/10/2004 Cabie-OVD Player Cable-Smart Trailer $6512 Paid Chk# 079170 9/13/2004 OTTEN BROTHERS E 651-49910-227 Utility System Maint Supplies E 613-49830-223 Bldg/Qrounds Maint Supplies E 613-49830-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies ToUl OTTEN BROTHERS $4313 8/11/04 $5181 8/12^04 $13 74 8/12/04 Top Soil Mums - GC Mums/Mulch - GC $108 68 PaidChk# 079171 9/13/2004 PERRrS TRUCK REPAIR 0 101-19999 Suspense Account $106 50 10614 Tow • Junk Car 4167 Hghwd CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register® 09/10/04 2:19 PM Page 10 SEPTEMBER 2004 Total PERRrS TRUCK REPAIR 9/V3/2d04" * PLYMOUTH PLUm¥iNG Chaci^mt S106 50 Invoice Comment PakJChk# 079172 R 601*39610 Miscellaneous Revenue ToUl PLYMOUTH PLUMBING $320.00 660 Tonkawa Meter Return $320.00 Paid Chk# 079173 9/13/2004 PRAIRIE OFFSET E 101*45200*404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total PRAIRIE OFFSET S277.26 93183 Prairie Maint • Fr Creek Paid Chk# 079174 9/13/2004 0 101*21710 Life Insurance G 101*21710 Life Insurance G 101*15996 Non*Employee Health Ins Total PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE $277 26 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE $87.75 96234 $686.55 96234 $1 65 96234 Life Insurance • 9/2004 Life Insurance • 9/2004 Life Insurance - 9/2004 $775 95 Paid Chk# 079175 9/13/2004 QWEST E 613*49830*321 Telephone ToUl QWEST $61 12 9524739904 Phone Service - GC $61.12 Paid ChV#''079*176 9/1*3/2004 R f ELECTRIC. INC E 101*42110*403 Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip Total R T ELECTRIC, INC $2,815 17 04-558 Siren Repair $2,815.17 Paid Chk# 079177 9/13/2004 REED VENDING E 613-4990C 093 Concessions For Resale-Txbl Tout REED VENDING $53 10 4634 Concessions for Resale $53 10 Paid Chk# 079178 6/13/2004 RICKS SUPERVALUE E 613*49830 201 Office supplies E 101*42110*439 Meeting Expenses E 613*49900*092 Soft Drinks For Resale E 613*49830 221 Equipment Parts & Accessories E 101*45200 439 Meeting Expenses E 101*42110*439 Meeting Expenses E 613-49900*092 Soft Drinks For Resale E 613*49630*223 Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies Total RICKS SUPERVALUE $11 13 $57 99 $50 95 $23 27 $98 17 $25 15 $8 32 $6 99 M762 37084 7/02/04 7/1/04 7/6/04 8/15/04 8/31/04 8/31/04 cups, napkins farwell cake Mtn Dew for Resaie Misc Supplies Deli * Park Tour Food - Com Days Reserves Coffee. Coke MiSC Supplies $281 97 Paid Chk# 0791*79*' * Q/1V2004 ''ROWEKAMP ASSOCfATES INC. ................. E 602*49450*240 Small Too’s and Minor Equip $85^0 2004131 Total ROWEKAMP ASSOCIATES INC. * Rowemap 1.1 $852 00 Paid Chk# '679'180‘ *^ 9/13/2004****'SAFETY sIgNS E 602 49450-415 Other Equipment Renlafs E 602*49450*415 Other Equipment Rentals Total SAFETY SIGNS $181 55 41258 $214 60 41259 barricades barricades $396 18 Paid Chk# 079161 6/13/2004 SAMARITAN TIRE CO INC ' 101*42110*221 Equipment Parts & Accessories ToUl SAMARITAN TIRE CO INC $210 00 191647 snow tires $21000 Paid Chk# 079182 9/13/20C4 SCHARBER S SONS E 101-43000*222 Vehicle Equipment & Parts ToUl SCHARBER S SONS Paid Cnk* 079183 ^3/2004 $323 85 319336 part».JO liactor $323 85 SHAUCHNE5SY, COLIN I CITY OF ORONO 09/10/04 2:19 PM Pag*12 *Check Detail Register® SEPTEMBER 2004 Tout VESSCOINC. VOOt'MEAfiNO SAI R' $347.09 Involc* Commant PaktChk# 079196 9/13/2004 E 101-41000^04 Ropaira/Malnt-Bldga/Orounda Tout VOOT HEATING & AIR $199 00 fan repair at CH $199.00 PaidChK# 079197 9/13/2004 WAGERS E101-42110-201 Office supplies ToUl WAGERS $159 32 ARIN030082 Toner Kit • PD Fax ( PaktChk# 079190 9/13/2004 E 602-49450-381 Gas & Electric E 101-43000-381 Gat & Electric E 101-43000-381 Gas 8 Electric ToUl WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC PidChiJ 679199'''"9/i 3/2004 ' XCCL ENERGY E 101-42260-381 Gas & Electric ToUl XCELENERGY $159 32 ■^WWGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC"’ $21 86 090804 $33.72 090804 $18 03 090804 electric electric electric $7361 $365 58 118154914723 Electricity - N bv Fire $365 58 Paid'ChiS' 079200 9/13/2004 YOUNG, JACKrE *' E 101-42400-319 Other Professional Services E 10M1300-319 Other Professional Services Total YOUNG, JACKIE $165 00 8/25/04 $140 00 8/25/04 $305 00 Plan Minutes 8/16/04 CC Minutes 8/9/04 10100 Primary Cash $160,847 37 Fund Sunnmary 101 GENERAL FUND 231 DRUG/FELONY FORFEITUR E FUND 316 2003 Sewer Refund Bond 402 MUNICIPAL ST AID ST CONSTUCT 415 2001 SENIOR HSG TIF CONST FUND 425 NAVARRE FIRE STATION PROJ FUND 601 WATER OPERATING FUND 602 SEWER OPERATING FUND 613 GOLF COURSE 651 STORM WATER UTILITY OP FUND 10100 Primary Cash $105.604 34 $71431 $420 00 $14,071.09 $150.00 $12,631.73 $15,826.69 $4,327,59 $1,937.48 $4,964.14 $160.847 37