Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
12-08-2003 Council Packet
Public A ttendance Meeting D ate ^ '0 ^ □ Council □ Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other____________ NAME (please print) Please hll outthe information requested BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 1.. 2. ,(^CK 6.. 7, 9. 10... ii-_ 12._ 13. _ 14. _ 15. W;VA4nitelMrMl«e Svppoet'tFomupPnBBe AiifdaBCt.wpd rar-irw I m AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY. DECEMBER 8.2003.7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY. ORONO. MINNESOTA (♦) Asterisk items arc considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet • located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL CONSENT AGENDA I. Approve/Amend APPROVAL OF MINUTES • 2. Regular Council Meeting of November 24,2003 • 3. Truth in Taxation Hearing of December 1 ,2003 a 2005 C'/tru^OHO^o PUBLIC HEARINGS - 7:00 P.M. 4. On Sale and Off Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License - Paul Ode at 3435 Shoreline Drive 5. 2004 Levy Adoption Hearing - Adoption of 2004 Budget and Tax Levy A. Adopt Final 2003 Levy Collectible in 2004 - Resolution B. Adopt 2004 General Fund Budget - Resolution C. Adopt the 2004 Special Revenue Funds Budgets - Resolution PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Andrew McDcnnott. Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Liz Hawn. Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 6. /t02-2858 Scott Standa, 2659 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution ♦ 7. #03-2866A David and Judy Zoschke. 2040 Shadywood Road - Appeal of Administrative Decision - Final Action 8. #03-2943 Robert and Janet Labalt, 3202 North Shore Drive - Variance (Revised Proposal) - Resolution * 9. #03-2951 Judith and James Pierpont, 1801 and 1849 West Farm Road - Subdivision ofa Lot Line Rearrangement - Resolution 10. #03-2961 Nina Wildman, 745 Spring Hill Road -Preliminary Subdivision MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 11 . Request for Payment # I -Navarre CR 1 9 Sidewalk Project 12. Request for Payment #2 - Old Long Lake Sewer Extension 1 3. Request for Final Payment - Surface Water Management Plan 14. Minnehaha Creek Watershed Management Model Agreement - Resolution AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, DECEMBER 8,2003,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA CITY ADMINISTRATOR ’S REPORT 15. Request for Payment #11- Navarre Fire Station 16. 2004 Fee Schedule - Ordinance and Summary Ordinance for Publication 17. 2004 Meeting Schedule 18. Council Liaison to Park Commission and Planning Commission Meetings in 2004 19. 2003 Interfund Transfers and Loan Payments 20. Authorization to Disburse City Funds for Claims Received 21. Year 2004 Non-Union Employee Pay and Benefit Adjustments - Resolution 22. BCA Furniture Donation 23. Contract Payment to County Assessor 23a. Support of Abandonment of Dakota Rail - Resolution CITY ATTORNEY ’S REPORT 23b. Authorize Quick Take Condemnation to Get Easement - Resolution 24. LICENSES One Day Gambling Permit - Resolution 2004 Liquor Licenses * 25. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS im 12/01 12/03 12/08 12/24 12/25 12/26 Truth in Taxation Hearing, 5;30 p.m. Planning Commission Work Session, 5:30 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. HOLIDAY, Observance of Christmas (Afternoon) HOLIDAY, Observance of Christmas HOLIDAY, Observance of Christmas 2004 01/01 01/05 01/12 01/19 01/20 01/26 HOLIDAY, Ne^^' Year’s Day Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. HOLIDAY, Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Planning Commission, Tuesday, 6:00p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 COUNCIL DEC 8 2t*w CITY OH UHU.mO ROLL The Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson, Council Members Bob Sansevere, Jim Murphy, Jim White, and Lili McMillan. Representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, Planning Director Mike Gaffron, City Planner Melanie Foth, City Planner Janice Waatasa, City Attorney Tom Barrett, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Alissa Wintemheimer. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA I. Approvc/Amend Items 6.14, and 16 were added to the Consent Agenda. Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to approve the consent agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 10,2003 Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 10,2003. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS—DREW MCDERMOTT, REPRESENTATIVE McDermott stated that the snou fall means winter activities will be able to occur on schedule. They were pleased with the work session. He thanked Mayor Peterson for keeping the public audience present at the last meeting for the Friends of the Parks award presentation. He also remarked that the lighting at the Navarre fire station was excellently done. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS None. (g) ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 LMCD REPORT—LILI MCMILLAN, REPRESENTATIVE McMillan stated that they had their annual meeting with the Hennepin County Sheritf s Water Patrol, which enforces the LMCD code on the lake. Overall code enforcement went well. They had a safe summer, except for the July 4''* boating incident. There was a significant increase in BUl's, with 67 in 2003 vs. 22 in 2002. One possible cause would be the good weather. The water patrol campaigned this year to address underage drinking on the lake, which led to a significant increase in citations, with 87 in 2003 vs. 30 in 2002. Licensed deputy and special patrol hours totaled 4,500 on Lake Minnetonka, which came to about 85% of enforcement time for the entire county. The percentage time was consistent with what they’ve done in the past. They had about 33 special deputies (volunteers), which is down with their hours totaling 800 in 2003. They felt 33 was a good number of special deputies. Hennepin County has not yet determined if they’ll fund enough of the budget to have the two extra deputies next summer as well. They should know by the end of December. Murphy asked if the increase in BUI has to do with increased enforcement. McMillan stated they had the same number of deputies last summer. Sansevere stated he believed they stepped up enforcement of BUI after the Big Island problems over July 4*''. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 3. #02*2829 Orono Zoning Code Amendment—Section 78*71 —Regulation of Nonconforming Uses and Nonconforming Structures Gaffron stated that the Planning Commission had been working on this Zoning Code amendment for about two years. The intent was to add standards for nonconforming structures. The current draft was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing held on November 17***. They recommended approval with a unanimous vote. The draft accomplishes three things: a purpose for the nonconforming uses and structures section, and standards for nonconforming uses and nonconforming structures. It separates the provisions pertaining to "Nonconforming Uses” from those pertaining to “Nonconforming Structures.” It eliminates language that makes the existing section pertinent only to uses, not structures. It eliminates the ’36-months after 1-1*75’ sunset provision for lawful nonconforming use of land not involving a structure or involving a structure with value less than $3000 on 1-1-75. It eliminates language that suggests Council w ould look favorably on the granting of variances where a situation existed legally under laws prior to 1975. It distinguishes between “Involuntary Destruction” and ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 3. M2-2829 Orono Zoning Code Amendment-Section 78-71 —Regulation of Nonconforming Uses and Nonconforming Structures—Continued 'Voluntary Destruction ” and establishes separate standards for each. Involuntary Destruction: Voluntary Destruction: retains threshold after which rebuild must be conforming at ‘damage is 75% or more of fair maricet value/ establishes that if less than 50% of fair market value is retained, or if less than 50% of pre-existing volume remains then the entire structure and site must be made conforming. Gaffron stated that if a tornado hit a house and damage exceeded 75% of fair market value, then structure and site must be brought up to code in total. If only 60% of property is damaged, then it may be rebuilt as it was before destruction. That standard has been in place for over twenty years. For voluntary destruction, a teardown, if less than 50% of fair market value is retained, or if less than 50% of the original structure remains, then the entire site must be brought into conformance. Gaffron stated the problem has been when the City approves a remodel, and the applicant tears down to the foundation, or leaves only one wall standing, and then calls it a remodel to avoid bringing the property up to code. The Code amendment gives them a standard at which to hold applicants when determining if a project is a remodel or a rebuild. Murphy asked for an example of volume. Gaftron stated that if one had a single story house with a pitched roof and full basement, and tore down to the cap of the basement, they have removed the first story and the volume of the roof, they would have removed over 50% of the volume of the house. That would trigger the entire property having to come into conformance, including a found.ation that was encroaching into a setback. The proposed code also establishes standards for the expansion of existing nonconforming residence structures as well as slightly more strict standards for expansion of nonconforming accessory structures. A lawful, nonconforming residential structure may be expanded, provided it does not increase the nonconformity and complies with all requirements of the district. For example, if a house were nonconforming based on being too close to a setback on one side. The addition could be on the side opposite the substandard setback, provided any expansion of the building met all standard requirements. You could not add a second story where the first story is already too close to the lot. White asked if a house were okay on setbacks, but had too much driveway hardcover. L- ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 3. 002-2829 OronoZoniHgCoJeAmendmetU—Section 78-71—Regulation of Nonconforming Uses and Nonconforming Structures—Continued would adding a second story then require reducing the hardcover of the driveway. GafTron stated that it would not trigger the hardcover nonconformity. Expansion would be permitted if the structure is nonconforming only with respect to substandard lot area or width for the district in which it is located, and the expansion shall then meet ail requirements of the district. GafTron stated that 1/3 - '/a of lakeshore homes are on substandard lots. Some percentage of those may have substandard setback or hardcover that would require variance applications. The amendment provides standards with which to work regarding such applications. In cases where the lot line setback of a structure is less than 50% of the required setback for that district, the City may require that the discrepancy be made up by enlarging the opposite yard depth to result in an aggregate yard depth equivalent to the combined required yard. The Planning Commission felt that there ought to be some threshold at which they look at compensating for an extremely substandard situation. If a house had a 4’ setback on one side, where 10' is required, they could be required to make up the difference on the other side. If that was not possible, then the City would consider a variance. White asked if the code could lead to residents feeling the City has removed rights. Barrett stated that he had not yet closely reviewed the ordinance. Any ordinance the City drafts could brush up against Constitutional rights. The language in item 3(C) reads, “may require," which means Council would set a series of precedents as to how the ordinance is interpreted and enacted. GafTron stated most cities’ codes have a 50% threshold. Accessory structures have the same caveats in general. Item 4(C), was a little difTerent, stating that when an accessory structure is located too close to a lot line, the City could require that the structure be modified so that it becomes completely conforming with respect to setbacks. GafTron stated that a detached garage that comes up for remodel, the City may require the entire structure be moved into conformance. The Planning Commission recommended approval. GafTron stated that Council could approve, amend, or table it for further review. » 4 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 3. #02-2829 OroHO Zoning Code Amendment—Section 78-7!—RegulathH of Nonconforming Uses and Nonconforming Structures—Continued Murphy asked about the overall basic goal of the ordinance changes. Gaflron stated that Orono’s code never had a threshold for how far one could go on a remodel before it triggered the need to come into conformance. The proposed ordinance will limit expansions and require properties be brought into conformity if too much is tom down. Murphy stated his only concern was whether the attorney should review it before Council voted. Barrett asked if there was any need to rush on the ordinance. Gaffron stated there was not. McMillan asked if there was a volume distinction for involuntary destruction. Gaffron stated there was not. This part of the code always contained a “75% of fair market value” distinction. Staff felt with voluntary destruction, volume would be fairly easily addressed. McMillan asked if in the past, on a teardown where the foundation was left, would they have allowed someone to lebuild in a nonconforming situation. Gaffton stated that if the foundation was too close to the lotline or lake, they would need a variance to put back anything that was nonconforming. McMillan stated her concern was that some people might not be able to get the same value of house as they already had by bringing the property into conformance on a substandard lot. Gaffron stated that the logical situation would be to look at a variance for such a property. The intent of the code was not to make substandard lots with substandard houses currently in existence unbuildable, but to give clear direction that if the ability exists to make a property conforming, then it is expected. Variances would continue to be granted where there is clearly a hardship. Murphy moved, and White seconded, to table Item 3, Orono Zoning Code Amendment—Section 78-71—Regulation of Nonconforming Uses and Nonconforming Structures, for legal review. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 4. 803-2866A David and Judy 2^chke, 2040 Sbad>'wood Road—Administrative Appeal The applicants were not present. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 4. M3-2866A David and Judy Zoschke, 2040 Shadywood Road—Administrative Appeal—Continued White moved, and Murphy seconded to table Item 4, David and Judy Zoschke, 2040 Shadywood Road—Administrative Appeal. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. *5. #03-291 Winfield and Nancy Stephens, 350 Crestview Avenue—^Variances- Resolution No. 5078 Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5078 granting variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-282,78-305(B), and 78-1288(B) to allow construction of a new residence on a property that is 0.455 acres in size when 2 acres is normally required and for the structure to be setback 30’ from the front property line when is required, and 10’ from the side propert>- line when 30’ is required and 30’ from the rear property line when 50’ is required and also to allow 45% hardcover in the 75-250* zone when 25% is normally allowed. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *6. #03-2935 Scott and Kara Hutton, 1835 Shadywood Road—Variance Resolution No. 5079 Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5079 granting variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-282 to allow hardcover within the 75- 250 ’ setback zone of 27.8% or 4,584 s.f. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 7. #03-2950 David and Tara Gross, 2635 Countryside Drive West—After-the-Fact Variance—Resolution No. 5080 Foth stated that the applicants requested an after-the-fact variance to allow a 2380 s.f. sport court to remain less than 6 ’ from the side lot line, where 30' is required. The Planning Commission voted to deny the application, 5-1, as they found no hardship. They recommended a deadline of June IS, 2004 for removal or relocation of the sport court. After the Planning Commission meeting, GafTron and Building Inspector Bruce Vang had discussed a reduced time line for removal of the sport court. Mr. Gross came forward. He stated that they never intended to be deceptive with the installation of the sport court. They moved to Orono two years ago. They have four children. They have done some other projects in the back yard since moving in. They decided to install the sport court to keep the children active and safe. They assumed a 10’ setback would be allowed, as that is standard in Plymouth. They flagged the area for the court and left the flags up for six weeks. The current location allows them to see the children from the deck and kitchen windows. They spoke to the neighbors, including the ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 7. 1t03~2950 David and Ta^m Gross, 2635 Countryside Drive West-After-the-Fact Variance—Resolution No. 5080 —Continued next door neighbor along that property edge. No one had any concerns. They shopped for the court and chose a green one that is not too visually disturbing. He had assumed the sport court company pulled a permit. They assumed he had. The company installed the court and after the gr^ing was done, they put the court at 6* instead of the 12* wiiere it had been flagged for installation. Over the siunmer, he was approached by Bruce Vang who told him that the court was too close to the property line. He applied for an after-the- fact variance after consulting with an attorney. Mr. Gross stated it looks like they delayed parts of the process, but he responded to every City request promptly and complied with all the deadlines. He offered to plant a row of arborvitae along the property to screen it from the neighbors. The Planning Commission voted against it. He would consider moving the sport court to another spot on the property. He stated the alternate location chosen by the Planning Commission would not work well for them. They could reduce the size of the court at the current location. Or they could do soil tests to possibly move the alternate location of septic and shift the sport court away from the property line. Sansevere asked how ihey failed to get a permit, w hen the conuact with Sport Court stated permits are the customer’s responsibility. Mr. Gross stated that they have never had to puli a permit for other projects. The contract was a 4-page document and customer responsibility was in no way flagged for them. It was his error, however, Spon Court admitted they used to pull permits and this was the first year they did not pull permits. Now because of mistakes like his, they are again pulling permits for customers. Sansevere asked about the alternate site and sight lines. Mr. Gross stated there is a sunroom off the house they can’t see around, as well as a row of mature spruce trees. He added they are concerned about people coming off the road to approach their four young children. Sansevere asked if the yard will be fenced. He said it would be. He also said the pool is kept covered, so they are not worried about that as a hazard. Sansevere asked if they have a hardship. Mr. Gross stated they would have to remove a number of mature trees. Mr. Gross stated that he feels singled out when he sees the other sport courts around Orono that are up against lot lines. Barrett stated that the authority of the City to grant variances comes from the State statute, which sets out determinations that can be seen in the resolution. Key is the City's obligation to follow the law. Also, understand that if the law is read loosely in one case, it is difficult to not read it loosely in another case. Council’s task is to apply the law to the application before them. They have had similar unfortunate cases in the past. Murphy stated he received two calls from John Bowman regarding the application. His ■wv i - I•J ! Ii!1 I, 5 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 7. U03~2950 David and Tara Gross, 2635 Countryside Drive tVest—After-tke-Faci Variance—Resolution No. 5089—Continued company put in the applicant’s garden. Bowman stated that something changed with the neighbors, and they are no longer okay with the sport court’s presence. Mr. Gross stated that initially there was no issue, and he is not sure why things have changed. Murphy stated that if the court were off by 1 ’ and the neighbors all approved, he would feel difTerent about the application. But the court was too far into the setback. Murphy asked about the location in regard to the septic system. Foth stated that she had the septic inspector took at the site and he said the mound on the survey is smaller than the actual mound. They suggested soil testing to see if the alternate septic lc''ation could be shifted to the west to make more room for the sport court. The problem was that the septic tanks run close to the sport court. Murphy stated it seemed the alternate site for the sport court suggested by staff seemed the best choice. He suggested rebuilding the deck to create another location from which to view the children. Mr. Gross stated that the alternate sport court site is not out of the question. Sansevere asked if Sport Court had offered to help with the expense of moving the slab. Mr. Gross stated he had not yet discussed that matter because he wanted to first determine what would need to be done with the court. Mr. Gross stated he just found out staff changed the deadline and wanted the court moved within two weeks. He stated that would be impossible. Gaffron stated that Vang's perspective on the matter was that he never recommended an after-the-fact variance, but mentioned it as an option and stated it would be unlikely to be granted. Vang felt the applicants have already had four months to consider what to do with the sport court, which should have been moved last summer. Gaffron stated that at this point, the applicant will have issues with moving the court due to the weather. It may have to wait till spring. If the applicant has to move the court, it should be done as soon as possible to minimize the nuisance to the neighbors. Mayor Peterson asked Mr. Gross how the court wound up 6’ from the lot line. Mr. Gross replied that he flagged the court at 1 1 ’ or 12 ’ from the lot line. In the process, with a slight change in grade. Sport Court placed it at 6’ and said it was necessary. He stated that activity on the court has been minimal so far. In the spring, they would like to minimize the amount of trucks in the yard tearing it up. He stated they need time to consider options and conduct soil tests concerning the septic site. Mr. Gross stated they plan to live in Orono for a long time and want to make the matter right. 8 1 ORONO CITY COUN CIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 7. U03-2950 David and Tara Gross, 2635 Countryside Drive tyest—After-the-Fact Variance—Resolution No. 5080—Continued Sansevere stated he would not support removing the court immediately. Todd Umess of 2630 Countryside Drive West, stated that in addition to being a neighbor, he was serving as attorney for the Gross’s. He stated that he was stunned at staffs reconunendation that the court be removed in two weeks time. He submitted the variance application on behalf of the Gross’s in a typical time frame and it was incorrect to say they dragged their feet. The sport court has no li^ts or fence and use would be inoffensive. He requested Council stick with the June IS^ deadline. White stated he would agree with the June 1S"* deadline because in the spring weather is too muddy. He asked if the garden had to come out too. Mayor Peterson replied it did not. Sansevere stated that Sport Court should not have installed the court at 6 ’ without permission. He suggested Mr. Gross’s attorney discuss the matter with the company. McMillan stated it's unfortunate that there is no real hardship for the variance. Mayor Peterson stated that Council could not approve the variance, but would support a June is"* deadline for removal of the court. Murphy stated that if Sport Court sent someone to the Planning Commission meeting, where they admitted to changing policy on pulling permits, Mr. Gross should pursue some assistance from them. Gaffron stated that if the applicant finds a location that meets City code, he would not need a variance, but only a building permit. If he needs a variance for a new location, he would need to submit a new application. The current application would be closed out once Council moved on it. Sansevere moved, and Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5080 denying variances per Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1404, Subdivision 2, allowing a deadline of June 15,2004 for removal of the sport court Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 8. #03-2951 Judith and James Pierpont 1849 and 1801 West Farm Road—Lot Line Rearrangement Gaffron stated that the applicants proposed a lot line rearrangement between their two properties. The westerly lot, #14,1849 West Fann, remains vacant. The easterly lot, #1S, 1801 West Farm, contains a principal residence and a guesthouse approved via CUP ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 A M03^295I Judith and James Pterpant, 1849 and 1801 tPest Farm Road- Lot Line Rearraugemeut-^ontinued Resolution No. 2854. The applicants’ intent is to yield two lots that are conforming for the intended uses with the easterly lot totally 4-acres. This can only be accomplished if the wetland area is attributable for the 4-acre guest house requirement. Planning Commission concluded that the wetland area is not attributable and that the guesthouse use should be discontinued, the kitchen removed, and a “Plumbing in Accessory Building CUP" be applied for. Gaffron stated that at the time the CUP was granted for the guesthouse, the lots should have been combined, yielding a lot with over 5 dry contiguous acres. For unknown reasons, the applicants never completed the legal combination. They requested the lot line rearrangement in order to maximize the area of the homestead parcel while retaining the minimum 2.0 dry buildable acres in Lot 14 for future development or sale. The result w ould be a lot with 3 acres of dry buildable and I acre of wetland. The Planning Conunission feL that was not adequate to allow the guesthouse to remain. Gaffron stated that the applicants would have to make necessary easement vacations in exchange for dedication of new easements along the new lot line. There is a driveway on the property that has existed for many decades. The Planning Commission suggests it be removed by 2004. The applicants suggested that the drive ought to be left alone as it poses no complications to any one. Gaffron stated that the City Attorney advised that the iq)plication for conversion of the guesthouse to Plumbing in an Accessory Structure be a separate application and should not be added to the current application. Planning Commission discussed the fact that the guest facilities did not meet location standards for the Plumbing CUP but concluded that because the building has been in the present location for many decades, is far from any neighboring residence, has no negative visual impacts, and is a historic structure dating in part to the 1870’s, any negative impacts of such a CUP would be limited. Gaffron passed out copies of a letter from Mr. Pierpont. Sansevere asked if the applicants intended to apply for the plumbing CUP. Mrs. Pieipont stated that the guesthouse had partial plumbing when they bought the property and applied for the conversion permit in 1990. Mrs. Pierpont stated that the letter from her husband covered all the Planning Commission points. She summarized. They have no problem with the requirement to change the utility easements. The driveway recommended for removal has been in existence since the 1870’s. Previous ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 S. n03~295l Judith and James Pierpont, 1849 and 1801 fPest Farm Road—Lot Line Rearrangement-^outinued owners had blacktopped part of the drive, and they finished the blacktopping. The drive connected Farm and Homestead streets and was used by neighbors. The neighbor w ho lived on Homestead at the end of the driveway informed the Pierponts that they were nervous about a road exiting opposite their house, so the Pierponts blocked the access to Homestead by installing a mound at the end of the drive and planting it. The Pierponts did not understand the need to remove a drive that had been in existence for so long when its presence did not impact anybody negatively. Mrs. Pierpont stated that when they bought the house, it was in disrepair and the stable was derelict. They wanted to keep the character of the property. They kept the roof, walls and foundation of the stable and converted it to a guest house with an alcove kitchen, bathroom, balcony, and bedroom. She stated that the guesthouse is only ever used by family members or close friends who visit, with the exception of allowing guests of their church to stay briefly on two occasions. They have tried to add value to the neighborhood with the changes they’ve made, while keeping the original charm and style of the property. She stated that they originally believed the lots were connected in order to provide alternative sites for septic. She stated they plan to bring sewer hookups to both lots 14 and IS. Mrs. Pierpont stated that her husband figured they have 13,000 s.f. (7.5%) of wetland on their property with lakeshore frontage. According to his calculations, they do have enough dry buildable to keep the guesthouse. She stated they would gladly sign an agreement stating the house is only to be used by family members and that it would never generate an income. Murphy stated that the City should do a better job of protecting historic properties. Gaffron asked if they would be ignoring the preservation of a historic structure by merely requiring the kitchen to be removed. The 4-acre requirement has to do with density. The code doesn’t distinguish between constant use and occasional use. The Pierponts seem willing to limit the use of the house. Wetland is not credited in terms of density when a property is sewered. Still, the situation has existed for over 13 years with no negative impacts. There is, however, a precedent setting concern if the City allow ed the situation to continue as is. Murphy stated that they need a unique situation in order to find a hardship. Mrs. Pierpont stated that the age of the house and guesthouse make it a unique situation. They were built in 1870. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 8. U03-29SI Judith and James Pierpout, 1849 and 1801 West Farm Road—Lot Line Rearrangement-Continued Murphy asked which calculation on the wetland was correct. Gaffron stated that based on the watershed district ’s maps of wetland, 2S% of the 4-acre property is wetland. If Mr. Pierpont walked the property looking only for open waters, he would have arrived at his calculations technically in error. McMillan stated that wetland has to do with soil and grass types and not necessarily with open water, which fluctuates greatly. McMillan asked Mrs. Pierpont if they had intended to combine the lots in 1990 with the guesthouse CUP. Mrs. Pierpont stated they had intended the lot combination, though it never happened. McMillan stated that the applicants could combine the lots and get only one sewer. Gaffron stated if the lots were combined, the guesthouse as a separate unit would cease to be an issue. However, if the Pierponts only got one sewer, the cost of sewer for each uni t within the project would increase. Moorse stated that the zone requires a 2-acre minimum for a guesthouse in the 2-acre zone so that if the lot were ever subdivided, the guesthouse could stand on its own. In this case, they wouldn’t want the guest house to stand on its own, so would the 2-acre minimum requirement still stand, or could some compromise be worked out where the house remains, but could never be subdivided in the future. Such a compromise would then raise the issue of enforcing the use-restrictions related to the guesthouse in the future. Murphy asked if they could attach a covenant to the property. Moorse stated that a CUP would effectively do the same thing. Gaffron stated that a CUP would run with the property and be permanent. Moorse staled the problem would remain of monitoring for violations of the CUP. McMillan stated that the Pierponts would surely use the guesthouse ^propriately, but the next owner could violate the CUP. When lot line arrangements come up, it gives the City a chance to influence a situation. Mrs. Pierpont asked if it would be possible to make the restrictions part of the property deed. Barrett stated that they have a subdivision application, but do not have an application for a guesthouse before them. In order to grant a variance for the guesthouse, they would need the application and a hardship for that matter. He stated Council could decide on a preliminary basis if they would allow the guesthouse to stand, then require a formal application. They could put conditions into the variance, but could never effectively ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 S. m~29SJ Judith and James PierponU 1849 and 1801 fVest Farm Road—Lot Line Rearraugemeat-^oatiaued police those conditions. McMillan stated the only way to enforce the appropriate use of the guesthouse, is to require the removal the kitchen. White stated he would like to see standards for historical residences, and also a definition of a kitchen. Mrs. Pierpont stated they installed a cooktop to help prepare simple food items for children. Otherwise guests dine at the main house. Gaffron stated that the applicants wanted to move the lot line 3/lOths of an acre, creating a 2-acre and a 4-acre lot. Rededicating easement is not an issue. They would still have two buildable sites with sewer coming in to both sites. Mrs. Pierpont stated they want to redefine the lot line because they have the chance to bring in sewer to two lots, defraying the cost of sewer for the nei^bors and making it more feasible for the City to bring sewer. Also, their son suggested they divide lot 14 so that they’d have the option of selling it off someday if they wanted to. They also own a house on 6"' Avenue North, which their son lives in. If someday the property passes to him, he would have the option of selling off lot 14. Gaffron stated that as it currently stands, lot 14 is a separate tax parcel from lot IS. Both lots abut a private road. The only reason to move the lot line, could be because the septic system for lot IS crosses the property line. With sewer coming, lot 14 could remain at 2.2 acres. Barrett stated the Pierponts currently have two lots, so there is no real need to change it. They would then be left with a nonconforming guesthouse on a lot with under 4-acres of dry buildable. If the kitchen were removed, that problem would be solved and they could leave the lots as is. Gaffron stated that the typical kitchen contains a sink, stove and refrigerator. The Planning Commission was not concerned with the Pierponts use of the house, but there is a risk that the next owner could use it as a permanent residence. Murphy stated that there ought to be a better way to insure the future use of the guesthouse than to punish the Pierponts for wanting to leave things as they’ve been for die last decade. McMillan stated that the lots were supposed to be combined in 1990, before the ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 8. #03-2951 Judith and James Pierpout, 1849 and 1801 West Farm Road—Lot Line Rearrangement—-Continued conversion, and it never happened. Sansevere asked if another CUP would solve the problem. Mayor Peterson stated it would not unless they removed the kitchen. Gaffron stated tliey wc.ild have to remove the kitchen under a plumbing for accessory structure CUP, or receive a variance for the acreage required for the guesthouse. Ga^ron stated that the sink is the primary factor that makes the kitchen, as other fixtures such as stove and refrigerator can be merely purchased and “plugged in.” Mrs. Pierpont stated that she is afraid if the sink were removed, the pipes would freeze and back up into the rest of the plumbing. Sansevere stated he felt a stove made a kitchen. Gaffron stated a kitchen is defined by use, not the appliances installed. He stated if the Pierponts apply for a CUP, the discussion would center on what needs to be pulled out. Mrs. Pierpont stated that the stable had a sink in it before they bought the property. Gaffron asked Mrs. Pierpont if they really need to move the lot lines. She replied not necessarily. Gaffron stated that if the application went away, the City would be faced with enforcing use of the original CUP from 1990, which has never resulted in a complaint. Mrs. Pierpont stated that her younger son has a strong interest in the property, and so she’d be willing to put a deed on the property as it will likely stay in the family. Gaffron stated that the CUP for plumbing in an accessory structure would not be intended for overnight use. Mayor Peterson suggested the Pierponts apply for a CUP application. She asked what needed to be done about the road then. Gaffron stated nothing would need to be done. As long as the properties remained owned by the Pierponts, there would be no issue. Most likely, the road, which passes through lot 14, would be dealt with should the lots ever come under separate ownership. Sansevere asked that if the Pierponts got the CUP, then removed the kitchen, got in two sewer hookups, then could they move the lot line at a later time and put the kitchen back in. The sons could then subdivide the property should they take ownership of the property some day. Mrs. Pierpont stated their intent was to take care of everything themselves so ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 S. M3-295I Judith and James Pierpont, 1849 and 1801 fPest Farm Road—Lot Line Rearrangement-Continued that their children would not need to go through the process. Gaffron asked if there are substantial reasons to continue with the subdivision. If so. he suggested Council proceed with the subdivision conditioned upon approval of the CUP application in January. Sewer would happen for both lots regardless of the subdivision. At this point, there is no need to do anything with the driveway. Mrs. Pierpont stated they would like the subdivision approved conditioned upon the CUP application ’s approval in January. They would then remove the kitchen if the CUP required doing so. At that point, they would have lots 14 and 15 standing on their The road would remain as is, unless they were no longer the owners of the properties. Ganion stated Council could table, or conceptually approve the subdivision subject to staff drafting a resolution that says they rqiprove the subdivision and lot line rearrangement subject to it not becoming effective until they complete the CUP application and all conditions of the CUP approval. Sansevere moved, and While seconded, to conceptually approve the lot line rearrangement and easement vacation/rededication, directing staff to draft a resolution for adoption on December 8'^ staling that the lot line rearrangement will not be effective until an application for a Plumbing in Accessory Structure CUP is obtained and the guesthouse is brought into compliance with requirements of the CUP. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1 (Murphy). Murphy seated that he voted against the motion because he felt they were unnecessarily restricting the Pierponts due to fear of a potential future problem with the guesthouse use. *9. #03-2953 Raymond and Nylene Newkirk, 1489 Shoreline Drive, Variance, Resolution No. 5081 Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5081 granting variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-282 and 78-305 Subdivision B to allow construction of a new residence on the 0.71 acre property and hardcover level within the 75-250 ’ setback of 35.7% where 25% is aliowed. Vole: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1 ( f ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 *10. #03-2959 Timothy J. Latterner, 2032 Sbadywood Road—^Variance—Resolution No. 5082 Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5082 granting variance to Municipal 2Coning Code Section 7^282 to allow hardcover within the 75- 250* setback zone of 59.9% (4,504 s.f.), and 78-350 (B) to add a pitched roof over an cxbting flat roofed porch, and to expand the */i story to a full 2"° story within 5.8* of the property line where 10* is normally required. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *11. #03-2960 Timothy and Kelly Mahoney, 2760 Pheasant Road—^Variance— Resolution No. 5083 Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5083 granting variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-330(B) to allow a new 7/12 pitch roof with a covered entry to be setback 29* from the front property line when 35* is allowed and 33* currently exists. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *12. #03-2963 WJM Properties, LLC, 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard—Commercial Site Plan Review—Resolution No. 5084 Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5084 approving the commercial site plan to allow a 20* x 75* addition to an existing detached garage structure on the property. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 13. #03-2966 Orono Zoning Code Amendment—Section 78-1491(H) and 78-1577— Regulation of Vehicle Storage in Residential Districts—Ordinance No. 4,3^"* Series Foth stated that historically special mobile equipment and vehicle parking was addressed within the introductory paragraph of 78-1577 regarding exterior storage. This revision of City Code Section 78-1577 is in part to maintain consistency between the various code sections that deal with parking, to establish additional updated standards commensurate with the residential nature of Orono, and to address the wide range of uses of vehicles in the community. The Planning Commission determined that the code section regarding vehicle storage on private property was a better fit within the Exterior Storage section (78-1577) of the Ordinance. Recreation vehicles and motor homes will have overlapping coverage in both the Zoning Ordinance (78-1577) and within City Code Section 90-1 Manufactured Homes and Trailers due to the different enforcement components. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 13. U03-2966 OroH0 Zoning Code Amendment—Section 78~1491(H) and 78~1 577 — Regulation of Vehicle Storage in Residential Districts—Ordinance No. 4,3^ Series—Continued Foth pointed out an error in the report. Under staff recommendation it read 78-1479h, it should read 78-1491h. The summary of changes in the report were added to by Sergeant Kurt Erickson and were indicated wiftin circles in the report. The Planning Commission reviewed the final draft absent comments from Sergeant Erickson and recommended approval. Staff also recommended approval. Jeffrey Hagen of 2905 Sixth Avenue was present with his wife. He stated he was in favor of the changes to the Zoning Ordinance. Sansevere stated that the Ordinance seems to restrict campers in ways that boats and trailers are not restricted. Gaffron stated that a year or two ago, Orono changed the boat storage ordinance to be more liberal, and are finding that they did not have in place an ordinance that addresses the storage of large vehicles away from the lakeshore. The new Ordinance changes provide standards and limitations for large recreational vehicles. Foth stated that recreational vehicles will now need to meet the same setbacks as utility trailers are required to meet in the boat storage ordinance. Trailers are now included with recreational vehicles, where before they were only addressed in the boat storage ordinance. The setback was set at 10’, and will now be required to sit no closer than S’ from a lotline. The present changes are more liberal. McMillan asked if parking of vehicles for more than 24 hours would be allowed in the driveway. Foth stated they could not be stored in the driveway, but must be in a side or rear yard, not in a street yard. Foth stated that vehicles over 14,000 lbs could not be stored on property of less than S- acres. Large, 1-ton pick-up trucks used for towing are typically at 14,000 lbs. They wanted to allow those, but restrict heavier vehicles. Mr. Hagen stated that his neighbor has a dump truck stored on his property, as well as other vehicles. Gaffron stated that staff have attempted to solve such problems with large vehicles through home occupation ordinances, but found they could not, so they propose revising the vehicle storage ordinance. MSI. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 /i. m-2966 OroHO Zoning Code Amendment-Section 78-149I(H) and 78-1577— Regulation of yehicle Storage in Residential Districts—Ordinance No, 4, y* Series—Continued Sansevere asked if a dump truck was not included under the ordinance. Foth stated that a dump truck is NOT special mobile equipment, which is regulated elsewhere. Special mobile equipment would be things that one could not drive to and from work, like a well driller or bobcat. Special mobile equipment is not allowed to be stored outside at all. GafTron stated that page 3 of 6, items 2 a-g covers the dump truck. The City wilt handle violations of the ordinance on a complaint basis. Staff would likely allow a 3-month grace period to allow residents to work out new storage spaces for their vehicles. GafTron stated they could get word out through an article in billings, the website, and/or the newspapers. Sansevere asked for a definition of nuisance. Barrett stated there is a definition of nuisance in a different portion of the ordinance. Murphy asked where special mobile equipment was covered. Foth stated section e on page 4 of 6 stated that outdoor storage of such equipment is prohibited. While moved, and Mayor l*eterkaD seconded, to adopt the Ordinance No. 4, Third Series, An Ordinance Amending Section 78 of the Orono Municipal Zoning Code by Amending Sections 78-1491(h) Regarding Commercial Vehicle Parking and 78-1577 Regarding Exterior Storage. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1 (Sansevere). Sansevere stated he felt the City sometimes overly restricted where residents could and could not keep things on their property. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Sansevere .licntioncd a resident who wanted to plant poplar trees in the boulevard outside power lines along his property, whieh would put them along the street’s edge and in the City ’s right-of-way. Mayor Peterson asked Gaffron to look into the matter. Murphy stated that he had attended three meetings with Mn/DOT and would have two more on Tuesday regarding construction. He felt the meetings were making progress. The engineer and Mn/DOT representative seem to understand their issues better than ever before. They raced to get the temporary bridge blacktopped on Friday afternoon and did Kelley Parkway on Saturday. They agreed that the issues raised thus far require that they redesign the construction plan for the balance of the project over the winter months. They have discussed w ays to keep people apprised of progress. One idea is to shoot still photos ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 MA YOR/COUNCIL REPORT~-ContiHHed with a traffic camera that posts to a website. Murphy added that Orono Police Sergeant Jay Dembouski was nominated by the Long Lake Chamber of Commerce as the Person of the Year, and won the award. White suggested Orono could charge a fee for companies bringing heavy vehicles onto city streets that tear up the streets. The fees could help cover costs of street repair. Moorse stated he would look into it. Mayor Peterson stated the Mr. Anderst of the Narrows Saloon stated he felt a pull-tab license could raise $50,000 to help beautify the City. Moorse stated that the establishment and charitable organization both would require state permits. Sansevere noted that the MS Society raised less than $5,000 from the pull-tabs. Mayor Peterson stated that she attended a groundbreaking ceremony for the Excelsior Fire District. The Chief spoke to the members of the board from the five communities in the fire district and recommended Orono and Long Lake ’s partnership as an example of cooperation. She thanked them for their partnership with Orono over the next few years. PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT *14. Accept Quotation for Industrial Park Watermain Extension Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to accept quotation for the industrial park watermain improvements from Nodland Construction Company, Fergus Fall^ Minnesota in the amount of $7350.00 to be funded from the Water Fund with a budget adjustment to the 2003 Water Fund budget Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 15. Adopt Assessment Roll—^North Long Lake East Sewer Extension —Resolution No. 5085 Murphy stated that Council had agreed to try for the lowest possible interest rate for another sewer assessment at the previous meeting, and wondered if they should do the same for this project. Gappa stated that everyone assessed for the current projects had already agreed to the 6.25% interest. Assessment rolls that had already passed would have to go down to the county in order to change the interest rate, and they would have to re-adopt the assessment rolls. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 15. Adopt Assessment Roll—North Long Lake East Sewer Extension —Resolution No. 5085—Continued Sansevere stated they should look into it for the current ^plication because it came before them after they were aware of the possibility. Moorse stated they could adopt the assessment at 6.25% or lower based on the City ’s cost offtinds. Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resotntioo No. 5085 approving the assessment roll for the North Lake East Sanitary Sewer Extension Project at an interest rate of 6.25% or lower based on the City’s cost of funds. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT *16. Application and Certificate for Payment 85 —^Navarre Fire Station Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to approve the Application and Certificate for Payment No. 5, in the amount of $301,395.00 to be paid from the Navarre Fire Station Construction Fund. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 17. Police Department—^Accept Donation Sansevere stated it was kept off Consent so that it could be acknowledged publicly. McMillan moved, and Murphy seconded, to accept the donation of six traffic safety vests from Dr. Charles Boehm to be used by the Orono Police Department Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT None. 18. LICENSES ANNUAL LIQUOR LICENSES I i11 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 18, LICENSES—Continued Club On Sale and Sunday Liquor Wayzata Country Club 200 Wayzata Boulevard Woodhill Country Club 200 Woodhill Road Off Sale Liquor Navarre Liquors, Inc. 3421 Shoreline Drive Mayor Peterson moved, and White seconded, to approve the above Ibted licenses Vote: Ayes 4, NmjS 0, Abstain 1 (McMillan). *19. BILLS Sansevcre moved, and White seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor MINUTES OF THE TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARING HELD AT 5:30 P.M. ON MONDAY. DECEMBER 1,2003coi INP.IL MEETING IN THE ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS DEC 8 2003 MtmiMrs Present: Council Members McMillan, Sansevere and White OHONO Staff Present;City Administrator Ron Moorse, Finance Director Tom Kuehn Acting Mayor Sansevere call the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. Acting Mayor Sansevere opened the hearing and indicated the hearing was an opportunity for citizens to ask questions and provide comments regarding the proposed budget and tax levy for 2004. Bill Stubbs indicated he did ■''^t have any concerns regarding the proposed budget or tax levy; however, he had a question regarding the valuation of his property at 185 Old Crystal Bay Road North. The Truth in Taxation notice he recently received indicated that his market value had increased by $91,000. The Truth in Taxation notice also indicated the zoning of the property to be “industrial preferred". Acting Mayor Sansevere indicated that City staff would contact the Assessor to follow up regarding the increased property value. Mr. Stubbs indicated he would follow up with the Assessor. There being no further public comments. Acting Mayor Sansevere closed the hearing. Council Member White moved, Council Member McMillan seconded, the announcement that the 2004 budget and tax levy will bo adopted at a hearing to be held at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, December 8,2003. Vote: 3 Ayes, 0 Nays. ADJOURNMENT Council Member White moved. Council Member McMillan seconded, that the meeting be adjourned at 5:53 p.m. Vote: 3 Ayes, 0 Nays. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor d • I Lin Vee - P«ui Od« - Licente Application Pagtt i* From:Kurt Erickson To:Lin Vee Date:12f8A» 8;34AM Subject:Paul Ode • License Application Lin, Tony has complated part of the investigation but is no where dose to being done. Mr. Ode has been very slow in providing documentation that he is ready to start business. He is missing his federal tax ID number, he has not provide proof of liquor liability ins., ho is missirtg a ID number for workers comp. Tony has been asking Mr. Ode to produce these Herns to proceed wHh the investigation. I have particular concern on the missing liquor liabilHy ins and worker comp info. The criminal history check is dear but has not been verified by fkiger prints yet. We had a problem incur Live Scan fingerprint system which will require Mr. Ode to come back and be printed again. Mr. Ode does have a history of DWI and other traffic offenses. Based on the above I would not recommend even passing the provisional license pending completion. This is based on Mr. Ode having failed to get us documentation on the liquor liabilHy ins. and workers comp coverage. I think these are important issues and until proof of coverage, I doni feel he should be in business. Can you pull the application from the agenda or would you like the council to discuss die def ciencies and decide to not approve at this time? CC:Stephany Good; TonyWHtke p REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MEETING DEC 8 2003 CITY OF OHU.vU DATE: DecembCT 4,2003 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name LinVee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Public Hearing - On Sale and Off Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License Paul Ode at 3435 Shoreline Drive Attachments:Application for On Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License Application for Off Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License Paul Ode has recently acquired Navarre Lanes and is requesting a 2004 On Sale and Off Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License for the bowling lanes at 3435 Shoreline Drive. Previously Dan Scherven held both an On Sale and Off Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License for the bowling lanes. The specific standards or requirements for granting of the license include proper zoning, a background investigation, and payment of the license fee. The Police Department is in the process of completing the background investigation and will provide a memo for Council review at Monday’s meeting. The required investigation (S500) and license ($150) fees have been paid. The license application requires a public hearing process to provide an opportunity for public comment. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the license, with the condition that the Police Department recommends approval upon completion of the background investigation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the application of Paul Ode for an On Sa'.e and Off Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor license for Navarre Lanes at 3435 Shoreline Drive effective January 1, 2004 through i u«M rMK ifiil RETAIL *H>FF SALfT 3tatc of minncsota, Cmmy JtontPjfi To Ci£E. of Ihc^Citf Orooo SUHcofMiiiMtola: fml 04m famm fke---lirst----------------------4tiytf ___¥MtJt JmaHI la Oiigiiwl PMiaics Only 3 J Mall liqyon, mt lk€ tmm€ or# ie/imti ^jr tmw, fmr ^OFF** tkmt€ cerl^im pnmistt im ike. M«M**M*M*M**« ■ovarro Uum 3435 Slwroliaa Drivo icvarrop Ml 01 wkUk pim€i tm(4 rnppiitmm.....#f#rol#..ff.......Ike kmtlafu •••••••»«•• mm4 lo ikmt tm4 rv^r#«#iil...A.ooil ms /mtimwa Tkmt smii mpplUmmi...............4?...?.................cUizsm.......m/ik§ C/oiirtf Sfolri; o/fooil mmrmt tkmrmttsr mm4 fV|Hil#; oo^ 4o.9....ofloio#ir tkm of# #/ 2i y##ft; tkmt.........f99lv.Ar...Mft ...................f r#^fl#f#r......o/lA# fstmkiitkmmmt fmr wkick tke licmmtm wiUkt ittmti if tkit mppHtmtiom is grmmtti. Tkmt tmid mpplUmmt.....mtmkt...!!..tkit mppikmtimm pmnmmmt mmd tmkjeei tm mil tkt Imwt mf tkt Stmte •/ Mimmmsmtm mmd tkt mrdistmmtts mmd rtgmimtimmt tf smi4„.,.^%%T ................................mgpiUmktt H«r#ro, mkiek Of# ktrtkf mmit m pmrt ktrttf mmd ktrtkf off##.a...io o4f#rv# mmd mktj tkt tmmt: iMm« MOt 01^ I • »0**OOM«»04 tmck mppliemmt fmrtktr simtts tkmt^ kt it oof mmw tkt kmtdtr #/. oor Aoi^ k§ mmit mpgiiemtimm ftr, oof dttt^ kt imttmi tm mmkt mpplUtiimm fmt m Ftdttml Fttmil Dtmltf*s S^^riol loo stmmtp /or tkt tmit mf irntmiicmtirng lif oor. Dmttd r#or.. AfpUtmml. r.O. Ai4r0$$.i^5^.J^ftfiktJ[l!.JL.^L 1 ■ ;iv- J ir* » k Fnnil No. 235—<%p|iltriiuw tm ttmatt Ur»n — m Ml j I uah U^uor *Oir Op* turn RETAIL <*ON SALE’* ^tBtt of 4Utineoota. COVNTYOr.. To the .. c4?T.c?«*M.............of the ct?y. cit^ ................or.. .??®9P.. .............of__.9????... .State of Minnesota: Paul a. Oda henby appl-lmm ... torm Ucenta tor Iho term of.. .aaa.jaar...................................... fnm Iho.. .f iFP.t....................................doy of... .4*Wrr.......................... At Retail Only, 3.S Malt Liquors M the oame ore defined by low, tor conoumption "ON" thote cortoln premiteo In the .................................c.i.tjr ...........................of........9^w<....................... de§cribmi m foSowM, tthwit:................................................................................................. rtv.?QQ^...ioooa Umwmrrm Lsoco 3435 SborcliiM Drlvo Umwmrrm^ MN of which piMce §mid mppUcmnt,.. .operate,.. .the buaineaa of.. MWf .♦.IWW..................... and to that ettd ropr&ent. R .and olofe.*.. .aa foUowK That aakl applicant ............4?. ?......................citiacn ------of the United Statea; of good moral character and repute; and ha%e..........attained the age of It yeara; that . R.\ ..........proprietor. ...of the eatabliahment for which the licenae will be laaued if thia application la granted. That no manufacturer of auch non-intoaicating malt llquora haa any twrnerahip, in whole or In part, in aaid buaineaa of aaid applicant. ...or any koereat therein: That aaid applicant -----makeR.. .thIa application purauant and aulgect to all the tawa of the State of Minneaota and the ordinancea and regulationa of aaid .. f A57........................................................................ applicable thereto, which are hereby made a part hereof, and hereby a^ee.R. .to obaerve and obey the aame: llh^ state iithar mfukrtiiPtiia. If atiy. of hral rpnulalliMtsi Each applicant further atatea that by the commencement of buaineaa and by July J of each auct:eeding year aaid applicant will ha%e paid the Ferleral Special fkxupational Taji to the Bureau of Ahohtd, Tobacco and Firearma for a retail dealer. Dated ................. P.O. Addreaa . ... .yicnif^d.. .mju. . . REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COl IMCIL MEETING OEC 8 2003 CITY OF ORO.N DATE: December 5 RO.no ,2003 ITEM NO: S Department Approval: Name Ron Mcorse Title City Administrator Adminbtrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Levy Adoption Hcarin^Adoption of the 2004 Collectible Tax Levy and Annual Budget - Resolutions Attachments: 1. Resolution Adopting the Final 2003 Tax Levy Collectible in 2004 2. Resolution to Adopt the 2004 General Fund Budget 3. Resolution to Adopt the 2004 Special Revenue Fimds Budget Lew Adoption Hearing This is the final hearing prior to the adoption of the 2004 budget and tax levy. Proposed 2004 Budget The proposed 2004 budget reflects an effort to comply with the State-imposed levy limit, and to deal with reduced State Aid revenue; while maintaining current service levels, accommodating the additional costs related to the start-up of the Navarre Fire Station, and providing for necessary equipment replacement in the police, fire, and public works areas. General Fund Budget The proposed 2004 General Fund budget expenditures are $4,701,490. This is a reduction of $ 11,390, or .2% from the 2003 budget. Although the General Fund budget expenditures are reduced overall, there are a number of areas that require increased e.xpenditures. These include annual compensation adjustments, start-up costs for the Navarre Fire Station, acquisition costs related to an upgraded police records system, and costs related to the 2004 election. These increased expenditures are more than offset by a large number of expenditure reductions in the range of $500 to $2,000, as well as a number of more substantial expenditure reductions. The substantial expenditure reductions are in the areas of contracted street overlays, training and development, and special projects and contingencies. 9 \ BSJt.i TK» H Tax Lew. Tax Rate, and Impact on Property Owners The total tax levy required to fund the proposed 2004 budget is $3,197,930. This is an increase of $99,530, or 3.27%, over the 2003 levy. The total levy includes a Fire Facilities and Equipment Bonds debt service levy of $73,250, which will be used to fund the debt service on the bonds used to finance the Navarre Fire Station, and the purchase of fire apparatus and equipment needed for the Fire Station. The total levy also includes a special levy of $83,000 to fund the repayment of equipment certificates for the purchase of three replacement police squad cars, and a special lev>’ of $125,000 to fund the repayment of equipment certificates for the purchase of replacement equipment in the Public Works Department. The estimated tax capacity for taxes payable in the year 2004 is $18,142,562. This is an increase of $2,556,915, or 16.41% over the 2003 tax capacity. Based on the City’s increased tax capacity and the proposed lax levy, the tax capacity rate will be 17.599%. This is a reduction of 11.4% from the 2003 tax capacity rate. The reduction in the tax capacity rate will result in a reduction in the City’s share of the property tax bill. Assuming a 10% increase in a home’s property value, the City’s share of the property tax bill for a home valued at $350,000, would be reduced by $17.85, or 2.6%. For a home valued at $500,000 the reduction would be $25.51, or 2.6%. Truth-in-Taxation Hearing The Truth-in-Taxation Hearing was held at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, December 1. Three citizens, representing one property, attended the hearing, llie property owner indicated he did not have any concerns about the budget or tax levy, but had some questions regarding the increased valuation of his property. After clarifying the issues related to the valuation, the property owner was advised that staff would assist him in working with the City Assessor to address his concerns. Adoption of 2004 Budget and Tax Lew It is recommended that the Council adopt the 2004 budget and tax levy at this time. The necessary- resolutions are attached for Council adoption. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Motion to adopt a resolution approving the proposed tax levy to fund the 2004 budget. 2. Motion to adopt a resolution approving the 2004 General Fund budget. 3. Motion to adopt a resolution approving the 2004 Special Revenue Funds budget i A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE FINAL 2003 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 2004 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the final 2003 Tax Levy Collectible in 2004, is determined to be as follows: GENERAL LEVY General Fund • Operations PIR Fund • Infrastructure - Roads Park Fund • Land Acquisition & Development Improvement & Equipment Outlay Fund • Capital Equip TOTAL GENERAL LEVY $2,547,900 35,450 5,000 -0- $2J18J50 SPECIAL LEVY General Fund - PERA Rate Increases General Fund - COPS Grant Decrease General Fund - Capital Equipment Cert. TOTAL SPECIAL LEVY-GENERAL FUND 5,540 14,790 83.000 $ 103.330 BONDED DEBT AND CERTIFICATES OF INDEBTEDNESS Improvement & Equipment Outlay - Capital Equipment Cert G.O. 1997 Sewer Improvement Bond G.O. 1999 Sewer Improvement Bond G.O. 2003 Sewer Improvement Refunding Bond TOTAL BONDED INDEBTEDNESS $ 125,000 18,000 5,000 35,000 $ 183.( BONDS OF OTHER GOVERNMENTAL UNITS H.R.A. Refunding Bond 1998 H.R.A. Fire Facility and Equipment Bond 2003 $ 250,000 73.250 $ 323.250 TOTAL ALL LEVIES $3,197,930 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 Cit>~ Council of the Citv* of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 8, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, Cit>' Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ■••oluUaaaVrlMl 1004 Uvy.ns.wpd i A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 2004 GENERAL FUND BUDGET BE IT RESOL VED» by the City Council of the City of Oronc, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the 2004 General Fund budget is determined to be as follows: ESTIMATED REVENUES Taxes - General $2,651,230 Market Value Credit Lost (54,410) Licenses and Permits 367,600 Intergovernmental 206,020 Charges for Services 1,358,190 Fines and Forfeits 96,500 Interest Income 41,000 Miscellaneous —um TOTAL $4,685,790 APPROPRIATED EXPENDITURES General Government Public Safety Street Maintenance Parks and Recreation Recycling Program Engineering - Unallocated Reimbursable Expenditures Special Projects and Contingency Capital Outlay Transfers To Other Funds TOTAL $ 973,150 2,826,140 485,490 64,610 90,380 10,570 66,150 30.000 110,000 45.000 $4,701,490 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 8,2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Ranluteii^nari :0O4 te N Bu4iiui4«p4 1 A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 2004 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS BUDGETS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the 2004 Special Revenue Funds budgets are determined to be as follows: Estimated Revenues Park Improve & Equip Outlay Community Investment Taxes • General $ 5,000 $ 125,000 $ Interest Income 6,000 10,000 66,980 User Fees / Loan Payment m m 6,100 • • Park Dedication Fees 30,000 • •• • Transfers from other Funds - -45,000 • • Use of Fund Balance • -- -53.020 Total Revenues s 41.000 $ 186.100 suoooo Appropriated Expenditures General Government Public Safety Streets Parks & Recreation Transferr to other Funds Increase to Fund Balance Total Expenditures $ 9,600 125,000 120,000 4L000 51.500 .LdLj S 186.100 $ 120.000 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Miimesota at a regular meeting held December 8,2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor %■ 1 . fr 5 -1 i 1 j B 4000 3600 D 3200 2800 F 2400 G 2000 H 1600 I I I . I * a,TM *>twt w I fii I 800 if VAYZAIA BLVD US MWt «8 • ^ ffoirr P€wt. a.Nsii. i__o 9 ro» STRirr urArwrw B at ua MDomwxA ACKN4>A FOR COUNCIL .MEETING SET FOR MONDAY. DECE2^IBER 8.2(K)J, 7:00 P..\ ORONO COUNCIL CHANIBERS, 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 arc available in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLLCAIL CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/Amend APPROVAL OF MINUTES • 2. Regular Council Meeting of November 24. 2001 * .1. Ilulli III Ia.\ali«iii ItciiiiiiguriK'vciii Ih:? l,2tHM DEC 6 2003 CITY 0^ UHUivU PUBLIC HEARINGS - 7:00 P.M. 4. On Sale and Off Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License - Paul Ode at 3435 Shoreline Drive 5. 2004 Levy Adoption Hearing • Adoption of 2004 Budget and Txx Levy A. Adopt Final 2003 Levy Collectible in 2004 • Resolution B. Adopt 2004 General Fund Budget • Resolution C. Adopt the 2004 Special Revenue Funds Budgets • Resolution PARK C05L^USSI0N COMMENTS - Andrew McDermott, Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Liz Hawn, Representative PUBLIC CO.UMENTS - (Umil 5 Miaetes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 6. #02*2858 Scott Standa, 2659 Casco Point Road - Variance — Resolution • 7. M03-2866A David and Judy Zoschke, 2040 Shadywood Road - Appeal of Administrative Decision - Final Action 8. #03-2943 Robert and Janet Labalt, 3202 North Shore Drive-Variance (Revised Proposal)Resolution ' 9. #03*2951 fudilh and James Pierpont, 1801 and 1849 West Farm Road-Subdivision of a ILine Rearrangement - Resolution 10. #03*2961 Nina Wildman. 745 Spring Hill Road-Preliminary Subdivision MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 1 1 . Request for Payment # I -Navarre CR 19 Sidewalk Project 12. Request for Payment #2 - Old Long Lake Sewer Extension 13. Request for Final Payment - Surface Water Management Plan 14. Minnehaha Creek Watershed Management Model Agreement - Resolution AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, DECEMBER 8,2003,7:00 P > ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY. ORONO. MINNESOTA CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 15. Request for Payment #11 - Navarre Fire Station 16. 2004 Fee Schedule - Ordinance and Summary Ordinance for Publication 17. 2004 Meeting Schedule 18. Council Liaison to Park Commission and Planning Commission Meetings in 2004 1 9. 2003 Interfund Transfen and Loan Payments 20. Authoriaalion to Disburse City Funds for Claims Received 21. Year 2004 Non-Union Employee Pay and Benefit Adjustments - Resolution 22. BCA Furniture Donation 23. Contract Payment to County Assessor CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 24. LICENSES One Day Gambling Permit • Resolution 2004 Liquor Licenses * 25. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 2IS2 f / Dale Appikatioo Received: 12>11M12 Date Application Considered at Complete: 8-26-03 60-Day Review Period Initial Espiratlon: 10-264)3 Review Period Extended on 10-24-03 to: 12-24-03 COUNCU MFFTING DEC 8 2093 CITY OH OHOivO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: December 4,2003 Item No. Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gafiron Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #02-2858 Scott Standa, 2659 Casco Point Road • Variance (Aiter-the-Fact) • Resolution (Partial Approval or Denial) List of Exhibits (a) Resolution for Adoption (Denial s (b) Notice of Council Action 12-1-03 (c) Memo and Exhibits of 11-3-03 (1) Notice of Council Action 11-3-03 (2) Memo and Exhibits of 10-24-03: A - Resolution for Adoption (Partial Approval) B - Notice of PC Action 10/24/03 C - PC Draft Minutes 10/20/03 D - Memo and Exhibits of 10/17/03 This item was tabled on November 10 because the applicant was not present. Council was advised that Mrs. Standa indicated via voice mail on Novemt^r 10 that the deck will be removed, and that they are moving and do not wish to pursue the application further. City staff inspected the site on December 4 and confirmed that the deck has osi been removed. The property is for sale. The 60-day review deadline has already been extended once, and the 120-day review period runs out on December 24. Council action is necessary on December 8 to either grant partial approval of the deck per the Planning Commission recommendation, or deny the application. A 'partial approval ’ resolution is attached as Exhibit A of the October 24 memo. This resolution denies the 8' x 12* deck but allows a smaller 4* x T walkway to remain to service the existing patio door of the boathouse. A ‘denial ’ resolution is attached as Exhibit (a) of this memo. This resolution is in line with the stated intent of the applicants, and requires total removal of the 8* x 12* deck. It requires removal of the deck by January 1, 2004 and modification or blocking of the patio door if the resulting distance to the ground exceeds Building Code standards for an access door. i i #02-2SS8: 26S9 Cisco Point Roid December 4,2003 Page 2 The applicants have been advised by mail of the December 8 meeting and have been given the opportunity to appear [see Exhibit (b)]. As of this writing we have no word from the applicants as to their intent to q>pear. Because the deck remains tn violation, with the tegat application review period soon to expire, and the property being for sate. Council may wish to direct the City Attorney to take iegtd action immediately to ensure that the current owner remains liable for correcting the violation. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends adoption of the Denial Resolution. Staff recommends that the City Attorney be directed to commence whatever legal action is necessary to ensure that the sale of the property does not negate the City’s ability to pursue correction of the violation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached Denial Resolution, Exhibit (a). Direct the City Attorney to commence legal action as necessary to ensure that the sale of the property does not negate the City’s ability to pursue correction of the violation. ■ iWi . :>.i ------------- i ■ ( I EXK.(»^) A RESOLUTION DENYING AN AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-281 (A) & (B); 78-282;78-l 279; AND 78-1288 FILE NO. 02-2858 WHEREAS, Scott S. Standa and Irene S. Standa, husband and wife (hereinafter "the applicants"), are the owners of the property located at 2659 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follow s: Lot 137, Spring Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota; (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for after-the- fact variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-281 (A) & (B); 78-282; 78-1279; and 78-1288 to allow the cons ’ojction of an 8’xl2' deck and stairw ay located within 75* of the OHWL t)f Lake Minnetonka w here no structures or hardcover are normally allowed, and located lakeward of the average setback line and within I foot of the side lot line where such structures are not no;v«t:My allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File "02-2858. The property is located in the LR-IC Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, which requires minimum lot area of 0.5 acres and minimum lot width of 100*. The lot has a defined width of 60’ and is 0.29 acre in area. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on October 20, 2003 and on a vote of 4-1 recommended partial approval of the after-the-fact variances to allow the partial reconstruction of the deck to leave a walkw ay 4' wide by T long w ith a 3 ’ wide stairway to continue to serve the existing patio door. Page 1 of3 4. 5. 6. 7. On November 10,2003 Mrs. Standa indicated to City stafT via voicemail that they no longer wish to pursue the after-the-fact deck variance application, they have put the house up for sale and plan to move, and that they will remove the deck in its entirety. The communication did not include a date by which the applicants intend to have the deck removed. The applicants have not removed the deck as of December 8, 2003. The only remaining opportunity for the City Council to take formal action on this variance application in compliance with the statutorily imposed 60-day/120-day review period regulations is December 8.2003. The City Council has considered this application including the fu 'lings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the deck was constructed in violation of a variety of zoning code sections, in a completely nonconforming manner, and without any apparent attempt on the part of the applicant to obtain a building permit. The plight of the property owner is due to the property owners action, and not a result of demonstrated hardships. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby denies the requested after-the-fact variances to retain the 8'xl2* deck adjacent to the boathouse, and hereby requires that such deck be removed no later than January 1, 2004. Applicant shall take whatever reasonable measures may be required by the Orono Building Official to ensure that the patio door access adjacent to the deck will be left in a safe condition. Page 2 of3 V rI • [- II mi r • 1^ Date Appikatloi Received: 12-10-02 Date AppHcatlea CoBtidered as Cenpletc: 8-2043 00-Day Review Period Initial EspiratioB: 10-2043 Review Period Eitcnded oo 10-2443 to: 12-24-03 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: November 3,2003 Item No. Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffion Title: Plannmg Director Agenda Section: 7nning Item DcfcriptioB: #02-2858 Scon Standa, 2659 Casco Point Road - Variance (Afler-the-Fact) - Resolution Lbt of Exhibits 1 - Notice of Council Action 11-3-03 2 - Memo and Exhibits of 10-24-03: A - Resolution B - Notice of PC Action 10/24/03 C - PC DraR Minutes 10/20/03 D - Memo and Exhibits of 10/17/03 This item was tabied on October 27 because the applicant was not present. Please refer to the Memo and Exhibits of 10~24^3, aiuntt ■ -V *a* Si®? j ■: il i li I I . ! JS it I 'i 6 lii !i jJ CITY OF ORONO 2750 KeUcy Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE #02-2858 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: November 3, 2003 TO: Scott Standa 2659 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: October 27, 2003 VOTE: 4 FOR 0 AGAINST Motion: To table because the applicant was not present. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, November 10, 2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you cannot be in attendance, please send a representative or contact City staff to re-schedule. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. If you have any questions, please contact Planning Director Mike Gaffion at 952-249-4600. */* 4 K..: . .-.1' Date Application Received: 12>ltMI2 Date Application Considered as Complete: 8>26>03 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 10-2^3 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Dote: October 24,2003 Item No. Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffro Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #02-2858 Scott Standa, 2659 Casco Point Road - Variance (After-the-Fact) - Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Notice of PC Action 10/24/03 C - PC Draft Minutes 10/20/03 D - Memo and Exhibits of 10/17/03 Application Summary: Applicant requests after-the-fact hardcover and setback variances to allow the reconstruction of a deck located at the shoreline attached to an existing accessory building. Variances required include: 1 . Structure within 0-75’ setback zone, extending out over the shoreline (cantilevered 2-3' past the OHWL). 2. Structure encroaching within 1 foot of side lot line. 3. Hardcover in 0-75* zone of 16.24% (no changes proposed). 4. Encroachment of average lakeshore setback. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends partial tq)proval per the Planning Commission recommendation. Zoniog District: Lot Area: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2-acre min. 0.29 acre (12,815 s.f.) Plaoning Commission Recommendation The Plaiming Commission reviewed this item at their October 20 meeting and on a vote of 4-1 recommended partial approval as follows; 1.Deck as reconstructed is not approved. Applicant to remove the 8'xl2* deck, but will be allowed to replace it with a 4'x7' walkway with 3* wide stairway to g^e. i I I M2-2SS8 26S9 Casco Point Road October 24,2003 Pagc2 2.Applicant to remove the following items of hardcover: Concrete sidewalk at north side of house Concrete slab adjacent to accessory building Fabric and plastic liner from all landscape areas (132s.f.±) (208 s.f.) (235 s.f.) 3.Applicant is plac^ on notice that the deck and accessory building are nonconforming structures and subject to the pertinent ordinances limiting the degree of structural repair allowable for such structures. 4.Applicant is advised that replacement of the stairways providing access to the lake is allowed but will require building permits at the time such activity is commenced. Staff Recommendation Staff commends partial approval per the Planning Commission reconmendation. Applicant paid the after-the-fact fee for the zoning application, and must obtain a standard-fee building nermit for the 4’x7 walkway to replace the deck. * Staff is recor^ending that deck and hardcover removals be required to be completed by June 15 2004; a permit for the 4x7' walkway would have to be obtained no later than October 27,2004. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached resolutioiL .-M ...a; "*• i i .•'A.' • mm •' * 4' I Tri-aiinirrwrmv-i*''" A RESOLUTION DENYING AN AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE AND GRANTING CERTAIN VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-281(A) & (B); 78-282;78-1279; AND 78-1288 FILE NO. 02-2858 WHEREAS, Scott S. Standa and Irene S. Standa, husband and wife (hereinafter "the applicants"), are the owners of the property located at 2659 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 137, Spring Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota; (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City ofOrono for after-the- fact variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-281(A) & (B); 78-282; 78-1279; and 78-1288 to allow the construction of an 8'xl2* deck and stairway located within 75* of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka where no structures or hardcover are normally allowed, and located lakeward of the average setback line and within 1 foot of the side lot line where such structures are not normally allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File ^02-2858. 2.The property is located in the LR-IC Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, which requires minimum lot area of O.S acres and minimum lot width of 100*. The lot has a defined width of 60' and is 0.29 acre in area. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on October 20, 2003 and on a vote of 4-1 recommended partial approval of the after-the-fact variances per the following findings: Page 1 of 6 1 f I 4. 5. A deck in deteriorated condition existed at the lake side of the accessory boathouse building prior to applicants' construction of a new 8'xl2' replacement deck in April 2001. Based on a picture provided by the applicants, the old deck was apparently somewhat smaller than the new deck. The new 8'xl2* deck was constructed within one foot of the side lot line and at the shoreline, a portion of said deck extending lakeward of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. The structure is also lakeward of the average setback line and constitutes hardcover in the 0-75' zone. The new deck would likely not have been approved had the applicants attempted to obtain the required permit and variances prior to construction of the new deck. Howe\ er, the boathouse does contain an existing doorway which should be provided with a minimal walkway to grade for safety and functionality reasons. In addition to the boathouse and new deck, exi'-ting hardcover in the 0-75' zone includes retaining walls, stairways and landiirgs which are necessary to maintain the steep slopes and provide access to the lake. The 0-75* zone also contains a 208 s.f concrete slab which serves no specific purpose and which the applicants have agreed to remove to reduce the excessive hardcover on the property. The applicants have also agreed to removal of a sidewalk and all fabric/plastic landscape bed liners in the 75-250' zone. The average lakeshore setback encroachment by a replacement 4’x7' walkway will have no impact on views of the lake enjoyed by the adjacent property owners. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variances 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 variances 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 Page 2 of 6 « HMiMB I convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserv e 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 Cay. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby denies the after-the-fact variances to retain an 8'xI2' deck adjacent to the boathouse, but grants variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-281 (A) & (B); 78-282; 78-1279; and 78-1288 to allow the construction of a 4*x7' walkway and 3' wide stairway to grade, located within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka where no structures or hardcover are normally allowed, and located lakeward of the average setback line and within 2 feet of the side lot line where such structures are not normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1.Council approval is based on the survey/site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any changes from the approved site plan which are not in conformity with this approval or City requirements will require further Plarming Commission and Cit> Council review. 2.The follow ing hardcover removals are required: (0-75 zone) Concrete slab adjacent to accessory building (208 s.f.) (75-250 ’zone) Concrete sidewalk at north side of house (132 s.f.+) (75-250* zone) Fabric and plastic liner from all landscape areas (235 s.f.) The above hardcover removals shall be completed no later than June 15,2004. 3.Hardcover on the property shall not henceforth exceed the limits as noted in this resolution and as noted on Exhibit A. Applicants arc advised that any future proposals for additional hardcover on the property will likely not be approved, but might be approved only in conjunction with concurrent hardcover removals to result in no net hardcover increase on the property. 4.Applicants are placed on notice that the 4'x7 walkvvay and accessory boathouse building are nonconforming structures and subject to the pertinent ordinances limiting the degree of future structural repair allowable for such structures. Page 3 of 6 ii&Mi na 5.Applicants are advised that replacement of the existing stairways in the 0-75' zone providing access to the lake is allowed but will require building permits at the time such activity is commenced. 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 one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (December 8,2004). 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 granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 8.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on l^half of the applicants and their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 8th day of December, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 4 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this__dayof ,2003 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 ,2003 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. Notaiy Public Page 5 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this____day of by Scott S. Standa, husband of Irene S. Standa. .2003 Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this____day of by Irene S. Standa, wife of Scott S. Standa. .2003 Notary Public Page 6 of 6 OF LOT 137, SPRING PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA fity srvf^ TP TO ^ /2in^V€^ rONKA ).4 CONTOUR UNE id Hardcover: IS e [ Walls ilk Vood Borders eway and stq>s (3a4) >nes i garage apron Ik (backyard) ick incl. stoop iteps MEsTJTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. 4. Applicant paid the after-the-fact fee for the variance application. If the variance is approved, should an after-the-fact building permit fee be paid? Applicant claims he was unaware that he needed a permit to replace an existing deck on the property... 5. Does Planning Commission have any other issues or concerns with this application? Gaffron indicated that staff recommends denial of the application. In staffs opinion, if this reconstruction had been applied for before-the-fact, the encroachment over the shoreline and within 1 foot of the side lot line would have been questioned and likely not approved. He noted that the apparent expansion of the deck from a depth of 6* to 8* would certainly not have been approved. Gaffton maintained that, while the fact that the approval process has cost the property owner more than the project itself is unfortunate, but should not be a factor in determining whether the approval is granted after-the-fact. Maintenance and/or replacement of existing decks and lakeshore accessory structures is an ongoing issue along Orono’s 40 miles of Lake Minnetonka shoreline. Gaffron stated that the Planning Commission may wish to consider whether the current policies and codes are appropriate, or whether they need to be relaxed or strengthened. If approval is granted, Plaiming Commission should address the excessive hardcover on the property and make a recommendation as to removals. An after the fact permit should be applied for so the building inspector can confirm the construction meets pertinent building codes. Chair Smith asked if staff had recommended to the applicant that he consider a lockbox. Page Sof41 n MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. Gafifron indicated that the discussion had not pursued that far, since it was the applicant’s intent to keep what he had. Mr. Standa volunteered to make additional removals of hardcover on the property, including the concrete slab behind the accessory structure, sidewalk along side of the home to the accessory building, and repair or removal of the crumbling lake access steps. Mabusth recommended the lake access steps be replaced for safety sake, since the lot is a steep lake lot. Mr. Standa pointed out that the retaining walls would also be in need of repair in the near future. Hawn questioned the necessity of the fire pit and flagpole. Mr. Standa indicated that he would prefer to keep both his flagpole and fire pit; however, if it was mandated he could remove the fire pit. Mabusth questioned whether the LMCD would have an issue with the structure protruding over the water. Gaffron stated that the LMCD may want to look at it if the posts are at or below the OHWL. If this application had come before the Commission before the fact, Mabusth asked the Commission what they would have allowed. She noted that she would have asked for the removal of the slab. Hawn questioned whether they would have approved a deck on an accessory structure, and an even bigger deck than previously attached to this nonconforming structure. She asked whether it was the Commission’s intent to do away with these structures altogether. Hawn Page6or41 i iMft) MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o’clock pin. asked what record the City has of the previous deck size. While he felt that he probably would not have allowed it, Rahn stated that it was not out of character of what is currently in the neighborhood. Mr. Standa sUted that the deck has alwav^ been on the structure. Gaffron agreed that, to everyone’s knowledge, the deck had always been there. He noted that research could be done to find the original paperwork. Rahn maintained that the cantilevered portion was new, and asked the applicant consider a straight replacement, without the cantilever, and minimum landing. Mr. Standa stated that he would like a deck to allow for safe exit from the sliding doors that have always been there as well. There was no public comment. Fritzler suggested the applicant remove the sliding doors and replace them with a solid window. Mabusth stated that she believed the applicant should be allowed some kind of access platform out of the doors, for safety sake, adding that a second exit is beneficial. Rahn noted that two accesses are not mandatory. In light of the removals, Mabusth stated that she felt a 4' platform was a fair compromise. Hawn questioned whether the deck and or structure could be moved further than 1 ’ from the property line. Page 7 of 41 \ 1 L 6.00 o ’clock p.m. ix Mr. Stmda poiM«l out that ih« entire boathouse is just one foot off th. r a . been that way. ^ ®*®®*®“*cbne and has always Mabusth acknowWged that ntany of the boatf.ouses in th. neiehho* . way. She rentinded the appUcant that th. City d<«, not approve to nonconfoiming stmciures such as this. s>™ctural repairs Mr. Standa asked how the storm of 1998. which damaged several boath ■■npacW this policy. He questioned if the precedent L at a repair of these structures due to ‘acts of god' and 4 ■aetsofgod'. ' • ““ ««ion etc. are tdso While catastrophic events are e.,empt, Gaffion reiterated that the cod. 1 reparr. He rndicated that painting, new siding, and roofing am allowable repir Structural Mabusth stated that she felt a 4’ landing was reasonable. oaffron asked for firrther clarification. wbeth„ r^. deck was to be d'Xd' wifi, v . access steps. A4 with 3 \vide Aesthetically Rahn indicated that the deck shn.,w which are appro.ximately 6 ’. He suggested the ® ®f*»»e patio doors, access stairs 3* wide to the ground. ommission approve a 7*X4’ deck and Mabusth and Chair Smith concurred. Fritzler disagreed, stating that one exit should be sufficient and th« H replaced by a window. “ * be P*geSof41 H MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m.r>/2 Gaf&on reviewed the recommendation, which included the removal of the concrete slab fabric, and sidewalk along the side of the home, reconstruction of the lake path and retaining walls to be permitted for at a later date, and the fire pit and flagpole allowed remaining. Chair Smith asked if this was acceptable to the applicant. Mr. Standa agreed. Mabusth moved, Rahn seconded, recommending approval of Application ^03-2858, Scott Standa, 2659 Casco Point Road, granting after>the-fact variance approval for the reconstruction of a 4 ’X7* deck and 3* wide access stairs to the accessory structure, subject to the removal of the concrete slab, sidewalk along the side of the residence, and all landscape plastic prior to the final inspection; Duly noting that the structure is considered a nonconforming structure and limited structural repair is allowed. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Fritzler dissenting. Fritzier stated that he neither supported the work being proposed to the nonconforming structure nor could support the after* the-fact request. (#6) #03-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607 SHORELDf^RIVE, VA?J.\NCE, 6:43 - 7:40 P.M. Stevan Wagner, the Applicant, and Nortdh^it^ the Architect, were present. Foth reported that the applicant has subimtted an application for a building expansion and remodel in the B-1 Zoning DistrieJ/^ per City Code Sehitm 78-642 any application for a commercial building permit pedmpts a site review by the Planmhg;^Commission and City Council. The applicant has requested the following: 1) Commercial site plan review in order to obtain a building permit to remodel and Page9of4l I Date ApplicatioD Received: 12-1IM)2 Date Application Considered as Complete: 8-26-03 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 10-26-03 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Mike Gaffron, Planning Director October 17,2003 Subject:#02-2858 Scott Standa, 2659 Casco Point Road - Variance (After-the-Fact) - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2-acre min. 0.29 acre (12,815 s.f.) Application Summary: Applicant requests after-the-fact hardcover and setback variances to allow the reconstruction of a deck located at the shoreline attached to an e.xisting accessory building. Variances required include: 1. Structure within 0-75* setback zone, extending out over the shoreline (cantilevered 2-3* past the OHWL). 2. Structure encroaching within 1 foot of side lot line. 3. Hardcover in 0-75’ zone of 16.24% (no changes proposed). 4. Encroachment of average lakeshore setback. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial. If this reconstruction had been applied for before-the-fact, the encroachment over the shoreline and within 1 foot of the side lot line would likely not have been approved, in staffs opinion. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Letter of Request 11/4/02 C - Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan D - Submitted Deck Plans E - Submitted Hardcover Calculations F - Correspondence 2001-2003 G - Photos H - Property Owners List I - Nei^bor Acknowledgement Form J - Plat map Background In June 2001 Building Inspector Marc Da\is found that the deck adjacent to the lakeshore accessory building had been replaced, and he advised the owner that a permit was needed for such work. In July 2001 the owner applied for a building permit and was advised that because the work was within 75' of the shoreline a permit could not be issued and it would have to be removed or a variance application would have to be filed to see if Council would allow it to remain. On August 14, 2001 the owner filed an incomplete vahance application, lacking most of the necessary information to process it This matter remained as an open violation file and the next communication between applicant and City was in October 2002, which resulted in a new variance application being filed in December 2002, but still lacking an up-to-date survey. After a flurry of discussion between City and applicant in May/June2003, a survey was submitted and the application considered as complete in late August 2003. #02-28S8 - 26S9 Casco Point Road October 17,2003 Page 2 LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot ArcaAVidth i LR-IC Required Actual Lot Area 21,780 s.f. (0.5 acre) 12,815 s.f. (0.29 acre) Lot Width 100' 60’ Deck Setbacks! Structural Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage Allowed: 1,922 s.f. (15%) Existing/Proposed: 2,743 s.f (21.4%)* •Deck in question does not constitute lot coverage as it I is not 6* above grade. Hardcover Calculations! Hardcover Zone 0-75’ Total Area In Zone 4,580 s.f 8,235 s.f Allowed Hardcover Os.f (0 %) 2,056 s.f I (25 %) * After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Existing Hardcover 744 s.f (16.24 ?/q) 3,466 s.f • (42.1 %) Proposed Hardcover 744 s.f (16.24%) 3,466 s.f • (42.1 %) JTr- T n #02*2858 - 2659 Casco Poiot Road October 17,2003 Pages Deck Nonconformities The deck that was replaced is attached to a 12'x22' accessory building located S* from the shoreline and nearly abutting the side lot line. The accessory building has been there for many years and has apparently been maintained in relatively good condition. The deck extending from Ae end of the building towards the shore was replaced by the ^plicant in April 2001, per applicant's statement, because the old deck was rotting away. The City has no record of the pre-existing deck, either on old surveys or in the assessors records. The January 1992 photo submitted by the applicant shows a deck at this location, although the deck in that picture appears to be not as deep as the new deck, and is perhaps 6* x 12’ rather than 8' x 12*. The old deck had posts at the perimeter, the new deck is cantilevered 2' past the posts, and extends over the water. The deck is located less than one foot from the side lot line. City code would generally not allow an accessory deck with a railing to be less thai 1 O' fix>m a side lot line. The neighbors have indicated they are aware of the construction. The deck as it exists today comprises appicximaiely 100 s.f. of hardcover including the .«!leps to it. Part of this hardcover is over the lake. City coJp allows no hardcover or structures within 75' of the shoreline, except for one 4' wide stairw.<iy; a lift; landings of no greater than 32 s.f; and lock boxes. Total existing hardcover in the applicants 0-75* zone is 16.24%, consisting of: Accessory Building 22.rxl2.1' Concrete slab adjacent to building (Approx 12x18) Retaining Walls Stone walkway and landing Deck at shore incl steps (portion over land) Slone & wood borders 267 s.f 208 s.f 87 s.f 71 s.f 84 s.f 27 s.f 749 s.f 74580=16.24% Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a hardship statement in his letter of request (Exhibit B), and should be asked for his additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering appiications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, Ught and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, nnJ the effect on values ofproperty Ut the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recomm ’.nding approved 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 suck actions witt be in keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. #02*28S8 - 2659 Casco Point Road October 17,2003 Page 4 Staff would make the following recommendations in regards to the criteria for “ pertment to this application: 5 w me cntena for undue hardship' 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. ““ “'0 >«<l-c.„di.ions allowed The property can be used reasonably if the variances are denied. “ique to his property not created by “The Vimance. if granted, will not alter the essential character of the localitv » Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue harHchin trui r the property exists under the terms o: the Zoning Chapter.” ^ tTreasonable use for ‘Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to. inadequate access to ditrect sunlight forsolar energy systems. Variances shall be stranted for earth sheltereH .• .i e . ■" " iu. ws Hot applicable. Hot Applicable ;'^c rt^tt^^rcTy isrornbf;;^;'^-- 77,e zoning code lin,l,i„g ,!^use c/lcieshore,ropery, applies ro neighboring propprH^. i^Ys l««cd""‘‘° ■» <«*■« 'b-clurcs in dre disrtc, in which .aid ^=<>"^odelimi,a,iomcpply,oaUprop.r,i.s^0.in,heSHor.M^ The pro^ty owner does not hax e an inherent right to replace In kind a nonconforming sirucure when it has reached the end of Us us^llife #92-2858 - 2659 Casco Point Road October 17,2003 Page 5 II.‘The granting of the preposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code.” Granting of the variances would be in conflict with the intent of the Zoning Code, the intent of which is that no new structures be allowed within 75' ofthe shoreline, and that existing non-conforming structures eventually are removed by attrition.. 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.** It is staff ’s opinion that granting of the after-thefcct variances would merely serve os a convenience to the applicant. Issues for Consideration 1.Would the Planning Commission have recommended appro\*al for the replacement of this deck had the application been made before the fact? 2.Does Planning Commission agree with staff that the 1992 photo provided by applicant casts doubt as to whether this deck wa.' 8’ deep prior to its replacement? 3.The property has excessive hardcover in both the 0-75 ’ and 75-250 ’ zones. Is there any hardcover on the site that should be considered for removal if the application is approved? The surveyor has identified 235 s.f. of landsc^e areas lined with plastic or fabric that are not included in the hardcover calculations on p. 2 and would be subject to removal if the application is approved... 4.Applicant paid the after-the-fact fee for the variance application- If the variance is approved, should an afier-the-fact building permit fee be paid? Applicant claims he was unaware that he needed a permit to replace an existing deck on the property... 5. Does Planning Commission have any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation St nT recommend- denial of the application. If this reconstruction had been applied for before-the- fact, the encroachment over the shoreline and within 1 foot of the side lot line would have been questioned and likely not roved, in staff s -*pinion. The apparent expansion of the deck from a depth of 6* to 8 ’ would certainly r.ot have been approved. The fact that the approval process has cost the property owner more than the project is unfortunate, but should not be a factor in detem'.iiiing whether the approval is granted after-the-fact. Maintenance and/or replac<< meat of existing decks and lakeshore accessory structures is an ongoing issue along O 'ono’s 40 miles of Lake Minnetonka shoreline. The Planning Commission may wish to consider whether the current policies and codes are appropriate, or whether they need to be relaxed or strengthened. If approval is granted. Planning Commission should address the excessive hardcover on the property and makr s recommendation as to removals. An after tne fact permit should be applied for so the building inspector can confirm the construction meets pertinent building codes. «i • i t • > REQUIRED SUB>DTTALS All of the following information must be submitted hv the application dgadline date in order far vour applicatinn to be comidcred complete; 1. 2. 3. 4. ^ 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form _ Cenified Property Owners List of owners within 150*, labels and plat nap (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-5910). _ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8*/a" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing ^ grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/i" x 11" for reproduction. ^ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (i)rovide one (1) copy S'/a" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons wim an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current ownerfs). __ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of .ly other persons you wish notifled of this application. Additional items as may be request”! by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this applicaiion. Please remember that your variance application » not complete if the above informatinn has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to proude all information requited or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this appl.cation, and cc.mfies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her Inowledge. Applicant's Signature ^Date /O/XT /dl. OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Cotitnission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this .‘equest. re f/jC7K ______Owner's Signatur Date /d/71 A Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days' before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commist'on Meetings are held on the third Monday of.each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in >our place and to advise the Biilding & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting .7 .7i- ';; ^ * *- •• •. •.O • • V' 'B ^ooi ^ptciafisti anJ Sury«otu, S. SCOTT STANOA, O.P.M., F.A.C.F.S. MiCMAEL O. O BORSKY. D PM., F.A.C.F.S. 287 MARSCHALL RD., SUITE lOS SHAKOPCe. MN 8BS7S TCLCPHONC; (982) 445-9390 Fax 1992) 449*9994 E-MAIL: STANOAOPM@AOL.COM 290 NORTH CENTRAL AVC., SUITE 3t4 WAY2ATA. MN 59391 TCLCP hcnc 1992) 476 )376 Fax 1952) 476-7494 E-MAIL: StANUAOPM@AOL COM November 4,2002 Lyle Oman. Building Official City of Orono Municipal Offices 270 Kelly Pkwy Orono, MN 55356 Dear Mr. Oman: was approximately $900 I^btlfetedTuoTa an^cl materials dimensions to the deck were not changed when I replaced it. The deck does have a railing that meets code 1 “ r” *f' rr' r "* *" >™^ jurisdiction. ■ do hti f! w.rv“ !° *at >«ve been tecenlly remodeled, so. my question would be. wta happened? Again, my position in this matter is that I replaced a pre-existing dert with dimensions at me prc-exisling dimensions and the deck was replaced because it w as structurally unsound. I did the work myself and the CMt of material was S900. This has now taken 15 months to resolve for actually no change in my property. 1 would like this resolved at the soonest possible time. ^ s y Sincerely, S. Scott Standa, DPM SSS/soap/sb Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal, MN. 55323 i I LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PRQyllSES : Lot 137. SPRING PARK o : denotes iron marker Bearings shown are based upon an assimed datum. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of three esisting buildings, and the location of oil visible ^'hardcover thereon. It does not purport to show ony other irrprovements or encroachments. SftIC GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. *v"**4—eiMSLi.mo DsaMBois. land surveyors , sitc planners 1 »C30r ccrrr that ms piam. srccrcAncK oi scrair VAS PVANO ST IC or (MR Ur OmCT mFCRVSON MO IHAT I All A SUIT ucoao PROrCSSOHAL CMaCOI AM) UM> sjNCToi imt M uws or sc mn or imsota.* -X EGD SAfC 7-17-03 PCOCS UBO 1 ^ 44S NORTH WlOW ONVC. LONO LAKE. IM. S93M fS2-473-4141 m Ma 03-3020A1C m uocNsi Nmeoi /t7rs OF LOT 137, SPRING PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA INNETONKA fG PARK BAY 929.4 CX3NTOUR UNE .COMII /OCARS l^C X iY ai 43i rxcKf- ST» BtJLCNNG EXISTWC ^ 'fm WOOD STCF STOIC WALL STOIC 7S»Oo '00« o STOICfiAcms 30: LEGAL DlSCRIPTION OF PREMISES Lot 137, SPRING PARK <9'^y 75*SETBACKv-j y LNE 75 / .OOSC-LAO. STOICS /^ LOOSC- LA© .... CJt lC^.jB,.^r- SURVE LINE STOIC ICTAiCC I WAU ' /137 EXISTING 22S«irSj 137 EXISTING ■&ARAGE5fote?> STOIC RCTAMNC, WAU DECK HOUSE #2659 25 79*00 '00'' WAOC RA 1C ^34.78 / EXISTM6 GARAGE ^ 4 f->A*jr1c - 4 t.sr:.Ly- o : denotes iron marker Bearings shown ore based upon on ossumed dotunn •{ i! i f I 1 t• • i• • i : I • f .J t • • • • • * • r I > I • I* It •• I r: i: it. « I ■ I.. I * 1.1 i • ) 1 f'/ot 3*<>' ? 1 1 oJ d kjo Ic . TV. d Ic ^c^ K^xijrio Cji i r*\ ^ t 0 •>* 10 rC. 'iW Vn«»v«. tf.C K Wv\^ «. 7-IS-03 Ur »37 iid SpfliNfr Pa(?I<- HAlinrov ^t ^CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House "52: L^gU X X X B. G>^c C. Dri\'cway X X D. Sidewalk X X E Patio/DecSc X X F. LandKtpe Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X C. Other - ivoati - ATSftaeg TOTAL RARDCO VER IN ZONE TOTAi. PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A___________+ B PROPOSED RARDCOVER IN ZONE' A, House _____________ Ltngth V 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 0. Other TOTAL*cR IN TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A - B 75-250* 12.f 250-500*500-1000* '71-7 cc BU»L0iA?dT-fcA-t-------S F.-^T 20d JU ft4- 27 X 100 IA.24 X too _____ .. SP.~can£.^LA^j S F. N&«T TZ? SR 97 S F. - WALLS S.F. S.F. . - ST*NE. WAUi S F.-OfCK(25Hoe£ SF. \nu. ^TCPS SF. S.F. S.F. STtfve f S.F. - 6d»t0l?*iZ$ S.F. A SF. B % S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. SF S.F. SF. SF. S.F. SF SF. SF. SF. SF. A SF. 3 % I S*^ir f iRffNE* Stamc ^ 7^ZS^oS 350-S00' Untih -J2J ZSL Width Jt^l:l^ B. Gara);e C. Driveway 2g.3 D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain ByPUsuc Or Fabric G. Other R^5 = 4^0* total HARDCOVER IN ZONE total propertv area in zone A-------------------- - B 6^/0^ : 7 X 100 Icngiti Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X £. Pacio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other --------------------- ♦ B ___ xlCO - Lor 1^7^ Spring 500-1000' 1524" S.F. - H9 u5£ S r. -A4(b«S£ -^*^7 S r. - -39 i -CPtJC. AP^J, J t0O 3701 9Zi^ A».94 5T9N£ . S ■ {<3ACKV^rt£)J . S.r.-COHf 7®2ia< •Hdt. sreop SF.-CeCKfST£^ Sr. _ Fg9HT/<ID£ J>.r. - HCKTM ep- 0eC>C S --- - Snatt T,*ut.^t.i; 45 <s r . R* T| £S S.r. A S.r. B 0 . S.r. .S.F. S.r. S.F. SF. S.r. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. A S.F. 3 _% • t L CITY OF ORONO INSPECTION NOTICE PERMIT NO_______ DATE TIME CALLED IN SCHEDULED COMPLETED ADDRESS OWNER _CONTR. TELEPHONE NO. Si: § I §1 § 2 DESCRIPTION. 01 FOOTING 02 framing 03 INSULATION 0* WAU BO. C5 Final 07 OCMO - SITE 07 DEMO - FINAL C9 PLUMBING R1 10 PLUMBING FINAJ. 11 mechanical Rl 13 MECHA.VCAL FINAL 24/2S WOCC 5L’PNER/flR£?LACE 12 WATErt LOCK UP 14 Sr/VER i-CCK UP 27 SEPTIC AVLNT. 15 SEPTIC LSS*ALL. 23 SEPTIC F2*AL OWNER/CONTRACTOR TO MEET YOU:__Y5S___NO 18 EXCAV/GRAOlNQ/FiLLING 19 lakeshoheavetl ^nos 34 TREE REMOVAL 17 SITE INSPECTION 08 PROGRESS 21 COMPLAINT 22 FOUOW-UP 35 KARO COVER REMOVAL 38 FOUNOATION/REMOVAL qAmRJENTS: - ^___________. _________ 0: 0 u. U j 0: {2 1o: 0<- ^ ^ g o ujo: U j Q 8 C WORK SATISFACTOflV; PROCEED C CORRECT WORK t PROCEED ^^RRECT WORK. CALL FOR REINSPECT.C N ^^EFORE COVERING C CORRECT UNSAFE CONDITION WITHIN INSPECTOR WILL RETURN HOURS. □ PROJECT COMPLETE C ISSJE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCy _________TEMPORARY _________PERMANENT C STOP ORDER POSTED. CALL INSPECTOR C INSPECTION REQUIRED. CAU TO ARRANGE ACCESS. OPVOTO TAKEN □ CTTAnON ISSUED Call lor the next inspection 24 hours in advance. (952) 249*4600 Owner/Contraclor on site:_____________________________ Inspector •■44r Whilt CopyOfitp«cior*t Fil«CariAry CopylSItt Node# F'2. CITY of ORONO Monicipa] Offices StnttlMrfss: 2750 Kelley Pokwiy Otpno. im 55356 Miiliag Mdriis: ^0.8a 66 Ciyitel Bay. M 55323^066 July 11.2001 Scott Sc Irene Standa 2659 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Re: Boathouse Deck at 2659 Casco Point Road Dear Mr. & Mrs. Standa; TOs tetter is in regards to the brathouse deck that was replaced without proper authority from the City of Orono. Pl^e contact the Zoning Department at 952-249-4«00 or rroove the deck bv August 1,2001. If you fail to do so, legal action will be taken. Sincerely, Marc Davis Building Inspector 1Mcphoae(952)M9<46M • Faa(9S2)249-4616 wwwxiorooojmui* p'^ ClTYor ORONO Mtmldpat OflBcts StfMtMims: 2750 IWhy hifciny OrotMi Ml S53S6 MjingMdmi: P.O. Boi 66 Crystal Bay, Ml S5323-C066 Scott & Irene Standa 2659 Casco Point Road Wayzata,MN 55391 Re: Boathouse Deck at 2659 Casco Point Road Dear Mr. & Mrs. Standa: The Cit>’ has received your after the fact application for a Deck replacement on you: property. Unfortunately the Deck is within 75 feet of the lake where no structures are allowed. Therefore the City must require removal of the Deck or submission of a variance application to see if the City Council will allow it to remain. Please review the enclosed variance applicaticn and contact the Zoning Department to discuss submittals. If the deck is not removed or if a complete variance application is not received by 08/18/01, legal action will be started. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at my office. Sincerely, Lylfc Oman Building Official Enc. Variance Application LO/mj 1Ucplioiie9S2)24M<M • Fai (fS2) 24M6M mmcLecewMBOM f t A I ii y I r ■ ; i ^ _ — -i - I ii 1 'Ht jT . ■ * ^ ■ V ' -y»- ^ ^••/ ,'f- rj..i<^:'. ■• < • r- r/ ■V ' -y»- ^ ^ V -r' > v . f W CIT« lifeIml J s',:4. '*.. <- 4-- . V ' ‘. i>»/ ^ . > - - • :■ i Sc/ V;. ■’ AppUcation # ^/«<97p. Date Rccehed - »C/.Q> Amouat Paid Va* AfA? Hiv ’r^ K r- R2CZ;V5D /;UG 1 4 20Gi crrY OF oao,\'o PROPERTY INFOR>UTION Site Addres s, ^ ^ J-y /r. £* / Property Identification Number (P,I.D.)_ Attach legal description to applicarionlf not •-- ---• «„-----r—3 ----------- - ~ ^ Q/\j^ ----- required survey. /T7-^ JV'JiJ Date Pr Acquired,_____________ I (do) ^ojj^ also own the adjace.nt parcels c: ’=“d Present use of propert>-: _j/reside.-.tia' ’ -~-7.' /’e---:R.x Zoning District;................. ..............Cs^eci^) .(month/year) applicant Name _sSrj7.^.n.d> aQ Address:, 24 Jl? C\ FJ.Q-.rr. OWTS’ER (if different than apolicant) Name C» Phone (home) 9/~Z"" V7/- gy?-? Phone (work) Zip: sr-fi/ Address:C.:y: Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Zip; Ali. t^»v. r/. ^ ^S(anach additional shet-.i if necessary)Wvit f-bryc.^ soT"' .VARIANCES REQUIRED -----Lot Area ___Lot Width Hardcover Setback: Lot Coverage Fron Average Lakeshore rl r.<^\eL c-J cJ^w. (anach additio.nal shee j if r.ecessan) L/^ /» /9^C t #2 t! 5Uj P.'i m e>>' - .1 *r i -»N r 5 - --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.. ... ........................................................................^..- : .„. -_ I i SETBACK BONE: EXISTING HARDCOVF r in rnm A. House ______^______ X 500-1600'F'U Lffiflh ^Idth X X X B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk /3 V ^ C h jQ//) X /f/pr’ E Puio/Deck h X> F. Landscape Underlain JJ TJ^^J C P -'5'^ • < X. o/cc^£ my r'£'P /■^£,cp jD'^ f /rr-tr^ O. Other X V init, ^# pr A A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _____________ + B ___ _____________ + B X 100 X 100 PROPOSEn HARDCOVER IN 7nVF A. House Length U1dth X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ♦ B X 100 ^ O Li S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SP. SP. SP. SP. SP. SP. A - SP. B % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SP. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SP. S.F. SP. SP. S.F. A SP. B % I \ I ‘ t i HAR *OVE SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) U.CULATION works ; ET 75-250* 2S0-S00'500-1000' EXICTINC HARPgOVER IN ZONE K. H oum Lcfigrti WMtfi X X X B. Oangt C Drivtwxy X X D. SMewaOc X X E« Pitio/Dcck X X nl F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other X . A A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ______________ B *___ + B PROPOSF.n HAttnrOVER IN ZONE A. House X Length width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _ _ _ _ _ ♦ B _-n • • • mm • 9(o X 100 X 100 X 100 96 n r, tj •. • ST. S;F. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. A ST. B V« S.F. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. S.F. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. ST. A ST. B H ••; i: t ; I E-& V w ■ - -f fiUBif«‘ liii iHJWS "3 IIHIH I ■■ ”K-- . A* litrt fr ^.. » ill iiinrii I iminm^ii 1 F-^ CITY of ORONO Mtinklpil Oflkcs SlnttlMnst: 2750 lUliy Paikiny Orem. MN S53S6 P.O. Ba 66 Cfystal Bay. MN 55323^)066 Scott & Irene Standa 2659 Casco Point Road Wayzata. MN 55391 RE: Boathouse Deck at 2659 Casco Point Road Dear Mr. & Mrs. Standa: On 7/18/02 this office reviewed your after the fact permit application for replacement of a deck on your property. You were notified at that time that the deck replacement was in violation of the City Ordinances. The City required removal of the deck or submission of a variance application to seek City Council approval. As of this date the issue remains unresolved. Therefore the City must again require you to remove the deck or to submit a variance application. A deadline of 11/01/02 has been established. If this deadline is not met the City will initiate legal action. A court appearance will be required. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at my office. Sincerely, Lyle Oman Building Official Rd Enclosure 1UeplMoe(9$2)24M r.d • Fai(BS2)M9461( F-/0 GITYoT ORONO MnaidiMl «BBOJ Strati Mirass: 2750 Mlty Pailnray Orator MN S53S6 November 15,2002 HtitflMrats: P.O. Bu 66 Cnnlal Bay. MN 553230066 S. Scott Stsnds 2659 Casco Point Road Wiyzata, MN 55391 RE: Boathouse Deck Dear Mr. Standa This is in response to your letter of November 4*, 2002. A Review of your street file shows the following chronology ° »••«<>*• Penni. i. ° infoiming you that no wnictures m ..f o W Av^MK^wIic^iMwaTSl.o 10-17-2002 ^tter fiom me explaimng the issue is unresolved. .2.02, Sincerely, Lyle Oman Building Official LO/dml Enclosures lUcpboiM(9S2)24M400 • Faa(9S2)24M6M WWW-rfjtlTMWt HIHiIH , • • • • •• F'li CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices Street Mdiisi 2750 KeHiy Partnny Orono, MN $5356 Hifflflg Addrats: P.O. Bn 66 Ciystal Bay. MN 5K 66 REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION December 19,2002 Mr. Scott Standa 26S9 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN S5391 SUBJECT: Zoning Application #02-2858 The City of Orono is required to notify you within ten (10) business days as to the status of your application for an after the fact variance for property located at 2659 Casco Point Road. Below is a list of items the City of Orono is requesting to complete our review: o 2 original surveys, (certificate of survey, signed by licensed surveyor) of an updated survey indicating the location of the lakeside deck on the property. o All existing and proposed hardcover shall be calculated on the hardcover worksheets that are enclosed. The hardcover calculations must be completed by your surveyor. Bf A certified property owners list, mailing labels, and plat map of all property owners within 150’ of your property. You can request these items from the Hennepin County Department of Finance at 612-348-5910. Application #02-2858 is incomplete. If you wish to proceed with your application please submit the items requested above by Tuesday January 8, 2003 to remain on the January 22, 2003 Plaiming Commission agenda. Please call me at (952) 249-4600 should you have any questions. Sincerely, Wendy Bottenberg Zoning Administrator/Planner Triephooe (952) 24M600 • Fas(9S2)249<4616 uiMoaomaan ...... - * *4 V - lU : im! I * axTof IJ SbMt Mdrtts:' 2750 Kilicy rwfcway Orono. MN 5535$ Mimldpal Offices MalOiii Iddms: P.O. Ba 66 Ciystat Say. MN 55323-0065 May 2,2003 Scott & Irene Standa 26S9 Caico Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 RE: Boathouse Deck at 2659 Casco Point Road Dear Mr. and Mrs. Standa: the City Ordinances. The City required removal of the deck or submission of • y*o*ahon of .ppUcHon to Council .pptovd. As ofUus date the Sincerely, Michael P. Gatiron Planning Director Telephone (9S2) 249>4600 • Fhx(9S2)249*4$lf « • • U th 7='I3. CITY of ORONO ManId|Hl OfBcts Stmt Mdress; 2750 Kelley Pailmay Ofono, MN 55356 MeiBmMnn; P.O. Boi 66 Ciystal Bey. MN 55323-0066 September 26,2003 Scott Standa 2659 Casco Point P.oad Wayzata, MN 55391 SUBJECT: Zoning AppUcation #02>2S58 Dear Mr. Standa: This letter is to notify you as to the status of your application for so. aAer-the-fact variance for deck replacement on your property located at 2659 Casco Point Road. Our preliminary review indicates that your application is considered complete now that the sur.ey and hardcover calculations have been submitted. Your application is scheduled to appear before the Planning Comcussion on Monday, October 20, 2003. The meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. Please make sure that >ou or your representative is available to attend the meeting. You will be mailed a staff report regarding your ^plication prior to the meeting date. Please call me or one of the City Plaiuiers at (952) 249*4600 if you have any questions. Planning Director cc: Melanie Foth, City Plaruier Janice Waataja, City Planner Ttkpbooc (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-6616 wwwxLoronaauuis r\K' *;JW* Dir* F*51*a;^ ^ *. * . »1f*» ' f •Si/. W - .i?.. '4- <-^#*• V —. •*— * -V''-‘V v: 1 • ‘^ rr if* *'vxr W' O-Vr :^v ^ '-C\'% ■ ^ 1;S nv • -v’ Mi ,.j!i;———i « :;-Ur- H Xr>': ?:: rJFnm :• a *> I ^;i I' _ *■*.^. *> .-• *^j!, ~ — “* V : « «*• •*' ~ J< •' ‘ij il “l-H J r- .• r ^ .• ^ ^ <7 ^:: ^ ^ -iU 5?^ *B T** f • - /-:.• w, 'i* Vrv-ri^ kC— I Wi-<-/^••<t i '-'•rA m V; v-'~ .■■>• .fe> fc-MK T. ;l: r-'X'-*I.^i-'' .•>;7^T-'::ir-:i^-l^ - "-TX-- ’^**y/*7i-'-k- • V •i&; 'j. V •;^»'^v \ r. . •» • «>VT'K; •XV-.^^ f. ’Sjr,•jji V ViJ^ ;•%:. ^1 / " ‘•;T'’'■'' -’^v- l?:ii ‘V,’ '■'V-'-‘T.Sv •v'. •r-^- -- I?■S/r^ ^v ‘v7 ‘> ■-■», . . , -'^' .-•, ■'^..•^• .. . i V ;: X• 3:^* N m4^ '4f ^ XJry ^i.^: ■ .VAT'^ mM I aA pw^ 2»/' V !tf^ ■.: i<5'/• /i 1/i. •<» 5^'”? JBpf»a«;, r. 'H ■_______^\\ '’i • 7 . ■ 'Ta*' "^af^f'.,j§j*s:- tjOi^" -:-r* .1 MhlP ■r . ,l'( ,‘,M ' IJ^^jrArro »-' - iilMI'jairi L^^'. fl f*T ^4riMrro * ■' ,*• A a . ** r^-^rs* rrr-^f I! nil. '' u-.. , m- K\ ' ■ •• ■ ' V / Y4;/ & . •• *■ 'V -v-*. \ ^^lO. f^^-oTT^ ^u£^y.TrcA Atf^tACMrr 1 1 I w» diiiMir *ffn r WM DATE 12/2S/E2 ■ATCN SU “^'STSiiS'SS""KPOtr MO. PXASSAOl FACE 1 EMP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER nahe/aoor St 2A-tl7>23 2S AMI •2AOS CASCO POINT RO ® fMCKSOM ESP ERICKSON m * ^ ERICKSONPO tOX S04 WAV2ATA NN SSSYl SR 2R-117-2S 2S Rt2R •2477 CASCO fOINT RO A 0 KLUIS • S V KLUXS A 0 KLUIS A S V KLUIS 2477.CASCO POINT RO WAYZATA NN S5SYI SO 2S-117-2S 2S ••21 •2445 CASCO POINT RO C R SNUTTS S N 0 SNUTTS CARL R R NARUYN 0 SNUTTS 2445 CASCO POINT RO WAYZATA NN 55391 PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR SR 20-117-23 23 OKZ •2459 CASCO POINT RO S S STANOA R I S STANOA S S STANOA R I S STANOA 2459 CASCO POINT RO WAYZATA NN S5S91 SR 2R-117-23 29 ORRZ •2449 CASCO POINT RO P L HAIR ROE HAIR CO'TRST •***" « OIANE E HAIR 244S CASCO POINT RO > WAYZATA NN 55391 SO 29-117-2S 29 •••3 •2409 CASCO POINT RO 0 L RUNKLE R L P RUNKLE DAVIO L RUNKLE 2409 CASCO POINT RO WAYZATA NN 55S91 PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR SO 20-117-2S 29 0029 •2499 CASCO POINT RO •WLIANNE H SCNERVEN . JULIANNE N SCNERVEN 2499 CASCO POINT RO WAYZATA NN 55391 - 'N‘v -f *4’ so 20-117*2S 29 ••3t •2495 CASCO POINT RO N J GREENE R A K GREENE NORNA GREENE R ALAN GREENE 2495 CASCO POINT ROAO WAYZATA NN 55391 SO 20-117*23 29 ••31 •2435 CASCO POINT RO NARILYN 0 TNORNE NARILYN 0 THORNE 2435 CASCO POINT RO WAYZATA NN 55391 I . Jm PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR S» 29<117>23 2A ••3<» •2490 CASCO POINT RO W R 0 J ESSEN JEPPREV R OAROARA ESSEN 2490 CASCO PT RO WAYZATA NN 55S91 total OATCN SRI •••!•00 CQ or NY KNOWLEDGE AND OELXEP. POOPERTY TAXATION, TO THE REST DATS Qa-)u/; lx X. Adjacent Property Ownen* Acknowledgement Form e A/ I (we) Pt>^/ __________of ^Cv9 Pr. ' [print name(s)] [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 pfkrd 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 neignbor’s project or use requires Council approval. Owner OJa \0-aS-o3- Date Property Owner ( Date I (wc) Co^ */7 LuTfs of ^^jLi ' ' ‘ [print address][print name(s)J have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at 2dLr» 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 propertv- or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aw*are of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor’s project or use requires Council approval. /O “ — o i. Date 'A t ! ^.dUh\ S> • ^ \amUI Proper^ Owriir fC - 3r'<?3. Date If you have any information that may assist tlie Cit>* 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. « * • Taxpaj^ Services Depait^nf # 2 P)iXSJ / ^1^Parcel Information -• • ».Parcel 10 2011723230022 ; ' Nousa Numbar 2689 Otraat Nama CA9CO OOINT HD Date Application Received: 10-21-03 Date Application ConiIdered at Complete: 10-21 -03 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 12-20-03 COllNr;il MPPTiMr; DEC 6 20U5 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OH OHu.'^O CONSENT AGENDA Date: December 4,2003 Item No.: 7 Department Approval: Name: Michael P. GafTron Title: Planning Director ’Ml Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zonir.2 Item Description: i^03*2866a Judy & David Zoschke, 2040 Shadywood Road - Appeal of Administrative Decision - Motion to Confirm List of Exhibits A - Notice of Council Action 12-1-03 B - Depiction of Agreed-upon Removals C - Memo and Selected Exhibits of 11-14-03 Application Summary: Applicant is appealing City Staff s interpretation of the conclusions of the Planning Commission and Council in relation to the extent of hardco\ er removals required per Resolution No. 4920, adopted February 24,2003. Planning Commission Findings and Conclusions: Planning Commission reviewed this on November 17,2003. On a vote of 4-0, Planning Commissioners who were at the February PC hearing concluded that the drawing in Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4920 correctly depicts the Planning Commission’s intent regarding removals of concrete patio. However, the number "681 s.f." was not part of their conclusion, therefore staff should calculate the actual square footage based on the drawing, and that result should be used as the basis for removals. Further, applicant has the option of removing other items of hardcover in the 0-75' zone than concrete patio to make up the required square footage (except for rock/plastic landscaping bed liner which was to be removed regardless). Staff Recommendation: Staff concurs with the conclusion of the Planning Commission. This item was tabled at your November 24 meeting because the applicant was not present. Staff met with Mr. Zoschke on the site on November 21 and discussed the additional removals required to comply with the Planning Commission’s conclusion (see 11-14 memo). Staff has recalculated the total area of the required removals at 644 s.f. rather than the 681 s.f noted in the Resolution. Mr. Zoschke has advised staff he agrees to remove the additional hardcover items necessary to meet this requirement, w hich includes the upper patio and the concrete sw ale across the sidewalk from the waterway. Given that the applicant has accepted the conclusion of the Planning Commission, the only remaining action necessary is for Council to confirm the findings of the Plaiming Commission. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to confirm the conclusion of the Planning Commission. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by __, seconded by __, that in the appeal by Judy and David Zoschke. File ~03-2866a, the City Council hereby confirms the findings and conclusions of the Planning Commission as noted in the staff memo to Council dated December 4,2(X)3. CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE #03-2866a NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: December I. 2003 TO: Judy & David Zoschke 2040 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Appeal of Administrative Decision DATE OF MEETING: 11-24-03 VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGATST Motion: Tabled because applicant was not present. Per our discussion on the property on November 21, under the assumption that the Council agrees with the Planning Commission’s findings, in addition to the areas of lower patio and walkway already removed, you have agreed to remove the 112 s.f. upper patio and 40 s.f. waterway north of the sidewalk, in order to meet the 644 s.f. hardcover removal requirement. If you will confirm this in writing, I can place this item on Council’s consent agenda for the December 8 meeting; or you can attend that meeting if you wish to discuss this with the Council. Please advise me of your intent as soon as possible (Mike Gaffion, 952-249-4600). Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, December 8, 2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the Cit>' Council. A r.VtO 4 I WOOD RE.TAMNU wALL I R ip rap S 4r081Qp;_E_7352, + 1 Oi 33.5 fAT»o /HUrA^ De^icrrt^ ffHj A/eiOL. fe>*«. A c . • fl^«A«VAvS /V6vure^-Tt> •J}Sdr - i^oS ^ «■ zi-.r TWT. \(73 MAHM e-1 I CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Cry stal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING HLE #03-2866a K; NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; November 19, 2003 TO: Judy & David Zoschke 2040 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TTTE OF APPLICATION: Appeal DATE OF MEETING: November 17, 2003 Planning Commission concluded as follows: The drawing in Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4920 correctly depicts the Planning Commission’s intent regarding removals of concrete patio. However, the number “681 s.f.” was not part of their conclusion, therefore staff should calculate the actual s<]uare footage based on the drawing, and that result should be used as the basis for removals. Further, applicant has the option of removing other items of hardcover in the 0-75' zone than concrete patio to make up the required square footage (except for rock/plastic landscaping bed liner which was to be removed regardless). VOTE: 4 FOR 0 AGAINST (Only the members who were at the February meeting voted on the appeal) Staff has recalculated the area of the concrete patio to be removed as depicted in Exhibit A, and finds a total square footage of 644 s.f. rather than 681 s.f as noted in the Resolution! Staff is scheduled to meet with you on the property on Friday, November 21, 2003 at 1:30 p.m. to re\iew the removals already completed and consider which additional 0-75* hardcover items should be removed to meet the 644 s.f requirement. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, November 24, 2003; meeting starU at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Plaiuiing Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call Planning Director Mike Gaffion at 952-249-4600. Date AppUcalioD Received: 10-21-03 Date Applicatioo Considered as Compietc: 10-21-03 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 12-20413 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Mike Gaffiron, Planning Director November 14,2003 #03-2866a Judy & D^^id Zoschke, 2040 Shad^ood Road - Appeal of Administrative Decision • Public Hearing Zoning Dbtrict: Lot Area: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2-acre min. 0.4 acre (17,467 s.f.) Application Summary: Applicant is appealing City Staffs interpretation of the conclusions of the Planning Commission and Council in relation to the extent of hardcover removals required per Resolution No. 4920, adopted February 24,2003. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the appeal, since we believe Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4920 as signed by the applicants is a correct depiction and interpretation of the required removals. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Letter of Request Submitted by Applicant ^^.fi,£l)Qlo^2iUhiDitlcd.byApplicant ^"^D - Resolution No. 492(T^ E - Council Minutw of 2^4-03 F - Planning Commission Minutes of 2-19-03 G - PC Memo & Exhibits of 1-31-03 H - Council Memo & Exhibits of 2-20-03 1 - Letter to Applicants 9-25-03 J - Zoning Code Sections 78-96 thru 78-99 re:appeals process Background The Zoschke’s were granted a variet>* of variances in Febmary 2003 in order to replace a deck on the lake side of the residence and enclose part of it as a porch. The applicants agreed to remove hardcover including landscape areas lined by plastic/fabric as well as patio area in the 0-75* zone. However, the applicants are disputing the square footage and extent of patio removal agreed to; they do not believe they agreed to the removals as depicted in Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4920, but to a lesser removal that allows the upper patio, stairvvay, and a 3' portion of lower patio adjacent to the retaining wall, to remain. Review Process to Date Staff was initially advised by the Zosebke’s in July (July 21 framing inspection called for finishing removals before continuing project) that they disagreed with the Resolution diagram and the extent of the removals required. This was news to staff, since they had signed the resolution in March/April and had not noted any issues at that time. s «03*2866a N»ven:ber 14.2003 Page 2 Staff rjviswed the zoning file and the PC and Council minutes to determine whether any docur.er/.ation therein would support or refute the Zoschke’s position. The initial conclusion reached was that the square footage to be removed was not documented in either set of minutes, but the Ccur.cil memo of 2-20-03 clearly indicates a 681 s.f. removal, which was reflected in the attached resolution adopted by Council on 2-24-03. Staff has confirmed that the diagram. Exhibit A, w as attached to the resolution at the time it was presented to Council, as it appears in the official record packet for that meeting. Therefore, the Zoschke s had opportunity to review the resolution and exhibit prior to its adoption, and had further oppor-nity to review it benveen its adoption and the time they individually signed it more than a month .c.er. The Council did place this item on its Consent Agenda, so no discussion was held at the Cc.r.cil level for this item. In ord:r to give the Zoschke’s the benefit of the doubt, I discussed this application in July with Jennifer Chaput Zierke who was the Orono staff person responsible for the ZoschV«- application, Jennifer is currently the City Planner for Long Lake. Jennifer advised me that the resoluuon, exhibit and irer.o accurately reflected what she believed to be the required removals. I then rec/jested that Planning Commissioner Jeanne Mabusth review the audio tape of the meeting to dctsrrir.e w hether any new information could be gleaned from the tape. After reviewing the tape she ir,c::ated that she could reach no conclusion as to the exact extent of removals required. She did indicate *nat there was discussion that occurred in relation to my (Gaffron’s) drawing the potential remov3.L' on an overhead transparency at the PC meeting. It would be useful if that transparency was availar.e. However, as is our standard practice, transparencies and duplicate copies of documents are discarded from the zoning files at the end of the review process, and that transparency is, unforrcr.a:ely, long gone. To firier the review I brought the matter informally before the Planning Commission after their Augus. September meeting, and the few members present who were part of the February review did nc: have a clear recollection of the details of the required removals. The inability to reach a concensus generated my September 25 lener to the Zoschke’s suggesting they cc-Id file an appeal. I did not offer the Zoschke’s the option of filing for a new variance applicatio.n, although that option was perhaps available; this could still be an option depending on the ou.ccme of this appeal, but also puts them at risk of re-opening the entire hardcover issue and an ever, more negative result, from their perspective. Applicant ’s Request Please review the applicants ’ lener of request. Their position is that they have removed all buta2.5' strip o: L".e lower patio, which strip was retained to support the retaining wall. They believe the stairway leading to the upper patio, and its adjoining spillway, need to be retained for drainage purposes and to reatin access to the lower >-ard. They further want to keep the upper patio as it is accessible to family members who cannot traverse stairw ays. M3-2l6<a Novtmbtr 14,2003 Pag«3 The applicants indicate they have removed atotal of447 s.f. of concrete to date, as well as the plastic landscape bed liners. This leaves them 234 s.f. short of the 681 s.f. removals required per the resolution. Options for Action This appeal process is intended to allow for consideration of w’hether the administrative actions taken by Staff (i.e. the interpretation of what hardcover was required to be removed) reflects the intent of the Planning Commission and Council. Since this was on the Council ’s consent agenda, the primary review focus will be at the Planning Commission level. This is a public hearing process as defined in the zoning code. Planning Commission could reach a variety of outcomes on this, including one of the following: 1.Determine that the staff interpretation as noted in Resolution No. 4920 correctly reflects the Planning Conunission’s intent. 2. Determine that the staff interpretation docs no: correctly reflect the Planning Commission’s intent, and provide staff with direction to clarify and correct the resolution. 3. Reach no consensus as to whether the interpreution is accurate, and send it along to Council with no recommendation. (Not a desired outcome, obviously). The applicants could, if they disagree with your conclusions, file for a new variance and attempt to demonstrate a hardship that would support the granting of variances. In stofPs opinion, the appeal process is not intended to take the place of a new variance application. Staff Recommendation Planning Commission should review the available documentation and attempt to reach a conclusion as to whether the Resolution and Exhibit accuralely reflect the Planning Commission’s intent at the February 19, 2003 meeting. If not, provide detailed direction to the applicant and staff as to the conect intent. Your conclusion will be brought forv/ard to the City Council at their next meeting. H -‘^1- liiiii iitiin BTrMri Biirt< • • D CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 9 2 9 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C); SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 (B); SECTION 10.22, SUBDIMSION 2; SECTION 10.56} SUBDFNTSION 16 (C)(6); AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDI\'IS10N 16 (L)(2) FILE NO. 03-2866 Vplicants") are the ou-ners of the property located Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described 23 follows: ~ ^ Lot 6 and the Northwesterly half, front and rear, of Lot 7, “Gust S. Johnson ’s Addition ”, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property"); and ^ ^ the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zomng Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14(C): Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B); Section 10 22 SuMivision 2; and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C)(6) and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 ' ’ (LX2) to replace an existing 507.6 s.f. lakeside deck, enclosing 151 s.f as patio area uith2 848 s.f (16.3%) of structure where 2,620 s.f (15%) is pe.-nitted; 6.442 s.f (57.08%) of hardcover where 2,821.5 s.f (25%) is permitted in the 75’-250’ hardcover zone; and a 21’ encroachment into the average lakeshore setback in the LR-IC zoning district; and >VTIEREAS, after due published noUce and mailed noUce in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City* of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Oror.o Plannina Commission held a public hearing on Febryaiy 19,2C03, at which time all persons desiring to b^ heard concerning this application were given the oppc.nunity to speak thereon. Minnesota: NO\>, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was re\ iewed as Zor.:.-.g File #'03-2866. 2. The property- is located in the LR-IC Zoning District, where 0.5 acres is the Page 1 of 6 V • • • •, i CITY of OROXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ___ 4 9 2 9 3. 5. 6. minimum required lot area. The property consio of approximately 0.4 acres. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this applicaUon on February-19,2003 and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 0. ' * 4. The Planning Commission made the following Crdings of fact: A. The deck has existed for many years in the Iccatioa of the proposed deck; B. Replacement of the deck as it currently exists and enclosing a small area will not increase the lot coverage by stmcture, hardco-. er in the 75 ’-250 ’ hardcover zone or change the average lakeshore setback; C. The deck will continue to provide a landing fc-r two sliding glass doors located on the lakeside of the house; D. The neighbors ’ views of the lake are not grea-Jy affected by the locadon of the deck or the proposed patio enclosure; E* There exists 1,506 s.f. of non*confomung plsisric hardcover on the property that must be removed; and F. Excessive existing hardcover in the 0.75 ’ zone can be substantially reduced by removirg a portion of the concrete patio near the lake. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on t}*;$ property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that craating the variances will not adversely affect traffic conditicis, light, air, nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property, would nc: merely serv e as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or diSculty, is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; a.nd would be* in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Cede and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application, including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safely and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 6 M • • GITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ 4 9 8 9 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14(C); Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B); Section 10.22, Subdivision 2; and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C)(6) and Section 10.56, SubdMsion 16 (L)(2) to replace an e.xisting 507.6 s.f. lakeside deck, enclosing 151 s.f as patio area, \%itb 2,848 s.f. (16.3%) of structure where 2,620 s.f. (15%) is pendned; 6,442 s.f. (57.08%) of hardcover where 2,821.5 s.f. (25%) is permitted in the 75’-250 ’ hardcover zone; and a 21* encroachment into the average lakeshore setback. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Any further amendments to the site plan may require further Planning Commission and City Council review*. Approval is subject to the following: a) 1 ,506 s.f. of existing landscape plastic hardcover must be removed on the property; and b) in the 0-75’ hardcover zone, the 681 s.f. concrete patio must be removed to reduce the hardcover from 1,341 s.f. (24.86%) to 660 s.f. (12.23%). 3.Authorities granted by this variance ren with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council appro\'a!, or these variances will expire on that date (February 24,2004). 4.Violation of or non-compliance with a.ny of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, arid shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the.*r.selves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 3 of 6 'll CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4929NO. Adopted by the City Council of the City or Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of February, 2003. ATTEST: m^S.Vee, City Clerk ■/L- Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 4 of 6 A i ^ GlTYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 49 9.9 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of Febniaiy, 2003 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the CiQr. Notary Public STA* COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of Februarj-, 2003 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executedonbeh^^f the City. Dcc^ ^ c Notary Public ^ 3SS3! STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this 29! day of OW/t'.L .2003. C- '?o5c.WVl<^ personally appeared before me, who is personally known to me _ whose identity I proved on the basis of K3 *i^c whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of ^ credible wimess .a and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. sazzi CHNISEMLESKINEN notary Wjeuc .WCtfSOTAN!)f CcnariBien E»r*u Jia. 31, aXS Pages of6 s i * L ummask j CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL __^4929NO. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On thi$./5^ day of f! 1 2003, K. n grannall y i|)peared before me, ' who is personaHy known to me whose identity I proved on the basis o f jL.tL3 T>^ _whose identity I proved on the oath/aSiimation of ___ credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/hei/their free act and deed. Notary Public DENISE M.LESKMEH NOTARyUUe*UMCSOrA ll^rCanMeii !)«*« Jn. 31.23CS 4 i Paged of 6 MINNETONKA CRYSTAL DAY (114 CaACM uc ICCAl OCSCntATtON or pwrum-y . Ul • Md Um N*r|h.«.i«rljr Mil. lr«Ml «i»d «tw. «l Ul 7. -&.M S. JvMtMft MdillM- yi tvtrciMfMifif TTfU, Tlicrf?^t ** ^ *• • t il§nol9§ lr«n itorkcf Ot«r ^ff •ttimii tfclim. tiM iMill. Ml i.ri 99¥nmmriM§ •! im tf»tcrlM4 i It Wtl Ml fwTMfl !• M m Mjr BlMr iMTfMMMU M "TMIlVinll. CRONBERG & ASSOCIATES. INC. COWaTM UKMIR^ UW SWVCTM». 9U nAMCNS 44S IMM «U0* owe UW LAIC. Mi u*M •II-4M.4I4I Ty!Sr*jy * *4» ••^ ^ VPt# •• 9IIMf HMMMBs ^ • Mi • »%f tCMMM M«M MM -------Mt ^ |M« V fti MMI « MHIa »-HH tJ*ii uuouMjkuucUli AI iiiiicMi ii*Wnt r-*^"— Date AppUcatUm Received: 4-23m3 Date Application Considered as Complete: 9-S-03 60*Day Review Period Expires: ll<4^ extended to 1-3-04 COUWCII MCCtiwq DEC 8 2003 CITY Onu.vo REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: December 4,2003 Item No.: ^ Department Approval: Name: Janice Waataja Title: City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #03-2943, Robert & Janet Labalt, 3202 North Shore Drive - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - IB. One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 'eminimum) 0.223 acres (9,715 s.f.) 62.37 feet List of Exhibits A - Resolution per Planning Commission and City Council Recommendations B - Revised Plans C - Notice of Council Action dated 10-29-03 D - Minutes from 10-27-03 City Council Meeting E - 60-Day Extension Notice dated 10-28-03 F - Notice of PC Action dated 9-16-03 G - PC Memo and Exhibits of 9-12-03 Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variances to construct an addition to the home: 1. Hardcover variance to allow 37% hardcover in the 75-250' zone when 25% is allowed and 50.5% currently exists. 2. Hardcover variance to allow 47% hardcover in the 250-500 ’ zone when 30% is allowed and 55% currently exists. 3. Side yard setback variance to allow a side yard setback of 8 ’ when 10' is normally allowed and a 2.8 ’ setback currently exists on the existing house. Background This application first appeared before the City Council on October 27, 2003. The applicant was proposing an addition to his home and requested hardcover and structural coverage variances. The applicant was instructed to redesign the proposal whereby a structural coverage variance would not be required. ! #1 The applicant has submitted a plan which implements staff and City Council recommendations. The existing detached garage is proposed to be removed and a new, tuck-under st> le garage is proposed with two stories of living space above. This redesign meets the City’s structural coverage requirement but still requires a side yard setback and hardcover variance. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission reviewed this application, but under the original proposal which included keeping the detached garage and adding a living space addition. At that meeting, held on September 15, 2003, the Planning Commission recommended denial due to the overage on struchiral coverage. The applicant at that time requested to go forward to the City Council with that proposal wliich was then tabled at the October 27, 2003 meeting where the applicant was directed to redesign in accordance with the structural coverage requirements. StafT Recommendation Approval of the redesign as follows (see Exhibit A of attached Resolution): 1 . Hardcover variance to allow 47% hardcover in the 250-500 ’ zone when 30% is allowed and 55% currently exists. 2. Side yard setback variance to allow the addition to be setback 8’ from the western property boundary when 10 ’ is normally allowed and a 2.8* setback currentlx exi.sts on the existing house. The applicant is instructed to design the driveway whereby a hardcover variance for the 75-250 ’ zone is not required. This allows for a total driveway of 1050 s.f. where 800 s.f. lies in the 75-250 ’ zone and 260 s.f. lies in the 250-250 ’ zone. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting a 250-500 ’ zone hardcover variance and side setback variance for 3202 North Shore Drive. N A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-330 (B), 78-282, AND 78-1288 (B) FILE NO. 03-2943 WHEREAS, Robert Labalt and Janet Labalt, husband and wife, (hereinafter “the applicants”) are the owners of the property located at 3202 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City”) and legally described as follows; That part of the West 57.3 feet of the East 115.05 feet of Government Lot 1, Section 8, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5 “’ Principal Meridian, lying North of County Road No. 51 and lying southerly of a line running West at right angels from a point in the East line of said 57.3 feet distant 165 feet north of the North line of said road. (hereinafter the “property”); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-330 (b), 78-282, and 78-1288 (b) in order to construct an attached tuck under garage with 2 stories of living space above on the walk-out side of the home attached to the existing one story walk-out home. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Miruiesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2943. The property is located in the LR - IB One Family Lakeshore Residential district, which requires a minimum lot area of 1 acre. The applicant's property is 0.223 acres in size. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on September 15, 2003 and recommended denial. Tlie application was heard by the City Council on October 27, 2003 and was tabled to allowed redesign in accordance with the Planning Commission ’s recommendations. Page 1 of 5 r 4. The applicants have submitted a revised plan for which the City Council finds that the hardcover and side setback variances for the redesigned proposal are supported by the following findings: a. The applicant's property is 0.223 acres in size located in a one acre zoning district. The redesigned proposal makes efficient use of the limited lot area. b. The shared driveway arrangement causes excess hardcover that wouldn't be required should the property only be accessed by the applicant. c. The location of the existing home limits locations for expansions. 5. 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 effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 6. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other 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 78-330 (b), 78-282. and 78- 1288 (b) in order to construct an attached tuck under garage with 2 stories of living space above on the walk-out side of the home attached to the existing one story walk-out home subject to the following conditions: 1.Council approval is based on the site plan and building plans submitted by the applicants and armotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Page 2 of S 3. 4. 5. 6. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. Hardcover in the 75-250’ zone shall be limited to 800 s.f. or 25% and hardcover in the 250-500’ zone shall be limited to 2858 s.f. or 47®/i per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summar> as depicted on Exhibit A. The 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. Required removals of hardcover shall be completed by the footing inspection for the new garage. The existing detached garage structure may remain until construction of the new garage is complete, however a Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued for the work until the detached garage is demolished. 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 variance will expire on that date (December 8,2(X)4). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 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 agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 8* day of December, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson. Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 5 f : STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of . 2003 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 insmunent was acknowledged before me on this _ day of , 2003 by Linda S. Vee. City Clerk of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of S State of Minnesota ) )ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this__day of by Robert Labalt, husband of Janet Labalt, husband and wife. . 2003 Notary Public State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this by Janet Lablt, wife of Robert Labalt, husband and wife. day of ,2003 Notary Public Page S of S EXHIBIT A CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BOB LABATT \IN GOV'T LOT 1. SEC. 8-117-23 \ J^NNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA ^•VgWAY- O^lENTAiTlOlsJ ....... TO 6E I^EWOVED}CASTEW.Y Lf€ Of COV T lot 1. sea 8-117-23 FI^POSEP appitioM (^’ X 2H*) Hac^VEO. 78’250 |I0$.T. * CBlOXlc VII " ^Vcw*y 000 sT. -r 3200 • 26% rOBE removed LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES HAiRPgQVCp. IbD-hOfi* '130S/.*£»iS»ir«A Kivse TW Si.-o^4iVm (5o ’»i.»r) S^."(^<r€|t Ofirert 5/. - CJr^rttC YMkJls 52- ”Srtn« bo«r^Urt ton 4nvCMAy 2f3«S.r.TbOZ.^s 47^ Thot port of the Lot 1. seel.on 8. To**nship n7*NS!th^*Ronqi 23^Wef t ^of * tri Mend.on. lying North of County Rooo’no. I* ond ?5 nj sJ.---Mv^orn' I me running West ot right ongles from o ooint in^th2 r«I.‘ 7 ^ ®•oio 57.3 les fsrioah'^rnS'j:- ;;?s o: denotes iron marker set denotes iron morker found Beorings shown ore bosed upon on ossur«d dotim. This survey intends to show the boundaries of th« -k-.^ the locotion of on existing house ond gorlge the ?ocotic* "hordcover" ond the proposed locotion I? o^Sroposei odd ? - * does not purport to show ony other inprov«?«nts o? enc.^c:’:-mlnti ‘ CO 6B0NBKRG k iSSKlkm, DiC CDOIM OOBR IN IMKft K MMB MSINinOK IKUICMSM l lertf wWt M Be imr m « v e* ■> is: tm- Vw Ion al Sw 9«lt al Unwaate 'o\| "T5Cf^“ e-16-03 i EXHIBIT B s; 1 1 1II II 1 1 II II II 1 1 1 1 l^>. FtgQNf gUeVATION fCMXx ...II J P INNl 1 IN fm * k h . — ^fffarF4 IUNNr’.a044i - ---- 12'12* ©© PATH jy c[ 'P t % J L EXHIBIT C CITY OF ORONO 27S0 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE: #03-2943 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 29,2003 TO: Robert & Janet Labalt COPIES: 3202 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variances DATE OF MEETING: October 27,2003 VOTE: 4 FOR 0 AGAINST Motion: Table. The ^pUcant agreed, rather than have his proposal denied, to redesign to meet the 1,500 s.f. structural coverage requirement. The next City Council meeting will be held on Monday, November 10,2003. Also, your application has been extended an additional 60 days to January 3,2004 to allow for redesign. If you desire certifled copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. r Is' u EXHIBIT D MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEET ING Monday, October 27,2003 7:00 o’clock p.m. 7. M3-2929 JEFF MARTHSEAU, 2565 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 5064, Continued standard code restrictions on use of that structure, and concurrent removals of eicess hardcover per the Planning Commission recommendation. As a follow-up to the neighbor’s request, Murphy confirmed with and thanked the applicant for his willingness to postpone construction until after Mr. Callahan has moved. Mr. Martineau obliged the request. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. SsOLUTIo1^NO^5065 ROAD, VARIANCE - Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5065, a Resolution approving the lot area and lot width variances, side street setback variances per the Planning Commission recommendation, and approval of the 75-250’ hardcover at 1,838 s.f. in order to construct a new residence on the property located at 3445 Crystal Bay Road.VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. - RESO l It IoIT nO ^ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Murphy moved, >Vhlte seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5066, a Resolution granting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a barn on a ’through’ lot located at 465 Turnham Road, subject to its proposed location on the submitted plans VOTE* Ayes 4, Nays 0. ^ ^ 10. ROBERT AND JANET LAB ALT, 3202 NORTH S’iORE DRIVE - VARIANCE Waataja reported that thw applicants have requested the following variances to construct an addition, approximately 515 s.f., to the existing home. 1. Hardcover variance for the 75-250* zone to allow 37.6% hardcover when 25% is normally allowed and 50.5% currently exists. 2. Hardcover variance for the 250-500’ zoi.. to allow 42.7% hardcover when 30% is normally allow ed and 55% currently exists. 3. Side yard setback variance to allow a setback of 2.8 feet when 10’ is required and 2 8’ currently exists. 4. Structural coverage variance to allow 19.4% when 15% is required. While the applicant had met with staff to discuss other options. Waataja indicated that it was their preference to move for%vard with their original plan, which the Planning PACE 6 of 16 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 27,2003 7:00 o’clock p.m. 10. ROBERT AND JANET LABALT, 3202 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE, Continued Commission and staff had recommended for denial since the increases in structural coverage go beyond what is allowed by Code. Waataja further explained that it was staffs opinion that no unique hardship has been presented which would justify expanding the current home’s footprint, given alternatives for an addition exist. Waataja indicated that staff had recommended the applicants consider building an attached garage with living space above. Mr. Labalt stated that, in his opinion, adding a second story to his small home would give it the appearance of a silo and block the view of the lake to his neighbor to the rear. He urged the Council to consider the fact that he lives next to a commercial property and that his is a substandard lot when making their decision. He felt his proposal was the only way to go and did not wish to build a three story tall home. Acting Mayor Sansevere asked whether any hardships could be found with the topography to support the expansion out versus upward. He, too, believed the effect would be a silo. Waataja stated that staff could not find any unique hardship to warrant the request. She pointed out that most of the new constructions around him were 2 '/j story homes without variances. Labalt stated that ‘most’ but not all meet the definition; however, he believed his conditions were different. Murphy asked what the City wished to accomplish, other than strict adherence to the codes. Waataja stated that the applicant could be in compliance by attaching his garage and building a second story. Gaffron stated that, currently, the applicant has made inefficient use of the property with the detached garage, and Gaffron would recommend the applicant design a tuck under style garage. McMillan pointed out that it is critical that the City maintain the integrity of the structural coverage requirement when other options are available. Acting Mayor Sansevere maintained that massing also occurs when properties are forced to build up and not just out. Gaffron pointed out, that perhaps unfortunately, the Ordinances have encouraged people to build up versus out based on hardcover restraints. He noted that, while the Planning PAGE 7 of 16 J MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 27,2003 7:00 o’clock p.m. 10. ROBERT AND JANET LABALT, 3202 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE, Continued Commission has wrestled with the density of structure over the past several years, this house is under its structural coverage now. Murphy questioned how high the structure might be and whether he would gain the same space if th'' applicant followed the staff recommendation to attach his garage. Gaffron stated that, with the tuck under garage and walkout, the home would essentially have three stories and rise approximately an additional 8’. Acting Mayor Sansevere wrestled with the issue of massing and forcing conformance which would create an eye sore or lighthouse effect. Wlule Murphy was also empathetic, he failed to find a hardship to support the .equest and believed more could be done to ensure a proper design. \\^ite posnted out that State rules stipulate the City must be able to support their decision with an identifiable hardship, which they cannot do in this case. Acting Mayor Sansevere asked the applicant whether he would like the Council to act on what’s in front of them or take more time to meet with staff to consider their options. Waataja pointed out that an extension notice would need to be signed. Attorney Barrett suggested the Council deny the proposed application for lack of a hardship; with the provision that if the applicant signs the 60 day rule extension notice, the Council will continue the application to give the applicant additional time to work with staff rather than having to reapply in 60 da>s. Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to deny .Application #03*2943, Robert and Janet Labalt, 3202 North Shore Drive, due to the increases in structural coverage beyond what is allowed by Ordinance and lack of a definable hardship; however, upon the condition that the applicant signs an extension, the denial action ’.vill be replaced with a continuation action so that they may continue to work with staff to redesign the proposal. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PAGE 8 of 16 ii I 1 \ : ( ii • I I I EXHIBIT E October 28,2003 Bob & Janet Labalt 3202 North Shore Drive Orono, MN 55391 RE: 6(May Review Period Extension Dear Mr. and Mrs. Labalt: State law provides that Cities shall make decisions on zoning requests within 60 days from the date of application, and that this review period may be e.xtcndcd by notification to the applicant. Your application was received on September 5, 2003 and the 60-day review period would end on November 4, 2003. However, because your application was tabled by the City Council at the October 27, 2003 meeting, the earliest potential date of final Council action falls after the 60-day period ends. Therefore, the 60-day review period is hereby extended an addUionai 60 days to January 3,200^. Please mail/fax/drop off a copy of this letter with your signature indicating that you have been notified of this extension. The Cities mailing address is Post Office Box 66, Crystal Bay, MN 55323 and our fax number is (952) 249-4616. Thank you and please call me at (952) 249-4623 should you have ftirther questions. Sincerely, City of Orono Janice Waataja City Planner lllobert Labalt and/or Janet Labalt agree to the 60-day extension. I k ■ V ^ * ' ►’ V ‘ ■ EXHIBIT F CITYOFORONO ZONING FILE: 03-2943 2750 KeUcy Parkway P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 DATE OF NOTICE: September 16,2003 TO: Robert & Janet Labalt COPIES: 3202 North Shore Drive Wayzata. MN 5539 1 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Hardcover Variances, Side Yard Setback, Structural ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ DATE OF MEETING: September 15,2003 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Denial of all requests consistent with staff recommendation. VOTE:FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, September 22,2003; 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. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Waataja at 952-249-4623. rwaiii I IIIII liifT-1 rr 'kiani m-2943 September 15,2003 Page 1 of6 Date Applkation Received: 8-19-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 8-19-03 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 10-19-03 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Janice Waataja, City Planner^ September 12,2003 03*2943, Robert & Janet Labalt, 3202 North Shore Drive - Setback, Hardcover, and Structural Coverage Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR- IB. One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1-acre min.) 0.223 acres (9,715 s.f.) 62.37 feet Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variance to construct an addition, approximately 515 s.f., to the existing home. 1. Hardcover variance for the 75-250’ zone to allow 37.6% hardcover when 25% is normally allowed and 50.5% currently exists. 2. Hardcover variance for the 250-500’ zone to allow 42.7% hardcover when 30% is normally allowed and 55% currently exists. 3. Side yard setback variance to allow a setback of 2.8 feet when 10’ is required and 2.8’ currently exists. 4. Structural coverage variance to allow 19.4% when 15% is required.______________ Staff Recommendation: Staff recommendations: 1. Denial of the proposal due to the increases in structural coverage be>ond what is allowed by Ordinance. No unique hardship has been presented which would justify expanding the current home’s footprint, given alternatives for an addition exist. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Section 10.22. Subdivision 2: Lakeshore Hardcover and Land Alteration Regulations. Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L): Hardcover Limitations. Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B): Lot Standards Section 10.03, Subdivision 14(C): Lot Coverage List of Exhibits A - Application B - Survey C - Revised Survey Showing Removals D - Hardcover Calculations (revised by stafi) E - Building Plans & Elevations M3-2943 September IS, 2003 Pige 2 of 6 F - Alternative Plan (Staff Concept) G - Photographs H - Property Owner’s List 1 - Plat Map Background The applicant is proposing to build an addition to the existing home over existing driveway hardcover and to add a two-story deck adjoining the proposed addition to the existing home. An existing deck, 9 x 19, will be removed. The majority of the 525 square foot living addition and a portion of the deck are being placed over existing driveway. The applicant is proposing an additional 15 square feet of hardcover for the living addition and an additional 81 square feet for the deck with significant driveway removals. The nature of this lot requires a shared driveway for the lakeshore lot to the north. Currently, the applicant is not using the shared driveway and is accessing the property from the adjacent marina. This lot is currently substandard with respect to hardcover and side yard setback. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Area/Width; LR-IB Lot Area Lot Width Required 43,560 s.f. (1 acre)140’ Actual 9,715 s.f. (0.223 acres)62.37 ’ Setbacks; LR-IB Required Existing Proposed Front 35 ’30.5 ’30.5 ’ Rear 30 ’13.9 ’13.9 ’ (detached garage) Left Side 10 ’2.8 ’2.8 ’ (new deck) 10 ’ (addition) Right Side 10 ’21.9 ’24’ Lakeshore n/a n/a n/a Average Lakeshore n/a n/a n/a Structural Coverase: W03-2943 September 15,2003 Page 3 of 6 Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 9,715 s.f. (0.223 acres)Allowed: Proposed: 1,457 s.f. (15%) 1,883 s.f. (19.4%) Hardcover Calculations: When calculating hardcover percentages for tht;; 75-250 ’ zone the area within the shared driveway easement (490 s.f.) was taken out of the lot area so as not to either help or hinder the hardcover percentages. This is because this portion of the shared drive does not benefit the applicant. When calculating hardcover percentages for the 250-500 ’ zone the area within the shared driveway easement was kept added into the lot area due to the fact that the applicant benefits from this portion of the shared driveway. Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcoveri\75-250 3,200 s.f.800 s.f. (25%) 1,618 s.f* (50.5 %) 1,205 s.f (37.6 %) 250 - 500 6,025 s.f.1,807.5 s.f (30%) 3,324 s.f * (55 %) 2,570 s.f (42.7 %) After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Hardcover Variance The applicant is proposing to add th** addition over existing hardcover with the exception of 15 square feet. The dramatic dec .eases in hardcover amounts for the proposal are the results of the applicant eliminating the drive access through the marina and utilizing the existing shared drive. This includes a net decrease of approximateh 413 square feet of hardcover or 13% in the 75-250 ’ zone. In the 250-500 ’ zone there would be a decrease of approximately 754 square feet or 12%. Although Planning Department staff is encouraged by the proposed decreases in hardcover and the existing drive through the marina being eliminated, the overall proposal doesn’t fit within requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Structural Coverage Variance The applicant is proposing a living space addition of approximately 525 square feet and a deck of approximately 81 square feet. This results in an increase of structural coverage of606 square feet bringing the current structural coverage percentage (14.9%) over the allowable amounts to 19.4%. Side Setback Variance The applicant is proposing a second story deck, approximately 81 square feet in size connecting the existing house to the proposed addition. This deck would be located on i M03-2943 September IS« 2003 Page 4 of 6 the western side of the home facing the marina. The current side yard setback in this location is 2.8'. The applicant isn't proposing to get closer to the property line. The deck would extend diagonally from the 2.8' setback to an 11' setback where it attaches to the proposed addition. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In coHsUerbtg applkatlonsfar variance, the Planning Cot'mission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of tk. community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safer, , 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 b demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds that there are hardships which may justify hardcover amounts beyond what is allowed by Zoning Ordinance. Those hardships consist of the man-made lagoon at the marina bringing the property closer to the lake and the shared dri\ eway arrangement for the lot to the north. Staff is also very agreeable to eliminating the drive access through the marina in an attempt to eliminate hardcover. From a zoning perspective, gaining access from the marina is inappropriate. However, staff dots not find a hardship w hich would allow the applicant to increase their structural coverage from a percentage which meets Zoning Ordinance to a percentage which would become non-conforming. 14.9 to 19.4 percent. .Allowing this increase in structural coverage would also not fall within what has consistently been approved by the Planning Commission as structural coverage requirements are strictly followed. The applicant also has alternatives for adding living additions to the house without adding to structural coverage. This would consist of having an attached garage instead of a detached which would allow living space above and turning the existing deck (which is 6' or higher above grade and therefore counting towards structural coverage) into living space. Therefore, staff cannot support the proposal in its entirety. Staff w ould make the follow ing recommendations in regards to the criteria for “undue hardship" pertinent to this application: 1.“The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." The property could e.xist in its current manner. 2.“The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." f ‘ OClsa-y 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. M3-2943 September IS. 2003 Pages ol6 The applicant has seems to have outgrown a small house. There is no unique circumstance to the property that would justify an increase in structural coverage because there are alternatives to adding living space. “The vdrisnee. if granted, will not niter the essential character of the locality. The character of this lot and a few lots to the east are smaller lot, smaller house situations. Allowing a dramatic increase in structural coverage would change the character of this. Most of the other lots and house in the area meet the requirements of their zoning district. “Economic considerations alone shtH not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. The applicant has not indicated that economics are an issue. “Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes. Section 1 16J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." .\ot applicable “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." The uses proposed are allowed in the LR-IB zoning district. “The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." Sol applicable “The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." The shared driveway arrangement may be a condition which is peculiar to the property and wouldjustify hardcover variances. However, there are no special conditions applying to the structure or land which would allow increases in structural coverage. “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." Most of the properties immediately surrounding the applicant's property, except the marina, fall within allowable structural amounts. “The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." There are alternatives for adding a living space addition therefore not hindering the applicant's right to enjoy their property. It Pafc6«f6 II."The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code." Should a structural coverage variance be granted it would be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. 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.” Granting a hardcover variance may alleviate demonstrable hardships however granting of a structural coverage variance may serve as a convenience to the applicant for not requiring a redesign. Issues for Consideration 1. Should the applicants be limited to the 15% structural coverage requirement? 2. Are the applicant's headed in the right direction towards reducing hardcover? 3. Are the hardships which would justify granting a structural coverage variance? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Denial of hardcover variances for the 75-250' and 250-500’ zones, denial of the structural coverage variance, and denial of the side setback variance to allow a 525 square foot living space addition and subsequent 80 square foot deck. The applicants should be directed to redesign whereby not increasing structural coverage on the property. The applicants should also be directed that the proposed decreases in hardcover are reasonable. EXHIBIT A CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPUCATION Initial Application Fee S2S0.00 (SSO.OO per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures S2S0.00 Afier-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address lO » AppUcadon «L DateRccdvcd Amount Paid ,ai*np350. e'o Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired vaVcxV q_____________________________(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Pr^nt use of property: V residential ___pother (specify)_____________________ Zoning District: C rv\oJTY'i ) APPLI Name ____________________ Address: Vs 5^>C~" tir, OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home). Phone (work) Address:City:Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF RE(JUEST Estimated Construction Cost S Describe request in detail: VA:^;:arvV Ccsc 0 (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _ Setback: ___I ot Width Front Side ^ Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: n V- VA.cArcv^<“ . 1 0 ce «\ _ ' ' (attach additional sheets if necessary) O Z\»Ao\'<b ‘av>^'3>‘V-e«’c'«^cWv^^ V>e ^WNe...»\vVi v«o»ys.cj>,«.o:» ■Sorr^.'V'at-V.to.V ^________« REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the fftllftwing infonnation mmt be suhmitted hv th. irnrHin# in *>*‘<^**‘ fof vour application to be gnmidered rnmp|y|^» 1. 2. j ^0* _1 y Completed Application Form 3. Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-5910).'-paoici.. t^cpanmeni oi Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover 4. 5. 6. calculations as required. In addition, provide one (I) copy 8'/," x 11" for reproduction. To^graphic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing g^e are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8/i" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or nlans of floor A H^vatinn /•-__:j____................................ 7. 8. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/j" x 11") — legd names (include mariul status) of all persons with an interest in foe property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s) _ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. _ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner' must sign this application. Piease remember that vivr 3atiiUlie.t.;plit«tiltn ii But ramn ltn if the above mformello. ha. not been APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by foe Zoning Admimstrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered b - original fee payment) andor consultant expenses incurred in review of this application,'and certifies that foe mformation supplied is tnj^and correct to foVbest of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s Signature _Date 3^*~ VtJ n- :■ •% OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owTier hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto foe property by City staff, consultants, agen»^. Commission members and Council members for purposes onnvestigatiqiyand verification of this request. t'f-' \\ » Gwner's Signature Date (P- /f - O ? < \\f Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Comnussion Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held or. foe third .Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Cc tnmission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting please make ^gements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the BuUding & Zoning Office of this change prior to foe meeting. * . li EXHIBIT B 0 01 00 X (T. EAST 57.30 CNCIK)AC»«C CPAVU• ouTsec or lo* ^ CASCICNT ARCA TO K RCIIOVCO flO* ORTVCWAY frA$**MENT PCR • OOC. 2774792 I 10 iik"" \ SCTBACK LAGOON PROPOSCO - AOOlTiON Hi EXISTMG HOUSE #5202 Sti WMX • • v' CNTROACMNO CPAVaouTsce or io* CASCkCNT ARC A TO 1C RCyOVCO ORCMAt LOCA' ^ or NORT^CRLY L»» V CO no NO 91 1/ >- < Ui > < t •A 04 in CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BOB LABATT IN GOV'T LOT 1, SEC. 8-117-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA I I I CASTERLY L»€ OT COV* T LOT 1. .... 5CC 8-117-23 8tri ID •11909 X : ; i:T legal description or PRF^MSES : That porl of the West 57.3 feet of the East 115 05 feet of Government Lot 1. Section 8, Township 117 North. Ronqe 23 West of the 5th Principol Meridian, lying North of County Rood No. 51 ond 'ying southerly of o I ine running West at right ongles from o point in the East line of soid 57.3 feet distent 165 feet north of the North line of soid road. o: denotes iron marker set : denotes iron marker found Bearings shown ore based upon on ossifned dotim. This survey inlends to show the boundnr i es of the nr.ovo r I bed property, the location of uu existing house and goioge, the locution of all visible **hardcover*' and the proposed location of a proposed addition thereon. It does not purport to show ony other irrprovements or encroachments. GRONBERG ft ASSOCIATBl HC ODBUK eon M sm K Ml 4«A«iOIBM iiCUCftSII I kvAf cwtif M 8b MYty Mi ly m « wder my Bed xpe- mm, ed M I Bi i 4W ttfOmni (M Dtfwcr od loNf edv 8u loM of 8b Slolt of IBiBMla IBrIi 1 GroiBwo tfnnrtoto LicenM 12799 TKCf" i--2cr 6-1§-03 JOB NO. 0»-24»A 05 % « ..) •• f-s EXHIBIT C CAsrcBLY ifc or COV-T lot 1. .. see S-117-23 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BOB LABATT IN GOV'T LOT 1. SEC. 8-117-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA I 1m legal description of premises Thot port of the West 57 3 feet of the East 115 05 feet of Government Lot 1, Section 8, Township 117 North, Ronoe 23 West of the 5th Principol Meridian, lying North of County Road No. 5l and lying southerly of a Iine running West at riaht ongles from a point in the East line of said 57.3 feet distent 165 feet north of the North line of said road. o; denotes iron marker set • : denotes iron morker found Beorings shown are based upon on ossLined dotim. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the obove described property, the location of on existing house and garage, the location of all visible •'hardcover** and the proposed locotion of o proposed oddition thereon. It does not purport to show any other iirprovements or encroochments UASSocuns. me mmmmnm mtmmm mmmwm 0H73-4141 r7x?nr I Imhr ceMy M intf m pnpvti ly «t « urie mi M i mm, fld lei IIM 4W rifrteti Cni tufMe ee Imi Wwyei le tan qI le SWt if tfaesota Mvl 1 Qroftwi tanmoto L<««« iMtSer 1275S SCALE r-2<y DATE 05-249A j n i • : EXHIBIT D HAEDCOVER CALCVLA SETBACK ZONE: (CIROBONE) 0-7S’ WORKSHEET 2S0^00‘SOO-iOOO' KriSTINfl HAMi A. H<mu~ VIATlQHWiC^) (arfA. tastmtnj ’(soUEty^ ou1 o-f olh , X m 5 jp M iMHXtk jr jr X B. Caragi S.F. S.F. S.F. C. Driveway X X 5.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. £. Path/Deck X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Undiriain By nuric Or Fabric X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. C. Other S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IS ZONE - TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ Ibl^ + B ^D-t-fTQ xlOO mt S.F. £0-5 S.F. B % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X Lengiti wm S.F. X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage 5% • ^ S.F. C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X - t W ^S.F. - ISO >fiy^5.F.- OLW/6 5.F. S.F. E. Patio/Deck 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 'hZOO xlOO If. a '6ZCfO 5.F.B «4JM)C(0V£i? CALCULATION WORKS. SETBACK 2X>NE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0^75' * EXISTING HARDCOVER IN T A. House- - /AV; UngA 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 PROPOSED HARlDCOVERINZONE A. House _X Length X X X B. Garage X C. Driveway __\-^\h 0 - X D. Sidewalk _X X E. Patio/Deck _• X X F. Landscape _X Underlain _X By Plastic __X Or Fabric C. Other __X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ + B 75-250' MM 500^1000 I'bO S.F. DCrMlS.F. S.F. Mb ni Pnv6 S.F. ■S7/^C(^K(MdC S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A S.F. + B (dOZ^XlOO loOZ^ 55 A S.F. % B WUth Z2/i> 1^S.F. y\S.F. 'hL S.F. . 5^5 - e.Pr^Aiidthdy) S.F. mi \5.F. 5^ S.F.+1^50(^ S.F. tti^ lrW»4 S.F. S.F. -------------- S.F. S.F. IdOl^ xtco 24 ^ VblO ^F. A __S.F. B % La:. .. ir A . J-X '■r-t. . ■•. !% .mmM ^ •• • • •*« w t sw i '.^ v^i'v . aI -1' ' V.».. ^'*'»V'-, [ry' f. tyi9T.LAP NOgtMWE5f EUEVAT10J $c%e «/4 *-r a.1 ^ir\ mka^- wiuii^t^inb ■ b'nr ■ iit^i ^ k ■! u^.ui / .-rw^.k-tfnrv*i#iu*uMiMKkicAArkk ‘Mn i iii iiiiitfri ■rutfn >i>i<i —nil ii m*--—^ - ?;| in A*-« » fl I» HI ir^ 11 BCacA J 72*9^ ___,t-»-^ j EXHIBIT F ^ASTCRIY INC or GOV* T lot 1. see 8-117-23 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BOB LABATT UIN GOV'T LOT 1, SEC. 8-117-23 \ HENMFPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ^ I I I Ter AUtSU io 3hdr<^pWvt« priV6*«>rw;4j^^ MTrirwu W ■ liti iAthi)4eclc« m LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : That port of the West 57.3 feet of the Eost 115.05 feet of CoverrYnent Lot 1. Section 8, Township 117 North, Ranqe 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying North of County Rood No. 5l and lying southerly of a I ine running West at right angles f rom o point in the f.n*; t linn of soid 57.3 feet distant 165 feet north of the North line of said road. o: denotes iron marker set • : denotes iron marker found Bearings shown are based upon an assvmed dalim. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the obove described property, the location of on existing house and garage, the location of all visible *’hur deover ** ciiifj IIm- j»r o|mis«m1 lucation of o propoticd niliiitiun thereon. It does not purport to show any other inrprovements or encroachments. 0GRONBERG It ASSOaATESl INC ommma^mwKmwinm fiMTMHI I hffckjf evilly M Bn wwy m p^etd by nr v iirfv ny duel t^e- mm, «d Ml mi eir ripiUrid Cni Dgixw «d imi Svwyor Mv At Ion of Iht Mt of Vmtola. Mari Sw CroiMi llwmolo liccnn ligfcr I27SS SCALL r-20* DATE 03-24tA 03-249A F.MIIKITC I ! 'i- j' '' • Hi, * ' ‘'^1, . \ A • f V ...'V .. \'ki . m * •• . • IP* >V T mia. ~ .» * I L. >*— •■• • .v( - S .‘V K N ^ X. ^ •*% /'W.;;' ^v-. r V/ ^ S -♦•4 . w • »I8 :t rr V. -if VitP •-jc*: -Jt; ■ 1 ^^' t—^ . TV as»^‘ ‘' [•'• * '•'t*. O' *'*te,. •V ’ C/i ■‘ r# ' t\i *<i • 1 'Jt . V •« V * r iv '■ i ">^ Sr ; ■ ir-^ -ft «• ■ «• pMMMb«>-''>' ' <-iSiJL^ — *, J ;'. - •-->^;x5^) ■ ;.;' v3^-': ^.’■ ■.: ^V'^.->v•. r^J^TTi : - ’ r- ^t~~rr . y'K r. <rr-3*L ■^’,>-AO ^.Ifc. V » ^ t*’-'«. V ^MV *'• ^ •/. jk* :#w 1^ -»/ ■ f ■i'-’ '>•■ »'V4W'. ^-'1'wy 'Wi^. • •CW • *. \ *'' v‘fcL'f‘U|!f.‘ ■?i' JTst. . *» ■< ^*1 f fei,I K— >2. ■' £l---i-Pj ’ 'A. '.»' rC' JHii^-: ■■ ^ -----------------------■-:■-/■.'■■■■■ •• • ■• ' . (m4 4 ••*■ •z^-’ ..■■p’-' , < - •• T ■ * V . . 2 #•■*• '' '• * *. 1. . -• • • . #> -. -'c . • • •• ^ -•*, <*.}.' L *• 1 • *>y> I ^‘vf-✓ M. . , '*'•» r i' '.■ \'1.'.'^'‘, V -■•/V » ‘vV '••I'.' . ^ . ‘. -.v “ ■ 't ;:-w • >':5/' > ■. ^ v* J . A U.V Tv* .'S?''-:.''' iS <rf; ■ ^■:^ssm^ •■,.■' '\ \ ' vV r*'^ f 1 I ^ N #• ' V 1^* *' * ^ J , V « ,^A-? 1* ; -'■- ■v T. ^ £1.. P« - .n. i «MI r -: . . • - .’%u \ -V... .«'• .- - • C-' A*.«3*.»»VI . > ^‘ V- ' •* w» -• . * • V. . • f .*-/v 1 !•* **^ > - • •. w .*». • i4MT I . * •-«i*' ' *1 • ,V ’ '. * >;^ jT"* tv • *'•' ••* * .* t '*Vv^ ^ • ■^r- • .,, *•> • ‘ ^ .J»T • * . ** . _ * > V,>^^'vB7M#* *riLV-c ~»X.r , .^-wv.4*«‘'*<--fc,»-^ -_^%C *:■* ' I .i % RUN DATE: 8/190003 38 08II7234I000I PROPADDR 3200 NORTH SHORE OR OWNER NAME SHIRLEY 3 HENDRICKSON ET AL TAXPAYER SlURLEYJ HENDRICKSON NAME/ADOR RICK A WINDENBURG 3200 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 33391 38 OSI1723410004 PROP AODR 3224 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME NORTH SHORE MARINA INC TAXPAYER NORTH SHORE MARINA INC NAME/ADDR 3222 NORTII SI K3KE DR WAYZATAMN 33391 PROPADDR OWNER NAME Btaxpayer Hname /addr ea 38 0911723320010 3186 NORTH SHORE OR RESORT VENTl'RES COMPANY LLC RESORT VENTURES COMPANY LLC POBOX97 EXCELSIOR MN 33331 PROPADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 38 0911723330013 1406 BOHNS POINT RO CWAEPCHAPMAN CHRISTOPHER & EMILY CHAPMAN 1406 BOHNS POINT RO WAYZATAMN 35391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 0811723410002 PROPADDR 3210 NC't ill SHORE OR OWNER NAME MARK FINNEY TAXPAYER MARK FINNEY NAME/ADDR 3210 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 08II7234IU0O3 PROPADDR 3202 NORTH SHORE OR OWNER NAME ROBERT G A JANET L LADATT TAXPAYER ROBERT A JANET I ABATE NAME/ADDR 3202 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0811723410003 PROP ADDR 3240 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME NORTH SHORE MARINA INC TAXPAYER NORTH SHORE MARINA INC NAMli/ADDR 3222 NORTH SIKJRI; DR WAYZATAMN 33391 38 0811723440006 PROP AODR 3220 BOI INS POINT LA OWNER NAME A C TRAPANESEA: A TRAPANESE TAXPAYER ALBERT C/Cl IliRYL A TRAPANESE NAMiyADim 3220 BOHNS l>OINT IV\ WAYZATAMN 53391 38 0911723320011 PROP ADDR 3188 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME JA&DLROSATI TAXPAYER JAMES A & DEBRA LROSAH NAM E/ADDR 3188 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 33391 38 0911723320012 PROP ADDR 3190 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME C A A A C TRAPANESE TAXPAYER CHERYL & ALBERT TRAPANESE NAME/ADDR 3163 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 33391 V. : r/ % r-V. ft * 4 4 ^ O' I CERTIFY THATTHE FACTS REPRESEKTEO ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OFTHE HEWEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. TO TNE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BEUBF. DATEO '^3 BY TMENT.TOTHEBEST % .. v>- nmn IhMlttAHItn ft WIP^ * M I Ili Wtfrtl IBMlI»ltl'lA«T nWniyiii i~rn I EXHIBIT I • %»V ,te. W. * Henne()in V* rrfTT^ * .'•• ’ *• -« V' ••* VHeDjhepin County-"' »paye^rvices Depai^rnent • ■■if'” ■.*• • ■ • N . * ». » 0%-/l7- 2.3-® > . p.yij’; *ParceUnformation nf Avi<- l^^ouM llumb«r 3202>.K stmt |l«n« NORTH SHORE DR This Isiiftf legally tecort^map. It represents a compilation of information anddggf.fiom City. County, end State road authorities and other sources. l■TlTl^Tll ^ f Ditc Applkatloii Received: 9/16/09 Date AppUcatloB Considered as Complete: 9/17/09 120-Day Subdivision Review Period Espires: 1/14/04 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CONSENT AGENDA COIiMr;ii mppting DEC 6 2003 CITY OF OHUjvo Date: December 4,2003 Item No.: Department Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffion . Title: Planning Director ^ Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #03-2951 James & Judith Pierpont. 1801-1849 West I'ami Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Resolution - Vacation/Rededication of Drainage A Utility Easenr ent - Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution - Lot Line Rearrangement B - Resolution • Easement Vacation C - Notice of Council Action 11-27-03 D - Draft Council Minutes 11-7-03 E - Comments from Xcel/NSP Application Summary: On November 27 Council voted 4-1 to conceptually approve the lot line rearrangement and easement vacation/rededication, directing staff to draft a resolution for adoption on December 8th, subject to such tqiprovals not becoming effective until/unless a Plumbing in Accessory Structure CUP is successfully obtained and the kitchen removed from the guest house. Resolutions reflecting the above approvals are attached for review and adoption. Note that, per the comments received from Xcel/NSP, the vacation will not become effective nor be released for filing until such time that existing electric lines have been relocated. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolutions. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED 1 . Motion to adopt Resolution No._____,“A Resolution Approving a Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement for Properties Located at 1801 and 1849 West Farm Road -File #03-2931". 2. Motion to adopt Resolution No.____, “A Resolution Approving the Vacation of a Dedicated Drainage & Utility Easement Within Lots 14 and 15, Block 1 , The Farm at Long Lake - File No. 03-2951". A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 1801 AND 1849 WEST FARM ROAD FILE #03-2951 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and whereas, the City Council of Orono (hereinaRer “City Council ”) has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement by James Pierpont and Judith Pierpont, husband and wife (hereinafter “the applicants") of properties legally described as: Exhibit A attached Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter “the properties”); and WHEREAS, the properties consist of two tax parcels, both owned by the applicants and shown on the survey attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, and referenced hereinafter as the “vacant lot” (1849 West Farm Road) and the “homestead parcel” (1801 West Farm Road); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 20,2003 and again on November 17,2003, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicants have completed or have agreed to complete all requirements of the City for a metes and bounds subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for division and combination purposes, resulting in the relocation of the common lot boundary between the properties, as shown in the survey attached as Exhibit “B” and resulting in a new legal description for each parcel as shown in Exhibit “B”; and Page 1 of 4 I WHEREAS, the homestead parcel was approved for a nonconforming lot width as measured at the rear of the front yard when it was created with the plat of The Farm At Long Lake in 1978 under the current 2-acre zoning standards. As a result of the proposed subdivision, the homestead lot will become less nonconforming as to lot width, and the vacant lot will remain conforming in lot width; and WHEREAS, the applicants have requested vacation of the existing drainage and utility easement along the existing shared boundary of Lots 14 and 15, The Farm At Long Lake, and have agreed to dedication of new drainage and utility easements along the new boundary; and WHEREAS, the q>plicants have been advised that the resulting dry buildable acreage for the homestead parcel will be less than the 4.0 dry buildable acres required to support a guest house on the property, and applicants have been advised that the approval of this lot line rearrangement shall not take effect until such time that a Conditional Use Permit for Plumbing in an Accessory Structure has been successfully obtained and the kitchen removed from the guest house. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the lot line rearrangement of the above referenced property by the applicants as shown on the certificate of survey by Mark S. Gronberg, a licensed surveyor of Gronberg & Associates, Inc. dated September 16, 2003, as attached in Exhibit “B”, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicants shall provide a title opinion for the properties confirming ownership and encumbrances. 2.Applicants shall dedicate to the public an appropriate drainage and utility easement along the new property line. 3.The approval of this lot line rearrangement shall not take effect, and this resolution shall not be released for filing, until such time that a Conditional Use Permit for Plumbing in an Accessory Structure has been successfully obtained and the kitchen removed from the guest house. 4.The aforesaid division shown on the attached Certificate of Survey shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder ’s Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before June 8,2004 together with a certified original copy of this resolution. Page 2 of 4 ---------- j STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of December, 2003 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 8th day of December, 2003 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 4 ■‘lUiaiiiai A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE VACATION OF A DEDICATED DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT WITHIN LOTS 14 AND IS, BLOCK I, THE FARM AT LONG LAKE - FILE NO. 03-2951 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, James W. Pierpont and Judith A. Pierpont, husband and wife (hereinafter the "applicants”) are t!.c owners of property located at 1801 West Farm Road and 1849 West Farm Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City ”) and legally described as follows: Exhibit A attached (hereinafter •■'ihe properties"); and WHEREAS, in conjunction with approval of a relocation of a lot line rearrangement involving the properties, the applicants have requested that the City vacate a portion of the drainage and utility easements dedicated to the public within the plat of The Farm At Long Lake, such easement portion to be vacated legally described as follows: Exhibit B attached (hereinafter "the existing easement"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice, as well as notice to the appropriate public utilities potentially using the existing easement, the Orono Plaiming Commission held a public hearing on November 20, 2003 regarding said easement \acation, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested easement vacation and the City Council of the City of 1. 2. 3. 5. The vacation does not affect access to or use of any adjoining property. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve or use the easement portion to be vacated. The appropriate utility companies have been contacted and none are opposed to the vacation. Xcel/NSP has indicated that the easement vacation should not become effective until such time that electric facilities within the existing easement have been relocated. The easement portion as it currently exists will serve no public purpose upon relocation of the aforesaid electric facilities.. A new drainage and utility easement will be granted by the applicants within Lot 14, 10 feet either side of the new property boundary, to serve fbture drainage and utility needs. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of James W. Pierpont and Judith A. Pierpont is hereby granted and that the portion of drainage and utility easement as legally described above is hereby vacated, subject to the following conditions: This vacation approval shall not become effective, and this resolution shall not be released for filing, until such time that the applicants provide written confirmation from Xcel/NSP that their interests in the existing easement have been abandoned. 2.This vacation approval shall not become effective, and this resolution shall not be released for filing, until such time that all conditions of the lot line rearrangement approval have been satisfied and the lot line rearrangement approval resolution has been released for filing. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 8th day of December, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor Page 2 of 3 • I i : I i A I iifci aiiiiTin iiriiTPiTiiMi 11 m y STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of December, 2003 by Barbara A, Peterson & Linda S. Vec, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation azd said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING HLE #03-2951 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: December 2, 2003 TO: James & Judith Pieipont 1801 West Farm Road Long Lake, MN S53S6 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement DATE OF MEETING: November 24, 2003 VOTE: 4 FOR 1 AGAINST Motion: Conceptually approve the lot line reanangement and easement vacation/rededication, directing staff to draft a resolution for adoption on December 8th, subject to the lot line rearrangement not becoming effective until/unless a Plumbing in Accessory Structure CUP is successfully obtained and the kitchen removed from the guest house. Murphy stated he voted against the motion because he felt they were unnecessarily restricting the applicants due to fear of a potential future problem with the guest house. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, December 8, 2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. The resolution will be placed on the consent agenda; I will fax you a copy of the resolution for your review later this week. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. If you have any questions, please contact Mike Gaffton at 952-249-4600. ORONO CITY COUNCIL >IEET1NG MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 7. U03 ‘2950 ^avid and Tara Cross, 2635 CouHtrystde Drive West—After-the^Fqct mce—Resolution No. 5060 —Continued Sansevere stated he would not support removing the court immediately. Todd Umess of2630 Cmmtryside Drive West, stated that in addition to beutg a neighbor, he was serving as attomeySfor the Gross’s. He stated that he was stunne^t staffs recommendation that the cc^ be removed in two weeks time. He subniitted the variance application on behalf of the Cass’s in a typical time frame and it w^ncorrect to say they dragged their feet. The sport c<^ has no li^ts or fence and use \^ld be inoffensive. He requested Council stick with Uie June 1deadline. ' White stated he would agree with tho^e IS’’* deadline becadM in the spring weather is too muddy. He asked if the garden ha^o come out too. ^yor Peterson replied it did not. Sansevere stated that Sport Court should not\ave inmiled the court at 6 ’ without permission. He suggested Mr. Gross’s attomeVdi^uss the matter with the company. McMillan stated it’s unfortimate that there i^o rm hardship for the variance. Mayor Peterson stated that Council coi^not approvci^e variance, but would support a June IS*** deadline for removal of thexlourt. Murphy stated that if Sport Court sent someone to the Planing Commission meeting, where they admitted to changing policy on pulling permits, 1^. Gross should pursue some assistance from them. Gaffron stated that ifAe applicant finds a location that meets City^de, he would not need a variance, bptonly a building permit. If he needs a variance ^a new location, he would need to ^mit a new application. The current application wouR^e closed out once CounciUnoved on it. Sanseyera moved, and Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5080 wying variaifces per Municipal Zoning Code Section 70-1404, Subdivision 2, allowing a deadline of June 15,2004 for removal of the sport court V mc : Ayes 5, Nays 0. 8. #03-2951 Judith and James Pierpont 1849 and 1801 West Farm Road—Lot Line Rearrangement Gaffron stated that the applicants proposed a lot line rearrangement between their two properties. The westerly lot, #14,1849 West Farm, remains vacant. The easterly lot, #15, 1801 West Farm, contains a principal residence and a guesthouse approved via CUP ' (I*'* ORONO cmr council meeting MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 8. §03~29S1 Judith and James Pterpout, 1849 and 1801 West Farm Road—Lot Line Rearrangement—Continued Resolution No. 2854. The applicants' intent is to yield n\o lots that are conforming for the intended uses with the easterly lot totally 4-acres. This can only be accomplished if the wetland area is attributable for the 4-acre guest house requirement. Planning Commission concluded that the wetland area is not attributable and that the guesthouse use should be discontinued, the kitchen removed, and a ''Plumbing in Accessory Building CUP" be applied for. Gaflron stated that at the time the CUP was granted for the guesthouse, the lots should have been combined, yielding a lot with over 5 dry contiguous acres. For unknown reasons, the applicants never completed the legal combination. They requested the lot line rearrangement in order to maximize the area of the homestead parcel while retaining the minimum 2.0 dry buildable acres in Lot 14 for future development or sale. The result would be a lot with 3 acres of dry buildable and 1 acre of wetland. The Planning Commission felt that was not adequate to allow the guesthouse to remain. Gaffron stated that the applicants would have to make necessary easement vacations in exchange for dedication of new* easements along the new lot line. There is a driveway on the property that has existed for many decades. The Planning Commission suggests it be removed by 2004. The applicants suggested that the drive ought to be left alone as it poses no complications to any one. Gaffron stated that the City Attorney advised that the application for conversion of the guesthouse to Plumbing in an Accessory Structure be a separate application and should not be added to the current application. Planning Commission discussed the fact that the guest facilities did not meet location standards for the Plumbing CUP but concluded that because the building has been in the present location for many decades, is far from any neighboring residence, has no negative visual impacts, and is a historic structure dating in part to the 1870’s, any negative impacts of such a CUP would be limited. Gaffron passed out copies of a letter from Mr. Pierpont. Sansevere asked if the applicants intended to apply for the plumbing CUP. Mrs. Pietpoin stated that the guesthouse had partial plumbing when they bought the property and applied for the conversion permit in 1990. Mrs. Pierpont stated that the letter from her husband covered all the Planning Commission points. She summarized. They have no problem with the requirement to change the utility easements. The driveway recommended for removal has been in existence since the 1870’s. Previous I I. ■■ I ^ I : i ■ fc » i maaam ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24,2003 8. M3‘2951 Judith and James Fierpontt 1849 and 1801 West Farm Road—Lot Line Rearrangement —Continued ov^ners had blacktopped part of the drive, and they finished the blacktopping. The drive connected Fann and Homestead streets and was used by neighbors. The neighbor who lived on Homestead at the end of the driveway informed the Pieiponts that they were nervous about a road exiting opposite their house, so the Pierponts blocked the access to Homestead by installing a mound at the end of the drive and planting it. The Pieiponts did not understand the need to remove a drive that had been in existence for so long when its presence did not impact anybody negatively. Mrs. Pieipont stated that when they bought the house, it was in disrepair and the stable was derelict. They wanted to keep the character of the property. They kept the roof, walls and foundation of the stable and converted it to a guest house with an alcove kitchen, bathroom, balcony, and bedroom. She stated that the guesthouse is only ever used by family members or close friends who visit, with the exception of allowing guests of their church to stay briefly on two occasions. They have tried to add value to the neighborhood with the changes they've made, while keeping the original charm and style of the property. She stated that they originally believed the lots were connected in order to provide alternative sites for septic. She stated they plan to bring sewer hookups to both lots 14 and 15. Mrs. Pierpont stated that her husband figured they have 13,000 s.f. (7.5%) of wetland on their property with lakeshore frontage. According to his calculations, they do have enough dry buildable to keep the guesthouse. She stated they would gladly sign an agreement stating the house is only to be used by family members and that it would never generate an income. Murphy stated that the City should do a better job of protecting historic properties. Gaffron asked if they would be ignoring the preservation of a historic structure by merely requiring the kitchen to be removed. The 4-acre requirement has to do with density. The code doesn’t distinguish between constant use and occasional use. The Pierponts seem willing to limit the use of the house. Wetland is not credited in terms of density when a property is sewered. Still, the situation has existed for over 13 years with no negative impacts. There is, however, a precedent setting concern if the City allowed the situation to continue as is. Murphy stated that they need a unique situation in order to find a hardship. Mrs. Pierpont stated that the age of the house and guesthouse make it a unique situation. They were built in 1870. K '///y r> ^•1:1 II •:• k*ir#rnii imvYtiiirti tifliin &liE?j!ll®lfPIi11.Tnr»CTra mw} ir« f •! iT^tti r iUim n] wiir«»nira •iMr«iiPi«5Tirinra •iMffiftiiirti >arate unit would cease to ost of sewer for each unit \t Fmm Road—Lot aflron stated that based on )erty is wetland. If Mr. i^ould have arrived at his I* I II • and not necessarily with the lots in 1990 with the combination, though it bine the lots and get only •niKilild isthouse in the 2-acre zone id on its owiL In this case, d the 2-acre minimum it where the house npromise would then sthouse in the funue, loorse stated that a CUP would run with the tmain of monitoring for Nllalil III imiTi use appropriately, but the come up, it gives the City ns part of the property I have an jq)plication for a tthouse, they would need could decide on a en require a formal lid never effectively riTim.if'.ir-Tii • r.raf'.ral I il ijTil 4j> irm Road—Lot ORONO CITY COUNCIL ME MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24, ^esthouse, is to , and also a definition food items for IS of an acre, creating a y would still have two lave the chance to K>rs and making it they divide lot 14 so o. They also own a ! property passes to ;el ujm lot IS. Both be because the septic 14 could remain at 2.2 al need to change it. vith under 4-acres of solved and they could igerator. The he house, but there is ruse of the IS they ’ve been for the ; before the 8. 803-2951 Judith and James Pierpont, 1849 and 1801 Line Rearrangement—Continued conversion, and it never happened. Sansevere asked if another CUP would solve the problem, not unless they removed the kitchen. Gatfron stated they would have to remove the kitchen unde structure CUP, or receive a variance for the acreage require stated that the sink is the primarv- factor that makes the kitcl stove and refrigerator can be merely purchased and “plugge Mrs. Pieipont stated that she is afraid if the sink were remo' and back up into the rest of the plumbing. Sansevere stated he felt a stove made a kitchen. Gaffron stated a kitchen is defined by use, not the appliance Pierponts apply for a CUP, the discussion would center on \ Mrs. Pieipont stated that the stable had a sink in it before th. Gaffron Mked Mrs. Pierpont if they really need to move the necessarily. Gaffron stated that if the application went awa) with enforcing use of the original CUP from 1990, which ha complaint. Mrs. Pierpont stated that her younger son has a strong intere she ’d be willing to put a deed on the property as it will likel; Gaffron stated that the CUP for plumbing in an accessory sti for overnight use. Mayor Peterson suggested the Pierponts apply for a CUP ap| needed to be done about the road then. Gaffron stated nothii long as the properties remained owned by the Pierponts, ther likely, the road, which passes through lot 14, would be dealt come under separate ownership. Sansevere asked that if the Pierponts got the CUP, then remc sewer hookups, then could they move the lot line at a later tii in. The sons could then subdivide the property should they t some day. Mrs. Pierpont stated their intent was to take care ( ^ i.. ji TRir O CITY COUNCIL W WAY, NOVEMBER wnriiii L*JilU i]i»*rtr*T7iTO1 •m inir«riTT#n»^ w T« • 1iT» itTb I <» ll s Pierpottt, 1849 and h ^ent—Continued d to go through the proc ntial reasons to continw the subdivision conditio ould happen for both lol do anything with the dri ike the subdivision appi They would then rem they would have lots 1 ess they were no longer le, or conceptually appr< they approve the sub<i (coming effective until the CUP approval. !Conded, to conceptual! Bcation/rcdedicatlon, < tmber 8'\ stating that tion for a Plumbing in brought into compliant wnriiiTiiir iViWvfOi 1iT< I] u rotWLTr II MBit ist the motion because h ir ofa potential future p lene Newkirk, 1489 Sh 81 conded, to adopt Resol :ode Section 78-282 am dence on the 0.71 acre .7% where 25% is alio W: To: Ce: SuNoct www.duMiino.mnjjf MachowoW, Undo K TO: Mhdtaal Oaflirwi Re*. Vocution of Utiirtv Easement ot 1801-1849 West Form Rood Mr. 6offron. As I informed you in my voice moil message of today, I was awaiting word from our field designer. I hove since spoken to her. She hos contacted the londowner, who clarif ied the reolignment plan. We have no objection to the proposed vocotion. PROVIDED that: 1. Until existing electric is removed, Xcel Energy retains all rights within the easement as currently platted: 2. Londowner will bear the entire cost for relocation of existing electric focilities; and 3. Replacement easements will be reserved in favor of Northern States Power Compony d/b/o Xcel Energy as required to occon\odate electric focilities within the new location. Thank you. ICathy Bhmguist 61Z330.5&04 Date Application Received: 10*22-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 1 120*Day Review Period Eipires: 3-KMM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION cm IMHIL MEETING oec 8 2003 CITY OF ORONO Date: December S, 2003 Item No.: iO Department Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title: Planning Director \ A JL Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #03-2961 Nina Wildman, 745 Spring Hill Road - Preliminary Subdivision 2U>ning District: Lot Area: RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential, 2-acre min. 23.9 Acres + List of Exhibits A - Notice of Planning Conunission Action 12-2-03 B - Staff Sketch C - Updated Preliminary Plat Drawing (Reflects PC Recommendations & Lot Line Shift) D • Draft PC Minutes of 11-17-03 E - PC Memo and Exhibits of 11-13-03 Application Summary’: This is a proposed 3-lot residential plat of property located on the southwest shore of Lydiard Lake. The proposal includes: keeping the existing residence, guesthouse and tennis court within a 6.3 acre lakeshore parcel (Lot 1); development of a new 11.5*aere 10.0-acre* lakeshore building site for construction of one new home in the near future (Lot 2); creation of a 5.8»acre 6.5-acre* non-lakeshore parcel to be acquired by the adjacent property owner, has potential for future residential development (Lot 3); and creation of an outlot for a private loop cul-de-sac driveway primarily serving Lot 2 but also functioning as an emergency vehicle turnaround. *Minor lot line shift since Planning Commission review Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval subject to a number of conditions including no road upgrade required if 30-year “no subdivision” limitation is established. See details of PC recommendation on page 3. Staff Recommendation: Approval subject to a number of conditions including road upgrade to 24' paved width and 50' outlot corridor from Spring Hill Road to loop outlot. See below. 1 .7 i #03-2961 745 Spring HUl Road December 5,2003 Page 2 Background Please carefully review the staff memo of November 13, as well as the draft Planning Commission minutes. The extent to which the private road system should be upgraded was the primary issue which Planning Commission discussed with the applicant’s representatives and her neighboring property owners. These issues require Council consideration in order to move forward with this application: 1.Whether the private road system should be expanded ftom an average width of 12 -14' to a greater width more in line with Code standards: 20’ min. per Fire Code, 24' minimum per the Subdivision Code. 2.In conjunction with a road expansion, or absent a road expansion, whether the City should require underl>*ing public road & utilit>' easements for the existing road corridor, and if so, at widths commensurate with the current paved road or at a greater width to accommodate expansion. 3.Whether the City should approve a subdivision to allow creation of a fifth (and potentially sixth) residence that will be served by a substandard road, and whether such approval can or should be conditioned on a 30-year limitation on future development of the property. Council should discuss the merits and ramifications of granting subdivision approval for this unique property without requiring either a road upgrade or at least an e.xpansion of the corridor to allow a future road upgrade. This topic is addressed at length on pages 3-5 of the November 13 memo. The Subdivision Code provides clear authority to require an upgrade of the private road system leading to the property as a condition of subdivision approval. How’ever, the applicant’s ability to accomplish such an upgrade, or even just an expansion or dedication of the corridor to allow for future upgrade, is limited due to the private easement status of that road system. Planning Commission concluded that if the ^plicant is willing and able to place restrictive covenants on the property that would prohibit further subdivision of the property for the ne.xt 30 years, they would be OK with not requiring a road upgrade or corridor expansion. Preliminary discussion with City Attorney Tom Ba,Tctt suggests there is no provision in the Code that gives the City the authority to condition approval on such a limitation, which may have the impact of a spot zoning or downzoning, each of which has negative aspects. The applicant would have to be willing to agree to this limitation and make the City a party to it with the ability to enforce such a covenant. Mr. Barrett can address this further at the meeting. A position which Pl^ng Commission chose to avoid was to condition future subdivision approvals on road expansion, i.e. suggesting that the current level of use with one or two more homes is OK with the existing road, but making the assertive statement that no further subdivisions of the property will be approved without a road upgrade. Such a position could be overturned or ignored by any future Council, and it would seem to merely enable the nibbling syndrome (“just one more house, please *) that over the years has resulted in the variety of severely substandard private roadway situations noted in the November 13 memo. . i t i L #03-2961 74S Spring Hill Road December 2003 Page 3 Plonning Commission Recommendation Approval of preliminary plat, finding that the Shoreland standards for development along the shores of Lydiard Udee are met; approval should be subject to the following : 1.Approval of width variance for Lot 3, and approval of hardcover \*ariance for expansion of roadway (cul-de-sac loop) within 75* of OHWL of Lydiard Lake. 2. Access to Lot 2 should be via a SO' wide outlot rather than a SO* wide corridor portion of Lot 2 (see sketch. Exhibit B) to provide for potential future access should Lot 2 be further subdivided in the future. 3.Upgrade of access road other than the proposed cul-de-sac loop should ds! be required if applicant agrees to establish covenants that prohibit further development of Lots 1, 2 and 3 for 30 years. This recommendation for approval to be rescinded if the 30-year covenant condition is found not acceptable by the applicant. 4. 5. Park Commission to review for park dedication needs. No limitations on dock use on Lydiard Lake are proposed as part of this approval (existing second dock is neither approved nor disapproved). Staff Recommendation StafTconcurs with Plarming Commission reconunendations 1,2,4, and 5. Staff does not concur with reconunendation 3. Council should seek to balance the health, safety and welfare obligations of the City against the potentially negative environmental and neighborhood impacts of creating a conforming access situation. The unusual length of the private road and the individual driveways extending from it, create a ur-’ que rural character that is becoming rare in Orono, but also create practical problems for the provision of fire protection services. City Code standards require a 24* paved private road within a 50' private road outlot to serve a development of this magnitude. We have required such road standards for private roads serving as few as three homes; this road will serve S or more homes. Despite the Planning Commi:»ion's conclusions, given the recommendations of the City Engineer and Fire Marshal, staff must continue to recommend that the road be upgraded from Spring Hill Road to the loop cul-de-sac, to a 24' paved width if this subdivision goes forward. If Council finds that there is a basis for nor requiring the full 24' paved width, staff would suggest that it should not be reduced below 20' in order to comply with the Fire Code standards. The subdivision is subject to the standard fees, easement dedications, etc. as noted in the November 13 memo. ( « J I03-2M1 74S Spring BU Road Dtctnbcr S, 2M3 Pagt4 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Council should discuss the three issues noted above with the affected property owners, all of whom we expect will be represented at the meeting. Based on Council’s conclusions, staff will draft a resolution for preliminary pto approval for the January 12 Council meeting. i‘ - f • : 4.' 1 - , ,’f , i’,i* i rii' *■»»s; 4-V , if*:;/ r f 4 1 s, a mia I m It 'i c^r'i CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 4 ZONING RLE #03-2961 ^ — I2.-S-03 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: December 2, 2003 TO; Nina v’ildman 745 Spring Hill Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: Bob Carlson Jyland Homes 201 E. Lake St., Suite 241 Wayzata, MX 55391 Mark Gronberg Gronberg & Associates 445 N. Willow Drive Long Lake. MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Subdivision - Preliminary Plat MEETING DATE: November 17. 2003 VOTE: S FOR, 0 AGAINST. I ABSTAIN (Hmm) Planning Commission recommended as follows: Shoreland standards for development along the shores of Lydiard Lake are met, approval subject to the following: * 1.Approval of width variance for Ut 3, and approval of hardcover variance for expansion of roadway (cul-de-sac loop) within 75* of OHWL of Lydiard Lake. 2. of 2(^ Lih!!!? ^ ^ portionfi ^ attached sketch) to provide for potential future access should L^2 be further subdivided in the future. ^ oe 3.Upgrade of access road other than the proposed cul-de-sac loop should naj be required applicant a^ees to ^ablish covenants that prohibit further developmrot of UtTl 2 and 3 for 30 j^ars. This recommendation for approval to be rescinded if the 30-year covenant condiUon is found not acceptable by the applicant. ^ 4. Park Commission to review for paric dedication needs. 5.No limitations on d^k use on Lydiard Lake are proposed as part of this approval (existing second dock is neither approved nor disapproved). M^ng Conmission did not specifically address whelhcr die existing easements over the Road & Utility Easement to the City. This issue may require finther discussion by the CoS Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: ~ ................ City Council - Monday, December 8, 2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. ft '■l»™i"rCommission miilliies, they are availableftom the Ci^ Records afier reviw and approval by the Planning Commiision If ™ "have questions, please call Planning Director Mike GafTion at 952-249-4600 tfi tea-rtn •w > ? __ ^ ■ wHr«r • •njt ^ __ '1 J HILL ESTATES :ELIMINARY PLAT FOR HNA WILDMAN (ENT LOT 1, SECTION 36-118-23 :pin county . Minnesota AS OMTA*r A * ^®Atk i MTiijrr ^AsH»<4?iMr ro City /•lm-aa > C^^ri^r B ss 4^r* /• 2 -3 f7f« A>«wtk fVt. AO uTTory fiAsisfF^r J «IItM,*r'‘*" “• ’•"•'•* »>. •w-w.ii. cisr». • Vft *M Ml* IlM »f Mit •*j.’** •**•* •! •» u#^?*m! i«»i mim /// miuw *!•* JJ !• ttlMM Ctll • •i||«A«l ll f«| J3 itti !• IM ill I. d ff tfVfi (XMAMAf" *ra MMri #«M 0rr V P99 M HL'blL^Ti* i.S.!? T» 'I ./;#y / I'' f Mvl^ltiltM*. cltM IM %•.»*% •! lI•••ri la im : Is'UT-i.ir.:i»^| tt ?H 4> itti !• !•• MUf •! fetflMla^ IM MalA IlM If Ml# 0#«tMI*»a| i»| | >• "*••»•*#• it itt#«#i «Mt ‘ tIJttW--------------------------^_____ ■»L •»»» S iT44*42* V 47XM ’ f Z .3 P :ia._r V ffi£UyL^. S I 7 r V -.J ‘s, a' \ 1 '•V a\ i lewod-» Mo^i " ^1-3,. SPRING HILL ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR NINA WILDMAN IN GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SECTION 36-118-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA ' I 6 * \ •r A \ legal OCSCRiPTiON OF PREMISES: ii I 11 I I / ' V \' A V J I ' I / f I I \ Inrt;,J \ k \ 'N, «-'i / I \ \ \ » \ V N N \ i-lv'-V ■V-'\xifrj \*-r •i \ ■ \ ^ y \.' \ N X 1.1 ^ T»>.>'/ / f 4 I I-w, <11 H7'/7 ' \\ ''n * ^T/' i'if # ' M P.. f ■V/ */ ; 7 - - / 1 t HJn/f' ^<i .' ^/''':;li ■'I if 'l l', I I t I *' \ I \v V. t \ 4.-'. ‘>\ I V t \ V \ ' \ ^ \ '// ' I // III I, 4 V. ^~ -V. \ i:JI I" I \ 1 I I I I»'ip, I I,' r II /i' Thot port of Cowfffrntnt Lot 1. Soction 36, Townihip 118, Rar;t 23. Htnntoin County Minnoaoto. datcfib^O os foMovs ; '' Corrmincino ot tha srthwtat corntr of said Govtrrmsnt Lot 1; trtrca South 0 dooroos 18 minutts 21 stconds Wtst. olonq tht west lint of said CoverfVTvnt Lot 1. o distonct of 582.74 fast to tht point of beginning of the troct of lend beina described; thence North 37 degrees 03 minutes 07 seconds test, e distonct of * 45.83 feet; thence North 15 degrees 12 minutes 57 seconds Eest, o distonct of 158.42 feet; thence North 51 degrees 48 minutes 47 seconds Ees! o distonct of 139.55 feet; thence North 71 degrees 15 minutes 30 seconds Ecst to tho shore of Lake Lydiord. thence southeosterIy. olong the shore of Lc«e Lydiord to the tost line of soid Government Lot 1; thence South 0 degrees 36 mmutes 41 seconds West, olong lost soid eost line, o distonct or 480 fee:, more or less to the southeost corner of soid Government Lot 1; thence North 83 degrees 34 * minutes 51 seconds West, olong the south line of said Coverrmint Lot 1. o distonce of 1335.14 feet to the southwest corner of soid Goverxvnt Lot 1; thence North 0 degrees 18 minutes 21 seconds Eost. olong the west line of'so'd Goverrment Lot 1. o distonce of 741.40 feet to the point of beginning. For purposes of this description the south line of soid Covc*nnint Lot 1. Is ossumd Ia beor North 89 degrees 34 minutes 51 seconds West. lo /> ' I *y I "1*'' ' \ \I « -'.Ml • I 1.1 :: Sue sw^Cm^i u( I.s«ew je-ite>ij I'We J / \ / ^ ^ ^ r-r / i / ¥ n TOTAL A8EM&904-. AOONOTE % TOPOGRASWr B FNCM omr OF OROND MAPS N N ^s'A' / / /i M OUTLOT OCTAL 1*-80» V V N N N V N. ^ s Nlh i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 17,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. request to retain the bittuhiq^ surface of the drive, since it is extremejy^fficult to maneuver and safely access SbMWood Rd. Hawn moved, Zugschweit seconded, toS;Mommra^'^l{pproval of Application #03- 2959, Timothy and Sheryl Latterner, 2032^^n^^ood Road, granting a hardcover variance reducing the current ievel of^af^overih«^e 75-250* zone from 65.1% to 61,2%; approval of the side yapk^hack variance MS^ow the construction of a pitched roof over the existip^t-roofed porch 5.8* fromthq^ide yard where 10* is required; approvaloHM side setback variance in order to M^iMd the current Yt story into a fuU^t^’ 5.8* from the property line where a 10* side sewa^ b required; Removal opine 357 s.f. carport in order to reduce structural coverage frohi^4.8% to 21.4^;^<and removal of all plastic and fabric lined landscape beds. VOTE?^v^6, (#11) #03-2961 NINA \V1LDMAN, 745 SPRING HILL ROAD, PRELL>nNARY PLAT (8:42-10:00 P.M.) Marie Gronberg, of Gronberg and Associates, and Bob Carlson, applicants* representative, were present Gaf&on explained that this is a proposed 3-lot residential plat of property located on the southwest shore of Lydiard Lake. The proposal includes: - keeping the existing residence, guesthouse and tennis court within a 6.3 acre lakeshore parcel (Lot I); - development of a new 11.5-acre lakeshore building site for construction of one new home in the near future (Lot 2); - creation of a 5.8 acre non-lakeshore parcel to be acquired by the adjacent property owner, has potential for future residential development (Lot 3). - creation of an outlot for a private loop cul-de-sac driveway primarily serving Lot 2 but also functioning as an emergency vehicle turnaround PAGE 29 of 56 i4iiiauii MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 17,2003 6:00 o’clock pjn. Carlson stated that Ms. Wildman felt as her neighbors and wished to preserve the character of the neighborhood. He indicated that they had provided the City with a site sensitive design. Gaffion stated that if the Commission deems that adding one home is appropriate, and addressing the issue of more development later as these are proposed, he suggested the Commission consider the addition of covenants to the recommendation. Acting Chair Mabusth felt better addres^plates distinguishing the residential properties was necessary. She asked if the applicant would be comfortable with the Commission placing restrictions on the development of the properties. Zugschwert asked if the Conunission could legally deal with the possibility of future subdivisions now by setting limitations on development. Rice indicated that covenants could be placed over the properties if the current owners were willing to allow it. He suggested getting all of the stake holders involved at that time to afford them a certain level of comfort in creating the deed restrictions or covenants for preservation. A'ttng Chair Mabusth asked if these covenants might impact the value of the lots. Rice stated that undoubtedly they would, positively or negatively, since many potential buyers are looking for more open space and elbow room tfiey may be willing to pay a premium. Gafhon stated that the addition of covenants provides the City and neighbors with an attractive option and stability by setting limitations on development Rather than seeing foe plots subdivided further into smaller 2 acre sites, the covenants provide the City with a PAGE 37 of 56 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, Novtmber 17,2003 6:00 o'cltKlc p.m. basis to keep limitations set Wumo. su.«l Hu, ,he would look upon «ul .cknowW,*, a, P'"-* over . portion of ftd, p«p«y would b. ™nnin* oa in 2005. She felt. cov«an, would provide dro neijhbodrood wia .seuronce for . pedod of time, say 20 years, and help in future City planning efforts. Actin, Chair Mabuath ,ui,ed du, if „rti„ive cov«.a,tt were «lded ro a. r^«m.enda..on. dro would exp«;. a, upgrale lo the roalway if farther developmen. ro the south occurred. Wee eared da. hie clieme would be impactal by aeee upgralee and would no. look favorably upon this requirement. Frialer aeked if dieee upgradee would need ro be mandattd a. ae dine of de now.velopment or Gaffion ea.«l do, i. would be bee. lo reeolve ae roadway ieeuee in advance. Bremer eared da. ehe w ould be concerned letting die recomn.enda.ion proceed due way widiou. looking a. ae leeeone learned Irom pae. eimilar mieokee by aUowing aeee ekinny roadw ay e to reman, widroul plane for upgradee. While ehe eaied d.al ehe would go along wia a r^ommendadon wiftou. roadway improvemena if only one houe. ie propoe«l. eh. would not support approval if more development will occur.. Zugechwen could eupport d.e propoeal reoining d* nnal characler of da neighborhood With the development of one additional homesite. G.»on eoirf do. a. pr.poe«l loop ««1 fang prfvae drivmvay would provide «x.eeib.ho. for fire. While fae cov««no would limi. farther developmeni for a peiiod of PAGE 38 of 36 m MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday. November 17.2003 6:00 o*clock p jn. time, he acknowledged that other improvements would be necessary at that time. He encouraged the Commission to review other aspects of the proposal, including road width. Carlson asked if the City could cover the zoning of diis subdivision specifically by limiHng future development altogether. Acting Chair Mabusth stated that, unfortunately, the City cannot spot ron? Gaffion asked whether this proposal would put a future planning commission in an awkward predicament. Rahn questioned whether road width will alone limit development. Bremer asked if the outlot or driveway could be jointly owned by the three property ownen. In that case. Gaf&on indicated that easements would suflBce. Acting Chair Mabusth questioned the dock situation and why the Wildman’s had allowed the neighbor dock access. Winston stated that, historically, the neighbor to the north had run a dock all the way across the wetland to reach the water, which was not allowed. The Wildman’s then offered to let this nei^ibor position Aeir dock on their property. \ ^Gaffix)i^t.ate^at there^M no specific code that applied to Lake Lydiard and mentioned / that th^dc^ easement eeuMire based on a simple handshake agreement which could be \an issue with potential new owners. Winston stated that theneighbbrfaood has an informal agreement that the trail is open to the PAGE 39 of S6 NDNUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 17,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. Mce. which i. m^ked vnA w«kI chip,. She n.t«d ito Ms one «f fc, nice OiJ •bout the neighborhood in geneni and ,he hoped that Orono would not get too picky about overseeing where the neighborhoods trails are located. Acting Chair Mabustb moved, to recommend approval of AppUcaHon #03-2961, Nina >VUdma., 745 Spring HUI Road, granting tt. PreUmlnar, SubdivUion bared on the nndiogs that all ataadards for development of the lots nlihin the natural euvironmcit lake area of Lydiard Lake to be satbfled, no bluff Impacts, and nU aetbacks have been met, accessing via a private driveway on lot I subject to the standards set forth, creating an outlet for future potential subdivision of lou I-’-S with access granted to lot J, requiring restrictive covenants to Umit development for 30 years on lots 1-2-3 noting that road Improvementt wlU consist of a loop; and no standard be set limlttag the number of docks on Lydiard Lake, subject to aU other fees and stair recommendations. Park Commission review, approval of the variance for lot width of lot 3 on the cuPde-sac loop, and minimal hardcover for 0-75’ setback to allow the loop. CalTron asked if the road upgrade requirement would be ried ro this approval. He suggested the Commission add the notaUon that if the covenants are not fiend to be acceptable, there would be no approval of the subdivision. Acting Chair Mabustb amended the motion adding that the recommeodatiou to City Council contain language that if the covenauts are put in place, the road upgrades will not be required at this time from Spring Bill Road m the outlot; however. If the covenauts are not found to be acceptable, the approval for the subdivision will be rescinded. Zugsebwert seconded. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Abstain I, Hawn abstaining. CaBron indicated that he would address some of these issues with the City Ancmey and noted that the application will appear on the December 8,2003 Council MeeUnc. PAGE 40 of 56 ——— 1i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 17,2003 6:00 o'clock p jn. <# Carlson found this delay to be acceptable in order to have all issues addressed prior to Council. Recess was taken from 10:00 -10:07 P.M. (#12) #03-2962N^BERT AND JOANNE SWITZ, 1740 SHADYWOOD ^OAD, VARUNCE (10:0Kj 0:40 PJVI.) Joanne Switz, the ai^licant, w^sj>resent Waataja explained that the applicants frauest the following variano^ to construct a new home on the property: 1. Lot area variance to allow a rebuild on a^ which is 0.^''acres in size when 0.50 acres is normally required. 2. Lot coverage by structures variance to allow 19^s^ctural coverage when 15% is normally allowed. 3. Hardcover variance to allow 44% hardcov« fa the 75^0’ zone when 38.8% currenUy exists and 25% is normally allowed. Waataja indicated that the applicants^ve bought this property untfar the contingency that the appropriate approvals are receiyW from the City. The current coKditions on the lot consist of nonconforming har^over in the 0-75’ zone and 75-250’ zon^The applicants are proposing to tear down fae existing home and construct a new home ^pletely within the 75-250’ zone. The aroltcanis have also agreed to remove.the existing bo^ouse. In doing this, a standard l^area variance and a hardcover and structural coverage\ariance are still required to osnstruct the proposed home. Since the applicuts have met with staff to discuss their proposal and what the City consistently ^qui res with rebuild situations, the applicants are aware that the hardcover ' and structural coverage proposals are excessive to what has been consistently approved PAGE 41 of 56 iivirniiratftiiAiiiirii i i Datf AppUcalioa Rcccivid: 10>22<03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 1 l*12*0l 120*Day Review Period Cipires: 3>10-04 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Mike GafBron, Planning Director November 13,2003 Subject: #03-2961 Nina Wildman, 745 Spring Hill Road • Preliminaiy Subdivision Zoning District: RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential, 2-acre min. Lot Area: 23.9 Acres ± Api^ieaHoH Summary: This is a proposed 3-lot residential plat of property located on the southwest shore of L;^iard Lake. The proposal includes: - keeping the existing residence, guesthouse and tennis court within a 6.3 acre lakeshore parcel (Lot 1); - development of a new 11.5-acre lakeshore building site for construction of one new home in the near future (Lot 2); - creation of a 5.8 acre non-lakeshore parcel to be acquired by the adjacent property owner, has potential for future residential development (Lot 3). - creation of an outlot for a private loop cul-de-sac driveway primarily serving Lot 2 but also functioning as an emergency vehicle niroaround. Staff Recommendation: Approval subject to a number of conditions. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Survey/site plan C • Aerial photos D - Wetland delineation excerpts E • Septic systems approval memo F - Road easement documents G - Plat map H - Property owners list I - City Engineer comments J - Fire Marshal comments Background The applicant proposes to construct a new home southeast of the existuig residence. The property is zoned for 2-acre lots and is not in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area, and therefore will continue to be served by septic systems and wells. The site is mostly open fields and abuts the #03-2961 74S Spring Hill Road November 13,2003 Page 2 TT.. p™p«ty i«if d«, abu, a public road. n,. priva,; serve 5 homes (and a potential 6th) upon completion of the subdivision While the aoDlicant doM not w„, ,0 subdmd. ,0 U.. higher, possible d«»i.y under .he 2^re zoZtmS sJS^ to meet CiQ' codes for fuhire subdivisions is not compromised by the current proposal. ^ Preliminary Piat Review fll". *""'y sp™« ■"<! chose to submit a prelimiiuiy Cvnfomllv to Zonfa. nwa. Comnr^^.l^ D,.- The ptoposed aibdiwion to create residential lots of Wo acres in area or larger confonns to the Retationshtp to Surrounding The proposed subdivision is consistent with surrounding niral-densitv residential devf.innn,«» tu ^rdteas. teund^ of the property is Lydiard Lake. wS sZS » omM on 2 acre lots. Directly south of the property is the Wood Rill SNA, a ‘big woods’ Scienrific and Natural i^a owned by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Directly west and northwest of the property is a large estate parcel including open fields, woods and wetlanr Lot Layout and Lot Stamlari^^ Lot area: Each of the three lots exceeds the 2-acre minimum lot area standard of the RR-1 B District which IS 50' from the cuMe-sac loop. Lot 3 technically iw..,i,.^.i„,..i...i. ^.^a^rThewt^ wtlo. »« suMested by staff as a meS^ niowlStTlJ "7, , priv.,e oT pISfic r^ ^uired by code, md allow emergency vehicle accessibilioi, while avoiding the c eCn ofm W diameter paved cuMe-sac which the applicant would like to avoid * ^ Wiican. >h«»Ke long narrow access comdor for Lot 2 be no less dian SO' in widlbso that future subdivision of that lot could accommodate a SC road outlot. M3*2961 745 Spring Hill Road Novtmbcr 13,2003 Paged Orano-5 subdivision c^e dots esublish standards for private roads serving 3 or mote homes A pnvate noimaHy be subject to the following standards: Minimum paved uidth: 24' w • *** ^ , . _ ® Class 5 100% crushed; 3" 2341 bitum. surfaceMaxunum Cul-de-sac Length: 1000* Orono Code Section 82-282 regulates access to subdivisions as follows: be^eenpe«o^_a"n7mrcrty*°S^u^^^^^^^or thrronn^ V *>6 Suitably improved as required by the ciw the stateor me county. If the public roadway, including but not limited to existing oridges. drainage sSJ^ »r.?s:i:rnrpr/o?v usrr ^ ^ b%*Sprnrpr.:srdSo°:a^'rr^^^^ suitable performance bond to eomplate the taprovements In Ihe^subdlvlder-s aor.^2 ‘’™” * "’•P*®/* over existing private roadways. Wherever the area tr, l» pLte to%dU JhafbrsS;^rSpm«dVsT«^^^ Ba^ on the above l^guage. the City has the authority r ■ require improvements to the private road M a condttton of subdtviston approval, should the City so choose. The applicant would have to ^'1 “?.*"' ™P™j;«”«nts would be allowed under the terms of the vanous ------- providing acce« to the site. The City should require an underlying •Road. Drainage and iS Easement for the enttre comdor, again, the question is whether the applicant has the ability to Kwsto?de“a™‘- ■“ “““• •>' > »“« f« on is »mc. hat similar to the Van Eeckhout access issue on Brown ™improvemen«. «:^rf A^l“* P^va.: mad M3-1961 74S Spring Hill Road November 13,2003 Pages In the cases of 'Lydiard’ and Lyman, this process has not resulted m a good access situation. On Lydiard we have approximately 20 homes served by a narrow private easement road, barely wide enough for cars to pass each other, >\ith a corridor ranging from 16* to SO* in width, and City easements over various short segments. On Lyman Avenue the City has easements over 2i'3 of a cul- de-sac but the remainder of the road serving S-6 homes is merely private easements and a narrow 12- 14' roadway about 900' long. Neither come near meeting City standards. SiaffTRecommendation re: Road Improvements: Despite the complexities imposed by the easement situation, based on the code requirements staff must recommend that a SO* corridor be platted from Spring Hill Road to the proposed cul-de-sac loop, and a 24' paved private road be constructed within that corridor. This may not be to the liking of the o\vners and users of the road, as it will change tihe character of the area. Further, actual construction of such a road potentially would require wetland encroachments in the cartway area. Planning Commission should discuss whether there is a basis to allow the proposed subdivision without requiring road upgrades or at least corridor dedications. Please carefully review the comments of the City Engineer and Fire Marshal. Park Dedication While the property does abut Wood Rill SNA, the propeit>' does not abut any public roads, and does not abut any of the existing or proposed public trails shown on the Citv's Comprehensive T rail Plan. The City plan shows a trail along East Long Lake Road and Spring Ihll Road to connect Wood Rill to Wolsfeld Woods SNA further west. This subdivision proposal wnll be submitted to the Park Commission for their review in early December, to determine whether land dedication is required or merely a park fee for each of the tu o new building sites (Park Fee would be $S,S50 per lot for Lots 2 and 3 under the 2003 fee schedule; Lot I as an existing residence w ould not be subject to the Park Fee). Xtormwater and Drainage improvements The City Engineer has indicated that stormwater treatment provisions should be added to the plan. White the current plan suggests only minimal improvements/expansions of the private road, if road expansion is required this may tngger the need for stormwater ponding. Additionally, as has been required for similar large-iot divisions, the use of vegetative buffer easements may be of benefit, since the runoff created by one or two new widely-spaced homes cannot be easily captured for treatment. The subdivision is subject to the Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee established by City Ordinance. The fee is established at S2,700 per acre, with a cap of 4.0 acres to be charged per lot. For this property, three 4-plus acre lots are being created, so each w ould be charged a fee of (4.0 x S2,700 = SI0,800 or a total fee of $32,400. The subdivision is subject to dedication of standard Drainage & Utility Easements along lot lines. #03-2961 745 Spring HJU Road November 13,2003 PageO StPtic TesHnr and Sit* Sil* w r*”"* has rcNicwed the submitted septic testing and confinns that lot has suitable sites for adequately-sized septic systems. The 1 -bedroom guest house and 4- ^m mam house on Ut I cuirently have separate systems; the gu«t hou« ^t« conforming, the mam house system is non-compliant and must^ replaced b^Se cnZm^T^c two sitM identified for Lot 1 each have a capacity of 5 bedrooms; should the guest house system Shoreland Standards 3Wor.l^ slope. TOewisUng garage on Ut 1 encroaches to within 12-lVofihetoDo^ bluff, m^g .t noneonfomung witf, nrgards to the required 3ff -top of bluff Ktb«k Z “ approximately W ftom the shore, but with a required 1 Sff structure seib^k the OHWL, a new residence would more than meet the 30' bluff setback. 75* '“P “ «>' 0»«»' *»“'1 "e within Sections 78 1286fc^^^ 78 driveways are normally allowed per Codebecuons 78-1286(c) and 78-1288(a). A short length of the existing drivewav within I nt i ami ..aments, is within the 0.75’ zone also. ExpanTn of the toad^f reilS^^St ta°Lie^ r^gnment to mw a 75; jetbaek; but this mi^t also result in the iSd ^retatainTw^U^ A variance is neees.J.n„ dtrtYa^'sS:due to wetl^ or bogs^ Oty code emrently d4 not htSc^xt brad'^l■rs^:^^^t"*'“^ “ " IVttlands on o 2 must maintain a 26 setback fi^om the boundaries of the wetlands. Applicant has no plans .asu-.gtu.niwi. M3-2961 74S Spring Bin Road Novcmbtr 13t 2003 Page? Tiw and/or Woodlamd impacts The property is primarily open fields, with pertu^s only 10% of it being wooded. The only woodland impacts anticipated are related to the loop driveway, where the loop center is intended to remain woo<M but die dri^'eway will result in some removals. Only one tree to be removed is within 7S* of the lake, and that is right at the 75* setback. Arehaeohftcal Im^ While there are no historically significant features on this property known to staff, the locatkm of the property with bluffs abutting a water body suggest the potential for archaeological significance. The applicant should contact the State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) and inquire as to the need for an archaeological review. Summary of Issues for Dbcusslon 1. Width variance for Lot 3 • typical for lots abutting a cul<de-sac. 2. 3. Hardcover variance required for any roadway expansion within 75* of OHW. Road upgrade to meet City Code and Minnesota Uniform Fire Code standards: a) should upgrade be required? b) to what standard? c) does ^pUcant have authority to do upgrade over existing easements? d) environmental and aesthetic impacts of upgrade? 4.Would/should voluntary limitations on the future development of these lots influence the City’s position on road upgrades? 5. Status of second dock and pathway. If M3.2M1 74SSpriagHiURoMl Nwtmbcr 13,2003 PaftO Staff RccommendatioB ind llie individuri Jriv^i Tie unii^ length of the priwteioid dedic«ion».«c.asnot5 mt;text “" " *“ «“• *“««“ 1 « v< ! 1 i^A i A AppOaition # 2^(o I Date Received Amount Paid /D« OO CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERT\* LOCATION Site address ^ f ^of Propel^ IdentificatioQNumber(Plb)^CL^ / 7~ Please check one - Property Nj abstract or Attach legal description to application. jii oooA torrens? APPLICANT Name Alina Wttcih^/l/i Address ^ S'Spr^/i* k: // City 'T^AJ^’ia4-A ^ _______Phone fliomel O^A ^ J Zip Ad/I Phone (work)________ OWNTR (if difTerent than applicant) Name i5~>4 Al £_____ Address City __Zip Phone(home), Phone (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)______ / Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes ________ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Vi Subdivision for New Building Sites ____Existing Units ____New Units Total Units Number of Building Sites Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per___Acres V • Sq. Ft Dry Buildable Land Residential Other {*• >ecify)_________ ji^ ZZ ' -• * • • _____/ i/J %X 3. ^iMitt^pUtinfonnadonooCeitificMeofSorvey. afpucation I of S«"«> or »yS;«p^Tf7o.^^ «*«». «Klp* fe. i 4. FlawlB reesifippUcable). 4. Easeineiiu, coveoanis/etc. 3. Oevelopen Agreemeat ud Lener of Credit Zoning OfliciaTs Signature DkS '■ •» Pq 1»« l-icl .PPM ------ITf''.')" U1 i ttl) S275.00 ■ --------f^™“>“«f*L<«H“R«TM».n«.SJ30.00 ■ ■ -------- S“WivuionAppLciCon(ClassId:IDS40000 — ~ <c.» m * .D - Legal Review and FQiag; _____Subdivision only SI00.00 St<Ldi^ion ».'easement$ and covenacts min. S200 00 es (to be detennined oer S#rw«.. i w,. »^w.00 Totals yyzra r-" - -'7" -»«*nieno ana covenact Parft Fees (jo be detennined per Section 11.62) B ‘ D w„5u.«fui* Review tees (as mcuired) ------ Proposed Private Roads S650.00 + S.50/lineal ft.- r a PrODOScd Public Rn>r4. «Q<n An . . ----------Im. ft X JO " S_____ •pplicacioo) - . a.w.ssi ivu«G5 oo^u.uu ^ 5.50/liacal ft.- Proposed Public Roads S950.00 + S.SOOineal ft.-' r /- ' Request for City to Accept Existing Priv^ Road S950M^ «- x JO -S Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $275 00 ! S25?.o.k Proposed Watenruin Extension t77< nn 'Proposed Watermain Extension S275.00 + S25/smb ^oposed Storm Sewer System (exc* -ding culverts) S250 00 On-Site System, Site Evaluatioa Review ^acntiV^m S60.00/per lot x ^ new lots ^ subdivision appUcadons) Innlirafinn rAAw'Vt:... r>__ new C. Flexible Application Fee&'Misc. Fees PRD Application with Subdivision $35.0aDweUing Unit 12^ Applicant's SigTu cur Owner's Signature Dax__^ D*3? ^ — PP'^^snt must hav e all submittals into the City Office 5 ^ #1 • ^ are held on the third .Monday of each month. Applicant **** Planning Commission meeting. Plannint ComniMiAn » • and Council. If a= applicant is unable to anend a ^ **'“*®* “ *“ review meeLgs^ftiSfpSt^ • *“** a .. 1.^.. »>.*«•i; m. 'li i>\II \\'' s weroreer v ita>i * ^vs,'. l'< r\\i \k M RING HILL ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR NINA WILDMAN GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SECTION 36-118-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA / //; i'rs\ ^C^iPTlCN :* =R£MiS£S:Huuw ’C 3t l^« -;r!r>«e»l C3/’A«r I5«r;nutti 21 itsonji Wts jf fjid Covt' ,.o«,... dJitjncf :' 532.74 ftt: *.: X^f pD»nl o i: 37 22 •nir.uits Q7 n. \3rih 15 ae-;.*#!. 12 rtl. ^3^t^ 5i ftX. X^t-zt *ortn 71 Ofi^f.i lSnn..-5wlfi :z stxonds Cssi to ^CJlr^*Zi:irtr. Jianj t.*- I-J', of Lz<t Lydord to ?f# f 9f 13-: tot ? »nfor« ozjI>^ 2 =?3ff#» 35fr.m.»-. 1% itr. [' OO^inolna of tnt trod of loni dtma >/ itrondi Cast, a diiionct of ’ ‘•r**- ® Ji»10«Ct Of» ifxoAds £3*1 0 d.itcnc* of ^ stxonds £3*1 la yaVii i q'l ) / ^ ,7w T\ '. ^ § M My. / / a § mmm^^ ^ ■■»■ r «t-3 UU L TOTAL MEA»2XN4- NOTL : TOPCCRA^f 3 fRCM CPY OF CflC^ MAPS :« «i:.:,=y‘::;;;s jr.;;;;:,■ i............ PROPOSED CUL-DE-JAC DETAIL FOR NINA WILDMAN IN OUTLOT A, SPRING HILL ESTATES HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA 0 30 I'lllIMM 120 SCALE FEET - ffl-— : r#4^rwM4 : /4#r 44904 f 00^ DRAWN O4CM.0 3-403 RCWON DAIC D:SCflf»f«N GRONBEHG k ASSOCIATES; INC. ccvmiMr. iicNiRMAMi MMviffir*. *Jii hamiic ^ 445 N. mxom OR. LONG LAN£. MN. 55556 652-475-4141 I »€RCir CLH^Pr IHAT tIfS KAH SPCCTCAtCN. OR RCRORT WAS PRCRAKO av 1C OR UMCR MV OCCCI SUPCRVOON AM> IHAT I AM A OU.V UCrUStO MIOTCS^lONAi fNCRCrR AMO IAM> *itfWtlMIN«N l«t UVkIt M suit if IWNMAfA un.Uh2z£3imm\3ammmSi /K7^f SCALC r-50' DAII 11A17/05 1® t?ar in li ’RING HILL ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR FOR NINA WILDMAN GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SECTION 36-118-23 « HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA JT?HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA JCSC^.PTiCN Of PRCMiSES • »»a :: nor l»»wfsl com## of to»d Coverrmtnl Lot 1; ihtnct South 0 U'--.*. - *** ------------ — ------------------9% 2t •fC0r»st ©‘ong Ihf «ttt lino of ta*d Co«crm«ni 9 s t::':o cf 132 74 to tht point of btainnira of tn«i:nj Ufi-; this roizrip: t*^t tauth lint of toio Cd«trrr«n: tot i Mn !» 34 m.nwttl Si tfCOndt WfSt ’* *» lO 'mrn$-■m .1^ C^'HirLtr -1 ri >jj V 2T^t :^il l^iiT/V J*VA itu kmm /\fr^<^<- P kAOTiT ^p ^ P/?f'r(Y't*7 /Kic t" Access'; rc5 >1<J 5:-i >/-,/•'^r.r*5«W r3:^.{?f m'9,I' >• • i>* 1. ., r-, '■‘‘•v^: ■ V-- m CWX^>-.-5 It?.-m ^ iM; ti;v*’*'r -t ^ r * ‘^’■/i.'V^V fe*3'fi-: vrjPrr ''JPH ^fy ml i©&^^ -TlXpff^ A ■ <* Jjf fc/'/ViM MM ISI''.,v^r:, •'fl '/.V-, £«■ >Tyv-' W •iiWT'* V ^ '•* . i-’ v'- J*!.<, /****“ J, WM V /ra m -.V i- Aw —. ‘•^i ' • ^ • • ^ I • - _ t . k,n V •V*'** /Ijrt i 'v*** ., - .; ' '“^V>7;v -T <' .^* •> N It ‘ W -V®4^ 4.\ . T> ,v ..■■K-^- ^ . 7* . . '* >' ' ^ I • *'^’lt .W _ •'I, ^ . • .*'• ^ I ^Pi « i2xlD llI L''*k VvJ JfinvUUng thm simrptr Edg* i» gii ^rrct i ffB»ftiwiwimlif HinriffTf-if Ecoi^k^ l^sd^RCES M i< r-A‘ . *U- s.,vii.#‘ ¥«‘ -r.SEirsA. I I I I I I ■ I I I SVOBODA ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES Providing the Sharper Edge in Natural Resources & Environmental Consulting October 27,2003 Mr. Bob Carlson Jyland Distinctive Homes 201 E. Lake St., Suite 241 Wayzata, MN 55391 RE:SER Project Name: Lydiard Lake SER Project No: 2003-326-03 Project Location: NE •/«, NW V*, Secuon 36. To\Miship 1! 8 N., Range 23 W., Hennepin, Minnesota Project Description: Wetland Classifleatioo, Identification, Delineation, & Staking Services Dear Mr. Carlson; As requested. Svoboda Ecological Resources (SER) visited the above referenced prop erty on October 24, 2003 to examine the site for the presence of areas meeting wetland criteria. Criteria for determining jurisdictional wetlands are as described in the 1987 U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987 Manual) as required by the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. SITE DESCRIPTION The subject parcel consists of a home site with a surroundung horse pasture, bordered by hardwood forest. Lydiard Lake borders the parcel to the north, a home site and pasture border to the west, and a state-owned Scientific and Natural Area border the parcel to the south and the east (See Figure 1). The surrounding landscape is primarily rolling hills with low-density housing. Maple-basswood forest, small wetlands and lakes are the pri mary surrounding natural communities. METHODS National Wetland Inventory (NWH) maps (Figure 2), Soil Survey of Hennepin County maps (Figure 3), Minnesota Protected Waters maps (Figure 4), and aerial photographs were reviewed prior to the site visit to identify areas that may be wetlands. Areas illus trating evidence of wetland conditions wrere examined ia greater detail during the field" survey. Vegetation, soils and hydrology were examined (as outlined in the 1987 Man ual) and used to characteria wetland types and determine wetland boundaries. Sample transects were established in representative wetlaod-to-uplar.d transition zones in order to characterize the vegetation, soils, and hydrology of tlie site. Transects consisted of 2477 ShadywTxxl Road • Excebior, MN 55331 (952)47M10C • (932)471-00C7(Fa.x) rcpresenialivc upland sample point(s) and represemalive wetland sample point(s). Information obtained from the sample points can be found on the field data sheets located irt Appendix A, Wetland boundaries were marked at the site by blaze-orange “wetland boundary” flagging attached to 4-tbot wooden lath. Where vegetation was dense, to assist in locating the flagged lath (wetland edge), a second piece of flagging was attached to a nearby tree or shrub branch. The “wetland boundary” is considered to be the topographically highest extent of the wetland basin; are» below the staked boundary met the three required wetland criteria while areas above were lacking in one or more of these criteria Wetland classification followed methods described by Cowardin et al. (1979) and used in the NWI, completed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Circular 39 classification (Shaw and Fredinc 1956) is also given. The indicator status of plants, as described in Appendix B, was determined ing the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands - Region 3 (Sabine 1999).usin RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The NWI map (Excelsic r Quadrangle) indicates one smaller wetland basin on the subject property, and one wetland compl;x (Lydiard Lake) adjacent the property (Figure 2). Lydiard Lake is adjacent the property but no boundary was determined for the lakeshore upon request from the client. The smaller basin in the v;ry southeast comer of the property is mapped in the NWI as a palustrine type wetland with an unconsolidated bottom and a semipermanently flooded moisture regime (PUBF). SER staff classifiea this basin as a PFOIC wetland type. The Soil Survey of Hennepin County. Figure 3, indicates three soil series on the subject property, Hamel loam, Hayden loam, and Hayden and Lester Loams (see figure 3). The Hamel loam series is classified as i hydric soil (SCS Hydric Soils of the United States), illustrated with blue crosshatching on Figure 3. Soil series descriptions are included in Appendix C. The Miimesota Depar^ent of Natural Resources, Public Waters map of Hennepin county illustrates that Lydiard Lake is a stale protected wetland or waterway (Figure 4). SER personnel examined the subject property for areas meeting jurisdictional wetland criteria dunng the site visit. Areas meeting the jurisdictional criteria of a wetland included two small wetl^ds; one reed canary grass {Phalaris arundinccea) dominated basin, and one wooded wctl^d (Figure 5). Detailed soils, vegetation, and hydrology data for the delineated wetlands are provided in the data sheets of Appendix A. Basin 1 Basin 1 is a small reed canary grass dominated basin. It is centrally located on the parcel. This deoression was not identified by the NWI. SER classified this small isolated depression aS a oalustrine (P) type wetland, with emergent vegetation (EM), and a saturated (B) moisture regime, or a tvoe 2 PEMB wetland. The soils within the basin were hydric, with strong evidence of redoximorohic features and oxidized rhizospheres. The hydrophytic vegetation within the basin used to determine the boundary included reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea. FACW+), smartwe^ (Polygonum amphibium. OBL).and tussock sedge (Corexjrricrfl. OBL). The upland adjacent to the I L weiland was a grazed or mowed pasture dominated by Kentucky bluegrass (Poapratensix. FAC-). Basin 2 Basin 2 is a small wooded wetland. It is located in the southeast comer of the parcel. Only part of the basin occurs on the subject property. This depression was identified by the NWI as a PUBF wetland. SER classification of this small isolated depression is a palustrine (P) type wetland, with ^si vegetation (FO). Md a seasonally flooded (C) moisture regime, or a type 1L. PFOIC wetland, ^e soils the basin were hydric, with strong evidence of redoximorphic features and oxidized rhizospheres. Watermarks were apparent on the tree trunks along the basins edge and a drift line of small duckweed (Lemna minor) was also observed on low tree branches and on tree trunks. The hydrophytic vegetation within the basin used to determine the boundary included reed canary crass) green ash {Fraxinuspennsyhanica, FACW), American elder (&/n*«cus canadensis, FAC WO wood nettle (£npor/eacWw/s, FAC W). and clearweed(/>i/eflpumi7a FACW). The upland adjacent to the weUand maple-basswood forest dominated in the understory by common buckthorn (Rha, cathartica, FAC-), sugar maple (Acer saccharum, FACU), and scattered oak trees xmnus CONCLUSIONS SER examined the subject property and delineated two small wetlands, one centrally located just south of the home site, and one in the very southeast comer of the parcel. The shoreline of Lydiard lake was not delineated upon instruction from the client that no development was intended in the immediate proximity of the lakeshore. All of the areas within the delineated wetland boundaries exhibited a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and w jtl^c;i hydrology. These two small basins most likely collect enough surface water to pond during high water periods or snowmelt, which results in wetlands in these depressional areas. Please feel fw to contact us at (952) 471-1100 if you have any questions regarding the information in this report. SER appreciates the opportunity to assist you with this project and look forward to serving any future needs you may have. Sincerely, Svoboda Ecological Resources Franklin J. Svoboda, CWB, PWS Vice-President rfc ■ rBr ■■ ii ^tiit^'i •sm'.MJBMAtil - rWm. /■, m - •::nx::<>x: v.y/ a-’r •* '< .4 ,y.r:.*"• , c *v^5 r.? - - K I-'•'-* -; • . • -•^’ » «• ^»AA4^6oouC<WXSf ft-iT: i?- ■ -^s- $^Sr ‘^‘^X r»^ '• • ^•>rv «V-- : ^' V* rr.-K^^>: SS©; -:<;x ;. V- vw mm i ’ Hennepin County Soil Sur\ey Overlayed on 1991 Aerial Photo ■'•..tSVOBODA r^*' I__J nop-h.-rij 5: r.\ l h>:inc s?i' . • > 2 u<e -c.e3 V 1^ 1^ jCOPQPQ tm S8S8% • r U^'9 -^.•e3 A . '' 4 ^ \ ' tf^ £ -v^ ^ A ^ > w •*. ':Y *■-f/5. V ‘*. ■'' v2i»: K' ->- Y •• ■• . \a r% '- .«; -O ivi<^ '-^ ■ 11 •. -■* > > V r^J 11 .■>5i>-'. ■ ' •• •- y:.. ' vv. -tl m * • -■ « 5v^>i^rti?- . Hm:iz »lS!«il«;'5rf.S-.:. ■ft ■-.-A ’• .• ' *- •^.»•' RKS r‘ . <.• .- 4fi.:*5!S mr 0^ < H ■I--'' \ >'■»*. •* c \v TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJEC Theprop< lot has ar Schirmen Septic Cc on septic ..J ~ —- \m.pkS’ cmroT ORONO ^N '/ Munklpil Offices Strastlddrais: 2750 Ksiley Parinny Orono, MN 5S3S6 MaiHsi AMms: P.O. Box 66 Ciystal Bay. MN 5532^:- TO:MikeGafifran FROM: Matt Boltennan, On-Site Systems Manager DATE:November 12. 2003 SUBJECT: Septic Review for Nina Wildman (Spring Hill Estates) The property at 745 Spring Hill Rd is being split into 3 lots. Two of the lots are vacant lots the other lot has an existing house and guest house on it (lot 1). The septic designs were done by Steve Schirmen on October 31,2003. All 3 lots have two septic sites that meet all Orono and State Septic Code requirements with a minimum of 5 bedrooms desiped. I recommend approval based on septic concerns. ‘Mcphooc (9S2) 24M600 • Fax (952) 2494416 I f * .3 25*7668!) rS-572r4a637 .. r. V flBPIR oy T. B. EYK CAP.roAY STATl OF KIlfRESTi, COOHT3f OF TOWEPIN, TCWSHl? 0? m • • iliui' it. fcS'V' ? V '7 ’ I I '1HER2AS upon petition of six lesxl vctirs voters vho i ^ ovn rotl ottttf or vho oecup/ real estate ur/.er the Hoaesteed or C)6y>Al«S. 1 UJ / o ' ' w if ^ t ‘7 (f> proemption lavs of the United States or under coatrsict fren the St^te of Minnesota vlthln one nlle of ir-id read. Jcples of said petition havlnc been first duly posted in three of the aost public places In said town at least twenty days tefere any action was had in relation thereto proof of which posting was duly cade by affidavit, which eald proposed Cartway..two-r.Qd_s..vlda Is described and set forth In srld petition as follows to t it: Btfinning at a point on Section line of See. S5 end 36, Township 119, Range ?3. sltua:;ed at the ieve^ fqOtfX N. V. corner of Lot 1 of eforesaii Secticr. 39 and thence running Vest on aforesaid Section line to center of North Watertown and I-tinrv-iapcllj road. 4^^ OS'? jei/y (fT> and wheroas upon receiving said petition ve did within thirty days theieafter make out a notice and ♦‘lx therein a tire and place at which ve would meet and decide upon such Hppllcftlcn tewit: on the 11th day of November A. D. iSi^a- ut tne house John Murchy ceuslng copies of s>ich notice to V''* r-o^ted In thfe** pv.r.^‘..r pieces in 8 eld town et least ten days previous of such ceetln.’. ehd having met et such time ana pisce z.4 <bcve nar.cd in said notice and being satisfied that the applicant had at least ten days ^^^'7 previous to seid time caused seld notlc** of tlce and place of hearing to he given tosll the. occupants of the land through which Cartway might pass, by serving the sans personally or by copy left et the usuel place of abode of each cf s aid occupants, proof of which Is shown by affidavit, ve decided to e.xarlne personally such Cartway end hear all reasons for cr against h «/ ?. -ff & ‘ -1- 1 r r» '• *»• T.V f,f ..^t; • • •. V . • • "•' / * :■•.' •. .'i ?• •*i»^'*. •• :• I.*.;?. •‘.’O • ;j,.-. . r / lAyinc ottt thii tut and teiag of tK# opinion such Cartway vaa naeaaaary ai^.propfr to public Interest vculd te promotes , thereuyi we granted the prayer of said petltlcners and determined t A I to loy out Mid public Cartvay a a\rw being urj-.isassar;/ I *aecc*dln( to the daaorlptlon In the ictd petition ecntsiced* 1 It Is tharsfora Ordarad nd DatarnlMd that a patllc Cartvay be t and tha saaa la hereby laid out and It is hershy itslwti to be a public Cartvay two rods the said description steve given being ..the curbs of said Cartway. Given under our hands this eighteenth iay of November A. D. 1882.. Signed 1 P. B. WLSFELD )) Supervlscrs CEO. A. REISER ) CSRTIPICATS I, Fhlllp Schmitz, Town Clerk of the tc-.r.shl? of Medina, Hennepin County, Kinnesta, do hereby certify t.hnt the i cregolng Ig g true and correct copy of pages ICC .mt: ..-5 of ..ne Bold « Record Book of..said. Township.. . ** • « / ^ I August 17, 19^9* «I Filed f«r ^'^cord on the 21 day of Aug A.C. '-r at 1C;‘“0 r'clpsk. .. -2- £ • — iiM w^t ,:_>75acr-;=».;-.-^-:», •'* •:i rpt*« • ! t • r^>;:.j.:TV: I t^'ir' t> •*;i N rJ • ft^ 5* 1;;f V*V- :-yr- . ./ . : MU eT^iu ^ .L • —L_*gy.v»^._ - .••«•** h/ii* ^ ^ it j •! 92& •; 0»nefe»rr:-•■:••• ••ijpi'ewicc.N"- - IS87JUL30 ';: "S® ASC0CV««i5* >' • ®#* A-C. ••: =I:??^ik^'i.;. - C^-. STATE CESO TAX DUE HER OaU: December 31 .19 y*^ 30118713=57 A57C5S.I} 3(/.TXS7lS:57 A5Jyf92S (rutrvi’d fcr rf.io'dinif <!.>t' <-r £‘il'l’'Jr--------^■:=.#----------------------------^ «• -«s^ ^cr- :3'cfc' r.r. vi'udK; ^’3V! r* •' ■ ^•.: •; •ifJ;- >^fVrf ^i:»5 •FOR VALUABLECOWSmERATIOW. Thocas M. Cryafay and Ell.i ?. Crosby, a - -: -= ylli'/i; and vise —------------—— -—!—u'-'f *K.*i -----------------------------------------B=W,------------------'■••• ■•■■(’%iicl-. hawbyconvey(i)andWMiMtft)to, Fradarlek Wir.stor. an d Eleanor C. Winstri . . tanm^t.. teal property to Hennepin ■ZlZI’^unty. M.-nMotq;&;cS^;.r,.:.^ ' .......................................• - •• . •.■ •“ > V" ’ Sec’ Exhibit A •■’'id • '■-• :->1 ;J •y - V:| ■n '- S -• ■-■iidai»33'j;CO ;• • '* ♦ a ,#••• •• « .•' •• • •• j-“:... • ! - ^ •V* • ■»# . •* ^€>M?IN OJUHr/ PCTL’.rv rm: ezr KS OSJ L1K PT.ID 07/ZZ^7 2UVTK ; .V • ^b«efcl tore:h<f rrith dl hmdiramenUand ippurtanar.cw balongi-c^Jiarato, lubJiKrt to the fcitowLng a::cc?V.:. . Exceptions.Qf^record y •> 7=^■K. -..■ .\fi*ix Deed Tax Stimp Ilch? STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF Hennepin Tr.csias M. Crosby }■ Ena"“?T croasy 'J The fetagotof toftcu'naat waa aclmewladifd bafora me Q-ii / ^ o' ‘ • by Thomas M. CitesbV and Ella P. Crosby, has b&nd end wT-T" . • »■ •'■f •-»» • to f, I I II — ■ ■■ ~~ .U> WOTASLU. #TAW oa igs cmgs TITLS oa lAXa BONATvai or atatos ta tn??A«"roVux^ ZTnStTKattaia Rjsihr^.f ^i’rr • - 'll m avtasmsT V Aa saMTU r V oi Aus AMB Asoasw)- Fae9re a Bebsbo ;(TMC) ; 2300 Kultifocda .Tower 33 South Sixth' Street Minneapolis. NM ' S54C2 Vnn^rfcn 7-^0 S ^pvMO !^ifl i?. ‘.‘.n. So 3'-'s I • » a i ‘...... i.n;- .• . v-.r ' 3;, •• • *11 .'•;-.v .V. ;':» Hindis?,,,.J Trr- i :.';.-.-v:' '7:;:^’ ■ * . s.:• • t. • , ^ **•* >- , ... . ’ •*• •!• • ••• • • • .• •. •CRCSSY-WlNSTTOr • {■= • • •* •• .* ’ ' ntaiBiT A ”i <*• yorjhvt e-u.rt„ ,f d«*erlb«d;Aajfoilw3t^'®' County. ri-iT'.rsotA, Sf®2S^SimvJI? Northwest Cuarter•loS’tSJ •.bearing c5 South. NortKwei^ Cul?t«, ^.n^e fiuarter of rji.idcotwaieit -^rn.t ir-e o? • North-vest Quarter to the point of Northwest Sgre.a 34;;i4nu?« M «c‘:5; w;.:! "S'®*** -’ '***' ^.t the northwest ^thence South 0 deerees 'S ?f ■•id ^vem.r.aat Lot 1; west line of seid^^-ti^IeSt feetj.-tHence IJar^h^- ef SS2.74 •V.Vfft^K •%-t t P lee :«31i9tj7aj»ZI •:if sVi , -, ‘"I § ■I i i).;r l:'-^ VJ.'. • I d'^.’ e • hy .U . 4ai f^:.:7; sf 133.55 of-bdiSlnS • • =^***^?* -rvemment Lot 1 to the point . e . % I ^% . • /, . • £;.?n^nf?Siif i**^: “••«i;«« ti« •ot.tt 11„. Of ..If 51 «Son3i-H’»t ■ “ fc**-- K»ft» 59 d„r... 34 „l„„t.. County, manetste. the eiatJr “!^e 2o. HennepinJa deae^ed as £oli«e, l-« of ■•id 2.0.00 foot .itrlp s{ ill^'IF •.’§■: V, t^a K.rth 37 deg>^ 03 JUpu^i 07-aacenda FeS; • • ■ ■ ••- - '.-ir f. L.fV ..a •>-y : ‘ • »ei »V.*V • e<» • .i-Vf:• 4 *•*» ••.•;*»,' -T. 't:.V' • .. » •f -i:* Jf- . 1,•■>•...fe* ..Sr:-.**:. * • \ 7, ..v:- ■ r. vvAi? • ■-'j-.-w.jiji jmsss^ .-■ ..-. »<J^ i j t •it.- I*'* . .• .* iv'•.» ■ ••• • -• - V .*i ••' c I -?• ••V 4 •• • f{l. I l' .* *•?: rr- I • ■•'ii: t ‘ .1 I* diatanea of 135;73*‘faotvtV ^o point of boginnifag of • • th«- e*nt*r lln* to b«.'.d«serlb»4; thoae* continue North • 37 decrees 0? minutoe .07;,s«eqnds Keat a diatonne of 45.63..faat; '.thanea'Nortbr 35. dagreea 12 nlr.utce 57 ®**lt» * blitanca or■'155.42 faetj thence'North Blnutaa 47raac6nda Bast, a distance of 139.55 feet;\thaneo,nprtt>rly and northwesterly ' a distance of 294.3,5,:^eet( >'aleh9 a tangential curve, . eoncaya to the West,'having>'4 radius of 150.OQ feet nnd .• •ngla of J112 degrpea 46 minutes 47 seco.ida; .' _ weaca northwesterly and. yasterly, a distance of 164.47 • ”**i' along a. co^pund'curve,' concave to the Koirthvesti * ra^us of 3S8.'5S fa'et and a central ar:«le'of 26 degrees 16 minutes 15 seconds; thence North 86 r?®*^**" minutes 54 seconds'West, e distance of line of said Northwojjt Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; riince South 69 degrees 44 ' minutes 42 steonds West, a dlatanee of 420.OC feet to . . the center line of Spring Eill Road, and there tcrninati'r.g« [l *.'-^®5i?“**'®*** "^1* descriptlor. 'tha'south line of said • «“ Northwest Quarter la assu.ned to'North 89 dagraes 34 minutes 51 f-;eonds W»st. • ! •*.;r .‘I .f • \yrn-. to^i;ai»4;ect to a drivawPy aasement for tha banefit of th propet'^jKdaacribad.aboyp and the Winston property (as de balow}.-which driveway easemant is dassrlbad as follows:described A.strip .of/land .20.00 faat in «idth across parts of tao Nottbwaat Sjuartsr of tha Northwest garter and Cevrmniant tot 1, all In Sactlon 36, Township 118, Range 23. :ia.-.nepln County,. Minnesota,, tha center-lina .of said 20.03 feet .etrip Is daseribed as follows: . . r%» . r?‘c: A' : { •Commancing at tha northwest oornor of aald Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; .thence cn a bearing of «outh^ along the vest.line of cald Northwest Quarter ; of;.the Northwest Querter, *a distance of 759.60 fsp.ti . thence on a bearlng'of East, ^a distance of 990.71 £^«t; thence South 76 degrees 41 tilnutee 36 seconds East, a distance of 276.40 feet to the point of begiraiing iif . the. center line to be described;’thence North 1 degree 02 ^Inutea 13 seconds West^ .a distjxce of 138.15 feot; thence North 37 degrees 03 ninutes 07 seconds Eist a . *.»•* f f. ■ • •• ‘li •• • • . diat^.ce of 135.73 feet; and there terminating. ; Tor. purposes of this description'the south line of said >' •Nortoweat Quarter of tha Northwest Quarter is assunsd to ‘ .bear: North 89 degress 34 minutes 51 seconds West. • • t 'ae.Winston property is described as follows: •' . 'That part of Northwest Quarter INW b) of the Northwest . , Quarter (NW %) of Section 36, Township 113, r.nrcc 2.3, lying Southerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point in the West lino of aaid Nort,hveot Quarter (NW )«) of the Northwest Quarter (KW H). dif.tent ■»S9.'6 feet South of the 'Northweat comer of s-iid Northwest Quarter (NW %) of the Horthwe ’at Quarter (.'W l»); thence North 89*“'.. . . . . feat; thence South . __ __ to its Interaoctloh.wt-tti-os. aa^a • northwest Quarter (W %); oflldrthwPat Qjirter^ h)' and there tarminatlaig. '.Tcf puxpoaaa.of t.' tion tha South 11a* of aUaTjdrthwa;*^?^^^ -Ir the Nertteaat Quarter (NW.%V‘:^a All arcerdisg to89«5S'04* West. •'1 .: •£/' ' .;V . .'Vi. 3 •I * ni ■ ■Ai y ‘ •...vT -2- . ... . ' / • • • •.. f r • |t^u4 . »• I * 'm;»‘ • ♦- *. S j^ i • { 5^?*^ towciMp inii«sQta, describtd as •r ! i •ai ® o«9r««« larv.vSr"”**.** Mcoim waat, Aiona tha : -v... •*v^ % w v ;'^«ne«. North'IS dogrlSr'lH Srlluoo*57^.f^‘®2 ^••^* •’*Mt«.o dlotoiuj* Br-v«2;li ®" ••cor.dii - dogrooa 4S ainutOo'O?'Sl5f thonco M»;i-th 51, r iiia.SS sStT S22. 2oI5S®??*^^*'‘ ■ dl«nneo ofil Mcoad. slU S^S! IhHi Zr 20 . SOuth O door... a* thence ; \ ^ ♦ • % •• ^■i^rnei of .Z?S^S! 1335.14'^eot to the eouthw ^SSm. fa £LSZ*^““^ f’orth 0 ct/rtSSnrLoS^^fi lit., of .eld • •..* f *. a •• • •• 0« »• — •*.. ».s.* >»; i . .>; p;' : V *;' • ^ * k. - •: . •‘. .*• • * ;.*•“/ • e*. ^ •• r / I • • •• • «*./ ‘V. n>r ••• •/* •.». ;K ‘ •it': ■* m .'Kv::te.-il * t;^-. . 7^*..rVl • • - nfc.'j '■£:ium•t t .-^ ^1- ' ris-^ •■h.a 1-Jvi % yv;li ■-ui: •• V*"•Z ‘ ..f'-T M'.c ; ■^f!' - , J*!? •i-£’ :-*L : it */• ■ -f .*2*'. • »v » • i-V . Cl 4r^<:C .■fi‘:T V K-.-rt ♦*».* i». . yf %r * . ' > • . • *««• •U v' •: :•: j;: > hyi* r-i- <■;••:. *4 4,. .. •*. .• ‘. M':-' ♦j»-.-. • .*.• H I; I j 1 '.1 ■^i W-^.SSj^i iraSiMikES ------Aii- cMikBbibrBMlfi*^^l'r*ZiiJ Hr..*mm$fim Ikautv * ' * . '.'• / .'. 1^4* • . STATE DK£i5'fAXt!JE'Ha&» • AiJ?lli££ Dit« V- Apg<^, •',* tC* i •' ri « • •• '• •• *-■ .1981_ • X-.— •k'w vs ::... ^T?:::i i*: ; •. • • -.1 • r ; * 4; «• ■ »v . .« • .(nMfnd tat nnrt^tEC'' -5 rORVALUASLBOT:«1DS^<^, Ttw^d m; ‘cpoeby ^V^MciV-r. Croa^; > •■ ’ And wife' ■ ' v-iMN ^ ' • ' . . v .-________; h«h|^i<r;v4y'MtadDonald C. Wlld7.g.r.' ■.v.:V!-iitennenir. ’ Imth^ #>Anl 1 ■. tonaiiti, rr4 proparty la Ses legal deicrlption ■tttcHad'hererd iid‘Exhibit A. ,1^ * *•• ^ ^ - • • I The real proper^ty transferred'hereby ie.eUb'Jcct to the* resrrictr^ne let forth on Exhibit B a'ttached ' ‘hereto, *. ‘ V* '. . *: S:> i «•», i -i -jii'-. . (If ff«on e«9 « MMd«l.<o^>w« s* bacsi tut«thn With tU htm. u.'oiHtt •ppurtintncw beloagl/i] >ub}^ te thf fcl’.t'Tfnie^'f.*- Tax Statements (c''.*!' i Real P/o^rtf ; oeacri-: ■-. in t:-s iiiJ *; -.T.cqt shoL-g ■ ae sen: :n; • /e**/^ • JCs/r.tV; A?/; \fftt l)<N'd r*< i^icL'itp'IScre Thonas X. Crosby ft, »' U t , Sl“ • • K^;'.'5:i; ‘ • cr »iiN'>n:507A ;;. ■ ^ 'ciSiifNi"/ 0> = * • ■ — • • • • » % • . f • ♦ I Ella V. -Crotfoy r:? < Vr- i-ivT; >•: :?it \ tv' ..■••4-rV ;;^tev>hrV»v . « %•1^*• *4 * ♦e .•II •n, f;ro^sic>ari£«ittrim^ bkaw aa.ttir' /trr M. Crosby.md Ella p. Croahv. huibjtad-4nd vl*c-i---- "lOf |ii5• ;•;?: i-.■J* • .i vi « ' . ^ -- —. « - - - ——» p'.' '- ’ «eTAi^ArBAivcrT^‘iMpa^Tfn««ataSn ’ T-''>»-'Jr{;•■?:! 1 r:s‘^,-.;\lJ,'sSSSli,'\ I. .rr*^ ► ^ • •If:v • »*. V*. "••'t • M-!-,vfi;' »v ^■TMCStS.i M'CWliSSV. ^Ji'}I _11 j : -ij.^’i__ I vT*-*r. eTA^ferr ♦ • * • •r'^ xVt 9«eMfliAie iPae^i'u :& Ee2,;caV (1 24€0 ICjLltX5tCa(lJjCi® 33 jSovtis r -—^egUigr ; ‘ * - ;5{; • ';II iTii iriTiir V• , - > • •» m^m^mJm ‘A . . - * ' •rt* —; -w: c . ’ . v*»^ •*.»*,H ■;;ii j;, i ■■.'•life \ •* ■m’^i %..t- ............................................. : j •• ii • ;;cpjDsay-HziDmH ^laiT.AT *.• . !fff||!;:''!-‘ji'“.'. . ••.•'.•■ •• .'. •• '■■! ■ . • •;■• °* CoyarruMnt Let l, ;.Mct 36, Tcv:Tc-rnship county,,iiinhe)iotii -dB»cr^ iollowat . Rir'T:^ m-- yl^h •to StlOJTCi of. Li&lcft 1 Jli^H •to th« shore of. lake Lydiard; thence' southeasterIv, ‘S •hS'<j . r.^along the shore bf LakeXyi;lj.ard;*to the east line of sIvV’. '' - ’.* * t.VGOVGZmmGntl L,Ofc.. 1$: .^h«inr>o.. Cmi^’K ^in f .a a :v .9*,. *3,35;^14 feet to the:'scithvest corner of. cavn • •'.Coy^^ninont, Lot 1; .thence North'6.'degrees 19 rsinuteo .21 •^«oo9a East, along the west line cf o.jid Coveriincnt Let 1..7 -A'-M ... **-•- ror^pu^oses. of this ;description the'.scuth li;.« of sa.U <3ovi‘—“ Let ;i ,■ is assuired to'bear north as Han>an> •«• -i c- - ; u- -. _ ______ __________________ ____________________ ________________ ■ ^Lct ■Jl'.-.'is-assuir.ed ‘to ;bearr:orth”89 ‘ deoraos 3^ r.inutos*.>C>’yV'j. .. -«-a«».wva W«^ -fc- 1 •••• • • • } ■ ^ tocetli^r with a-drivewky eiscrer.f for tho b-i.-f - .; . of the .-property described above and,for the benefit o.' the it.'-* '-i' yf^nstpn ^property, (os -descrlbed -belc'v)' ‘which driveway e.io*''ij;»' ' described, aa.,follows I ' ^ '.vV . vr.r •:. v.^ ;• i . , If ?>A'skrip of land .20.6 a-.'.>*? hr 4yirT.^:u Ar 1, ,i:! feet," in| width a'crcss parts of t.*'r 7;iwi;®.t ail fh. Section -ii',- Towniiiip Tl«* "?.ingc'*2n*HVnn=Tir. A •;j^;County, Minnesota; , the •center.i^^^^^^ of‘said 20.00 foot r\- .» v'^is. described as fellow®..• ‘ .. . : J * ^Northwest Quarter;of the'. Northwest Quarter and Covorr.Tir.*: cj ;j \ ^ T ‘fm'} ‘ r '• V* irv ‘5-p:v. ■ ■ jia. described as fellows:'. • ■■ ^ -,•-. ■>■ • • * *J* *'** ** “• ' % ***Ccmmencing' at the'northwest corner cf said North ; ••'Vim Vm.'-...-._________________________ . ‘T* 3: . t- • , -JSn.C • a^ • « r«- * - a •> rr :'AH^~ I- rtV.;* . ► 'W . r.-degre'es ... --------- .. _____ distwee of ;276i40. feet;; .thienre 'North 1 dcaro^s C,“ minutes 13 .aecdnda West, aVdistance of 139ri3 fi?ct; thence,.North.J7. degrees.op.'.'ninutes '"f serondo Km’z, : ' dia^hce pf-l35.;73 ‘.£e.et; to'the point of bscimir..; r ' tho cente'r'*illfie .to bii d• A'or4vWr«e*v>v mmr i / 'f'i^h.iv-w^cEa ‘ «• • « • »• •• aw » ..- • :: T:;:v7v '-0 \ * ::,r:*.. v< . ;>. "■ r••••t.-i . ^'.4 Vii . . !. •: . • ...• “HV>-r :..:• ■- , ii,.;,. .••.''r••;••■• ••• • ; .. .•.•■.• • »•» rta<W.*A» j .1.1. . '• .'•. *:4•5 4 •}i".;; tismir.i'iJ.r.-, if . • • ■ <!< I'i ••■ ri*c-';» .!* './•-''^•;Win4toh'p^Si;H|riy.;l8 described .*•••. ••?'* < . i ■* •• .* ' . i ^•r»* ■ f * • . • ' ' • : ‘ pirtj'Ioi! th« nprthwe3^^i0u«tt«r. of .the Nori-.hi'oaf- i ■•«,.■ • Quarteriipf.-^lBji^ 36,' ToWnsh'ip'118,- Range 23, nt-iir; jnin . ' r» ' Countyi, Mlhneaota, described aa' fol}.OMB{ ■ ■ :••• ■ • • •■ :>• -Bpglnnlng at the northwaat corner, otf :snld North*.":^*: * V ai aa*^ J( w 1.2 a ^ _ .. !^. ■ fe'v * * • *#* ^- • 4 ^ m- V ■ ^ ■ •I a.'.’ >• ’Quartlil'j of ^a No'rthwet Vo'uarter; l-tHenes North 0. ; ;■ ,--.do<jtp4ii l8 i^hutasf;ax;:8*conds'East, al^^^ th-» ozsti , •• sv'Mnp^r^fj.Baid. Korthwest .Quarter of ;the Korthvua'c ., 'Quar,tir| to the north> lir.e,:of; said-Nprthwsst "Quarter! of the Kprthw'eat'QuaVteri '<t)ienco Scuth C? ;degr'aea’44 ninutea-i42'seconds West* .along th-i rori .••.‘•V. Vlinevofi laid Northwest- Quarter of -the Itorthvost -» iv;.’'fQuaT*®'?l to point of .V^ r T"' ' • •%.•. ■ W*. .Forof'.th description ;tho south linn of sti ^ Ndt'th'west'<Qu'arter..of the" Northwest Quarter is a.fr;:,''.3d • Wi*'iiAi-i.'*. aa J---------' •• 4’minutes 51 stcor.Js treat; m - . -- __________ .Section 36p Tevnahip’ llS^iiRange; 2,3/ Hennepin County^ Minnesota^ d23c::iJbC53l’au follows.:. •;•. " • • - • •■ ■ '• "; ••• , -•. •■••. • i.Begi^ing at the northwest corner of said cSovern- * * •• **’ .vmcnt2*Lot^ 11 thence South 0 ‘dogroos 13 rninutt'^i: 21 • isecondsl West, along the west line of said Govnrh- j Mnty^Iibjt 1, a'diatance of 582e74 .feet; thenre ,Korth:;37 degrees 03 laihutes *07 seconds Last, i\' 'diati^e of .45*63 feet; thence North 15 dtgre^?3 12 ‘ inlriutcs; 57 seconds Sast, a dintahee cf 15Ce42 §-C^. m • •“ ■ ■J\ rl •'•'•ITkT'*! a 14 Ail kuti'wC Vrl’ - ' •• ../feeti:.thence‘.North..51o‘dagree Jit’ •’• ‘ ’ r.*4coDds; East, a dis'tahee'Of 119.55 feet; thenc ■•' • '• . . -No’rthi?.! degrees 15 minutes".30 esconds Eaat.to?:4- }‘-iP . ________Q N6"rtS>7.1 degrees 15 minutes'. 30 . seconds Eaat .to'the "shore-of- Lake Lydiard; thence northeasterly^ along . ".the'r'shibrai.of-Lake/Lydisfd' to the north lint of I.r'.a'didfGeyarnaeht Lot ;i| 'thenge'North 89 dogresn'is ‘miAutesl 32 'seeende West "along the north lino o* a * ^ "s"aid"-c6v#rnnent tot 1 to the point cf becrinnir.:. For.puiipoBu of this deecrlotldB the south lin^ of Ui- 0 ‘. ■>• • ki u:n r-‘ id •• j f3 or. pu^bsea of this descript Ida tho south line o.f t Gc7era»o|:t".l«^ 1, .1* .aesptwd tp;b*jc North 0.1 derm? Weri^eer'Oujiiftcr.; CKS" k) :ci ll;;: ,Ko.-.th'.':3t slysAg/Sovt^lf et.\tta: fellowiBg dtocrib^l .Ee^lsuiiBgr.ii^ • point ia .the ViRt IJa'j o-T .759>4ji-^" Hi aoBtlninet 'cbtnor. of cnidof tha iMa^r" ItSV %i I yifTth 19*34*: _ _ _______ tb 77*67*02® *Mt .a dletTrlicn c YH^Ia____ •**» il*3t ‘’i^s' ef ’csl'3 ‘’’1• ‘Y; •••- •I' ••t-i I —i S*> Vi •> • ? il Mi S5*.-; rM,¥wyi .“■"?'.v'’..-( ?;.••• .*f * * •• r* • • •• •• ' ' ••••.-.•• ; ..“WJ • * •* f r • • •*'* •■ inv;r- - ■ • :?i:th •• . • V4l;:‘• ’•' cKf* • •.,*•>.i.’iii ••• ••• • • . • ... . • • j •.*-• - * •. - f •^ • • A * .• 1?•• !• • I. • s *• JV‘. • •» !• • • • • . • V*,,. .-*.• • .# ■ • * •• • Vr-' . •• -V . v.jTjr* • <• -•• .-..I...ai . i? * • Vf 7' * . ^' •• ■Ay -uU*.- •• .;•/>•.' >(?• .) •. % * V r'n.r;;. ?vyi^- ,• V V ’:mr vV#-.. ..*5 c .*• y-m- Am • • If'*' : ■|Sr.; I./ • • ♦.? %»*•» I • Jr\ ♦ t * T^k ■■ 't ; r ■I pi w^:t:n M Vr>rv r» y,~ ’ '■!^f: ''r'i. -?• . . * ’ . “S^ ‘ ,, J-' .•r:c-.. ■ -i‘ %. ■1•ti} -V ■jPiii r >' '. V. >.• •{ • :^.“?; ■ ■■ -.•.J'i-l;.. ( • • • . » :. “r .'•*•••? . V-.-. CMte-NXltfKAlf ' • • I • *’••• • •• 'KaXBtt B »•• < .* .f Mters Bad htftfiMlS thB Cif||Urr to iy^F‘•SSigf th« win 'W •« that: ft«tt a a,________ o tha riigri’cisinr.r. ^11, aoOSjr^a) h>r. -4:(Si< p) oalirjonb.:il_-4vio - :.M^:j ad <c» th: '-VT^' placad,;pn-»Mi. . ■..ndlr.9 tht^fact ■ rb8ult;ln‘,a.l<-.i; ^ch Eaatai^';Pares!. .. and ba . --s»sri propar their Intern Pare'e a fbrHh^ ' ty 16: ■• 'eJlfW- r hairs:a;-1 . / arcei-ls V^ut •m TowaahlprllS, . ' ^ich lie. aasteriy r-; Sing at the aouthi'osL . on an aasVjMd':r^iid "•“*W^;*t8ou«n. as BatfMi 34 ?•'h*I€ii2Sl seconds East cV- -.-» to tha:aeWfl point 6^i«ffl^ing of tfiaVUr.-s to 'Jafcrib.adi^thgnea -Rofft'3 dograaSfisIjminutes 33 bicar'* ; ?i"^taa aaconda *aa V 'chera.M^g^inatlng. • -•-V tat* ar.'! =:im.l ■■■m 5 TCSi'f m-- '' ' '• •"•Mfi': 4^r-‘ ; •.•*.’ •v c'''^■* '• *“ ■ • •’ •* •• • • ..• . t/ '..* • ^3-*‘*• '** i*•*':.**'.*•• •• • . •bite- 4 ' Thii xmn are icknSilfl^ and i^ii^ ' j v.^' aI3~^|j?Iiaaan:‘. ------- "*'^ aiit,f6rt6* Above * •; ,;'[ ‘'p ‘ ■'IV". / «•• •• • •*, . f. Donald ----------------- .. . . .'*• .' . •3 S*0* ‘ty- • • « r •*• •• •:•',• •• • • • ... • */r '• • :• •• -r.i ■ . 4.' •. t*. » •. • /• . f , •. .. *> ' 'i^c • • '.f.: ■ .'. ■»• f •• • *. .. - .V • »'• '■•••■.* «a r-- • t ;5' •••*• ' IV .. .#. »•»« «•*••• ••. . • • • • • V * ^ •.• A • * • “ m a •b ••* A 4 *.) . *. ••... i.-» - r rp- V*•« • • r. r. • * 1^ •* «•".*• j. • '.f-y- ; '^iv . • <* a* /: f/4 ‘ ti.*.» /S-;;.- 5 * < * * * £**• *’ » ‘ 4 •I w'-4 '•’V' r feiiSSSI^ ivib tOMUMbi M ]l 2Slin))XN»J PtOrAODR «2S SnUNOHILLRO OWNBRNAMB VZABTHAWN TAXfAVBR VANZANDTREUZABimiTIIAWN NAME/ADDR ttS SMMOIIRX RO WAYZATAMN SS29I HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPPJ NFORMAI lUN SYSTEM PROPERTYOWI«. LIST ' I ri'k11 25111231^ mOf ADOR 5ft NORTH STREAM RD OWNERNAMB D M LARSON AIL LARSON TAXPAYER DAVID A JANIS LARSON NAME/ADDR 5tl NORTH STREAM RD WAYZATAMN SS39I 51 34III25I2000I PROfAODR 755 FERNOALERON OWNERNAMB ROALVUULT TAXPAYER RAYMOND 0 A LUCILLE VUULT NAME/ADDR 755 FERNDALfi RD N WAYZATAMN 55591 5t 5611125150001 PROP ADOR 51 ADDRESS UNASSIQNED OWNERNAMB STATE OF MINNESOTA TAXPAYER DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES NAME/ADDR TAX SPEC DUREAU OF RE MOT 500 LAFAYETTE RD ST PAUL MN 55155 51 5611125220005 PROP ADOR 755 SPRING HIURD OWNERNAMB FWINSTON ABC WINSTON TAXPAYER FREOERKX WINSTON NAME/ADDR 765 SPRINO HILL RD WAYZATAMN 55501 51 5611125210002 PROPADDR 745 SPRINO HILL RD OWNERNAMB DONALD C A NINA WILDM AN TAXPAYER DONALD A NINA WILDM AN NAME/ADDR 745 SPRINO HILL RD WAYZATAMN 55591 51 5611125250002 PROPADDR 5t ADDRESS UNASSIQNED OWNERNAMB STATE OF MINNESOTA TAXPAYER DNR REAL ESTATE MGMT NAME/ADDR ATTN DEBOIE OURTIN 500 LAFAYETTE RD STPAULMN 55IS5 51 5611125220002 PROP ADDR 765 SPRINO HIURD OWNERNAMB FREDERICK WINSTON ETAL TAXPAYER FREDERICK WINSTON NAME/ADDR 765 SPRING HILL RD WAYZATAMN 55591 I CliKni Y 11IATTHli FACTS KliPKIiSliKI 1U5 ARli AN ACC\JRA11i AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARSTIiS DATEONTHE RBCOROS OFTHCICNNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. TOT1IE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BEUEF. nATff/g-y-433 OV CD C:i I/J Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik& Associates Engineers & Architects November 11,2003 ■on«itroo. and Attociacat. Inc. is an Affirifiattv* Actlon/ffqual '\itf layiaytr and fifiployat Ow*w« frlncipalft: C::s G Ls^tivzo. PI. • L Sorva'a *1. • Giann e Coo*. PI • ffoetn G Semattefit. ^C. • ;*rr/ A ioc':;n. »£ • V#re A. Hanicn. Sanior Cantuitancs: W tosart. PI • iosapn C A.-ccrii*. Pi. • fficrtard E Turr^ar. Ff • SuunM. fbarim. CPA Aiiociata Princip*x <e A Corpora. • tcoart t. A*a*'affa. AC. • ^icnard W Potter Pi • Oaaid O Lotkota. Pi • Vicnati T »j.:*napr • ‘as x F.aio. Ff • sannac- P A.-danon. Pt • Var* ff Roifi. PE. • OaaM A tonairroo. MB A. • S*dray P W i-ifcr »£. lS • Agnas M t.ng. MSA. • A..ar Re* ScMrudt. PE • Thomai W Pactn»vFE • :amai R Ma j-d P£ • V at i iaman. PE • L P^iiiip G^a.a PE • Canaf J Edgartcn. PE • fimaat Martirax PE • ••rorrai A S.*»o. P£ • Sp« icn j Jonr&c/* • Caia A G^.a, •£ • Thermal A. Rouinar PE • Robdfi X Oavary. PE orficas: Sr ■aui. Si Z r-i tschastar aro .V.V • V i^awkae. Wi • Crucago. iL >sabfita: WA .vacpdLins ii.Ti Mike Gaffion Planning Director City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN SS323 Re: Nina Wildman Subdivision (Spring Hill Estates) Plat No. 03-2961 File No. 139-03-000 Dear Mike, We have reviewed the preliminarv' plat for the proposed Spring Hill Estates subdivision. The parcel is currently a single lot «iih a sitr^si'e-family home. The proposed use is to subdi^de the parcel into three single-family lots. The property i« served off of Spring Hill Road m a combination of public road and driveway easements. We have the folV?%1ng;>:^/?unents in regards to engizeering matters. The city attorney should renew the legal issues related to the existing and proposed access to the site. City code requires a minimum right-of-way width of 50-feet and a minimum paved street width of 24-feet for a private street serving 3 to 6 units. If the access serves more than 7-units the minimum paved street width is 28-feet. The proposed access would serve the proposed 3-lot subdivision and at least an additional two adjacent parcels for a total of S units. The e.xisting access does not meet the minimum right-of-way or street width requirements to serve the properties. It also appears that there is the potential for further subdivisions at sometime in the future. The cit>* should review the future potential subdivisions and possible densities to determine the appropriate street width. The proposed cul-de-sac is approximately 1200-feet long, city code states that the maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1 000-feet. The driveway to serve Lot 2 from the cul-de-sac to a building site on Lot 2 would exceed 1000-feet in length. The resuh would be the creation of a private road/driveway to serve Lot 2 that approaches a half-mile in length from the nearest public street. The city should review and cotrunent on the lengths of the proposed accesses. Plans should include storm water treatment provisions. Plans should include temporal' and permanent erosion and sediment control measures. The plat should provide drainage and utility easements S-feet wide along interior lot lines and 10-feet wide along exterior lot lines. Drainage easements should be provided over all wetlands, drainage ways and ponding areas. The fire chief should review and comment ca the access and proposed cul-de-sac configuration. Please contact me at (651) 604-4S63 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLK & .\SSOCL\TES. INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: 0«, ,4.5,. „„55tt3* 651-636*4600 • Fax: 651-636-1311 mm i CITY OF ORONO Fire Marshal November 10,2003 To: Mike Gafiion, Planning Director From: Bill Meyer, FM Re: Proposed 745 Spring Hill Road subdivision Mike, My review of the above mentioned subdivision found that the existing roadway, as cmistfucted, would not be adequate to support fire operatioDS in diis area. This area of Orono has no water supply (fire hydrants) so that tny fire emergency at any of the properties would requite access with multiple tankers and pump veldcles. I've enclosed a copy of Minnesota Uniform Fire Code, Chapter 5, Section 503 that addresses minimum type, width aod surftce for fire department access road serving more than two buildings or properties. If you have any questions, please contact me. Chapter 5 FIRE SERVICE FEATURES SECTION 601 GENERAL 501.1 Scope. Fire service features for buildings, structures and premises shall comply »ith this chapter. 501.2 Pemits. A pencil shall be required as set forth in Sec tions 105.6 and 105.7. SOU Construction documents. Construction documents for proposed fire apparatus access, location of fire lanes and con struction documents and hydraulic calculations for fire hydrant systems shall be submicsd to the fire department for resiew and approval prior to conscrjction. 501.4 Timing of instaHatloii. When fire apparatus access roads or a water supply for fire protection is required to be in stalled. such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the nice of construction except w hen ap proved alternative methods of protection are provided. Tempo rary street signs shall be installed at each street intersection when construction of new roadways allows passage by vehicles in accordance with Seezoo 503.2. SECTION 502 DERNmONS 502.1 DeOnitloru. The following words and terms shall, for the purposes of this chapter and as used elsewhere in this code, have the meanings shown herein. FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD. A road that provides fire apparatus access frcm a fire sution to a facility, tmilding or portion thereof. This is a general term inclusive of all other terms such as fire lane, public street, private street, parking lot lane a.nd access roadw2.y. FIRE COMMAND CENTER. The principal attended or un attended location w here the sums of the detection, alarm com munications. and control systems is displayed, and from which the s\ stcm(s) can be nuaually controlled. FIRE DEPARTMENT NLASTER KEY. A limited issue key of special or controlled design to be carried by fire department officials in command which will open key boxes on specified properties. FIRE LAND. A road cr other passageway developed to allow the passage of fire appararus. A fire lane is not necessarily in tended for vehicular trz5c other than fire apparatus. KEY BOX. A secure, usperproof device with a lock operable only bv a fire departmez: icaster key: and containing building entry keys and other key s that may be required for access in an emergency. 2000 INTI RNATIONAL FJ»E CODE* SECTION 503 FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS 503.1 Where required. Fire appararus access roads shall be provided and maintained in accorda.-.ce with Sections 503.1.1 through S03.1.3. 503.1.1 Buildings and fncUitics. Approved fire apparanis access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or wi'hin the jurisdiction. The fire apparams acce .'. road shall comply with the requirements of this secuon ) i shall ex tend to within 150 feet (45 720 mn) of all portions of ±e fa cility or any portion of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility . Exception: The code official is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet (45 720 mm) where: 1. The building is equipped throughout with an ap proved automatic sprinkler system installed in ac cordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. 2. Fire apparams access reads cannot be installed due to location on property, topography, waterway s, non-negodable grades or other similar condidoos. and an approved altemadve means of fire prctec* tion is provided. 3. There are not more than rwo Group R-3 or Group U occupancies. 503.U Additional access. The code official is authorized to require more than one fire apparatus access road based on the potential for impairment of a single road by vehicle con gestion, condition of tetrain. climatic conditions or ether factors that could limit access. 503.U High-piled storage. Fir; department vehicle access to buildings used for high-piled combustible storage shall comply with the applicable provisions of Chapter 23. 503 J Specifications. Fire apparanis access roads shall be in stalled and arranged in accordance with Sections 503.2.1 through 503.2.7. 503 J.1 Dimensions. Fire apparams access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (6096 nun), except for approved security gates in accordance with Sec tion 503.6. and an unobstructed venical clearance of notless than 13 feet 6 inches (41 15 mm'i. 503.2J Authority. The code official shall have the auicr- ity to require an increase in the minimum access widdis where they are inadequate for fir: or rescue operations. 503JJ Surface. Fire apparatus access roads shall be de signed and maintained to supper, the imposed loads of fire apparams and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-wea±er driving capabilities. S03 J.4 - S06 J FIBE SERVICE FEATURES 503^^ ‘nimlog radius. The required turning radius of a fire apparatus access road shall be determined by the code official. 503 Dead ends. Dead-end fire apparatus access toads in excess of 150 feet (45 720 mm) in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. 503.2.6 Bridges and elevated surfkccs. Where a bridge or an elev ated surface is part of a fire apparatus access road, the bridge shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges. Bridges and elevated surfaces shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry the imposed loads of fire appa ratus. Vehicle load limits shall be posted at both entrances to bridges when required by the code official. Where elevated surfaces designed for emergency vehicle use are adjacent to surfaces which are not designed for such use. approved bar riers. approved signs or both shall be installed and main tained when required by the code official. 503.2.7 Grade. The grade of the fire apoaratus access road shall be within the limiu established by the code official based on the fire department's apparatus. 503 J .Marking. WTiere required by the code official, approved signs or other approved notices shall be provided for fire appa ratus access roads to identify such roads or prohibit the obstruc tion thereof. Signs or notices shall be maintained in a clean and legible condition at all times and be replaced or repaired when necessary to provide adequate visibility. 503.4 Obstnictioa of fire apparatus access roads. Fire appa ratus access roads shall not be obstructed in any manner, in cluding the parking of vehicles. The minimum widths and clearances esublished in Section 503.2.1 shall be maintained at all times. 5033 Required gates or barricades. The code official is au thorized to require the installation and maintenance of gates or other approved barricades across fire apparatus access roads, trails or other accessways, not including public streets, ailevs or highways. 5033.1 Secured gates and barricades. iMien required, gates and barricades shall be secured in an approved man ner. Roads, trails and other accessways that have been closed and obstructed in the manner prescribed by Section 503.5 shall not be trespassed on or used unless authorized by the owxer and the code official. E.xccption: The restriction on use shall not apply to pub lic officers acting within the scope of duty. 503.6 Security gates. Where security gates are installed, they shall be .maintained and an approved means of emergency oper ation shall be provided and maintained. SECTION 504 ACCESS TO BUILDING OPENINGS AND ROOFS 504.1 Required access. Exterior doors and openings required by this cesfe or the International Building Code shall be main- uined readily accessible for emergency acceu by the fire de panmen:. .An approved access walkway leading from fire apparatus access roads to exterior openings shall be provided when required by the code official. 504 J Maintenaocc of exterior doon and openings. Exterior doon arid their function shall not be eliraisa’.ed without prior approval. Exterior doors that have been rendered nonfuncti^ and that retain a functional door exterior appearance shall have with the words THIS DOOR BLOCKED. The sign shall consist of letters hav- mg a pmicipal stroke of not less than 0.75 irch (19.1 mm) wide and at least 6 inches (152 mm) high on a contrasting back ground. Required fire dep^ment Kcess doors shall not be ob- stwti^ or eliminated. Exit and exit access doors shall comply with p^ter 10. Access doors for high-piled combustible stor age shall comply with Section 2306.6.1 . 5043 Stairway access to roof. New buildings four or more stones in height, except those with a roof slope greater than four unitt verucal in 12 units horizontal (333-percent slope) shal ^ provided with a stairway to the roof. Such stairway shall be marked at sueet and floor levels wi*Jj a sign indicatins that the stairw ay continues to the roof. Where roofs are used for roof gardens or for other purposes, stairwavs shall be provided as required for such occupancy classificau'cn. SECTION 505 PREMISES IDENTIFICATION 505.1 Address numben. New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers, or ap- prov^ building identification placed in a position to be plainly lepble and visible from the street or road bonting the property. Tne« numbers shall contrast with their backzround. Address numbm shril be Arabic numerals or alphabet letters. Numbers snaU be a minimum of 4 inches (102 mm) high w ith a minimum suoke width of 03 inch (12.7 mm). 5053 Street or road signs. Streets and roads shall be identified w ith approved signs. Temporary signs shaU be installed at each s’jeet intersection when consuuction of new roadways allows '^abides. Signs shall be of an approved size, weather resistant and be maintained until replaced by pe.tnanent signs. SECTION 506 KEY BOXES 506.1 Wlien required. IMiere access to or w ithin a structure or a.1 vea is restricted because of secured openL-.gs or where im mediate access is necessary for life-saving or fire-fighting pur poses. the code official is authorized to require a key box to be mstalled in an accessible location. The key bc.x shall be of an approved type and shall contain keys to gain access as required by the code official. 506.1.1 Locks. An approved lock shall be installed on gates or similar barriers when required by the code official. milntenance. The operator c: the building $..all i^ediately notify the code official and p.-ovide the new wy when a lock is changed or rekeyed. The kev to such lock shall be secured in the kev box. 2000 MTERNATIONAl FIRE COOEB Jim Murphy, City Council Member December 4,2003 Page 2 and are not now, adverse to access across this portion of their land, such access is purely permissive in character and does not rely upon any easement or other vested legal right. > Third, access to the Property further requires travel for several hundred feet over one final segment, a twenty-foot (20’) wide access easement across portions of the Winston property (the “Easement”). The Easement was granted by deed in 1985, and by its terms it is specifically limited in scope and dimension. In addition, because of the angle at which the Easement converges with both the Cartway and the Hawn’s property, it appears that the effective width of the Easement is reduced to appro.ximately ten feet (10’) for a cenain limited distance. With these facts in mind, and in view of the single new residence contemplated by the Application, the Hawns believe that the Application could be tq)proved without requiring any alteration of the existing path of access, and the Hawns would not object to such an approval. The existing access, from the Hawns’ perspective, is compatible with the serenity and rural flavor of this part of Orono and has served all of the neighbors well despite its obvious narrowness and legal complexity*. More importantly, the existing path of access to the Property is sufficient to support what little additional travel would be spawned by the construction of one additional home on the Property. However, the Staff Report prepared for the City’s Planning Commission recommends approval of the Application only upon condition that the existing access to the Property be significantly expanded to meet contemporary City standards. These standards include widening the existing driveway to fifty feet (50’) in width for its full run from Spring Hill Road to the Property, and to this the Hawns object. Although the Hawns do not speak for the Winstons — and can not, therefore, comment on any willingness the Winstons may (or may not) have to expand the Easement for the benefit of the Property — the Hawns wish to clearly articulate for the record that they are opposed to any expansion of the Cartway or any significant intensification of its use. In this regard, I would also obser\ e that in the absence of the Hawns’ consent (which they have not given), any expansion of the Cartway or additional use of other portions of their property in furtherance of the Application would require a formal taking by the City. The law is clear that any such taking would, in turn, require formal proceedings, a bona fide public purpose, and pa>inent of just compensation to the Hawns, including severance damages. Because extensive landscaping and utilities are present on the affected portion of the Hawn’s property, as well as other factors, such damages are likely to be significant. In short, because an expansion of the existing access to the Property would prove to be both urmecessary in practical terms and expensive to the public in real terms, as you consider the Application the Hawns respectfully request that you reject any condition of approval or other requirements which would mandate such an expansion. \ : i ] miam WT--I Jim Murphy, City Council Member DecembCT4,2003 Page3 As always, I urge 3rou to contact me directly if you have questions or comments about this letter or the Hawns’ position with respect to the Application. Evan B. Rice cc: Members of the City Council Nina Wildnum Eleanor and Fred Winston Elizabeth and Van Hawn MI:I0$33T4.0| i- I I: nfluaiAi S • COUNCIL MEETING DEC 8 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO DATE: December 8,2003 ITEM NO.: // Dcpartncnt Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Tilk Director of Public Serv ices Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Request for Payment #f, Navarre CR19 Sidewalk Project We have reviewed the information submitted by the City's engineering firm and recommend approval of this Request for Payment. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Request for Payment #1, Navarre CR19 Sidewalk Project to Schmidt Curb Company Inc. in the amount of $30,641.78 •'airiM • f lU 1 Bonestreo Bosene Mamt Associates Owner Cityof Orono. P. O. Box 66. Ofono. MN 55323 D«t»: DeciwbT2.2003 Fof Period: 0/140003 to 12/2/2003 Request No; Connector SchmidtCwbComoenv.Inc. 13195 NEOSthStreet.ElkRivef.MN S5330 CONTRACTCMTS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT COUNTY ROAD 19 SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS BRAFILENO. 139^)2-115 SUMMARY 1 Originel Contract Amount Change Order • Addition Change Order • Deduction Revised Contract Amount Value Completed to Date Material on Hand Amount Earned Less Retainage S% Subtotal Less Amount Paid Previousiy Liquidated damages • AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. 40.SS2.SO 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 $ S 0.00 0.00 40.SS2.S0 32.254.50 0.00 32.254.50 1,612.73 30.641.78 000 0.00 30.641.78 Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO, ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Approved by Coniriclor. SCHMIDT CURB CO INC Approved by Owner CfTY OF ORONO • • Specified extract Complelion Date: October31.2003 Date:• Nmi 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 BASE MO: REMOVE BITUMINOUS SURFAONG SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FUU DEPTH) COMMON EXCAVATION (P) AGGREGATE BASE. CLASS 5.100% CRUSHED MODULAR BLOCK RETAINING WAU r CONCRETE WALK CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER. DESIGN B818 10 r CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT 11 PEDESTRIAN CURS RAMP 12 TRAFFIC CONTROL 13 SILT FENCE. HEAVY DUTY 14 SODDING. LAWN TYPE Total BASE BID: BASE BID: • Bid Amount Total • $40,552.50 Contract Unit Currant Quantity Amount UnH Quantity Plica Quantity to Data to Data SY 190 11.00 152 152 $1,872.00 LF 340 3.75 276 276 $1,035.00 CY 99 25.00 99 99 $2,475.00 TN 115 30.00 80 80 $2,400.00 TN 18 125.00 12.5 12.5 $1,582.50 TN 12 125.00 1^5 12.5 $1,562.50 SF 45 35.00 $0.00 SF 2350 5.00 2350 2350 $11,750.00 LF 335 17.50 347 347 $6,072.50 SY 10 45.00 5 5 $225.00 EA 2 250.00 2 2 $500.00 LS 1 3000.00 1 1 13.000.00 LF 200 3.75 $0.00 SY 500 7.25 $0.00 $32,254.50 Total BASE BID:$32,254.50 Total Wortc Complaiad To Date $32,254.50 * ‘ PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS OWNER CITY OF ORONO BRAFILE NO. 139^2-116 CONTRACTOR SCHMIDT CURB CO INC CHANGE ORDERS No.Dat*_________________________D*acrlptlon Amount Total Chang* Ordtrs PAYMENT SUMMARY No.From To Payment Retainage Completed 1 1 08/14/2003 12A12/03 1 30.641.76 1,612.73 1 32.254.50 1 Matarial on Hand Total Payment to Date $30,641.78 Original Contract $40,552.50 Retainage Pay No.1 1,612.73 Change Orders Total Amount Earned $32,254.50 Revised Contract $40,552.50 l3N21tlPay«to4lJdi COI MFETING DEC 8 2003REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CtlYOF ORONO DATE: December 8,2003 ITEM NO.: /2- Dcpartmcnt Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Admioistrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Request for Payment Old Long Lake Road Sanitaiy Sewer Project We have reviewed the information submitted by the City's engineering firm and recommend approval of this Request for Payment. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Request for Payment U2, Old Long Lake Road Sanitary Sewer Project to E. J. Mayers Inc. in the amount of $ 12,779.40 I '* r r ! / i id Anderli& Aoodates ttfnunkknmKiM M Ownar City ofOrono. P. 0. Box 66. Orono. MN 553234)066 Data: ForPariod:11/512003 to 12/1/2003 RaouastNo;2 Contractor E.J. Mayors. 21360 Larkin Road. Corcoran. MN 55340 CONTRACTOfrS REQUEST FOR PAYKKNT OLD LONG LAKE ROAD SEWER EXTENSION BRAFILEN0.139^)3-127 I SUMMARY 1 Original Conlrad Amount Chang# Ordar • Addition Changa Ordar • DaducOon Raviaad Contract Amount Vakja CompMad to Data Malarial on Hand Amount Eam^ Lass Ralainaga 5% Subtotal Lass Amount Paid Praviously Liquidntod damagas - AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 39.950 00 $ s 000 0.00 39.950 00 36.352 00 000 36,35200 1.817.60 34.534.40 21.755.00 0.00 12.779 40 Raoommandad for Approval by; BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANOERUK S ASSOCIATES. INC. /tTr'P'f Approvad by Con E J MAYERS App~vad by Owmar CITYOFORONO Spacifiad Contract Complation Data: Novambar 14,2003 Da‘.s: istniiracozjii Contract Unit Cufrant Quantity Amount No.Itom Unit Quantity Prica Quantity to Data to Data BASE BIO: 1 1-1/r HOPE. SOR 11 DIRECTIONAL DRILLED LF 440 10.00 -2S 372 S3.720.00 2 r HOPE, SOR 11 DIRECTIONAt. ORNXED LF 1675 10.00 118 1618 S18.180.00 3 MM* HDPE. SERVICE PIPE SDR 11 DIRECTIONAL DRILLED LF 300 15.00 200 230 S3.450.00 4 1-1/4* CURB STOP AND BOX EA 8 1000.00 7 8 S8.000.00 5 CONNECT TO EXISTING GRAVITY MANHOLE EA 1 1500.00 0.5 1 S1.900.00 ' 6 r ISOLATION VALVE EA 1 500.00 1 S500.00 7 FLUSHING CONNECTION EA 1 1200.00 1 si;k)o.oo 8 TERMINATION FLUSHING CONNECTION EA 1 1200.00 1 1 SI.200.00 9 CLEAR AND GRUB LS 1 1000.00 0.5 0.5 ssoo.oo 10 SILT FENCE. REGULAR LF 300 1.00 60 60 S60.00 It SODDING. LAWN TYPE SY 500 0.00 S0.00 12 MNDOTSEED MDC70A AC 0.3 1000.00 SO.OO 13 WOOD FIBER BLANKET SY 300 1.00 42 42 S42.00 TotolBASE BID: B/^SE BIO: - Bid Amount Total • S39.9S0.00 S36.352.00 f * PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS OWNER CITY OF ORONO r . \ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNHl. 0£0 8 2003 C\TY OF ORONO DATE: December 8,2003 ITEM NO.: Dcpartncnt Approval: Nanc Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Request for Final Payment Surface Water Management Plan This is the Request for Final Payment, in the amount of $60,000 for the Surface Water Management Plan which has been completed by Bonestroo Engineers. This issue was discussed at a recent Council woric session with a recommendation for approval of this payment. This final payment amount is a combination of the unpaid balance of the original contract amount, and a portion of additional costs beyond the contract amount. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Request for Final Payment for the Surface Water Management Plan to Bonestroo Engineers in the amount $60,000. Expenditure to be funded from the Stormwater Utility Fund, with approval of the appropriate budget adjustment to reflect this expenditure. ml TO: Mayor Peterson and Council Members FROM: Ron Mooise, CiQr Administrator DATE: October 27.2003 f SUBJECT: Boncstroo Associates Request for Additional Budget for Completion of Snrfiice Water Management Plan In the mid 1900*s the City contracted with Boncstroo Associates, the City ’s engineering consultant, to develop a Surfisce Water Management Plan (S WMP) at a cost of $108.000. The process and timeline for the development of the plan were extended significantly as Boncstroo experienced chany and as the rules and conditions under which the SWMP was being developed were changed This resulted in a final product that is substantiaUy beyond what was initiaUy envisioned, but also doubled the costs. Boncstroo has requested these additional costs be divided between the City and Boncstroo. Two letten firom Boncstroo regarding the additional costs are attached. Representatives of Boncstroo will attend the worksession to review the cost information. ■ 1 k'.*. .1- •j''' -A' • tl\t Bonestroo Rosene Ancfertik£i |\|| Associates Engineers & Architects ********^- —ww. AjMtflHi <fM AtiactM*!, kK. It «n AtrinnMI** ActlaivtAyal OkM^tuAlty ttnyltiftr IFrIfMlejIi: Ctto G Bonestroo. H • Mjrvm L Sorveie. Pi • Oi«nn B. Cook. Pf • Bobert G Scfiunicfil Pf • Jtffy A tCwTOon, P£ • Merk A. Hjnson. Pf Stfiier CiAMllBiifr Bobort W Boient. Pf. • iotopb C. A«*eriik. Pf. • B kam f bimtf. Pf. • Suun M. Bberim. CPA Aisbclbct PnnclMiB; Beitfi A. Gordoa PI- • Bobert B. Pfefftfi#. Pf. • Bidsorti w Poittr. PI. • Oovie O LoUot#. Pf • Mtcnael T BA^monr. Pf. • ^ K. Pittd. Pf. • Rennem P Anderson. Pf • Mere B Boifs. Pf • Odvid A. Bonestroo Mi A^ • t*a>ey P W.*:jrnion. PI.. LS. • A^nes M. Bmg. MBA • Aitjn Bicfe S€fwmdt. PC • fhonus W Pettnon. PC • Jornts B. Meerd. PX • M«ies B. iensen. PC • L Pfniitp Grevet w. Pf • Oentel J fdgerton. Pf. • nmjfi Mjrtmei. Pf • Thomji A i/no. PC • Shekson j Jonnson • Dole A Grove. PC • Tftomes A Bousbbr. Pi. • Bobert J. Oevtry. P£. Officti: St *ml. Sc C^outf. Bochester end Wtiimjr. MN • XLl^sukpt. Wi • ChKsgo. it Hbbilte: AAetborejr^oocom . . May 21, 2003 Mr. Ron Moorse« Administrator Qtyof Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway, PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 • — - . Re: Additional Budget for the Orono Surfece Water Management Plan Bonestroo Prefect # 198-98-063 Dear Ron: This letter Is in follow-up to our meeting of March 12,2003. At that meeting, we discussed . Bonestroo's request for additional budget/reinibursement for the Orono Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). At that time, it was determined that there were two primary groupings of tasks that accounted for the additional costs associated with completing the SWMP. They are 1) determining the stormwater utility and trunk/area fee schedules, and 2) transforming the SWMP from an engineering document to an implementable planning tool. Below are estimates for the value or cost of these tasks with a listing of the primary sub-tasks. 1. Fee Determination............ $14,400 $25,6002. SWMP Transformation ....... > Redevelopment Issues > Basis For Finandng/Fee Determination > Wetlands Section (other than inventory/assessment) > Implementation Section > Changes to Technical Section > General, across the document Ron, In the time since that meeting, we have been able to identify a few tasks that should be counted as notable contributors to cost of the S'.'/MP. Tliese are in addition to the issues cited In our letter to you dated September 19, 2002 $15,2003. Additional Tasks ............... > Highway 12 Coordination > MCWD Rule Changes (not related to approval process) > Ravine Stabilization Needs > Mapping 4. Total.$S5,200 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul. MN 55113 • 651-636-4600 • Fax: 651-636-1311 J These numbers are based on csHmales or hours needed to complete the tasks. Wetooka conservative approach (to Orono% benefit) to estimating the hours, and dU so after discussion wkh the individuals involved at the time. In most cases, the work vrasmtertwined with other aspects of the proilect and therefbre difficult to determine an exact amount Attached is a description or the tasks performed that did not fan under the original scope. Alongwilh the tasks/description provided in our letter or September 2002 (attKhed), this letter represents the basis for our request for additional budget for completion or the SWMP. Please cafl IT you have any questions or concerns. Respectfully submitted, BONKTROO, ROSENE, ANDERUKANDERUK 8i ASSOCIATES, INC Andrew M. Budelis, CPESC Project Scientist Attachments a: Mflte Gaffron, Orono Tom Kellogg, Bonestroo Foe 139-98-063 ■ % Attachment ■ Additional Budort Reoueat -1 higbwsy^UDtiate/CQQQtlQft!^ Ion ef Additional Ta«k« The 1997 draft SWMP was based on pre-TH 12 conditions TH 12 predicated changes in watershed configuration and discharge rates Next draft SWMP modified to reflect new ponding requirements, mapping, etc In 1996, MCWD adopted Ruie B, which induded Stormwater Management and ESC In 1998, MCWD adopted Rule N, which separated and updated both issues Both instances mandated review of the SWMP and some changes to models, and caused a ripple effect to appendices, text, and mapping While locating pipes for conveyance of runoff, degraded or susceptible ravines were identified Qty initiated effort to inventory and prtoritize all such ravines for the QP f!taDypsl9i«ii • As a result of the tasks/issues described above • Also see the tasks/issues described in the September 2002 letter ERfLQfitRnniOitfian Stofmwater/Area Charge D^etmlnaOort • Evolved from a single City-wide fee (original scope) to a watershed based fee Expansion of watershed fee to consider MUSA and Non-MUSA areas Final fee was calculated using QP indicator projects ^orm water Utility • Research, compilation of Information, and determination done coincidental to SWMP development Performed gradually as compared to a separate study Redevelopment Issues City identified a need to address stormwater impacts associated with expansion and new construction • Led to the preparaton of flow charts, guidelines, fee curves, and tables • Addressed water quality requirements and/or cash contributions In lieu of improvements WeOands Secdoh Integrate a wetland section Into the SWMP, including wetland inventory, mapping, restoration. and management Implementation Section • Expanded to be more comprehensive • Required a series of meetings to reflect the goals and objectives of the Council and SWMP task force Tedtnical Section • Expanded to provide guidelines for new developments including Bioretention and Biofiltrabon • Curves and tables were prepared specifically for Orono's conditions. General/ Document • Format and content of the document changed for readability and logic as a planning tool • Modified after original draft approved by staff in 1997 \ ■ : >i September 19,2002 Mr. Ron Moorse, Administrator Oty of Orooo 2750 Keiiey Parkway, PO Box 66 Crystai Bay, MN 55323-0066 Re: Additionai Budget for the Orono Surface Water Management Pian Bonestroo Project # 198-98-063 Dear Ron: As you are aware, the deveiopment of Ororw's Surtoce Water Mana > nent Plan (SWMP) has exceeded the original time arid budget In this letter we have prepare a description of additional services associated with runoff managerrent planning in Orono, as well as the amount of additional costs associated with the SWMP. Also, Mike Gaffron and I have recently completed work to resolve issues for final approval from Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). From the submittal of the review draft to MCWD (May 2001) to the present, we have Included hours spent on this project under the "general" billing number, with detailed descriptions. >I»UC»U al ServicesDescription of Ad<____________ Because this SWMP has evolved over a six-year period, it has effectively had two lives. The first was the draft approved by staff In 1997. Subsequent edits, updates, and changes to the SWMP have resulted in a better, more implementaticn-oriented runoff management tool. It now has detailed schedules, priorities, cost estimates, and strategies to approach a variety of surface water issues. This means that Orono will realize immediate, tangible benefits from its investment in runoff management. Some of these additional services have already been put to work, while others will happen as the SWMP is implemented. Following is a brief description of changes and updates to the SWMP since the 1997 draft. •f GIS Maps and Databases The originally approved GIS for system mapping was a UNIX-based system. Over the life of the project, GIS has evolved into a PC-based sy^em. In order to be compatible with Orono's PC-based system and to be able to keep up with current GIS technology, the entire data set for producng maps and associated information was converted. ♦ Work Flow Interruption There have been periods of time that vrork on the SWMP stopped. The lengths of time, source, and reasons for interruption have varied. When the project resumed after an extended period of time, "getting back up to speed" resulted in additional hours. Consequently, some parts of thie SWMP had to be revised to reflect nev/ information. ♦ Trunk Fee/Stormwater Utiiity The research, compiiation of informatcn, and rate determination for the "trunk fee" and the "stormwater utility" were done coincidental to SWMP development The method used to determine trunk fee rates was also devised as pert of these tasks. The hours spent on these was charged to the SWMP, which was then updated, as these issues were resolved. Changes In Scope The originally approved scope was designed to meet the standards and requirements (at that dme) of reviewing agencies, notably MCZ/D. Tnese standards and requirements have evolved over the course of the project. For example, the*e is considerably mere emphasis on the use of infiltrabon as an on-site runoff management tool today than there was in 1996. Also, as the SWMP took shape, both Qty and Bonestroo staff saw ways to improve it to reflect the goals and objectives of the Council and residents of Oreno. As a result, there have been several minor alterations to the scope, which, when Incurred Individually, seemed to pose an insign Jeant impact to the budget When the changes are looked at collectively, the impact to the budgec vras notable. Seme examples of this are: V' minor fbrmat/content changes as well as those described below v' development of water quality treatment flowcharts ^ determination of QP project prerities ♦ Additional Meetings We have participated in several addifera! meetings with staff. Council, and MCWD to review and discuss SWMP content and develop shert-term strategies for moving forward. In particular, along with aty staff, we have spent bm.e coerdirating with MCV/D staff to review comments and discuss resolutions. Often, as suggested earlie*, this coordinaden would lead to additional or modified requests to be addressed in order to ertain approval. Also because of the length of the SWMP process, there has been the need to familiarize new Council and Commission members with the content and objectives of the SWMP. ♦ Format and Content of the SWMP Revisions, deletions, additions, ard modif cabons to the format and content have been ongoing throughout the second life of the project due to the issues discussed above. Along with many minor editing changes, these majer erftcral/format changes to improve readability, flow, and appearance have created a docum.ent that is a notable improvement over the 1997 draft: assimilation of the Executive Sum."nary into the Introduction v' reformatting and rewriting the Technical Background section v' development of the current corrprehensive Implementab'on Section v' expansion of discussion of water quality treatment end wetland management style/format of font, tables, paragraphs, footers, figures, and page setup / reconfiguring subject headircs and numbering Transitions In addition to the SWMP improvements, Screstroo has changed key personnel over the life of the project. At these transitions, time and effer: needed for the new person to "ramp up" their familiarity and proficiency to move the SWMP forward. The final transiticn was to put me in as project manager, which began the SWMP's secend Hfe. Since then the SWMP has developed, through much coordination with and effort by Mike Gaffran and others at the Gty, into the current document. Budget Status To date. Invoices for 90% complete (of th« criginal budget) have been submitted and paid by the City. Another invoice, originally submitted July 1997, for a.n additional 5% ($5,410) has not been paid, and is enclosed. Also at this bme, we are submitting an invoice for the remaining 5% of the original budget. Payment of these t.vo ir.c'ces would complete remi*tarKe of the contracted budget amount of $108,000. The total amount charged [for the SWMP] to Bonestroo project mjmter 139-98*063 is $201«600. The original contracted budget amount was $106,000. Some of the factors contrfcuBng to this dWeranc e have been beyond aty or Bonestroo control. On the other hand, some can be directly attribufable to decisions, requests, and actions by the three primary parties involved • Bones boo, ttte aty, and the MCWO. We feel that because we are responsible for a portion of the additional hours spent on the Plan, we should accept responsibility for a portion of the ercess budget The different between the contracted amount and the costs for additional services is $93,400. This represents our efforts up to submitting the draft SWMP to MCWD and the Met Council (May 2001). Again, work done since then, as part of the review and approval process has been charged to the general billing number. Considering all factors, including those under our control, and our desire to provide the Qty with an up-tCHlate, high quality Surface Water Management Plan, we feel that a division of the additiotMl costs [between Orono and Bonestroo] is a reasonable approach. Therefore, we request your review of this matter and a meeting in the near future to work out a solution. Thank you In advance for your consideration. Respectftilly submitted, B0NE5TRCX), ROSENE, ANDERUK Si ASSOCIATES, INC Andrew M. Budelis Project Scientist Enclosures cc: Mike Gaffron, Qty of Orono Gregg Gappa, Ofy of Orono Glenn Co^ Principal • Bonestroo Tom Kellogg, Bonestroo Ismael Martinez. Bonestroo File 139*98^ COl INCIL MEETING . DEC 8 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION oF ORONO DATE: December 8,2b03 ITEM NO.: /4 Department Approval: Nine Gregory A. Gappa Till* Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: /j Public Services's Directors Report Item Description: Minnehaha Creek WatersfM Management Model Agreement- Resolution The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has developed a computerized watershed management model which contains hydraulic information on creeks and lakes within the watershed district. This water flow and water elevation information is useful to the City for various purposes. This model is available for use by cities in the watershed district for no charge. In order to adequately protect this model information, the watershed district has developed a standard license agreement that cities must sign in order use the watershed management model. We are recommending approval of the resolution authorizing execution of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Management Model Agreement. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve resolution authorizing execution of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Management Model Agreement. I A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF ORONO TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT FOR THE USE OF MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT MODEL WHEREASy the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has developed a Watershed Management Model and which is described in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District License Agreement attached and hereby made a part hereof; and WHEREASy the City of Orono desires to use this Minnehaha Creek Watershed Management Model in the course of conducting the City’s business; and WHEREASy the parties agree that the execution of this agreement is necessary to adequately protect said Minnehaha Creek Watershed Management Model; and NOWy THEREFOREy be it resolved that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota authorizes execution of this agreement. Adopted by the City Council of Orono this 8th day of December, 2003. Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson Mayor ATTEST: ' i 1 i • I H i i ' 1^...^..., a I......... [ LICENSE AGREEMENT MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT MODEL Lkcnscc: City of Orono THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT is entered into by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District C District”), a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, and The City of Orono ("User"). WHEREAS the District has developed a model consisting of geographic-based data that may be used to determine hydrologic, hydraulic and water quality conditions at all specific points within the watershed under specified land use and land cover scenarios (“Minnehaha Creek Watershed Management Model,” or MCWMM); WHEREAS the MCWMM has been developed for application to watershed-wide planning as well as to the evaluation of the local consequences of development or public infrastructure projects. WHEREAS the MCWMM has been developed with public resources, and it is the District’s intent that the MCWMM be made available to other public bodies to provide the greatest public benefit for purposes of water resource planning, management and protection; WHEREAS the District finds that wide usage of the MCWMM by public bodies within the watershed has watershed-wide benefit, wishes to promote such use, and therefore has determined not to charge other public bodies for use of the MCWMM; WHEREAS the District and User have a shared interest in the District’s maintenance of current geographic-based data within the MCWMM so that the MCWMM continues to reflect existing conditions at the time of use; and WHEREAS the District has determined that the MCWMM data are classified as "trade secret information,” nonpublic dau and otherw ise data not subject to disclosure under the Minnesota Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the District and User agree as follows: I. Use of MCWMM Data 1.1 Authorized Uses. User is g.*anted a nonexclusive, nontransferable and nonassignable license to use the MCWMM. This license shall be in effect only during compliance by User and its agents, consultants and contractors (ACC’s) with the terms and conditions of this License Agreement. User and. pursuant to section 1.3. its ACC’s may use the MCW MM in the form provided b> the District for User's own authorized public purposes and for no other purpose. User and its ACC’s ma> modif> or transfer the MCWMM data, or merge the MCWMM data into other data bases, only for User's authorized public purposes. User and its ACC’s may operate on the MCWMM data using such proprietary or public software as it independently is authorized to use and may disclose or distribute the products of that operation, but it may not disclose or distribute the MCWMM data in the same or substantially the same form as received from the District. User may duplicate the MCWMM data for use by User and Its ACC’s, provided the central processing units on which the MCWMM data are maintained support only equipment operated by User and iu ACC’s, and the MCWMM data are used only for User's own authorized public purposes. Except for off-site backup pursuant to established proc^ures. User and its ACC's shall not remove the MCWMM data from their place of business. . II 1 li uiiWAlWi A 1.2 Unauthorized Uses. User and its ACC’s shall not use the MCWMM data on behalf of any individual, organization, corporation, government entity, or any other party other than User. User’s ACC’s shall use the MCWMM data only in the conduct of User’s business and for User’s authorized public purposes. User and its ACC’s shall not duplicate or disclose the MCWMM data to any third parties unless such use. duplication or disclosure is e.xpressly authorized in writing by the District. User and its ACC’s shall not charge third parties for the availability of the MCWMM data. This shall not prevent User and its ACC’s from charging third parties as otherwise authorized for its software costs, staff time or other ancillary costs associated with modeling and analysis using the MCWMM data. User acknowledges that the District has declared the applicability of copyright protection to the MCWMM data User shall conform to all legal requirements consistent with the copyright status of the data as declared bv the District. 1.J Third Parly Access. If it is necessary for User to make the MCW'MM data available to an outside ACC for User’s authorized public purposes. User must obtain from each ACC and provide to the District a signed copy of the Watershed Management Model fhird-Party Certification attached to and incorporated into this License Agreement as Attachment A, and must receive a written authorization from the District 1.4 Data Security. User and its ACC’s agree to take all necessary and reasonable steps to ensure the MCWMM data are not disclosed or made accessible in whole or in part to third parties e.xcept as may be authorized in this License Agreement. User and its ACC’s agree they will not knowingly or negligently allow their employees or agents to copy, sell, disclose or otherwise make the MCWM.M data available to others. User and its ACC’s agree to immediately notify the District by telephone and in writing of any ur. .thorized sale or other disclosure. User and its ACC’s further agree to prevent unauthorized disclosure through appropriate security measures including, but not limited to. providing physical security for copies of the MCWMM data and taking all steps that they take to protect tangible and intangible data products of their own that they regard as proprietary, confidential or nonpublic. 1.5 Data Practices Act User shall treat the MC\K MM data as nonpublic data not subject to public disclosure under the Data Practices Act and shall advise any requestor of the data classification accordingly. User shall notify the District immediately of any challenge to User s withholding of the MCWMM data and shall not release the MCWMM data, or any pan thereof, pursuant to the Data Practices Act without written authorization from the District. 1.6 Reservation of Rights. The MCWMM data are the e.\clusi\e property of the District which reuins all right, title and interest in the MCWMM data, including the right to license the data to other users. Any right or remedy provided to the District in this License Agreement shall be nonexclusive and in addition to any other right or remedy available to the District in law or equity . 1.7 Errors and Omissions. User timely shall adv ise the District in w riting of any errors or omissions it finds within the MCWMM data. 1.8 Annual Report. User shall submit to the District annually by January 3 1 a report containing the following information; (a) a description of each change in land use, land cover and stormwater conveyancing infrastructure since the date of the prev ious annual report that may affect the outcome of hydrologic, hydraulic or water quality modeling within the drainage area where the change has occurred, including all information necessary for the District to maintain the currency of the MCWMM; (b) a text description of User’s use of the MCWMM data since the date of the previous annual report; and (c) the name and contact information for the User’s representative(s) who may be contacted for further information regarding the maners in the report. 2. License Agreement Term and Termination i 2.1 Term. The term of this License Agreement shall commence upon execution of this License Agreement by both parties and shall end on the January 31 first following commencement Notwidistaidng, the License Agreement shall renew automatically from year to year provided that the District has received the annual report required by paragraph 1 .8. 2.2 Termination for Cause. Notwithstanding section 2.1, the District may terminate this License Agreement at any time on written notice to User if User fails to comply with the terms and conditions of this License Agreement, and may terminate the License Agreement without cause on 30-day notice to User. 2.3 Return or Destruction of MCWMM Data. When this License Agreement has been terminated. User must either destroy all copies of the MCWMM data and provide to the District wrinen certification of the destruction, or return all copies of the MCWMM data to the District. 3. Limited Warranty and Disclaimers 3.1 Limited Warranty. The MCWMM data provided by the District are made available to User subject to the following limitations and restrictions; (a) User is responsible for the installation and use of the MCWMM data and the results or consequences obtained from User ’s installation or use of the MCWMM data. (b) The District does not warrant that the MCWMM data are error free, and disclaims any other warranties, express or implied, respecting this License Agreement or the MCW'NIM data. (c) THE MCWMM DATA, AND ASSOCIATED MANUALS, REFERENCE MATERIALS AND TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION (IF ANY), ARE PROVIDED "AS IS” WITHOUT ANY SUPPORT WHATSOEVER AND WITHOUT WARRANTY AS TO THEIR PERFORMANCE, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE RESULTS AND PERFORMANCE OF THE MCWMM DATA IS ASSUMED BY USER. <d)THE DISTRICT SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, COMPENSATORY OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, LOSS OF PROFIT, OTHER FINANICAL LOSS, LOSS OF DATA, OR ANY OTHER DAMAGE OF ANY KIND ARISING OUT OF USER’S USE OR ATTEMPTED USE OF THE MCWMM DATA, OR ANY THIRD PARTY CLAIMS THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE USE OF THE MCWMM DATA, EVEN IF THE DISTRICT HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH POTENTIAL LOSS OR DAMAGE. 3.2 Sole Remedies. User's sole and exclusive remedy for breach of these limited warranties shall be to return the MCWMM data to the District within sixty (60) days of receipt. The District shall replace or repair the MCWMM data at its discretion and renim the MCWMM data to User. 3.3 Indemnification. User shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the District. iU officers, board members, employees and agents from any and all actions. cosU, damages and liabilities of any nature related to User ’s use of the MCWMM data, to the degree they are the result of User ’s or an ACC’s negligence, or other action or inaction by User or an ACC that is the basis for User ’s or an ACC’s liability in law or equity. Nothing in this License Agreement shall be construed to waive any immunity applicable to the District or User or otherwise to create a right in any third party. i . r 4. General Terms and Conditions 4.1 Whereas Clauses. All recitals included in this License Agreement are incorporated into and considered a part of the Agreement. 4.2 Amendment. The terms of this License Agreement may be amended only by written agreement of the District and User. 4.3 Governing Law. This License Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted according to the laws of the State of Minnesota. 4.4 Waiver. No waiver of any violation of this License Agreement shall constitute a waiver of any subsequent violation, whether of the same or of any other term. Subsequent performance of any of the terms of this License Agreement shall not constinite a waiver of any preceding violation, regardless of the other party’s knowledge of the preceding violation at the time of subsequent performance. The delay or omission of any party's exercise of any right arising from any default shall not affect or impair the party's rights regarding the same or future default. 4.S No Agency. The District and User are independent parties for all legal purposes hereunder, and nothing herein shall be construed to create an agency, joint venture, partner^ip or other form of business association between the parties. 4.6 Assignment. User shall not assign, sublet or transfer this License Agreement in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the District. Any attempt to assign, sublet or transfer this License Agreement without prior written consent shall be void and of no force or effect. 4.7 Correspondence. Correspondence regarding this License Agreement or the MCWMM data shall be directed as follows: To the District: Modeling Coordinator Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 1 8202 Minnetonka Boulevard Deephaven MN SS39I To User: Greg Gappa City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal, N!N 55323-0066 4.8 Survival of Provisions. All obligations of User regarding use and protection of the MCWMM data, all indemnification obligations and limitations on all warranties in this License Agreement shall survive termination of the Agreement. 4.9 Authority. The person or persons executing this License Agreement on behalf of User represent that they are duly authorized to execute this License Agreement on behalf of User and represent and warrant that this License Agreement is a legal, valid and binding obligation enforceable according to its terms INTENDING TO BE LEGALLY BOUND by the foregoing lenns: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Date: December 8,2003 (Attach Resolution of Governing Body Anthoriiing Signature) MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT District Administrator Date: '•V/' •r-va j REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COllNCII MEETING DEC 8 2003 CITY OF ORONO DATE: December 4,2003 ITEM NO: /S^ Department Approval: Nanc Ron Moofse Title City Administrator Adminbtrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Payment Request Number 1 1 - Navarre Fire Station The City has received two invoices for work related to the Navarre Fire Station. - BKV Group, for architectural services, in the amount of $4,520.95 - STS Consultants, Inc., for construction testing services, in the amount of $1,263.25. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: BKV ^ R O U P Archit«ctur« Interior Design Engineering Boormofi KfOOf Voo«l Group Inc 222 North Second Street Minneapolis^ AAN 55401 lelephone; 612339^752 Focskmio: 612339.6212 www.bkvgroup.com EOE Bininc Groyp 001 Tetab: Invoice Invoice Number: 21033 Invoice Date: November 25.2003 CitvofOrono 2750 Kellev Parkway P.O. Box 66 Oiono. MN 55323-0066 Attention: Mr. Ron Moorse Project: 1124.10 City of Orono--Fire Station Professional Services throuKh 11/25/2003 Billing Group: Contract X: 001 Contract Amount: Percent Complete: Fee Earned; Prior Fee Billings; Current Fee Total: Billing Group Total: Billing Croup: rcimb Contract»: Reimbursables 0 2 2003 ciTyoFo«o«<o SI 10.500.00 94.00% SI 03.870.00 S99.450.00 S4.420.00 S4.420.00 I BiUlag Grtap rclmb Toub: L BKV Group. Inc. Project: 1124.10 Invoice: 21033 November 25.2003 Page 2 of 2 Expenie Copy Paper 81/2x11 Ex|Kess Mail Services Fax Long Dist Telephone Chrgs Milcage/Travel Postage Reimbursables Totals Charge 21.90 14.00 300 0.75 43.80 17.50 S 100.95 Billing Group Total: Project Totals: S 100.95 Invoice Total $4,520.95 BUIUlf Sunnuiry Cuirr:eiifil Professional Services $4,420.(0 $99,450.00 $103,870.0( Reimbursable Expenses*$100.9:$6,510.04 $6,6I0.9‘ Outside Services:$0.(0 $11.40 $ll.4( Other Services and Fees:$0.(0 $0.00 SO.Ol Finance Charges:$0.(0 $0.00 SO.Oi Taxes:$0.(0 $0.00 SO.OC Total:$4,520.95 $105,971.44 $110.492.3-: I: i 1 -i ii ! 1 i! 1 mu ir<ri i-BVTM-atiiaiTrhrni u M jiMiuaiua 1 Please Remit To: STS CONSULTANTS LTD. P.O. BOX 1238 BEDFORD PARK, IL 60499 Invoice Number: Invoice Date: 251123 NOVEMBER 21, 2003 TERMS: DUE UPON RECEIPT Customer Code: Customer PO: STS Office: STS Job Number: Bill Thru Date: 151891 6-99043.C 10/25/03 TO: CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 ORONO, MN 55323-0066 If you have questions regarding this invoice, please call STEVEN J RUESINK at (763) 315-6300 ATTN: MR. RON MOORSE DESCRIPTION UNITS RE: Construction Testing & UBC Special Inspection Services for the Navarre Fire Station in Orono, MN. UNIT PRICE ECTENDED TOTAL Construction Senior Consultant 2.50 Hours 92.00 230.00 Structural Steel Technician 3.CO Hours 52.00 156.00 Clerical/Word Processor 2.CO Hours 45.00 90.00 Senior Technician 13.25 Hours 43.00 569.75 Mileage 250.CO Miles .45 112.50 Concrete Compressive Strength 7.00 Tests 14.00 98.00 Curing Reserve Cylinders 1.00 Cyl.7.00 7.00 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE $1,263.25 PLEASE REMIT ONE COPY OF INVOICE WITH YOUR PAYMENT. A FINANCE CHARGE OF 1 1/2% PER MONTH (18% ANNUALLY) WILL BE ADDED TO ALL INVOICES UNPAID AFTER 30 DAYS >tr 1 V i:. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUMCH MFETING DEC 8 2003 CITY OF ORONO DATE: December 4,2003 ITEM NO: l(p Department Approval: Name LinVee TIUf City Clerk Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: Proposed 2004 Fee Schedule Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Attachment: A. Memo from Mike Gaflion Regarding Planning and 2k>ning Fee Increases B. Summary Ordinance C. Proposed 2004 Fee Schedule Ordinance The proposed 2004 Fee Schedule Ordinance and Summary reflecting the proposed changes are attached. The proposed changes include: Increase in various planning and zoning application fees (see attached Exhibit A for detailed analysis). Increase of 1.3% in all sanitary sewer and water connection charges. 2.8% increase in sewer rates and 2.8% increase in water rates. Fifty cent to one dollar increase in golf rates. The golf rates are increased every other year so that they can remain at even dollar amounts. Addition of Plumbing and Mechanical Permit fee for “Replacement of residential flxture or appliance” that meets the 2002 State Statute requirements. Addition of fee for GIS and color maps. Addition of fee for information provided on CD. Addition of fee for postage and handling of administrative documents that are requested to be returned by mail. Addition of charge for administrative staff time in excess of regular fees. Decrease in Beer, Wine & Liquor License fees related to Initial Investigation and Temporary permits. State law establishes the maximum fees cities can charge. Remove charge for Firearms Permit to Cany as these permits are now issued by the Sheriffs Department. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached ordinance adopting the City's Fee Schedule for 2004 and Summary Ordinance for publication. A To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mayor and Council Lin Vce, City Clerk Greg Gappa, Public Services Director From: Date: Subject: Mike Gaffron, Planning Director December 5,2003 Proposed Plaiuiing & Zoning Application Fee Licreases for 2004 Summary*: The basic costs for processing variances, CUPs and other zoning applications are not being covered by application fees. To bring fees more into line with actual costs, the basic variance/CUP fee is proposed to increase to $600 from the current level of $250. Other fees are proposed to increase commensurately as noted in this memo. If Council concludes this increase is too drastic all at once, a pha5'*-in could be considered. The 2004 Budget reflects an increase to $500. Background Plarming and Zoning staff process on average about 1 1 0 zoning applications per year. The numbers breakdown for a typical year has been: Variances CUP’S Subdivisions/Sketch Plans Miscellaneous* 75 15 10 10 Total Applications 1 10 •Zoning Code cr CMP Amendments, Commercial Site Plan Reviews, Street or Easement Vacations, PUD or PRD Rezonings. Administrative Appeals, etc. I have reviewed the fees charged by other metro area cities for similar applications, as a comparison with our fees (“Municipal License and Permit Fee Survey - 2003" Copyright 2003 by Association of Metropolitan Municipalities). 1 have also attempted to estimate the actual costs incurred by the City in reviewing variances and CUPs. Variances and CUPs The base fee for variances has been S250 since the beginning of 1997. The last increase was from $220 to $250. As compared to other metro-area cities in the 2,500-20,000 population range, Orono’s current variance application fees are slightly over the average of $ 160. However, the range for other cities is $50-620, and some add an escrow to cover actual costs, ranging from $50 to $1,500. It should be note -i that few other cities document their variances with detailed resolutions that are filed at the county. The complexity of our reviews due to odd shaped lots, hardcover calculation‘s etc., suggests it w ould rot be inappropriate for Orono’s fees to be at the high end of the range JL- p i: ZoiUng Fees Review December 5,2003 Page 2 Prior to 2003 the base fee for Orono ’s CUP applications ranged from SI00 to $325 depending on the type of CUP. Since virtually the same costs are incurred for CUPs as for variances, for 2003 all residential CUP fees below S250 were raised to the $250 level. Commercial/Industrial CUP fee is $325. Residential CUP fees for other cities range from $75 to $825, with an average of $245. Again as with variances, an escrow is often collected ranging from $50 to as much as $3,000 for commercial uses. Exhibit A is an estimate of the average staff time and costs involved in processing a tvpical variance application. For both variances and CUP’s, staffis recommending a fee increase to S600for 2004. We do not expect this to reduce the number of applications we receive, but we will expect a few complaints about the fee increase. Subdivisions Orono ’s subdivision application fees have been somewhat higher than variance/CUP fees due to the complexity and wider range of disciplines involved in the review. Separate incremental fees are charged for number of lots, septic review, and special improvements such as roads, sanitary and storm sewer systems, water systems, etc. to cover additional staff time and some of the engineering review as well as inspection fees. NMiile the "Special Improvement Fees” have remained nearly constant over the past 15 years, these are meant to cover the City Engineer fees, with excess Engineer review/inspection costs treated as a pass-through cost to the applicant. We do not need to increase these fees, as any excess costs incurred will be billed. The basic staff review process for a plat or a lot line rearrangement is similar to that of a variance/CUP, but the plat usually results in two resolutions rather than one. Our current fees appear to be about average as compared to the other cities, although we do not collect an escrow up front. It is my recommendation that the base fee should be raised to $750 for a Class III plat and $600 for a Class I lot line rearrangement or Class II plat, in order to cover processing costs. Actual legal and engineering fees would continue to be passed on to the applicant. Sketch plan reviews do not require legal publication and do not result in a resolution. The fee for such a review should be reflective of staff time incurred, which can easily be 3-5 hours plus clerical costs, and is proposed to increase only from $275 to $350. Actual subdivision rccording^filing fees will var>' widely depending on the complexity of the subdivision and whether any legal issues arise. The City Attorney s pass-through fee is $280 hr, and a particular subdivision might require anywhere from Vi hour to many hours of attorney time. For this reason. I am suggesting a minor increase in the filing fees with the annotation that all incurred legal costs will be billed to the applicant. I Zoning Feet Review December S, 2003 Page 3 Miscelimeoua Applications These mclude street or easement vacations, requests for property rezoning. Comp Plan amendments, etc. and involve a variety of processes. However, in nearly every situation, the process involves a public hearing at the Planning Commission, and final action by Council to adopt a resolution or an ordinance. Other cities have a wide range of fees for the various miscellaneous applications; for example, rezoning requests range from $75 to $1,050 application fee and an escrow ranging from $100 to $3,000. Street vacations range from $50-350 application fee, with escrow from $0 - 500. The basic costs associated with the processing of most such applications differs little from that of variances or CUPs, hence fees should be similarly increased. There are perhaps a few exceptions. Appeals of administrative decisions have been kept at $100 for many years to provide a low-cost method for a resident or property owner to obtain PC and Council consideration of administrative actions taken by staff with which an applicant disagrees. Council may wish to leave this at a level below that needed to cover costs. “Renewal ” variance or CUP requests typically occur as a result of an applicant not being able to commence an approved project or use within one year of the initial approval, due to financial or other reasons. When no changes are being proposed from the original approval, the amount of staff time needed is significantly reduced, as prior documents are generally re-used. The City has in the past kept the renewal fee at about half of the new application fee (currently renewal fee is $150, vs new application fee of $250). Staff would recommend that the renewal fee be increased to $250, to reflect the reduced processing costs as compared to a new application. Finally, there are certain types of applications that regularly are put on the Planning Commission and Council ’s consent agendas because they are generally of little consequence and have no impact on neighboring properties. These include but may not be limited to: • lot area and/or width variances for rebuilds where no other variances are necessary; - “through lot" CUPs for accessory structures; and - certain average lakeshore setback cases where neighbors ’ views are clearly not impacted. It is staffs intent to propose code revisions that would allow these t\pes of applications to be handled administratively if specific conditions are met. The result would be a slight reduction in the annual number of applications, but also avoiding what would seem to be unneeded costs and delays for applicants. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A - Basic City Costs for Processing Zoning Applications Exhibits - List of Fees and Proposed Changes i i EXHIBIT A 12-5-03 City Expenses for Processing Variance and CUP Applications Initial prc-application meeting with applicant: 2 staff people x 1 hr = 2 hrs @ $50/hr =...............$100. Application initial clerical processing (create file, prepare envelopes for public notice, enter information into Govern system, etc.): 1 clerical person x 1/3 hr = .33 hrs @ $30/hr =........$10. Legal notice publication cost: $8/coIumn inch x 1.1 col. inch typ. =...................$9. Initial group review by B&Z staff: 6 staff people x 1/10 hour x $50/hr =....................$30. Site inspection & photos 1 staff person x 1/3 hour x $50/hr =•......................$ 17. Prepare Planning Commission memo 1 staff person x 4 hours typ. x $50/hr =................$200. Copying 1 clerical person x 20 minutes x $30/hr =...............$10. Attend PC meeting 1 staff person x '/i hr x S50/hr =.............................$25. City Recorder (Minutes incl. mtg. time & draAing time) 1 City recorder x I hr x S30/hr =..........................$30. Prepare and mail Notice of PC action 1 suff person x 1/4 hr x S50/hr =..........................$ 12. Prepare Council memo and resolution 1 staff person x 2 hours x S50/hr =.......................$100. Copying 1 clerical person x 20 minutes x $30/hr =...............$10. Attend Council meeting 1 staff person x 1/4 hour x $50/hr =.......................$ 12. City Recorder (Minutes incl. mtg. time & draAing time) I Citv- Recorder x 1/2 hr x $30/hr *........................$ 15. Prepare and Mail Notice of Council Action 1 staff person x 1/4 hr x S50/hr =............................$12. Prepare Resolution for filing 1 clerical person x 1/4 hr x $30. =............................$8. City Attorney review 0.1 hr x $280./hr =................................................$28. Metro Legal (filing) Typ. SI5-25 per item; avg =..................................$20. Final prep of file for closure 1 staff person x 1/4 hr. x $50/hr. =...................$13. Typical variance or CUP application costs $661. Additionally, if the City Engineer is needed to review drainage issues, etc. his time is a pass-thru c»'.1 which is typically 1-2 hrs @ $ 125/hr. The above costs reflect the time spent on a normal application that moves through the process without being tabled and with an applicant who is responsive to staff requests and recommendations. If an item is tabled, or if staff must spend inordinate amounts of time on an application for whatever reason, the costs in staff time necessarily increase (but in the past have not been recovered). An option to consider is whether to charge additional incremental fees w hen a tabling occurs that results in added meetings and additional staff time. i 1'^ t' CURRENT AND PROPOSED ZONING APPLICATION FEES ADDllcatlon Tvpc 2003 Current Fee $250.00 50.00 each VARIANCE Base Fee Additional variances (Addiltanal varlaaccs included ia base fee for 2004) Variance Renewal (No change from original application) $150.00 After>thc-Fact Fee Double Applic. Fee CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Residential Accessory Use Institutional Use (School, Church, etc.) Dupics Credit (per building) Guest House/Gucst Apartment Commercial/Industrial Use Non*Conforming Use (Finding of Similar Use) Land Alteration: - Grading St Filling - designated wetland/floodplain - Grading, filling, etc. (over 500 cubic yards) - Sea walls, retaining walls within 0-75’ lakeshore Amend Existing CUP Renewal Conditional Use Permit (no change from original application) Aftcr-thc*Fact Fee Conditional Use Permit with Variance COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT RPUD or PRD Application with Subdivision RPUD or PRD Application without Subdivision PID Applications (5 acre minimum per code) PUD Rezoning (Highway 12 Corridor only) Residential: Commercial/Industrial: ZONING AMENDMENTS INCLUDING REZONXNG REQUEST TO A.MEND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN $250.00 $250.00 $250.00 $250.00 $325.00 $250.00 $250.00 + permit $250.00 $150.00 Double Applic. Fee Add $75.00 for each variance $275.00 * Consultant Fees EXHIBIT B 12-54)3 2004 Proposed Fee Subdivision Fee plus $35.00 per dwelling unit $ 40.00 per dwelling unit (minimum $150.00) $175.00 per acre (minimum $350.00) $«00.00 . 0 - $250.00 Double Applic. Fee $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 + permit $600.00 $250.00 Double Applic. Fee (Included in base CUP fee) $600.00 + Consultant Fees Subdivision Fee plus $35.00 per dwelling unit $50.00 per dwelling unit (minireum $600.00) $175.00 per acre (minimum $875.00) $375.00 + $40.00 per $600.00 * $40.00 per dwelling unit dwelling unit $175.00 per acre (min. $350.00) $175.00 per acre (min. $875.00) $350.00 $600.00 $375.00 $600.00 r i t VACATIONS Public Roid Easement Vacation with Subdivision Application Easement Vacations Not Associated with Subdivision Applications SUBDIVISIONS Sketch Plan (Class I, II, & III) Basic Subdivision Application (Class I dc II Subdivisions, Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement) Preliminary Plat Review (Class III and all non-residential) Final Plat Review (Class III) Filing Fees: a) Subdivision only (base covers 'A hr legal) b) Subdivision Easements & Covenants (base covers 1 hr legal) Renewal of Subdivision Application Annroval (Class I, II dc HI, and Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement) (No Changes From Original Application ADDrovall SPECIAL IMPROVEMENTS 12-5-03 S75.00 per benefitting property ($300.00 minimum per application) $75.00 per benefitting propcrly ($600.00 minimum per application) $100.00 $250.00 $100.00 $600.00 $275.00 $400.00 $350.00 $600.00 $400.00 H- $30.00/lot $750 $30.00/lot $250.00 Incurred $250.00 Incurred Legal/Engineering Legal/Enginecring Charge}Charges $110.00 $140.00 plus any additional costs incurred $220.00 Minimum $.80.00 plus any plus any additional additional costs costs incurred incurred $200.00 $300.00 Non-refundable charges for City Engineer's review for applications and design drawing, including construction inspection fees. If improvements are proposed as part of a Subdivision, review charges are payable with Preliminary- Plat application. Engineering review fees incurred in eiccss of the amounts shown will be billed to the annlicawt. Proposed Private Roads Proposed Public Roads Request for City to accept existing private road Request for City to maintain unimproved public road Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension Proposed Walermain Extension Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) On-Site System - Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $650.00 plus 506/lincal foot $950.00 plus 504/lincal foot $950.00 $225.00 $275.00 plus $25.00 per stub $275.00 plus $25.00 per stub $250.00 $ 60.00 per new lot proposed for on-site No change No change No change No change No change No change No change No change \ ■ i i lL_. ORDINANCE NUMBER ____, THIRD SERIES SUMMARY APPROVED The Council hereby determines that the text of the summary of this ordinance marked "Official Summary of Ordinance Number __, Third Series," and a copy of which is attached hereto, clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. The Council further determines that the publication of the title and such summary will clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. -A.j h I It iM i -■HamnitiitinriB A SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NUMBER____, THIRD SERIES ORDINANCE NO..TB I Kl I SERIES AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 2004 FEE SCHEDULE AND REPEALING ORDLNANCE NO. 224, SECOND SERIES The following is the official sununary of Ordnance Number City Council of the City of Orono on December 8,2003. j Third Series iq)proved by the The following sections have changes, additions and.br deletions: USSSE 2mm.2004 FEE SQM SIS: ZONING APPLICATIONS VARIANCE Base Fee Addidonal variances ^included in base feel VariaiKie for Non CoafonniBg-Stnictures Variance Renewal (no change from original application) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (One charge per project) Residential Accessory Use (Animals, etc.) Institutional Use (School, Church, etc.) Duplex Credit (per building) Guest House/Guest ^>artment Commercial/Industrial Use Non-Conforming Use (Finding of Simitar Use) Land Alteration; • Grading A Ailing • designaled wetland/Aoodplain • Grading. Ailing, etc. (over S(M cubic yards) • Sea vvalts, raiaining walls within 0-7S' lakeshore Amend Existing CUP Renewal Conditional Use Pennit (No change from original application) Cond itional Use Permit with Variance PLANNED DEVELOPMENT RPUD OR PRD Application with Subdivision RPUD OR 1RD Application without Subdivision PIP Applications (S acre minimum per code) PUD Rezoning (Highway 12 Cor»^Jor Only) Residential: Commercial/Industrial : (Flexibl e applicatiotii involving mote thanew variarce will requir e an add itionju SiO.W payment per each vihance) $iSMO ta&M mo tiSOlOO pennit S3-5Oi00 Add S7S.00 for each vaiiasee Subdivision Fee plus S35.CO per dwelling unit 540.00 per dwelling siit (minimum-StSO.OO ‘ 5175.00 per acre (r—imii—: S375.00 ^ $40.00 pe: dweZiag unit $175.00 per acre (r—iimm 1350.00) Page 1 of 6 $600.00 (Additional variances included in base fee for 2004) $250.00 $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 + permit $600.00 $250.00 (Included in base CUP fee for 2am Subdivision Fee plus S35.00 per dwelling unit $50.00 per dwelling unit (minimu m $600.00) $175.00 per acre (miniimim $875.00) $600.00 •»• $40.00 per dwelling unit $175.00 per acre (minimum $875.00) 78-42:78- 96 thru 99 78-42:78- 96 thru 99 78-42:78- 913 Ch.78. Article VI i ll I! «i L M«Li. COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW SUBDIVISION Sketch Plan (Class I. II, & 01) Basic Subdivision Application (Class IA 0 Subds, Lot Line Rearrangement) Preliminary Plat Review (Class in and all non-residendal) Filing Fees: a) Subdivision only (Base covers 'A hr legal) b) Subdivision-t-Easements & Covenants (Base covers 1 hr legal) Renewal of Subdivision Applieation Approval (Class 1,0 & III and Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement) (No Changes from Original ^.pplication ApprovaO VACATIONS Public Road Easement Vacations Not Associated with Subdivision Applications ZONING AMENDMENTS INCLUDING REZONING 2003 FEE Consultant Fees t>7$.00 $400:60 $400:00^ S30.00/lot II 10.00 minimum plus any additional costs $330.00 minimum plus any additional costs $300 S7S.00 per benefitting property ($300.00 minimum per application) $300:00 $310:00 REQUEST TO A.MEND COMPREHENSINi; PLAN $375.00 2fifii£E£ S600.00-t- Consultant Fees $350.00 $600.00 $750JX) + S30.00yiot $140.00 Minimum plus any additional costs $280.00 mininaim plus an) additional costs $300.00 $75.00 per benefitting property i$600.(K) minimum per application) $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 CODE SEC. 78-42 82-85 82-112 (aXb) 78-42 78-42 78-42 f CONSTRUCTION PERMITS AND INSPECTION FEES < •- * PLL^IBING PERMIT Replacement of residential fixture or appliance (meets code requirements^ MECHANICAL PERMIT Replacement of residential fixture or appliance (meets code requirements^ • • •>* • S1500 S15J)0 LlCEaNSES & MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES DOCL'MENT TV?E GIS and Cit\- Mani Black &. white Cfiloi General Adminlsiralive Documents Assessment Search Information Provided on CD 8-1/2x11 11x17 $0.25 $1.00 -$3:50 $354)0 Page 2 of 6 8-1/2x11 11x17 17x22 22x34 $0.25 $1.00 I2J2Q $4.00 S2J2Q im im ii&QQ $20.00 $10.00 General Administradve Dociments (cont) Mail in postage •wH handling charge Suicharae for Staff Expense in Excess of Regular Fees PiofeasionalTime Clerical Time Legal/Engineering Consuittott Mileage/Copiea/Postage/Etc. 2Sfil£E£2fiSi£E£SEC. SI.5Q actual cost if more than f. 1^ iSSt S30.00/liour Actual Billed Coat Actual Coat Ptdlce Department Admiiilstercd Beer, Wine & Liquor Licenses Initial Investigation Temporary Set-up Permit (one day) Temporary Beer Permit (one day) SHOO&per License SMiM/each SSOrM/each S500.00 per License X2S.OO/each S210Q/each Ch.34, Article II 34^2 34-82 i»o.oq Page 3 of6 SEWER PROJECTS Unit Chirac -f Am cr Credit to Arci 2003 2004 By District • Project • 1963 ST-IA, LS-IA, ST-IB. LS-IB s$;moe 85.825.00 (1) 1964 LS-IA or LS-IB 85.780.00 85.825.00 (1) 1965 LS-I 85,780.00 S5.825.00 0) 1965 LS-IA 85,780.00 85.825.00 0) 1967 LS-I 85,780.00 85.825.00 (1) 1969 LS-I Shore HUls 814,350.00 814.535.00 (1) 1969 LS-2 Chevy Chase 810,065.00 811.370.00 (1) 1970 LS-I Saga HUl 810,065.00 811.370.00 0) 1971 LS-1 Dunwoody 810,065.00 811.370.00 (1) 1973-1 814,350.00 814.535.00 (1) 1980-1 Minnetonka Blufis 842,455.00 812.615.00 (1) 1980-1 WeitFemdale/CountyRoad 15 828,930.00 829.305 00 (1) I980-I Orono Lane 823,150.00 823.450.00 (1) 1980-1 County Road 15/Marinas 89,695.00 89.820.00 (1) 1980*2 North Shore Drive/Scotch Pine L41 828,930.00 829.305.00 (I) 1981-1 North Shore Drive/Highwood 814,895.00 lllQSlQfi (1) 1982-1A Navarre Utilities 83,165.00 83.205.00 TninV Area 81300.00 81315.00 1982-IB Navarre Utilities Northern Ave 8515.00 S520.00 ti 420-00 S3.475 00 Per Acre V ■/ 1985-1 Crystal Bay 84-5,0654)0 af tr Jt i 815.260.00 0) 1983-1 Highway 12 Orono-Lcng Lake-Medina 8h475.00 81.495.00 (1) 1989 Highway 12 66:440 85.5 10.00/acre (1) 1992 Stubbs Bav Sewer I Stubbs Bay NE/NW-Baysidc East 846,95000 817.170.00 (5) n Bederwo^826,250.00 826.590.00 (5) III Bayside North 822,225.00 822.515.00 (5) IV Oxford 831,370.00 S31.780.00 (5) V Cygnet and Leaf 825,355.00 825.685.00 (5) 1997 Sewer 97-1 North L.L7L.L.C.C.822,085.00 822.370.00 (6) 97-2 Bracketts Point 836,768.00 837.244.00 (6) 97-3 Bay Ridge 819,630.00 819.885.00 (6) 1998 • 1999 Sewer 1998 Shoreline/Heritage 848,-5454)0 818.785.00 (7) 99-1 Orono Orchard 821,440.00 824.760.00 (7) 99-2 Edgewood Hills 831.060.00 831.465.00 (7) 2000 Sewer 2000-1 Webber HilU 88,050.00 88.155.00 Excludes Grinder Allowance (8) 2000-2 Fux Ridge 847,770.00 818.000.00 Excludes Grinder Allowance (8) 2000-3 East Long Lake 814.105.00 814.290.00 Excludes Grinder Allowance (8) 1984 Forcemain and Lift Station #7 46BvFasf-l-#7 Forccmiln Credit to Area Existing Properties/Increase 6680:008590.00 (4) New Bldgs Replacing Existing Bldgs 66804)08590.00 (4) New Residential w/Existing Stub 64t666:00S 1.685.00 (4) New Residential without Stub 85^.8:00(248525 00(1) 84,665:0681.685.00(4) (l)and(4) Freshwater Biological (Incl. *Manh at Laraycne* Lou)8-‘:20:00(3)1525 00(l) 8650:06$660.00 (4) d)and(4) 1989 Gravity Line and Lift Station Filed Chirac #10 Bv Pass Credit to Araa (see map for affected areas)8223.00 63,930:0082.970.00 (I) Page 4 of 6 WATER PROJECTS Unit Charae Arca/Acreaac Front Foot Credit to Area By District - Project S4,89S<0e S4.960.00 SJ640 $3^.9?(1) 1967 LW-I Highway 12/Ciysial Bay Road S4<89$<0eS4.960.00 0) 1969 LW-2 Chevy chase S3<436,M S2.4SS.00 4344^ S24.SS (1) 1970 LW-1 Navaire Residential SJ:640.00 S3.690.00 83640 $3$.9Q 0) 1970 LW-1 Navaire Commercial SJrWS.OO S2.620.00 (1) 1982-1A Navano 8840400-S9.110.00/acre (1) 1989 Highway 12 1999 Navaire Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation 8400:00 S40S.00 0) th PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES MUNICIPAL SEWER RATES by unit:f e 2004 Fee 1st 88848 per quarter S9I.3S per quarter 2nd 88080 per quarter S82.7S per quaner by flow:8-3441000 gallon plus S 3.44/1000 gallon plus 8-848 per quarter per S 8.60 per quarter per connection connection MUNICIPAL WATER RATES Navaire Area Billing & Ready to Serve Cbg 42848/qtr J?6i5/qtr Water Usage Rate 8-448/1000 gal $ 2.21/1000 gal Unconnected Property Chg 64848/qtr S26.15/qff Highway 12 Area Billing & Ready to Serve Chg 8448/qtr $ 9.8Q/qtr Water Usage Rate 8408/1000 gal S 3.06/1000 gal Chevy Chase Area Billing & Ready to Serve Chg 8448/qtr $ 9,3Q/qtr Water Usage Rate 8444> 1000 gal (no change)S 2.30/1000 gal (no change) Bulk sale to Minnetonka Beach for Lafayette Ridge 82448/qtr billing charge plus S26. IS/qtr billins charge nlus Area 8348/1000 gallon toul flow at S2-21/IOOO gallon toul flow at border meter border meter GOLF COURSE CHARGES - Effective date 2004Season <6 *4 Monday thru Friday (deluding Holidays Begin Play Before 12:00 Noon 2003 Fee 2004 Fee 1st Nine Holes S 10.00 S 10.00 2nd Nine Holes $—740 $ 8,00 After 12:00 Noon and Weekend Rales 1st Nine Holes 8-13.00 S <3.00 2nd Nine Holes 8-940 S 10.00 2*^ Nine Holes (Weekday After 12:00 Noon)8-740 S 8.00 League Rates Monday thru Friday 8 10.00 S 11.00 Page 5 of 6 J n GOLF COURSE CHARGES, Conttancd Scolor Cittea (Over M yean oM) Begin Pby Befon 12:00 Noon • Weekdayt 1st Nine Holes 2nd Nine Holes 2m t 4$0 $ 45 0 S 7.00 i 7.00 Season Ticket (Senior Cidzeas Only)1160.00 SI70.00 PALL RATES WiU begiB the tkird Monday of September Weekend Rates: 1st Nine 2nd Nine Riding Ciit $10.00 $-9:00 $10.00 $ 8.00 $ O.OO iiiiie Weekday Rales: 1st Nine 2nd Nine Sr. & Jr. Riding Cart $ 8.00 % 5.00 $-4:00-$ S.OO $$.00/nine 7.00 nine GOLF CART RENTAL Motorised: 1st Nine Holes (After 12:00 ft Weekends) 2nd Nine Holes $44:00 $-^ S 12.00 $ 10.00 Begin Play Before 12:00 Noon 1st Nine Holes 2nd Nine Holes Pull Carts - Per Round Golf clubs - Per Round $-^0:00 $-9:00 $-3:50 $ J.iV' S 10.00 S 8.00 S 3.00 S 3.00 STUDENT RATE (AGES 12 -17) Begin Play Before Noon Monday - Friday, Excluding HoMdays 1st Nine Holes 2nd Nine Holes S-640 S 7.00 i 6.50 $ 7.00 A prinUrd copy of the 2004 Fee Schedule Ordinance is available for inspection by any person at City Cleric during regular office hours. office of H This ordinance becomes effective the week of January 1,2004. and Adopted by the City Council of the City of Oroito on this 8th day of December, 2003, by a vote of _nays. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor .4^ , % Page 6 of 6 ORDINANCE NO.. THIRD SERIES AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 2004 FEE SCHEDULE AND AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 224, THIRD SERIES The City Council of the City of Orono ordainc SECTION 1. Ordtnonc»i Rcacolcd. Ordinance No. 224, Second Series, entitled 2003 Fee Schedule is hereby repealed. The City Council of Orono per Section 2>17l of the Municipal Code hereby ordains the following fees effective during the calendar year 2004: SECTION 2. Fees. ZONING APPLICATIONS All fees are aPDltcatton fees and are noii*rcfundable after staff work has begun on the application. Application Type Applicable Code Section VARIANCE Hase Fee (Addltlonai variance* incliHled in base fee for 2004) Renewal Variance (No change front original application) Afler*lhe*Facl Fees 5600.00 5250.00 Sec. 71-42; 70-96 thru 99 Sec. 70-42; 70-96 thru 99 Double Applicilloo Fee Res. 01306 A #1309 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (One charge per project) Residential Accessory Use (Animais, etc.) Institutional Use (School, Church, etc.) Duplei Credit (per building) Guest House/Guest Apartment Commercial/lndustrial Use Non-Conforming Use (Finding of Similar Use) Sec. 70-42; 70-913 $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 smM $600.00 $600.00 2004 Fee Schedule-Page / *sn -1 X , a ■.oil A/wr-rrm- -wUMI I utimaat : it ■■■ S'V.: K«-; 'i.i^mm >■ yjQNINC APM JCATIONS fCONT.^ AnpUcrtl— Tvp« CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Continued (One Chirgc per Project) Land Alteration: - Gradint A filling - dctignaled wctland/floodplain - Grading, Mllng, etc. (over 500 cubic yards) - Sea walls, retaining walb within 0*75' lakeshore Amend EibtiagCUP Renewal Conditional Use Permit (no change from original application) Conditlooal Um Permit with Voriance (included in base CUP fee for 2004) Aftcr*the*Facl Fees $600.00 + permit $600.00 $250.00 Double Application Fee Applicable Code Section Sec. 71-42; 7S-f 13 Res. 01306 A 01309 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT RPUD or PRD Application with Subdivision RPUD or PRD Application without Subdivbion PID Applications (5 acre minimum per code) PUD Reaonlng (Highway 12 Corridor Only): Residenlial Commercial/lnduslrial COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW ZONING AMENDMENTS INCLUDING REZONING REQUEST TO AMEND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Subdivbion Fee plus $35.00 per dwelling unit $ 50.00 per dwelling unit (minimum $600.00) $175.00 per acre (minimum $075.00) $600.00 + $40A0 per dwelling unit $175.00 per acre (min. $075.00) $600.00 + Consultant Fees $600.00 $600.00 Ch. 70, Artkk VI Sec. 70-42 Sec. 70^2 Sec. 70^2 2004 Ffe Schedule-Page 2 * vn-v:'o'::-' :* ! ■ /■>< • t ZONINC APPLICATIONS fCONT.^ AiMillcatkwi Tyne SUBDIVISION Sketch Plan (Clam I, II, A HI) Bask SnbdIvMan AppHcathm (Clam IAII Subdivisions, Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement) Preliminary Plat Review (Clam 111 and all non-residential) nnal Plat Revkw (Clam 111) Filing Fern: a) Subdivision only b) Subdivision + Easements ^Covenants Renewal of Subdivision Approval (Clam 1, II 4t III, and Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement) (No Change From Original Approval) VACATIONS Pnblk Road Easement Vacations with Snbdivbion Applkathms Easement Vacations not Associated with Subdivision AppUcatioos ,* /. • Applicable Code Section $350.00 $600.00 See. 12-05 See. 02-112 (aMb) See. 02-112 (e)$750.00 -*• $30.00/lot ($010/2 loto; $040/3 lots; $070/4 lots, cte.) $250.00 + Special Lcgal/Engincering/ Consultant Charges See. 02-142 (9) $140.00 Minimum plus any See. 02-142 (11) additional eosts $200.00 Minimum plus any additional eosts $300410 $ 75.00 per benefitting property ($600 JO minimum per appUcation) See. 70-42 $100.00 $600.00 See. 70-42 See. 70-42 2004 Fet Schedule-Page 3 I '2 m S;!£S ZONINC APPLICATIONS fCONT.^ ADDUcatfcMi Type SPECIAL IMPROVEMENTS Non-rcfHBdable char|ct for City Engiaccr'o review for applications and design drawing, incinding construction inspection fees. If improvements are proposed as part of a Subdivision, Review Charges are payable with Preliminary Plat appHcatiao. Proposed Private Roads Proposed Public Roads Request for City to accept eiisting private road Request for City to maintain unimproved public road Proposed Sanitary Jiewer Main Eatension Proposed Waterniain Eatension Proposed Storm Sewer System (eacluding cuhrerts) On^te System - Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) RIP-RAP Staff Review (normal rip-rap) Unusual Rip-Rap: a) New installation b) Repair previously approved APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND APPLICATIONS Minimum Project Valuation: $290,000.00 Application Fee: ' '.V." :• ^ ' rt ' ' : . V ■‘I'', •• '.i . » w . . • -a ■» .^ ' qjle‘ Applicable Code Section Sec. S2-2I3 (4) 5650.00 plus 504/lineal foot 5950.00 plus S04/lineal fool S9903M $225.00 $275.00 plus $25.00 per stub $275.00 plus $25.00 per stub $250.00 $ 60.00 per new lot proposed for on-site No Charge (MCWD Permit Required) $100.00 + CUP review Staff permit * $100.00 $100.00 Sec. 78-99 0.1% of project valuation ($250 JO minimum) plus $5,000JO deposit for legal/ administrative eipcnscs 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 4 Oimk I. Aj an j%M w i . <U£i f> Aso h jsa^ p ZONINGAPPMCATIONS ICONT.I Apallcallon Type SURCHARGE FOR STAFF EXPENSE IN EXCESS OF APPLICATION FEES Per Fee Schedule set farth below: Professional Time Clerical Time Lcgal/EPBinccrint Contullanis MileaBe/Copies/PoslaKe/Etc. AFTER-THE-FACT APPLICATION INVESTIGATION FEES (Resolution 1306) (Applies to all applicalioa types including variances, conditional use permits, subdivision, loning amendments, rip-rap permits, special improvement reviews, grading permits, moving permits, business licenses, kennel licenses, ail building permits and all general permits.) This permit fee may be waived by staff for resident property owners who have not involved a contractor in their work, have no previous history of work without a permit and where such work docs not entail any zoning violations. Whenever any work, use or division of land for which a formal application is required has been commenced without first making such application and receiving City approval therefore, a special investigation of the circumstances shall be made during the application process. Because of the estra administrative costs involved in the special investigation, the minimum application fee for after-the-fact applications shall be twice the fee set forth in the basic fee schedule, whether or not the application is thereafter approved or denied. Payment of an after-the-fact application fee shall not constitute approval or authorization of the work, use, or division of land, and shall not constitute a penalty or a waiver of the right of the City to institute civil or criminal legal actions against the applicant for commencing such work, use or division of land without the required prior approval of the City. ADer-the-fact Investigation Fee Amount: £ss Applicable Code Section Sec. 78-42 $ S0.00/hour $ 30.00/hour Actual Billed Cost Actual C^st Equal to and in addition to the basic fee amount (total fee is twice tbe basic fee amount).Res. 1306 2004 Fee Schedule -Page 5 .'J TOWl-.W 'uuduoiSBauiuauaiaHBliifii 7" ZONING APfLICATIONS ICONT.i Apptkible CodeSMthni PARK DEDICATION FEES 1 Land Dedlcatioa Minimum Area - Subdividers thill be required to dedicale to the City for parks, playgrounds, trails, open spaces and other public purposes at a minimum that percentage of gross land area, or other such amount as may be determined by the City Council, as set forth below: (1) Rcsidentiai/Agriculturai/Muitipie Residential Zoned Land. Dedication requirement of S% of the land being platted or subdivided. (Eichisive of lot that includes an csisting residence.) (2) CommerciaVIndustrial Zoned Land. Dedicated requirement of of the land being platted or subdivided. Cash Contribution In Lieu of Lands. In those instances where a cash contribution is to be made by the subdivider, in lieu of a conveyance or dedication of land, the cash contribution to be contributed shall be equivalent to the fair market value of the equivalent undeveloped land that would otherwise have been conveyed or dedicated. The City shall account for such funds in a special fund named Park Dedication Funds. The City Councii has established by resolution a minimum residential park fee of S3.250 per dwelling unit and a maiimum of $5350 per dwelling unit. The City Council has cstaMUhcd by resolution a minimum commercial/industriai park fee of $0,125 per acre and a maiimum of $13375 per acre. Sec. 02-227 Ret. 4730 (12-10-01) Res. 4739(12-10411) 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 6 ZONING APPLICATIONS ICONT.^Apolkablg Code Scclkta STORM WATER AND DRAINAGE TRUNK FEES Sec. 14-281 Ibru 14-287 Storm water trunk fees apply to new development and redevelopment of eiisting properties and provide funding for the storm water infrastructure necessary to serve the City. The trunk fee is bas^ on the land use and acreage of the property being developed. An equivalency factor multiplier is assigned to each land use type, with a 2-acre residential lot considered as the standard in the City with an equivalency factor of 1.0. The table below lists the storm water trunk fees per acre for the various zoning dbtricts and land uses in the City, with a base fee of $2,700 per acre. 2003 Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fees New Devefopmeiit Trunk Fee/ Land Use Acre Single Family Residential S Acre Zone (1)S2.160 Single Family Residential 2 Acre Zone S2.70O Single Family Residential 1 Acre Zone $.t.5IO Single Family Residential Vt Acre Zone S4.050 Multi Family Residential 4 Units/Acre or Less $4,860 Multi Family Residential Greater than 4 Units/Aae $5,670 Commercial or Industrial $6,480 (1) nuflcT Fascmcnt R c^iuri . Fuf the 5-acrc zoning district, a reduction of up to of the trunk fee for the k>t will be allowed for the percentage of the lot protected by perimeter and/or drainage way bufler easements. TheK buffer casement areas shall remain in a natural condition. (2) Maximum Fee. For the 5-acre zoning district, any lot exceeding 7.U gross acres including wetland, shall be charged a maximum trunk fee equal to the tnmk fee for a 7.0 acre parcel. Such lot shall remain eligible for the up to 50% reduction noted in (I) above, such reduction based on the penrentage of 7 0 acres that is placed in buffer easements. (3) Maximum Fee. For the 2-acrc zoning districts, any lot exceeding 4.0 gross acres including wetland, shall be charged a maximum trunk fee equal to the trunk fee for a 4 0 acrepanrel ** Redevelopment projects will be defined as any project to either remove and replace esisting structures or to enlarge esisling structures. These projects will be charged a portion of the base trunk fee adjusted for the area of eipansion of impervious surface above the eiisting conditions. The table below lists the base trunk fee based on the area of impervious surface eipansion and adjusted for the type of land use. The trunk fee shall be determined by multiplying the appropriate fee by the acreafp of the development site. Area aC Impervlauf Surface Residential Redevelopment or Etpanslon Commercial or Industrial Ei|iansloa of Eilsling Development Redevelopment or Eipansion of Eilstlng Trunk Fec/Acre Devetopment Trunk Fec/Acre 0-1000 Square Feet $950 $2,270 1000-2000 Square Feet $1,890 $4,535 More than 2000 Square Feet $2,700 $6,480 20M Fee Schedule-Page 7 CONSTRUCTION PERMITS AND INSPEfTTION FEES FtmiltTw AppUcabk Code Strtlon BUILDING PERMIT Ord.21d Miaimum Fee NormilFcc PIm Rcvicir Fee: Commercial Rcfldential Buildiof Valualkm Slaadard S23J0 (per 1997 UBC/SBC Slaodard Schedule) (per 1997 UBC/SBC Staadard Schedule) 6S% of Building Permit Fee (per Curreat I.CJ1.0. Building Standards/Building Valuailoa Data) ZONING CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WITHOUT BUILDING PERMIT (chaage In uie) SS0.00 RETAINING WALLS (In ciccu of 42" abo multiple tiered walla that eicccd 42 ” and not located in lakcshore protected area) NOTE: Retaining walb in 9-75' iakahore protected zone - see Coad. Use Permit section of fa schedule. $23.50 minimum (per 1997 UBC/SBC Standard Schedule) TREE REMOVAL WITHIN 0-75' DOCKS - RESIDENTIAL IPcrmanent (CUP Required) and Initial Seasooall $30.00 $30.00 Sec. 7S-2S1 thru 7S-2I3 1 ICKS - COMMERCIAL Per 1997 UBC/SBC Standard Schedule DEMOLITION PERMIT Principal Structure Ord.216 Accessory Structure $ 50.00 Initial inspection $ 25.00 for each requated or required inspection beyond initial inspection $ 30 JO Initial inspcaion 2004 Fee Schedule-Page S t.tnm , ......................mAsiii CONSTRUCTION PKRMITS AND INSrECTION »T!:KS fCONT.I Permit Type PLUMBING PERMIT Minimim Fee for Ptambiot Permit Replicement of resIdentUI fliture or appliance (meets code requirements) MaIMn postage St handling charge MECHANICAL PERMIT ResIdentiaL SInf le Family St Dunlei bv Unit Tvne Minimum Fee for Mechanical Permit Replacement of residential fiiture or appliance (meets code requirements) MaIMn postage St handling charge Under Ground Tank Removal CommerclaL Industrial St Multi-Famtiv Residential bv Unit Type MUNICIPAL CONNECTION PERMIT (together with area connection charges) Sewer Water 5/V’ (3/4 ”i7y’i'*) meter including sales las 3/4 “ (3/4 “s9») meter including sales tai I “ meter including sales las larger meter Mail-in postage St handling charge (sewer and water permits only) Applicable Code Section 1.25% of contract price or S 35.00 minimum per project $15.00 $ IJO U5% of contract price or S 35.00 minimum per project $15.00 $ L50 Per mechanical permit fees $ 35.00 minimum fee or 1.25% of contract price $35.00 $35.00 $130.00 $100.00 $2603M quote basis $ 1.50 2004 Fet Schethile-Page 9 I rnFfiiiiTnii n J V lJ"■ r ... ALL SANITARY SEWER AND MUNICIPAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES (If not prcvlouily usctscd or if an improvement project b not deemed to be reqnired in the sole dlKretion of the City. If an improvement b required, the connection char(c may be in addition to any assessment.) The connection charge for properties wishing to connect to the sewer or water but which arc located oubide the delineated boundaries of the affected project area shall be charged the connection fee for that area. Such connections are subject to City Council approval. SEWER PROJE UK By District - Project Unit Charge +Area Or Acreage Charge Credit To Area 1963 ST-1 A, US-l A, ST-IB, LS-IB $54125.00 (1) 1964LS-lAor li^-IB $5,825.00 (1) 1 1965 LS-I $5425.00 (1) I965L.S-IA $5425.00 (1) 1 1967 LS-I $5425.00 (1) 1%9 LS-I Shore llllli $14,535.00 (1) 1969 liU2 Chevy Chase $11470.00 (0 1 2 1970 US-I Safi Hill $11470.00 (1) 1 1 1971 LS-I Dunwoody $11470.00 m 1 1 1973-1 $14,535.00 (U 1 CREDIT TO AREA! (I) 602-37091 Sewer Operating (4) 406-37691 PIR Fund »7 LS & Forcemain (5) 308-37691 1992 Improve Stubbs Bay (6) 311-37691 l997lmprovcmenb (7) 313-37691 1998-1999 Sewer improvemenb (8) 314-37691 2000 Sewer Improvemenb 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 10 .'IS- .w ;. ■■:■ ■: -J..':r v I .J^ Jy>>p r* • .jh ■ iL' ■ ‘ V ^/ 'Vv j-1ii ALL SANITARY SEWER AND MUNICIEAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES (If not previously assessed or if an improvement project is not deemed to be required in •. the sole discretion of the Cay. If an improvement is required, the connection charge may be in addition to any assessment) The coiuiection charge for properties wishing to corr- ■*ct to the sewer or water but which are located outside the delineated boundaries of the affected project area shall be charged the cormection fee for that area. Such coiutections are s> * to City Council approval. SEWER PROJECTS 1980-1 Minnetonka Bluffs S12A1S.00 (1) 1980-1 West Ferndalc/Cottnly Road IS S29405.00 (1) 1980-1 Orofio Lane S23.450.00 (I> 1980-1 County Road 1 S/Marinas S 9 J20.00 (1) 1980-2 North Shore Diivc/Seotch Pine Lane S2940S.00 (1) I98I-I NoHh Shore DriveWithwood $15,085.00 (1) 1982-1 A Navarre Utilities $3J05dW Trunk Area SUI5.00 (1) 1982-1 B Navarre Utilities Northern Avenue $520.00 (trunk unit acrc/unit) $3,475.00 Per Acre (1) 1905-1 Crystal Bav SI 5.240.00 m < KEL»JT TO AREA; (I) M2-3769I Sewer Operating (4) 404-37*91 riR Fund #7 LS & Foreemain (5) 300-37491 1992 Improve Stubbs Bay (4) 311-37491 1997 Improvements (7) 313-37491 1990-1999 Sewer Improvements (8) 314-37491 2000 Sewer Improvements 2004 FitSckedule-Page // ^■;)5 It'.' •: >, *"V -V.’; > #tfV ^' AM. SANII'AKY SKWKK AN1> MUNICIPAL WATLR CONNeC*! ION CIIAKCKS (If mM previously assessed or if an improvemenl project is not deemed to be required in the sole dberetioa of the City. If on improvement ii required, the connection chorge moy be in odditlon to any atieftment.)I The connection charge for properties wlsking to connect to the sewer or water but wbkh are located outside the delineated boundaries of the affected project area shall be charged the connection fee for that area. Such connections arc subject to City Council approval. 1903-1 Highway 12 Orono-Long Lakc-Medina $ 1,493.00 (1) 1909 Highway 12 $5,510/acrc (1) 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer 1 Stubbs Bay NE/NW - Bayside East $17,170.00 (S) 11 Bederwood $26390.00 (5) HI RaysMe North $22,515.00 (5) IV Otford $31,700.00 (5) V Cygnet and Leaf $25,605.00 (5) 1997 SEWER 97-1 North L.LJL.L.C.C $2247030 <«) 97-2 Bracketts Point $37,244.00 (4) 97-3 Bay Ridge $19405.00 (6) CREDIT TO AREA: (I) 602-37691 Sewer Operating (4) 406-37691 PIR Fnnd #7 LS & Forcemain (5) 300-37691 1992 Improve Stubbs Bay (6) 311-37691 1997 Improvements (7) 313-37691 1990-19M Sewer Improvements (0) 314-37691 2000 Sewer Improvements 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 12 It idUHli i ALL SANITARY SEWER AND MUNICIPAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES (If net prcvloutly uMsscd or if an improvement project it net deemed to be required ' in Ike tele ditcrelion of Ike City. If an improvement it required, the connection charge may be in addition to any attettmenl.) The connection charge for proper!i« withing to connect to the tower or water but which arc iocated eultide the deiinealed boundarict of the affected project area ahaH be charged the connection fee for that area. Such connccliont are tubjeci to City Councii approval. 1998 -1999 SEWER 1990 Shordine/Hcritage Sewer $10,703.00 (7) 99-1 Orono Orchard Sewer $24,760.00 (7) 99-2 Edgewood Hilb Sewer $31,465.00 (7) 2(MC SEWER 2000-1 Webber Hilit $0,155.00 Eicludet Grinder Allowance («) 2000-2 Foi RMgc $10,000.00 Eiciudct Grinder Allowance (•) 2000-3 Eatt Long Lake $14490.00 Eicludet Grinder Allowance (») 2003 SEWER 2003-1 North Long Lake Eatl $11,000.00 (1) 2003-2 OM Long Lake Rd $6,500.00 (1) 2003-3 Siith Ave N/Brown Rd (PhiUipt) $0300.00 (1) CREDIT TO AREA; (I) 602-37691 Sewer Operating (4) 406-37691 PIR Fund #7 LS A Forcemain (5) 300-37691 1992 Improve Stuhhs Ray (6) 311-37691 1997 Improvemenla (7) 313-37691 1990-1999 Sewer Improvementt (0) 314-37691 2000 Sewer Improvementt 2004 Fee Schedule-Page IJ ___ r ALL SANITARY SEWER AND MUNICTP AL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES (If not previously assessed or If an improvement project is not deemed to be required in the sole discretion of the City. If an improvement is required* the connection charge may he in addition to any assessment.) The connection charge for properties wishing to connect to the sewer or water hut which are located outside the delineated boundaries of the affected project area shall be charged the connection fee for that area. Such connections are subject to City Council approval. ’ '1 1984 Forcemain and Lift Station #7 upgrade: (An additional fee is charged for properties benefitting from the 1984 forcemain and lift station 87 upgraile, as follows, see map for affected areas): #6 By Pats ***#7 Forcemain Credit To Area Eiisting Properties/Increase $590.00 (4) New Bldgs Replacing Existing Bldgs (If usage increases from existing) $590.00 (•«) New ResMential w/l^xKting Stub $1,685.00 (4) 1 New ResMential without Stub S 925.00 (I)$1,685.00(4)(l)and(4) 1 Freshwater Biological (Incl. "Marsh at Lafayette* Lots) S 525.00(1)$ 660.00 (4) Per unit on connection (previously assessed $2,000/acre) (1) end (4) 1989 Gravity Line and Lift Station 810 By Pass: An additional fee is charged for properties benefitting from the 1989 gravity line and lift station 810 by-pass per Resolution 82671: FixrJ Charge-f 810 By Pass Credit To Area (see map for affected areas)$ 225.00 $2,970.00 (1) CREDIT TO ABKAi (I) 602*37691 Sewer Operating (4) 406*37691 PIR Fund #7 lii & Forcemain (5) 308*37691 1992 Improve Sluhhs Bav (6) 311*37691 1997 Improvements (7) 313*37691 1998-1999 Sewer Improvements (8) 314-37691 2000 Sewer Improvements 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 14 ir ALL SANITARY SE WKK AND MUNICIPAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES (If nol previously assessed or if an improvement project is not deemed to be required in the sole discretion of the City. If an improvement is required, the connection charge may be in addition to any assessment.) The connection charge for properties wishing to connect to the sewer or water but which arc located outside the delineated boundaries of the affected project area shall be charged the connection fee for the area. Such connections are subject to City Council approval. WATER PROJECTS By District - Project Unit Charge +Area Or Acreage Charge + Front Foot Charge Credit To Area 1967 LW-I Highway 12/Crystal Bay Road $ 4,960.00 $ 36.8S 0) 1969 LW-2 C hevy Chase $4,960.00 m m (I) 1970 LW-I Navarre Residential $ 2,4S.S.OO $ 24.S5 (1) 1 1970 LW-I Navarre Commercial $3,690.00 $ 36.90 (1) 1 1982-1A Navarro $ 2,620.00 (I) 1 1989 Hiihway 12 $9,110/acre (1) D 1999Navarre Water Treatment 1 Plant Rehabilitation* $ 40S.00 (1) •1999 Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation Connection Charge* All properties within the Navarre Municipal Water District (the area served with municipal water service via the Navarre Water 1'reatmeni Plant) which were either not assessed or not fully assessed via special assessment for the 1999 Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation Project shall pay a connection charge of S390.00 per unit upon connection to the municipal water system. Such charge shall be coHected at the time a building permit is issued for new construction, or at the time a connection permit is issued for eiisting structures. CREDIT TO AREA! (1)601-37391 Water Operating 2004 Ftf Schedule-Page IS 'wssamm:. .-■•A’ .V:/::^^f m--m. mm SEWER AND WATER UNIT APJUSTMENT CHARGES CHARGES Charfct shall rcsalt from either aa lateasiflcatioB of aa existiag aoa*resldeatial ase or a aew BOB-resMeatial ase that replaces a furaier ase oa a property located withia aa area already assessed aad served by muakipal sewer aad water. CREDIT Credit for prevloasly assessed sewer or water aaits shall be applied agalast the total aaaiber of sewer aad water aalts established for the aew ase. UNIT CHARGE Each sewer aad each water aait adjastaieat charge shall be eqaal to the carreat Service Availability Charge estabibhcd by the Metropolitaa Coaacil Wastewater Services or its saccessor aad shall be payable to the City of Oroao apoa appllcatioa for a baUdiag permit 2004 Fee SckediUe-Page It r CONSTRUCTION WIRMiTS AND INSPECTION FEES Ptrmh Tvoc ON-SITE SYSTEMS Dcfin Review Fm SubdivUkNi Silt Evataition Report Review ResMratlal Syttem Permit: Repair eiiitiag aystem New/Replaccmeat Syatem Noa-RaaMeatlal Syatem Permit: New or Total rcpiacemeat Partial replacement Annual Service Charge GRADING, EXCAVATION, RLblNG SM cubic yardaorlcm Ml -r cubkyarda .1 Applicable Can Ch. SS, Artkk n Included with permit feca $ M.(W/per new lot S 50.00 S100.00 + S20.00 per each inapcction over 3 (Includea outhouae on Big laland) SI00.00 -f S20.00 per each inapcction over 3 S 60.00$20.00 per each incpccthm over 3 S S0.00/ayatem/ycar pIna an additional SIOJO fee for late penalty plua t% intcrcat for unpaid chargm certifled $ 50 JO (ataff permtt)actual engjnoering feca if required (SIOOJO if engineering fee ncccaaary) $ 25.00 per each inapcction ever 1st $ 50 JO -I- Conditional Uae Permit (SIOOJO if engineering fee ncccnary) $25.00 per each inapcction over lat NOTE: 501 cubic yarda or more rcquirca a Conditional Uae Permit unicaa approved as part of building permit. SIGNS Tampt Permanent S35J0 Per 1907 UBC/SBC Standard Schedule Minimum $35JO 2004 Fee ScMkk-P»t$ 17 .r CONSTRUCTION PERMITS AND INSFECTION FEESICONTJ Permit Tvat SPECIAL INSPECTION CHARGES Site lespectUa witbrnit permit (wbefl called by awiier) iMpeettaa sarcharfe far work or application on Big bland or Decrlng bland Rcintpcction fee after failure to comply with Building, Septic or Zoning Code Correction Notice • 3rd trip nUE PROTECTION Fire Prevention Inspection Fire Code Permib Comme rcial Fire Abrm Plan Review Fee Fire Sprinkler Systems - Commercial Kitchen Fire Eitinguishiag System - Commercial LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEM BURNING PERMITS Up to 5 times per year For Each Rcinspection Mora than 5 times per year (for all organizations and indlvMuab regardless of tat status) CONTRACTUAL INSPECTION SERVICE Monthly Retainer Fee (Includes clerical time) Inspe ctbn Charge Plan Review Charge Clerical Fee (Only charged if clerical use b eicessivc) AppHcabb Code Section S3«JI0 S36.M per trip boat rental if transportation b not provided by owner $ 30.60 per trip S304M per hour after 1st hour Ord.223 No Charge $30.00 each Per 1997 UBC Schedub 0S% of permit fee $ 3S.OO minimum fee or 1.2S% of contract price Surcharge based on valuation Per 1997 UBC/SBC Standard Schedule S 35410 No Charge $20.00 $100.00 Per Contract $ 25.00 per month $25J0pcrinspcctloa Per 1997 UBC/SBC Standard Schednk $ 20.00 per hour JOM Fee Schedule-Page it t'- LICENSES A MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES COMMEROAL MARINA UCENSB ApfrikatlM Fm (Wtial) RtMwal AppHcattM A iMpcctiM Fet (■■■nal) pim: Late fee JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE AppBcetiee Fee (l^lt^al) Reaewal AppUcaUea Fee Hm each (dip Late Fee CANOE RACK RENTAL GARBAGE HAULER UCENSE -Oat rate -pcrhaakr • traaaferfee HOME OCCUPATION UCENSE (Level 2) TEMPORARY TRAILERS A BUILDINGS LICENSE ZONING DEPARTMENT DOCUMENTS 2Mt 2t2t Cemprchcuive Plaa Mmkipal Cede Beek • cemplctc (Ch. 1-94 w/eevbteas) Maaklpal Cede Book • PortleM Cb 7t ealy (Zaabit Cede) w/rcvbieM Ch n eely (Sebdiv. Cede) w/rcvMees Other ladhrideal Chaplert Btader It «2 (Hwy 12) AppIkaMe CedeScctiea SStOJh S2NJ9 SNOJO SSOAO S2AM $ 2.00 S25A0 $40.00/fUp $50 JO SlSJtVtrMk $30 JO Ch. 54. Article III $ lOOJO laltlal Review Fee $ 30J0 (Aaaaal Review Fee) Sec. 20-70 $30.00 $75J0 $00J0w/Mader $25J0leeae $15J0leaae $ J5/)^ $ 5J0 $ 5J0 2004 Fee SckeMe-Page !9 • I:. LICENSES A MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES fCONT.> PocMia —t Time CIS and CHy Maps Black&wMte Calor Tapographic lafwmialian BiilMiiig St naaalag PaMkalioas Ccwcral Admlnfatratlve LIcensw/FiBci Tabacca Lkcascs Lktmcc ar Emplaycc Vioialiaiu within 24 month period 1st Offense 2nd Offense 3rd Offense A Over GamhHng A Raffle License Transient MerchanVPaddler License General Admlalrtratlve Pocumante Listing Infonnalian Assessment Search - Written (Verbal searches not given) Fat Charge Copy Service (for public City records only) ir 117” copies Individual copies a( Ordinances (1 copy) Reprint a( Oversiacd Dacuments that have been mkralllmed Building Plan Copies Current Street Addreu Book Labeto ftram UtiUty BMing System Audio Recording Duplicatian Inrarmalloo Provided an CD Applicable Cade Section i:2&lU Uil2 J2l21 22221 StJS $1.00 $2.00 $ 4.00 $2A0 $4.00 $0A0 $10.00 $ 12.00 per acre + engineering consultant fee if computer diskette is required As Pasted - Prices subject to change $100.00 Ch. SO, Article II $75.00 $200AO $2S0A0 $10.00 Ch. 30, Article II $100.00 plus actual CMts up to $1,500 Ch.30 $10.00 $ 20310/parccl No charge up to 6 pages; $J5each additional page $ .25 each $ 1.00 each No Charge Cost of copying service. Messenger service A Min. Clerical Fee of $5.00 (entire amount to be paid upon request) Cost of Copying, Messenger Service A Min. Clerical Fee of $5.00 (entire amount to be paid upon request) $2SJ0 $AS per label (approilmately $150 JO) $ lOJO per tape $10J0perCD 2004 Fte Sehetlule-Pttgg 20 r LICENSES It MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES fCONT.I Tv— <»—r>l Admlalitratlve Dtnw—ti IContlnutdl Surcharge for Staff Eipcatc in Exccn of Regular Feet Profcatlonal TIhm Clerical Time l<cgal/Knglneerlng Coniultanti Mlkagc/f 'opIn/Poitagc/KIc. Electronic Labcb Returned Check Charge IG LICENSES Biannual License (issued In odd years) Annual License (issued in even years only) KENNEL LICENSES Commercial Applkalhm & Inspection Fee (Annual) Residential Appikatkn A Inspection Fee (Annual) NOTE: Dop kept in residential kenneb must be individually licensed. Residential kennel fee b in addition to dog license fees. GS AT LARGE - RELEASE FEE First Offense Second Offense Third Offense After Hours, Weekend A Holiday Release Charge ANIMALS AT LARGE (Other than dogs) • Release Fee First Offense Second Offense Third Offense Trace A Catch Animal Trailer Charge CARE OF IMPOUNDED ANIMAL iak___ $ S0.00/hour S 30.00/hour Actual Hilled Cost Actual Cost SS0.00 S 20.00 $15.00 S 7J0 $150.00 $25.00 $55.00 $65.00 $753M S753W S55A0 $65.00 $75.00 $35.00AHHir $ 55.00 plus J1 mik (total distance) Actual Cost Applicabk Code Section Sec. 62-131 thru 62-135 Sec. 62-161 thru 62-105 Sec. 62-104 Ch. 62. Artkk 1 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 21 LICENSES A MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES fCOWT.l EfiODlLlai Polke Dcairt nift AdminhtMrtd BEER, WINE A LIQUOR LICENSES Uitial iBmtiiatfM O^-Salc/Ofl-Sale Llqaor/3.2 Beer On Sale/ 3J Beer Off Sale/Wine In atate inveatitatien Ont state investi(ation Off-Sale Lkinar License On^ale Liqnar License On-Salc Wine License 3.2 Beer Off-Sale (Annual) 3 J Beer On4iale (Annual) Selup(Anaual) Club Liqnar License (weekday) (Sunday) Tcuaparary Set-up Permit (one day) Temparary Beer Permit (one day) Liquar VMations 1* VkdatieB 2** VMation 3^ VMation 4* Violation AMUSEMENT DEVICE LICENSES Per EstabUskment (Annual) Per Machine Fee PUBLIC DANCE LICENSE (annual) (Individual Permit) LARGE ASSEMBLY PERMIT (ever 300 people) FIREWORKS PERMIT Display of FIreworka/Pyrotechnic Special EffccU Sale and/or Storage of Consumer Fireworks Applicable CadeSectian SS00.M per License CaUcctcd at AppHcatiao Actual cast up ta $10,000 Actual cost SIS0.00 $3,000.00 $2,000.00 $ 30.00 Cb. 34, Article U I $ $ $ $ $ $ 100.00 100.00 2004M 200.00 23.00/each 23.00/each See. 34-46 Sec. 34-66 Sec. 34-77 Sec. 34-66 Sec. 34-126; 34-143 Cm* Sec. 34-42 Sec. 34-02 $300.00 $1,000 A 3 day Ucense snapensioB $2,000 A 2 week license suspenslan License revocation $I00JW 4- machine fee $ 23.00 each Sec. 30-601 thru 3S403 OlOOJO $ lOJO Sec. 30-501 thru 30-506 $2M JO$60.00 each Sec. 30401 thru 30-003 additional day; actual costs up to $1J00 Sec. 70-90 $30.00 $30.00 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 22 .V LICf VSES Mt MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES fCONT.^ Aprttetfwi Pdkc Dcfliiiiiwm Adnrinlttwcd nREARMS DISCHARGE PERMIT OccuioBal (United bm ) Game Aalnab (United mm) AMMHat (CiMb OBiy) LIMITED TRAPPING PERMIT SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT (laclMdce Parades, Nabc EienptiaB, U m of PobUe Property) FALSE POLICE ALARM USER FEES Flnt fahe aiann/caleBdar year Secoad fabc alam/caieodar year Third fabc aianB/caieadar year Foortb fabc aiana/calcndar year Fifth aod over fabc alarai/caicndar year FALSE HRE ALARM USER FEES First fabe aiaroi/catcBdar year Sec oad fabc aiam/catcBdar year Third fabc aiann/caleBdar year Fonrth fabc alam/calcBdar year Fifth Ac over fabc alam/calradar year FINGERPRINTING SERVICE AppUcaUe Code Section Ch. 7». Artkte HI SIOJO S 25.00 S 25.00 S 20.00 See. 70-71 S 50.00 or S200.00 If over Ch. 64, Article VI 200 people; actoal costs np to S13U0 Ch. 42. Artkb 111 No Charge S 50.00 5100.00 SI 50.00 5250.00 Ch. 42, Artkb III No Charge S 75.00 S250J0 S350J0 $500 JO each caU S 25J0/appUcatioB for 2 cards - RESIDENTS ONLY S13 JO each additioBal card (CMaeasUp No Chaiie) 2004 Fee ScheMe-Page 23 LICENSES it MISCELLANEOUS CTi ARGES iCONTA t Uw Type fpHce PwMirtmeiit AtfiwIwIilwJ COPY SERVICE - Polkc RccArds Pint Two Cepkt Addllioiiol Copies SUMMARY DATA REPORT COPY OF ACCIDENT REPORTS Acddcat Pboloo COPY OF DRIVER'S LICENSE RECORD COPY FROM MICROFICHE FILE First Two Copies Addltloool Copies "NO PARKING ORDER OF POLICE" paper sigiis (m latk Irdndcd) AUDIO TAPE DUPLICATION VIDEO TAPE DUPLICATION mMm r. ■wm'Vi' ' ■ ' • ' «o 5h S'' ^ Applicable CodoSeetloB $ S^nrst popeeach additiooal pofc S O^Scach $lf.M S S.00eacb $ 2S.00 mlBlmum or actual cost S SMcach $10.00 $ JOeach $1.00 each $ 10.00 each $S0J0each 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 24 ■ ■I 11 iiiTiarr-iiin di^Ui ■ . ---------------------------m PUBMC WORKS l>KPARTMENT MISCELLANEOUS Cl I ABfiES AonlicaHoa Tvog Ess UtiHiv Service Rates - Effective beginning Pint Quarter 2f04 MUNICIPAL SEWER RATE by unit: 1st 2nd by flow: S 91J5 per quarter $ S2 ^9 per quarter $ 3A4/IM9 gallon plu* S 8.60 per quarter per connecthm MUNICIPAL WATER RATES Billing Sc Ready to Serve Chg Water UMge Rate Unconnected Property Chg (ready to icrvc/hydrant chg) Area #1 Area #2 Area #3 Navarre Hwv 12 Chew Chaie $26.15/qtr $9.S0/qtr S9J0/qtr $2JI/I000gal $3.06d000gal S2J0/l000gal $26.1S/qtr -0- -0- Applicablc CodeSectloB Federally Mandated Safe Drinking Water Testing Program (Charged per sendee connection) S 5.21 per year on second quarter billing Quarterly Service Charge for Non-Functioning $ 50.00 or Inacccssibie Water Meter Bulk sale to Minnetonka Beach for Lafayette Ridge Area • Area #1 Rate $26.15/qtr billing charge plus S2J 1/1000 gaUon total flow at border meter. Bulk sale - All Others - $25.00 per location plus area rate per/1,000 gallons. i.e. Fill fwiroming pool or watering sod. Penalty for late payment of sewer/water bills - 8% after 30 days from billing date (applied to the total unpaid balance). Interest at 8% on unpaid water/sewer bilb certified. Ord. 218,2** Serfes Water Tum-On Water Turn-off $ 20.00 Minimum S 20.00 Minimum Water System Repair/Replaccment if damage caused by property owner: Labor - Current Hourly Rate Parts-At Cost 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 25 - ■^-f »^r***^^-^* PUBUC WORKS DErARTMKNT MISCELLANEOUS CilAttCES <CONT.> AppIlMtioii Tvp* MUNICIPAL STORM WATER UTILITY RATES Applicable Codes lx±iVlL See. I4-2SI thru 14-287 Tkc bitic inlciil of i torni wstcr rc£iilitioiis b to minimiic Ibe impict of devotopment on nstnrsl droinogc tyttems* Any developiiieiit In m area will chance the natural conditions by increasinc the total volume of runoff and the level of pollutant loadinc* The storm water utility provides dedicated funds to operate, maintain, manage, construct or reconstruct the municipal storm water drainage system. Residential properties will be charged one residential unit fee for each residential unit on the property. Non-resMential properties will be charged the appropriate number of residential unit fees based on the ^Residential Equivalent Factor^ for the property. One residential unit: j 9.00 per quarter Non-residential unit: Based on ^Residential Equivalent Factor** . 4 RECYCLING CHARGE Recycling Conlilner - Initial lor new residence Replacement Container (including tales tai) Wheel Kit $ 23.08/year No Charge $ 3.00 each SS.00 GOLF COURSE CHARGES - Effective date 2004 Season Monday thru Friday (eicluding Holidayt) Begin Play Before 12:00 Noon 1st Nine Holes $10.00 2nd Nine Holes $8.00 After 12:00 Noon and Weekend Rates 1st Nine Holes $13.00 2nd Nine Holes S 10.00 2nd Nine Holes (Weekday After 12:00 Noon) $8.00 League Rates Monday thru Friday $11.00 Senior Citiaen (Over 00 years old) Begin Play Before 12:00 Noon - Weekdays 1st Nine Holes S 7.00 2nd Nine Holes $7.00 Seaton Ticket (Senior CltUent Only)$170.00 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 26 idosaai ...J PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES fCONTA AddIIciIIob Type AppUcabk CodeStcttoa GOLF COURSE CHARGES - Effective dale 20d4 Season (continned) GOLF CART RENTAL Moloriicd: 1st Nine Hates (After 12:00 St Weekends) 2nd Nine Holes $ 12.00 S 10.00 Begin Play Before 12:00 Noon 1st Nine Holes 2nd Nine Holes Pnll Carts • Per Round Golf dubs'Per Round $ 10.00 $ 8.00 $ 3.00 S 3.00 STUDENT RATE (AGES 12 - 17) Begin Play Before Noon Monday - Friday, Eidiiding Holidays 1st Nine Hates 2nd Nino Hotes $ 7.00 $ 7.00 FALl. GOLF RATES Win begin the third Monday of September. • Weekend Rat'.: 1st Nine Hotes 2nd Nine Hotes Riding Cart S 10.00 S 8J0 S fJO/^nine • Weekday Rales: 1st Nine Hotes 2nd Nine Hotes Sr. * Jr. Riding Cart S OJM $ 5.00 S 5.00 S 7.00/per nine CONCESSIONS As Posted 2004 Fee SekeMe-Page 27 M :^m- % • • . .V..' . Ik. ’I r,:-^vv^»;^V ”v;.^:.•'”‘r * ‘ . r.:. ■ ■•;iSl'ISSi5«SSiK«» <l.v. •*> ./v/ •iVV:.\ ':m.m ■j:s rUBLIC WORKS SlirriJES a skrvices Strcd sr Traffic Sigms (sale inchidcfl iMlaHallM) Driveway Cnivcrta (sale a«ly, aal lastallcd) Water Meter Sales (See BiiUdini remtlt Section) SIM J«/Md. sign On Quote Basis Temporary No rarklng Signs (wllbout lalb)S IMcack Driveway/Curb-Cnt Pcmills IndIvMnal Driveways $ 30.M/pcrmlt New Street Interscctioas (See aoning section • Special improvement fees) Address Change Request by Owner SS0.M per address SKCriON 3. I bb ordinance cstnbihking the 2M4 Fee Schednle shall l»e published as a Summary Ordinance in the leaker and FhNieer Newsnaper and shall be cncctivc Ibo week or January 1,2004. Adopted by the City CouneU of the City of Orono on this Olb day of December, 2003. ATTEST: UBda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Feterson, Mayor V-- .i f ^ ■■2004 Fee Sckethtle-Page 29 INDEX FOR 2004 FEE SCHEDULE A AccMtnt ftoports ........................................24 AddfM* Book ..............................................20 Addfoss Chang#..........................................28 Administration Documant Coplot.................20 Aftar-Tho^act Faas .......................................5 Amusamant Davicas.....................................22 Animal Impound Faas .................................21 Animals at Largo..........................................21 Appaal of Administrativa Dacislon.................4 Assassmant Saarch.....................................20 Audio Racording Duplication ................20,24 I Boar, Win# A Liquor Licansa........................22 Building ParmH Faas.....................................8 Building Plan Copiat...................................20 Burning Parmits..........................................18 £ Canoa Rantal Slip.........................................10 CD (Information previdad on).......................20 Cartiflcata of Occupancy ................................8 Coda Book Copias.......................................19 Commarcial Sita Plan Raviaw........................2 Commarcial Marina Licansa.........................19 Comprahontlva Plan Amondmant .................2 Comprohansiva Oulda Plan Copias..............19 Conditional Usa ParmH Faas..........................1 Connaction Chaigat ...............................10>18 Contractual Inspactlon Sarvica.....................18 Copy Chargas • Administration.....................20 Copy Mieroficha Flla • PD ............................24 Copy Sarvica • Polica DapI ..........................24 Cuivaits.......................................................28 6 Dane# Licansa ............................................22 Damolltlon Parmit Faa...................................8 Docks - Commarcial.......................................8 Docks - RasMantlai .......................................8 Dog Licansa ...............................................21 Dogs at Largo..............................................21 Drivar*s Licansa Racord................................24 DrivawayfCurb Cut Parmits..........................28 Drivaway Culvarts.............................. 28 E Easamant Vacation........................................3 Electronic Lahals........................................20 F Falsa Alarm Usar Foot.................................23 Fingarprinting (Polica).................................23 Fira Alarm ParmH.........................................18 Fira Protaction ............................................18 Fira Sprinkler ParmH ...................................18 Fireworks ParmH Faa...................................22 S Gambling/Raffla Licansa..............................20 Garbage Haulers Licansa ............................19 Golf Course Chargas...................................20 Grading, Excavating. Filling .........................17 H Homo Occupation Licansa ..........................19 ! impound Fans..............................................21 Information Provided on CD........................20 Industrial Ravanua Bond AppI.........................4 Inspections.................................................18 J Joint Usa Dock Licansa................................19 K Kannai Licansa............................................21 KHchan Fira Extinguishing System ................18 L Labels from UtilHy Billing ............................20 Largo Assembly ParmH................................22 Lawn Sprinkler System ................................18 Licansas ................................................19*22 Umitod Trapping ParmH ..............................23 Liquor Licansas ..........................................22 Listing Info • RaaHors .................................20 M Mall InPostaga and Handling........................20 Maps For Sale..............................................20 Marina Licenses..........................................19 Mechanical ParmH Faas.................................9 Mieroficha Copias (PD) ................................24 Municipal Water Annual Sarvica Charge .... 29 Municipal Coda Copias................................19 Municipal Water Connaction Charge............15 Municipal Connaction Parmits (Sawar/WMaG . 9 Municipal Sowar Annual Sarvica Charge .... 25 U ‘‘No Parking ” Signs ................................24,28 Noise Exemption ParmH ..............................23 fi On<Sita Systems (Septic)..............................17 Ordinance Copy ..........................................20 Outhouse Construction (Sea On*SHa Systams)l7 Ovarsixad Docunwnt Reprint .......................20 P Parades Parmit............................................23 Park Dedication Faas.....................................8 Paddlar/Transiant Merchant Licansa............20 Plumbing Parmit............................................9 Public Dance Licansa...................................22 Public Works Suppllas A Sarvicas................28 PUD Razoning...............................................2 8 Raffia Licansa..............................................20 Recycling Charge........................................28 Recycling Raplacamont Bins........................28 Reprint Ovarsixad Documents On Microfilm .20 Retaining Walls..............................................8 Ratumad Check Charge................................20 Raxoniitg Application Faa..............................2 Rip Rap Ap^lcatlon Faa ...............................4 S Sanitary Sowar Connaction Charge........... '0 Septic Annual Sarvica Charge.......................17 Septic System Permits..................................17 S (eont) Sowar Connaction ParmH F Sowar Profocts (1983-1973) Sowar PnHaets (1980-1992) Sowar Pr^acts (1997-2000) Sowar Praiocts (LHl Station Sawar Rates ................... Signs.............................. Sketch Plan...................... Special Event ParmHs .... Special Improvamants Appi Special bispactien Chargas Special Assessment Saarch SprinMar Systems - Comma StormwalorfDralnaga Trunk Stormwater Utility ............. Straat Address Book ....... Stroot Signs (Public Works) Subdivision Application Faa Summary Data Report___ Surcharge for Staff Exponsa I Tape DupNcallen (Admin) - J Tape Dupilcalion (PD) - Audi Tape DupNcaUon (PD) - VMa Tamp. "No Parking ” (P.W.) S Tamp. ”No Parking ” (P.D.) Si Temporary A Permanent Si^ Temporary TraMarfBuHdlng Tobacco Licansa .............. Topographic kiformaUon ... Traffic Signs..................... Transient Morchant Licansa Trapping ParmH................ Trsa Removal.................... U Underground Tank Ramoval UnH Adjustment Connaction Use of Public Property ....... UIHHy Rata Annual Sarvica O y Vacation AppHcation Faas.. Variance AppNeaHen Faas .. Video Tape DupHcaMen (PD) 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 29 iPMtag* and Handling .....................20 For Sat#..........................................20 a Ucanaaa .......................................It ■nical Parmlt Fdaa .................................0 llcha Coplaa (PO) ................................24 tlpal Water Annual Sarvica Charga ....20 iipal Coda Coplaa ................................10 sipal Water Connacdon Charga .........IS iipal ConnacUon Parmite (SawarlWate^ . 0 iipal Sawar Annui>‘ Sarvica Charga .... 20 'arlting” Signs ...............................24,20 Exampllon Parmlt ..........................23 la Systems (Sapdc)..........................17 ancaCopy .......................................20 Htsa Construction (Saa On>Slte SystomsJIT iiad Documant Raprint .......................20 las Parmlt ........................................23 Badication Faas .....................................0 ar/Transiant Marchant Ucanaa .........20 ling Parmit ............................................0 s Danca Ucansa................................22 e Works Si^iaa A Sarvicas............20 laaoning ...............................................2 ) Ucansa..........................................20 iNng Charga .....................................20 iUng Rapiacamant Bins.....................M lit Oirarslaad Documsnte On Microfilm .20 ling Walls..............................................0 nsd Chock Charga ............................20 ling Applicalion F4o..............................2 ap AppNcaUon Faa ...............................4 wySaarar Connection Charga ..........10 t Annuai Sarvico Charga ...................17 e Sy stem Parmi te..............................17 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 29 Sfeont^ Sawar Connaction Parmit Faas .......................g Sawar Pra|aete (1003-1073)..........................10 Sawar Projacta (1000-1002)....................ii. 12 Sawar Prajacts (1007-2000)..........................13 Sowar Pr^aets (LHI Stations).......................14 Sawarftatas ..............................................20 ..............................................17.24.28 SkatchPtan .................................................... Spacial Evant Parmite .................................23 Spacial Improvamante Application .................4 Spocial Inapaction Char^..........................10 Spacial Aaaasamant Soa rcha s.....................20 SprkiMarSyatema-Commarcial and Lawn ..10 Stormwa teriDrainaga Trunk Faas ...................7 Stormwater Utility ........................................20 StraatAddroaaBook ...................................20 Stiaat Signs (PuMic Works)..........................20 Subdivision Applicalion FSa ..........................3 Summary Data Raport .................................24 Sureharga for Staff Expanaa ..........................o I TapaOupliealion (Admin) - Audio.................20 TapoOupNcallon(PO)-Audio .......................24 Tapa Dujdlcation (PO) - Vhteo.......................24 Tamp. *No Parking" (P.W.) Signs.................28 Tamp. "Mo Parking" (P.O.) Signs...................24 Tsmporary A Pormanant Signs.....................17 TamporaryTrallor/Bullding ..........................ig Tobacco Ucansa .........................................20 Topographic tnformathm ..............................20 Traffic Signa ................................................28 Translant Marchant Ucansa........................20 Trapping Parmlt ..........................................23 Traa Ramoval ................................................g y Underground Tank Ramoval ..........................g Unit Affluatmanl Connaction Charga ............10 Use of Public Property .................................23 Utility Rate Annual Sarvica Charga .........17,20 y Vacation Application Faas ..............................3 Variance AppUcaUon Faas ..............................i Video Tapa Duplication (PD)........................24 Water Connaction Parmlt Faa ........................9 WMar Mater Faas ..........................................g Water Projac te ............................................is Water Ratea .................................................20 Water Turn-Off Charga .................................20 Water Tum-On Charga .................................20 Wheal Kite for Recycling Bins.......................20 Z Zoning Amondman te...................................3 Zoidng Documant Copias...........................is . 1 A 200) Fee Schedule-Page )0 Departn Name Lin Title Cih Item Dm Attechm On the ati month at PISBIlillg and Febn will be or Commiss Pork Coi Exception Tues^y t Commissi The City i floating hi Day is on COUNCI Motion to ■( A e • ^ vT • u Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name LinVee TWe City Clerk r ________________^ City Administrator's Report Item Description: Proposed 2003 Meeting^chedule COUNCIl MFETING DEC 8 2003 * CITYOFOHONO >ATE: December S, 2003 TEM NO: Ascada Section: City Administrator's Rqwrt id and 4th Monday of the duled in December. nonth at 6:00 p.m. January ise months, the meetings ting of the Planning e month at 7:15 p.m. scheduled for the following re is no December Park ommending that this year’s r’s Day. Since New Year’s day. COI INril MEETING DEC 6 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITTOFORONO DATE: December 4,2003 ITEM NO: / ^ Department Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Council Liaison to Park Commission and Planning Commission Meetings in 2004 The following is a proposed schedule for Council Member attendance at the monthly Park Commission and Planning Commission meetings during 2004. SCHEDULE PARK COMMISSION PLANNING COMMISSION Mcetiog Date Representative January 5,2004 Mayor Peterson February 2 Lili McMillan March 1 Jim Murphy April S Bob Sansevere May 3 Jim White June 7 Mayor Peterson July 6 (Tuesday) Lili McMillan August 2 Jim Murphy September 7 (Tuesday) Bob Sansevere October 4 Jim White November 1 Mayor Peterson Meeting Date Representative January 20, 2004 (Tuesday) Lili McMillan February 17 (Tuesday) Bob Sansevere March 15 Jim White April 19 Jim Murphy May 17 Mayor Peterson June 21 Lili McMillan July 19 Bob Sansevere August 16 Jim White September 20 Jim Murphy October 18 Mayor Peterson November 15 Lili McMillan COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve schedule for Council attendance at the Park Commission and Planning Commission meetings during 2004. Liliton 2004.doc \ \ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MEETING DEC a 2003 ciry OF orono DATE: December 8,2003 ITEM NO: 1 ^ Department Approval: ^ , Name TomKuehn Title Finance Director ' Administrator Reviewed: Item Description:0- Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report 2003 Interfund Transfers and Loan PaymentsI Attachment: Schedule of2003 Interfund Transfers and Loan Payments Each year the Council is requested to authorize transfer of monies between funds. These transactions fall into two categories: 1.) Budgeted Transfers - Items designated in that year’s budget when originally adopted for the purpose of providing support from one fluid to another. 2.) Fund Obligations - (a) Payments from one fimd to another to reimburse expenses incurred by one fimd on behalf on another. This is generally for City portions of special assessments, or for equipment capital outlay. (b) Loan payments from one fund to another. Loans are generally made to construction funds for the purpose of payment of expenses incurred prior to the sale of bonds and the levying of special assessments. In addition certain loans are necessaiy to fund major undertakings when the fund incurring the expense does not have adequate cash flow available to complete the project. This would include such situations as the loan from the Community Investment Fund to the Water Operating Fund for the Navarre water plant rehabilitation project. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of transfers as indicated on the attached schedule. f J . , 'A-r.^.iiiuikiiLsaw ’. rrui SCHEDULE OF 2003 INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND LOAN PAYMENTS FROM FI General General Community Investment Water Operating Sewer Operating Park Park JQIi AMOUNT Imp & Equip Outlay $ 105,1 Annual operating transfer for capital equipment purchases, as budgeted. Imp & Equip Outlay $ 8,400 Budgeted annual payment from police operating budget 1998 Public Facility $ 130,< Refunding Bond Debt Community Investment $ 50,390 1999 Improvement Bond Debt Community Investment $ 87,000 Community Investment Word NrfKiMoaiVMfO Coiml«ArtwV200JTrioiliw»»tooi#aymatt wpi for city network improve ments. Annual operating transfer for debt service support of HRA building bonds, as budgeted. Budgeted loan payment for Navarre water treatment plant rehabilitation project. (Princ paid, $31,660; int paid, $18,730. Loan balance at 12/31/03, $316,700). $ 12,660 Annual operating transfer for debt service support of non- assessed properties, as budgeted. Budgeted loan payment for land purchase, $33,000, plus $54,000 additional payment from 2003 park dedication fees. (Loan balance at 12/31/03, $-0-). $ 68,575 Pay off loan for Hackberry Park improvements. (Princ paid, $65,000; int paid, $3,575. Loan balance at 12/31/03, $-0-). REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COlWf'*' ^«PETlNG DEC 8 2003 CITY OF ORONO DATE: December 8,2003 ITEM NO: Department Approval^ y ^ Name Tom Kuehn^^^^^^^---- Administrator Reviewed: Title Finance Director Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Authorization to disburse City funds for claims received Typically during the month of December the City has only one Council meeting. The second Council meeting, which falls on or near the Christmas holiday, has been canceled. We will have the next scheduled Council meeting on Monday, January 12,2004. We therefore are requesting authorization to do a normal claims processing for the canceled Council meeting. This practice has been done in December each year with the Council then formally approving the claims at the first meeting in January of the following year. COUNCIL ACnON REQUESTED: Motion to authorize the City Treasurer to disburse City funds in payment of claims received for the December 22"* Council meeting, which has been canceled, and that such paid claims be presented for formal approval at the January 12,2004, Council meeting. «'«4 PsfKfVTgiRVMM ■ i I COliMCH MEETING DEC 8 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO DATE: December S, 2003 ITEM NO: Z/ Dcpartncnt Approval: Naac RonMoone TMe City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrators Report Item Description: Year 2004 Non-Union Compensation Adjustinents - Resolution The following wage and cafeteria benefit plan contribution adjustments for non-union staff are proposed for 2004: 1. Pay: Increase pay ranges by 3.0% 2.Cafeteria Benefit Plan Contribution: continue the contribution level at $500.00 per month Compensation Adjustment Criteria The criteria on which pay and insurance adjustments are generally based include the Consumer Price Index, market comparisons, and the increase in health insurance costs. For 2004, two additional factors are having a substantial impact. These are the City’s restricted budget situation caused by the State budget deficit, and the position the unions representing police officers are taking regarding pay adjustments, across the state, in bargaining 2004 contracts for police officers. A. Pay Adjustment Criteria 1. Cost of living increase A. Minneapolis/St. Paul Consumer Price Index: llie annualized increase from July 2002 to July 2003 was U%. The increase for the first half of 2003 was 0.9%. If this six month increase is annualized, it is a 1.8% increase. B. U.S. Consumer Price Index: annualized increase from September, 2002 to September 2003 is 2 J%. 2. Market comparison a. The average pay adjustment in cities in the lake area and throughout the metro area spears to be about 2% to 2.5%. 3. Budget Restrictions A \ fr >v' . The State Legislature placed the City into a restricted budget situation by reducing the City's State Aid revenue and imposing levy limits that prevent the City from recouping the lost State Aid revenue through a propertv* tax levy. The result is that, in order to balance expenditures with reduced revenues, major reductions have been made to expenditures in key service areas of the budget. The magnitude of the expenditure reductions reflects, in part, an effort to create room in the budget to enable the City to provide an overall compensation adjustment that is consistent with the CPI. Position Regarding Pay Adjustments Taken by Unions Representing Police Officers The LELS union, which represents Orono’s police ofllcers, has indicated that it will not settle any 2004 contracts for less than a 3% pay increase, although this is substantially higher than the increase in the CPI. LELS. and other unions representing police officers, have been successful in obtaining this level of pay increase in other cities through the binding arbitration process, even though it is out of synch with the CPI and with the financial restrictions of the cities. To avoid this discrepancy bett\een the police and non-police pay adjustments for 2004, the City has determined it will meet the LELS 3% pay increase requirement for the police officers, as well as for all other employee groups. However, this does not leave any frmding available for other compensation adjustments, including the benefit contribution. S. Health Insurance Premium Increase The City generally sets its benefit contribution at a level that will cover a portion of the health insurance premium increase. However, the restricted budget and the need to provide a 3% pay increase are causing the City to hold the benefit contribution at the 2003 level for 2004. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving pay plan adjustments for non-union employees for 2004, which reflects a 3.0% adjustment to pay schedules and continuing the Cit> 's cafeteria benefit plan contribution at $500.00 per month. il !: 1 •= I - I I* RESOLUTION APPROVING PAY PLAN ADJUSTMENTS FOR NON-UNION CITY EMPLOYEES FOR 2004 WHEREAS, the City Administrator is responsible for annually presenting pay plan adjustments for City employees, with the exception of employees covert by collective bargaining agreements; and WHEREAS, sufficient funds have been appropriated in the proposed 2004 Annual Budget to fund the recommended pay plan adjustments and such other matters of compensation as herein specified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Orono City Council as follows: 1.That the 2004 employee pay schedule; reflecting a 3.00% pay adjustment effective 1-1-2004, is approved. 2. That the City's cafeteria benefit plan contribution remain at $500.00 per month. 3.That City employees using their own vehicles for q>proved work related business shall be compensated at a rate of S.37S per mile. Adopted by the Council this 8th day of December, 2003. ATTEST: Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Cleric Page 1 of 1 .1 Updated: December 8,2003 CITY OF ORONO NON-UNION ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT/TECHNICAL/PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION PLAN POSITION/POINT GROUPINGS FOR 2004 GroBPing Pofait Raaee Mid Point Position in Groaning Position-point groups 2004.doc 1 45-47 46 Community Service Officer 2 48-50 49 Receptionist 3 51-54 52.5 Police Records/Secretaiy 4 55-58 56.5 Administrative Support Assistant 5 59-61 60 Administrative Support Assistant/Deputy City Clerk Payroll/Utilitv' Billing Specialist Police Office Manager 6 - T 62-65 63.5 Public Works Maintenance Worker i I ■■If I ■ I an City of Orono Compensation Plan Administrative Support/Technkal/Public Works Pay Lewis and Pay Ranges For 2004 BUDGET Level StepI SnmD Step HI Step IV Hourly Monthly Hourly Monthly Hourly Monthly Houriy Monthiv m 1 12.S8 2.180.33 13.32 2.308.80 14.06 2.437.07 14.80 2,565.33 2 13.30 2,305.77 14.09 2,441.40 14.87 2,577.03 15.65 2,712.67 3 14.13 2,448.68 14.96 2,392.72 15.79 2,736.76 16.62 2,880.80 4 1S.08 2,613.69 15.97 2,767.44 16.85 2,921.19 17.74 3,074.93 S 16.21 2,809.65 17.16 2,974.92 18.12 3,140.19 19.07 3,305.47 6 17.51 3,035.07 18.54 3,213.60 I9J7 3492.13 20.60 3,570.67 ^ ^ ^ .. *. 0- I lOff* !y^*« . '.i y i ■■I ■•.....« 1 •^u«)fcf W-(r 4^ <(^ .♦.«,••.w Ji»y —^• I Updated: December 8,2003 CITY OF ORONO NON-UNION SUPERVISORY/ADMIMSTRATIVE EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION PLAN POSITION/POINT GROUPINGS FOR 2004 Grouplag Polat Ranee MM Point Position in Gronnlns 1 66-69 67.5 On-Site Septic Manager (E) 2 70-74 72 City Clerk (E) Golf Course Supervisor (E) Building Inspector 3 75-79 77 ,. ..j Asst. Finance Director/MlS Coord (E) City Planner (E) 4 80-85 82.5 Building OfHcial (E) 5 86-91 88.5 6 92-97 94.5 Planning Director (E) 7 98-104 101 8 105-111 108 Police Chief (E) Finance Director (E) Public Services Director (E) 9 112-118 115 10 119-126 122.5 City Administrator (E) (E) - Exempt Potibon-potnl groupt 2004.doc nytwn f lien / / ‘‘ « .» Step III Step IV i riy Annual Houriy Annual M 45,905.90 23.23 48,322.00 13 48.937.35 24.77 51,513.00 18 52,166.40 26.40 54,912.00 '3 55,60825 28.14 58,535.00 59,473.80 30.10 62,604.00 ^4 63,932.15 32.35 67,297.00 3 68,911.10 34.87 72,538.00 ^5 74.368.85 37.64 78,283.00 i A 1 80,993.20 40.99 85,256.00 la 88.141.00 44.61 92,780.00 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed: COiiMrii MFETING DEC 8 2003 CITY Of ORONO Date: 12/8/03 Item No: ^ ^ Agenda Section: Name: Title: Stephany GootL^^^ Chief of Police'^^^^^ A Item Description: Accept BCA Furniture Donation Exhibits: See attached list DISCUSSION The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) recently moved from 1246 University Ave. to 14JO Maryland Ave E., St. Paul. State Statute does not permit the BCA to sell its used ofrice furniture. The BCA was directed to dispose of it by donating it to government or non profit entities. The disposal was advenised both in writing and verbally including an announcement to the Hennepin Count> Chiefs Association on November 6. 2003. The police department previously identified the need for new squad room chairs, additional filing cabinets, and a freezer for forensic evidence. The BCA offered chairs without arm rests, filing cabinets, shelving, and a freezer. Chief Good contacted BCA representatives Julie Syfko and Lorie Youngren and made a request to claim certain items of office furniture for the Police Department and the non-profit organization known as the Orono Discovery’ Center. On November 19,2003, a work crew consisting of police and public works under the direction of Officer Bruce Anderson moved furniture from the old BCA to the police department and to the Orono Discovery Center. The police department proposes to distribute one w orkstation to the Orono High School for use by the school resource officer, and se\ eral desks and chairs to Orono Public Works. Two workstations for the police office staff were replaced and the police department recommends installing of the w orkstations at the City of Spring Park for use by the police and public works staff There are several pieces of old office furniture that are no longer functional and/or have no value. The city code does not provide for disposing of e.\ce&s property other than by selling it. Staff is requesting council authorization to simply dispose of these items. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to accept donation by the BC.A and distribute as requested. Motion to dispose of worthless items as proposed HENNEPIN COUNTY ASSESSORS OPPICE A-2103 Govemcnant Center Minneapolis, MN 55487 612-348-3046 Fax 612-348-8751 7/a flECEtVED DEC U ^ ^005 QHtOFORONO INVOICE NO: CA2343 DATE: December 1.2003 Cityof Ororx) 2750 Kelley Parkway POBoxOe Crystal Bay. MN 55323 FUND NUMBER ACCOUNT NUMBER CENTER NUMBER PAYMENT REQUESTED BY 10 44250 674200 December 2003 QUANTITY DESCRIPTION Services Rendered by the County Assessor Under Contract First half payment of 2004 assessment due December 2003 UNIT PRICE SUBTOTAL SALES TAX TOTAL DUE Make all checks payable to: Hennepin County Assessor A-2103 Government Center Minneapolis. MN 55487 I, AMOUNT 55.1 $55.1 $55,1 rtfalribilhsiii 1 r V COIIMCII MFETING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION OEC 8 2003 DATE: December 4, ITEM NO: 2^ ClTYOFO|jggo Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name Lin Vee Licenses Title City Clerk Item Description: List of Licenses fgflr Council Approval ONE DAY GAMBLING - RESOLUTION Orono Elementary PTO (raffle) Winter Fun Fest - Orono Middle School Saturday, February 7,2004 ANNUAL LIQUOR LICENSES On Sale 3.2 Beer Lakeview Golf of Orono, Inc. 405 North Arm Drive Orono Golf Course 265 Orono Orchard Road South Oir Sale 3.2 Beer O'Sullivan's 2420 Shadywood Road O'Sullivan's 11 3340 Shoreline Drive On Sale Liquor Narrows Saloon (Orono Liquor Inc.) 3380 Shoreline Drive Please review the attached memo from Sergeant Erickson regarding the renewal of the Narrows Saloon liquor license. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to deny or approve the above listed license, subject to full payment of the utility bill and the civil penalty. ■Ti ratiiihrftin A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING APPLICATION FOR EXEMPT PERMIT OF THE ORONO ELEMENTARY PTO FOR A ONE DAY OFF-SITE GAMBLING PERMIT activities; and WHEREAS, the Orono Elementary PTO is licensed to conduct lawful gambling WHEREAS, the Orono Elementary PTO has proposed to conduct a one day off-site gambling activity (rafne) as part of its annual Mid Winter Fun Fest at the Orono Middle School on February 7,2004; and WHEREAS, the Orono Elementary PTO is required to obtain approval of the off-site gambling activity from the city in which the activity will occur. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Orono City Council does hereby approve the application of the Orono Elementary PTO to conduct a one day off-site gambling activity (rafne) at the Orono Middle School on February 7,2004. 2003. Adopted at a regular meeting of the Orono City Council this 8th day of December, ATTEST:Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Linda S. Vec, City Clerk OtONOnOM us DOC Page 1 of 1 ! « i A Date: 12/05/03 Date Received $10.00 Fee____________ City of Orono Application for Gambling Activity lyi* Of Pei^ i Type of Gangling . ryMK □ Premises Renewal Effective Dates: y[ One-Day Lawfu^ambling Ezempt Effective Date: WOnXAU^^i ZOO^ □ Bingo □ Paddlewheels □ Pull-Tabs Id Raffle □ Tipboards Organization CviQlfip Address { ■fi’/V fe/t i Phone n » I fsVc licant \(hAA,vS^\r ________i_______ iation with Organization ~ ‘rlU.I «s ^ i I . faJK'li Applicant AfTiliation with Address _ Phone Establishment When Address lent ^ere Cymbling w||i be Coodacted DvtnMJ l(V\L/j/ilp^itTT7^^ Sire) tU \ /i Km la/vwsr / I'r. 1\ /' lA I'aF 4 * I" *Property Owner i[\''i;'l\X Ui^r Gambling Manager t<yfirr6V-“J ssyj-Zr (dm) Phone (middle)(Uit) Name/Descriotion of Event 0rfi7\.f> Day(s) of Operation (lL| AAU Ar Hours of Operation_____^\0O (IAa ^ri) hi Ct'i 1 Required Submittals: □ Copy of permit application from the Minnesota State Gambling Control Board □ Sketch plan of area being leased for gambling activity Tlie Orono Chief of Police shall have 30 days in which to investigate and a recotnnieodatioD pursuant to Ormio Municipal Code Section 5^3, Subd. 3 (D). The undersigned applicant hereby agrees to the conditions quoted in Swtioh 5.23 of the Orono Municipal Code a nd any addi^onal requsmgnts the City staff may have. _ _ ^ Signature of applicant: ^ Date: ^ 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66, Crysttl Bay, aMN 55323 Phone: 9S2*249-4600 / Fax: 953*349-4616/www.ci.orono.mn.us Date: 12/04/03 To; Lin Vee From: Kurt Erickson Ref: Lakeview Golf - 3.2 Beer License Renewal The police department has no problem with the Lakeview license being renewed. Lakeview Golf has always been very good at carding our underage buyers in compliance checks and aggressive and sending them away. The message has always been clear that they don't want to sell to underage buyers. We have not had another alcohol related problems there. r Fiimi No. ia3»4m<lwiilMii Uw muM tkmm tm IHiXt MliqMHrnffr n«niMi II RETAIL “ON SALE" 9tate of dliimeoota. CDUVIY or........Lltw Orono To the.. P.MX J.............of the....................................of......... .................................................................................state of Minnesota: Grant R usba II UtnksCarn hereby appl.. ItP.. for e Ucenae tor the term of............ptM ,Xt*F.................................................................. from the ............................................................day of.........J WWFX...............................feer ...............loeeU At Retail Only* 3Jl Malt Liquors M file Mune enr dmfltwd by law, for eon$um§filon *WT ihoao certain premlaea In the .................................. ................................City ...........................................9r?P5l.......................................... Uaerlbetl as fohwa, to-wit:..................................................................................................................................... LAkevlew Coif of Oronot Inc. 405 North Ars Drive ef which place aaki applicant... .operate. .the buaineaa of..............PMhUc. tPi/. and to titat end repreaent.^. .and atate.9 . .aa foUowa: lltat aakl amMcant..........M .4.......................cittaen... .of the United Statea; of pood moral clwractor and tvihilct aiHl haw..........attaliHftI the aifit of 2i ycaras Utat . A)iru|idofur... .of tlw tmtaldlaltmtnU for ivli/tVi tlw Ihrtfnfm trill btt laautnl If thia apidir-athfn In pranUnt. Ttief no numufactnrer of anch nofi*lnraticol/f^ malt Uquora haa any ownerahip, in whole or in part, in aakl hualncaa of said applicant. ...or any Aiferesf tlwrdn; lltat aakl applicant... .make. .thia application punoant and subject to all the lawa of the State of htinneaota and the ordinances and rcgulationa of said......................9.K^X ....................................................... applicable thereto, which are hereby made a part hereof, and hereby agree. 9.. to observe and ttbey the aame: aievft Maio ollwr wqiilreuwiitx 9 mty. St tuut nqRilailen Each applicant Airfher jlefei that by the commencement of business and by July 1 of each succeeding year said appUcant will have paid the Federal Special Occupational Taa to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms for a retail dealer. Datml ....................YtarAi... ............... Applicant.... l».o. AMnm... ................... wcibi Date: 12/04/03 TorLinVec From Kurt Erickson Ref: Orono Golf - 3.2 beer license renewal The police department has no problem with the license being renewed at Orono Golf. We have not ^ any alcohol related problems there. i Ktmil No* U5»4|nrflrHMM lur llruM UmM» •• Ml 14 iM li^MT n»r i»wiwiii» II ihmmmrni RETAIL “ON SALE" i^tate at fliitititaota. nv Ol'...????fPA"......................I .............................OP.... 'I'U lira... PA*.X ..........»f Iho................................of......... ............................................................................Stale of Minnesota: horeby »ppl. ifP. ..form Ueonmm far Uxt term gf......................9{if. Tf.V........................................................ fmm aw.... ...................................SV of...........MWtX.......................Ytar ............ lo wff At Hvtall Only, 34 Mall Liquors M am HUim ant tlitfltml Ity law, far canaumiMlau "ON" i/nmo ranmlii promlmm hi Um........................... ..........................QiW........................................of..............Ofpna................................................. flUMVlflMIvl MU fttUttVMm IthwU:, • . ................................................................................................................................................... . Orono Golf Courso 263 Orono Orchard Road South at which pUce maid applicant.... oparata.. tha bualnamm of... Kin lc^^ei|;. ipi/. Mtid lu lliil Mfiii tvpnmmH. 9. .Mini oiMfo.. 9.M fullowK timl Mill miffUicmit..........A.............................vJiUtm§... .ciT flm f/ii/loil HisMti of gWMi iiMirnl idwirarfftr Mftd reputm mnd im¥0 ..........Mttained ihe mge of It yoans fliMf Ron .SCtf f cnluiftAn .Iprofunfofor. ...of the ettMlaliinant for which tlw Hcmue will bo laauod If fliii a§9pllcoUon l§ grantod. *l1ial no manufacturer of such non4ntoMlcatlng nuilt Ihtuora luta any otrnrmitlpk In whole or In part. In aaki bualnau of aaki aitplicant. ...or any hUoroat tlwreln; That aaki ap§tUcanl... .make. 9. .Ma application purauaat and aubfoct to all tho lawa of the Stale of ktinneaota and tho ordinancoa and rcgulatkma of aald ..................PXtjr........................................................... applicable thorolo, whkh are hereby made a part hereof, and hereby agree. 9. .toobaenmandobyytheaame: a mtf. of lorol ft Each applicant further atatea that by the conunertcement of bualneaa and by Jufy I of each au cceedb^ year aald applicant will have paid the Federal Special Occupational Taa to the Bureau of AhohoL Toba cco ai$d nroarma for a retail dealer. ....rJ.W. r.O. AdUrtam ... ....... Htiil il f i i Date: 12/04/03 To: Lin Vec From: Kurt Erickson Ref: O'Sullivans 3.2 License Renewal The police department has no objection to the O'Sullivans 3.2 beer license being renewed. There was one compliance check failure on 07/26/02. In that the clerk claimed several days after the incident that he sold to our under age buyer because he recognized him as an Orono CSO and assumed he must be of age we did not prosecute. We have had no other problems at O’Sullivans.■ i ll V. .1] AIMffiMiM b MIIInm* l> Ml .ilii tfWt of lIlinncBoni, To the _____cttj:j:oujncn_, RETAIL “OFF SALE*' Clty^Orono .of the..City Orono .....Stale of MinncaoCa: John M. O*Sullivan kertkf 4VlKJja.........../ir « Uanu/f f At imi tf___£n.?«Jf.*S£..... MMff In Original PlKkagcs Only JJ Mall Liquon. «f l*« MM« «f« dtfimti *y tow, /ar etintimplUm "OFF" th»tt cartato prtmhu to l*a. ----------------fiAtX------------------------- ___________Orono ________________________ iH€r^M tm»wk:.---------------------------------------------,..........,,,,,,,,, ...^. ^ O'Sullivans 2420 Shadywood Road :*!| al wUtk ptMct S0U tppU€»m....ayarato...t .....ikt tortoau a/.-----«W.UnR/.fi9.nX?MsnSt. «.9.F*___ aarf la Mai <a<l npn$tni..,.k.tnd tUlt...k. a«/aftowi: TAaf mM ayyNraal..........ia..n......................tiiium.......a/ lAa Unitti SMm a/ g»*4 mafal tkarttlir •mi rtpmit; ami ha.....aiiatoto toa ay# a/ Jl yaar*; iaal..Joba..O.'.SuJUlxaB..JUl______^nprUtar.„...tif tha ttlakliihaualfar whUk Ika Aaaata will kt inati IfikU applitatiaa It gtamlti. Tkal teii applltaal.....mak*.,a...lkh applitaiiaa panaami aai takjtcl la all Ik* lami af ik» Slal* af Miaatiaia aai Ik* arilaaae** aai ngalallaat afiaii.............Pitt........................applitakl* toarala, wkltk an k*nhf aiai* a pan htnaf, aai k*nby agn*..k..ia akum aai ak*p Ik* taai*: ;.v Eatk applleaai /unhtt tiaitt lkal_ k* it aai mow ik* kalitr af, mar kat_ k* mai* applUaliam far, mar ia*t_ k* iml*mi I* rntak* applitaiiaa far a Ftitral g*iail Daahrl Spatial lax tlaaip far Ik* fs/r •/ intoMicaling liquor. rA ?Dalfd.dfMJS.............. raar..?.o?.? Applltami...,.j F.O. Aiir*n...Afi.rj£...Ai.‘^S...^^^^^^ ____________ lALr* Orono Orono eofMioiieMla: muary Mall IJqiiors, Ik0t€ rtfla^a premiut im lA# tl8 ilint Driva ......RftRRlAn?./.f.SnXSSif.HJ;S..R«2F*f. .a/lA« VmUH SUiin: •fi—4 «aral tkmrmtUr 0ha.0.!SuUU.YaA..iJI.........^rafrltlar......#/ lA# fcailaa U f raalt^. iaf mni tmkjut I# all lAt lain a/ fA# 5laf# a/ .•...a//llraAI« lA«f«la, wAIcA a aatf aAajr IA« taai#; lAf Aal^ff #/• aar Aai^ At aia^a a/ifllrallaa rral ITalall Dtalar V SptcM laa ilaai^ /af lAf p.iriTiTiiwmini Renewal Rirriii¥*roiwr*i have found that there an ling a bad check to the cil ident. These have occun riV/ic#: run n \ icient to not reconunend < City should be aware of here is some concern. red, I would reconunend soca Depaitmem of Public Safety )ol aad GanbUng Ealbftaiicat (44 CbdarSueet. Suite 133 SLPaul,MNSSI0t-3l33 TTY 65I-282-6553 • Fm 651-297-5259 [QUOR, WINE, OR CLUB LICENSE oocfl the RciiOcr in Cird fee ii received by MN Liquor Control Q contained below. Make corrections if necessary and sign. City lew'al with completed license and licensee liquor liability for the new io required by bl«S. 340A.404 S. 3 to report any license 1)1 ( 12/31/2003^, 2561!Dse Penod Ending_______________ID# 'SinTWiY riBWeTifi ([♦ i»iT«ri line Dr 55392 •JVtIe • I On Sale S 5000.00 Sunday $ 200.00 cenifles Hut there has been no change in ownership on the above licensee named above, or for new licensees, hill applications should ;r infomution needed to complete this renewal. the fnllnwing! Failure to i any of the following will rgsult In fines. • I I « H I r*TTriu»a ;r»TiTo tsoc\ er, directly or indirectly in any other liquor establishments in this application. liquor license rejected by any city/township/county in the state of leiails on the back of this renewal, then sign below. (ears it has not had a liquor license revoked for any liquor law violation red. please give details on the back of this renewal, then sign below, we years it or its employees have not been cited for any civil or criminal Kcurred, please give details on back of this renewal, then sign below, cease year, a summons has not been issued under the Liquor Liability attach a copy of the summons, then sign below. Lsanon insurance is in effect for the full license period. ;e certificate that corresponds with the license period in ch '^county rides or SlOOgOOO surety bond may be submitted in lieu of liquor Date nrea and license has been approved by ciiy/county.) _________________________________Date ___________________ le or club license has been improved by the city/county as stated above.) _________________________________Date ifies licensee is eligible for license). _________________________________Date ___________________ been cited during the past five years for any sute/Iocal liquor law violations gn here. PS 9093-98 _ ^ w Jt CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 12/05/03 11 23 AM Page 1 DECEMBER 2003 ^^FPT■.NG UEC 8 2003 Check Amt IhvoiCA Corfimei 10100 Primary CMh Paid Chk# 076826 1CV7/2003 SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION E 101-42110^89 Other Miscellaneous Charges ($20 00) 76826 Total SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION ($20 00) Void Check #76826 Paid Chk# 077227 ^11/30/2003 METRO WEST INSPECTION SERVICES E 101-42400-437 Training & Development ($6 0 00) 11/2403 Total METRO WEST INSPECTION SERVICES Void Check #77227 ($60 00) Paid Chk# 077247 11/24/2003 METRO WEST INSPECTION SERVICES E 101-42400-437 Training & Development $30 00 Oman 2000 IRC. IBC - Oman Total METRO WEST INSPECTION SERVICES $30 00 Paid Chk# 077261 12/4/2003 WINTERNHEIMEK AUSSA E 101-41300-319 Other Professional Services $165 00 47 E 101-4*1300-319 Other Professional Services „ Total WINTERNHEIMER, ALISSA $365 00 CC Minutes 11/10/03 CC Minutes 11/24A)3 Paid Chk# 077262 12/5/2003 PIERCE MANUFACTURING E 425-48945-550 Automotive Equipment $197.5C0J)0 M014416 Total PIERCE MANUFACTURING $1 97.5CO 00~ Pumper - Nav Fire Station Paid Chk# 077264 12/8/2003 A-1 RENTAL E 602-49450-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total A-1 RENTAL $75 08 8384 $7508 Scaffolding Paid Chk# 077265 12/8/2003 ACCLAIM BENEFITS E 101-41900-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges E 101-41900-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges Total ACCLAIM BENEFITS S1C0 50 339766 $137.75 339767 Cobra Adm-11/2003 FSAAdm-11/2003 $238 25 Paid Chk# 077266 12/8/2003 AT ST E 601-49400-321 Telephone E 602-49450-321 Telephone E 101-41900-321 Telephone Total AT ST $9 90 3419397 $990 3419397 $3360_ 3419397 $53 40 Cell Phones Cell Phones Cell Phones Paid Chk# 077267 12/8/2003 BETTENDORF ROHRER KNOCHE WALL E 225-45223-319 Other Professional Services $2.1CO OO 5048 E 225-45223-319 Other Profbssionat Services $2.1C0 0(^ 5049 Total BETTENDORF ROHRER KNOCHE WALL $4.2C0 00 Saga Hill Land Exchange Saga Hid Land Exchange Paid Chk# 077270 12/8/2003 CECE*S SIGNS E 602-49450-227 Utility System Maint. Supplies Totnl CECE*S SIGNS $127.80 1468 Signs - S\«r Clean Out $127 80 ' -* i I Paid Chk« 077268 12/8/2003 BFI OF MINNESOTA. INC E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds E 101-45200 404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgt/Grounds E 101-41900-489 Other Mitcellaneous Charges E 613-49830-469 Other Miscellaneous Charges ToUl BFI OF MINNESOTA. INC $164 12 1307115 $13676 1307214 $555 30 1307420 $114.16 1307461 $973 34 Solid Waste 10-11/2003 Solid Waste 10-11/2003 So<id Waste 10-11/2003 Solid Waste 10-11/2003 Paid Chk# 077269 12/8/2003 BIFFS INC. E 101-45200-415 Other Equipment Rentals $60_91_W209357 Portable • BedenMood Total BIFFS INC.’$€3 91 J CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 12/05/0311 23 AM Page 2 DECEMBER 2003 Check Aiwt Invoice Comment Paid 077271 12/8/2003 CENTERPOINt ENERGY E 601-49400-381 Gas & Electric E 101-41900-361 Gas & Electric E 101-42110-381 Gas & Electric E 602-49450-381 GssA Electric E 602-49450-381 Gas & Electric E 101-41900-381 Gas & Electric E 601-49400-381 Gas & Electric Total CENTERPOINT ENERGY $8713 $322 31 $263 71 $16 98 $261 39 $522 74 $350 84 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service $1.82510 Paid Chki 077272 12/8/2003 CHUNKS LAKE8HORE AUTO E 101-42110-402Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $140.2924682 Oil, Mnt Tires «198 E 101-42110-402Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $89.83 24686 Oil, Mnt Tires 0196 E 101-42110-402Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $84 09 24708 Oil, Oifferentail 0190 E 101-42110-402Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $485324713 0110197 E 101-42110-402Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $55 59 24716 Oil. Mnt Tires 0192 E 101-42110-402Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $59 09 24722 Oil. Mnt Tires 0191 E 101-42110-402Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $460024736 Siren Cntrl Head 0197 E 101-42110-402Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $618.7224780 Radiator 0191 E 101-42110-402Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $7007824791 Wiper Mtr, Sway Bar 0185 E 101-42110-402Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $144024793 Spot Handle 0193 Total CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO SV857 32 I1 E 101-41900>403 Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip Total CITYVIEW PLUMBING t HEATING $^W_28 23752 $380 28 Furnace Repair - PO Paid Chk« 077274 12>8/2003 CORRPRO COMPANIES E 601-49400<405 Repairs/Maint-Watermains/plant Total CORRPRO COMPANIES $47^00 SI066602 $475 00 Cathodic Prol - Wlr Twr Paid Chki 077275 12/8/2003 DCA - WIRE ONLY G 101-21719 DCA/'Spending Accounts $712 93 11/26/03 Total DCA. WIRE ONLY Flex Spending -11/26/03 $71293 Paid Chk# 077276 12/8/2003 DEBAERE.DON E 101-43C00-226 Clothing & personal equipment Total DEBAERE.DON $100 00 12/3A)3 : 100 do' Safety Shoes Paid Chki 077277 12/8/2003 DELL E 227-45500-570 Office Equip and Furnishings Tout DELL $5.551 96 525601911 4DetlOpUplex $5 551 96 Paid Chki 077278 12/8/2003 DEPT OF ADM • INTERTECM GROUP E 101-41SC0-321 Telephone $118 19 W03100607 E 101-42110-321 Telephone $50 65 W03100607 Total DEPT OF ADM. INTERTECH GROUP Phone Service -10/2003 Phone Service > 10/2003 $168 84 Paid Chk# 077279 12;8/2003 DEX MEDIQ EAST LLC E 613-49830-340 General Advertising Tout DEX MEDIQ EAST LLC $263 10 17520133000 Yellow Page Adv > GC $263 10 Paid Chk# 077280 12/8/2003 DICKS AUTO DETAIUNG E 101 -4211CM02 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip ToUl DICKS AUTO DETAILING $90^3 14666 $90 53 Clean Sqd Interior CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register<S) 12AyS/03 11 23 AM Page 3 DECEMBER 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment Paid Chki 077281 12/8/2003 E J MAYERS INC G 602-20600 Contracts Payable G 602-16500 Fixed Asset-Const, in progress Total EJ MAYERS INC (S672 60) RFP #2 $13.45 2 00 RFP #2 $12.779 40 RFP#2 0LLRdS¥^Ext RFP#2 0LLRdS\wrExt Paid Chk« 677282 12/8/2003 E-Z RECYCLING E 101-43270-316Contract Recycling Pickup $6,409 20 5953 Recycling 12/2003 Total E-Z RECYCLING $6.409 20 Paid Chk« 077283 12/8/2003 EARL F. ANDERSON & ASSOC. E 101-43000-224Street Maint Materials/Supply $96 70 57153 No Parking Signs E 101-43000-224Street Maint Matehals/Supply $42^57343 Sign Total EARL F. ANDERSON S ASSOC.$139 65 Paid ChM 077284 12/8/2003 EGAN MCKAY ELECTRICAL CONTRCTR E 101-4300G408Contracted Street Maint.$145 00 JC2C*2369 Bulbs • TH12/Cty 6 ToUl EGAN MCKAY ELECTRICAL CONTRCTR $14500 PaidChk* 077285 12/8/2003 ELECTRIC PUMP E 602-49450-227Utility System Maint Supplies $300 00 24661 W Layfayette LS Repair Total ELECTRIC PUMP $300.00 Paid Chk# 077286 12/8/2003 ELECTRIC RESOURCE CONTRACTORS E 601-49400-404Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $150 00 33433 Heater - Water Plant Total ELECTRIC RESOURCE CONTRACTORS $150 00 Paid Chk* 077287 12/8/2003 ERICKSON, KURT E 101-42110-437Training & Development $503 22 9/24 C3 Lodging - AMEM Conf Tout ERICKSON, KURT $50322 Paid Chk* 077288 12/8/2003 ESS BROTHERS S SONS E 602-49450-227Utility System Maint Supplies $104 37 FF5cC5 Adj Ring Total ESS BROTHERS S SONS $104 37 Paid Chk* 077289 12/8/2003 G S K SERVICES E 101-43000-226Clothing & personal equipment $73 13 006-:*44429 Uniforms E 601-49400-226Clothing & personal equipment $12 19 006-'44429 Uniforms E 613-49830-226Clothing & personal equipment $575 006-'44429 Uniforms E 602-494S0-226Clothing A personal equipment $36 87 006-'44429 Uniforms E 101-43000-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $57 03 0C6-'44429 Shop Tovvelts E 101-43000-226Clothing A personal equipment $6971 006-751052 Uniforms E 613-49830-226Clothing A personal equipment $575 006-751052 Uniforms E 601-49400-226Clothing A personal equipment $1162 006-'51052 Uniforms E 602-49450-226Clothing A personal equipment $34 86 006-'51052 Uniforms E 101-43000-221Equipment Parts A Accessories $5463 006-757658 Shop Tovvels E 613-49630-226Clothing A personal equipment $5.75 006-757658 Uniforms E 601-49400-226Clothing A personal equipment $1265 006-757653 Uniforms E 101-43000-226Clothing A personal equipment $7585 006-'57658 Uniforms E 602-49450-226Clothing A personal equipment $37 95 006-'57658 Uniforms Total GAKSERVICES $493 74 Paid Chk* 077290 12/8/2003 GOOD, STEPHANY E 101-42110-439Meeting Expenses $137 63 11/2403 Refmshments-Meetmgs E 101-42110-489Other Miscellaneous Charges $95 64 1124 03 BCA Furniture Expenses E 101-42110-437Training A Development $26 00 112403 Chiefs Meetings Total GOOD. STEPHANY $259 27 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Registei^ 12M/03 11 23 AM Page 4 Paid DECEMBER 2003 Commeiit ;hki 077291 "/aOOI^OOPMERSTAT^ E 602-4945CM89 Other Miscellaneous Charges $99 98 3100628 E 601-49400^89 Other Miscellaneous Charges Total GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL $99 98 3100628 Locates -10/2003 Locates-10/2003 $19996 Paid Chk« 077292 12/8/2003 HAWKINS CHEMICAL E 601-49400-216 C lemicals and Chem Products Total HAWKINS CHEMICAL $1.508 87 $1.508 87 565701 Flourfne/Chtorfne Paid Chk# 077293 12W2003 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE E 101-41900-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies $57 4C 60858 E 101-41900-223 BldgA3rounds Maint Supplies Total HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE $26 63 60659 $84 08 Ice Melt Spreader Paid Chki 077294 12W2003 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH DPT E 101-42110-319 Other Professional Services $1,541.89 23118025 Radio Lease -11/2003 Total HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH DPT $1,541 89 PaidChki 077295 12/8/2003 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF E 101-41600-309 Jail Charges $753 63 1-138-212 Total HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF Booking fees 10/2003 $75363 Paid Chk# 077296 12/8/2003 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-JAIL E 101-41600-309 Jail Charges $957.98 233 Total HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-JAIL $9'sT98 Rm & Board - 10/2003 Paid Chk# 077297 12/8/2003 HERMAN. JOHN E 101 -42110-439 Meeting Expenses Total HERMAN. JOHN $30 00 12/01/03 $30 00 Pizza - Meeting Paid Chk# 077298 12/8/2003 INFRATECH E 602-49450-406 Repairs/Maint-S¥vr imes/lifts $1.320 00 ToUl INFRATECH $1.32(T00 310961 Televise - OCB/HWY 12 SWR Pad Chk# 077299 12/8/2003 J A R RADIATOR CORP. E 601-49400-404 Repa;rs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $315 25 Total J A R RADIATOR CORP. $3162^ 3964 Rep Windows-Wtr Chem Rrrs Pad Chk# 077300 12^8/2003 J H LARSON COMPANY E 101-41900-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies ToUl J H LARSON COMPANY $47 80 4379146-01 Light BuK)S $47 80 Pad Chk# 077301 12/8/2003 KENNETH N. POTTS. PA E 101-41600-306 Legal-Prosecution Total KENNETH N. POTTS. PA $2.391 66 12/1/03 Prosecutions 11/2003 $2,391 66 Pad Chk# 077302 12/8/2003 LOGIS E 101-41900-311 Data Processing Communication $30 00 23476 E 101-41900-329 Other Communications $159 00 23476 E 101-42110-310 LOGIS-Applications $1.643 00 23476 E 101-42110-329 Other Communications 23476 Total LOGIS $1,991.00 Henn Cty Con 10/2003 Internet 10/2003 Police Records 10/2003 Internet 10/2003 Pad Chk# 077303 12/8/2003 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT E 101-43000-221 Equi'^ent Parts A Accessories $31 94 51860 ToUl LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT $31.94 Chain Saw Bar CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 12A)5A)3 11 23 AM Pag«5 OECEMBEf(2003 Chacii Ami Involc* Comiiwnt Paid Chic* 077304 12/8/2003 LONG LAKE. CITY OP G 601-16500 Fixed Asaet-Const in progress E 101-42260-316 Fire Services Total LONG LAKE, CITY OF $571.30 20030077 $38.493 00 20030085 Orono Share-Wtr Interconnect Fire Protection • 4th Qtr 2003 $39,064.30 J Paid Chk# 077305 12/8/2003 MCLEOD USA • PHONE BILLS E 101-41900-321 E 101-42110-321 E 602-49450-321 E 601-49400-321 E 601-49400-321 E 602-49450-321 Telephone Telephone Telephone Telephone Telephone Telephone $475 03 2301524 $203 59 2301524 $51.78 2301524 $22 62 2301524 $42.95 2301524 $39 45 2301524 Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Total MCLEOD USA-PHONE BILLS $836.42 Paid Chk# 077306 12/8/2003 MEDIA COM E 613-49830-415 Other Equipment Rentals Total MEDIA COM $6.30 838392162003 Cable-GC $6 30 Paid Chk# 077307 12/8/2003 MEDICA G 101-15998 Non-Employee Health Ins G 101-21706 Hospitalization/Medical Ins G 101-15998 Non-Employee Health Ins G 101 -21706 Hospitalization/Medical Ins G 101-15998 Non-Employee Health Ins G 101-21706 Hospitaiization/Medicat Ins Total MEDICA $68205 $5,133.51 ($1.183 44) $1.095 87 $2.55607 $2,980.69 103335102552 Medica High 12/2003 103335102552 Medica High 12/2003 103335122585 Medica Low 12/2003 103335122585 Medica Low 12/2003 103335125488 Medica Elect 12/2003 103335125488 Medica Elect 12/2003 $11,264.75 Paid Chk# 0773C8 12/8/2003 MIDWEST FENCE E 601-49400-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds G 601-16500 Fixed Asset-Const, in progress Total MIDWEST FENCE $1,470 00 107803 $5,063 M 107803 $6.533 00 Repair Fence - Nav Wtr Fence - Hwy 12 Water Paid Chk# 077309 12/8/2003 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $30 67 RI11030875 Cylinder Rental E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories Total MINNEAPOUS OXYGEN COMPANY $15.34 R111030876 $46.01 Cylinder Rental Paid Chk# 077310 12/6/2003 NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS G 101-21710 Life Insurance Tout NCPERS GROUP UFE INS $272 00^67321203 $272.00 PERA Life-12/2003 Paid Chk# 077311 12/6/2003 NEENAH FOUNDRY CO E 101-41900-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Totol NEENAH FOUNDRY CO $108 08 27548 $108 08 ’ Curb Grates - CH Drainage Paid Chk« 077312 12/8/2003 OBERAIGNER. SCOTT E 601-49400-321 Telephone $1256 12/2/03 Use of Cell Phone ToUl OBERAIGNER. SCOTT $12.56’ Paid Chk# 077313 12/8/2003 PIONEER E 602-49450-352 Printing & Publishing $27.50 832 Homestead Swr Notice E 101-42400-340 General Advertising $25 87 845 Hearing Notice F. 101-42400-340 General Advertising $127 36 847 Applications E 101-42400-340 General Advertising $25 87 848 Vehicle Storage Notice E 101 -419CX)-352 Pnnting & Publishing $109 45 857 Ordinance #2 E 101-41900-352 Pnnting A Publishing $481 58 858 Ordinance #3 H .4IL CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Registei® Total PIONEER DECEMBER 2003 Invoice Comment $797 63 Paid Chk« 077314 12/6/2003 POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC. E 101-42110-404 E 101-41900-404 E 101-42110404 E 101-41900-404 E 101-42110-404 E 101-41900-404 E 101-42110-404 E 101-41900-404 E 101-41900-404 E 101-42110404 E 101-41900-404 E 101-42110-404 E 101-42110-404 E 101-41900-404 ToUl Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Hepairs/Maint-Bldgi/Grounds Repaira/Maint-Bldot/Grounda Repaira/Maint-Cldgs/Grounds Repairt/Maint-Bldgs/Groijnds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounda Repairs/Maint-Bldga/Grounds Repain/Maint-Bldga/Grounds Repalrs/Maint-Bldga/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgt/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgi/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Mairvt-Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC. PaidChk# 077315 12/8/2003 PRECISION TURF E 613-49830-223 Bldg/Grounds Maim Supplies Total PRECISION TURF $1.442 07 10126 wd/Carpet Cleaning $1.762 52 10126 Tile/Carpet Cleaning $76201 10127 Janitorial Service - May $931 34 10127 Janitorial Service - May $823.41 10128 Janitohal Service - June $1,006.3910128 Janitorial Service - June $762 01 10129 Janitorial Service • July $931 34 10129 Janitorial Service - July $931 34 10130 Janitorial Service - Aug $762.01 10130 Janitorial Service - Aug $931.3410131 Janitohal Service - Sept $76201 10131 Janitorial Service - Sept $76201 10132 Janitorial Service - Oct $931 34 10132 Janitorial Service • Oct $13.501.14 $185 53 3005 GC Chemicats $185.53 Paid Chk# 077316 12/8/2003 QWEST E 613-49830-321 Telephone Total QWEST tSVOA 9524739904 $61 04 Phone Service • GC Paid Chki 077317 12/8/2003 SAFETY SIGNS E 101-43000-415 Other Equipment Rentals ToUl SAFETY SIGNS $181 58 32336 Barricades $181.58 PaidChk# 077318 12/8/2003 SBC PAGING E 101-42110-321 Telephone E 602-49450-321 Telephone E S01 -49400-321 Telephone Total SBC PAGING $3108 20261012031 $29 34 48300511036 $29 35 48300511036 Police Pagers PW Pagers PW Pagers $89.77 Paid Chk# 077319 12/8/2003 SCHMIDT CURB COMPANY, INC G 402-20600 Contracts Payable ($1,612.73) RFP#1 E 402-48030-530 Other Improvements Tout SCHMIDT CURB COMPANY, INC $32,254.51 RFP#1 RFP#1 Cty 19 Sidewalk RFP#1 Cty 19 Sidewalk $30,641 78 Paid Chk# 077320 12/8/2003 SKEIE. PATRICK G 602-11501 Accounts Receivabte-w/s ToUl SKEIE, PATRICK $131.52 340 Tonka Ref - Overpayment 340 Tonka $131 52 PaidChk# 077321 12/8/2003 STS CONSULTANTS LTD. F 425-48945-304 Engineering-Consulting ToUl STS CONSULTANTS LTD. $1,263.25 251123 Testing/Inspection Nav Fire $1.263 25 Paid Chk# 077322 12/8/2003 T.L. STEVENS E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total T.L. STEVENS $485 00 3505 Pud Pump - CB Park Well $485 00 Paid Chk# 077323 12/8/2003 THE HOME DEPOT E 601-49400-223 Bldg/G;ounds Maint Suppbes E 602-49450-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies $188 88 11/12/03 $128.32 11/7/03 Lumber Water Plant Garage 12A)5A)3 11 23 AM Pages CITY OF ORONO ^Check Detail Registeitg) 12y05/03 11:23 AM Page? DECEMBER 2003 ClMck Amt Invoke Comment Total THE HOME DEPOT $317.20 PaidChk# 077324 12/8/2003 TKDA E 601-49400^5 Repairi/Maint-Watermeins/ptent E 601-49400-489 Other MisceRaneous Charges To^l TKDA $223.73 $54928 64126 64724 Locate Leak • C19/Old Beach Watermain Locate Paid Chk# 077325 12/8/2003 TOLL GAS A WELDING SUPPLY E 602-49450-227 Utility System Maint. Supplies $233.34 E 101-43000-224 Street Maint Matenals/Supply _ $664 Tout TOLL GAS A WELDING SUPPLY $239 98 275669 432172 Welding Supplies Cylinder Rental PaidChk# 077326 12/8/2003 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE E 101-41900-322 Postage $66 00 Box 66 Total UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE PO Box 66 Rental $66 00 Paid Chk# 077327 ^2/8/2003 VALLEY-RICH CO E 60249450-406 Repairs/Maint-Swr lines/lifts ToUl VALLEY-RICH CO $2.086 06 $2,086.06 7599 Swr Main Break-E Lake St PaidChk« 077328 12/8/2003 VERIZON WIRELESS E 602-49450-321 Telephone $33 82 3516377219 Utility Phone E 601-49400-321 Telephone $3382 3516377219 Utility Phone E 101-41900-321 Talephone W78.51 3516867559 Cell Phones ToUl VERIZON WIRELESS $4^’ 15 Pan Chios 077329 12/8/2003 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER E 60149400-226 Clothing A personal equipment $278 97 130650 Safety Equip E 10143000-226 Clothing A personal equipment $695.95131440 Reflective Jackets Tout VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER $97492 Paid Chk# 077330 12/8/2003 VOGT HEATING A AIR E 10141900404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $880 00 13746 Breaker System - Irrigation Tout VOGT HEATING A AIR $880 00 PaidChk# 077331 12/8/2003 WESTONKA GLASS SERVICE E 61349830404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $88 85 11/18/03 Window Repair E 61349830-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $201211/21/03 Window Repair ToUl WESTONKA GLASS SERVICE $10897 PaidChk# 077332 12/8/2003 E 101 -42400-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip Total WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE $3784 7 524160 $37847 Tires #210 Paid Chk# 077333 12/8/2003 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC E 60249450-381 Gas A Electric E 10143000-381 Gas A Electric E 10143000-381 Gas A Electric Tout WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC $30 75 3113009200 $3105 3113009200 $^;V69 5015782900 $43349 Electrical Service Electrical Service Electrical Service 1 Paid Chtc# 077334 12/8/2003 ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS E 101-43000-221 EquipmenI Parts & Accessorlfs Tout ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS $6» 38 93053 $653.38* Sweeper Brushes 10100 Primary C«h $360,039.31 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register^) 12A)V03 1.1:23 AM * Pages DECEMBER 2003 Check Amt Invoice ■SSSS& Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 225 PARK FUND 227 IMPR/EQUIP CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND 402 MUNICIPAL ST AID ST CONSTUCT 425 NAVARRE FIRE STATION PROJ FUND 601 WATER OPERATING FUND 602 SEWER OPERATING FUND 613 GOLF COURSE 10100 Primary Cash $90,632.35 $4,200.00 $5,551.96 $30,641.76 $196,763.25 $11,296.16 $17,997.46 _______$756.35 $360,030.31 LI ^ V I // CITY OF ORONO clwck rogistor 12«1/031:5SPM Pago 1 Chick Numbar Employaa Mama 053650 053651 053652 053653 053654 053666 053667 053655 053656 053657 053658 053659 (>§3000 053661 053662 053663 053667 053665 ANDERSON. BRUCE L. BORIS. SCOTT W. CORNICK. JAMES L DEMBOUSKI. JAY C. VOID ERICKSON. KURTR VOID FARNIOK. CORREY L FISCHENICH.DANT. FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K. JOHNSON. JEFFREY MCNICHOtS. DAVID L MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES RUSSEYH. KYLE M SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B. VOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. TOMCZYK.MARKW. WITTKE. ANTHONY A. Pay Chack Chtck Pwkxt Amount Date Clwck SMw 24.1 $1,451.87 12/1A)3 Outstanding 24.1 $291.24 12/1/03 Outstanding 24.1 $1,319.88 12/1/03 Outstanding 24.1 $1,545.15 12/1/03 Outstanding 24.1 $0.00 12/1/03 Void 24.1 $1,007.23 12/1/03 Outstanding 24.1 $0.00 12/1/03 Void 24.1 $1,545.15 12/1/03 Outstanding 24.1 $1,417.34 12/1/03 Outstanding 24 1 $1,339.29 12/1/03 Outstanding 24.1 $133.01 12/1/03 Outstanding 24.1 $744.82 12/1/03 Outstanding 24.1 $1,521.81 12/1/03 Outstanding 24.1 $553.25 12/1/03 Outstanding 24 1 $1,241.35 12/1/03 Outstanding 24.1 $1,417.34 12/1/03 Outstanding 24.1 $1,451.87 12/1/03 Outstanding 24.1 $827.61 12/1/03 Outstanding $17,808.21 CITY OF ORONO 11/2V03 11:51 AM Pag# 1 clwck register Chack Numbar Employaa Hama 053617 053618 053619 053620 053621 053622 053623 053624 053625 053626 05362/ 053628 053629 053630 053631 053632 053633 053634 053635 053636 053637 053638 053639 053640 053641 053642 053643 053644 053645 053646 053647 053648 C53649 003028 003029 003030 003031 003032 003033 003034 003035 003036 003037 003038 003039 003040 003041 003042 003043 003044 003045 003046 003047 003048 003049 003050 003051 003052 003053 DODGE. RACHEL M LESKINEN. DENISE M. SILUS. BARBARA O. ANDERSON. BRUCE L. BOBZIEN. SUE A. BORIS. SCOTT W. BUDIG. STACIE M. CARLSON. MICHAEL B DEM60USKI. JAYC. ERICKSON. KURT R FARNIOK. CORREY L FISCHENICH. DAN T. MADSON. ADRIENNE M. MCNICHOLS. DAVID L. MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES PERSELL. WIUIAMR. RUSSETH. KYLE M SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. 1CMC7YK.MARKW WITTKE, ANTHONY A. HERMAN. JOHN R GAFFRON. MICHAEL P. MFYER. WILLIAM C. OMAN. LYLE E. VANG. BRUCE L GREGORY. JAMES D HANSEN. STEVEN OBRIEN. RANDY L PALMER. GREGORY A. RATHBUN. BARRY J. SKREEN. DALE S STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD MOORSE. RONALD J VEE. LINDA S KUEHN. THOMAS M OLSON. RONALD J PETTIT. SANDRA K. ANDERSON. BRUCE L. BOBZIEN. SUE A. BORIS. SCOTT W BUDIG. STACIE M CORNICK. JAMES L. FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K. GOOD. STEPHANY R JOHNSON. JEFFREY MCNICHOLS. DAVID L TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. LEE. JOSEPH P BOLTERMAN. MATTHEW A FOTH. MELANIE C GAFFRON. MICHAEL P GAPPA. GREGORY A. OMAN. LYLE E. WAATAJA. JANICE J. OEBAERE. DONALD L HANSEN. STEVEN OBERAIGNER. SCOH Q. OBRIEN. RANDY L 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 Chack Amount $1,031 08 $864 60 $502.27 $932.38 $855 83 $1,477.34 $802.37 $635 90 $1,556.61 $1,623.33 $2,103.35 $1.563 62 $857.05 $700 95 $1,843 45 $59333 $1.307 56 $51750 $41809 $1,469.55 $1,823.97 $896.36 $1,404.19 $695.26 $44 63 $1.31361 $1,217.39 $317.72 3663 69 $92011 $1 352 72 $1,190.39 $1.363 46 $2,235.92 $1,243.61 $1.31326 $1.147 61 $1,083.57 $1,135.00 $110 00 $20.00 $40 00 $1,717.25 $1.577 27 $1,941.39 $1.842 24 $87500 $900 00 $354 41 $1.098 45 $1,166.71 $125 00 $1,790.38 $1.400 00 $1.212 45 $1.400 77 $7500 $1,601.54 $50000 Chack Data Chack Statui 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/26/33 Outstanaii':^ 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/260)3 OutsUnding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 1ir4.60)3 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/260)3 OuUtanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstano g 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/260)3 Outsta'iding 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/260)3 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 111^6/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding 11/26/03 Outstanding cmroF ORONO 11/2y0311:51AM Pagt2 clwck raglstor dwell dwek AmoufH dwell 003064 PALMER. GREGORY A RATHBUN. BARRY J. 24 24 $350.00 $200.00 11/20/03 Outstanding 11/20mOutitanc$ng $63,318.49 r?:' IrS' CITY OF ORONO 12A)3A)3 11 58 AM Page 1 *Check Detail Register^) NOVEMBER 2003 Check Amt Nivolc# CommeffR 10100 Primary Cash Paid Chk« 077248 11/26A)3 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES G 101-21701 Fedefal Withholdif>g G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholding G 101-21703 FICATaxWtthholding Total FIRSTNATIONALBANKOFLAKES $9.422 55 $4.448 56 $4.448 56 $18,319.67 PaidChk# 077249 11/26A)3 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 487 G 101-21705 Other Retirement Total ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-487 $56862 Paid ChkS 077250 1l726A)3 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 0101-21707 Union Duet $618 26 Total LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE $61826 PaidChk# 077251 n726y03 MN CHILD SUPPORT PMT CTR G 101-21712 Other Deductiont $557 88 Total MN CHILD SUPPORT PMT CTR $557.88 PaidChk# 077252 TU26^3 MN DEPT OF REVENUE G 101-21702 State Withholding $4.118 45 Total MN DEPT OF REVENUE K118.45 Paid Chk# 077253 11/26A)3 MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM O 101-21718 Pott Employment Health $231.77 Total MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM $231.77 Paid Chk# 077254 11/26/03 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 0 101-21705 Other Retirement $1,797.00 0101-21705 Other Retirement $0T)^ ToUl NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION $i>97 00 PaidChk# 077255 11/26A)3 ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEEA:UST G 101-21705 Other ReUrement $2,979 W Total ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRU8TEEA:UST $2,979 68 Paid Chk# 077256 11/26/03 PUBUC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT O 101-21704 PERA $6,886 07 O 101-21704 PERA $5.354 42 Total PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT $12,240 49 Paid Chk# 077257 11/26A)3 UNITED WAY G 101-21708 United Way $65 00 Total UNITED WAY $65 00 Paid Chk# 077258 11/26/03 WISCONSIN SCTF G 101-21712 Other Deductiont $164 62 ToUl WISCONSIN SCTF $184 62 10100 Primary Cath $41.68144 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 10100 Primary Cath $41,681.44 $41,681 44 FEDERAL W/H FICA A MEDICARE W/H FICA & MEDCR CITY SHARE DEFERRED COMP-302030 UNION DUES M.Carlton#0014164432 STATE TAX W/H HC Savingtf/11/23X)3 USCM - ENTITY 2339 OBRA#2343 MN STATE RETIREMENT PERA CITY SHARE PERA EMPLOYEE W/H i CHARITY DONATIONS X)HNSON # 0002756896 ■ ■„— CITY OF ORONO ^2^0A^02 T 27AM Page 1 *Check [>etail Register^) DECEMBER 2003 ClwcORmt kNoic* Cowmint 10100 Rrlmanf 35TT72 Caali i Paid Chki 077259 1 G 101-21704 PERA G 101-21704 PERA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMEMT $2,520.48 $1,680.30 PERA CITY SHARE PERA EMPLOYEE W/H Total PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ftBmiEMENT $4,200.78 PaidChk# 077260 l2/3« G 101-21704 PERA G 101-21704 PERA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES REnREMENT $236.97 $157.99 PERA CITY SHARE PERA EMPLOYEE W/H Total PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT $394.96 10100 Primary Caah K595.74 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 10100 PrimaiyCaah $4.595 74 $4,595.74 lJ .• *INFORl^TlbN ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL MFFTING C:C 8 2003 OF CITY OK Ohui^O » % L Hennepin Hennepin County RECEIVED NOV t 5 200} UrYUFORONO Noveiriber21.2003 GABRIEL JABBOUR CITY OF ORONO P.O.BOX 66 CYSTAL BAY MN 55323-0066 Dctr M$./Mr. JABBOUR This lener is intended to notify your organization that Hennepin County is applying for two Brownfield Grants from the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) to support brownfield assessment and cleanup activities within the County. We are also requesting your comments and input for the applications. Hennepin County is seeking funding to support the following activities (the funding, should it be awarded, will be available in the fall of 2004): $400,000 for the environmental assessment of properties on an as-needed basis in association with highway corridor redevelopment and improvement projects: $200,000 of this funding will be dedicated to sites contaminated with petroleum and $200,000 will be dedicated to sites contaminated by non petroleum hazardous substances. $1,000,000 for the capitalization of a Brownfield Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund that will be dedicated to the cleanup of environmental conumination at sites within the County. The EPA's National Brownfield Program provides grants for the assessment and cleanup of brownfield properties to help encourage their re-use. Brownfield properties are those where the presence of contamination, or even the possible presence of conumiiulion, is a barrier to the re-use of the property. The EPA requirements for a grant application include having public comment to ensure that the application has die support of the communities that will be affected by the project Toward that end, Hennepin County will post a draft of the applications on their website at http://www.co.henneoin.mn.us'environmental/programs'eprotect.html starting Monday November 24 2003. If you have any comments, positive or negative, or suggestions for inclusion in our application, please communicate them to us by December 2,2003. Comments may be sent by e-mail to Dave Jaeger at daMd.jaeger@co.hennepin.mn.us , or in writing at 417 North Fifth Street, Minneapolis, MinnesoU 55401. We apologize for the short notice but our application has to be finalized and sent to the EPA no later than December 4, 2003. As part of the review process you may be contacted by the EPA as a reference check. Please feel free to contact Dave at 612-348-5714 with any questions you may have regarding this letter or the EPA grant applications. Smcerely, k Rosemary Lavin Division Manager Environmental Services ttrick Connoy Economic Development Project Manager Housing, Community Works & Transit Department of Environmental Senices 417 North Fifth Street Minneapolis, MinnesoU SS40M397 (612) 348-6509 FAX: (612) 348-8532 Facility INFO Line: (612) 348-6500 http://www.co.hennepm.mn,ua^envifDnmenul/envhofne.html Recy cled Paper k FT IM: 18202 Minnetonka Bvl, Oeaph»en.MNSS301 Phone:(952)471-0600 Fai: (962) 471-0682 Email: admin0fflinnehahaoe6k.0(g WebSito: «Miw minnehahacreek.org 3oan1 of Managira Pamela G.BIxl James CaRcns Lance Fisher Monica Gross Scott Thomas Richard MHIer Robert Schroeder Miiiehalia Creek Watershed District Improving Quality ofWater, Quality ofLift Ettablished in 1967 OEC n ( Cll t w. November 29, 2003 "iWfVO Dear Painter Creek Watershed Leader You are invited to participate in a discussion with other community leaders about the future of the Painter Creek Watershed. Building upon a volunteer-driven three-year study, a rich technical history and the recommendations of a panel of water experts, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District embarked upon the Painter Creek Feasibility Study earlier this year. The Study is nearing completion and preliminary findings are in. We would like your participation in helping set the course for future management efforts. The open house is scheduled for Wednesday. December 10 from 7:00-9 00 p m at Orono City Halt, located right off Hkihwav 12 and Old Crystal Bav Road A brief presentation will begin at 7:30 p.m. You will join members of area city councils, planning and natural resource commissions in learning more about the results of studies relating to wetlands, greenway corridors, Jennings Bay, stormwater runoff and overall governance issues relating to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Project volunteers will share their perceptions and aspirations regarding the valuable Painter Creek Watershed You will join other attendees in sharing your ideas regarding management of this valuable resource If you have any questions, please contact Jim Hafner, MCWO Project Manager, at 952-471-0590 or Gary Oberts, Technical Consultant, Emrrions and Olivier Resources, at 651-770-8448. Sincerely vours. Lance Fisher President Board, of Managers \ Mai; 18202 MinnaionkaBML, DMphMn,MNSS»1 Phone: (962) 471-0680 Fax:(962)471-0682 Emal: adminOminnahahactealLorg WabSile: Miwwminnehahacreok.org SoardolHanagare Pamela G. Bind James Caluns Lance Fisher Monica Gross Soon Thomas Richard Miler Robert Schroeder or vC«i|MM| * tMtf J0% rjrtk#'#' hk9» Niiiehalit Creek Watersked District Improving Quality opi^attr, Quality of Lift EttaUishetl in 1967 OfCn ' rnor a.... November 29,2003 Dear Painter Creek Watershed Leader You are invited to participate in a discussion with other community leaders about the future of the Painter Creek Watershed. Building upon a volunteer-driven three-year study, a rich technical history and the recommendations of a panel of water experts, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District embarked upon the Painter Creek Feasibility Study earlier this year. The Study is nearing completion and preliminary findings are in. We would like your participation in helping set the course for future management efforts. The open house is scheduled for Wednesday. December 10 from 7:0O-9:(X) d m at Orono City Hall, tocated rioht off Hkihwav 12 and Old Crystal Bav Road A brief presentation will begm at 7:30 p.m. You will join members of area city councils, planning and natural resource commissions in learning more about the results of studies relating to wetlands, greenway corridors, Jennings Bay, stormwater runoff and overall governance issues relating to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Project volunteers will share their perceptions and aspirations regarding the valuable Painter Creek Watershed. You will join other attendees in sharing your ideas regarding management of this valuable resource If you have any questions, please contact Jim Hafner, MCWD Project Manager, at 952-471-0590 or Gary Oberts, Technical Consultant, Emmons and Olivier Resources, at 651-770-8448. Sincerely yours. Lance Fisher President Board.of Managers l■&iH1lftarfirifnri(r UCUCNISCK lU, 9am - 8pm and ^J\nali \V y.- tf ^OUX (Dux ^e£&uision cStudio dl£lJl^axn c/f^oui dta cStudio n^&monstxations A' ^ ♦ #* ♦ 9 m ▼ ,% »^ X- The LMCC is launching a new channel. Channel 12. Come to the open house and give us your input as to what you would like to see on this channel. Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission I Channels 8,20 and 21 4071 Sunset Drive Spring Park, Minnesota 952-471-7125 X-\ ' \ PUBLIC WELCOME ■I* A it- * » ■ihihiflf Minneapolis/ Hennepin County Community Advisory Board on Homelessness 2004 State Legislative Recommendations yfeh November 25,2003 nrp r>ear Hennepin County Municipality,dry Of '**COV| At the November meeting of the Community Advisory Board on Homelessness (CABH) the following legislative recommendations were adopted for the 2004 state legislative session. The CABH applauds the efforts cities have made to preserve funding and take policy actions to reduce the impact of the state’s fiscal crisis and the resulting budget decisions nuule during the 2003 legislative session. In principle, the CABH opposes the devolution of state entitlement programs (such as Emergency Assistance) to counties and cuts to LGA funds for cities that impact community services. We encourage you to include the following issues in your 2004 Legislative Agenda. The issues are listed by priority to preserve the existing safety net and housing programs that benefit our homeless and most vulnerable citizens: Support New Initiatives: I. Legislative relief for income-restricted rental housing properties from escalating real estate taxes and property valuations that are a result of recent changes to property tax system and elimination of the 4D tax program. 2.Support legislation calling for a flexible Bonding package for affordable housing, competitive on a statewide basis and targeted to very low-income households, including support for the bonding request by the MHFA for permanent supportive housing to end long term homelessness. Lessen the Impact of *03 Budget Cuts/ Policy Changes: I. Provide adequate funding to Emergency Shelter and Transitional Housing programs to restore a cut of a combined $2.7 million dollars in 2003. 2.New investments in homeless youth services that were reduced by 25% ($37.3 million) as a result of the Community Services Act block grant to counties. 3.Remove the cap on the number of new slots available to provide services to people with disabilities (imposed on Counties in ’03) through community based waivers, including the Community Alternatives for Disabled Adults (CADI) and TBI Waivers. Additional impacts on homeless and disabled citizens: • Remove Co-pays and eligibility changes to GAMC, MNCare and MA imposed in ’03 and restore funding levels to the previous biennium. • Eliminate the $50 housing penalty for MFIP recipients and to SSI recipients imposed in ’03. '■■■ I • i \ 1 ; I I : I ; ' 1 1 » . - 1 r Restore cuts and increase funding to the Bridges rental assistance program for persons experiencing mental illness. Support existing and new legislation and reform to prevent discrimination* improve access to affordable housing and prevent homelessness, (such as Application Fee Reform, Human Rights assurances. Eviction and Unlawful Detainer processes. Oppose legblation limiting the expungement process for Untewful Detainers. Increased Resources for Effective Programs: 1 . Increase base funding to the Family Homeleu Prevention and Assistance Program (FHPAP). 2. Increase base funding to the MHFA Housing Trust Fund. We welcome the opportunity to work with your staff to realize these essential reforms on behalf of homeless citizens and to present these recommendations to your City Council upon request. If you would like to schedule a meeting, contact Pat Crosby at 612-879- 3470. Sincerely, fCccyU, pc Paul Williams Chairperson On Behalf of the Community Advisory Board on Homelessness A . : .u