Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-10-2002 Council Packet
AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY. JUNE 10,2002,7:00 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 arc available in the Public Packet • located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve'Amend COnur'ii mhe TINQ juN 10axu CITY (Jt ORONO APPROVAL OF MINUTES ♦ 2. Regular Council Meeting of May 28,2002 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Pauline Bouchard, Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Jeanne Mabusth, Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 3. #02-2782 Professional Properties of Orono, 2765 Kelley Parkway - PUD Rezoning and Concept Plan Review - Resolution 4. #02-2789 Dahlstrom Development LLC - Highway 12 at Willow Drive (NW Quadrant) - Comp Plan Amendmenl'PUD Rezoning/Concept Plan Review MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT 5. Golf Course Seasonal Employees CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 6. City Recorder Fee Adjustment 7. Pay Requests - Long Lake Fire Station 8. Amendment #2 to the LOGIS Joint Powers Agreement - Resolution 9. Establish Reward Fund 10. 800 MHZ Radio Agreement 11. Police Radio Equipment Upgrade 12. Urban Hennepin County Joint Cooperation Agreement - Resolution CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT 13. LICENSES Kennel Special Event * 14. BILLS I AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY* JUNE 10,2002,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS i 2m C<)/I0 • Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 06/12 - Highway 12 Informational Open House at St. George’s Church, Wednesday, 5:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. 06/17 - Planning Commission, 6:30 p.m. 06/24 • Council Meeting. 7:00 p.m. 07/01 - Park Meeting, 7:15 p.m. 07/04 - HOLIDAY, Thursday, Observance of Independence Day 07/05 - HOLIDAY, Friday, Observance of Independence Day 07/08 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 07/15 - Planning Commission, 6:30 p.m. 07/22 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. t » i PUBLIC A ttendance I ^ Meeting Date _____^ . / 0 ^C ouncil □ Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other Please hll our the information requested BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. i - PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER 1. r 4. 5. 6.. 7.. 8. 9.. 10.. II. 12. 13.. 14. 15. li\0««\A*iMaraltw tapfMmranw • OM)tfOKMSWBUC.A1T 1 i MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, May 28,2002 7:00 o’clock p.m. COliMni MEETIM^-' JUN I 0 2002 CITY OF ORONO % ROLL The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson; Council Members Bob Sansevere, Jay Nygard, Jim White, and Jim Murphy; City Attorney Thomas Barrett; Representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, Planning Director Mike Gaffron, Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, and Recorder Kristi Anderson. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. Mayor Peterson added an LMCD Report to the agenda, following the Planning Commission Report. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approvc/Amcnd Items 7,8,10,11,13, 14,15, 16,19, and 21 were added to the Consent Agenda. Items 4,5, and 17 were removed from the Consent Agenda. Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. RECOGNITION 2. Richard Flint, Council Member - Resolution No. 4816 Nygard thanked Representative Flint for his openness and willingness to share advice. White acknowledged Flint’s unique ability to separate his professional life from his service to the community and complimented him on his strong ethics politically and professionally. Sansevere noted that his wisdom will be missed. He has been a strong leader for the Council and Park Commission. Murphy stated that Flint gave a great perspective to the City and Council. His passion for parks and trails are an inspiration. Mayor Peterson joined the others in honoring Flint adding what a privilege it has been to serve with him. She stated that Flint offered the City a great deal of integrity and an added sense of humor. Page 1 of 16 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesdav, May 28,2002______ (RECOGNITION, RICHARD FLINT, Continued) The Mayor read the resolution and awarded Flint a plaque acknowledging his service to Orono. Flint thanked staff and Council Members for the great opportunity to serve the community. Drew McDermott, of the Park Commission, added that he and the other commissioners will sorely miss the support Flint has provided the Commission over the years. Sansevcrc moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4816 in appreciation to Richard Flint for distinguished service as City Council Member. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 3. Accept Donation to Park Fund Murphy moved. White seconded, to accept the Park Fund donation given hy Mr. Flint. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 4. Regular Council Meeting of May 13,2002 Sansevere moved, Nygard seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of May 13,2002. Vote: 4/0/1, with Mayor Peterson abstaining. * 5. Reconvened Board of Appeal and Equalization Meeting of May 13,2002 Murphy moved, Nygard seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Board of Appeal and Equalization Meeting of May 13,2002. Vote: 4/0/1, Mayor Paterson abstaining. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - RICK MEYERS, REPRESENTATIVE Meyers stated that he had nothing new to report, however, is looking forward to the upcoming park tours. Meyers took a moment to thank Flint for his vision and persistence over the years. He thanked Flint for his strong philosophy and belief that trails build community, and his perseverance to sec the process through. In reference to access points, Meyers reiterated the need to examine the list of access points and set parameters with adjacent property owners from the get go. He added that the adjacent property’ owner to 3165 Casco Circle has been dumping their construction debris on the park/City property’. Moorse stated that he will be taking a closer look at the access points list in June with Director of Public Services, Greg Gappa. Page 2 of 16 OKONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING ______Tuesday, May 28« 2002______ PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - J. MARC FRITZLER, REPRESENTATIVE Fritzler reported that the meeting of May 20th was quite lengthy and several items discussed were on the Consent Agenda. The Hennepin County item w as tabled due to a lack of representation. The two items that took considerable time were the Dental or Professional Building at Highway 12 and Old Ciy’stal Bay Road, and the Highway 12 and Willow Project development. LMCD REPORT • LILI MCMILLAN, REPRESENTATIVE McMillan reported that the LMCD 2003 budget will match the 2002 budget, which she hoped the Council would view favorably. McMillan stated that the LMCD had completed its review of the Fox Hill application, and has allowed them to retain their 16 slips. The decision was made in part due to a concise resolution adopted by Orono in 1979 that offered great detail and helped to clear up the process. She complimented the City of Orono on its 1979 Resolution and plans to hold it up as an example of ck ar thinking to other communities as they look to the future. In an effort to reduce motorized boat traffic on several creeks, such as Long Lake Creek, Painters Creek, and 6 Mile Creek, more investigation needs to be done. McMillan pointed out that many developers are trying to use this marginal lake access to market property as lake access. Murphy questioned whether demarcation exists between what is lake and what is creek. McMillan stated that the LMCD is currently working to define its jurisdiction in regard to these issues. Questions over creek or lake exist and need to be defined further. She promised to keep the Council apprized of any developments. Mayor Peterson asked what the date for budget approval is. McMillan stated that they arc gathering input now and look for approval by the end of June. White inquired over the threat of Zebra Mussels on the Lake and to what extent the DNR w ill be providing examinations. While the LMCD is hoping to get more DNR representation and inspection time at the Maxwell Bay and Spring Park launch sites, this may need to occur as a pilot program, due to the expense. She maintained that this w ill be an ongoing battle keeping the mussels out of the lake. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. Page 3 of 16 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, M^ 28,2002______ ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 6. #02-2772 John and Donna Crotteau, 1405 Sixth Avenue North - Variances Resolution No. 4817 John and Donna Crotteau, applicants, and Brian Novak, architect, were present. Weinberger explained that the applicants have requested variances to permit construction of additions to the existing house. The additions are proposed to be located within a bluff setback and within the 30’ top of bluff setback. I he application also requires a variance to permit the garage addition 20.5 ’ from the side lot line where a 30’ setback is required. Weinberger identified 5 individual modifications and additions included in the application, however, the applicants revised these based on DNR review and staff recommendations. Weinberger stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the variances to permit construction of the residential additions within the 30’ top of bluff setback for the kitchen/entry way and bay additions on a 7/0 vote. Weinberger continued that the Planning Commission was split 5/2 recommending approval of variances to permit a lakeside addition to the residence, creating a further encroachment into the bluff area. This portion of the project includes the 13’ of additional encroachment for the living room expansion. The Planning Commission voted 7/0 to recommend the denial of a variance to permit the garage addition to be located 20.5 ’ from the side property line where a 30’ setback is required. Weinberger noted that several factors played into this denial, including the fact that the property is a conforming lot and that the garage could be shifted 9.5 ’ to the west leaving a 30’ setback. Weinberger stated that Peter Leete of the DNR has stated that they object to the portion of the project that further impacts the bluff and suggested the project be scaled back. Due to elevations, access around the house becomes rather difficult, and fill or alteration is not permitted on a bluff. Weinberger stated that in consideration of the comments received from the DNR, staff continues to recommend approval of the addition but due to the limited access around the building and the potential impact on the bluff, staff is recommending the lakeside addition be reduced to 8 ’. The staff recommendation allows for an addition to extend an additional 5 ’ rather that the proposed 13’. The Crotteau ’s offered a revised proposal for consideration by the Council, which included a scaled back living room addition to 10’, tied into an existing deck and a 2’ raised roofline. The builder explained how they are working to improve the existing conditions, including mitigation, and extending footings with no additional fill. Page 4 of 16 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, May 28,2002______ (#02-2772 JOHN AND DONNA CROTTEAU, Continued) Sansevere asked about the garage application. The Crotteau's indicated that they would be withdrawing that application in order to investigate a detached garage that would fall within the code. White asked staff if they were comfortable with the 2’ differential, from the 8' the City was requesting to the 10* the Crotteau’s were proposing. Gaffron felt that preser\ing the e.xisting pathway around the house was important due to the potential for erosion. Since the house was originally built right up to the bluff, Gaf'ron stated that no matter where the Crotteau's build, they will be encroaching. White acknowledged that the Crotteau's seem to be trying to meet the spirit of staffs recommendation by cantilevering the upper level, detaching their garage, and allow ing the e.xisting pathway to remain, which should be taken into consideration. Murphy inquired about roof runoff. Novak responded that the runoff would be directed to the sides of the house and not onto the bluff. Weinberger stated that, with the cantilevering plan, the bottom addition will be 8' and the top tloor 10’. Sansevere asked staff once again if they were comfortable with the revised proposal. Gaffron indicated that the cantilevering can help to solve some of the issues and that he was satisfied with the new proposal as it addresses some of the grading and erosion concerns. White moved, Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4817 granting variances to permit construction of additions to the existing home located at 1405 Sixth Avenue North, as diagramed as items #2,3, and 4 of the proposal as recommended by the Planning Commission. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. White moved, Nygard seconded, granting approval of the living room extension with 8* ft extension on the base and the cantilevered 2* addition on the upper floor. Sansevere reiterated that if staff has any reserv ations at all he would like to hear them. Gaffron repeated that he found the proposal acceptable and that the applicant had demonstrated hardships exist. Murphy asked to amend the motion to include that the pathway reconnection cannot fall beyond the amortized bluff line. Page 5 of 16 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, May 28,2002______ (#02-2772 JOHN AND DONNA CROTTEAU, Continued) White revbed his motion to included the proposed amendment, Nygard seconded. Vote: 4/1, with Mayor Peterson dissenting. Barrett clarified that the garage addition had been withdrawn from the application. * 7. #02-2777 Tom Meehan, 2825 Little Orchard Way - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution No. 4818 Sansevcre moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4818 granting a Conditional Use Permit to allow plumbing in an accessoiy building. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. * 8. #02-2779 Jerad and Leslie Hahn, 809 Brown Road North - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution No. 4819 Sanses ere moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4819 granting a Conditional Use Permit to allow plumbing in an accessory building. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 9. #02-2782 Professional Properties of Orono, 2765 Kelley Parkway - Proposed Dental Office - Conceptual Rezoning and Site Plan Review GaiTron reported that the applieants propose to construct a one story, 15,000 s.f. dental office and professional building on the 2.0 acre existing lot at the NE corner of Old Cry stal Bay Road and Highway 12. The request is for a PUD rezoning of the property from RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential to B-6 Highway Commercial District. Gaffron summarized that the actions requested this evening were to consider conceptual approval for PUD rezoning and the preliminary proposed use, review and comment on the commercial site plan, and direct staff to draft a Resolution Granting Concept Plan Approval for action on June 10. The Planning Commission had concluded that the dental otfice use was consistent with the 2000- 2020 Community Management Plan guiding of this site for office use, and that B-6 was the appropriate zoning district for this use. Gaffron noted that the Planning Commission not only recommended approval of the rezoning 7-0, but recommended the Concept Plan Approval as well. Gaffron pointed out several questions for consideration; is Council satisfied with the percentage of green space, the site circulation and parking, should a greater buffer be required between the existing trail and parking, should the northerly row of parking more closely meet the 20 ’ setback requirement, should a traffic study take place, and several others as noted in his memo. Sansevere inquired as to the approximate number of clients that could potentially be in and out of their offices daily. Page 6 of 16 4 ■ifi TSfcaF'hoi ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, Mav 28,2002______ (M)2-2782 PROFESSIONAL PROPERTIES OF ORONO, Continued) Dr. Berg stated that the otTices would house appro.ximately 5 services. He maintained that with the built-in efficiencies of a drop-off site and full building circulation the flow would not be an issue. Dr. Kottemann stated that he sees approximately 60-80 patients daily. Dr. Eberts noted that he services approximately 40 visitors daily. Sansevere noted that the offices will ser\'e several hundred patients daily. Murphy questioned whether simply too much is trying to be squeezed onto this 2 acre parcel. He asked whether the building could be made any smaller. Dr. Berg maintained that in order to make the whole project feasible, they need to have the building as large as possible. Sansevere commented that he had heard the site to the east may also be developed w ith dental uses. Gaffron noted that the property to the east was approximately 2 acres and guided for office use. While Sansevere agreed that access around the building is necessary, he questioned the visual impact that less green space on the backside would have on traffic heading west on Highway 12. Gaffron noted that all sides of this building virtually have to be treated like the front. Mayor Peterson asked what it w ould mean if the Council could not support 10' setbacks. White stated that the Council believes this to be a good use, and with the low demand for office space currently, he supported the concept. He also complimented the Doctors on how the design picks up the look of the City Hall. Mayor Peterson, once again, questioned the setbacks. She stated that wtiere exceptions have been made in the past she has been disappointed by the result. Sansevere asked whether Kelley Parkway would be moved. Gaffron noted that while the re-location of Kelley Parkway is not currently planned, if it were moved, the size of this parcel may change. Murphy stated that once construction on Highway 12 begins, the stack up will be substantial. Sansevere acknowledged that the complex can look good even if it is heavily packed. He did have other questions regarding the minimum entrance and access. PagcTof 16 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING ______Tuesday, May 28,2002______ (#02-2782 PROFESSIONAL PROPERTIES OF ORONO, Contiaued) Dr. Berg stated that he and his colleagues had spent a great deal of time with planners deliberating the placement and design elements for the building before choosing this specific format. Sansevere pointed out that he has additional concerns regarding the parcel just to the cast. While the City caimot control the flow, its use concerns him. Gaffron suggested consideration be given to shared accesses. With regard to design compatibility, Sansevere stated that the City can ask developers to follow certain design elements but cannot require it. Murphy questioned w hether the west row of parking could be swapped with the east. Dr. Kottemarui stated that was one of the design plans they had considered until it was determined that the bike path was to remain. Sansevere stated that he was concerned with the west and north visual impacts. Bob Ritter, realtor, resident, and one of the partners in this building project, stated that the group made an effort to parallel the City Offices and currently, about 20' of greenspace exists between the road and the trail. Murphy questioned moving the trail. Gaffron indicated that would be unlikely, since the trail would then be closer to the busy intersection and ditch. Moorse explained that Hennepin Parks will allow a 5 foot minimum buffer between parking and trail. He added that consideration might be given to the space to the west in the right-of-way for additional landscaping. Gaffron suggested the Council work down the list of questions and considerations supplied by staff in order to give the applicant direction and staff an opportunity to draft a resolution. He asked the Council to first consider the rezoning and determine whether it is an appropriate use. Gaffron added that no motions are necessary but merely agreement. Mayor Peterson asked if all agreed that a dental office complex was an appropriate use. The Council members agreed. All agreed that they could conceptually approve the rezoning. Attorney Barrett recommended that an application to extend the deadline be filed. Pafctori6 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, May 28,2002______ (M)2-2782 PROFESSIONAL PROPERTIES OF ORONO, Continued) Sanseverc made reference to Council Action request number 3a. He believed that more grecnspace to the west was desirable. He asked Moorse to contact the neighboring property owner, Gagne, and inquire about the price. Furthermore, he suggested the City purchase this parcel in order to solve all the issues here. Murphy felt he could support this action. Moorse believed that this second piece would be less costly than the City ’s comer parcel and he would contact the current owner. Nygard supported this action as well. Murphy reiterated the desire to move the parking and asked the group how set in their plans they were. Dr. Berg stated that they had already examined many other layouts and settled on this one. I Ic stated that many hours have gone into determining what makes the most sense and this is it. They would have to go back to the drawing board and begin anew if this did not work. Dr. Kottemann felt that if Kelley Parkway were moved some of the parking could be shifted as well. Murphy stated that he was troubled by the lack of flexibility the applicants have shown, especially after the City has been trying to work with them this evening to come up with alternatives. Mayor Peterson reiterated her concern over the setbacks. White suggested flip flopping the parking lot. Ritter stated that parking still needs to be in the front of the building and if the building were flipped, a new development next door could essentially block or back up to theirs. Gaffron acknowledged that this is probably plan revision number 16 that the doctors have considered and he recognized the amount of work they've put into their proposal. He also noted that wile they ’ve virtually already gone through their whole planning process with limited City input, the City has just begun its formal evaluation process. Mayor Peterson asked Gaffron to explain stafTs concerns. Gaffron indicated that the setback on Kelley Parkway is most notable and believed while the issues can be worked out. they need to lay out an aesthetically pleasing solution. The buffers between the trail and parking, circulation around the site, and the service area need additional work. Pafc9ofl« ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING ______Tuesday, May 28,2002______ (#02-2782 PROFESSIONAL PROPERTIES OF ORONO, Continued) Sansevere questioned whether moving Kelley Parkway could make up for the lack of setback on the north side. Moorse pointed out that everything in the proposal worked and fit until about a month ago when it was determined that the trail would remain. Everything before that worked great, but losing the 25' for the trail had a huge impact on the plan. Me felt the only way to make the plans work now would be to lose the flow of traffic around the building, shift the building to the east, which w ould allow more space for the whole picture. Sansevere agreed, stating that this suggestion would satisfy Council if the doctors could work with staff to accomplish this. Murphy reminded the group that the City has not only offered to revise Kelley Parkway, but potentially purchase the ne.\t door property in order to assist their development. He asked the doctors if they had time enough to allow the City to investigate these two suggestions. Dr. Berg stated that they had hoped to be in the new clinic in early 2003, which allows for approximately 8 months of construction. Mayor Peterson asked Moorse how long it could take to investigate these possibilities. Moorse pointed out that the length of time would be difficult to gauge. He could approach Gagne, but it depends how quickly he would be willing to move on the matter. Sansevere conceded that while 10' might not be necessary, an effective screen would be. He again stated that there is a mental density issue that he has a problem with and asked if the shift eastward could alleviate the problem or even improve the turning radius. Kellogg noted there are drainage and utility easements along the south lot line. Gaffron noted that moving it 14' east, would still require a 20' setback. Another possibility could be sliding it 5’ down and over which would gain 5' without encroaching on easements. Dr. Eberts stated that they are about as tight as they can be without becoming a two story building and still attract service providers. They would need a 15,000 to 16,000 s.f building to make the plan work. Sansevere obser\ ed that one other possibility remains, that the site simply does not work. They and the City have been trying to make a fit but perhaps it doesn't. Gaffron suggested the City give the applicants the opportunity to revise their plans and guide them through the process. Page 10 of 10 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING ______Tuesday, May 28,2002______ (#02.2782 PROFESSIONAL PROPERTIES OF ORONO, Continued) Sansevere reiterated the need for a buffer on the west and that S’ is not enough. He suggested that the applicants consider a wall, vegetation, berm, or greater distance. Mayor Peterson stated that the current 10 ’ setback on the north is not enough to satisfy the 20’ requirement and suggested more work be done to pick up additional space. Nygard agreed that the development is attractive but more work needs to be done to move it towards Highway 12. Gaffron stated that he will put together a concept Resolution stating the issues and standards the applicants will need to address to move forward with their application. Murphy stated the City should continue to review the placement of Kelley Parkway and the purchase of the property to the east. Sansevere added that even if the City acquires the adjoining property, the applicants might not want or be able to alTord it. Gaffron indicated that he will bring back the Resolution based on what’s been said tonight on June 10,2002. Ritter stated that the group is prepared to sign the purchase agreement with the space for the trail subtracted. * 10. #02*2784 Bob Tunheim, 2755 Countr>'side Drive West - Conditional Use Permit * Resolution No. 4820 Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4820 granting a Conditional Use Permit to build two accessory structures on the property behind the residence. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. * 11. #02*2790 Lyle and Gretchen Shaw, 1750 Shad^nood Road* After*the*Fact Variances * Resolution No. 4821 Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4821 granting After-the*Fact Renewal of Variances previously approved on April 12,1999 for the property located at 1750 Shadywood Road. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Pige II of 16 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday^ May 28« 2002______ MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Sansevere addressed the issue of ticketing on North Shore Drive, near Noerenberg Park, and asked that more be done to deter cars with trailers from parking and congesting the area on weekends. Mayor Peterson welcomed Mr. Murphy and thanked staff for their work on the Open House. Moorse commented that staff was e.xcited about the open house and Wells Fargo made a donation to the North Tonka Crime Prevention Coalition. Sansevere added that the Dahlstrom Development group was insistent that they did not know that the City was not interested in a groce*y. He added that they will be very aggressive in tiy ing to push this through. Moorse and Gafhon indicated that Dahlstrom and Landform have been aware of the City's position since they first spoke, and in fact, have heard repeatedly there is a problem with a grocer. Sansevere encouraged staff to make them well aware of the City’s position prior to any more meetings. Nygard brought up the need to discuss an ordinance requiring fences around pools. Both he and Sansevere were surprised no such ordinances were on the books. Nygard also suggested that staff take a closer look at tlie intersection arrows in Navarre at County Roads IS and 19. PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT 12. Golf Coune Operation Study Mr. McMurchie, of McMurchie Golf Management, summarized the Golf Course Operation Study. McMurchie cited three recommendations in the study; 1. Development of a long term and consistent methodology for setting of golf course rates 2. Increase the volume of available slots for golf by reducing the current 10 minute tee time interval to 8 minutes. McMurchie maintained that by moving the green to lengthen the first hole, this would allow a reduction to an 8 minute tee time thereby increasing the available tee times by 27%, which in turn should result in increased golf revenue. As part of the plan, the second hole could also be lengthened by moving the tee further back. The estimated costs to complete this project are $60,000. 3. Renovate and improve the existing clubhouse and furnishings at an estimated cost of $310,000. P»tcl2ori6 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING ______Tuesday, May 28,2002______ (GOLF COURSE OPERATION STUDY, Continued) McMurchie believed that renovation could preserve some of its history while adding to its conununity value. Murphy questioned whether there is existing demand for this increased number of tee times. Ron Steffenhagen, Golf Course Manager, stated that on weekends the demand does exist. McMurchie stated that the first hole expansion could provide players with a good fast getaway hole, with a bit longer and larger green. With a minimal amount of clearing, the landing would be larger and at less of a slope. While Sansevere could support the extensions of the first two holes, he didn't believe that his math, based on weekends only, supported the added revenue that McMurchie referred to. He was also unsure about the proposed clubhouse renovations. McMurchie stated that his figures were based on the same utilization percentage rate as the course uses currently. In his view, this would give the course the opportunity to capture more tee times during upside of the evenings. White asked about the potential for adding a driving range. McMurchie stated that the typical driving range requires a minimum of 5-6 acres, with 1 S-16 as the most desirous. Murphy questioned whether the City's goal is to maximize usage or provide a nice course in our City. Steffenhagen indicated that in his view that was up to the Council to decide. White envisioned a City golf course that could eventually help provide support to the Parks. Rick Meyers, Park Commissioner, stated that the goal of the Park Commission is not only to maximize profits, but to also provide a nice place with a clubhouse for people to sit down and enjoy themselves in their community. Having lived near the golf course for many years, Murphy maintained it is a picturesque place worth preserving. He encouraged the Council to be wary of messing up a treasure in the community. Murphy complimented the course manager on a his great job keeping the course running. Moorse reminded the Council that anything the City can do from a marketing standpoint to let people know it is there and exactly where it is would be beneficial. McMurchie pointed out that the Orono course is one of the first of its kind and needs to state that in its advertising. He also suggested placing signage on County Road 15 pointing to the Course. Page 13 of 16 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday. May 28,2002______ (GOLF COURSE OPERATION STUDY, Continued) McMurchic continued that any additional synergy with the local park and recreation departments can help as well, by ofTering extension courses. He stated that any advertising the City does needs to capitalize on the renovations and the look of the hidden course, being mindful that the where will always need to be addressed. White suggested changing advertising to reflect the historic aspect of Orono Golf Course. Sanscvcrc moved, White seconded, to approve completion of a project to lengthen hole numbers 1 and 2 at an estimated cost oi $60,000 to be funded from the Golf Course Fund retained earnings and to approve a budget adjustment of $60,000 for the year 2002 Golf Course Capital Outlay Budget. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Mayor Peterson indicated that patt two of the proposal will be considered in greater detail during the budgeting process. * 13. Purchase of Docks Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, to approve the purchase of new docks from Mullen Marine Brokerage, Maple Plain Minnesota in the amount of $6,810, to be funded from the year 2002 Park Fund Capital Outlay Budget. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0 * 14. Award Contract for Sewer and Water Utility SCADA System Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, to award the contract for sewer and water utility to Automatic Systems Company, Roseville Minnesota for the installation of a SCADA sy stem. The award to include Base Bid, $108,830 and Alternate No.2, $65,498 for a total contract amount of $174328.00 Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, to approve a budget adjustment for the Year2002 Sewer Fund Capital Outlay Budget in the amount of $129,498 for the Sewer Fund’s prorated share of the Automatic Systems Company contract for the installation of a SCADA system. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, to approve a budget adjustment for the Year 2002 Water Fund Capital Outlay Budget in the amount of $44,830 for the Water Fund’s prorated share of the Automatic Systems Company contract for the installation of a SCADA system. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, May 28,2002______ * 15. Approve Seasonal Golf Course Employee Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, to hire Rodney Jensen as a Golf Course Seasonal Employee at an hourly rate of $7.50 under the monthly maximum earnings provision of the PERA rules. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT * 16. Pay Request - Long Lake Fire Station Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, to approve Payment No. 1 in the amount of $18,512.60 to Rochon Construction, and to approve the payment of $4,625.00 to Kirk Program Management, and $5384.46 to GME Consultants, Inc. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 17. Navarre Dog Days of Summer Committee Request for Funding Sansevere questioned whether this donation should be made out of the Park Dedication Fees. Park Commissioner Rick Meyers was in attendance acting as liaison to the Committee and encouraged Council support for this, Orono’s Community Festival. He added that the golf tournament at the conclusion of the festival raises a great deal of money for the Parks fund and he believed this to be a good 'bangfor the buck'. Mayor Peterson passed along a request from Rick Bloomquist for additional monetary support of $500 for a DJ at the National Night Out. She indicated that she wasn't sure if this was appropriate but had promised to pass along the request. Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, that the $350 funding for the Navarre Dog Days of Summer be set up to come from the General Fund. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 18. Council Appointments - Resolution No. 4822 Mayor Peterson moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4822, amending the 2002 Council appointments resolution recommending Bob Sansevere to ser> e as acting Mayor aud Sandy Smith to serve as Planning Commission Chair for the remainder of the year. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. * 19. ReviseTransientMerchantLicense-OrdinanceNo. 219,2nd Series Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt Ordinance 219,2nd Series, amending Chapter 5 of the Orono Municipal Code by amending Section 530, Subd. 3H, providing for extensions to the 10-day limit for transient merchants licenses, and to authorize its publication. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 15 of 16 iimina nnWirf-g f -mr*nBMnmfrii"i—' siilta imnni mi Tiifi ilMMi illiWLtfl «i sit n “t’ ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, May 28,2002 CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 20. LICENSES Special Event Sansevere moved. Mayor Peterson seconded, to approve the following licenses as on Council action memo: 1. Applicant:Dennis Nelson Event:Wednesday Night Bassin’ Fishing Tournament Location:Ease^ff from Maxwell Bay and weigh>in at Wayzata Marine Date:Wednesdays - June 5, June 26, July 10, July 17, August 14 and August 28,2002 Time:4:00 P.M. - 8:30 P.M. 2. Applicant:Andrea Siegert Event:Summer Party Location:1270 French Creek Drive Date:Saturday, June 29,2002 Time:7:00 P.M. • 12:00 A.M. midnight Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. * 21. BILLS Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, to approve payment of All Funds Account. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:47 P.M. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor • « . » 4 i' Pafcltofia nesota S-4 Auax.1 wfvtifg* i M mn, ^mu sc^. t, itM 9C»CfM AMMLMi JtfiC mA9%( t. itti M.M •.!•«» jm MLitts AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 10,2002,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY. ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items arc available in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet ROLL CALL ... . JUN ,1.0 2002 CONSENT AGENDA I. Approvc/Amend CITYOFORON u APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 2. Regular Council Meeting of May 28,2002 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Pauline Bouchard, Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Jeanne Mabusth, Representative! PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 3. #02-2782 Professional Properties of Orono, 2765 Kelley Parkway - PUD Rezoning and Concept Plan Reviewr - Resolution 4. #02-2789 Dahlstrom Development LLC - Highway 12 at Willow Drive (NW Quadrant) - Comp Plan Amendment/PUD Rczoning/Concept Plan Review MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT 5. Golf Course Seasonal Employees 6. Purchase of PubI ic Works Truck CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 7. City Recorder Fee Adjustment 8. Pay Request • Long Lake Fire Station 9. Amend LOGIS Bylaws - Resolution 10. Establish Reward Fund 11. 800 MHZ Radio Agreement CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 12. LICENSES Kennel Special Event * 13. BILLS AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 10,2002,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CIUMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 2m 06/10 • Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 06/12 -Highway 12 Informational Open House at St George's Church, ire</»iej</<iy, 5:00 p.m. - 8:00 p m. 06/17 • Planning Commission, 6:30 p.m. 06/24 • CouiKil Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 07/01 - Park Meeting, 7:15 p.m. 07/04 - HOLIDAY, Thursday, Observance of Independence Day 07/05 - HOLIDAY, Friday, Observance of Independence Day 07/08 • Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 07/15 * Plaiming Commission, 6:30 p.m. 07/22 - Council Meeting. 7:00 p.m. ...------ Application Date: April 16,2002 Initial 60-Day Review Eipiration: June 15,2002 60-Day Review Period Eitcoded on May 30,2002; Eitended Eipiration: August 14,2002 meeting JUN 1 U 2002 CtTY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Dale: June 6, 2002 Item No.: 3 Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. GafTron Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: ^02-2782 Professional Properties of Orono, 2765 Kelley Parkway - Proposed Medical Office: PUD Concept Plan Approval - Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution for Concept Plan Approval B - Notice of Planning Commission & Council Action and 60-Day Extension 5-30-02 On May 28 Council directed staff to draft a Resolution for Concept Plan Approval for the medical office project. The attached resolution contains the following elements: Findings (pages 1 -3) which establish the basis for conceptual approval of the rezoning from RR-IB to B-6, and which identify specific City concerns that lead to the need for certain approval conditions appearing later in the document. Conclusions, Order and Conditions (pages 4-10) which grant Concept Plan Approval and establish specific “Conditions for Development Plan Approval” which must be met before Development Plan Approval will be granted. The Conditions for Development Plan Approval include the following sections: A.Development Standards and General Conditions specifically addressing various aspects of the site layout, building design, landscaping, streetscaping, lighting and signage, trails and walkways, etc. and also addressing general conditions relating to the development process such as erosion control, other agency permits, and the like. B.Plans and Specifications which identifies the specific design detail that must be provided for Council review in order to gain Development Plan Approval. C. Development Agreement requirement. r #02-2782 Professional Properties of Orono June 6,2002 Page 2 Financial Guarantee requirement. E. Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee requirement. F. Park Dedication requirement (still undergoing staff review). G. Sewer and Water Connection Charges requirement. Page 10 also includes procedural elements establishing that this resolution does not constitute the formal rezoning of the site, and that this approval is effective for 6 months. Staff is still reviewing whether Park Dedication requirements are applicable to this project, given that a $200 park fee was paid at the time of subdivision in 1984 with the intent for a library use at the site. Staff will followup with further information on this topic. The Resolution leaves this subject for later review and conclusion. The Resolution does not address the possibility of site expansion due to acquisition of adjacent lands. However, such acquisition may be necessary in order for applicant to meet the conditions of the Resolution. The resolution language does not specifically preclude the opportunity to acquire additional land. Ron Moorse and applicant may be able to update Council regarding the adjacent property status on June 10. Council may wish to consider whether it wants the opportunity to review the Concept Plan Approval conditions if the site is enlarged. Staff Recommendation Council should carefully review the Concept Plan Approval Resolution. The intent of this Resolution is for Council to give applicant clear direction regarding what will be necessary in order to obtain Development Plan Approval. Council is free to make any revisions, additions or corrections to this document to ensure that it reflects the Council’s intent. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt or amend the attached Concept Plan Approval Resolution. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2765 KELLEY PARKWAY RLE NO. 02-2782 WHEREAS, Professional Properties of Orono (hereinafter the "applicant") has an interest in property located at 2765 Kelley Parkway within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Willow Properties Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the property is located in the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area for which the City has established special requirements for rezoning and development per Municipal Code Section 10.52; and WHEREAS, the City of Orono Highway 12 Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance (Municipal Code Section 10.53) requires a multiple step approval process for properties developing via the PUD process; the General Concept Plan approval stage is the first step in the process followed by the Development Plan approval stage; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested General Concept Plan Approval for Planned Unit Development of this 2.0 acre property. Proposed is a rezoning from RR-IB, One Family Rural Residential District to B-6/PUD for medical office use of the parcel. The intended use of the property is a 15,000 s.f. one-story medical office building; and WHEREAS, the Orono City Council makes the following findings in regard to this ^plication for rezoning and PUD General Concept Plan approval: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #02-2782. 2.The property is located in the RR-IB One Family Rural Residential Zoning District. The property consists of approximately 2.0 acres. Page 1 of 12 I -g- - ■ Jr-r.K- . -M. .. 3. 5. 6. 7. Rczoning of the property from RR-IB One Family Rural Residential to B-6 Highway Commercial District (PUD) for a medical office use would be in keeping with the 2000-2020 Orono Community Management Plan (CMP) which guides the area in which the property is located, from Willow Drive to Old Crystal Bay Road between Highway 12 and Kelley Parkway, for professional office use. Professional office use is a permitted use in the B-6 District. Per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.52, minimum area for a rczoning in the Highway 12 Corridor is 5 acres. The property is nominally 2.0 acres in area; the site was created in 1984 to accommodate a branch of the Hennepin County Library, which was never built. The City of Orono purchased the site in 1996 for temporary public works use and as a means of controlling the future development of the site. Because the site exists as a separate parcel and the proposed use conforms to the CMP and the B-6 district, an area variance to allow rczoning of the site is reasonable. Such a rczoning is unlikely to have negative impact on the adjacent 2.S acre vacant lot, since that parcel is also guided for professional office use. Other properties abutting or near the property arc used for or planned for uses which are generally compatible with the proposed office use. North of Kelley Parkway is the Orono municipal complex including administrative offices, police department and public works facilities to the northeast. Directly cast is a vacant 2.5 acre parcel guided for professional office use. To the south across Highway 12 is the Orono industrial park. To the west across Old Crystal Bay Road is the Orono Schools campus. Thu applicant has provided preliminary plans attached to this resolution as Exhibits A and B including site plan, grading plan, utility plan and landscaping plan (all dated 5-17-02) and conceptual building construction plans (dated 4-17- 02) which the Council finds are sufficient to indicate the intent of the developer and the potential impacts of the project. The proposed site plan meets the general access standards developed for the Highway 12 corridor, in that all access is directly to Kelley Parkway, and trail links are provided. An existing 8' wide bituminous trail which is part of the Orono comprehensive trail system is located within the property along Old Crystal Bay Road. The City wishes to maintain this trail in its current Page 2 of 12 II n III ■ Tfri 8. 9. configuration and location to maintain a pedestrian corridor that is separated from Old Crystal Bay Road. An easement will be required for this e.xisting trail. Sidewalks/trails within the Kelley Parkway and Highway 12 rights-of-way are subject to approval by Orono and MnDOT respectively. Stormwater management is an overriding concern with development of this site, since ponding is not proposed within the property. Stormwater management is proposed to be provided by stormwater catch basins and storm sewer lines which would discharge to a proposed storm sewer through properties to the east, then eventually outletting into a regional stormwater pond to be located approximately 1/4 mile east of the property. This regional pond is proposed as an expansion of an existing MnDOT stormwater pond by Dahlstrom Development LLC to serve their proposed SO-acre development surrounding that pond. The timing of expansion of the MnDOT pond may not coincide with applicants intended schedule for the medical office. In addition to the City of Orono, MnDOT and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District have approval authority over the applicants’ stormwater management plan. The City Council finds that the development of this critical comer property will set the standard for the quality, character, context and compatibility of development desired by the City for Kelley Parkway. While Orono has not created specific design guidelines fot commercial or residential development within the Highway 12 corridor area, minimum standards for site design and building construction have been incorporated into the applicable zoning codes. In order to ensure that development of the property will result in an expression of Orono’s open space character and image. City Council will herein establish minimum Concept Plan Approval conditions to be met by the developer in order to gain Development Plan Approval. The City Council finds that the proposed rezoning and proposed development of the site for a medical office building is appropriate for the property, will not have negative impacts on the surrounding properties when all Concept Plan Approval conditions are met, and is in keeping with the goals, policies and philosophies of the City. Page 3 of 12 riiiinn rm r^TlWTi] nvifiiinniri] OTrinfre TtmsiTm [•TiWHlliW ^TiTinfr«yiic«w [• WIliWi >11 I I l?474 fi1 1 11 f 41 1 loTTm fTT I I --------- ^ The above (able values are based on the B-6 standards for residential zoning of the Orono municipal facilities to the north and the Orono Schools to the west; the industrial zoning to the south; and the intended commercial zoning lo the east. Required off-street parking per Section 10.61, Subd. 10 shall be provided at a ratio of no less than 5 stalls per 1000 s.f. net building floor area. Parking layout and trafTic flow shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. The northeasterly access driveway to the site shall be operated and signed as “in only ”. Appropriate traffic and parking signage within (he site shall be installed subject to the Orono staff and City Engineer's review and approval. Applicants shall demonstrate to the Council ’s satisfaction that the service area along the northeast side of the building is designed to provide for efficient service vehicle access and is treated architecturally as a primary facade that presents a positive visual image toward Kelley Parkway. The percentage of the property that is devoted to green space (not including areas within road rights-of-way) shall be ma.ximized to the greatest extent possible but in no case shall be less than 25% of the lot area. Landscaping plan shall meet all landscaping standards established for the B-6 District in Section 10.45, Subdivision 6(H). In addition, the Developer shall be responsible for sodding the boulevard of Kelley Parkway and any other areas outside the property boundary that may be disturbed. The developer shall create a “parkwa/’ character through substantial landscaping along Kelley Parkway, shall provide substantial deciduous trees along the west boundary; and shall provide a combination of deciduous and coniferous trees along the south boundary of the property Page 5 of 12 ffi. -—J 8)Along Kelley Parkway, the Development Plan shall incorporate a green (sod) boulevard no less than 8 feet in width behind the curbline of Kelley Parkway; a concrete sidewalk 6 feet in width located partially within the right-of way and partially on the property; and a setback to parking from the north lot line of no less than 20 feet. The property owner shall be responsible for installation and maintenance of the sidew'alk and boulevard. Street lighting along Kelley Parkway adjacent to the property shall be provided by the Developer and shall be of a style, number, height and location approved by the City Council. Along Old Crystal Bay Road, the setback from the eastern edge of the existing trail to the back of parking lot curb shall be no less than S feet. A suitable buffer to provide a sense of physical separation between the parking lot and users of the trail shall be provided, in the form of a hedge or vegetative barrier, a berm, a short barrier wall, additional separation, or some other method acceptable to the City Council. A trail easement shall he granted to the City over the westerly 25 ’ of the property. The City shall be responsible for maintenance of this trail. The proposed pedestrian trail along Highway 12 shall be 8* wide, of bituminous surfacing and shall be located within the Highway 12 right-of-way, subject to MnDOT approval, approximately abutting the south property line, to provide separation from the traveled portion of the right-of-way. The construction of this trail may be deferred until such time that development of the property to the immediate east occurs, subject to the Developer posting suitable financial security in the interim for such construction. The City shall be responsible for the maintenance of this trail upon its completion and acceptance. Signage and lighting on the site shall adhere to the pertinent zoning code standards, and shall be subject to approval by the City Council. Site lighting shall be low and shielded, similar to the style of lighting found at the Orono Administrative Facilities. Page 6 of 12 L Site lighting along the west and south boundaries shall be provided adequate to light the trails along these two sides of the property. Final decisions by the Developer regarding colors, types and qualities of building materials shall be subject to Council approval. The proposed building shall be subject to the Architectural Standards for the B-6 District per Zoning Code Section 10.45, Subd. 6(1). The use of the building is specifically approved for professional office use. Retail uses accessory to the office use may be allowed through a formal amendment of the PUD, but if approved the combination of all such uses shall not exceed 5% of the gross floor area of the building. Applicants' architect shall submit flnal development plans to the Metro Council Environmental Services to determine the exact number of SAC units to be charged at the time of the issuance of building permits. Developer shall provide suitable evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) approval of the stormwater management plan before Development Plan Approval will be granted. Erosion control shall adhere to ''Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas". All erosion controls as required by the City and by the MCWD shall be in place prior to commencement of excavation on the site. This concept plan approval is based upon the known issues that may affect this project, but this approval does not limit the City from revising or amending these conditions as the review process continues. Page 7 of 12 c.Plans and Specifications. The following plans and specifications shall be submitted for review and approval by the City and other appropriate jurisdictions: Final plans and specifications for all proposed utility lines and services, including any proposed revisions to existing service facilities. Proposed plans shall be provided to the City for final review and approval with the Preliminary Plan set. The Public Works Department and MnDOT shall review and approve all utility improvements. Final sanitary sewer and watermain plans shall be provided and are subject to approval by the Public Works Department. Final grading, drainage and erosion control plan showing existing and proposed contours, building locations, elevations, stormwater facilities and calculations, utilities and erosion control measures to be used during construction. Development Plan Approval will not be granted until the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and MnDOT have approved the stormwater plans. Final landscaping design plan with planting schedules including numbers and species, in accordance with the landscaping requirements of the B-6 zoning district. Final building construction plans, including: elevations of all sides of the building; type and color of exterior building materials; proposed floor plan; building dimensions; and the location of trash and recycling containers and of heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment. Page 8 of 12 1 E. F. G. Parking lot construction plans, including confirmation that parking lots and driving lanes will be paved and provided with concrete curb and gutter, and that all driving lanes within parking lots shall have a 9-ton minimum pavement section. A geotechnical evaluation of the soil shall be done in conjunction with the pavement design and shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. Detailed signage and lighting plans. Any additional plans and specifications deemed necessary by the City as review progresses. Development Agreement. Development Approval is contingent upon the successful e.xecution of a Development Agreement between the applicant and the City. Such Agreement shall address all specific City requirements for the development. Financial Guarantee. The Development Agreement shall include a financial guarantee by the applicant to ensure the completion of site improvements. The City Engineer shall complete an estimate of improvement costs, including but not limited to landscaping, grading, erosion control, utilities, driveways and parking areas, trails, sidewalks, retaining walls and stormwater management facility construction, and the applicant shall provide to the City a financial guarantee of lS0?o of the improvement costs. Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee. The standard Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee for commercial development shall be paid by the developer at the rate of S6,480 per acre (2002 Fee Schedule). The City Council shall determine prior to final Development Plan approval whether the Developer will be charged additional fees for off-site stormwater improvements that benefit this property. Park Dedication. The City Council shall determine prior to Development Plan Approval whether Park Dedication requirements are applicable to this project. If so, the City will determine the dedication requirement in land or fee payment prior to Development Plan Approval. Page 9 of 12 -------- LL 3. 4. 5. H.Sewer and Water Coanectioa Charges. The applicant shall pay sewer and water connection charges to the City in an amount to be arrived at by use of the following formula: A - 2 X 2.0 acres X $14,115/acre - Conaection Charge Due A where: A = number of SAC units required for the office building 2 * number of sewer/watcr units paid previously 2.0 acres = area of the property $14,115 = per-acre connection fees for 1989 Highway 12 municipal sewer & water project. This General Concept Plan Approval resolution approves the development concept subject to the applicant meeting the requirements of this resolution and all other requirements of the City. This resolution does not constitute approval of the rezoning. Such approval shall only be considered when the City Council finds that all “Conditions for Development Plan Approval" as identified herein have been met. This General Concept Plan Approval shall be effective for a period of 6 months from the date of this resolution. If Development Plan Approval is not granted within that period, the terms and conditions of this resolution shall be null and void. The City Council at its sole discretion may extend this effective period. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 10 of 12 1 X > V i Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 10th day of June, 2002. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Cleric Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Applicant (for Professional Properties of Orono, LLP as Developer) Ronald J. Moorse (for the City of Orono as Property Owner) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this__day of 2002 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 Page 11 of 12 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of , 2002 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 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this d^y of 2002 by Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator 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 On this day of 2002. personally appeared before me, ____who is personally known to me ____whose identity 1 proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oailv'affirmation of ________________, a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that hc^'she they executed the same as his^Tier/their free act and deed on behalf of Professional Properties of Orono, LLP. Notary Public Page 12 of 12 I r^ir r ■ RESOLUTION NO. I AREA IjOCATION MAPI DENT ORONO, CLINIC EXHIBIT A-1 COVER SHEET SITE V} »^w*AT r? ORONO. MN 3 ABBREVIATIONS C ” jC • :3 DRAWING SYMBOLS CI3 UTILITY SYMBOLS C aiVWKM C3SITE/UTIUTY CONTACTS ■M «MT A« Ct>mm MjMM / *r Mm** U« IW>M« uS Ar** 0» tmm •CU •OM di •/« N a Pm» It •MI4HM 9m»* »•Rr n>r-- © or n W » C«v«*CIDSITE SYMBOLS I ffO«« KM HH* mor 0tKi fnitr >«t bM IP VPMArt; ««■ C9w«m(»i omrv «*TM MWt CUPMf * MD lltfTWM CAS IM SOL MW AW rjcnac-wiMAO tucTac<tscweidt*0 noMAM-^MMAa MO. Ml>t tmm ^ Pa* W 9m mrnmm Vmp( m 9fi 9»m9%t Im 9mm 9m W« ww Wa» # Ya*BW«Waa V^M Cmmmmm Wa* *a%aa taA # v«%Mi faawa* c:::zD :s3cr CW^OUI SKT luvAnw luox iPOMCMUtf stacTjn •MLCOAO •fiWOA P*»l« CO««^ CUM ICO 0» PAMr*a« owcrok H«o< a«0 RAA KOUUC «f APM VAU WUJM «fAM< HAU r«C««A»« M iWK POWaAT CCMTKA HM \jCfA flAACACP WWW wu «0>l IMWCR pwBjtf rmjL CAM! UM MtAC COOaOMfl KW •dUACP CZDSURVEY SYMBOLSI sntvicE i coM?A»na CONTACTS ftaw n«M ; ert a wcm SMTACf siwte a I me uau * PAatrAt ■ATM • PO KM M errSTA*. Mt. TW SS97J ;CMC CAPPA 90- |0>K a n* MTNis *IU AM-J a A-MOO |»aa ASf-}«A.MO •vKtac III PO Ml SA MMAPOa T« SS4K IU«A KOOMA jTSU ASJ-AtO-Mfl miwoa OMST WOO SC^P«t LAU COM amAiTiA M» SS4AJ *«L0 WASOM j taUT H3>S>*M0S WATUBAA CAS , MAM* w«PC*/*«pocASce ' MO LASAUS A*«M« 90 Ml . SMSO KPCAPXS m I SS*S*>OCM I Ota noNSOA ) 'wa 49*rrws«ss *4A A.7-J7-SSTS CDCIVIL SHEET INDEX GZ—i 01^1 i/T »0* ft • wo* «W rOMWC «r w» CtfWO A CAP S'WWC UMO COM* inw. KU0 MW rOtf«Mf CUAC9 K1» sew irUTv W0O K*M cut «■• S’ttif 0»<f tHJOAX tw Smtaat m«m wwoj CAfCW tASW irov* »«W HWWttJ CAfl «AA*« KM W*MAMT «ATW WWAOJ 0WMA9 i/f&/rv CMS ilocrK OM. mu Mtf •A«tK c»ano>d/wncct(M ^aw WfcWItt STB mjm mum m oiacm nwri T~ UtVitt PLAa mm rr~ wm^kaa w>a CAS CACU/rv VAICMMI SAtTACt SIvW t'sat »MU CZDEROSION CONTROL SYMBOLSC fttwx nscartOi v^» » cr SMPtwt CCWTCA ««<• (trWMP) Mnw* carcA *«ao caa ^v ait *) nwwAtT ttcraw wottervw I au.a>ai WB* Gopher State One Cal ?sa-:*HW^ fZC{/t> S-17' •UfeMOe MUPM.WI S540yiM4 T 112 » 2257 2 I1234I2S10 eRcfit: I: I uM CENTER PROFESSIONAL projBdtilie: DENTAL CUNiC ORONO. MN LANDFORM sheet title CML TITLE SHEET l*Q0cri«IM251I r-w no dtle CCKSPt WD C0.1 8 \ E>:a i>:i> I>I> /-/ax'hi Vj-f I t-3, •>?rw * DS^' B'lSbr? V” r' ,*. •• PROPOSED BUILDING 15.000 S.F. FFE « 1024 6 V 5?Ti 'S;-* rv \ • N ^ I>I> o:i>o • • -XiX' •••••*. ‘ • ' • —- . . •.#• .*■» . t • ., „*■, • • -• t * ~ • t ‘ * ' ^ •^_^ .*• t_j••_. ^ CDLANDSCAPE NOTES RESOLUTION NO. C=)PftEUMlNARY fCST SCHEDULE I OKtBVOUf ntts EXHIBIT A-5 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN « »ns& OMOn^•o«n«aflt mttm ty CH. • ttcor*aCM «a<;o«Af1 ucacr IfCH. Mtf «%i * «0w »au CAA 1 fthW IKO« •!• «(T. !■• i*> 9 i09eu#v i>:e> E> *«r» «att oRHAiiBifrAL mn iS * CA I>I>KMM • «rvi MM MM CN«k MCI AU •M M • QXI^ CAM CU^ [#> M*« •«l>E>*«U CAM DCCIOUOUS SHRUBS M CA0BCI «0U0M*«0AtBB* AAOMI COA0TVB » CM.Mf *^T 0 • «0 n OBBW ««M0 •NOi«A0 BHW0tO ABIW 00ABCTB > cat.•Of o 0 ftapM MO0«Bat 0A0BOBI iS^CMIBMM f CM. to JB»B «0 MBOLa •BOBM AOflTB A«a ma f CM.mat a*• T M0^ vaABM IMiBB OO00CB ICM.m iv JO SoSSTa MMM»aaOB«l«M • 9 cat.•or «.>• • 4AV i>:i> IKO i>:i> i>:i> i>:i>Knu BVCRCnCI SHRUBS camcta i>:i> E>I> i>:i> i>:i> PtREMHAU riM M o*m« j*r AAfCCau.* 9««u* OB au i>:i> EG> Dtl> i>:i> CZ3LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS; L ta*»ClA CM*«M TM Aau MB »» mwi «9 mAir<M * • !£J52* At CAMM fA k«nCAA C9k*UC’M »A4 iAA AE AMBMAM tOC«r« BtM »B At 0K9A fM U«MC a t CAMM«M PAi MMBMA MfAilYM 5. MIGHUIAT no . \2 s?M*i!*?Eris •sitSa SL'**** * ^**** m im «m »• i MCPAUB nBM A«U t fMV* CAJM M r « ftMl CAMML9 *m> A%A M * NMti* A M «M« M MWBWTA MAI AM 4 MBU< CAMB A « » MAI 9. MMM LM k«9IC^ AMI ABU. • aaCVBM ** M B»r» A AB MBB *M •*» 0 fUAtCB MMM A*m MMM0. M AAB MtcnM 0BMA « A AtuB M BA • n H/0 • » mm* mmmm • a cbcama Q>*u MiA AM AAL M woo A »«) »M AMI AM. MIPAM MAI 0* AMt <«* AAI0 v*A • AM0 A« i«i MA OMBfM MOHM >ACttMP »mb n*M 0A> mfmjm mam B BtCaiM 0 BIAAM MB T4B At »a A AMBt ft 00M*M CABBlCTM. |T^>tU> TB A AMOItJ MiMtftA 0MI, r AM ■ AAA «A AW AM A BA^ A Aav«au A0» (T^a 9 «u \a cam M'uap ? a ccmnue^ t UM0MAA0 BCAAM MB AA—AI MB WBAl mjiC* BCeaWM «C »**.<V* WAM PWM AA BBW MTMIAJM 1 B'MM A <UM« AM4 CAM* •MB. BMM0M BAB AAi^ 0 AAA MBMil 0 BA. #M WCIAtM Mf 0a L C0ABT A WWA «• a M* *M 4 M0B J| MMB A UB BM «A V* *MB A Wftf AMA AB 0 *A UM0BC4MC0MMC*M 0 A M.<v <u tfMTAt MAU M AMA 0M« rWBMB IMW M AAA tow CUMMM twv> « «AMt AM AMklM IRM •> tr Mk 4MWI JL 00 UMBCMB AM 0«U BA jM nMB0A9 0 B AMRT* lAMC B AMf* aAMB A C0OJTMCI 0*- 00 BA.C0BC 0HlM|- MMO CAMAMWI 0A 4B0»H»^Al B0MC* SBUl LMBO MOB^M 00 0A •tOCBMO - *30aCJ00 H0MH0 M«0Ct #B»U • AM0OOO W0000 t0MT ^ATBCMB VMM « 0»MO raw vauB /«* BKBI0N WOMO •aw wooer «a».u» 0B«MWW IlMOMO SphoMiQMCaN * I i»a:s22S7 f •I11H2B30 i»» CStflt ORONOPROFESSKWAl CEKTER pnjMiBia: OENTACUMC ORONO.MN LANDFORM Ml 0MBtook It• 0N0t0ia iliMtIlItt: PREUMNARY LANDSCAPE PLAN BnwBIti.U»4 lEMr r-iB •MtV mm tfMIBr w ______»l?4l mmirn i/>r cc^«*l0* OW a^0iO>M • PfVUKTIMiaflH«V«B 0 .a mm mam CtRTVICATIIB mm mmm ^ .tL_,. ■V.i'f'f|-,f I V'. ^ 11*1 an'TftiU^ %if ^0*10 . Pv01 i \S Vi t/ir-v-o- AFM.17.20C2 iriMfer. dMdiiW; iMnoBblc JR M. im knNtar 1 mn cnvsuBCTTN.H1I1 RESOLUTION NO. ■SSSSK EXHIBIT B*3 PRELIMINARY EXTERIOR BUILDING AND TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVEATIONS 111111911 ALUMINUM TRIM '^PRE CA&T STONE ^PRE CAST STONE BRICK'rock face PRE CAST STONE SPLIT STONE VENEER ANftLiO NORTH ELEVATIONI_______ EiV \/\e* = i‘-0*DATE: 4-H-20O2 *T‘* f * ■ f *1 1 1 ¥ ■ 1 A _1----■----1--- ASPHALT• SHINGLES ALUMINUM TRIM BRICK ■PRE CAST STONE *>*tS*i*i*f^i inrjuui: 4N0L1O CANOPY AND COLUMN BEYOND Jtauo N roCK face ^split stone PRE CAST VENEER STONE --LUEST ELEVATION EiV i/ife' • v-e>'DATE: 4-H-20O2 BRICK' GATES BACK SIDE front PRE CAST CAP rock face PRE CAST STONE SPLIT STONE VENEER TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVATIONS EL2y 1/lfe• * l'-0*DATE: 4-n-30O2 shea L J imnothiMbiBiit tuRlSSOc mlnnwptli.iwi S540»-1S94 T 6123392257 F 6123492930 v«ww.shtiSnlLCOffl i» «niV|Vfe» client ORONO PROFESSIONAL CENTER prelect Utie: DENTAL CLINIC ORONO. MN Sheet title: EXTERIOR BUILDING AND TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVATIONS enirLiiB:S241B0 t/tr-w 1 Mr APiai7.2002 AMfcK _______s dmmw.M 1 JR 1 ML M InaBlIv 1 1 tnm etiviuiMTTA 1 CReeMM 1 > 1 ___- El .2 1 / CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay» MN 55325 952-249-4600 ZONING HLE #02-2782 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 30, 2002 TO:Professional Properties of Orono Landform c/o Dr. Karl Berg 510 First Avenue North #650 2112 Sugar Woods Drive Minneapolis, MN 55403 Long Lake, MN S53S6 Shea Architects COPIES:Dr. William Kottemarm 100 North Sixth Street, Suite 650C 83S Partenwood Road Long Lake. MN SS3S6 Minneapolis. MN 55403-1594 Robert Riner 3260 Bohn’s Point Lane Wayzata, MN SS391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: PUD Rezoning / PUD Development - Concept Plan Review DATE OF MEETING: (Planning Commission) May 20, 2002 Planning Commission recommended as foliows: i.Motion to recommend approval of the PUD rezoning to B-6 Highway Commecial District. (Vote: 7 For, 0 Against) 2. Motion to reconunend approval of the PUD concept plan. (Vote: 7 For, 0 Against) DATE OF MEETING: (City Council) May 28, 2002 Council took the following action: Council did not take formal action, but did indicate that the Medical OHlce use is appropriate for tiiis site, as is the rezoning to B-6. Council directed that staff draft a Resolution for Concept Plan Approval to be considered at the Council meeting of June 10, such Resolution to incorporate conditions and parameters discussed at the May 28 meeting. Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, June 10, 2002; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. 1I j I I JJLT « #02*2789 Notice of Planning Conunission Action May 30. 2002 Page 2 Extension of 60*Day Review Period Minnesota Statutes §15.99 requires that the City must approve or deny zoning applications within 60 days of receipt of the completed application. The statute also provides that the City may extend the review period for an additional sixty days upon written notification to the iqiplicant. Your application was received and deemed complete as of April 16, 2002, and the initial 60*day period will expire on June IS, 2002. The City of Orono hereby extends the deadline for application #02*2789 an additional 60 days to August 14. 2002. The reason for the extension is that the PUD review process includes both a Concept Plan review and Final Development Plan review; although Concept Plan approval may be granted on June 10, the process requires submittal of final plans as well as Planning Commission & Council review of those plans subsequent to Concept Plan approval. The normal course of the review process will not allow the City to complete its review and take final action within the initial 60*day timeframe. 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 Planning Director Mike Gaffron at 612-249*4600. ■1 i 1 ** N • . Application Date: April 1 7,2D02 Initial 60*Day Rcvicvi Expiration: June 16,2002 60-Day Review Period Extended on ^lay 29, 2002 Extended Expiration: August 15, 2002 1 0 2002 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF OHowo Date: June 6,2002 Item No.: ^ Dcparlmtnl Approval: Adminiviralur Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title: Planning Director j''' Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #02-2789 Dahlstrom Development, LLC, “2550" Wa>'zata Boulevard - Proposed Residcntial/Commercial Development: 1) Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2) Rezoning 3) PUD Concept Plan Review List of Exhibits A - Draft Planning Commission Minutes 5/20/02 B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 5/29/02 C - Correspondence received from Public as of 6/6/02 D - 5/17/02 Landfonn Letter to City Engineer E - 5/2C/02 Landform Additional Concept Drawings (Distributed at 5/20 PC Meeting) F - 5/20/02 Fax from Long Lake Planner G - Planning Commission Memo & Exhibits 5/17/02 Summary of Request and Status of Review Applicants propose to develop this 51-acre site via the Planned Unit Development process. Proposed uses include a mixture ot‘residential housing types including 41 townhome units, 82 “rowhouse” units, and 112 co-op condominium units; and approximately 38,000 s.f. of commercial space including grocery-, retail and restaurant uses on the southeasterly 5 acres of the site. This application was submitted on April 17,2002. The developer made presentations of the proposal to the Park Commission on May 6 and to the Council and Planning Commission at a w ork session on May 14. The developer has also held one or more neighborhood meetings in the area to acquaint the public with this proposal. The initial formal public review occurred at the Planning Commission on May 20, 2002. Planning Commission limited its recommendation action to the broad concept issues related to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. r I #02-2789 Dahlstrom Development LLC June 6,2002 Page 2 Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission held a public hearing on this application on May 20,2002. The draft minutes of that meeting are attached. The resulting recommendations of the Planning Commission are as follows: 1 Motion to recommend approval for an amendment of the Community Management Plan to guide development for residential or office space north of Highway 12, South of County Road 6, between Willow and Old Crystal Bay Road. (Vote: 7 For, 0 Against) 2.Motion to recommend that Council guide appropriate spaces in the area defined by Willow Drive on the east. Old Crystal Bay Road on the west. Highway 12 on the south and the Willow View development boundar>' on the north for possible retail that is not accessory to the offices or anything else. (Vote: 6 For, / Against) 3.Motion to recommend that the retail uses allowed be accessory to the residents of this development and the surrounding community. (I'ote: 7 For, 0 Against) Planning Commission discussed but did not reach a conclusion as to whether the retail element should include the proposed grocery store. Planning Commission members did not conduct a detailed review of the various elements of the concept plan, and limited their action to recommendations regarding the proposed amendments to the Community Management Plan, leaving the issues of rezoning and concept plan detailed review for future meeting(s). Planning Commission did indicate to staff that it would be helpful to know with some certainty whether the Long Lake Council supports Orono ’s position with regards to the limitations on retail development in Oror.o west of Willow Drive. Plaiming Commission also expressed concern about the traffic impacts of this development on surrounding roadways and intersections, and suggested that a traffic study would be very useful. Additional Information Additional items received since the Planning Commission memo and exhibits of May 17 include a letter from Landform president Steve Johnston to the City Engineer (Exhibit D); a group of revised drawings (Exhibit E) which Landform distributed at the Planning Commission hearing, including a plan showing the proposed grocery at 30,000 s.f instead of the 20,000 s.f originally proposed, also including some detail sketches of various plan features and a map of the Long Lake Downtown Master Plan; two e-mails from area residents supporting the development (Exhibit C); and a fax from the Long Lake City Planner regarding opportunities for retail in the Long Lake area (Exhibit F). ^02-2789 Dahlstrotn Development LLC June 6,2002 Page 3 Staff Recommeodation It is recommended that Council carefully review the staff memo of May 17 (Exhibit G). Staffs position has not changed in regards to the grocery store. Staff strongly recommends against amending the Comprehensive Plan to allow the grocery store clement of the development proposal. The reasons for this arc stated in the May 17 memo. Staff concurs with Planning Commission that some minimal level of limited retail uses on the northwest comer of 12AVillow would be appropriate, as long as that retail is accessory to the residential or office uses along Kelley Parkway. Other than the grocery store, the types of neighborhood retail uses suggested by the developer, including the restaurant use, may be appropriate and could provide benefit to the surrounding community without having a negative impact on future redevelopment of Long Lake. Staff would note that while in general, the office market in this area is not strong, we have seen that office uses such as the medical office building arc viable in this area The City spent considerable time developing its 20(X)-2020 Community Management Plan (CMP) and established the office use as most appropriate for area between Highway 12 and Kelley Parkway. The applicants’ proposed conversion from commercial office use to multifamily residential south of Kelley Parkway, results in an overall residential density significantly higher than the City intended for this property, and significantly increases the intensity and massing of structural development along Kelley Parkway as compared to that contemplated in the CMP. Council should carefully consider whether this change in uses is appropriate. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Council is asked to provide the developer, staff and Planning Commission with direction in regards to the following: 1.Does Council support the CMP Amendment request for conversion from “commercial office” to “multifamily rcside.r :ial” (and rezoning from RR-IB to RPUD) for the area between Highway 12 and Kelley Parkway? 2.Docs Council support the CMP Amendment (and rezoning from RR-IB to B-6 PUD) for some level of retail commercial use at the northwest comer of the 12AVillow intersection that is not strictly accessory to the office use? If so, what level of retail use is acceptable? 3.Docs Council support the proposed 30,000 s.f. grocery' store element of the development plan at the intersection of 12/VVilIow? i i i -•vf..,. ... #02-2789 Dahlstrom Development LLC June 6.2002 Page 4 Once the above questions are answered. Council should provide as much direction as possible with regards to the overall concept plan. Direction that would help the developer and Planning Commission in moving forward with the review process includes: - overall density of residential development - size and scale of residential development • open space - site amenities • any other elements of the Concept Plan Council wishes to address The next steps in the concept plan review process are somewhat dependent on Council’s conclusions at the June 10 meeting. Depending on the level of revisions the developer must make in the concept plan, this item could return to Planning Commission for further concept plan review in late June - Planning Commission Chair Smith and former Chair Hawn have suggested that if this goes forward, it should be at a special meeting (continuation of the public hearing) with this as the only agenda item, possibly the week of June 24, to allow the PC to focus clearly on this specific application. i I, 1 rrjirrj-IflU PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 20,2002 Page 21 of 22 A Hawn moved, Kluth seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2782, Karl Berg, 276S Kelley Parkway, of the concept design and treatment of this parcel under the PUD. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (Recess taken from 9:31 - 9:35 p.m.) SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M, (#11) #02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT LLC, 2550 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST, PUD CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW/REZO.\L\G/COMPREHENSl\T PLAN AMEND.MENT, 9:35 -11:50 P.M. Applicant Dahlstrom Devrlopment representatives were present, including, Steve Johnston of Landform Designs; Kendra Lindahl, Landform Design Land Use Planner, and Carolyn Crawl???, architect for Landform Designs. Gaffron reported that the applicants propose to develop this S 1-acre site via the Platmed Unit Development process. Proposed uses include a mixture of residential housing types including 41 townhome units, 82 “rowhouse" units, and 112 co-op condominium units, and approximately 38,000 s.f. of commercial space including grocery, retail and restaurant uses on the southeasterly S acres of the site. With regard to the required sequence of steps the Plamiing Commission w ould need to follow* in order to make recommendations to Council, Gaffron explained that the Commission would need to consider: 1) Comprehensive Plan Amendment - North of Kelley Park way, the land is guided for multi-family PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 20.2002 Page 22 of 22 residential (MFR) use at a density of 3-6 units per acre. South of Kelley Parkway, the site is guided for Conunercial uses • specifically professional offices, limited service uses, and retail uses accessory to the offices. GaHron stated that the primary change would be to allow multi-family residential uses (row houses and condo’s) on the westerly 3/4 of the site south of Kelley Parkway, rather than the commercial it is guided for now. A second CMP change would be to allow a considerably more intense level of retail uses at the northwest comer of 12AVillow, i.e. grocery, service retail, and restaurant. 2) Rezoning • l>e entire site is currently zoned RR-IB, one family residential. The area of commercial development is proposed tu be rezoned to B-6 Highway Commercial District (PUD) and the residential component is proposed to be rezoned to RPUD Residential Planned Unit Development District 3) PUD Genetal Concept Plan Approval • a review process similar in scope to a combination of the sketch plan and preliminary plat phases of a standard subdivision process. Commitment by the City in this phase signifies the City’s formal commitment to the development. 4) PUD Development Plan Approval - In this final stage, the developer will provide detailed plans for implementation of the approved General Concept Plan, as well as, preliminary and final plat documents. Gaffron reiterated to the Commission that their mission this evening would be to focus primarily on the proposed amendments to the CMP. He encouraged the Commissioners not to get bogged down in the details and instead carefully consider the points made by the City’s planning consultant, John Shardlow. Gaffron reminded the Commissioners that in the 2000-2020 CMP update, that they only recently completed, the CMP envisions focusing retail development in a compact downtown area in Long Lake. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 20.2002 Page 23 of 22 The CMP specifically limits retail development between Willow and Old Crystal Bay Road to small scale. He mainuined that Orono’s plan was to avoid pulling energy and development potential away from the Long Lake downtown area, and to avoid retail uses that would draw high levels of traffic to the area west of Willow Drive. Furthermore, Gaffron noted that the grocery store that has been proposed as a retail element to provide the western ‘anchor’ to what would be a linear retail strip with its eastern end being downtown Long Lake is viewed by staff as being in complete conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff believes that if a grocery store is located west of Willow E)rive, it will draw retail development/redevelopment, to the detriment of the existing downtown Long Lake retail area, and to the detriment of both Orono and Long Lake to redevelop the downtown Long Lake area. Gaffron reiterated that staff strongly recommends against amending the Comprehensive Plan to allow the grocery store element of the development proposal, and suggests that the Planning Commission place significant focus on this element in its consideration of the concept plan. Gaffron pointed out that the final CMP issue to consider is whether conversion from office to residential is appropriate for areas south of Kelley Parkway. Two concept plans, “Study A” and “Study D”, have been used as standard guides for developers in recent years when inquiries have been made about the property. The applicants’ total combined residential/rctail footprint is 190,000+ s.f. south of Kelley Parkway, or three times the amount of building mass than the City had been contemplating. Once again, Gafflon noted staff recommends that the Planning Commission give careful consideration to • • the conversion from commercial office use to multifamily residential south of Kelley Parkw’ay. Steve Johnston, of Landform Designs, indicated that three types of units will exist within Orono Village: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINTJTES May 20.2002 Page 24 of 22 buflered single level townhomes located at the leA northeast comer with a price point in the mid $400,000*s, encircled by a tree lined Kelley Parkway roadway with canopy and sidewalks; followed by row houses with back tuck under garages that fall in the upper S200.000’s; and fmally, 3 story loft buildings with parking, priced around $ 180,000, comprise the development. He pointed out that available funding programs and lifecycle housing allows the City to meet many of its goals. Adding that the commercial sites are an integral part of the project by providing residents with a commercial retail area they can use, or walk to. Kendra Lindahl, a Landform Design land use planner, explained that within this ‘walkable community’. there are 28 acres of open space, 2 1/2 miles of trails and sidewalks, lifecycle opportunities, and community neighborhood retail. After reviewing the plan with staff, she pointed out that this type of community did not exist S-10 years ago, thus, the developer would like to maximize the use of office space upwards of 150,000 s.f. vs. the 100,000 s.f. allowance. With regard to the Long Lake downtown plan, Lindahl maintained that the plan discourages the large scale grocer, while retail makes sense for this comer. Lindahl stated that this offers a good alternative for an upscale grocer looking for 30,000 s.f. She indicated that in conversations with Long Lake, they too. believed a grocer should go further west on a main intersection. Physically, Lindahl explained, using props, how locations don’t exist other than the Willow/12 intersection and hoped for Commission support. Carolyn Cr • ?, an architect for Landform Designs, made herself available for questions. Hans Berg, a new resident building a home in the Willow View development, asked the Commissioners to explain to him how the proposed development will benefit the residents. He questioned the effect an additional 235 homes, multiplied by 10 average trips a day, would have on traftic in an already congested planning commission meeting minutes • May 20.2002 Page 2S of22 area. He voiced his support of the Commission entrusting them to make the right decision for the community. Tony Oxborough, T.F. James Company, a neighboring property owner and developer, was interested in how the Comprehensive Plan would or would not be changed in light of this application. He pointed out that if the CMP is changed, his company would like the opportunity to be involved more on a larger scale. Cliff Otten, Box 249 Long Lake, stated that he has heard many comments from people in support of this development. • Hawn asked the Commission if, in their view, the development matches with the spirit of the Comprehensive Plan in regard to, green space, affordable housing, and commercial vs. office space. Kluth stated that, in his opinion, the proposal does not fit w'cll with what the Commission has viewed the CMP to be as they ’ve reviewed it over the past two years. He pointed out that this is the most intensive development he has ever seen proposed in Orono. Although there is pressure for more affordable housing, Kluth maintained that this is an incredibly intensive use of housing. He continued, noting that a long standing unwritten agreement exists with Long Lake that indicates they would develop the commercial and ^ -.ono the office space. Cynthia B. •? commented that while she is excited about a grocer, the design is way too dense near the loft and row houses. She maintained that many people, like Mr. Hans Berg, come to Orono because there is more space and larger lots. Rahn stated that this is a very large production, one that is hard for the Commission to get its hands around. The density, traffic, and parking cause him issue even more so than changing the use. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 20.2002 Page 26 of 22 f Hawn stated that she saw no problem in changing the space from office to residential; however, the plan was much too dense for her liking. She added that while Orono would like a big upscale grocer, one here would dominate the parking area and parcel as proposed. The pressure of this huge grocer may diminish the other retail space, space which should be located closer to Long Lake. Hawn viewed traffic as another major hurdle, as intersections arc already heavy. Smith liked the idea of mixed use and believed the area was appropriate for it. Her concerns included traffic, parking, and density. Fritzler maintained that very few residents of the community will actually walk to the grocery store. He stated that he liked the idea of having a grocer in the area, and was not comfortable with waiting for Long Lake to come up with a plan. Mabusth stated that she liked the grocer concept; however, she had hoped to examine a formal response from Long Lake in regard to their position before endorsing or denying the application. Gaffron stated that there was no question Long Lake would need to get involved with the discussion. He noted that the Long Lake plan however, does not focus on a grocery because there is not any undeveloped area to place it. Mabusth commented that she had trouble seeing enough adequate parking for a grocer or retail development. Although she had no problem with moving residential to the south side of Kelley Parkway in order to alleviate some of the density, she did question the traffic. Mabusth felt more information was necessary in reference tq traffic and Long Lake’s position. She complimented the applicant noting that there were many nice parts to the p Ian including waterways, trails, etc. ----ii iiM-aa fTT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Mty 20,2002 Page 27 of 22 Mr. Johnston pointed out that the density pays for many of the features the Commissioners like. He continued that his company, too, would support a traffic study performed by the City, and would in fact help fund one. He admitted that more traffic would e.xist, but maintained this tiaffc would be at differing times of day. Johnston pointed out that the CMP itself states that main arteries, like Highway 1 2 and Willow, are designed to support 1,000 to 30,000 trips a day. Ms. Lindahl stated that while the density numbers are higher south of Kelley, they have proposed just 2.7 units per acre north of Kelley, which is waranted in this unique type of development. Carolyn C. was not surprised by the Commissioners reactions, this sort of development is new to Orono. She stated that many of the details can provide further flexibility and encouraged the City to initiate a traffic study. From what she felt she was hearing, they were moving in a positive direction, and on the right track to creating an exceptional product. Hawn stated that, with respect to the Comprehensive Plan, the plan called for commercial space in an area we are considering changing to residential. She asked for Commissioner comment on this issue. Kluth stated that the City needs to maintain its strong conviciluns. He questioned, in the present changing economic conditions, if the City should wait for the office market to redevelop or allow this plan to proceed. He stated that he would like to see a lesser degree of housing density, but was not opposed to changing the area to residential. He indicated that everyone he speaks to has been excited about a potential grocery store, how ever, are concerned if adequate space exists for both retail development, a grocer, and parking. Cynthia B. • stated that she had no problem with changing the area South of Kelley Parkway to residential PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES M«y 20,2002 Page 28 of 22 versus commercial. / Rahn, Hawn, and Smith concurred. Fritzler stated that given the choice between office and residential, he would rather have the area residential. Mabusth indicated that she had no problem with residential on the south side of Kelley Parkway and she thought the comp plan gave the Commission that flexibility. Hawn stated that in regard to the commercial concept she wanted to hear additional feedback. Kluth stated that he had already made his position clear. Cynthia B. - said that she liked the retail commercial and issues regarding parking etc. could be addressed later. Rahn liked the concept. Hawn stated that she would prefer to see a grocer located closer to Long Lake and not here. She believed it was too big for this proposed site and did not offer a fixable solution. Smith saw more trouble with the concept and was less inclined to support any commercial here. Although Fritzler agreed he’d like to see a grocer in the area, he felt this was not the appropriate location. He feared that Orono was not ready to commit to a large upscale grocer based on the amount of space PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 20.2002 Page 29 of 22 required for them to operate. Mabusth believed that she could support a co^ee shop, restaurant, and some small scale retail. She did. however, fmd it extremely difficult to receive as strong a staff recommendation as they had in this case and choose to ignore it. Both staff and the city consultant wrote recommendations that warn the Commission not to support this development. She believed that a grocer will come, eventually, and was uncomfortable supporting further development at least until Long Lake has been consulted. Cynthia B.- recalled discussion at a recent work session which surrounded the possibility of a small scale grocer as an attractive alternative. She wished that more direction had been obtained from Long Lake. Kluth maintained that the City does have an agreement with Long Lake and should ask for a formal opinion. Neil Weber, Long Lake resident and City Council representative, stated that there is a process which needs to be followed, we are virtually one community and need to continue to work together. He added that although the downtown Long Lake plan has not identified a specific site for a grocer, it will happen. and dialogue needs to begin. Weber continued that other landowners in the area need to be brought in to the discussion for their input as well, since the ramifications will effect many. Lindahl stated that her group had conducted discussions with Long Lake staff representatives who suggested they meet with Orono before moving forward. Mabusth asked for reaction from the neighborhood meetings. Johnston indicated that upon neighborhood review the biggest concern was the traffic. There was not planning commission meeting minutes May 20.2002 Page 30 of 22 much concern over the density due to adequate buffers, and most everyone wanted the grocer. Reaction from a smaller neighborhood meeting concluded again that the land use was fine, the grocer was desirable, and many were excited about the amenities including the 2 1/2 miles of trail. Carolyn C- stated that this is not a big box development, it is a mixed use community which operates on the right mix, potentially blending in some office and retail. Highway 12 is relocating, as Ron Moorse cites in his comments, and new potential exists. Bob Sansevere, City Council Liaison, stated that while he has heard much talk about synergy and what needs to be built, consideration needs to be given to the property to the west. If rezoned, anything can be built there. In her view, Carolyn C. envisioned a daycare center or medical facility, much like the one being proposed by Dr. Berg. Sansevere stated that he was confused and asked whether Landform interests control the land to the west that she is referring to. Carolyn stated that they did not. Tony Oxborough, T.F. James Co., stated that his company owns 20 acres just kiddy comer from the proposed development and asked for an opportunity to be involved more in the development stages of these parcels. Hawo moved, Mabusth seconded, recommending support of the concept to amend the Comprehensive Plan to allow the area south of Kelley and north of EUghway 12 to be guided for PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 20.2002 Page 31 of 22 residential asc. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 1, with Kluth dissenting. Kluth pointed out that there is no Kelley Parkway delineated as of yet and parameters should be set before blanket approval is given. Hawn withdrew her former motion in order to define the boundaries of Kelley Parkway. Mabusth stated that she would withdraw her second to the motion. Members of the Commission agreed to withdraw their former votes. Hawn moved, Mabusth seconded, to recommend to Councii that the Comprehensive Pian he amended in order to guide deveiopment for residential or office space north of Highway 12, South of Highway 6, between Wiilow Drive and Old Cr> stal Bay Road. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Kluth questioned if the Commission is going against the Comprehensive Plan by allowing residential. In concept, he was willing to go along with retail use, however, he cautioned the Commission to be careful of how intense a use it should be. He asked if the Commission was comfortable recommending an amendment to the comp plan, a plan that intentionally was drawn up to limit certain sizes to avoid an overly intensive use. Hawn continued by asking if the concept can be further defined in order to delineate between big box or little box. Rahn asked that in reference to the grocer, once adequate parking is achieved, if the Commission could vote in favor of the concept of a smaller grocer. i PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINQ MINUTES May 20.2002 Page 32 of 22 Carolyn C. stated that the previous plan allowed for small retail which supported the office Hawn questioned whether the Commission can recommend to Council that they guide the development for possible retail that is not accessory to the office. Hawn moved, Cynthia B seconded, recommending to Council that they guide appropriate spaces in the area deBned by Willow Drive on the east. Old Crystal Bay Road on the west. Highway 12 on the south, and the border of Willow View for possible retail that is not accessory to the offices or anything else. VOTE Ayes 6, Nays 1, with Smith dissenting. Hawn moved, with respect to the same geographic area bounded by Willow Drive on the east. Old Crystal Bay Road on the west. Highway 12 on the south, and Willow View to the north, that such retail use shall be conducted in buildings no greater than 20,000 s.f. Smith asked if size is the only precursor here. Based on these various concerns, Hawn wished that the Commission did not have to come up with a vote this evening. Gaffron pointed out to the Commissioners that all of these decisions do not need to be made this evening. He suggested that they table further discussion upon obtaining more information, results of a traffic study. discussions with Long Lake, etc. Carolyn C. stated that defining building types can help in defming use and asked the Commission to continue in order to allow her group to move the process forward. She maintained that Landform Designs r r.tc ► PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 20,2002 Page 33 of 22 needs to know if the concept is moving in the right direction. Smith questioned who should drive the process. Gaffron noted that the City should give the developer direction, which they have, and many things need to be done in the interim. Hawn informally asked how many of the Commissioners were comfortable with this grocery and parking plan. None of them were. She continued, by asking how many would be comfortable with a grocery store on die scale of a small box type with adequate parking, and a traffic study which supports it. Lindahl reiterated Landforms desire to define the specific square footage they could accommodate in order to move the process to Council. GafSron reiterated that no clear vote on any size grocery has been made and repeated that this is still unresolved. He stated that what has been approved is residential south of Kelley Parkway, and retail that does not have to be accessory to anything, but the intent is that it supports the walkable community. Mabusth stated that she was uncomfortable endorsing the grocery proposal until they speak to Long Lake, their consultant, and many issues are addressed. Carolyn asked for a vote with qualifications, but stated they could lake what they’ve learned so far to Council. Rahn reasoned that they keep saying the retail is not relative to the residential or anything, and questioned what it is there for if not for the residential. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 20.2002 Page 34 of 22 Hawn moved, Cynthia seconded, to recommend that the retail uses are accessory to the residents of this development and the surrounding community. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS, CONTINUED («9) «02-2780 OTTEN BROTHERS NURSERY, 2350 WEST WAYZATA BOULEVARD, amendment to pud «I, 11:51 P.M. -12:30 A.M. Cliff Otten, Applicant and President of Otten Brothers, along with Nunery Manager John O’Reilly, were present. Weinberger explained that the applicant has requested an application to amend PUD Agreement #1 that was executed with the approval of the East Willow Woods in 1990. The proposed amendment is to permit a restaurant use on the property and to lift the exception clause within the PUD agreement that limits the amount of B-1 permitted uses on the property. Weinberger reported that Otten Bros, has recently opened a self-contained concession stand, known as ‘Daisy Diner" to be located within the building and permanent greenhouse. Daisy Diner has been in operation for about a month and operating under a Transient Merchant License that allows it to remain open until July 2,2002. The property is currently zoned PUD with B-6 as the underlying zoning districts. Weinberger nuintained that the permitted uses are those uses listed as permitted in the B-6 district and those listed in the B-1, except those items as listed on page 1 of Weinberger’s memo and page 2 of the PUD Agreement CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay« MN 55323 952-249-4600 ZONING FILE #02-2789 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 29, 2002 TO:Dahlstrom Development LLC 7745 Polaris Lane Maple Grove, MN 55311 COPIES: Orono Plaza Attn: Tom Reiersgord Reiersgord Law Firm 4500 West 44th Street Minneapolis, MN 55424-1001 Landform 510 First Avenue North #650 Minneapolis. MN 55403 Malkerson Gilliland Martin LLP Suite 1500 AT&T Tower 901 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402-3205 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Comp Plan Amendment / PUD Rezoning / Subdivision / PUD Development - Concept Plan Stage DATE OF MEETING: May 20. 2002 Planning Commission recommended as follows: 1.Motion to recommend support of the concept to amend the Community Management Plan (CMP) to allow the area south of Kelley Parkw-ay and north of Highway 12. (currently guided specifically for office use) to be re-guided for residential use. (Vote: 6 For, t Against; Motion, second and action subseqnently withdrawn to allow for a revision to define the area in question) 2.Motion to recommend approval for an amendment of the Community Management Plan to guide development for residential or office space north of Highway 12, South of County Road 6, between Willow and Old Crystal Bay Road. (Vote: 7 For, 0 Against) 3.Motion to recommend that Council guide appropriate spaces in the area defined by Willow Drive on the east. Old Crystal Bay Road on the west, Highway 12 on the south and the Willow View development boundary on the north for possible retail that is not accessory to the offices or anything else. (Vote: 6 For, / Against) #02*2789 Notice of Planning Commission Action May 29, 2002 Page 2 4. Motion to recommend that the retail uses allowed be accessory to the residents of this development and the surrounding community. (Vote: 7 For, 0 Against) Plaiming Commission discussed but did not reach a conclusion as to whether the retail clement should include the proposed grocer)' store. Planning Commission members did not conduct a detailed review of the various elements of the concept plan, and limited their action to recommendations regarding the proposed amendments to the Community Management Plan, leaving the issues of rezoning and concept plan review for future mccting(s). Applicant's ne.\t scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, June 10, 2002; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. The Council will be presented with the Planning Commission's recommendations regarding tl.. proposed amendments to the CMP. Council will be asked to provide applicants with guidance in terms of two critical issues which arc key to the review process moving forward: I) whether the CMP amendments have Council support, and 2) whether the grocery element has Council support. Council will be asked to provide additional direction to the Planning Commission with regards to any elements of the concept plan if any which Council has concerns with at this time. If Council supports the proposed amendments to the CMP. the concept plan review process will continue at the Planning Commission. Minnesota Statutes §15.99 requires that the City must approve or deny zoning applications within 60 days of receipt of the completed application. The statute also provides that the City may extend the review period for an additional sixty days upon written notification to the applicant. Your application was received and deemed complete as of April 17, 2002, and the initial 60-day period will expire on June 16, 2002. The City of Orono hereby extends the deadline for application #02-2789 an additional 60 days to August 15, 2002. The reason for the extension is that the Planning Commission meets once per month and will not meet again until June 17; the Planning Commission has not yet made a recommendation on the concept plan; and Council action on your request cannot occur until after the Planning Commission makes a recommendation on the concept plan. These factors will not allow the City to complete its review and take action within the initial 60-day timeframe. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please contact Planning Director Mike Gaffron at 612-249-4600. Note: Please also contact Mike Gaffron As soon as possible to discuss the itinerary for the scheduled June 3 tour of multifamily residential developments. _____________________t _____ ..._____________________ MikeGaffiron • Grocery Store at Willow & 12 Pagel From: To: Date: Sub|ect: <gardnerc|OatLrwt> <mgaffronQci.orono.mn.us> 5/28/02 4 53PM Grocery Store at Willow & 12 We would support a smaller up-scale grocery store in the proposed Orono Village development at the comer of 12 and Willow. Thanks- Chris & Jolynn Gardner 1115 Cox Farm Road Orono I Mike Gaf^ - Orono VHIage Pdge 1 From: To: Dato: Subjtct: Chris WHIson <chri8wiQMiNN.Firstlndustrial.com> "‘mgaffronQci.orono.mn.us" <mgaffronQci.orono.mn.us> S/21/02 9:55AM Orono Village To Whom it May Concern; I would like to express my desire to have a commercial component integrated into Ihe proposed Orono Village development. I live with my wife and three kids on Cox Farm Rd and would look VERY favorably on the opportunity to have a quality grocery option at the intersection of Hwy 12 and Willow, not to mention a nice restaurant option and other assorted retail shops. That comer should clearly be directed as retail since the other comers at the intersection already are. As a 15 year professional in the commercial real estate brokerage / development field, I would tell you it will be many, many years before the ’office" market will expand that tar west, regardless of the extension of 1-394. The biggest regrets that my wife and I have with the area right now is the lack of a quality nearby grocery (the superette in Long Lake is a travesty) and quality restaurant food. Ravalo is a nice addition but impossible to get into....what does that say about demand? I understand the Cit/s position is negative towards a commercial component to the Orono Viliage plan and I would respectfully ask that stance to be changed. If you would like to discuss further, please contact me at my office....(952) 943-7492. Thank You. CC: "'sarahwillsonQaol.com'" <sarahwillsonQaol.com>, '"8johnstonQlandformmsp.com' <8john8tonQlandformmsp.com> ■Ttllk[THnrn«iirti~ n i ~ii'i n LANDFORM Ml May 17. 2002 Tom Kellogg, PE Bonestroo Rosene. Anderlik and Associates, Inc 2335 West Highway 36 St. Paul. MN 55113 RE: Orono Village Dear Mr. Kellogg. I have received a copy of your review dated 5-9-02 of our conceptual plans for Orono Village and offer the following comments. Sanitary Sewer - We acknowledge the apparent bottleneck In the system and trust that you and the City will take the steps required to make the necessary irnprovements to the system to serve this property. Based on our current schedule we will not have any units occupied until late next spring, with a three-year build out. I must make the assumption that our trunk sanitary sewer assessment would be our only financial contribution for off site sewer improvements. Watermain - The changes you request are totally acceptable and will be made on the next round of plans. Based on an earlier discussion with Greg Gappa the cost difference between 12 and 8" pipe should be credited against our trunk water assessment. Storm Sewer - All of the standards and documentation you have requested will be complied with In our next submittal. We are proposing to move the pond outlet to the west property line of the Golf Dome. This should help alleviate some of the parking lot flooding, since under the current condition the discharge water must make two M degree bends In the narrow, shallow ditch. Field observations during last week ’s significant rainfall confirmed that the water is not being contained in ttie ditch along Highway 12. Our pipe realignment should improve the situation. We are currently working on plans for this improvement and will forward them to you. the city, watershed and MNDOT for comment. We again assert our assumption that the cost of this regional Stormwater pond will be credited against our trunk storm sewer assessment. Streets/Trails - We have increased the width of Kelly parkway to 28 feet at the direction of Greg Gappa. We have also added a third lane to allow for turning movements at Willow Drive. The 30 MPH design is acceptable, as is the request Geotech report, including estimate of R-value, and the use of select granular subbase and draintile. 650 BUTICR NORTH BUILDING 510 FIRST AVENUC NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 5S40J OFFICE 612 252 »070 FAX 612 252 9077 www landTorm n«t Tom Kellogg Pago 2____ Ro: Ofono Village May t7.2002 We are concerned however with the recommendation for concrete curb throughout the project. In the area north of Kelly Parkway we do not anticipate using curb. This is an aesthetic not cost issue. We want to maintain a more natural appearance in that area of the project and utilize ditches and raingardens for the treatment of runoff. These toads are private. As such we should have the option to not use concrete curb. The cul-de*sacs. while irregular in shape, have the same outside radius as a starKlard 45 ’ diameter cul-de-sac. Regarding trails, we do show an extension of the Willow Drive trail to Highway 12. We would prefer to keep this a concrete sidewalk in keeping with the formal landscapirtg in the Village Center. Along highway 12 we again would like to see a concrete sidewalk to the east side of the restaurant and bituminous trail to the west. Traffic - While our estimate of the trip generation is slightly less than yours we do not have issue with the request for a traffic study for the area. Our estimate is lowered based on a factor for a walkable neighborhood as well as a muitiuse retaii area. We believe that the Study should also anticipate the impact on the Willow/CR 6 intersection. We request that you or another consultant do the study for the City. This will avoid the perception that our data is somehow skewed to present a more favorable conclusion. Our endorsement of the preparation of this report should not be interned to be acceptance of the full cost of the study or any offsite improvements. We believe that those costs should be bore by all parties who create the impact and benefit from the solution. You mention that Kelly Is part of the City’s MSA system. We encourage you to investigate the use of these MSA funds for any off-site improvements. Financial Guarantee - We have anticipated paying all of these fees and prowding a letter of credit for the improvements. Please provide a compilation of these fees and credits for improvements provided as soon as practical. Sincerely. LANDFORM COPY: Terry Dahlstrom. Dahlstom Development LLC John Hassler, Dahlstom Development LLC Mike Gaffron, City of Orono Greg Gappa, PE, City of Orono 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDING 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55403 OFFICE: 612.252.9070 FAX: 612 252.9077 «MM».lan<Nonn.nM Orono Village =^ow Houses / Lofts e'L, Vt.» \ • V -- *..V ,v^ • > f ^ •' '''V**’*"^ > '»'iV,t;>- • •••vv?v;\^s'' '■ Sr.. ‘ I '• rr >n # [s . '; I** • » ’ * -i •*' '* ^ V r* •« h .j: } -■ ' t' L • }.\. fi> ih? I A . .V-;.r:^ • . -V^ _ ________ r^r: >^V ' " '•;•• ' \ h '■'^‘~f^ .* • .,. ;)i ^ •/ jB. • . /; - >Or . v- . •>'•;, 'r‘-:fj, f ■'/!•■ ?,.; •■ • , .V, ■ .-.HA'.,; • ^,ir.?-'-: /*! ^ • • <» •% JF• • • • <x. ^ - . -•*• »>■ 'V 'J>• • /wt.* ■• • •'■ u- • • • • : '^i • ' _ fTH I# A ff ,i'7i • 1 ‘f ]C" i'i-i ■ i i / Wf . .. 'v»*4'lr landform Proposed Long Lake KELLEY PARKWAY I State Bank of • Long Lake I 1 GRAPHIC TAKEN FROM CITY OF LONG LAKE WEBSITE HIGHWAY • « LONG LAKE ? • A •31 V fi • * «4 Town Center LANDFORM 1964PaikAv*. Long LtM*. MN 66356 952.4734661 992.476.9622 (In) CITY OF LONG LAKE F > Tk Mr. Mke Gaffron Frniu Matt GoldstBin. Planner Hob (952) 249-4616 (952)249^ R« Comprehensiva Plan: BiQ Box Retail ____ CC: OUrfMit □FerMawiaw Date: S/20/02 M □■agly Mike: Today 1 fiook a closer look at our 1997 Comprehensive Plan relative to ttie big box retail issue and the opportunities fbr redevelopment to aooommodate a grocer in Long lake. In summary, it appears that the intent Is to limit large-scale big-box redevelopmenc but also permit and encourage small-scale redevelopment that makes better utiToabon of the land. The Comprehensive Plan steers the industrial area as a business park, permitdng the commingling of commerdai and industrial uses in the Industrial area. A grocer was discussed as a community need (p. 3-13), and was also discussed in the Downtown Master Plan process. However, limiting big box retail ’’anywhere and particularly in the industrial area (p. 3- 11)” was also Isted. The existing zoning In the industrial park is not intended to accommodate *a large home improvement and lumber type use or a power ratal center (p. 4- 21).” Included in this fax are two pages from the comprehensive Plan. COO/tOO‘4 >6091 2X>n 0N01 iO All3 ZZ96 91> Z96 tSi91 ZOOttOt'AVK 4> Indmtiial/Business Park The City’s industrial paric has been considered unique because it offers a consolidated area with full utilities, good access, and reasonable land prices at the edge of the rnetropolitan area. It provides Long Lake with a full cross section of community land use. an economic base and a non-residential tax base. The paric. (with a couple of notable exceptions) senres smaller industrial, construction and commercial uses. Its advantages also highlight its shortoomings. Lower land values attract more extensive land users such as building materials, auto body repair, vehicle storage, contractors, etc. which tend to create unsightly areas. Simple materials management, vehicle and equipment parking patterns and landscaping can make vast improvements, not only prornoting visual erthancements, but also business operations. Smaller businesses also often lack capital to support necessary improvements such as street paving, storm water management, parking area paving and landscaping. Area-wide imprcivements will tend to increase the attractiveneas of the park thereby increasing value and creating turn over and change. A third challenge is the accessibility and market created by TH 12. The state DOT has Installed sheltered turning lanes on TH 12 to improve access and safety. As a result increased pressure will be created for more commercial ventures that are highway oriented. On a lesser scale, the liquor store, pizza and yard equipment sales center is examples. In this mix of development challenges comes the confluence of City objectives • buildirig tax base. Increasing Jobs and economic opportunity, retention and expansion of existing businesses and meeting the broader needs of the community. Balancing these objectives requires a view of the future and some transitional strategies for transitional areas. To focus choices, the planning process looked at three alternatives for the industrial area. They were based on some fundamental objectives: > Improve the economic base of the City. > Create/maintain a sense of a district, functionally, operationally and visually. > Connect the business park to the city center (the City's investment in lighting and walkways along TH 12 is a symbolic beginning). > Foster smaller businesses and community enterprises. > Examine ways and incentives to develop economic clusters (e.g. home renovation center where hardware stores, lawn care, nurseries, roofing, plumbing and heating, etc.) coexist > Create a system of Internal access. > Limit direct private lot access to Wayzata Boulevard/TH 12. lors Uke Comprehensive rUn 4-ZO eoo/zoo*a I609i axn ONoi io xiio ZZ96 9Lt Z96 Z9'‘9X Z00Z,0Z ‘XW 1 Th« resulting three options provided contrast choices to distinguish what exists now and what might be realistically encouraged for the future. Option 1 - Industrial Park This option would follow current zoning to protect and presen/e industrial uses on a smaller scale. The premise is that an organized industrial parK protected from outside intriieion will produce a significant economic benefit over time and stimulate constant upgrading and improving the area. Existing internal street systems would continue. Direct access to and from TH 12 should decrease. Option 2 - Business Park This option encourages highway-oriented uses along the TH 12 frontages. The depth of that commercial expansion depertds on the ability to create parcel access from connector roads or internal access. One concept includes an extension of Industrial Boulevard easterly to Shaughnessy Circle. Daniels Street could have an industrial face on the south frontage and a commercial/business feoe on the north frontage. Additional public Infrastructure is required for this option. Option 3 - Commercial Center V This option would phase out all industrial uses in ^vor of highway and community related commercial. Care would need to be exercised to compliment downtown commerdai uses. The three optional development concepts are illustrated in Figure 4-5. Clearly, the industrial park will change overtime. The comprehensive plan seeks to create an investment framework that can be implemented over time and that will bring an upgraded and diversified employment and business center. The plan builds on Option 2 and retains the smaller parcel approach, but opens the TH 12 edge to commercial and highway commercial. Emphasis continues on reinforcing a coordinated and integrated idistrict The development concept moves from a strict industrial park to a more diversified *business park*. Additional internal east-west circulation may be required depending on the sc^of uses. The district would not intend to accommodate a large home improvement and lumber ^ yard type use or a power retail center. Instead the integration of community oriented. highway related businesses would be pursued. The emphasis of commercial uses would be to serve the business paiK community and subregion in that order. CommercMl uses generally are higher value development than industrial uses creating continuing presswe to ‘commercialize' all transition areas. Directing and fostering retail and service Uses in downtown while accommodating larger scale commercial uses In the business park are the plans'objective, it is the further objective to tedlity clustering of mutually reinfqrcing businesses. Virginia Street District Virginia Street is a residential street between Wayzata Boulevard and Oaniela Street. The - street exits one-way only north to Wayzata Boulevard to prevent non-residential circulating traffic. Trucks are prohibited from Daniels Street between Brown Road and Shaughnessy Circle as well as from Virginia Street. The residential property area is generally higher in elevation than the surrounding uses creating some visual impacts not easily resolved. Loi\g Lite Conpniuiuivt Ran 4-21 eoo/eoo*d t609#SXVI SNOT iO Alia ZZ96 9L9 ZS6 ZOOZ.OZ'AVM c ■» Applicttion Dite: April 17,2002 00«Day Review Eipiratlon: June 16,2002 To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Hawn & Planning Commission Members Mike GafBron, Planning Director May 17,2002 ^02-2789 Dahlstrom Development. LLC, *‘2550" Wayzata Boulevard > Public Hearing for Proposed Residential/Commercial Development: 1) Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2) Rezoning 3) PUD Concept Plan Review Summar}' of Proposal Applicants propose to develop this 51-acre site via the Planned Unit Development process. Proposed uses include a mixture of residential housing types including 41 touiihome units, 82 **rowhouse"‘units, and 112 co-op condominium units; and approximately 38,000 s.f. of commercial space including grocery, retail and restaurant uses on the southeasterly 5 acres of the site. Orono Plaza, a Minnesota general partnership Dahlstrom Development, LLC Landform Kjolhaug Environmental Services Malkerson Gilliland Martin LLP “Orono Village” Propcrt>' Owner: Applicant/Dcvciopcr: Planner/Engineer/Surveyor: Wetland Consultant: Attorney: Proposed Development Name: Dahlstrom Development LLC has provided leners from property owners authorizing subminal of the application. List of Exhibits A - Lener from City ’s Planning Consultant, John Shardlow, AICP B • E.xcerpts from 1980 and 2000-2020 Community Management Plans (CMP) C - “Study A" and “Study D" D - Applicants Submittals: 1 - Cover letter 2 - Application forms 3 • Property Owner Authorizations 4 • 350' List of Neighboring Property Owners 5 - Plat Map 6 • Concept Stage Required Infonnation 7 - Orono Village Narrative 8 - Letter to MnDOT (Timerson) re: Stormwater Pond Expansion 9 - Stormwater Pond Memo #02-2789 Dahlstrom Development LLC May 17,2002 Page 1 of9 10 - Plan sheets: CO.l - Title Sheet Cl.) - Existing Conditions Cl.2 - E:<isting Slope Analysis & Drainage Pattern Plan C2.0 - Land Use and Zoning Plan C2.1 - Concept Plan C2.2 - Conceptual Design Guideline Plan C3.1 - Concept Excavation & Embankment Plan C3.2 - Concept Wetland Impact Plan C4.1 - Concept Utility Plan C5.1- Conceptual Plat C5.2 - Phasing Plan E - City Engineer’s Comments 1 t I. Summary of Required Approvals City review of this application necessarily involves a sequence of steps in which the Planning Commission will be asked to make recommendations and Council must ultimately reach a decision whether or not to grant approval. These steps include: Qmprehen^ive Pfan Amfmfment. The developer ’s proposal relies on successfully obtaining an amendment of the Community Management Plan (CMP) North of Kelley Parkway the site is currently guided for multi-family residential (MFR) use at a density of 3-6 units per acre. South of Kelley Parkway, the site is guided for Commercial uses - specifically professional offices, limited service uses, and retail uses accessory to the offices. The pnmary change requested is to allow multi-family residential use (row houses and c^do s) on the westerly 3/4 of the site south of Kelley Parkway, rather than commercial office use for which it is currently guided. A second and equally significant CMP change to allow a Considerably more intense level of retail uses at the northwest comer of 12/Willow than contemplated in the CMP, i.e. grocery, service retail and restaurant uses. Bfzoium. TTie entire site is currently zoned RR-1B. One Family Rural Residential . The area of c^erctal development is proposed to be rezoned to B-6 Highway Commercial District (PUD) Md tM residential component is proposed to be rezoned to RPUD Residential Planned Unit Development District. Planning Commission will be asked to review and make appropriate zoning districts for the uses that will be allovyed, and whether any proposed uses are inappropriate or require special conditions or limitations based on the standards for those d.stricts. me application is being processed as a Planned Unit Development, and actual rezoning of the property would not occur until completion of the Development Plan Approval stagt rocess ects ^DQ^neraKoncfpf Plan Approval. The first stage of the two-stage PUD review p.v. 15 the General Concept Stage, in which Planning Commission and Council review all^.„ of the proposed development. This is similar in scope to a combination of the sketch plan Md preliminary plat phases of a standard subdivision process. General Concept Plan Approval is the City s formal commitment to the development, which will be documented «a a Council resolution, hence all significant issues and concerns must be addressed at the General Concept Plan review stage. The General Concept Plan review will include review «sMtZrm«?nTbyouf ““ P'“. “ « review of the proposed Em Dmitpmm rifu Anr,,„l, in this final stage the developer will provide detailed plans for implementation of the approved General Concept Plan, as well as preliminary and final plat documents. Rezomng and formal amendment of the CMP will occur as part of #02-2789 Dahlstrom De%'ctopmcnt LLC May 17,2002 Page 2 of9 ...TcV.-j .... . ..w.v.ir.lia.r . ..V jv; 11. Review Process Planning Commission ’s review on May 20 should focus primarily on the proposed amendments to the CMP. The developer has presented the City with a concept plan that includes a level of detail which should allow Planning Commission to begin to visualize and understand the v arious plan elements. However, the primary focus of this initial review should be to analyze the basic concepts rather than the details. You should carefully consider the points made by the City’s planning consultant, John Shardlow (see Exhibit A). Planning Commission should follow this outline for reviewing the general concept elements of the plan: 1) Mixed residential component (density and layout) a) Townhouses . b) Rowhouses c) Condos 2) Retail component (types of uses, relationship to development and City goals) 3) Open space and recreation component (public and private) 4) Transportation (streets, sidewalks and trails component) For the May 20 public hearing Planning Commission should expect a relatively brief staff report and a 10-15 minute presentation by the applicants, followed by public comments. You should then consider the proposed CMP amendments and if possible, reach a recommendation on whether the amendment is appropriate or under what circumstances or conditions it is appropriate. Finally, you should start to define issues related to the Concept Plan. If you reach a conclusion regarding the CMP amendment, that specific item will be brought to Council on June 10 for consideration and action. III. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Discussion History The 1980 Orono Community Management Plan guided this property for single family residential use at a density of one unit per 2 acres. By the mid-1980’s, support was growing for widening of Highway 12 in-place, to accommodate growing traffic levels. In anticipation of development pressure along the Highway 12 corridor through Orono, a study was commenced in 1985 that resulted in an amendment of the CMP in 1987. The amendment brought the area from Highway 12 to County Road 6 between Willow Drive and Old Crystal Bay Road, into the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). This nearly vacant 190-acre area was identified in the 1987 CMP amendment as Property Area No. 3. #02-2789 Dahlstrom Development LLC May 17,2002 Pages of 9 J L No. 3 was rc-guided to allow a single tier of commercial uses along 12, to be accessed via a frontage road with no direct access to 12. North of the frontage road and up to the north line of Section 33 (i.e. the north boundary of the Dahlstrom property), multi-family uses at densities of up to 10 umts per acre could be allowed via PUD. Land to the north of Section 33 remained guided for rural density single family (1 unit per 2 acres) but was allowed to develop with sewer due to high The guided densities in this area were keyed in part to planned sewer capacities. Area No 3 was expected to require 300 to 450 total sewer units under the adopted plan amendment. A concept plan provided during the 1985 study by the Orono Plaza partners would have required up to 1200 sewer units; that intensive plan was considered to have the potential to place excessive burdens on sewer capacities, and was rejected. Four other schematics which varied the mix of commercial and multifamily uses were considered as feasible. Development of Area No. 3 has occurred more slowly than anticipated (perhaps in part due to uncertainty about the future of Highway 12). Of the 190 acres, the Orono Schools have acquired the northwesterly 55 acres for education uses; Willow View was developed residentially at a sewered 2-aicre density in the northeasterly 60 acres; the City has approximately 15-20 acres of the remainder- and only the Dahlstrom 50-acre site and two 2-acre parcels at the southwest comer remain to be developed. 2000-2020 CMP: OFFICF. VS RKTAH. Dunng Ae CMP update process during 1999-2000, Council and Planning Commission reconsidered Ae land use plan for the Highway 12 area. The 2000-2020 CMP envisions focusing retail development m a compMIdow-ntown area in Long Lake, and specifically limits retail development betw een Willow and Old Crystal Bay Road to small scale, accessory to the principal office use (but in this c«e. accessory to the residential). Orono ’s plan is to avoid pulling energy and development potential avray from the Long Lake downtown area, and to avoid retail uses that would draw high levels of tramc to the area w est of Willow Drive. This plan is based on a number ofcritical element as noted by Ron Moorse in a December 2001 work session memo: 1.The Cities of Orono and Long Lake have a joint vision of a downtown that serves both communities. The two cities are at or near a critical crossroads where a small number of key decisions could be the difference between reaching our joint vision Md making that joint vision impossible to achieve. These key decisions relate to the locations of key significant development projects, particularly retail development. 2.It is much easier and less expensive for developers to develop on vacant land than to redevelop a site with an e.xisting use. 3.If we have^ opportunity to get a high quality, high income generating retail use to ocate in this market area, we need to guide this use to a priority redevelopment location, rather than changing our comprehensive plan and zoning to allow it to take the path of least resistance. #02-2789 Dahktrom Development LLC May 17,2002 Page 4 of 9 4. The Long Lake/Orono retail market can only support a certain amount of higher valued, higher income generating retail uses, i.e., one grocery store, one pharmacy, etc. 5. If these types of uses are allowed to locate outside of the primary Long Lake downtown retail area, there will not be another opportunity to locate similar uses in the downtown area. 6. Every high quality retail use that is allowed to locate outside ofthe relatively compact downtown area near Brown Road has a dual negative impact on the Long Lake downtown area: a. b. It pulls retail energy and vitality away from the downtown area rather than adding its energy and vitality to the downtown area. The financial resources that could be generated by the use to facilitate the redevelopment of the Long Lake downtown area are lost. 7. Given the small retail market, a more compact downtown is more vital and viable over the long term than a linear retail area spread out along Highway 12. 8. Most third ring suburbs would give their right arm for a compact downtown that could be a focal point for the community, or are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to artificially create one. In downtown Long Lake we already have a compact downtown retail area with the huge bonus of being located adjacent to to a beautiful lake. Enabling this compact downtown area to realize its potential should be a much higher priority than facilitating retail development in any other area. 9. Given these strategic elements, it is critical that development decisions in Orono and Long Lake are made in a coordinated way that enables progress toward the shared vision. This will require a specific plan and adherence to this plan by both cities. The grocery store has been proposed as a retail element to provide the western ‘anchor’ to what would be a linear retail strip with its eastern end being downtown Long Lake. Staff sees this as being in complete conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. The developer is correct that a grocery store w ill serve as an anchor. Wliat this means is that it will draw other retail development to it, because other retailers want to tap into the high volume of customer traffic that a grocery store draws. The developer suggests that the substantial retail development a grocery store would draw to the Willow Drive area would work in tandem with the existing downtown Long Lake retail area to encourage and facilitate development/redevelopment of a vital, viable retail area stretching from downtown Long Lake to Willow Drive. Staff believes that contrary to this optimistic perspective, if a grocery store is located west of Willow' Drive, it will draw retail development out to the Willow Drive area, making the Willow Drive/Highway 12 area the focus of retail development/redevelopment, to the detriment of the existing downto\Cn Long Lake #02*2789 Dahlsirom Development LLC May 17,2002 • • Page 5 of9 retail area, and to the detriment of the plans of both Orono and Long Lake to redevelop the downto^ Long Lake area. It is much less risky to focus on strengthening the Long Lake downtown area and moving to the west only as the development potential in downtown is used up and the market is calling for more retail development; vs. creating a new retail node and hoping that the market isstrongenoughtonotonlysupport both thenewretailnodeand the existingdowntovvn areabut a so to enable redevelopment of the downtown area and redevelopment west of the do^vnto^vn ’ area to create a continuous retail area stretching from downtown Long Lake to Willow Drive. SOlIuroatly retomi«iid. .gainst amending the Comprehensive Plan to allow the grocers 2000-2020 CMP: RESIDENTIAL V.S OFFIPF The final CMP issue is to consider whether conversion from office to residential is apDroDriaie for areas south of Kelley Parkway. In recent years the City has had its plamting c^uTtSS dr^l[ concept plans for both areas as a guideline for discussions (see Exhibit C). Two of the concept ttlrp/ope^^.*' ° 8“'*' «l=«Wrs inquiring about "Study A" depicts 45-75 townhomes north of Kelley Parkway, in a manner that would maximize the use of most of the dry land. This depiction locates Kelley Parkway with a southerlycurve. “Study D“ depicts a minimized commercial area of Office uses to complement “Studv A” It ^ 2.5 acres, each with a 20-25.000 s.f office and ^sociated parking, with green space ranging from 28-43% per site. Study D suggests a much more aoDlLnt^^^n'h Parkway and Highway 12 than is proposed by the “ “fhe^ed:^?:;?' ■ ™ » Study D depicts 80-90,000 s.f. of office space in one- or two-story buildings south of Kellev S U?50 f * f" ““«• Kel! ^ r«idenlial/retail footprint is 190,000+ s.f. south of Kelley Parley, or toee times“he ^o^tlff building mass (not even accounting for height) than the City had been contemplating. #02-2719 Dahlslrom Development LLC May 17.2002 Page 6 of 9 --WI.'.ZL-vmxVr...______.-r:rSultt*a^ . -0»r"+ ;.-n-»rtWW+-e/T-vw-.-. From staffs perspective, the conversion from office to residential has pro ’s and con ’s. Curtly the market for office space is very weak, yet this parcel has been sitting for nearly 15 years without any action, and markets come and go. Does it make sense to wait for the office market to develop? What if the neighborhood retail was developed at 12AVillow with office south of Kelley further west? Remember also that the City has made a commitment to providing a wider range of li fecycle housing options, and this is one of only three areas in the City where the 2000-2020 CMP allows for the higher densities necessary to allow lifecycle housing to happen. Staff recommends that Planning Commission give careful consideration to the conversion from commercial office use to multifamily residential south of Kelley Parkway. IV. Concept Plan Discussion Punchlist Applicants have provided a detailed narrative describing the various elements of their proposal, and have provided the required submittals for the concept plan review (See Exhibits D-6 and D-7). Rather than reiterate this information, staff would offer the following punchlist of issues to be addressed if the concept review continues to move forward. Site Features: 1.The full wetland delineation report should be submitted for review by staff and City Engineer. 2.Should a tree survey be required for areas to be disturbed? This is not a specific City requirement, but is alluded to in Subdivision Code Section 11.60... the applicant should do some degree of review of existing stands of trees to confirm the extent of woodlands to be impacted and determine if any should be preserved... Development of Kelley Parkway: 3.Does the applicant’s proposal provide the “parkway” character intended by the City? Since Orono has not strictly defined the characteristics (landscaping, lighting, pedestrim walkways, bikeways, etc.) for Kelley Parkway, some attention should be given to this topic as part of the concept plan review... 4. The City Engineer in his preliminary comments indicates a traffic study should be completed. #02-2789 Dahlstrom Development LLC May 17,2002 Page 7 of 9 Proposed Residential Density and Housing Types: 5. 6. 7. impacts of higher density. The densities proposed for the Lofts are only allowable in the context of RPUD development that meets City housing goals. The Lon . were initially presented to staff as senior housing, but applicant indicates they are now intended for all age brackets. Planning Commission may wish to review the CMP Housing Element, specifically housing goals, to conclude whether the proposed density increases attributed to the Lofts and the rowhouses are supportable by meeting a defined housing goal of the City (affordability, lifecycle) Recreation and Open Space: Development Areas Analysis Site Area: Upland 38.4 acres Wetland 12.8 acres Gross Area: 51.2 acres Site Area by Proposed Use; Kelley Parkway 2.8 acres Commercial 5.0 acres 41 To^.■nhoInes n.o acres (2.4 units/ac) 5 acres (24.9 units/ac)Wetland, Open Space &. * Stomm'ater Mgmt. 12.1 acres (+ MnDOT Pond) 51.2 acres Overall Residential Density: 235 Units on 31.3 acres = 7.5 units/ac 2000-2020 CMP Planned Densities: -North of Kelley Parkway 3-6 units/ac -South of Kelley Parkway (Not designated; guided for __________commercial use) 8. d.vot«ltepublicp,*d«liSn^.^. «clusiv.of,h.are« 9. M2-2789 Dahtstrom Development LLC May 17.2002 Pages or 9 General Issues 10. The mix/variety of dwelling types is a positive aspect... building height is still a potential concern, elevation views would be helpful., please provide City with specific similar Landform developments we should visit comparable to proposal... 11. Maricet analysis for residential and commercial - developer should provide additional detail. Staff Recommendation As indicated above, the focus of review on May 20 should be on the proposed amendments to the Community Management Plan, saving discussion of details for future meetings. Staff strongly recotiunends against amending the Comprehensive Plan to allow the grocery store element of the development proposal, and suggests that Planning Conunission place significant focus on this element in its consideration of the concept plan. Plarming Conunission should determine whether the other proposed retail uses are appropriate. Staff recommends that Planning Conunission give careful consideration to the conversion from conunereial office use to multifamily residential south of Kelley Parkway. #02-2789 Dabbtrom Dcvdopmcal LLC May 17,2002 Pafa9ef9 OS/lS/2002 12:08 FAX 612337S601 DAGBLGR SHARDLOW L UBAN 121002 n,\i ii.(,;ria' SI I/\K1 )|,( A\' AN i) I ! 1 IAN IMCOliFe RATIO CONSULTING PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH SUITE 210 MINNEAPOLIS, MN SS401 612-339 3300 May 15.2002 Orono Planning Commission C/o Michael Gaffron, Planning Director City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323 RE: Orono Plaza PUD Concept Plan Dear Mike and Commission Members: At your request, vie have completed a cursory review of the Sketch Plan for the proposed Orono Plaza PUD. Let me begin by sa>ing that there are many very positive elements to this concept and some aspects of the design are very well conceived. There are numerous important details that would have to be addressed in the design refinement process. The normal human tendency is to leap to those details, because they are so important and we all want to make sure that they get identified. The problem b fiiat when all of these issues get thrown out, their relative importance gets obscured. The better approach is to focus on the fundamental issues first, and only after they have been addressed to your satisfaction, move on to the other details. There is no more fundamental issue than the fact that this proposed PUD is inconsistent with the Orono Comprehensive Plan. The proposed land uses to the south of the stretch of Kelley Parkway are Afferent than those shown on the adopted Land Use Plan. We strongly recommend that you focus on these inconsistencies first, and be as clear and direct as possible with the developer about what you could support and what you will not support, as departures from the adopted Plan. The adopted Plan does not allow retail and it does not show residential south of Kelley Paricway. For as long as 15 years ago, we have been aware of the City of Orono's resolve to guide the development of the Highway 12 Corridor aivay from an expansion of strip commercial extending from Long Lake. That resolve was reaffirmed in the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan. Some of the reasoning behind the Land Use Plan was to avoid the appearance and character of strip commercial and another important aspect was to support ^e economic health of Downtown Long Lake as it redevelops. -A 05/18/2002 12:00 FAX 6123378601 DAGHLGR SHAROLOW 0 UBAN Q003 The propos^ PUD would address a significant part of that concern by introducing n^dcntiaJ along Ae western end of the corridor. With the change in role and funclion of ra 12, when the byjass is constructed, there may be a good rationale behind the change to residenbal use. The retail uses in the northwest comer of TH 12 and Willow Road. i^evdoi^ for ^wntowi. Un* Lake. He prapoaed reaUurant end some hmiM letul^d be a go^ complimeot to the rest of the developiiient and not detract sipuficantly ^in Long ^e. No one should be expecting that even limited retail could be nyiport^by the developorat itself. It will need to draw flora the broader coraraunity m order to l» successfiU, but .t still should maximize the opportunity to connect with tta adjacent residential area. In summap^, the pro]wsed PUD show promise and has many elements that we find very poauve. TTiere « also numerous design detaUs that need to be addressed, but they ne<^ to ^ m Ime behind the major issues. TTiose fundamental issues are related to land use and the inconsistencies with the adopted Land Use Plan. It ultimately does the develooers no service to beat around the bush, or spend a couple of hours discussing derign details If you can support residential along the corridor, if well designed and configu^ then ’ ^d that message. Be as dear as possible in identifying the criteria that you will be using to judge a successful design, .^so be as clear as possible about your feelings about retail m general and a grocery store in particular. The developers need to understand wiiere they stand on these key issues and the sooner the better. We would welcome the opportunity to help the City with any aspect of this process. Sincerely, Dahlgren, Shardlow, A Uban. Inc. Jo^^I^hardlow, AICP I^l^dent and Director of Planning .V 1 CMP Part 3B. Land Use Plan s- extent limited by environmental constraints, each such development must be analyzed and reviewed on an individual basis. The properties identified for residential development at densities of 2-6 units per acre include properties guide-planned fdr such use as a result of Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 in 1988, as well as properties heretofore planned for single family development at rural densities. All identified properties are located relatively high in the Lake Minnetonka watershed, allowing ample opportunity for effective stormwater management. These properties are detailed in the following tables and maps. Site Description: SITE A (Parcel Group 1, Map3B-7) 50-acre parcel located north of Highway 12 between Willow Drive and Old Crystal Bay Road Background, Site Characteristics A number of potential development schemes for this parcel which included townhomes and commercial development were reviewed in 1987 which became the basis for CMP Amendment #2 adopted May 23. 1988. This site was not subsequently developed, with the exception that ^e City of Orono municipal facilities were developed at the west end of the parcel in 1991. A development option for the vacant parcel was generated by the City's consulting plaimer, DSU Inc., in 1998 at the City's request, taking into account new information including the new MnDOT stormwater pond; City's new topography maps suggesting greater areas of wetland than previously anticipated; and the initial development of Kelley Parkway that established a service road corridor at the west end. The intent of this plan set was to show how townhomes and a small number of commercial sites might be developed. Planned Development Parameters The result of the 1987 study was adoption of a plan with the following components: a. An east-west service road will be developed connecting Old Crystal Bay Road and Willow Drive, located approximately 300-SOO feet north of Highway 12. This service road will allow for one tier of developable lots bet>\'een the service road and Highway 12, such lots to have access to the service road but not to Highway 12 due to traffic considerations. b. The portion of the property between Highway 12 and the service road may be developed with one tier of commercial uses, to potentially include professional office as well as limited service uses, and retail uses accessory to the office use. c. The portion of property north of the service road may be developed for residential uses, potentially a mix of single family and multi-family uses at a density of 3-6 units per dry buildable acre. d. Conversion frOrh 2-acre rural zoning to to the mixture of uses described above will be subject to strict performance standards which were added to the Orono Zoning Code in 1989. City of Orono Community Management Pian Septmber 2000 Page 3B-34 ----- CMPPartSB. Land Use Plan \ 'v 8. \A more compact community scale retail area matches Ae design of new Highway 12 with no interchanges Ihr^gh Long Lake. 9. Limits the impact on north/south roadways (i.e. i^reased trafTic^d activity levels) as compared to the mo;e intense *‘big bo^y retail uses. 10. Maintains a^lower activity level in the area ^est of Willow Drive. 11. Would create leu pressure for providipg an access from new High\N*ay 12 to tne retail area. Accordingly, this area should be developed with a mix of commercial uses including retail, serviceVwd ofR'ce components. Access via a service road paralleling Highw^,12 should still be required rather than direct access to Highway 12l since existing traffic levels along Highway 12 are expected to reihairiat a level which makes direct all* way access difficult and dangerous. / / The Highway 12 re-rqufe ("proposed Highway 12") w’hen completed in approximately 2007 will have a signifiqmit impact on access for this area, becaus^ burrent Highway 12 tramc levels are expected to increase betw^ now and 2007, then should ^op dramatically when the Bypass oiwns. However, traffic levels on "ord Highway 12" after 2007 are e)(^cted to again creep upward, and the nmg-term need for a servi^oad may again manifest itself. For this r^on, it is in the best unerests of the City and the business communit^o preserve at lea^a partial service road corridor between Brown Roao^d Willow Un future use, that will provide all properties with ac(^s options ^ther than direct access from Highway 12. The City supports the development of a "mid-point" connection to Highway 12 o^tly across from Brimhall Avenue, such access to be at least a ri^t-in, right-out configuration. Further, if and when the service road is constructed, all other existing accesses directly to Highw ay 12 should ultima tely he removed 2. Property abutting the north side of existing Highway 12 from Willow Drive to Old Crystal Bay Road. This area (shown on Map 3B-7 as the ^commercial* portion of Parcel Group 1) currently b vacant property, comprised of 3 tax parcels with some 2600 feet of Highway 12 frontage. As part of the 1989 Comprehensive Plan amendment, the City guided the portion of this area directly adjacent City of Orooo Community Management Pton Pagc3B-39 * ■ • , •' • • CMPPart3B. LaadVfcPIan to the north side of Highway 12 for commercial development At that time, the City was not clear about the type of commercial development diat should be planned for this area. Through joint discussions with the City of Long Lake regarding development along Highway 12, the City has determined that the optimum development in this area would be ofGce development Office development can provide services for Orono residents, can provide facilities for businesses owned by Orono residents, and can provide quality employment opportunities. The development of this area for office use versus retail use enables the Highway 12 retail area to remain a more compact pedestrian-friendly retail area versus a non-cohesive extended strip of retail development Access to all office uses will be via a service road connecting Willow Drive and Old Crystal Bay Road, with no direct access points onto Highway 12. Development of this service road began in 1991 with the extension of Kelley Parkway eastward from Old Crystal Bay Road. The City's intent is to have a single tier of office uses between Kelley Parkway and Highway 12, with primarily residential uses north of the service road. Due to construction of a stormwater retention pond by MnDOT midway between Old Crystal Bay Road and Willow, and the City's intent to develop the area north of the service road residentially at a density of 2-6 units per acre, the opportunities for large office sites are limited. As many as six 2-2.5 acre office sites can be developed along the Highway 12 frontage while still allowing the intended residential development to occur. This area is guided for office use with minor retail and service uses allowed only as accessory uses to the office use. "Big box" retail uses will not be flowed within this area. City af OroBO CoBmaalty MaDagtncat Plan Piia3B-40 J Study A - Maximized Multi-Family > 45-75 townhome units on 45 acres Four 2-plus acre commercial sites along Hwy 12 -• ■^WvOi‘>P-»<• :! ) JVclUiti § WtlU»Ji Lm I I ^ fcrliwii Lots 8-@- ! Ut3 oOooo COOOO Wajitla BWd. lluRi]^ Family Rcsld^tial WtIteM* @ I S-8-® fi) (8 ) I® ® u WctlasJ Mitigailoa WclUflds cSfcJE m PO Ltd ti^ Hw/. U Ut3 2JAc. Office 25.000 Sq. Ft • 2 Stories 132 Parking Spaces 34% Omen Space Ut4 2.1 Ac. Office 21.000 Sq. Ft 114 Parking Spaces 43% Oteen Space Lots 2.2 Ac. Office 22.000 Sq.Ft-2 Stories 111 Parking Spaces 32% Green Space Lots 2.7 Ac. Office 19.000 Sq. Ft 1 17 Parking Spaces 2S% Oreen Space I i City Of Orono Hwy. 12 Study D JLTL^ • m wm m Study D - Minimized Commercial Area: Office Uses Four 20-2S»000 sf office buildings on 2.5-acre sites ► Multi-family residential north of road is undefined, but more area available than in Study C LANDFORM April 17,2002 Michael Gaffron City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE: Orono Village PUD Concept Plan. Commercial Site Plan, Sketch Plat, Rezoning and Land Use Guide Plan Amendment Submittal Dear Mr. Gaffron, On behalf of our client, Landform is pleased to submit this application for PUD concept stage plan, commercial site plan, sketch plat, rezoning and land use guide plan amendment for property located at the northwest comer of the intersection of Willow Drive and Highway 12. We are requesting approval of a PUD concept stage plan/site plan and sketch plat for the Orono Village mixed-use development. The plan includes a mix of 235 housing units, including low-density townhomes north of Kelley Parkway, rowhouses south of Kelley Parkway and the Lofts in the southwest corner of the site. We are also proposing approximately 38,000 square feet of commercial development on the southeast comer of the property. Our proposal includes construction of the planned Kelley Parkway in the first phase of development. We are requesting approval of a reguiding from Commercial to Urban Residential Medium Density (SFR/MFR) for approximately 7.22-acres and a reguiding from Urban Residential Medium Density to Commercial for 0.49-acres of this 51-acre site to allow development of the rowhouses and the Lofts south of Kelley Parkway, townhomes north of Kelley Parkway, and commercial In the southeast comer of the site, as shown on the attached plans. The land use guide plan amendment is also required to accommodate the proposed location of Kelley Parkway. We have shifted this street slightly north to accommodate the topography, wetlands and align with the existing curb cuts. The proposed Orono Village project would require a rezoning from Single Family Rural Residential (RR-1B) to Residential Planned Unit Development District (RPUD) and Highway Commercial District (B-6) with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay district. The rezoning would be required in order to comply with the existing land use plan and the requested reguiding. If the City approves the requested reguiding, rezoning, sketch plat and PUD concept stage plan/site plan, we would prepare the required PUD master plan and plat applications for development of the site. •SO BUTLf ft NORTH BUILDING SlO FIRST AVCNUC NOfl OFFICC: BlXaS2.B070* FAX: •t2.2Sj7BGr MctwilGaffitM P*g«2 R«: Orono ViBag* SutonWat _____ Aphi ir, 2002 We request ai^roval of the land use guide plan amendment rezonIng. PUD concent staoe plan, commerc^l site plan and sketch plat It is my understandina that thie schecMs^Pla^ Commisslan on ^m eiMsa^ro®"^ " comments, please contact me or Steve Johnston at Sincerely, UNDFORM* indra Lindahl. AlCP Planner COPY: Terry Dahlstrom, Dahlstrom Development LLC *Landtonn Enginaaring Company doing bgsinm u Landfenn 690 BUTLER NORTH BUILOtNO S10 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MlWEAPOUS. MN BV403 OFFICE: 612.2S2J070 FAX* 612^92:6077 wwwjm/7 Q r • • • ! Application U 0^ ^ «^7 Date Received"" Amount Paid cx> CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION!. Site Address ' tvMfr itODclType of Application to be Filed PUI^ (W ________ ___ Property Identification Number CP.I.D.) II8 " 33 -i/ Obo'^ APPLICAW . » I I . i Phene (home) Name Daht^OM l>eoe.lOpiy>ei^T LLC Phone (wodc) Gf3»37S*-Cna V Address Po)g.W^ Lgr\^ City Kgplf Zip 1 I OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) . •_________. Name Ornnn P\a’ZCL' faiA^iToH fi>t\ert/fod^hoBe (work) 9S2- 7//V Address /.<co p;v rvi City Zip A"5VZV-/CO/ ^ UVO+- tihTCcV- ® ------ y—-g V rA .T Date Property Acquired I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. _ (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request wth CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) ' $225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ____$325.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _____$2S0.0P Land Alteratioa • Grading and ^ling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change firom original application) After-the-Fact Fee • Double Ciment Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS y $275.00 Commercial Site Plain Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____ $200.00 Easement Vacation $100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) y $375.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals _____Other - see Fee Schedule IL required submittals 1- ±^CompIeted AppUcaUon Form Describe request in detail.2. 3. 4. ■■ ■ --------------U^UUl. • ~ - -f« «. handout for »«vnx changes in elevation (grades). contoura) if land alterations involve 6. 7. 8. 9. --------------- ^ r-----VVAaauU^ ^ changes in elevation (grades). o::5s? •"^ Coiistniction plan, if appUcable Sc s^ “? oTt^r^pil^r «« or ,o.er m — FOR REPRODiraTON*(fl^^^7l! j^h^^rci^&rrhoTi^-^r - - £^1meri«?sS? ^0 W“ AppU^on is complete. •---------—__________________Date APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE «K)/or unusual e^^ T Applicanfs OWNER’S SIGNATURE memhera for P^'T^ofL^ifk^^f Dwnet^s signature. Date B r ?■ ^ «^>»lo. M«i„. eheduled review meetines of Ac PlLL Applicwu must be present at 2l cheduled meetln,. please*^^! '! “ o iuildiog & Zoning OITice of this change prior to tite meeting. ^ *" ****** •*** // a ,f*v, 7 0 >) i 7 •7'****/ *• mT i •../ tC.J J ■r; O'p*. 'SW • ’O <s=> . t r^mwn<.9<arm^»^-,i «<• 1 • • 4 •0 •% ^ • Application f Dale RecelTC^ Amount Paid jaf . CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATlp Siteaddress m.PropertyIdentificatioaNumber(PID) -il- ooq~> Please check one - Property /C As^tot toitcM? ^ Attach legal description to application. APPUCANT Address m-i^ Ln t^g______________ Phone (home) • —^yVxQlg QfOU<L Zip;SSji£Phone(woik) ’OWNER (if different than wplicant) Nam e Oronn Address _ M^C3U _________Phone (hom^ City M>r\/\egLOi9l.-<^ f Affn*. T2>M tslvee-V PhoneTh (attach list if more than one) Zip Phone (work) ^5 ^ “ 933 '1\ EXISTING LAND USE Ntimber of Tax Parcels Development Size / Present i^e (check) Present Zoning District Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify) PROPOSAL ________ Division for Tax Purposes _________ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) X Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites ______^ Existing Units New Units •I. :. Proposed Gross Density S.T Minimum Lot Size cfpr Proposed Use (check) ___V Total Units • • __Units vtt4K Acres tf <?d&ieiv4»*a^ __Sq.Ft DiyBuildableLand __Residentid _Other (specify)' goMMgrr rziA ■^Additional Owner: Anna ton Ella Braun Charitable Remainder Trust*Sir?*#2789 • • MINnvilIM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION y Payment off«es(referto"appIic«ion fees" listed below. PLICATION y. Completed appUcadoo form. y ■ Plelimmaiy plat infoimation on Certificate of Survey. MNIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPUCATION 3. Title opuion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter cf Credit Zoning Official's Signature ____________________________________ L APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check PQ diose which apply) A. ^pUcadoo Base Fees:. MpUcaHoo Base Fees: Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & m) S275.00 ____Subdivision of a Lot Line Reanangement S3S0.00 ___ Subdivision Application (Class I &n)J350.00 ----- Preltainaor Subdivision AppUcadon $400.00 + S30.00/lot (Class m & aU non-residential) ___ Ftnal Plat Applicarion (Class ID) $225.00 * ___ Legal Review and Filbg: ______Subdivision only $100.00 Subdivision w/easements and covenants min. $200.00 Totals 23£j2^ Park Fees (to be detemined per Section 11.62) Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) ^9 A MM A A m A V .A ^ i _ _ # BRenewal of C ass I^and H Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) Renewa of Class m. Preliminaiy Subdivision ApplicaHon $200.00 (No change from bridal appUcation) Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application $ 150.00 (No change from original ap^icadon) ^ B. Special Improvement Fees: _____ Proposed Private Roads $650.00+ $J0/lineal ft; _____ Proposed Public Roads $950.00 + $.50/lineal ft; _ ____ - -__________^ ^ _ A A A _ lio.ftx.50-$ lin.ftx.50-$ Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $950.00 Proposed Sanitary Sewer Mam Extension $275.00 + $25/stub Proposed Watermain Extension $275.00 + $25/stub Proposed Stonn Sewer System (excluding culverts) $250.00 On-Site System, Site Evaluadon Review (applicable to rural subdivbion applicadons) $60.00/per lot x_____new lots C. Flexible Application Fces/Misc. Fees _____ Variance $250.00 (550.00 per each additional variance) _____ Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $100.00 _____ PRD Applicarion with Subdivision $35.00/Dwelling Unit **'°^‘‘* *" r^u^ed by the Zoning Administrator. City Engineer, City Attorney. ordinMce^*'""'****”” Council necessary to process this appheadon and further agrees to pay all addidonal fees established by Date 3 Owner's Signature Date J ^ ^ $5 Q s •• ;% 1 I/O GITYof ORONO Mnnldpal Offices StmlMdrass: 2750 IWicy Paitany Oronoi MN 55356 MaiUBg Uinta: P.O. e« 66 CiysUI Bay. MN 55323-0066 DATA PRIVArV ADVISORY In accordance with M.S. 13.04, Subd. 2, "Rights of subjects of data", we would like to inform you that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential information. You are notified that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2.You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3.The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4.If your requested permit or license requires Council action to approve, some information may b^ome public. 5.You have certain rights under M.S. 13.04 (see following page) to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name is required to process this application or permit. First Middle Last T^eoe.ioptYV;r\.4- LLC Pr:)\Qrr,s LAY\e Address ' * MK3 City State srs3ii U9-31S- Zip Phone I understand my rights as stated above. /Signature Tdephoae (612) 249*4 O fit i /; r\. •• March 11.2002 Michad Gaffron OtyofOrono 2750 Kelley Parkway OrorK). MN 55356 RE: Orono Village Submittal Dear Mr. Gaffron: I hereby authorize and agree to this applicabon and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members and Council members for the purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Sincerely. Orono Plaza, a Minnesota general partnership Owner's Signature:Date #27 i J i; March 11.2002 Michael Gaffron CItyof Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 RE: Orono Village Submittal Dear Mr. Gaffron: iS'aS^I ^ ^ .S?StanS! a22IS.'of membeni for the purposes of bivestigalfon and varillcaUon Sincerely. Gilbert C. Braun Gilbert C. and Anna Lou Ella Braun Charitable Remainder Tnjst Owner's Slanaturer^iLaerju^^ '^r-ril Dale ,r. 3. <8 . HUN DATE 01/17/t2 N£NN£P1N COUNTY fHOfCRTY INFORIUTION SYSTEN PROPEHTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PXA3M01 PACE 30 / BATCH 50A OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 30 27*110-23 33 0009 00700 DICKEY LAKE OR ABRANAN THONAS AORAHAH THOfUS 700 DICKY LAKE DR LONG LAKE NN 55350 30 27-110-23 33 0010 00770 DICKEY LAKE DR C D LEIRCUHA 0 J N LEUKUNA CHARLES D 0 JILL N LEUKUNA 770 DICKEY LAKE DR LONG LAKE NN 55350 30 20-110-23 03 0005 00770 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO N XND SCHOOL DXST 0270 CORONOI ATTN SUPERINTENDENT XND SCHOOL DXST 0270 lORONOI 665 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD II LONG .AKE HN 55350 L PROP AODR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR 30 20-110-23 03 000^ OOiQ 00000 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO N XND SCHOOL.DXST NO 270 im SCHOOL DXST NO 270 ADHXN OFFXCE-SUPERXNTENOENT 000 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO N LONG LAKE HN 55356 30 20-110-23 00 0002 00005 WILLOW WXEW DR D 0 SAIfS I N J SANS DOUGLAS B B NARY J SANS 1105 LONA LINDA AVE ORONO NN 55300 30 20-110-23 00 0003 00025 WILLOW VIEW DR LE6RAN CORP LE6RAN CORP 1521 90TH LA N E BLAXNE NN 55009 OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 30 20-110-23 00 0000 00005 WXUOW VIEW DR WXUOW VIEW DEVELOPERi LLC WXLLOW VIEW DEVELOPERS LLC 1521 90TH LA N E HPLS NN 55009 30 20-110-23 00 0005 00005 WXUOW VIEW OR WXUOW VXEW DEVELOPERS LLC WILLOW VXEW DEVELOPERS LLC 1521 90TII LA N E HPLS NN 55009 30 20-110-23 00 0006 00005 WXLLOW VXEW DR WXLLOW VXEW DEVELOPERS LLC WXLLOW VXEW DEVELOPERS LLC 1521 90TH LA N E HPLS NN 55009 e L PROP ADOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 30 20-110-23 00 0007 00905 WXLLOW VXEW DR HANS P 0ER6H/SHAR0N P BERGH HANS P A SUSAN P BERGH 10009 CIUTHAN CT N BURNSVILLE NN 55337 SO 20-110-23 00 0010 00030 ADDRESS UNASTTGNED WXLLOW VIEW DEVELOPERS LLC WXLLOW VXEW DEVELOPERS LLC 1521 90TH LA N E HPLS NN 55009 30 20-110-23 00 0020 00030 ADDRESS UNASSXGNEO WXLLOW VXEW DEVELOPERS LLC WXLLOW VXEW DEVELOPERS LLC 1521 70TH LA N E HPLS NN 55009 OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 30 33-110-23 11 0003 00030 ADDRESS UNASSXONED ORONO PLAZA ORONO PLAZA C/0 REXERS60RD LAW OFFICE 0500 00TH ST W NPLS NN 55020 30 33-110-23 12 0007 02700 KELLEY PKWY N R A CITY OF ORONO H R A CITY OF ORONO 1335 BROWN RO S WAYZATA NN 5539' 30 33-110-23 12 0000 02705 KELLEY PKWY WILLOW PROPERTIES WILLOW PROPERTIES C/0 ALBERT B YNGVE 0535 BIG RXCE LAKE DR N RENER NN 56672 PROP ADOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR 30 33-110-23 13 0002 02607 WAYZATA BLVD W ACE PROPERHES LLC ACE PROPERTIES LLC 5500 ANDERSON ESTATES RO NAPLE PLAIN NN 55359 30 33-110-23 13 0010 02725 WAYZATA BLVD W VEDA INC VEDA INC PO BOX 375 LONB LAKE NN 55356. 30 33-116-23 13 0015 02605 WAYZATA BLVD W ORB RO LLC DRB 00 UC C/0 BUSCH/FREDRXCKSON/BYRON 900 2ND AVE S 1100 XNTRHL CT HPLS NN 55002 #9789 .. «» f % k4.ru. I MW SATE tl/17/«2 MTCH 5M HEfWEPlN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIA35401 PAGE 37 PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TARPAYER NAME/AODR 30 3A«110-23 22 RRRS •07M OICKEY LAKE DR P A K PUOM PATRICK ■ KAREN PUGH 72S OICKEY LAKE OR LOIffi LAKE MN 5S35L 30 3A-I10>23 22 ••■9 •07S5 OICKEY LAKE OR T 6 ESAU ANA ESAU TERRANCE G A NARY A ESAU 755 OICKEY LAKE OR LONG LAKE MN 55350 SO 30-110-23 22 0010 00705 OICKEY LAKE OR JANES FENSKE JAMES E FENSKE 705 OICKEY LAKE OR LONG LAKE MN 55350 c PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR SA 30-110-23 22 0010 02350 MAVZATA OLVO W CAL OTTEN CLIFFORD A LOUISE OTTEN OOX 209 LONG LAKE MN S53S0 SO 30-110-23 22 OOlO 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED CAL OTTEN CLIFFORD A LOUISE OTTEN OOX 209 LONG LAKE MN 55350 30 30-110-23 22 0020 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED CAL OTTEN CLIFFORD A LOUISE OTTEN SOX 209 LONG LAKE IM 55350 PROP ADDR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 72 33-110-23 10 0011 02000 INOUSTRIAL OLVO M ETCO PROPERTIES INC ETCO PROPERTIES INC 15500 MAVZATA OLVO JI750 MAVZATA MN 55391 72 33-110-23 10 0012 02020 INDUSTRIAL BLVO N LUSE AND SON INC SAFEWAY STORAGE INC 2020 M INOUSTRIAL BLVO LONG LAKE MN 55350 72 33-110-23 10 0015 02030 INOUSTRIAL BLVD H ETCO PROPERTIES INC ETCO PROPERTIES INC 15500 MAVZATA BLVO B750 MAVZATA MN 55391 PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAVER NAME/AOOk 72 33-110-23 10 0020 02055 INOUSTRIAL OLVO M LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO FREO NANUS 15001 WEST OAKS MINNETONKA MN 55305 72 33-110-23 10 0021 02 i05 INOUSTRIAL BLVO M LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO FRED MANUS 15001 MEST OAKS MINNETONKA MN 55305 72 33-110-23 10 0025 .02010 INDUSTRIAL BLVO N SVSTEH CAPITAL REAL PROP CRP MC DONALDS CORPORATION P 0 BOX 00207 AMF OHARE CHICAGO IL 00000 PBOP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAVER NAME/AODR 72 33-110-23 10 0020 02000 INDUSTRIAL BLVO M SPEEOMAV SUPERAMERICA LLC SPEEOMAV SUPERAMERICA LLC C/O PROPERTY TAX RECORDS 539 MAIN ST S FINOLAV OH 05000 72 30-110-23 23 0001 02399 MAVZATA oLVO M GEORGAVN C KRAMER GEORGAVN C KRAMER 2990 SUMMER SET LA LONG LAKE MN 55350 72 30-110-23 23 0002 02305 MAVZATA BLVO M* R E 0 B M MAUGEN ET AL OSCAR SEYEO t HOUR! MAXINZ 5905 BERNARD PL EDINA MN 55030 e (. PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 72 30-11B-23 23 0003 02305 MAVZATA BLVO M R C B B H MAUGEN ET AL OSCAR SEYEO 0 HOURI HAKINI 5905 BERNARD PL EDINA MN 55030 TOTAL BATCH 500 00030 an HUM OATC n/l7/$Z BATCH SM L L L > ^( 28 28-118-23-43-0011 2680 KELLEY PKWY CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPEHTV INPORNATXON SVSTEN PROPERTY OWICRS LIST REPORT NO. PXOMOX* PAO£ SO I CERTXFV THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATXON OF XNFORNATXON AS IT APPEARS THXS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPXN COUNTY DCPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TAXATXON, TO THE BEST OF HY RN0HLE06E AND DELXEF DATE f • ti . • i. .X - / 1* PUD CONCEPT STAGE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS We have reviewed the PUD concept stage plan submittal requirements as outlined in Section 10.53 of the Zoning Ordinance. In order to simplify City review of the submittal, we have noted each submittal requirement and identified where this information can be found or, in cases were the information is not yet available, when the information will be submitted. 1. Preliminary f^at and information required by subdivision Title. A sketch plat has been prepared to provide the City with a general idea of how the property will be platted for this development; however, the preliminary plat is not included in this submittal package. Following City Council approval of this application package, Landform will prepare a preliminary plat, final plat and PUD development stage plan application for review and approval. 2. General Information a. The landowner's name and address and his interest in Uie subject property. The subject property is owned by Orono Plaza, a Minnesota general partnership. The landowner may reached at: Orono Plaza Attn: Tom Reiersgord Relersgord Law Firm 4500 West 44** Street Minneapolis. MN 55424-1001 An undivided interest for the southeast 7.41 acres of the property has been conveyed to Gilbert C. and Anna Lou Ella Braun Charitable Remainder Trust, pursuant to an u 'recorded deed. Mr. Braun is also a partner in Orono Plaza. The applicant’s name if different from the landowner Dahlstrom Development LLC is the applicant. c.The names and addresses of all professional consultants who have contributed to the development of the PUD plan being submitted, including attorney, land planner, engineer and surveyor $• • I u J } . 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILOINO 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55403 OFFICE: 612.252.9070 FAX’612.252.6077 wMfw.landfonn.rat Mchad Gaffron Pag* 2 of 6 Planner Landform 510 First Avenue North. #650 Minneapolis, MN 55403 Phone: 612.252.9070 Fax: 612.252.9077 Engineer Landform 510 First Avenue North, #650 Minneapolis. MN 55403 Phone: 612.252.9070 Fax: 612.252.9077 Surveyor Landform 510 First Avenue North, #650 Minneapolis, MN 55403 Phone: 612.252.9070 Fax: 612.252.9077 Re: PUD Concept Plan Stage Submittal Requirements Apr* 17.2002 Wetland Consultant Kjolhaug Environmental Services 28105 Wild Rose Lane Shorewood. MN 55331 Phone: 952.401.8757 Fax: 952.401.8798 Attorney Malkerson Gilliland Martin LLP Suite 1500 AT&T Tower 901 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402-3205 Phone: 612.344.1111 Fax: 612.344.1414 d. Ewdence that the applicant has sufficient control over the property to fectuate Oje proposed PUD, Muding a statement of all legal, b^dal tenamy and contractual mieresls held In or Electing the subject property and rncMrng an up-todate certUed abstract of title or registered pr^^ mport 3. Present S*atus a. The ff fdress and legal description of the property. te^a^s assigned. The legal description D^?rtr?or,yHrT^ Pro^rties Addition, except parcel 201 and 201a Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 27-57. 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDING 510 FIRST AVEl #2789 NORTH MINNEAPoS. bW 55403^ OFFICE: 612.252.9070 FAX 612.252.9077 www.land1onn nat Mkhael Gaffron P«9e3of6 Re: PUD Concept Plan Stage Submittal Requirements April 17. 2002 The existing zoning classiTication and present use of the subject property and ail lands wiUiin 1,000 feet of the property. The subject property is currently vacant and zoned RR-1B. The property to the north and east is guided Rural Residential, zoned RR-1B/RPD and RR-1B, respectively, arKi developed with single family homes. The property to the east, south of Kelley Parkway extended, is guided commercial, zoned B^ (Highway Commercial) and developed with commercial uses including Often Brothers Nursery. The property to the south, across Highway 12 in the City of Long Lake, is guided Commercial and IrKjustrial, zoned B-2A, M and I-2 and developed with a mix of retail commercial, service retail and Industrial uses. The property to the southeast, across Highway 12 In the City of Orono, is guided Industrial and zoned Industrial. The property to the west is guided Public/Semi-Public and Commercial and is zoned RR-1B. The property guided Public is developed as Orono City Hall and Public Works and the property guided Commercial is currently vacant. We have included sheet C2.0 in the submittal package to identify the existing uses, land use and zoning on the surrounding properly. c.A map depicting the existing development of the property and all land wiUiin 1,000 feet thereof and indica^ng the location of existing streets, property lines, easements, watermains and storm and sanitary sewers with invert elevations on and within one hundred feet of the property. The subject property is currently vacant. We have included an existing conditions map in the submittal package (sheet Cl .1). d.A written statement generally describing the PUD and the market which it is intended to serve and its demand showing its relationship to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and how the proposed PUD is to be designed, arranged and operated in order to permit the development and use of neighboring property in accordance with the applicable regulations of the City. A narrative describing the Orono Village project is included in the submittal package. e.Site Conditions. Graphic reproductions of the existing site conditions on a scale of one inch equals one hundred feet. \C The existing conditions map is included on sheet C1.1 of the attached plans.oc f. Schematic drawing of the proposed development concept including but not limited to the general location of major circulation elements, public and _ _ _ • me 0 • ^comrrron open space, residential and other land uses. The PUD concept stage plan/site plan is included in this submittal package (sheet C2.1). W ‘ 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDING S10 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 95403 OFFICE; 612.252.9070 FAX 612 252 9077 WMw.landfomt net 'Hh;- Mkhad Gaffron Page 4 of 6 Re: PUD Concept Plan Stage Submittal Requirements _______________________April 17.2002 A statement of the estimated tote/ number of dwelling units proposed for the PUD and a tabulation of the proposed approximate allocations of land use expressed in acres and as a percentage of the total project area, which shall include at least the following: L Area developed to residential uses. Orono VillsQG would includo 235 nrisrkGt rsto honriGS In 3 v3ilGty of housino styiGS. ApproximatGly 42 acros of this 51-acrG parcGl will 5g dGvotGd to townhomGs, rowhousGS and thG Lofts. ThG ramaindGr of thG site is dedicated to streets and limited, neighborhood commercial. a. Area developed to residential by building type. •Approximately 30 acres of property north of Kelley Parkway are planned for 41 townhomes. 8 acres of property in the center of the site are planned for 82 rowhouses, and 4 acres of property in the southwest comer of the site are planned for 112 units in the Lofts. Hi. Area devoted to common open space. We have provided a Town Square in the commercial area and a Village N-.reen near the Lofts. Both of these common areas are intended to encourage use by the residents of the neighborhood and visitors. The Town Square will be a community gathering space where Orono residents can linger over a cup of coffee or Ice cream and visit with friends and neighbors. The Orono Village association would maintain both of these areas, which total approximately 0.6 acres. Our concept plan and sketch plat includes common lots over the wetland areas and surrounding the townhomes. as well as outlets for the private drives and private streets. The total area for the common open space areas, common lots and outlets is 28.5 acres. iv. Area devoted to public open space. No public open space is proposed. The current plan shows a large portion of the site as common open space with private trails and sidewalks throughout the development. While these trails will be maintained by the Orono Village, they will be open to use by the public. Given the proximity of a number of public spaces at the City Hall complex and school facilities, a large public open space within this development would be redundant. However, we have provided public trails along Kelley Parkway. Willow Drive and Highway 12 Additionally, we have retained large wetland areas within the development and have provided private trails around those features. The private trails and sidewalks within Orono Village will be maintained by the HOA. /• # I • • • ^ C A V •- * •* 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDING 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55403 OFFICE: 612.252.9070 FAX 612 252.9077 wmw landform.nel • • • Mtohad GaRron PaMSoce Re: PUD Concept Plan Stage Submittal Requirements Apra 17.2002 V. /Approximate area devoted to streets. Approximately 2.8 acres of the property would be dedicated to Kelley Parkway, a public street, arxl 2.8 acres would be devoted to the private streets located in the proposed outlets. Vi.Approximate area devoted to, and number of, off-street parking and loading spaces and related access. The concept plan shows general compliance with City's minimum parking standards. The townhomes and rowhouses have a minimum of two packing stalls for each unit as required by the Zoning Ordinance. In addition to the two dedicated parking stalls for each unit, additional guest parking is provided in the townhome driveways and 46 on-street parking spaces on the private streets adjacent to the rowhouses. The commercial area would also comply •with the City parking requirements. The Lofts would have one underground parking space per unit plus surface parking. We believe the proposed parking would be more than adequate for this use. The concept plan shows 99 surface parking spaces at the Lofts and 271 surface parking spaces in the commercial area. The total area devoted to these surface parking stalls is approximately 1.5 acres (exclusive of access aisles and drives). We have proposed screened loading areas for the larger commercial building. This loading area for the grocer would be screened from Willow Drive. Smaller vehicles would likely serve the smaller commercial buildings and loading would take place through the front door. Trash enclosures would be designed to be an integral part of the principal building. Access to this development would be provided from Kelley Parkway. There would be no direct access to Highway 12 or Willow Drive. vii. Approximate area, and floor area, devoted to commercial uses.• • > A • The concept plan shows approximately 39,000 square feet of complementary y retail space in the southeastern 5.6 acres of the Orono Village mixed-use PUD. WM. Approximate area, and floor area, devoted to industrial or office uses.c ■: No industrial uses are proposed. Office uses may be located in the retail J buildings. 0 C-.; 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDING 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55403 OFFICE: 612.252.9070 FAX: 612.2529077 wnMw landfonn.net MchatlGaRm Page 6 of 6 Re: PUD Concept Plan Stage Submittal Requirements ______________________ April 17.2002 /7.I/I^n the PUD is to be constructed in stages during a period of time extending beyond a singie (xmstruction season, a schedule for foe development of such stages or units shall be submitted staUng foe approximate beginning and completion date for each such stage or unit and the proportion of the total PUD public or common open ^ce and dwelling units to be provided or constructed during each such stage and overall chronology of development to be followed from stage to stage. In 2004/2005. The Lofts and the commercial portion of the site may be constructed as an^rne. A graphic representation of the proposed staging plan is Included In the submittal package as sheet C5.2. i.When foe proposed PUD includes provisions for public or common open space ^ service facilities, a statement describing the provision that is to be made for the care and maintenance of such open space or service facilities. Landform will prepare development standards that will be Included in the covenants for the property. A draft of those documents will be submitted with the PUD development stage plan and filed with title to the property. The PUD concept stage plan narrative provides a general description of the development plan. k.Schematic utility plans indicaVng placement of water, sanitary and storm sewers. The schematic utility plans are Included In this submittal package on sheet C4.1. • r . - 'O'. ■; I^^VENUE M|||||4a P|650 BUTLER NORTH BUI lOING 510 Flffsf AVE nJe NOmH MllWEAPOLIS.'Bii^5403 OFFICE: 612^2.9070 FAX: 612.252.9077 www.tandfbmuiet t-i. - .« »>»l’i JtWt a !'T » t>-7 ORONO VILLAGE NARRATIVE Land Use Guide Plan Amendment Landform is requesting approval of a reguiding from Commercial to Urban Residential Medium Density (SFR/MFR) for approximately 7.22-acres and a reguiding from Urban Residential Medium Density to Commercial for 0.49-acres of this 51 -acre site. The requested reguiding to residential would allow us to rezone the property and construct the Lofts and rowhouses south of Kelley Parkway. The reguiding from Residential to Commercial is simply the result of Kelley Parkway being shifted north to line up with the existing curb cuts on Willow Drive. The Comprehensive Plan anticipates that everything south of Kelley Parkway will be developed as commercial, however, the street was shown only 300 feet north of Highway 12. Our proposed Kelley Parkway alignment is slightly north of the planned alignment, consequently, the Land Use Guide Plan map must be amended to show the new alignment and the additional commercial south of Kelley Parkway near Willow Drive. The property Is currently vacant, but has been the subject of a number of city discussions over the years. The property was recently reviewed as part of the City's recent Comprehensive Plan update. The City’s Plan identifies a general alignment for the planned Kelley Parkway and Identifies the property south of Kelley Parkway as Commercial and the property north of Kelley Parkway as Urban Residential Medium Density. The City has Indicated a desire for office uses on the commercial p.'irtion of this site and has suggested that this property be developed in a way that does not compete with the retail uses in downtown Long Lake. Our analysis shows that the area would not support the amount of office the City planned for the site; however, some retail commercial could be provided to serve this neighborhood and provide retail uses that are not planned or available in Long Lake. We are proposing to reduce the planned commercial area and limit the commercial uses to the southeast portion of the site. The requested reguiding would allow development of housing south of Kelley Parkway where commercial was originally planned and would allow additional commercial development south of the realigned Kelley Parkway as intended by the City. The reguiding from commercial to residential would allow development of Orono Village as a town center with a mix of housing types providing life-cycle housing opportunities for the community. The proposed reguiding would be compatible with the surrounding land uses. Furthermore, the mix of residential and commercial land uses would allow for the creatior; of a truly walkable community that would be an asset to the City of Orono and would complement the existing and planned development in the City of Long Lake. The building mass of the Lofts would be simitar to the mass of a commercial office building that could be-constructed under the existing land use plan. The loft residential planned in the southwest portion of the site would be three-story buildings and would generate less traffic than the permitted office use. 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDING 510 FIRST AVENUE N OFFICE 61Z2S2 9070 FAX: 612.2S2.9077 ww«ir.iand(onn.n«t Michael Gaffrnn Page 2 of 7 Re: Orono Village Narrative April 17. 2002 We respectfully request approval of the reguiding from Commercial to Urban from^uIhai!i ?! approximately 7.22-acres and a reguidingfrom Urban Residential Medium Density to Commercial for 0.49-acres of this 51-acre C tv*i^Smn?rhP ® reguiding would comply with the spirit and intent of the City s ^mprehensive Plan, would allow development of this vacant site would orovide life-cycle housing opportunities for Orono residents, would provide limited retail to serve proposed development of the mixed use Orono Village as Rezoning Currently, the property is zoned Single Family Rural Residential (RR-IB) This zonino IS not consistent with City's Comprehensive Plan. Landform is requesting appro^^^^^^^ DiS?B erwfth a"pu Unit Development (RPUD) and Highwiy CommercialDistrict (B-6) with a PUD overlay distnct. This rezonIng would be consistent with the existing land use plan and the requested land use guide plan amendment The rezoning would also be consistent with the Section 10.52 of the Zoning Ordinance sJedfiSty: ® requirements for rezoning In the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area! 1. The project area exceeds five acres In size. 2. The proposed development would Include construction of Kelley Park .vay and would be consistent with the City’s Transportation Plan. ^ ™ 1h2' available to serve the subject property and the utility system has sufficient capacity tor this development.' ^ d. This development complies with the City’s Surface Water Management Plan *■ ?'■’<< B-6/PUO zoning districts are compatible with the Cc .iprehensive Plan and the Highway 12 Com'dor Study. ®' JeitiPioa'Jh''"'®®® mixed-use developmeni will be designed with attention to detail and the use of high-quality materials. PUD Concept Stage Pian/Site Plan Landform is requesting approval of a PUD concept stage/site plan approval to allow development of this 51-acre site as Orono Village, a miL-use devllopmenl e cycle housing opportunities to Orono residents and a limited amount of complementary neighborhood commercial. The proposed mix of housina nnH neighborhood commercial will be an asset to the City of Orono and the surrounding neighborhood. The upscale housing will provide lifecycle housing opportunities^ fo! Orono residents and the retail component will provide needed retail and service commercial, as well as. a convenient neighborhood gathering place. 650 BUTLER NORTH .JILOING 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55403 OFFICE: 612.252.9070 FAX 612.2529077 www landteon.net $ • \ ;> r / r :,*« ^ Vi! Michael Gaffron Page 3 of 7 Re: Ofor.o Village Narrative Apnl 17. 2002 Our development includes constaiction of the planned Kelley Parkway in the first phase. The Orono Village project preserves nearly all of the wetland area, while creating open space and recreational opportunities throughout the site. We have designed the townhomes north of Kelley Road to take advantage of the wetland views. This townhome layout provides beautiful views for the homeowners and also allows us to retain the existing vegetation on the north side of the property. The existing vegetation will be preserved to serve as a buffer between the townhomes and the existing single family detached homes to the north. Furthermore, we have designed the project so that the nearest townhome is over 300 feet away from the nearest detached single family home. The existing vegetation, proposed plantings and distance between the single family detached homes and the townhomes will provide a buffer and transition between housing types. Orono Village is proposed as a mixed-use development offering an approach to life- cycle housing that is unique in this community. A mix of 235 townhomes. rowhouses and Lofts will-be constructed and approximately 38.000 square feet of commercial will be included to serve the neighborhood needs. These homes will appeal to Orono residents who are seeking a retirement home for their parents or themselves, “empty- nesters" looking for a smaller-but still upscale-home, or to those are seeking to simplify their life with a condominium or townhouse. We also anticipate the rowhouses to be a viable first home for young professionals-particularly the children of current residents who would like to start their own families in Orono. This site is unique because it is near community facilities, including City Hall and the Orono educational campus, which includes an elementary school, middle school, and high school and offers community programming and recreational facilities. These facilities make this a natural location for seniors, who tend to be active participants in community programming, such as adult education, and volunteers in schools. Orono Village will encourage this participation by providing sidewalks and streetscaping to create truly walkable streets connecting the new community with the public facilities. The majority of the property north of the planned frontage road would be townhomes and would become less dense as you move north. The rowhouses are set along the gently curving road, closer to the Lofts. Private cul-de-sacs with the townhomes overlook the wetlands to the north. In order to buffer the rowhouses from the City Public Works facility to the west, we have proposed an increased structure setback with a berm, noise wall and landscaping. This will provide an excellent transition between these uses. The development north of Kelley Parkway would be low-density development with a net density of 2.7 units per acre where the Comprehensive Plan anticipates 3-6 units per acre. The property south of Kelley Parkway Is planned as an urban village. An additional 71 rowhouses are planned in this portion of the site. The rowhouses will be located near the MnDOT ponds and will be centrally located within the site. These rowhouses would have front porches on Main Street. Main Street is planned as a private. 36-foot wide street with parking on both sides of this tree-lined street. 650 SUTLER NORTH BUILDING 510FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55403 OFFICE: 612.252.9070 FAX 612 252.9077 MWW.landfornn.nei t { - .1 -. Michael Gaffron Page 4 of 7 Re. Orcno Village Narrative April 17. 2002 office use. This location is ideal for residential because of its proximity to the civic center, downtown l^ng Lake and the neighborhood commercial propped for the southeast corner of Orono Village. The net density for this area would be 13.6 units per On the southeast corner of the site, near Otten Brothers Nursery, we are proposing a limited amount of neighborhood commercial. This retail is a key component of ?he retail should be located within one-quarter mile of residential. The proposed retail portion of this development could include approximately 38.000 square feet of retail and upscale giocer. a sit-down restaurant and other service retail including a possible drug store or coffee shop. The B-6 zoning district allows retail commercial uses as part of a PUD. The retail component of this development is critical If we are to create a truly walkable neighborhood for Orono residents. All of the Orono a cun of rnffpp ^1 Jo Walk down to the Orono Village commercial center for3 cup of coffoG, lunch with friends or to pick up Qroceries. Long Lake ’s planner and reviewed their downtown master plan and design guidelines. The City of Long Lake has identified a need for a small grocer in *he area, but there is currently no viable location for a qrocer in the City of and h H !^J®rsection is a prime location fo^ an upscale grLr and other neighborhood commercial uses. We have had preliminary discussions with a thTflTnrIr ® ® ^’^P^^ssed Interest in this area and have indicated that a location on north side of Highway 12 is preferred. Commercial development on this corner would be consistent with the commercial development on the other three weir.[MirpH^f ^ intersection. Furthermore, our analysis shows that this comer would be well suited for neighborhood commercial uses, which would support the walkable neighborhood concept In Orono Village. waiKaoie SrTwISl'® P'f "Plural features of tho site, which Include several large wetlands, and stands of mature maples and basswood. These wetlands which WatershPd **1®, restored to the extent allowed by the Watershed Distnct to a beautiful natural feature for both Orono Village residents and Tnnnp^r .2 trails fo.^ Walking and biking will wind through the site. ^?iC,np r p *^® ^9uare in the commercial area and a pSnn^c ? T!’® wetlands will also form a natural buffer between the existing single family neighborhoods north and east of the site and the commercial deve opment a^^ong the highway. We will have wetland impacts as part oUhTZd 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDING 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55403 OFFICE: 612 252 9070 FAX: 612.252.9077 www landform nel • md . . V.- . •• Michael Gaffron Page 5 of 7 Re: Orono Village Narrative April 17. 2002 We have designed an environmentally sensitive project that preserves and enhances wetlands, preserves existing vegetation on the project edges and provides rain gardens In the cul de sac islands to reduce water runoff. We are proposing to expand the MnDOT ponds to provide storm water management for the site. We submitted a letter to MnDOT requesting permission to expand these ponds. A copy of this January 16. 2002 letter is attached. MnDOT stated that they City of Orono must initiate this action on our behalf. We have discussed this Issue with City staff and our January 30, 2002 letter to Mike Gaffron requested that the City initiate contact with MnDOT. The design of Orono Village will offer a rich, warm material and color palette, which responds to the site's immediate context, including City Hall. Suggested materials will include stone, several colors of buff and red brick, and accents of terra cotta and wood. Overall the colors will have the warmth of the local stone and brick, as well as natural wood with accents of evergreen and blues. We are requesting approval of PUD concept stage plan/site plan. Following City approval of the concept plan, we will submit a detailed PUD master plan for City rf view and approval. While submittal of development standards and covenants would be premature at this time, Landform has developed some general design guidelines for this project. We have reviewed the City of Long Lake Downtown Master Plan and Design Guidelines and we will Incorporate those standards into the Orono Village design where feasible. Orono Village has been designed to create a walkable neighborhood with consistent development standard and materials. The following guidelines will be expanded with details when we create the Orono Village development standards and covenants: Architecture • Material and color palette shall be contextual with the existing surroundings, selected and compatible with the overall buildings; • Buildings must have an expressed “base" and “cap", and the resulting “middle ” of the exterior wall should be proportionate to the base and cap; • The base material shall be consistent with the landscape elements; • The cap should include the sloped roof, and a well-expressed, trimmed eave; • Gable or hipped roofs are appropriate to convey the residential character of the buildings, but large, continuous roofs are not acceptable; • Porches are encouraged for curb interest, residential character, energy savings, and to encourage neighbor interaction along the street; • Exterior lighting shall compliment the architecture and landscape, while increasing security; placement of lighting shall prevent light spillage onto adjoining property. Parking & Garages • Resident parking shall be provided within each building; • Guest parking may include a combination of on- and off-street parking; 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDING 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55403 OFFICE: 612.252.9070 FAX; 612 252 9C 77 www landform.nef oa O W'________ W ^ww^» All residential buildings should be designed such that the garage doors are S2publi?s?reer"''"®"* exterior, particularly when seen from • Garage doors shall be compatible with the overall color palette; • Accessory garage buildings and carports are prohibited; • Parking lots are only proposed to provide guest parking at the senior cooperative and customer parking In the commercial area. Sidewalks & Streets • Pedesirian-sate sidewalks or trails shall be provided along all public streets- • P^estnan-safe sidewalks shall be provided along all private streets adjacent to the rowhouses and senior cooperative building; ^ • Sidewalks shall be lit by pedestrian-scale lighting, which may be combined with or separate from the local street lighting: ^ • cloihgV^^'^''’^ materials shall be used to designate pedestrian-safe • Street trees should be placed on average every 35 feet on the streets, and • Landscaped boulevards are encouraged on the public streets and the pedestnan-oriented Main Street. Open Space & Landscape provwrp^rfvacy^^^^ roadways (e.g. Highway 12) and design-^* preserved and enhanced through environmentally safe Trails shall wind through the wetland areas; Trails and sidewalks will connect with traits outside the site. Setbacks eiSxiraged stoops and similar entry features will be Commercial Setbacks • 50 felurorwgh^ay lir®' • Parking Setback: 20 feet from exterior lot lines. The Lofts • Parking Setbacks: 20 from all exterior lot lines; 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDING 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55403 OFFICE; 612.252.9070 FAX; 612.252.9077 www.lm<JfeTO.„rt # fv Cf f . .• MIchiel Gaffron Page 7 of 7 Re: Orono Viltage Narrative April 17.2002 Buildings shall have entrances to traits and sidewalks along the street side and along the wetlands and creek side of the building; Parking shall be buffered with the use of landscaping. Townhomes • Building setbacks; 25 feet along Kelley Parkway, 35 feet from exterior lot lines; • A walkout or lookout on private backyard; • Combine driveways where possible to reduce the number of curb cuts; • A minimum of two parking spaces shall be provided in an attached garage for each unit. Rowhouses • Building setbacks: 25 feet along Kelley Parkway, 50 feet from Highway 12, 35 feet from exterior lot lines; • Porches are located in the front yard; • Rear balconies for each unit; • Guest parking located in the front of the building; • Two spaces shall be provided in a tuck-under garage for each unit. Sketch Plat We have included a sketch plat for City review and approval. The sketch plat is simply intended to provide the City with some idea of how the property will be developed. Orono Village is proposed as a mixed-use PUD with common lots, private drives, private streets, private sidewalks. Town Square and Village Green that will be maintained by the association. The townhomes would be platted as envelope lots surrounded by a common lot, the rowhouses would be platted as condominiums and the loft buildings would be platted on a single lot. The commercial buildings are also proposed to be platted as condominium lots with shared parking and access. Summary Landform is pleased to submit this application for approval of the mixed-use Orono Village development. We request City Council approval of the PUD concept stage plan/site plan and sketch plan, as well as City Council approval of the land use guide plan amendment and rezoning to PUD contingent upon filing the final plat. We also request that the City of Orono extend the effect of the subdivision approvals pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 462.358, Subd. 3c. which states that no amendment to a comprehensive plan or other official control shall apply to or affect the use, density, lot size, lot layout or dedication or platting required or permitted by the approved application. The Orono Village development is a multi-phase development that will be constructed over a period of 3-5 years. Consequently, we request that the City extend the PUD and other approvals for five years as allowed by State Statutes. 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDING 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOUS. KW 55403 OFFICE: 612.252.9070 FAX: 612.252.9077 w>ww.landlbftn,mt m • . • ♦ t, j L Vv/* ••X A,2>-£ LANDFORM IS • January 16,2002 Ben Timdrson Minnesota Department of Transportation 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville. MN 55113 Mr. Timerson, I spoke with you earlier this week about the possibility of expanding two existing ponds located in a MN/DOT easement for use in a proposed mixed-use development near the rwrthwest quadrant of U.S. Highway 12 and Willow Drive in Orono. You responded with a phone call stating that typically MN/DOT does rx)t reach this type of agreement with private developers, but would be receptive to a proposal from the City to expand the ponds as long as they are designed to accommodate all drainage from surrounding developments that may enter the ponds in question, and that maintenance and construction responsibilities are transferred to the City or their representative. I would Just to take the time to thank you for your response and notify you that we will be pursuing this issue with the City of Orono in hopes that it agrees that the use of these porKis is beneficial to the proposed development aiKl surrounding area and will take the proper steps to get MN/DOT approval for these actions. If 1 have, in any way. misunderstood or misinterpreted your phone call or if you have any questions in general about this issue please feel free to contact me. Thank you. Sincerely. LANDFORM hris Cunningtbn. jt .r-' ■' ■ ff ; j URSTAVCNUC north MINNCAROLIl. MN ftSAOS•so tUTUR NOnrM SultOINa StOnRSTAVINUI NORTN MINNCAROua. mm SS403 omcf; •12.3S3.*070 7«X; •12.3S3.SOT7 «nn>.l»ndforiii.n«( I A LANDFORM MINNEAPOLIS *^NOCNIX MEMORANDUM 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDING 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH. MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55403 OFFICE: 612.252.9070 FAX: 612.252.9077 DATE April 17, 2002 Michael Gaffron. City of Orono FROM Steve Johnston COPY Terry Oahtstrom. Oahlstrom Development LLC Regional Pond Feasibility • Orono Village Feasibility Report for Orono Village Regional Pond The Orono Village project will require construction of a regional pond that would serve the site and other developed and undeveloped properties north of US Highway 12 and east of Old Crystal Bay Road. This 104-acre area, as determined by topographic information obtained by Landform and the City of Orono, is comprised of a large amount of woods, wetlands, open fields, 1-2 acre residential lots, city offices, school district facilities, public works facilities, and two existing MN/DOT treatments ponds. The proposed regional pond will provide NURP standard treatment of storm water as well as runoff rate control for the 100-yr storm event. The regional pond will be constructed within MN/DOT right-of-way in essentially the same location as the existing ponds. Preliminary correspondence indicates that MN/DOT would be receptive to allowing construction within the right-of-way if the City initiates the request. Preliminary hydrologic studies have shown that the pond volume necessary to meet NURP criteria is approximately 8.2 acre-feet. The current Orono Village concept pond has a volume of approximately 8.5 acre-feet. Furthermore, the runoff rate for the existing drainage basin is approximately 33.5 cfs through a 24” culvert under Highway 12. The new pond will be limited to this discharge rate under fully developed conditions within the watershed. To detain this runoff and not flood the Orono Village project it wilt be necessary to lower the normal water level of the pond. This can be accomplished by jacking a new 24” culvert under Highway 12 approximately three feet lower than the existing culvert. The new pipe will act as the primary pond outlet with the existing culvert providing for emergency overflow purposes. Pagel :^2789 April 17.2002 A breakdown of the major construction costs associated with the regional pond and trunk storm sewer is shown on an attached exhibit. The trunk line will provide service to the two undeveloped lots to the west of the Orono Village site. The natural drainage patterns of the remainder of the basin will remain largely unchanged as storm runoflFis routed through the new regional pond. We respectfully request that the City assist us in our negotiations with MN/DOT for the instruction of these facilities and that Trunk Storm Sewer fees be used where appropriate to fund this project. #278 2 .1 pi V . || II IJ ^ V L. r-4 ______ ■ '•:zZr'-T~{ r-j I ’ EmOrh A _se^ \ .* i i N fvio sov.€ Basin B»UNfiA«Y / * 4 J _5n»H»^OeNWK. pul. I •limit, pfWfA VJ>^Aa/O iU'' CJ ...r — ■ i * *ri ! r---. J|m.| 1___I n } 1IL-:----------*= i {.-•j LLI t ’ r.-^3 = :i ’ c:rj t —>• i. t=j, ^' ' / / 1 <> r Si L .* LANDFORM Orono Village Project Number TD01002 Contract Manager Chris Cunnington Location: Orono. MN File: Nurp Sire ConceptuaLxIs_____ Nurp Pond Sizing By: CNC Date: 3/26/00 INPUT VARIABLE Watershed Area UNITS INPUT VALUE NOTES acres Pervious Curve Number Impervious Fraction Design Storm inches 104.00 72 (SCS Soil Cover Complex) 0.21 2.5 (2.5 in. s VLAWMO Criterion) OUTPUT VARIABLE UNITS OUTPUT VALUE NOTES Imum Retention Design Storm Runoff Permanent Pool Volume Required Permanent Pool Volume Required inches 3.69 inches 0.94 ac.fL 8.17 cu.fL 3SS.849 #2789 6S0 BUTLER NORTH aULOmO 510 FMST AVENUE NORTH MNNEAPOUS. MN S5405 PHONE. 012.»2.9070 FAX: 612^52.9077 rur.ihigi I I iiniiSra tilinr— J r V \ landform Its Orono Village Project Number Location; Contract Manager Date; Revised; TD01002 Orono. MN Chris Cunnington 4/16/02 by CEC Pond Volumes File; Pond Volume Conceptual, xts Contour Elevation Dea^tera Site Area je ^ ^ “ Elevation Difference Volume _ tc f 7 Cumuiat^ Volume (c.f.) '*^erag^ Depth 996 18,910 997 21.919 1 20.396 20.396 0.9399825.013 1 23.449 43,845 1.7599928.587 1 26.780 70.625 2.47 ------1LliUj 31.989 1 30.272 100.897 3.15ITOl35.573 1 33.765 134.662 3.79100239.300 1 37.421 172.083 4.38100343.208 1 41.239 213.322 4.94 ------1004 47.686 1 45.429 258.751 5.43100552,980 1 50,310 309.060 5.83100671.591 1 62.052 371.113 5.18 Live Storag<% 1006 71.591 1007 76.759 1 74.160 74.160 0.97100881.797 1 79.265 153.425 1.88100986.906 1 84.339 237.763 2.74101092,088 1 89.484 327.248 3.551011120.725 1 106,084 433.332 3.59 1 1 L £wtHT C i Ir ORONOV'-2 Prepared by (enter your company name here} HvdroCAPe 6.00 s/n 001542 C1986-2001 AooBed Mjcfocomnutf Sysisms T>pe II 2Htr RaMatt^.90" Pagel _______________4/17/03 Pond IP: Existtng Pond I f (86] Warr^: Osdtiations may require smaller dt (63] WarNng: Exceeded Reach 2R inflow depth by 0.01* Q 15.60 hrs Inflow Outflow Primary 117.58 cfs e 12.99 hrs. Volume^ 33.52 cfs e 14.68 hrs. Volume^ 33.52 cfs e 14.68 hrs. Volume^ 25.443 af 25!455af. Attens71%. Lags 101.8 min 25.455 af Routing by Sim-Route method, Time Spans o.00>36.00 hrs. dts 0.05 hrs Peak Elevs 1.014.91* Storages 401.752 cf Phig>Flow detention times (rtot calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections Elevation (feet) Surf.Area (sq-m lnc.Store (cubic-feet) Cum.Store (cubic-feet) 1.009.00 1.010.00 1.012.00 1.014.00 1.016.00 0 777 6,511 126,937 439,784 0 389 7.288 135,448 568,721 0 389 7,677 143,125 711,846 Primary Outnow (Dynamic Tailwater) ^laCulvert # Routing Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 1,009.00* 24.0** x 120.0* long Culvert RCP, end-section conforming to fill, Ites 0.500 OuUet Inverts 1,006.81* Ss 0.0183 T n» 0.013 Ccs 0.900 /• <•• % *). .. • *TT • • v%:* •/ f j V‘^ J Smibit t> ORONOP^I Prepared by {enter your company name here} HvdroCAOet 6.00 s/n 001542 O 1986-2001 Apolied MlcrocomDuterSw«tam« Type II 24-hr RainHalh5.90 ” Pagel 4/1 7i Pond 2P: Conceptual Proposed Pond (86] Warning: Oscillations may require smaller dt Inflow Outflow Primary S S 114.12 cfs@ 12.38 hrs, Volume= 23.13 cfs@ 16.77 hrs. Volume- 23.13 cfs@ 16.77 hrs. Volume^ 29.179 af 18.708 af. Aliens 80%. Lag= 263.3 min 18.708 af Routing by Sim-Route method. Time Spans 0.00-36.00 hrs. dts 0.05 hrs Peak Elevs l ,010.52’ Storages 754.377 cf Plug-Flow detention times 418.1 min calculated for 18.682 af (64% of inflow) Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismaflc sections Elevation 'Surf.Area Inc.Store (feet)(SQ-ft)(cubio-feet) 996.00 18,910 0 997.00 21.919 20.415 998.00 25.013 23.466 999.00 28,587 26,800 1.000.00 31,989 30,288 1.001.00 35,573 33,781 1.002.00 39,300 37,437 1.003.00 43,208 41,254 47,686 45,447 1,005.00 52.980 50.333 1,006.00 71,591 62,286 1.007.00 76.759 74.175 1.008.00 81,797 79,278 1.009.00 86,906 84.352 1.010.00 92.088 89,497 1.011.00 120,725 106,407 Cum.Store (cubio-feet) t 0 20.415 43.881 70,681 100.969 134.750 172,186 213.440 258.887 309,220 371.506 445.681 524,959 609.310 698.8C7 805.214 ^rlm^OutFlow (Dynamic Tailwater) # Routing Invert Outlet Devices _____ 1 Primary 1 .OOO.OO* conforming to fill, Kes 0.500 Outlet Inverts 1,006.80^ S=-0.(X)67 T ns0.m:i rvsnonn */ Bwierr '£ t • Orono Village Regional Pond Orono, Minnesota LANDFORM Engineer's Preliminary Opinion of Probable Construction Costs Deycnptipn V iQu^tity Iteitf Cost : • Regional Pond Common Excavation Jackmore24”RCP- 48" Outlet Control Stnicture 36" RCP Stonn Sewer Seed CY LF EA LF AC $3.00 $400.00 $2,000.00 $50.00 $900.00 30,000.0 120.0 1.0 1,130.0 4.0 $90,000 $48,000 $2,000 $56,500 $3,600 SUB TOTAL $200,100 30% Contingency (Design, Administration, etc.)$60,030 • »•.•••• '• / ir'>—o I regional pond estimates.xls T - , C- C« • #-«• r • 3AREA LOCATION MAPI ORONO VILLAGE THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOT OMkU,tfVtl£f« DAKCTOMDEVElOl^kOTaCm.«r9vicsT?fiM n«s nclaxuuh . M.\UC90tC.%C<Blt| mA>s»m; fn ii^ai CV\9i>lXTfkeO 3 ABBREVIATIONS So •#«*« **• 0I» •tJ 00 «<V »Lov. Om /L«0 r«w g wwmm S^ibr- M» «MP u« 0^ A 9mk if EDDRAWIKC SYUBOLSi lSZj CaunUTY SYMBOLS c:s L2J OSIf QLEGAL DESCRIPTION! 4te«» a »oo»or ti «ovnoA »o*osoY* iVAOin^ m au , «Mi« TO *4 io«»Af»N » MAT Ur30«*tjrc<r outMC rau. eou« UAa MB' MtAfr COOBiM't OCM Ot<K»i - •COJUAJ'Bi ore •y«0 *IB* MMI ^0^ — fVTTT «AfMVM MM IM r •«flO MONO C3SITE/UT1UTY CONTACTS :• 4: CEDSITC SYMBOLS C .. ■ » . L M4MB OWTOUI •ROt MOrAfMN MAMM IMM9WRM orarnM ■RUOAO CMMf ■Nt/OtfLO 0A4OM C^OO** OJM •9M m 0a«r04f aOM SaKTMa CI3SURVEY SYMBOLSCEHS:- 0M*ii ^ MK or • aoN *«< a* «• CMMo * MAi*a CIO tOI'ACC 11 CQMFAIIIIS 11 covTans raartSAfTAev a«M e •Aroe or*» sMM TTsa cate* «AM>*At •• ecB «• ee*ira tA*. m nm oaccA^aa ea er ao aevee *aa Mi-ne leeaRAC ai»tAA-Aea aacrac ^ai s*fxieaa m* maa# uaAfMoePM Mio eN-«ia-wi taoMoa e«ee* «m eae«* uu aMamai«KMi >»A«»ML? lea-ijAaiaB aaiUUA cm srsusr^csr^BAaae fMMMaam aBAoana me ea«m.»AjB raa, M*aT*>Mrj nuLtrr MA.VOCS ifvcw assrxATVN CIDDEStGN CONTACTS OMUM CAM uoa MO* n*i4 ««fM MM4U OM—aO IOAT* iMO CaEROStON CONTROL SYMBOLSE! vaMWai •mTAOT »iM« f*0C« ••«•« CiAJiOAA 0*AlMAO| C3BENCHMARKS; !L !»y*giAA» AT M ^tMAr MM ‘•Ml* a Mo»*^^«nfAAiBf tXSVKt 11 CQIIPAMB CMTAC19 •mMR«ma'Scemem mUo£PmSS fteo AMoraara ma ao-m-arm RAa ea-m-eerr j t eManaeme«M •o a* AMwa tam imeAaaa m mtee •a Aaema a«-m>mm 1 »*e aa-lM>Ain *id**a^ leManaame**• M at AAiMemrAi :feieieaa mieMB 1 CAaam Aea^ m *aa a9<m>m*a ' »Aa ea«m«wrf i^Hea 1 m^fiSac^MBiTC ^ teoie lace^ ooe iMatMioame*^ |^M-iM-eftaImAiieaa m mms 1 ea-iei<aefv aoM* 1 ieaeaaaemrw | I ma ae-m-mmimieiRaa mieiee ra« •••m-eett 1 1 i S?¥aSl Sa^^aST** “^1izsn’zxai i ma ea >* am' Rea aa*aM*M 1 CONCEPT SUOMITTAL AruMT.aooo ORONO VILLAGE Orono. Nfinnesota LANDFORM "aSS««M rUHAMi Gopher State One Cel xaT.sxsar ¥ jCt 1':r CML1RU SHEET co.i 991 •9M niirMCHh^nMr ■M mmm 9M EXI5TMGI LAND USE EXISTMA LAND USE PESI6NATI0N OclSriNd lOHXNCt DESiONATICN mmm ii 111 f !!i .>4 V%v ' CA0NO CITT tONA tikiCB |l?:t H i' • • .-IV. OVC ■■asssr'••"■ •_____ : >•> I-'!;!!m•| '’l!!II? Ill I*'!i il ! i cirr CP t; -I-. v:i* «• * , \S *vl%V/^*VV> <• .. .. - i « ^ • M. Li* •'Mil iV • ;i iHr ‘! i, LCNAtiMd iT5^ • X\' t T* ^ - * *« « *t*»*^* ' I *.*•**• ■ N'*.-* •» \ :■-»•■'*'K-.i- -V cirr CPCXSNC ^^9 r-:-.:4»»TT77r;7^ •• •• • Af I:.• .^>*v-v •;.; •x-:w ipliiii«iS3 Onr CP LOPiA LAKM oiwxntLsm DAiotoMoemmiENriic TUttTOJWCiniCNrii^cijUbsuuiVH\moio»x.ic«um raatMIM oati-nruco tsy>o«»«tctr mr*m nULXSTMAMlOCSI OKtysAncN • - Ii—9 ^ •» . : • y ■’* • ■ •.*♦ • * ^ •■•; »y PROf^«SO LASO use DE6IGKATtON iifSSsi Si W:::'A:A v:a :;■mmm \mmi :$S\a SSSS;’: ••'*•«■'■ '. » , I J >N. Vi. V*^vvii-■•■•.v'^yxi ; -------- f *.», N*’». •. p :i !:.;.!r.': ri ir:-. ;ii|, J’*’:;*:' I'.ii* j*‘ •‘•H':‘»itV,i^*|I: l;/;. : .., i; i ’i;} •. I:-;:.. “ii::'! ii’;:.v;= 'V =S-i ;' ■ ! ;'|.;Vl|!.-. .::.-t;:;. “-hi SSmtSSSSSSSSS^^mmmmm ' ‘ *■' ^ ciTrcPC«i9«o eiTT OP LC»« L4X1 >: ■;:■•■'■ ■ PRSPOSED ZONMa OESIONATION coNcerr bobmittal APMLI7. aooz nsjish OR.ONO VILLAGE Orono, Nflnnesota LANDFORM MlMMCAPOtlt*PMOtMI> tor«4B4 PUM mC Pt&JsnCL lAWUMAliP ZSMNOriAM C2.0 •■f' " u I rr ( j V DESIGN giiPELINE TYPICAL SETBACK i. V' ‘iiv ! >/ .■51^ - i__j, 1 H0iuMOutc» X 1 s%\ , / >r 1 <• 1 J < \ lOtf MOUSES J I 7 \ ! riTm nI Iv/ *~7ikiErni 'VT *__y H • ■< lr» • 1 i_-. •_\ I \' V 1 ■Tt* ;S-__ i r»- • I i •Ml DESIGN GUIDELINE TTPICAL SETBACK I ^ -- ^uz I ^5^ NMl xm^•^/i © /^ DESIGN GUIDELINE VJ7 “typical setback MSU WOUtt* * J •fa*a i.4 DESIGN GUIDELINE MAIN STREET SECTION CMfR^cmupu D.m5ntOMDEVElCI>MENTLiC TVMTMtlTlM HiimAKULOV Mtaccao«LMiSMi «> Sm M Ml OatrUTMlX amatmwKt ~xs^ <»««/« ruLirriMMais iMtf acycAnoN CONCEPT SUBMITTAL AfM.ty. aoo2 0R03ST0 VILLAGE Orono. Nflnncsota MLie tuc^c* BSH« •iUMMtf M-M A\CVI ^ c«£^ev»u.<ai -■ilfeiiet-- um$^ if-If PESkjN GUtPsLiKS NOISE UJALL LANDFORM HIMMtA90tlt*^M9tMtS m %AMt ORTX£>0 tacjca ccNOfnML PCSieNOUVfLMfLAN C2.2 rsTsr mm MM mm m,»/m mmm M isrt)MMSTO(r mm MM MM m,^em mmm *S ^ J Bonestroo Rosene V B Anderlik & 1 vll Associates Engineers & Architects May 9.2002 Mr. Mike Gaffron Planning Director City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Re: Orono Plaza PUD Concept Plan File No. 139-02-000 Plat No. 02-2789 Dear Mike: ■on*itroa. Roitn*. Andollk and Aiio<lai*t, Inc. It an Affirmailva Aciien/Exual Opporiuniiy Im^oycr afitf Cmpioytc Otwned rnnclpati: Orfo G Bor^estroo. BE • Marv.n I Sorvjfji. PC • Cleno B Cooh. P£ • RoPer: G StDumchl. PI • Jerry A Bourdon. PE Senior Coniulcants: RoOeri W Rosene. PC • Joseph C Anderhk. PE • Richjrd i. Turryer. PE • Susjn M. Eoertm. CPA. Affoclote Principeii; Re»m A^ Gordon. PC • RoPert R Prefferie. PI • Richard W Foster. PC. • Oavid O Loskota. PC • Mark A Hanson. PE • Michael T Rautmann. PC • Ted K Field. PC. • Kernech P Anderson. PE • Mark R Rolfs. PE • David A Bonestroo. M B A • Sidney P Williomsoa PC. L S • Agnes M Rng. MBA- Allan Rick SchrmdL PC. • Thomas W Peterson. PE. • James R Mafarsd. PE • Miles B Jensea PE • I Pruihp C'a*ei IJI. PE. • Oanel J Edgencn. p£ • Ismael Martmei. PE • Thomas A Syfko. PE • She'don J Johnson • Dale A Gro .r »£ • Thomas A. Roushar. P£ • RoPeri J Oevery. PL Orrices; St Paul. St. Cloud. Rochester and Willmaf. MN • Milwaukee. Vlfl • Chicago. IL U%5iile. wwwPcrestroo com Wc have reviewed the PUD concept plan for the proposed Orono Plaza development. The site is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Willow Drive and TH 12. The proposal provides for a mix of residential housing and commercial development. Wc have the following comments in regards to engineering matters. 1. Sanitary Sew er: Sanitary sewer flows from the site will be routed to an existing sanitary sewer along the north side of TH 12. The existing sanitary sewer then flows southerly under TH 12 through a line just west of the Golf Dome property. This line serves an area north of TH 12 including the public schools along Old Cry stal Bay Road, the Willow View subdivision and the Medina Morningside neighborhood in Medina. Prior to the construction of the new Orono Middle School this sanitary line was nearly at capacity. The City recently constructed a bypass lift station along the south side of T.H. 12 to provide temporary relief for the additional flow s generated by the school. During peak flow times the bypass lift station pumps into an existing MCES forcemain along the south side of TH 12. The lift station was an interim measure and will remain in operation until the downstream infrastructure is upgraded to provide the necessary capacity. Currently the system is at capacity and cannot accommodate the additional flows generated by the proposed development until the system is upgraded downstream from the bypass lift station. Improvements to the existing sanitary line between the bypass lift station and the railroad (racks to the south would need to be a City project. The applicant should review costs for these improvements with the City. It is our understanding the system along the railroad tracks and to the east will be upgraded as pan of the proposed MX/DOT TH 12 improvement project. MN/DOT should be consulted to determine when the proposed sanitary scw*er improvements will be completed and to verify that the necessary capacity will be provided. Sanitary sewer shail be in installed in accordance with City standard details. Final plans should include plan and profile views of all sanitary sewer. 2. Water Main: The proposed water main from west to east should be 12 ” DIP. l*he alignment of the 12‘* main should follow the alignment of the proposed Kelley Parkway. Water main design throughout the ;cs: of the project appears acceptable. The two water main laterals serving the uniLs north of Kelley Parkway should be looped. Final plans should include plan and profile views of the proposed water main, water main details and service locations. 3. Storm Sewer: The draft version of the City ’s Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) shows that this site lies within the Long Lake drainage district. The nanaiive provided with the application proposes to expand the existing M.N*/DOT ponds along the south side of the site. As part of the expansion the improvements propose to lower the normal water level of the pond by installing a new outlet pipe approximately 3-fcci lower than the existing outlet pipe. The existing pond outlet pipe discharges on the south side of TH ! 2. Storm water then flow s overland through a drainage ditch along the west side of the Golf Dome property. The drainage ditch is very flat and the Golf Dome e.xperiences occasional flooding during heavy rain events. The developer should provide additional information as to where and at what elevation the proposed outlet will discharge south of TH 12. A minimum of 2-fect of freeboard should be provided between all basement elevations and pond high water levels. The City has storm sewer near the proposed westerly pond. Additional details such as connections to the City storm sewer, proposed emergency overflows and discharge points should be provided for the pond along the west boundary. All storm sewer within 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 651-636-4600 • Fax: 651-636-1311 I I City righl'Of'way or under pavement shall be RCP. There doesn't appear to be any proposed storm sewer to serve properties north of Kelley Parkway. Plans should include storm sewer provisions for this area. All ponds should meet NURP standards. Ponds should have a 10:1 aquatic bench at the pond’s normal water level (NWL). All ponds should have an outlet structure and provided a minimum of l<foot of skimming to remove floatables and debris. Riprap should be provided at all inlets and outlets. Final plans should show plan and profile views of the proposed sewer and include storm sewer details. A drainage area map, storm sewer and ponding calculations ^ould be submitted for our review. It is critical that an effective erosion control plan be included with the final plan set and implemented during construction due to the magnitude of the project and potential off-site impacts. Final plans should be submiued to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) for their review. Strccta/Tralls: Kelley Parkway is a municipal state aid (MSA) road. At a minimum, Kelley Parkway should be designed to meet MSA standards and should provide room for parking or distressed vehicles for both east and west bound traffic. A median could be incorporated into the design to provide a parkway appearance, provide traffic calming and accommodate construction of turn lanes. The design of the connection at Willow Drive should incorporate left and right turn lanes for eastbound traffic. Horizontal and vertical alignments should meet a 30 mph design speed. All sueets within the project should have concrete curb and gutter and meet City standards for public or private roads. The proposed turnarounds on the north end of the two private sueets north of Kelley Parkway do not appear to be adequate for emergency vehicle turning movements, plans should be submitted to the fue chief for review and comment. A geotechnical report, R-value recommendation and pavement design should be provided for review. The applicant should anticipate typical sueet sections that include select granular material and draintile because of the poor soils. The proposed bituminous trail should be extended southerly from Kelley Parkway to TH 12 and along Kelley Parkway to the west boundary of the site. The City should consider whether a bituminous path or concrete sidewalk is appropriate along TH 12 between Willow Drive and the west property boundary. 5. Trafllc: The proposed land uses will generate approximately S,2(X) trips per day. We have concerns regarding the intersections at Kelley Parkway and Willow Drive, Kelley Parkway and Old Crystal Bay Road and at Willow Drive and TH 12. At a minimum we recommend that the applicant commission a traffic study to determine whether improvements are necessary at these intersections. Additional concerns include the spacing of Kelley Parkway from TH 12 and access management along Old Crystal Bay Road. 6. Financial Gnaranlcc: When final plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. The developer will also be responsible for all pertinent City charges including, but not limited to, trunk sewer, trunk water, storm water area chvge, and park dedication fees. Please contact me at (65 1) 604-4863 if you have any questions regarding this nutter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCUTES, INC. /<T^ Tom Kelloi Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono .-m . TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES 1. Development per existing Comp Plan (per Studies A & D): 75Townhomes.......................................................................440 trips/day 4 Oflice Buildings, 20,000-25,000 s.f.: 45,000 s.f. medical oflice........................................... 1625 trips/day 45,000 s.f. general oflice.......................................495 trips/day Total 2,560 trips/day Development per Proposed Concept Plan 41 Townhomes ...................................... 82 Rowhouses............................................. 112 Condo’s........................................... 30,000 s.f. Grocery ..................................... 3330 trips/day 7300 s.f. Specialty Retail.......................... 7,500 s.f. High-turnover restaurant....... Sub-total 6,130 trips/day Less 20% for dual purpose trips •• 1,226 trips/day Total 4,904 trips/day CrXJNCtL MEETING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JUN 1 0 2002 DATE; ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Naac Gregoiy A. Gappa Titk Director of Public Services Adminbtrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Public Service Director ’s Report Item Description: Golf Course Seasonal Employees Golf Course Seasonal Employees are hired under two different provisions of the PERA rules. Several employees will be hired under the 6-month rule which allows unlimited earnings for a 6- month maximum time period. These are the main employees with the majority of the hours during the season. The remainder of the employees work fewer hours and will be hired under the PERA maximum earnings provision which limits earnings to $425 per month without any restrictions on the number of months worked. The Council previously approved a pay range and seasonal employees for the golf course. When this list of employees was approved in April all of the positions, had not been fliled. We are requesting approval to hire Dan Marsella, Kathleen Smyth, and Paul Goldsmith as a Golf Course Seasonal Employees at an hourly pay rate of $7.50 under the monthly maximum earnings provision of the PERA rules. COUNaL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to hire Dan Marsella as a Golf Course Seasonal Employee at an hourly pay rate of $7.50 under the monthly maximum earnings provision of the PERA rules. Motion to hire Katherine Smyth as a Golf Course Seasonal Employee at an hourly pay rate of $7.50 uiider the monthly maximum earnings provision of the PERA rules. Motion to hire Paul Goldsmith as a Golf Course Seasonal Employee at an hourly pay rate of $7.50 under the monthly maximum earnings provision of the PERA rules. I ■ A rt aitei a M REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COnMrii meeting JUN 1 0 2002 C»TY0F0B0W0 DATE: June 4,2002 ITEM NO:Lp Department Approval: Name Lin Vee Thie City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: City Recorder Fee Adjustment Staff lias reviewed the amount of time that is required for a recorder to prepare minutes for va !ous City meetings, which includes attending and recording the meeting, transcription, submittal of draft minutes to staff, and submittal of corrected final minutes. As the meeting length increases, particularly if due to extended discussion of complex issues, the amount of time required to compose and edit the minutes increases substantially. The composition and editing of minutes generally takes two hours for each hour of meeting time. To reflect this workload, it is recommended the fee schedule be increased substantially for longer meeting times. Length of Meeting 1- 2 hour meeting 2- 3 hour meeting 3- 4 hour meeting 4- 5 hour meeting 5- 6 hour meeting 6- 7 hour meeting COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Current Fee Schedule $135.00 $160.00 $190.00 $215.00 $240.00 Proposed Fee Schedule $135.00 $160.00 $195.00 $250.00 $325.00 $420.00 Motion to approve the following fee schedule for 2002 for the City Recorder, effective June 10, 2002: Length of Meeting 1- 2 hour meeting 2- 3 hour meeting 3- 4 hour meeting 4- 5 hour meeting 5- 6 hour meeting 6- 7 hour meeting Proposed Fee Schedule $135.00 $160.00 $195.00 $250.00 $325.00 $420.00 nTTiiriTiraiC pafiijirijo [•ra p.v/iiu •rrrr* wiTMi mvitj Riwini ra iiii* mpra^ niiuici ms roir*riTii - tp L OffKX ___ (952) 925-7500 PRODUCTS Fax (952) 925*7531 COMPANY fqyalOpponuitlcy Employer wwW.gopco.CORl ■•••wi Pago: 294391 S/30/02 ;llb horse issao ROP PE1UIAZ SOLD TO: KXCHXUJi E MORSE LONO LMCR CXTY 07 1964 PARE AVS P O BOX 606 lOKO XAXS.Mt) 5S3S6 United States 7:992.673.6961 SHIP TO: MICHELLE E MORSE LOKO LAME CITY OP 1964 PARK AVB P 0 BOX 606 LOKO LAKE.KK 9S3S6 United Statea Terma:13878S • n*‘'» 4-79 *71RE DBPT/ATTMi MXCHir.LE HORSE* DESION HOURS FOR THE MOKTH OF HAY 2002 OOP D3 CAD DATA INPUT 55.00 SALES TAJ Piease Pay Sub Total 04 (EXEMPT) This Amounct Szul ef Invoice' 261.25 261.25 0.00 261.25 Plaaseratuminvoleaeopy with your remWanea. Laie charge of 1S3« on paM dueaocounts. ORDER CANNOT BE CANCELttO OR RETURNEO. eOO/ZOO’d 99Z9i axvi SNOT iO Alio ZZ96 9i» Z96 00:0I ZOOZ.SO'Nm* DESIGN TIME CATEGORIES AND DESCRIPTIONS; desert^ below. 1. Project Data Collection: • Project Analysis (Discussions of project scope and concepts). • Physical site measurements and location of building elements. • Furniture and equipment inventory. • Use analysis of existing space • Client interviews. • Any information gathering required to accomplish the project 2. Design Development Activities required to conceptualize, refine, complete a project such as • Develop workstation‘typicals*. • Initial block plans and space plans. • Preliminary and developing concepts andjitectigfv Preliminary color and nnisr— • BudQdtdrypdcinQ* . . .... finishes for projert «ii ♦ • Refinement and development of above items as agreed upon through the approval process of client review meetings. • Working drawings • Design detail drawings 3. CAD Data Input . ^ . u -• Obtaining existing CAD documents and entering them 10 a GOP database. • Any computer input requiring entering data, into the computer that is not a professions' consultative role. (Data input vs consultative analysis) 4. Rnish Selections • Selection furniture and building finishes • Documentation of same for order or installation • Any data required for documentation of any item to be ordered to complete the project as agreed upon by the client. 6. Presentation Preparation • Assembly of materials and creating printa/plots for communication to client or trades. • Any preparation required to create suitable pnesentatinns to the client Presentations may be formal or informal. describe project elements. 7. PresentationsAfleetings meetings. 8. Project Administration • Coordination of project and/or design team • Coordination of Inatellation (fomitura and materials) • Project management roquirements • Change orders, correspondence, telephoning. • Site inspections • Punchlist ‘•I e00/£00*4 S9Z9I axvi SKOl iO A113 ZZ96 9t» ZS6 00:0T ZOOZtSO'NAr BKV C t O U P Arthil*ctur« Inltriof Dttign EngifiMftAg loormefi ICreot Voe»l Croup loc 222 North Socond Strooi MinnoopoKi. MN 55401 UiphM 6QJ3PJ752 4033947V2 www.bky9roup.eo10 60E Invoice Invoice Numberi9918 Invoice Dus: Mty 25,2002 CttvofLonsLeke P.O.B0X6O6 Lons Uke.li«N 55356 Anention: kfichelle Mofse Piegect: 1515 .01 Ci^ of Long Lake Piolieiiional Services throuth 5/25/02 iUllag Creep: Coettact#: flnStitioaFee: AibMence Service Altenete: TOTAL FBE: S222.600 $ 2,500 S23S400 ■lling Creep 112 TeUlu Contract Amouet: Percent Campleie: Fee Earned; Prior Fee BiUlngi: $225,100.00 85.00% $191,335.00 $186,833.00 CumiK Fee Total:$4402.00 Billing Group Total: Billing Creep: REIMB Cootract#: $4402.00 3.ECEOV €00/800*4 6189#axvi 9M01 iO AXXO 8898 9I.I 8S8 $€>80 8008.10’Nnr Project: 1 SI 5.01 iilllis Group ItlMI Toliii: Mtv25.2002 Page 2 of 2 Reimbursables Expaw^ Bond Paper by SP. Copy Paper 81/3 X11 Delivery Service Express MaU Services Pax Postage Reimbursables Totals 40.75 35.70 21.35 13.20 2.00 ■ 6.15 $119.15 Billing Ofoup Total: Project Totals: ••• Invoice Total Outstanding A/R: Balance Due: $119.15 $4,621.15 7,466.53 $12,087.68 Xqu Professional Services S4.S02.00 $177,331.20 $181.833.2( Reanbufssblo Expenses:s: •*•••• •$13363.84 $13,482.9; Outside Services:$9401.80 S9401.8( Other Services snd Pees:i0.00 $0.00 $0.0( Fmsnce Charges:$0.00 $0.00 $0.0( Texes:$0.00 $0.00 S0.0C Toul:UMU5 $200,196.84 $204.817.9< Aged Reeeivebles:• P^uetnMki DiMa aiemoavi i3.orae sooo S0.0O SOOO tOiXI CdO/eOO'4 6189#axvi OHOl 10 Alio 8896 91> 896 9€<S0 8008.IO*Nnr CIT'.' OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway - PO Box 66 Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323 (952) 249-4600 PERMIT Permit Number. Permit Type: Date Issued: P052I5 Sewer and Water Permit 6/7/2002 SITE ADDRESS:340 Willow Dr N (Fire Station) Long Lake, MNSS3S6 PID: 34-1I8-23-32-0003 DESCRIPTION; Prqtosed Use: Permit Class: Permit Type: Commercial General Sewer and Water Permit Permit Sub-type(s): SAC Only DETAILS: Approved per resolution #: Separate permits required: NOTICES/REMARKS: 3 SAC Charges for Fire Station • Per Met Council - Fund Transfer FEE SUMMARY:Valuation: $ 0.00 SAC Fee:S 3,600.00 TOTAL FEE:$ 3.600.00 APPLICANT:Owner / Self MN OWNER:City ofOrono 340 Willow Dr N Long Lake. MN 55356 TOE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY REQUESTS PERMISSION TO MAKE THE REAL IMPROVEMENTS SPEQFIED AND AGREES TO DO ALL WORK IN STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH ALL QTY OF ORONO ORDINANCES AND STATE OF MINNESOTA BUILDING CODE REQUIRLMENTS APPLICANT PERMITEE SIGNATURE ISSUED BY SIGNATURE Qmei: UTiicfSgiuiumRemirtdl. I*AoolicanL I •Monthly Renorts. I-Asiesina. I*FinaKe Page 1 Metropolitan Council Bunding communities that work ■1 ii May 14,2002 Lyle Oman Building Administrator CityofOrono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323*0066 V) Dear Mr. Oman; The Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Division has determined SAC for the Long Lake Fire Station to be located within the City of Orono. This project should be charged 3 SAC Units, as determined below. SAC Units Charges: Office 1164 sq. ft. @ 2400 sq. ft./SAC Unit Training 1360 sq. it. @ 1650 sq. a./SAC Unit Truck Washing Lockers 15 lockers @ 14 lockers/SAC Unit 0.49 0.82 1.00 1.07 If you have any questions, call me at 602*1113. r^inwciy, Total Charge: 3.38 or 3 rasi.-s(. (Sbuini! j^odi L. Edwards Staff Specialist Municipal Services Section JLE: (220) 020514S9 Cc: S. Selby, MCES ‘ Michael Kiych, BKV Group www.mctrocouncU.org Metro Info Ufit 602-1M 230CaitnfttiSlroci • 8LroutMlimctoU 65101-1626 • 16511602-1000 • rax602-1550 • Tnr291-0906 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CrtifMcil meeting JUN 1 0 2002 CITY OF OROMO DATE: June 7,2002 ITEM NO: ^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administratoi's Report Item Description: Amendment No. 2 to the LOGIS Joint Powers Agreement Attached is a letter from the LOGIS group explaining a proposed amendment to the LOGIS Joint and Cooperative Agreement that reflects the administration of a cooperative health and medical insurance program as a function of the LOGIS organization. The City of Orono is a participating member of LOGIS, an organization of 20-pIus cities who originally joined together to provide data processing services to member cities, and who also in 1988 have cooperatively purchased and administered a group health and medical insurance program. Also attached to the letter is a proposed new bylaw and amended Group Health and Life Insurance Policies and Procedures. The proposed new bylaw and amended policies relate to provisions regarding withdrawing from the LOGIS health care program. The proposed amendments require a city to pay to the LOGIS group liquidated damages if it withdraws from the health insurance program without giving notice by July 1 of the year preceding its year of withdrawal. This amendment is to protect the integrity of the joint purchasing group of cities. A resolution approving the amendment to the Joint and Cooperative Agreement is attached for Council adoption. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing an amendment to the LOGIS Joint and Cooperative Agreement to include as part of the purpose of the organization the administration of a program providing group health, life, accident, and other insurance and personnel benefits. A RESOLUTION RELATING TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono (City) as follows: Section 1. Background: findings. 1.01. The City is a party to the joint and cooperative agreement (Agreement) establishing an organization known as Local Government Information System (LOGIS). The Agreement is originally dated May I, 1972, and has been amended by Amendment No. 1, adopted May 3, 1993. 1.02.In 1988, LOGIS established the LOGIS Health Care Group (Plan) to enable members of LOGIS to participate in a program of cooperatively providing group health, life, accident and other insurance and personnel benefits for the officers and employees of the members of the Plan and LOGIS itself. LOGIS has continuously operated and administered the Plan since it inception. 1.03. The Board of Directors of LOGIS has been advised by legal counsel that it is necessary and desirable that the Agreement be amended to clearly authorize the Plan and the Participation in the Plan by members of LOGIS. 1.04. There has been presented to this Council a form of Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement (Amendment). The Amendment is on file with the City Clerk, and is attached as Exhibit A. 1.05. It is found and determined that it is in the best interests of the City that the Agreement be amended as proposed in the Amendment. Sec. 2. Approval and Authorization: Ratification 2.01 The form of the Amendment is approved. Page I of2 2.02. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to deliver the Amendment in the manner provided for in the Agreement. 2.03 All actions, if any, of the City, the City Council, and the officers and employees of the City in participating in the Plan, are ratified and confirmed. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on this 10th day of June, 2002. ATTEST: Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Page 2 of2 ------i clfli In:cr«^o» Local Government Information Systems Association The LOGIS Advantage -Health Care Group Stallion Group. Suite WO. 3405 Annapolis Lane, l iyniouth. M.\ 55447 I ’oicc:(763) 278-4462 •Fax (763) 278-4005 • Internet: http://wn'H\rjohnson(g.\tanton-]>roup.am May 22,2002 Ms. Lin Vee City Clerk City of Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay MN 55323 Dear Lin: Enclosed is a proposed Amendment No. 2 to the LOGIS Joint Powers Agreement, together with a sample resolution authorizing the e.xecution and delivery of the Amendment. (The sample resolution will have to be modified appropriately by each member). As stated in the sample Resolution, LOGIS has, since 1988, been administering a group health and medical insura:ice plan (Plan) for those members who have chosen to participate. LOGIS' legal counsel has advised the Board of Directors that the Agreement should be modified as proposed by the Amendment to clarify LOGIS’ authority to conduct and administer the Plan. The amendment also provides that other types of group benefits may be included in the Plan. The resolution also ratifies the participation in the Plan by members of the Plan. It is necessary for all members, including those governmental units that have not participated in the Plan, to approve the Amendment. The Joint Powers Agreement can be amended only by a unanimous action of the members. Once you have adopted the Resolution, please mail a certified copy with the Amendment attached as Exhibit A to Yvonne Johnson, Stanton Group, 3405 Annapolis Lane N, Plymouth, MN 55447. We will file the copy on your behalf with the City Manager of Brooklyn Center as provided in the original Agreement. In addition, a new LOGIS Group Health and Life Insurance Policies and Procedures document has been included for your information. It has been revised to include early withdraw penalties should any member leave the group without giving proper notification. 'Ihc Board w ill greatly appreciate your prompt attention to this matter. If you have any questions about the Amendment, the Resolution or the Polices and Procedures document, please feel free to contact either Ms. Yvonne Johnson, Stanton Group, or Mike Garris. LOGIS. LOm^ By:By: Dave Wertz Chair, LOGIS Health Care Committee Mike Garris Executive Director. LOGIS Enclosure • f DJK Draft 2/18/02 MFC Revised 3/27/02 Proposed New By Law LOGIS 6.15. Health Care Group members means those members who choose to provide group health, medical and personnel benefits to their officers and employees under the LOGIS Health Care Group Plan (Plan). A participating, coordinating associate, operations associate, or fianchise associate member may become a Health Care Group member. Members of the Plan on May 1, 2002 will continue as members of the Plan without further action by the Executive Committee or the Board of Directors. Members not participating in the Plan on May 1, 2002 may become flealth Care Group members by complying with the Health Care Group membership requirements. An eligible government unit wishing to become a Health Care Group member may do so by complying with the membership procedure set out in Section 62 and complying with the Plan membership requirements. Health Care Group members are subject to the withdrawal provisions of Article XII of the Joint and Cooperative Agreement. For purpose of Section 2 of Article XU the terms “budgeted revenues and the cost sharing charges ” mean the liquidated damages as set forth in the LOGIS Group Health and Life Insurance Policies and Procedures. niK-2l0239vl LOIOO-16 iiBliiwiii ii I iii#iiii ■ RESOLUTION NO. A rcsohition relating to local giovemmcnt Infomiation systems; authorizing the executimi and delivery of second amendment to the Joint and cooperative agreement BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF (City) as follows: Section I. Backaound: findings. 1.0 1. The City is a party to the joint and cooperative agreement (Agreement) establishing an organization known as Local Government Information System (LOGIS). The Agreement is originally dated May 1, 1972, and has been amended by Amendment No. 1, adopted May 3,1993. 1.02. In 1988, LOGIS established the LOGIS Health Care Group (Plan) to enable members of LOGIS to participate in a program of cooperatively providing group health, life. accident and other insurance and personnel benefits for the officers and employees of the members of the Plan and LOGIS itself. LOGIS has continuously operated and administered the Plan since its inception. 1.03. The Board of Directors of LOGIS has been advised by legal counsel that it b necessary and desirable that the Agreement be amended to clearly authorize the Plan and the participation in the Plan by members of LOGIS. 1.04. There has been presented to this Council a form of Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement (Amendment). The Amendment is on file with the City Clerk, and is attached as Exhibit A. 1.05. It is found and determined that it b in the best interests of the City that the Agreement be amended as proposed in the Amendment DIK-209993vl tOIOO-16 J Sec. 2. Approval and Aulhorization: Ratification . 2.01. The foimoflbeAmendment is approved. 2.(tt. The City Clerk is aidhoiized and difected to deliver the Amoidiiient in the manner fxovided for in the Agreement 2.03. All actions, if any, of the City, the City Council, and the officers and employees of the City in participating in the Plan, are ratiOed and confirmed. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Dated:^2002. Filed in the Office of the City Manager of the City of Brooklyn Center, this ___________,2002. day of t>nc-209993vi U!IOO-i6 EXHIBIT A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, Originally Dated May 1,1972, As amended By Amendment No. 1, Adopted May 3,1993 Section 1. Article I, General Purpose, of the Joint and Cooperative Agreement, Local Government Information Systems, as amended, (Agreement) is amended to read as follows: I.GENERAL PURPOSE The general purpose of this agreement is to provide for an organization through which the parties may jointly and cooperatively (novide for (j) the establishment, operation and maintenance of data processing facilities and management information systems for the use and benefit of the parties and others and fii) group health, life, accident, and othCT insurance aiKl personnel benefits for the officers and employees of the parties and the organization. Sec. 2. The terms of this amendment are effective as of April 1,2002. This amendment is effective on the date of its execution and delivery by all of the members of the organization in accordance with the Agreement. D)K-20999}vt LCIOO-16 A-1 i LOGIS GROUP HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Effective August 1,1992, Amended January 1,1995, Updated April 12,2001, and Further Amended May 9,2002 POLICIES Eligibility Requirements To be eligible for participation in the insurance program, the legal entity must be one of the following; 1. A current member of the LOGIS Group Health and Life Insurance Program; 2. A current member of LOGIS; 3. A Minnesota city; or 4. A joint powers entity sponsored by a Mirmesota city. The legal entity must also: 1. Not previously have been a participant in the LOGIS Group Health and Life Insurance Program; and 2. indicate its commitment to the program by July I S'*" of the current year or whenever reasonably possible for members entering on other than the first day of a plan year. For the Plan Year begiiming January 1,1990: 1. All current members of the LOGIS Group I lealth and Life insurance program will be eligible for participation in the Plan without restriction; and 2. Other current LOGIS members will be eligible to participate in the Group provided: a. They have not previously dropped membership in the Group; and b. They submit the necessary marketing information as requested by the Group or its design«ited representative. 3. All non-LOGIS members who are Minnesota cities will be eligible to participate if they comply with items 2.a. and b. above, as well as; a. They must become at least associate uembers of LOGIS. For subsequent Plan years, a LOGIS member who has not been a member of the Program or who has not previously dropped m;mbersh!p in the Program may participate in the Program ’s next Plan Year beginning January 1‘* of the following year, if: 1. 2. They sign a Participation Resolution on or before August 1 of the preceding Plan Year or whenever reasonably possible; They submit necessary marketing information as requested by the Program or its designated representative. LOGIS GROUP HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES OTHER REQUIREMEhrrS A. Definitions for purpose of these Policies and Procedures 1. nenefit-eaminu emplosec is a full-time employee working an average of 30 scheduled hours or more per week based on the employer definition during the plan year. 2. 3. 5. 6. 7. Benefit-eligible employee is a part-time employee working at least an average of 20 scheduled hours but less than the defined number of hours eligible to be benefit- earning under the employer’s definition during the plan year. Retiree is any employee of a member of the Group who is entitled to coverage under Minnesota Statutes #471.61, subdivision 2a - 2b (“chapter 488”t or any retiree policy maintained by the Member. Non benefit-eligible employee is a part-time employee working less than an average of 20 scheduled hours per week during the plan year. COBRA eligjbles are employees entitled to continue participation subsequent to the federal legislation commonly termed COBRA as in force and/or amerided. COBRA continuation does not constitute retirement coverage. This term also includes individuals e’^gible for continuation under any provisions of Minnesota State Law if different than any federally applicable legislation. Program means the health insurance or life insurance policies maintained by LOGIS for participating Members. Member means any legal entity as indicated above who has elected to participate in this Program. B. The Member must honor the LOGIS Health and Life insurance policy regarding employee eligibility, which is as follows; 1. An employee of a Member is eligible for health and life insurance if he or she is a regular or probationary employee and works at least 20 hours per week. However, the Member participating in the group, at its own discretion, may establish a more^ strict definition of eligibility, but not a more lenient definition. Once the Member’s definition of eligibility is established, it must be applied consistently within the Member’s employee population. All employees meeting the Member’s definition of eligibility must be allowed to participate. 2. Members employing two individuals married to each other may allow one of the partners to carry employee + spouse or family coverage. The other partner may then be carried as a dependent of that Individual. These married individuals may also carry coverage separately if desired. 3. Upon retirement, an eligible public employee as defined in Minnesota Statutes § 47 1.61, subdivision 2a - 2b (“chapter 488") and his/her covered dependents can participate in this Plan at the same premium rate as active employees until reaching age 65. The retiree must pay the entire premium unless otherwise provided for in a collective bargaining agreement or personnel policy. Retirees age 65 and over have the option of an HMO Medicare Supplement. ¥ LOGIS GROUP HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 4. COBRA-eligible employees may be covered to the extent the corresponding active employee is eligible for coverage. COBRA continuees are treated the same as employees who are actively at work. 5. Elected officials of any Member are not to be considered eligible for ps^icipation unless the elected official’s coverage was in effect April 15,1991 or prior. Coverage for these elected officials will terminate upon completion of the term of office. Non-benefit eligible employees may not be covered.6. C. The Member must honor the LOGIS Health and Life Insurance policies regarding enrollment in the health insurance, which is as follows: 1. At a minimum, 100% of its benefit-earning employees who are not covered elsewhere through a spouse’s employer sponsored group insurance must be enrolled in one of the single health insurance plans. All benefit earning employees must be enrolled in the group term life insurance plan. Members must pay at least 50% of the lowest single premium for benefit-eligible employees. This does not apply to early retirees eligible under Minnesota § Statutes 471.61, subdivision 2a - 2b (“chapter 488”). 2. The Member may opt, based on its bargaining agreements or personnel policy, not to provide coverage for benefit-eligible employees. 3. Each Member participating in the Group, at its own discretion, may establish a more liberal contribution policy, but not a more conservative policy. 4. Each Member must follow established contribution/paiticipation rules regarding benefit-earning and benefit-eligible employees. 5. Each Member must treat benefit-earning married employees where both are employees of the same Member as they would any other benefit-earning employee. D. The Member may allow, at its discretion, benefit-earning employees to waive health coverage provided that the employee shows proof of group coverage elsewhere. E. If the Member allows its employees to waive health coverage, a maximum credit of $50 per month may be given to employees in lieu of covt rage. F. The Member may not, for any reason, al’.ow any of its non-benefit eligible employees to purchase health coverage regardless of who pays the premium. G. Tlie Member must accept the LOGIS Health and Life Insurance Program’s policy regarding the effective date of coverage for newly hired employees. The effective date of coverage can be no sooner than the first day of the calendar month coinciding with or next following one full month of employment and no longer than the first day of the month coinciding with or next following six months of continuous employment. Any such arrangement as to the waiting period of coverage must be consistently applied to all eligible employees of the member. PROCEDURES A. Eligibility for participation in the following plan year ’s insurance program is based on the following procedures: 1. If the entity is a current Member of the LOGIS Health and Life Insurance Program: 1 LOGIS GROUP HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES C. a. a. It will automatically be included unless it notifies LOGIS of its intention to withdraw from the program prior to July of the current year or it is given leave for a late withdrawal, as provided below. b. It must submit insurance data as required. 2. If the entity is a current member of LOGIS, but is not a Member of the LOGIS Health and Life Insurance Program: a It must notify LOGIS in writing that it wishes to participate in the Program. ITie notification must be received by LOGIS by July 15* of the current year or as soon as is reasonably possible. b. It must submit marketing information as required by the group or its designated representative. Having satisfied all other conditions, entities with less than 50 emoloyccs will be automatically accepted, however, premiums will be based on 100% of their own claims experience for the first year, 50% the second year, and will not be 100% blended with the LOGIS pool until the third year, d. Entities with 50 or more employees r ay be declined based on claims experience. If allowed to participate, piemiums may be rated based on the above-mentioned formula (c.). If neither a current member of LOGIS nor the LOGIS I Icalth Care and Life Insurance Program: It must adopt a resolution authorizing e.xecution of the standard LOGIS joint powers agreement. It must execute the joint powers agreement. It must submit the resolution, two copies of the joint powers agreement, and a cover letter to LOGIS. The cover letter should request admission to LOGIS as at least an Associate Member and state the intention to participate in the LOGIS Health Care and Life Insurance Program and commit to the Program at least throug!) the following plan year. This material must be received by LOGIS by July 15* of the current year or whenever reasonably possible. d. It must submit marketing information as required by the group or its designated representative. An entity that is a current Member of the LOGIS Health and Life Insurance Program may not withdraw from the program for the succeeding year unless (1) it provides notice of withdrawal prior to July of the current year or (2) the Member requests leave for a late withdrawal and LOGIS’s Executive Committee grants the leave after concluding, based on objective evidence, that the Member ’s withdrawal financially benefit the other LOGIS members as a group. Any other withdrawal will be considered an “Unauthorized Withdrawal”, with the withdrawing Member being rcferretl to as a “Defaulting Member ”. a. A Defaulting Member will be obligated to pay to LOGIS the greater of (1) minimum liquidated damages of $500 multiplied by each individual insured through the Defaulting Member under the LOGIS Health and Life Insurance Program as of June 30 prior to the Unauthorized Withdrawal or (2) adjusted liquidated damages, as described below, multiplied by each individual insured through the Defaulting Member under the LOGIS Health and Life c. LOGIS GROUP HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Insurance Program as of June 30 prior to the Unauthorized Withdrawal. An amount equal to minimum liquidated damages are due and payable within thirty days of an Unauthorized Withdrawal, b. Adjusted liquidated damages shall be determined if there are any Unauthorized Withdrawals prior to the start of a plan year. In that event, after the start of that plan year LOGIS’s health coverage contractor shall estimate the difference between what the continuing LOGIS members can be expected to pay for health coverage during the that year and the following year taking into account the Unauthorized Withdrawals and the facts as they exist on the first day of the plan year (“Adjusted Cost”), and what such continuing members would have been expected to pay for such coverage in those years had the Unauthorized Withdrawals not occurred (“Base Cost”). These shall be determined based on actual premiums imposed for the current year, the health coverage contractor’s then current underwriting criteria, and facts concerning coverage and experience as known on the first day of such plan year. The determination will be binding on all parties absent clear mathematical error. If Adjusted Cost exceed Base Cost, the difference shall be divided by the number of individuals covered under the LOGIS health plan through the Defaulting Members as of June 30 preceding the beginning of the plan year. If the quotient exceeds $500, such quotient shall establish adjusted liquidated damages, and each Defaulting Member will be obligated to pay the adjusted liquidated damages (net of any amounts already paid) within 30 days of this determination. For purposes of marketing the Group to Health Care Providers, the Program has authorized the following to act as its designated representative: Stanton Group 3405 Annapolis Lane North Plymouth, MN 55447 (763) 278-4462 For purposes of marketing the Group Life Insurance, the Program has authorized the following to act as its designated representative: Larry Klopp & Assoc., Inc. 825 Nicollet Mall Suite 1045 Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612)333-5313 GP 82I}}} vl ^ to.aoo? REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ui i y OF ORO^ DATE: June 10.2002 ITEMNO: ^ Department Approval:Administrator Rcvieired:Agenda Section: DISCUSSION The Orono Police Department wishes to establish a $2,000standing reward fund. Money would then be immediately available to be used for rewards for information leading to the arrest and conviction of persons responsible for committing crimes which occur in the jurisdiction of the Orono Police Department. The reward fund will be established using the existing forfeiture fund. Reward postings and the determination of awards over $200 shall be made by recommendation of the chief of jrolice to the city administrator. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to create a separate account in the existing Forfeiture Fund for the establishment of a Crime Information Reward Fund Account of $2,000, to authorize the Police Chief to offer rewards of up to $200, and up to $2,000 with the approval of the City Administrator, and to amend the Forfeiture Fund budget to reflect the authorization of expenditures up to $2,000. li U I (* > REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUwnn meeting JUN 1 0 2002 CITY OF OflONO Date: June 10,2002 Item No: / O Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name: Title: Stephany Chief of Police'*^^^ Item Description: 800 MHZ Radio Agreement Exhibits: Communications System Subscriber Agreement DISCUSSION 1) Hennepin County proposes an agreement between the County and the City of Orono which defines the rights and obligations for the cooperative and coordinated purchase, lease, maintenance, technical and administrative support and use of portable, mobile, desktop and other end user radios by Orono Police Department on the Hennepin County 800 MHZ System. 2) The System is a multi-site general purpose wireless communications system designed to provide 24 hour a day public safety radio communications. It provides a minimum of 95% area coverage reliability for portable radio operation above ground level in light to medium buildings throughout most of Hennepin County. It provides access to a wide area nine county region-wide public safety radio communications, multiple system redundancies with backup power, user talk groups, electronic identification of all radios on all transmissions, 99.999% microwave system reliability, system security, radio interoperability, 24 hour a day system monitoring and repair response, access to a pool of special event radios, and training of Orono Police OfTicers. 3) The City of Orono agrees to proper use of the system and equipment, payment to Hennepin County of all applicable fees, including support fees, maintenance and repair fees. Metropolitan Radio Board User Fees, and payment for damaged, lost or stolen radios. 4) Costs for conversion to the 800 MHZ were approved in the 2002 budget. Radios will be leased on July 1,2002. Training and conversion is expected to be complete by October 2002. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the Hennepin County 800 MHZ agreement. « * * I • H«nntpifi County ShorifTo OfRco Communications Division 9300 Napsr Strsst Golden Valley. MN 55427 Regionwide Public Safety Radio Communications System Draft - 3-27-2002 Communications System Subscriber Agreement Between Hennepin County and Authorized Users Regarding: Use of the Regionwide Public Safety Radio Communications System, Lease, Maintenance and Repair of Subscriber Radios, Administrative and Operational Support of the Subscriber Radio Fleet t^Okinr ft ^ t , . .• . . —i J THIS AGREEMENT made and entered Into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, a body politic and corporate, under the laws of the STATE OF MINNESOTA, hereinafter referred to as the •COUNTY," A-2303 Government Center, Minneapolis. Minnesota 55487, and (Insert subscriber entity name and address below] acting by and through its duly authorized officers, hereinafter referred to as the 'USER". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the COUNTY operates a Local Subsystem as part of the Regionwide Public Safety Radio Communications System, hereinafter referred to as “System"; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has provided for the capability of Cities, Agencies, Districts and Other Authorized Users within the County to have access to the System; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY bears primary responsibility for the health, security and integrity of the System and other communications systems; and WHEREAS, the USER has elected to participate as a subscriber with end user radios operating on the System. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements hereinafter set forth, the COUNTY and the USER agree as follows: 1 . PURPOSE AND INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Agreement is to define tne rights and obligations of the COUNTY and the USER with respect to the cooperative and coordinated purchase, lease, maintenance, technical and administrative support and use of portable, mobile, desktoo and other end user radios by the USER on the COUNTY’S Systemm The System is a multi-site general purpose wirelecs communications system oesigned to provide, among other things, 95% area coverage reliability for portable radio operation above ground level in light to medium buildings throughout most of the County. Other USER benefits and services include, access to a wide area nine county regionwide public safety radio communications system, multiple system redundancies with backup power, a wide range of talk groups electronic identification of all radios on all transmissions, 99.999% microwave system reliability, encryption availability, system security, radio interoperability, 24 hour a day system monitoring and repair response, access to a pool of special event radios and USER radio user training. 2. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF USER 2.1 Conformance to Metropolitan Radio Board and COUNTY Standards USER agrees to be aware of and conform to all applicable standards, policies, procedures and protocols established or amended by the Metropolitzn Radio Board and COUNTY related to use of the System including but not limited to radio user training requirements, radio operating guidelines, audit, monitoring and compliance. 2 2 Conformance to Federal L aws and Regulations USER agrees to be aware of and conform to all applicable Federal Rules, Regulation and Laws pertaining to use of the System including but not limited to the Communications Act of 1934 as Amended and Part 90 of the Federal Communications Commission Rules and Regulations. • i * 2.3 Response to Improper Use In the event COUNTY informs USER that statistical analysis of System usage or other information indicates that USER personnel may hav& inappropriately used the System, or may have violated standards, policies, procedures, rules, regulations or laws regarding proper operation of the System, or may have violated the provisions of this Agreement, USER a^ees to take immediate and appropriate investigative and conective action to stop the violation and eliminate any reoccurrence. 2.4 Radio and Equipment Lease Fees USER agrees to pay to COUNTY all iease fees assessed to USER by COUNTY throughout the lease term In accordance with a lease policy established by the Board of Hennepin County Commissioners for end user radios or other related equipment furnished to USER by COUNTY under this Agreement. The specific lease fee schedule established by COUNTY and the list of equipment leased by USER shall be detailed in Appendix A attached hereto, and such Appendix A shall be made a part of this agreement. 2.5 Subscriber Fleet Support Fees USER agrees to pay COUNTY all Subscriber Fleet Support Fees assessed to USER by COUNTY In accordance with a cosf recovery policy established by the Board of Hennepin County Commissioners for costs including but not limited to programming, software updates, technical support, administrative support, configuration support, access to the special event shared pool of radios, training support and other costs attributable to USER’S participation under this Agreement. The Subscriber Fleet Support Fees are subject to annual adjustment and shall be detailed in Appendix A. 2.6 Maintenance and Repair Fees USER agrees to pay COUNTY all fixed fees for Tier 1 maintenance and repair services; time ai id material charges for consumables and repairs not covered under Tier 1 service: and lime and materials charges for Tier 2 maintenance and repair services. The Tier 1 Maintenance and Repair Fees, and the hourly rates for time and materials charges are subject to annual adjustmenl and shall be detailed in Appendix A. 2.7 Pass Through Metropolitan Radio Board User Fees USER agrees to pay to COUNTY ail user fees attributable to USER assessed to the COUNTY by the Metropolitan Radio Board, or its successor entity if appiicabie. and passed throuen by COUNTY to USER. ”“.e Matroociitan Radio Scare user fees snail be oetaileo m Appenoix A. 2.3 invcic:nc anc Pavnen: lerms COUNTY will invoice USER montniy. or at other intervals as oetermined by COUNTY, for all fees specifiec herein. Pnncipal and interest charges for leased equipment will commence wnen the COUNTY IS invoiced by the equipment supplier. Ail other fees specified in this Agreement wiil commence as foilows: For radios activated on or before the IS*” of the month. USER will be charged for the entire month. For radios activated after the 15” of the month, the fees will commence on the first day of the following month. Payment of all fees herein shall be made directly to the COUNTY within thirty (30) days from receiot of the invoice. 2 ? -low Down Metropolitan Radio Board Contract Provisions U5E.R agrees to ccmoiy with all applicable flow down provisions contained in Agreement No. A16906. as Amended, between the COUNTY and the Metropolitan Radio Board. Such Agreement provisions, including any Amendments thereto, are hereby incorporated herein as being part of this Agreement by this reference. 2.10 Provisional Use of USER Purchased and Owned Radios and Radio Software USER may utilize radios purchased and owned by USER on the System provided that such radios and i-adio operating software versions are specifically certified for use on the System by the Metropolitan .Radio Board and the COUNTY. Non-certified radios, or radios operating with non-certrfied software versions will not be allowed to access or use the System. I 2.11 De-certification and Disposition of Obsolete Radios The Metropolitan Radio Board and COUNTY may de-certify radios and/or radio operating so^are versions which become obsolete for reasons including but not limited to: become unsafe to use, impair System performance, are no longer supported by the radio Manufacturer, are no longer supported by the COUNTY, exhibit substantial defects, exhibit performance deficiencies. Impair Implementation of System upgrades, become unreliable, become economically unfeasible to maintain, etc. Except in those cases affecting safety or performance impacts to the System, COUNTY will make reasonable efforts to avoid de-certification of radios leased to USER which have not been fully depreciated and to provide USER with at least one (1) year of advance notice prior to the effective date of radio or software version de certification. De-certified radios, or radios operating with de-certified software versions will not be allowed to access or use the System. USER agrees to dispose of obsolete radios, batteries and other equipment In accordance with applicable laws and rules regarding disposal of hazardous materials. 2.12 Limitation of Radio Programming. Radio Code Plug Programming Files and System Key File Regardless of ownership, all radios on the System shall be programmed only by the COUNTY, and the COUNTY shall retain an archived electronic copy of all radio code plug programming files and encryption keys files installed in all USER radios covered under this Agreement The configuration of all radio code plug programming files and radio templates shall be subject to approval by the COUNTY before the radios will be activated on the System. All radio code plug programming files, system key files and encryption key files are the sole property of the COUNTY, and contain infonnation that is classified as security information and non-public government data. Unless specifically authorized by the COUNTY in writing, USER may not directly or indirectly, or permit any third party to: view. read, print, extract, copy, archive, edit, create, clone, transfer, tamper with or otherwise compromise the security of any radio code plug programming file, system key file or encryption key file for any radio on the System. In the event USER learns that any party has improperly or fraudulently obtained radio code plug programming file information, system key file or encryption key file. USER will immediately notify COUNTY of the security breech. 2.13 Payment for Damaged Radies USER aorees to promptly pay COUNTY for all costs incurred to repair radios damaged for any reason while lea'sed to USER, excluding ncrmal wear anc tear which is included in the COUNTY'S maintenance pregram. and also excluding damage which cc.curs while the radios are in the ccssess:on of COUNTY. I •- R‘S k c‘ -OSS for _cs:. Stoier c’ Cesircvec Rscict j5Hr. assumes full ns.< cf .css fc* CCUNT' crovicsc .'acics assignee :c rci-cmg soecialeven, anc repair loaner racics temporar.iy assigned to USER wn-cn are lost, stolen. pr.ysicaiK un-repairabte or destroyed for any reason excluding carnage which occurs while the radios are in me possession of COUNTY. USER will be invoicea. end agrees to pay. the remaining amount of tne non-cepreciated lease balance, including inte.--est. for any lost, stolen or destroyed radios. Assessment of subscriber fleet support fees and Tier 1 fixed maintenance fees will be terminated uoon such payment. 2.15 Notification to COUNTY of Lcs: cr Stolen Radios USER agrees to immediately nctry COUNTY of any missing, lost or stoien racics sc the radio can be deactivated on tne system 2.16 Radios Not Economical to Repair A USER radio which is covered under the annual Tier 1 fixed fee maintenance and repair services program listed in Appendix A which has malfunctioned, broken or failed, excluding a radio that is damaged, lost, stolen, destroyed or physically un-repairable as described in sections 2.13 and 2.14 above, and which the COUNTY determines cannot be economically repaired, by mutual agreernent may either be: (1) Replaced by COUNTY with a used radio of comparable age. value and condition if available; or (2) Considered an obsolete radio, deactivated and terminated from the lease and maintenance program witn no addiuonal fees payable by USER. In the event the reoiacement option is chosen, the used replacement radio may. at COUNTY’S option, be reconditioned or reouilt from salvaged parts and the COUNTY shall retain or assume ownership of the original failed radio and such radio may be salvaged for spare parts, rebuilt or otherwise disposed of by COUNTY. Further, if the failed radio is a COUNTY owned radio leased to USER, and the deactivate and terminate tease option is chosen, the COUNTY shall also retain ownership and disposition rights of the failed radio. 2.17 Assignment of Leased Equipment USER may terminate in whole or part the tease of radios or other equipment under this Agreement provided USER assigns the teased equipment in writing to another authorized user who has a subscriber agreement in effect with the County and further provided that the Assignee agrees in writing to make all applicable payments to COUNTY including the remaining lease payments. 2.18 Prepayment of Leased Equipment USER may pay off the remaining amount of the non-depreciated lease balanc*. Including interest, at any time during the lease term without any prepayment penalty. Title to the leased equipment shall transfer to the USER upon such payoff subject to the provisions of section 3.2. 3. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF COUNTY 3.1 Furnishinq of End User Radios COUNTY will periodically solicit orders for new, additional and replacement radios from USER. This will normally occur on an annual basis, however USER may request radios at any time. Subject to budget availability and approval by the Board of Hennepin County Commissioners, on USER’S behalf COUNTY will purchase radios, receive. Inventory, Inspect, test, program and install radios as requested by USER. COUNTY will assist USER in selecting and ordering radios that are purchased directly by USER for use on the System. 3.2 Financing of End User Radios and Transfer of Title Subject to budget availability and approval by the Board of Hennepin County Commissioners. COUNTY will finance the purchase of radios for USER s public safety operations (police, fire. EMS or emergency management) as requested by USER. The equipment lease period shall be for the expected useful life of the equipment, as determined by COUNTY. Interest shall be calculated at a fixed amount per Si,000 of equipment cost and shall be added to the equipment cost. The combined equipment and interest cost will be depreciated over the lease penod. Upon completion of payment of all pnncipal and interest fees to COUNTY, and execution by USER of any applicable Software License Agreements or Assignment of Rionts Agreements regaramc use c: emoedded software. COUNTY shai! trarsier title to the leased ecuipmer.; to USER. 3.3 Racio Maintenance and Repair Services _ COUNTY will provide two tiers of maintenance and repair services for USER radios, i ler 1 service will be provided at a fixed annual fee determined by the COUNTY and may be based on the model and age of the radio. Tier 1 service includes access to the shared pool of repair loaner radios. Tier 2 service will be provided on a time and materials basis and does not include access to repair loaner radios. Repair of Tier 1 radios may have a higner pnonty over Tier 2 radios if there is a backlog of repair work. The fixed annual fee for Tier 1 service includes all parts, labor and other costs to proviae maintenance and repair fcr internally malfunctioning radios and normal wear and tear Normal wear and tear is that anticipated qearadation which nonnaliy occurs to tne equipment in the regular course cf worn for the job position, assuming the user takes reasonable care and precaution. Tier i ser/ice excludes consumables such as batteries'and antennas, and also excludes radio accessories. Repairs beyond internal malfunctions and normal wear and tear including damage caused by negligence or accidental damage such as fire, water immersion, crushing, dropping from a moving vehicle, etc., and consumables will be assessed on a time and materials basis in addition to the fixed annual Tier 1 maintenance fee. Unless specifically excluded by COUNTY, all radios assigned for public safety operations on the System under this Agreement, regardless of ownership, will be provided with Tier 1 maintenance service by COUNTY and will be allocated the annual fixed costs. USER owned radios assigned for non-pubiic safety operations witi be aole to obtain Tier 2 maintenance services from COUNTY by mutual concurrence. 1 3.4 Repair Loaner and Special Event Radios COUNTY will maintain a fleet of radios which will be made available to USER, gene.'aily on a first come first serve basis, for temporary assignment for special events, response to emergencies, or other similar events. USER may receive a temporary loaner radio to replace a radio taken out of service for maintenance or repair if the failed radio is covered under the Tier t annual fixed fee maintenance and repair services program listed in Appendix A. If there are more requests for loaner radios than can be accommodated, the COUNTY will prioritize allocations and may require that USER return repair loaner and special event radios early. 3.5 Allocation of System Resources COUNTY will allocate to USER, on a fair and non-discriminatory basis, sufficient System resources including Talk Groups, Announcement Groups, Radio Unit IDs, Alias IDs, etc. in order to provide USER with an equivalent grade of service afforded to other comparable System users. 3.6 Monitoring of USER Talk Groups COUNTY will periodically monitor talk groups allocated to USER for USER'S internal use for system management purposes including but not limited to maintenance, troubleshooting, system performance assessments, unusual traffic patterns (sudden jump in usage), policy and procedure compliance checks, etc. COUNTY monitoring of USER'S talk groups may occur at any time, for any duration, may be without notice and is subject to recording. 3.7 Radio Operator Training COUNTY will provide USER with access to end user radio training instructional materials provided to COUNTY from the Metropolitan Radio Board or other sources. For the deployment of immediate and near term radios as defined in the COUNTY’S Radio Purchasing and Deployment Plan adopted uy Board Resolution No. 01-622R2, COUNTY will assist USER in training USER'S personnel by providing a COUNTY radio trainer (or trainers) to work in conjunction with a USER provided trainer (or trainers) to deliver training to USER'S radio operators. Once the near term deployment is completed, USER will have primary responsibility for training new employees and for providing refresher training. 3.6 Database Administration OUNTY will manage and administer tne System database records containing the information related tor* N-/ nventcr/, configuration, programming history, software version control, raoio IDs. service levels. 3ta:isi:oa. jsace anaivsis. etc. fcr USER s subscriber radios used on trie System. 2.S Racio Stauon Licenses COUNTY snail hold and administer all FCC licenses on behalf of all users of the System. USER shall operate as authonzed mobile, portable and control station units under the COUNTY'S FCC radio station licenses 4. TERM AND CANCELLATION •1.1 Term of Agreement ~riis Agreement shall be for an initial term beginning on the cate executed oy the COUNTY and continuing trirough December 31. 2008. After the initial term and any subsequent extensions thereto, triis Agreement will automatically be extended for an additional one (1) year term, unless either party gives written notice of intent not to extend to the other party, at least one hundred twenty (120) days prior to the expiration of the then current term. 4.2 Cancellation of Agreement This Agreement may be canceled with or without cause by either party upon one hundred eighty (180) days' written notice, provided that any such canceiiation by COUNTY shall require action by the Board of Hennepin County Commissioners. 4.3 Actions Upon Termination Upon expiration or cancellation of this Agreement as provided for herein, USER shall either (1) assign all leased equipment in writing to another authorized user who has a subscriber agreement in effect with the County as provided for in paragraph 2.17 of this Agreement; or (2) pay COUNTY the remaining amount of the non-depreciated lease balance, including interest, which has not been recovered under lease payments as provided for in paragraph 2.18 of this Agreement; and USER shall cease all use of the System including using the system with radios owned by USER. 5. MERGER AND MODIFICATION 5.1 Entire Agreement It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. All items referred to in this Agreement are incorporated or attached and are deemed to be part of this Agreement. 5.2 Amendments to Agreement Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this Agreement, except for revisions to Appendix A as provided for below, shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties hereto. 5.3 Appendix A Revisions . Appendix A shall be updated by COUNTY, and provided to USER annually, and at other times as deemed necessary by COUNTY, to reflect any changes to the list of available equipment, lease rates, fleet support fees, maintenance fees, Metropolitan Radio Board user fees, and the list of equipment currently under lease to USER. 6. DEFAULT 6.1 If the USER fails to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement, this shall constitute a default. Unless the USER’S default is excused by the COUNTY, the COUNTY may upon wntten notice immediately cancel this Agreement in its entirety. 5.2 In :ne event the COUNTi canceis this Agreement due to USER’S default. ’JSER shall return all leased equiomen; anc other matenals provioeo to USER py COUNTY, pay COUNTY the remainder of the balance of the onginal cost of the leased equipment whiCh has not been recovered under lease payments and USER shall cease all use of COUNTY'S System. 6.3 Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contiary, the USER shall not be relieved of liability to the COUNTY for damages sustained by the COUNTY by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by the USER. 6,4 The above remedies shall be in addition to any other right or remedy availaole to the COUNTY under this contract, law. statute, rule, and/or equity. 6.5 The COUNTY’S failure to insist upon strict performance of any provision or to exercise any right under this Agreement shall not be deemed a relinquishment or waiver of the same, unless consented to in writing. Such consent shall not constitute a general waiver or relinquishment throughout the entire term of the Agreement. 7. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 7.1 Independent Parties It is mutually understood that this Agreement does not create an employment relationship between the parlies, nor does it create a partnership or joint venture, nor does it constitute a cooperative agreement or joint powers agreement. L iiiAiii k‘ i iiiT^rKan f III! hum iili *i me iTt iiirrtev ir %-r. r * V.''rK* s 7.2 indemnification The USER agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the COUNTY, its officials, officers, agents,' volunteers arui employees from any liability, claims, causes of action. Judgments, damages, losses, costs, or expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, resulting directly or indirectly from any act or omission of the USER, a subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, and/or anyone for whose acts and/or omissions they may be liable in the use of the equipment provided pursuant to this Agreement, and against all loss by reason of the failure of the USER to perform fully, in any respect, all obligations under this Agreement 7.3 Data Privacy USER, its officers, agents, owners, partners, employees, volunteers or subcontractors agree to abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Goverrvnent Data Practices Act. Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13. and all other applicable state and federal laws, rules, regulations and orders relating to data privacy or confidentiality, and as any of the same may be amended. USER agrees to defend, indemnify ar>d hold the COUNTY, its officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers harmless from any claims resulting from USER'S officers', agents', owners', partners', employees ’, volunteers', assignees' or subcontractors' unlawful disclosure and/or use of such protected data. The terms of this paragraph shall survive the cancellation or termination of this Agreement. 7.4 Records - Availability/ Access Subject to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05, Subd. 5 (as may be amended), the USER agrees that the COUNTY, the State Auditor, the Legislative Auditor or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours, and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent to the accounting practices and procedures of the USER and involve transactions relating to this Agreement. Such materials shall be maintained and such access and rights shall be in force and effect during the period of the contract and for six (6) years after its termination or cancellation. 7.5 Contract Administration In order to coordinate the services of the USER with the activities of the COUNTY so as to accomplish the purposes of this contract._________________________________________________ . snail manage this contraa on benaif of the USER and serve as liaison between the COUNTY and the JSER. 5 Notices Any notice or demand whicn must be given or made by a party hereto under the terms of this Agreement or any statute or ordinance shall be in writing, and shall be sent registered or certified mail. Notices to the COUNTY shall be sent to the County Administrator with a copy to the Office of the County Sheriff at the address given below. Notice to the USER shall be sent to the address stated below. To COUNTY:Hennepin County Administrator A-2303 Government Center Minneapolis. MN 55467 Copy to:Radio Communications Manager Hennepin County Sheriff's Office Communications Division 9300 Naper Street Golden Valley. MN 55427 USER: 8 7.7 Mlnn«80ta Uws Govm The Laws of the State or i^innesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concemirtg the validity arKi construction of this contract and the 1^1 relations between the herein parties stkI performance under it The appropriate venue arxi Jurisdidion for any Migation twreunder will be those courte located within the County of Hennepin. State of Minnesota. Litigation, however, in the federat courts involving the herein parties will be in the appropriate federal court within the State of Minnesota, if any provision of this contract is held invalid. iUegal or unenforceable, the remaining provisions wili not be affected. ; This Portion of Page Intentionally Left Blank 1 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL USER, having signed this contract, and the County having duiy approved this contract on the day of _________,_____and pursuant to such approval, the proper County officials having signed this contract, the parties hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. Approved as to form and execution Assistant County Attorney Date: City organized under. Statutory,Option A COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA By: County Administrator USER Name: By:__ and By; Title Title Option B.Charter IF THE CONTRACT IS WITH A CITY USE THIS SIGNATURE PAGE. IF A CITY IS ORGANIZED UNDER THE STATUTORY STANDARD FORM OR UNDER OPTIONAL PLAN A, THE MAYOR AND CLERK MUST SIGN AND THE CORPORATE SEAL MUST BE AFFIXED; UNDER OPTIONAL PLAN B. THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER MUST SIGN; UNDER CHARTER. INQUIRE OF CITY WHO IS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN. A NOTARY IS NOT REQUIRED. HOWEVER. A CERTIFIED COPY OF CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONTRACT MUST BE ATTACHED. L 7 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JW« 1 0 2002 CTVOFOHoivo Date: June 13,2002 Item No: P Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name: Title: Ron Moorse City Administrator 0 Item Description: Police Radio Syslem/Equipment Upgrade Exhibits: None DISCUSSION The OroiK) Police Department, along with all of the smaller police departments in the Lake Mirmetonka area, as well as a number of larger police departments in Hennepin County, receive 24-hour dispatch service, as well as the lease, maintenance, and repair of the mobile radio equipment in the police squads and the portable radio equipment carried by the police officers. Hennepin County is upgrading its public safety radio communications system from the current VHF analog system to a 800 MHZ digital system. The Orono Police Department needs to upgrade its radio equipment to be compatible with the 800 MHZ system. The Orono Police Department requires replacement of IS portable radios and 12 mobile radios. Lease cost will be iqiproximately $17,900 in 2002. This cost includes optional equipment needed per portable radio including charger, remote microphone, spare battery and belt clip. It also reflects the installation cost of the mobile radios. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve expenditures of $17,900 for the lease of 800 MHZ radios in 2002. ,1 : j w ■! Memo To: From: Date: Subject: Mr. Moorse/^ Chief 6/5/02 / Line Item Adjustment Request For the Request for Council Action described as *ToIice Radio System/Equipment Upgrade. An additional $7,900 is needed for the lease of the new radios. This will require a transfer of funding from line item #550 (Automotive Equipment) to the line item #414 (Radio Rental). We will be unable to purchase an unmarked vehicle for surveillance and undercover use due to the reduction in the automotive equipment line for FY 2002. it: 1 ! ♦ ■ f: V ■ ' i f COmtrn meeting I 0 2002 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITYOFORON o DATE; June 7,2002 ITEM NO: Department Approval; Neoic RonMoorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Urban Hennepin County Joint Cooperation Agreement for FY 2003-2005 - Resolution In order for the City to be eligible to receive grant funds through the Community Development Block Grant or HOME Programs, it is necessary to execute an Urban Hennepin County Joint Cooperation Agreement every three years. Attached is a letter explaining the purpose of the agreement, as well as several changes to the agreement for the upcoming three-year period, and a resolution authorizing the execution of the Joint Cooperation Agreement. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to execute the new Joint Cooperation Agreement for Fiscal Years 2003 - 2005. _J A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ORONO AND HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM IN FY 2003 - 2005 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, Minnesota and the County of Hennepin have in effect a Joint Cooperation Agreement for purposes of qualifying as an Urban County under the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Programs; and WHEREAS, the City and County wish to execute a new Joint Cooperation Agreement in order to continue to qualify as an Urban County for purposes of the Community Development Block Grant and Home Programs. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a new Joint Cooperation Agreement between the City and County be executed effective October I, 2002, and that the Mayor and the City Administrator be authorized and directed to sign the Agreement on behalf of the City. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regulai meeting held on this 10th day of June, 2002. ATTEST: Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Page 1 of 1 I Hcnntpin County Dopartmont of Transit & Community Works Hennepin 417 North Fifth Street, Suite 320 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1362 612-348-9260, Phone 612-348-9710,Fax www.co.hennepin.mn.us May 22,2002 Mr. Ronald Moorse City Administrator City of Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 .e • r. Subject: Fiscal Year 2003-2005 Joint Cooperation Agreement Dear Mr. Moorse: Accompanying for your review and execution is the Urban Hennepin County Joint Cooperation Agreement for FY 2003 - 2005. The agreement sets forth broad shared powers for carrying out housing and community development activities. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires the agreement in order for Hennepin County to quality as an urban county and receive Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) entitlement funds. A draft gray-line copy of the agreement is enclosed, which details all revisions to the current agreement. There are several significant changes. The first deals with the need for “timely” expenditure of funds. This relates to the HUD requirement that unexpended CDBG funds cannot total more than 1.5 times the last grant allocation. The hard work of municipal and county staff to meet this expenditure goal has proven successful, but it was felt advisable to provide additional flexibility to address this problem and to avoid financial penalty in the future. One of these changes reduces the time for implementing activities from 24 months to 18 months. Another change is to increase the county administrative fee from 10 to 13 percent of the grant total to offset increasing county property tax expenditures for this purpose. Additionally, this administrative fee will include a set aside for countywide fair housing efforts. As a community participating in the Urban Hennepin County Program, your city would not be eligible in FY 2003 - 2005 to apply for grants under the small cities or state CDBG programs. Your community will automatically participate in the Hennepin County HOME Program and will not be eligible to receive HOME funds through the state or other consortiums An Equal Opportunity Employer Becycted Paper May 22.2002 Mr. Ronald Moorse Page 2 Please execute the city signature page of the agreement to indicate your continued participation in the Urban County Program. Return only an original copy of the city signature page with the city seal and a copy of the authorizing resolution. These documents must be returned to this office no later than June 30,2002. A sample council resolution is enclosed. A copy of the county signature page will be provided after execution by the county. Please contact Jim Ford at 612/348-6013 if you have any questions about the agreement or process. I look forward to continuing our cooperative efforts in addressing suburban Hennepin Enclosures: Cooperation Agreement Draft gray line agreement Sample Resolution ■ iwWh—ifctirtian Contract No. A04232 JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN. State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," A-2400 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55487, and the cities executing this Master Agreement, each hereinafter respectively referred to as "COOPERATING UNIT," said parties to this Agreement each being governmental units of the State of Minnesota, and made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59: WITNESSETH: COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY agree that it is desirable and in the interests of their citizens that COOPERATING UNIT shares its authority to carry out essential community development and housing activities with COUNTY in order to permit COUNTY to secure and administer Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership funds as an Urban County within the provisions of the Act as herein defined and, therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this Agreement, the parties mutually agree to the following terms and conditions. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that by the execution of this Agreement that it understands that it: 1. May not also apply for grants under the State CDBG Program from appropriations for fiscal years during which it is participating in the Urban County Program; and 2. May not participate in a HOME Consortium except through the Urban County. I. DEFINITIONS The definitions contained in 42 USC 5302 of the Act and 24 CFR §570.3 of the Regulations are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof, and the terms defined in this section have the meanmgs given them: A. "Act" means Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). B. "Regulations ” means the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act, including but not limited to 24 CFR Part 570. C. "HUD" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. D. "Cooperating Unit" means any city or town in Hennepin County that has entered into a cooperation agreement that is identical to this Agreement, as well as Hennepin County, which is a party to each Agreement. E. "Consolidated Plan ” means the document bearing that title or similarly required statements or documents submitted to HUD for authonzation to expend the annual grant amount and which is developed by the COUNTY in conjunction with COOPER.ATING UNITS as part of the Community Development Block Grant Program. F."Metropolitan City" means any city located in whole or in pan in Hennepin County which is certified by HUD to have a population of 50,000 or more people. II. PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize COUNTY and COOPERATING UNIT to cooperate to undertake, or assist in undertaking, community renewal and lower income housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing and authorizes COUNTY to carry out these and other eligible activities for the benefit of eligible recipients who reside within the corporate limits of the COOPERATING UNIT which will be funded from annual Community Development Block Grant and HOME appropriations for the Federal Fiscal Years 2003, 2004 and 2005 and from any program income generated from the e.xpenditure of such funds. III. AGREEMENT The term of this Agreement is for a period commencing on October 1,2002 and terminating no sooner than the end of the program year covered by the Consolidated Plan for the basic grant amount for the Fiscal Year 2005, as authorized by HUD, and for such additional time as may be required for the e.xpenditure of funds granted to the County for such period. COUNTY may notify COOPER.ATING UNIT prior to the end of the Urban County qualification period that the Agreement will automatically be renewed unless it is terminated in wnting by either party. Either COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT may exercise the option to terminate the Agreement at the end of the Urban County qualification period. If COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT fail to exercise that option, it will not have the opportunity to exercise that option until the end of a subsequent Urban County qualification period. COUNTY will notify the COOPERATING UNIT in wnting of its right to elect to be excluded by the date specified by HUD. This Agreement must be amended by wntten agreement of all parties to incorporate any changes necessary to meet the requirements for cooperation agreements set forth in the Urban County Qualification Notice applicable for the year in which the next qualification of the County is scheduled. Failure by cither party to adopt such an amendment to the Agreement shall automatically terminate the Agreement following the expenditure of all CDBG and HOME funds allocated for use in COOPERATING UNIT’S jurisdiction. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, this Agreement may be terminated at the end of the program period during which HUD withdraws its designation of COUNTY as an Urban County under the Act. This Agreement shall be executed by the appropriate officers of COOPERATING LT41T and COUNTY pursuant to authonty granted them by their respective governing bodies, and a copy of the authorizing resolution and executed Agreement shall be filed promptly by the COOPERATLNG UNIT in the Hennepin County Department of Housing, Community Works and Transit, and in no event shall the Agreement be filed later than June .10, 2002. COOPER-ATING UNIT and COUNTY shall take all actions necessary to assure compliance with the applicant ’s certifications required by Section 104(b) of the Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Fair Housing Act. Section 109 ofTitle I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974; and other applicable laws. IV. ACTIVITIES COOPERATING UNIT agrees that awarded grant funds will be used to undertake and carry out, within the terms of this Agreement, certain projects involving one or more of the essential activities eligible for funding under the Act. COUNTY agrees and will assist COOPERATING UNIT in the undertaking of such essential activities by- providing the services specified in this .Agreement. The parties mutually agree to comply with all applicable requirements of the Act and the Regulations and other relevant Federal and/or .Minnesota statutes or regulations in the use of basic grant amounts. Nothing in this Article shall be construed to lessen or abrogate COUNTY’S responsibility to assume all obligations of an applicant under the Act, including the development of the Consolidated Plan, pursuant to 24 CFR Part 91 . COOPER.ATING UNIT further specifically agrees as follows: A. B. C. D. E. COOPERATING UTJIT will, in accord with a COUNTY-established schedule, prepare and provide to COUNTS', in a prescribed form, requests for the use of Community- Development Block Grant Funds consistent with this Agreement, program regulations and the Urban Hennepin County Consolidated Plan. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that, pursuant to 24 CFR §570.501 jb), it is subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients, including the requirement for a written Subrecipient Agreement set forth in 24 Cr R §570.503. The Subrecipient Agreement will cover the implemenution requirements for each actiuty funded pursuant to this Agreement and shall be duly executed with and in a form prescribed by COUNTY. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that it is subject to the same subrccipicnt requirements stated in paragraph B above in instances where an agency other than itself is undertaking an activity pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. In such instances, a written Third Party Agreement shall be duly executed between the agency and COOPERATING UNIT in a form prescribed by COUNTY. COOPERATING UNIT shall implement all activities funded for each annual program pursuant to this Agreement within eighteen (18) months of the authonzation by HUD to expend the basic grant amount. 1. Funds for all activities not implemented within eighteen (18) months shall be transferred to a separate account for reallocation on a competitive request for proposal basis. 2. Limited extensions to the implementation period may be granted upon request only in cases where the authorized activity has been initiated and/or subject of a binding contract to proceed. 3.If COUNTY is notified by HUD that it has not met the performance standard for the timely expenditure of funds at 24 CFR 570.902(a) and the COUNTY-entitlcmcnt grant is reduced by HI ID. according to its policy on corrective actions, then the basic grant amount to any COOPERATING UNIT that has not met its expenditure goal shall be reduced in a manner proportionate to the reduction in the COUNTY grant. COOPERATING L^NIT w-ill take actions necessary to assist in accomplishing the community development program and housing goals, as contained in the Urban Hennepin County- Consolidated Plan. i F.C(X)PERATING UNIT shall ensure that all programs and/or activities funded, in part or in full by grant funds received pursuant to this Agreement, shall be undertaken affirmatively with regard to fair housing, employment and business opportunities for minorities and women. It shall, in implementing all programs and/or activities funded by the basic grant amount, comply with ail applicable Federal and Minnesota Laws, statutes, rules and regulations with regard to civil rights, affirmative action and equal employment opportunities and Administrative Rule issued by the COUNTY. COOPERATING UNIT that does not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or that impedes action by COUNTY to comply with its fair housing certification shall be prohibited from receiving CDBG funding for any activities. COOPERATING UNIT shall participate in the citizen participation process, as established by COUNTY, in compliance with the requirements of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. I.COOPERATING UNIT shall reimburse COUNTY for any expenditure determined by HUD or COUNTY' to be ineligible. J.COOPERfVTING UNIT shall prepare, execute, and cause to be fileu all documents protecting the interests of the parties hereto or any other party of interest as may be designated by the COUNTY'. COOPERATING UNIT has adopted and is enforcing; 1.A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in nonviolent civil rights demonstrations; and A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically bamng entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such nonviolent civil nghts demonstrations within its jurisdiction. COUNTY further specifically agrees as follows: A.COUNTY' shall prepare and submit to HUD and appropriate reviewing agencies, on an annual basis, all plans, statements and program documents necessary for receipt of a basic grant amount under the Act. B. COUNTY' shall provide, to the maximum extent feasible, technical assistance and coordinating serv ices to COOPERATING UNIT in the preparation and submission of a request for funding. C.COUNTY’ shall provide ongoing technical assistance to COOPER-\TING UNIT to aid COLTNTY in fulfilling its responsibility to HUD for accomplishment of the community development program and housing goals. D.COUN TY' shall, upon official request by COOPER.ATING UNIT, agree to administer local housing rehabilitation grant programs funded pursuant to the Agreement, provided that COUNTY' shall receive Twelve percent (12%) of the allocation by COOPERATING UNIT to the activity as reimbursement for costs associated with the administration of COOPERATING UNIT activity. E. COUNTY may, at its discretion and upon official reques} by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to administer, for a possible fee, other programs and/or activities funded pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. F. COUNTY may, as necessary for clarification and coordination of program administration, develop and implement Administrative Rules consistent with the Act, Regulations, HUD administrative directives, and administrative requirements of COUNTY. V. ALLOCATIO.N OF BASIC GRANT A.MOUNTS Basic grant amounts received by the COUNTY under Section 106 of the Aci shall be allocated as follows: A. COUNTY shall retain thirteen percent (13%) of the annual b.i grant amount for the administration of the program. Included in this administrative amount is funding for annual county-wide Fair Housing activities. B.The balance of the basic grant amount shall be made available by COUNTY to COOPERATING UNITS in accordance with the formula stated in part C and the procedure stated in part D of this section for the purpose of allowing the COOPER,-\TrNG UNITS to submit funding requests. The allocation is for planning purposes only and is not a guarantee of funding. The COUNTS’ will calculate, for each COOPER-\TING UNIT, an amount that bears the same ratio to the balance of the basic grant amount as the average of the ratios between: 1. The population of COOPER.ATING UNIT and the population of all COOPERATING UNfTS. The extent of poverty in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of poverty in all COOPERATING UNITS. 3. The extent of overcrowded housing by units in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of overcrowded housing by units in all COOPERATING UNITS. 4. In determining the average of the above ratios, the ratio involving the extent of poverty shall be counted twice. D. Funds will be made available to communities utilizing the formula specified in C of this Section in the following manner: I.COOPERATING UNIT qualifying as a Metropolitan City (hasing populations of at least 50,000) will receive annual funding allocations equal to the HUD formula entitlement cr the COUNTY formula allocation, whichever is greater. Other COOPER.ATING UNITS with COUNTY formula allocations of $75,000 or more wall receive funding allocations in accordance w ith the formula allocations. 3.COOPER.\TlNG UNITS with COUNTY formula allocations of less than $75,000 will have their funds consolidated in a pool for aw ard in a manner determined by COUNTY. Only the COOPERATING UNITS, whose funding has been pooled, will be eligible to compete for these funds. E.The COUNTY shall develop these ratios based upon data to be furnished by HUD. The COUNTY assumes no duty to gather such data independently and assumes no liability for any errors in the data furnished by HUD. F.In the event COOPER*-\TING UNIT does not request a funding allocation, or a portion thereof, the amount not requested shall be made available to other participating communities, in a manner determined by COUNTY. VI. METROPOLITAN CITIES Any metropolitan city executing this Agreement shall defer their entitlement status and become part of Urban Hermepin County. This agreement can be voided if the COOPERATING UNIT is advised by HUD, prior to the completion of the re* qualification process for fiscal years 2003-20US, that it is eligible to become a metropolitan city and the COOPERATING UNIT elects to take its entitlement status. If the agreement is not voided on the basis of the COOPERATING UNIT’S eligibility as a metropolitan city prior to July 13,2002, the COOPERATING UNIT must remain a part of the COUNTY program for the entire three-year period of the COUNTY qualification. VU. OPINION OF COUNSEL The undersigned, on behalf of the Hennepin County Attorney, having reviewed this .Agreement, hereby opines that the terms and provisions of the Agreement are fully authorized under State and local law and that the COOPERATING UNIT has full legal authority to undertake or assist in undertaking essential community development and housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly-assisted housing. Assistant County Attorney VIII. HENNEPIN COUNTY EXECUTION The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on 200?, and pursuant to such approval and the proper County official having signed this Agreement, the COUNTY agrees to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Assistant County Attorney Date: APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: Assistant County Attorney Date: COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA By: Chair of its County Board And: Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator Attest: Deputy/Clerk of the County Board And: Assistant County Administrator, Public Works and County Engineer RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Director, Housing, Community Works and Transit Department Date: i lit I11 III nilIII I ifiiiiriiiiifitinriii J IX. COOPERATING UNIT EXECUTION COOPERATING UNIT, having signed this Agreement, and the COOPERATING UNITS governing body having duly approved this Agreement on__________, 2002, and pursuant to such approval and the proper city official having signed this Agreement, COOPERATING UNIT agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Joint Cooperation Agreement, contract A________. May 20.2002 CITY OF By: Its Mayor And: Its City Manager ATTEST: i CITY MUST CHECK ONE: The City is organized pursuant to: Plan A PlanB Charter e i It ■ ■ i n I ■ SAMPLE RESOLUTION RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF __________AND HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM LN FY 2003 - 2005. WHEREAS, the City of j Minnesota and the County of Hennepin have in effect a Joint Cooperation Agreement for purposes of qualifying as an Urban County under the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Programs; and WHEREAS, the City and County wish to execute a new Joint Cooperation Agreement in order to continue to qualify as an Urban County for purposes of the Community Development Block Grant and HOME Programs. BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that a new Joint Cooperation Agreement between the City and County be executed effective October 1,2002, and that the Mayor and the City ^lanag et/Administrator be authorized and directed to sign the Agreement on behalf of the City. DATE: Mayor ATTEST: OADPUPROG'CDBG\Coopagree02'SA.MPLE RESOLUTION Joe Contract No. JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMEiNT URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COiVLMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," A-2400 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55487, and the cities executing this Master Agreement, each hereinafter respectively referred to as "COOPERATING UNIT," said parties to this Agreement each being governmental units of the State of Minnesota, and made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59: WITNESSETH: COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY agree that it is desirable and in the interests of their citizens that COOPERATING UNIT shares its authority to carry out essential community development and housing activities with COUNTY in order to permit COUNTY to secure and administer Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership funds as an Urban County within the provisions of the Act as herein defined and. therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this Agreement, the parties mutually agree to the following terms and conditions. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that by the execution of this Agreement that it understands that it: 1. May not also apply for grants under the State CDBG Program from appropriations for fiscal years during which it is participating in the Urban County Program; and 2. May not participate in a HOME Consortium except through the Urban County. I. DEFINITIONS The definitions contained in 42 USC 5302 of the Act and 24 CFR §570.3 of the Regulations are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof, and the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them: A. "Act" means Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 5301 el seq.). B. "Regulations" means the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act, including but not limited to 24 CFR Part 570. C. "HUD" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. D. "Cooperating Unit" means any city or town in Hennepin County that has entered into a cooperation agreement that is identical to this Agreement, as well as Hennepin County, which is a party to each Agreement. E. "Consolidated Plan" means the document bearing that title or similarly required statements or documents submitted to HUD for authorization to expend the annual grant amount and which is ! I developed by the COUNTY' in conjunction with COOPERATING UNITS as pan of the Community Development Block Grant Program. F. "Metropolitan City" means any city located in whole or in part in Hennepin County which is certified by HUD to have a population of 50,000 or more people. II. PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to authonze COUNTY' and COOPERATING UNIT to cooperate to undertake, or assist in undertaking, community renewal and lower income housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing and authorizes COUNTY to carry out these and other eligible activities for the benefit of eligible recipients who reside within the corporate limits of the COOPER.YTING UNIT which will be funded from annual Community Development Block Grant and HOME appropriations for the Federal Fiscal Y'ears 2pp3,.29|M .and 2005 and from any program income generated from the e.xpenditure of such funds. Ill, .AGREE.MENT The term of this Agreement is for a period commencing on October 1,2002 and terminating no sooner than the end of the program year covered by the Consolidated Plan for the basic grant amount for the Fiscal Y'ear 2005. as authorized by HUD, and for such additional time as may be required for the expenditure of funds granted to the County for such penod. COUNTY may notify COOPERATING UNIT prior to the end of the Urban County qualification period that the Agreement will automatically be renewed unless it is terminated in writing by either party. Either COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT may exercise the option to terminate the Agreement at the end of the Urban County qualification period. If COUNTY' or COOPERATING UNIT fail to exercise that option, it will not have the opportunity to exercise that option until the end of a subsequent Urban County qualification period. COUNTY will notify tlie COOPERATING UNIT in writing of its right to elect to be excluded by the date specified by HUD. This Agreement must be amended by written agreement of all parties to incorporate any changes necessary to meet the requirements for cooperation agreements set forth in the Urban County Qualification Notice applicable for the year in which the ne.xt qualification of the County is scheduled. Failure by cither party to adopt such an amendment to the Agreement shall automatically terminate the Agreement following the expenditure of all CDBG and HOME funds allocated for use in COOPERATING UNIT'S Jurisdiction. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, this Agreement may be terminated at the end of the program period during which HUD w ithdraws its designation of COUNTY as an Urban County under the Act. This Agreement shall be e.xecuted by the appropriate officers of COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY pursuant to authonty granted them by their respectiv e governing bodies, and a copy of the authorizing resolution and executed Agreement shall be filed promptly by the COOPERATING UNIT in the Hennepin County Department of Housing, Community Works and Transit, and in no event shall the Agreement be filed later than June 30.'2002. COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY shall take all actions necessary to assure compliance with the applicant’s certifications required by Section 104(b) of the Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, including Title VI of the Civil Rights .Act of 1964; the Fair Housing Act, Section 109 ofTitle I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974; and other applicable laws. IV. ACTIVITIES COOPERATING UNIT a^'ces that awarded grant funds will be used to undertake and carr\ out, within the terms of this Agreement, certain projects involving one or more of the essential activities eligible for funding under the Act. COUNTY agrees and will assist COOPERATING UNIT in the undertaking of such essential activities by providing the services specified in this Agreement. The parties mutually agree to comply with all applicable requirements of the Act and the Regulations and other relevant Federal and’or Minnesota statutes or regulations in the use of basic grant amounts. Nothing in this Article shall be construed to lessen or abrogate COUNTY’S responsibility to assume all obligations of an applicant under the Act, including the development of the Consolidated Plan, pursuant to 24 CFR Part 91. COOPERATING IFNIT further specifically agrees as follows: A. B E. COOPERATING UNIT w ill, in accord with a COUNTY-established schedule, prepare and provide to COUNTY', in a prescribed form, requests for the use of Community Development Block Grant Funds consistent with this Agreement, program regulations and the Urban Hennepin County Consolidated Plan. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that, pursuant to 24 CFR §570.501 (b), it is subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients, including the requirement for a written Subrecipient Agreement set forth in 24 CFR §570.503. The Subrecipient Agreement will cover the implementation requirements for each activity funded pursuant to this Agreement and shall be duly executed with and in a form presenbed by COUNTY. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that it is subject to the same subrccipicnt requirements stated in paragraph B above in instances where an agency other than itself is undertaking an activity pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPER/\TING UNIT. In such instances, a written Third Party Agreement shall be duly executed between the agency and COOPERATING UNIT in a form prescribed by COUNTY. COOPERA TING UNIT shall implement all activities funded for each annual program pursuant to this Agreement w ithin Twenty Fouf"(2 4 ) Eighteen (18) months of the authorization by HUD to expend the basic grant amount. 1 . Funds for all activities not implemented within Twenty Four (2 4 ) Eighteen (18) months shall be transterred to a sep'^rate account for reallocation on a competitive request for proposal basis. 2. Limited extensions to thc implementation period extensions may be granted upon request ofUy tn cases where the authorized activity has been initiated and'or subject of a binding contract to proceed. 3.If COUNTY' is notified by HUD that it has not met the performance standard for Acdimcly expenditure of funds at 24 CFR 570i902(a) and the COUNTY entitlement grant is reduced by HUD, according to its policy on corrective actions, then the basic grant amount^vOny COOPERATING UNIT that has not met its expenditure goal shall be reduced in ji^^^tnner propgrtionatejo Ae .reduchpnjn the COU^ COOPERATING UNIT will take actions necessary to assist in accomplishing the community development program and housing goals, as contained in the Urban Henneptn County Consolidated Plan. «n-<n&4 %i.^n*'tfTirrwffa ?,i^rrr -r*'.iJtMl F.COOPERATING L^NIT shall ensure that all programs and'br activities funded, in part or in full by grant funds received pursuant to this Agreement, shall be undertaken affirmatively with regard to fair housing, employment and business opportunities for minonties and women. It shall, in implementing all programs and/or activities funded by the basic grant amount, comply with all applicable Federal and Minnesota Laws, statutes, rules and regulations with regard to civil rights, affirmative action and equal employment opportunities and Administrative Rule issued by the COUNTV'. COOPERATING UNIT that docs not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or that impedes action by COUNTY to comply with its fair housing certification shall be prohibited from receiving CDBG funding for any activities. COOPER,‘\TING UNIT shall participate in the citizen participation process, as established by COUNTY, in compliance with the requirements of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. I. COOPERATING UNIT shall reimburse COUNTY for any e.xpenditurc determined by HUD or COUNTY to be ineligible. J.COOPERATING UNIT shall prepare, e.xecute, and cause to be filed all documents protecting the interests of the parties hereto or any other party of interest as may be designated by the COUNTY. K. COOPERATING UNIT has adopted and is enforcing: I.A policy prohibiting the use of e.xcessivc force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in nonviolent civil rights demonstrations; and 2.A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically bamng entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such nonviolent civil rights demonstrations within its jurisdiction. COUNTY' further specifically agrees as follows: A. COUNTY shall prepare and submit to HUD and appropriate reviewing agencies, on an annual basis, all plans, statements and program documents necessary for receipt of a basic grant amount under the Act. B.COUNTY shall provide, to the ma.\imum e.xtent feasible, technical assistance and coordinating services to COOPERATING UNIT in the preparation and submission of a request for funding. C.COUNTY shall provide ongoing technical assistance to COOPERATING UNIT to aid COUNTY in fulfilling its responsibility to HUD for accomplishment of the community development program and housing goals. D.COUNTY' shall, upon otTicial request by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to administer local housing rehabilitation grant programs funded pursuant to the Agreement, provided that COLT^TY shall receive Twelve percent (12%) of the allocation by COOPERATING UNIT to the activity as reimbursement for costs associated with the administration of COOPER.\TING UNIT activity. ---------iiiiiimiiin .......... iiin III mwara COUNTY may, at its discretion and upon official request by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to administer, for a possible fee, other programs and/or activities funded pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. COUNTY may, as necessary for clarification and coordination of program administration, develop and implement Administrative Rules consistent with ihe Act, Regulations, HUD administrative directives, and administrative requirements of COUNTY. V. ALLOCATION OF BASIC GRANT AMOUNTS Basic grant amounts received by the COUNTY under Section 106 of the Act shall be allocated as follows: jeOUNTY shall retain Ten Thirieet)' percent (10%) (13,%) of the annual basic grant amount for the undertak ing of eligible ytivities. the administration of Ac brogram. Include in this adi mniafialKv e ^puntjsXundmg fbr^uinual cpunty-i^e^^^^ B.The balance of the basic grant amount shall be made available by COUNTY to COOPERATING UNITS in accordance with the formula stated in part C and the procedure stated tn part D of this section for the purpose of allowing the COOPERATING UNITS to submit funding requests. The allocation is for plarming purposes only and is not a guarantee of funding. The COUNTY will calculate, for each COOPERATING UNIT, an amount that bears Ae same ratio to the balance of the basic grant amount as the average of the ratios between: 1. 2. The population of COOPERATING UNIT and the population of all COOPEIL^TING UNITS. The extent of poverty in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of poverty in all COOPERATING UNITS. The extent of overcrowded housing by units in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of overcrow ded housing by units in all COOPERATING UNITS. In deterr.iining the average of the above ratios, the ratio involving the extent of poverty shall be counted twice. D. Funds will be made available to communities utilizing the formula specified in C of this Section in the following manner: 1.COOPERATING UNIT qualifying as a Metropolitan City (having populations of at least 50,000) will receive annual funding allocations equal to the HUD formula entitlement or the COUNTY formula allocation, whichever is greater. 2.Other COOPERATING UNITS with COUNTY formula allocations of $75,000 or more will receive funding allocations in accordance with the formula allocations. 3.COOPERATING UNITS with COUNTY formula allocations of less than $75,000 will have their funds consolidated in a pool for award in a manner determined by COUNTY. Only the COOPERATING UNITS, whose funding has been pooled, will be eligible to compete for these funds. •I A E.The COUNTS’ shall develop these ratios based upon data to’be furnished by HUD. The COUNTY assumes no duty to gather such data independently and assumes no liability for any errors in the data furnished by HUD. F.In the event COOPERATING UNIT does not request a funding allocation, or a portion thereof, the amount not requested shall be made available to other participating communities, in a manner determined by COUNTY. VI. METROPOLITAN CITIES Any metropolitan city e.xecuting this Agreement shall defer their entitlement status and become part of Urban Hennepin County. This agreement can be voided if the COOPEI^TING UNIT is advised by HUD, prior to the completion of the re qualification process for fiscal years 2003-2 005 . that it is eligible to become a metropolitan city and the COOPERATING UNIT elects to take its entitlement status. If the agreement is not voided on the basis of the COOPERATING UNIT’S eligibility as a metropolitan city prior to July 16.'20Q2 , the COOPERATING UNIT must remain a part of the COUNTY program for the entire three-year period of the COUNTY qualification. VII. OPINION OF COUNSEL The undersigned, on behalf of the Hennepin County Attorney, having reviewed this Agreement, hereby opines that the terms and provisions of the Agreement are fully authorized under Sute and local law and that the COOPERATING UNIT has full legal authority to undertake or assist in undertaking essential community development and housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly-assisted housing. Assistant County Attorney I VIII. HENNEPIN COUNTY EXECUTION The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on 2002, and pursuant to such approval and the proper County onicial having signed this Agreement, the COUNTY agrees to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Assistant County Anomey Date: APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: Assistant County Attorney Date: COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MDsNESOTA i i By: . J Chair of its County Board < t ' And: ! Assistant/Dcputy/County Administrator Attest: » ^ Deputy/Clerk of the County Board i! ^ j And: Assistant County Administrator, Public Works and County Engineer RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Director, Housing, Community Works and Transit Department Date: i IX. COOPERATING UNIT EXECUTION COOPERATING UNIT, having signed this Agreement, and the COOPERATING UNIT’S governing body having duly approved this Agreement on __________, 2002, and pursuant to such approval and the proper city official having signed this Agreement, COOPERATING UNIT agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Joint Cooperation Agreement, contract A_______• CITY OF By: --------------------------------------------------------- Its Mavor And: Its City Manager ATTEST:_________ COUWrii meeting Owner: KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION Effective January 1,200^ to December 31, 200_2 «j / t::* oil T Wr w.-.U.O Property (include citvaod zip) ___________________________________________________________________________________________Mailing Address (if different): RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Fee: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time: (over 6 months of age) Principal Breed: Purpose for more than 2 dogs: Dogs normally kept: inside kennel structure COMMERCIAL Kennel License Fee: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: Business Activities: (example: boarding, breeding, veterinaiy care, reuil, etc.) Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name) (phone) Dog runs/exercise areas are:inside outside both The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigned hereby grants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. ’ ! • ' ; : H KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION n Effective January 1,200_^4o December 31, 200 Owner: ^ _______ Property Address: ^ (include city and zip) Mailing Address (if different):_________________________________________^ Phone: (home) U' (work) *76 S ^ 4-P^ ^ ^ RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Fee: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) MaximumNo. of dogs to be kept at one time: 3_________________________ (over 6 months of age) Principal Breed Purpose for more than 2 dogs Dogs normally kept: nside____kennel structure tooths of age) ^ ^ ^ -----^ >re tham2 does: ^ COMMERCIAL Kennel License Fee: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: Business Activities:______________________________________ (example: boarding, breeding, veierinaiy care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours: _______________________ After Hours Contact: (name) (phoncX Dog runs/exercise areas are: _inside outside both The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority to violate any provision of an> City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigned hereby grants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. Applicant Date For City Use OnN Kennel inspected by Recommends: Appr 'val ^ veni Lorw.(^ enial Dat e o KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION Effective Januaiy 1, 200_^to December 31,200_f- # * I Owner: 0 ^ Property Address: ^fW-AW 1V)LIX>^ L J 0 CU.'I VII I W»- Q 0'grv\r> Mailing Address (if different): (include city and zip) Phone: (home)9<A l4^<T^ (work) ^,e,m residential Kennel License Fee: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time: v3___________________________ (over 6 momhs of ige) Principal Breed: €r \e—_______________________________________ Purpose for more than 2 does: V k >4- Vcyj6- -A-VNf-VYN Dogs normally kept: X inside kennel structure COMMERCIAL Keimel License Fee: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business:_________________ Business Activities: (example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours:___________________________________••v After Hours Contact: (name) (phone). Dog runs/exercise ureas are:inside outside both The tmdersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigned hereby grants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. Applicant Date O-L For City Use OnN Kennel inspected by C7. Date rxjioSo ^ Recommends: Approval____Denial i\ 1 1 1 Owner: KENNEL LICENSE APPLti^ATlON Effective Januaiy 1,200j^o Deceinber il, 200^ Cl)_______ • I.- w*i I \ Oi* • Property Address: ^3 /Vh. 5T~ 7^ (include city and zip) Mailing Address (if different):_____ Phone: (home),^5^ - (work) ^ RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Fee: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time: (over 6 months of age) Principal Breed: Purpose for more than 2 dogs: Dogs normally kept:mside VC kennel structure COMA'IERCIAL Kennel License Fee: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: Business Activities: (example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, reuil, etc.) Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name) (phoneX Dog runs/exercise areas are:inside outside both The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigned hereby grants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. _ / Date For City Use Only Kennel inspected by C_p^p iC>^KjLLy Recommends: Approval ____Denial Date i CITY OF ORONO SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT Date Issued: Date of Event: Time: June 1 1 ,2002 Thursday. July 4.2002 1:00 p.m. - 12:00 Midnight Name of Person(s) And/or Organization Sponsoring this Event: Kick Bom/Rocky Ferguson Air Bom, Inc. 1535 Bohn ’s Point Road Wayzata,MN 55391 At! Phone: Location of Event: Type of Event: 612-810-3432 1535 Bohn ’s Point Road Fourth of July Party with Live Music and Cookout The following documenU are required and on file at the City* Administrative OfTices: 1. Certincatc of General Liability Insurance 2. Approval from Orono Police Department 3. Approval from Orono Building and Zoning Department 4. Site Plan 5. Copy of notification of the event that was provided to the neighbors The following conditions have been placed on this event: I. This special events permit is subject to immediate revocation by the Orono Police Department upon violation of any City Ordinances or identification of hazards to safety of the public. A “noise c.xemption” will be granted for live music regarding the decible level and the fact that the music may play longer than 10:00 p.m. as allowed by the Orono Municipal Code. The Police Department shall retain the right to stop the band/music if they are creating unreasonable levels of noise as determined by the Police Department. Music to end no later than fireworks; and music and fireworks must end no later than 10:45 p.m. Liquor will not be provided to anyone under 21 years of age. Access to liquor bars will be controlled and bartenders/servers are instructed to check ID’s of anyone appearing to be under the age of 35. Guests to be infomicd in advance of ID requirement. Must have security officers. No Parking on Bohn ’s Point Road. Permit holder must post Bohn ’s Point Road. Shuttle service to be provided from Orono School parking lot. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Approved at City Council meeting on: June 10.2002 (City Seal) Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator 2750 Kelley Parkway. P.O. Box 66, Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Phone: 952-249-4600 / Fax: 952-249-4616/www.ci.orono.mn.us 1 CITY OF ORONO SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT Date Issued: Date of Event: Time: June 11,2002 Thursday, July 4,2002 10:00 p.m. Name of Person(s) And/or Organization Sponsoring this Event: Rick Bom/Rocky Ferguson Air Bom, Inc. 1 S3S Bohn ’s Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Phone:612-810-3432 Location of Event: 1535 Bohn ’s Point Road Type of Event:Fireworks The following documents are required and on file at the City Administrative Offices: 1. Certificate of General Liability Insurance 2. Approval from Long Lake Fire Department 3. Approval from Lake Minnetonka Conser\'ation District 4. Approval from Hennepin County Sheriff s Water Patrol The following conditions have been placed on this event: 1. This fireworks/special event permit is subject to immediate revocation by the Orono Police Department upon violation of any City Ordinances or identification of hazards to safety of the public. 2. Fireworks to begin no later than 10:00 p.m. 3. Fireworks display to be conducted under the direct supervision of Garry Hanson, who is certified by the State Fire Marshal as a pyroteclmic operator, from Precocious Pyrotechnics, Inc., Belgrade, Minnesota. Approved at City Council meeting on: June 10,2002 (City Seal) Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66, Ciystal Bay, MN SS323 Phone: 052-249-4600 / Fax: 952-249-4616/www.ci.orono.nui.us CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register® JUNE 2002 Check Amt Invoice Comment 06A)7/02 6 48AM COri^fr^fi meeting JUN I 0 2002^ ^ CITY Oh UHOl^cj 10100 Primary Cash PaidChk* 073637 6/10/2002 ANCHOR SCIENTIFIC E 602-49450-227 Utility System Maint Supplies Total ANCHOR SCIENTIFIC $98 00 $98 00 128390 Floats Paid Chk# 073638 6/10/2002 ANDERSON. KRISTI E 101-41300-319 Other Professtonal Services $215 00 5/2002 Council Minutes 5/28 E 101-42400-319 Other Professional Services $420.00 5/2002 Planning Minutes 5/20 Total ANDERSON. KRISTI $63500 Paid Chk* 073639 6/10/2002 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $132 00 6013-255843 Coffee E 101-42110-439 Meeting Expenses $13200 6013-255844 Coffee E 101-41900-201 Offic* tupplias $132 00 6013-255845 Coffee ToUl ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES $396 00 Paid Chk# 073640 6/10/2002 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Resale-Txbl $6998 28284 Hot Dogs. Chsbrgrs ToUl AUGIES MOBILE CHEF $69.98 Paid Chk# 073641 6/10/2002 BIFFS INC. E 101-42110-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $149.10 W158967 Portables • Open House Total BIFFS INC.$149.10 PaidChk# 073642 6/10/2002 BIO POND SYSTEMS E 613-49830-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $531 44 11595 Treat Golf Pond Total BIO POND SYSTEMS $531.44 Paid Chk* 073643 6/10/20C2 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC. E 101-43000-224 Street Maint Materiats/Supply $856 21 6246 Rip Rap Rock Total BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC.$856 21 PaidChk# 073644 6/10/2002 BUDGET PRINTING E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $58 58 21111 Appreciation Plaque Tout BUDGET PRINTING $58 58 PaidChk* 073645 6/10/2002 CARGILL SALT E 601-49400-216 Chemicals and Chem Products $2.16208 22970213 BuOi Sdar Sait ToUl CARGILL SALT $2 162.08 PaidChk# 073646 6/10/2002 CARLSON TRACTOR A EQUIP CO. E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $292 88 10375301 Total CARLSON TRACTOR A EQUIP CO. $292 88 ~ Auger Bit Paid Chk# 073647 6/10/2002 CLASSIFIEDS E 613-49830-340 General Advertising E 101-42110-340 General Advertising ToUl CLASSIFIEDS $31 00 16370 $62JX) 168385 $93.00 Print Adv • GC Adv for Emp - Clerk Typist PaidChk# 073648 6/10/2002 CROWN MARKING INC. E 101-41900-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $414 29 97788 Name Plates and Holdeis ToUl CROWN MARKING INC.$41429 Paid Chk# 073649 6/10/2002 DEPT OF ADM - INTERTECH GROUP E 101-42110-311 Data Processing Communication $37 00 E 101-42110-321 Telephone $49 09 E 101-41900-321 Telephone $114 52 DV02049483 W02040611 W02040611 PVC Circutt Phone Service 4A)2 Phone Service 4/02 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 06A)7/02 8 48AM Page 2 JUNE 2002 Check Amt Invoice Comment Total DEPT OF ADM • INTERTECH GROUP $20061 Paid Chk« 073650 6/10/2002 E-Z RECYCUNG E 101-43270*316 Contract Recycling Pickup ToUl E-Z RECYCLING $6.31764 3799 $6.317M Recycling - 5/2002 Paid Chk# 073651 6/10/2002 E.8.G. COMPANY INC. £613-49830*403 Repairs/Maint*Misc Equip Total E.S.G. COMPANY INC. $175 00 11796 $17500 Repair Housing Bore Paid Chk» 073652 6/10/2002 EARL F. ANDERSON A ASSOC. E 101-43000*224 Street Main! Materials/Suppty $116 89 47421 No U Turn Signs Total EARL F. ANDERSON A ASSOC. $116 89 Paid Chk» 073653 6/10/2002 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE E 613-49900*091 Beer For Resale Total EAST SIDE BEVERAGE $112 60 248701 $112 60 Beer for Resale Paid Chk# 073654 6/10/2002 ELECTRIC PUMP E 602*49450*406 Repairs/Maint*Swr lines/lifts Total ELECTRIC PUMP $28100 20470 $28300 Check LS #2 Paid Chk# 073655 6/10/2002 EMBEDDED SYSTEMS E 101*42110*403 Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip Tout EMBEDDED SYSTEMS $768 00 15608 $76800 Siren Main! - 7/1-12/31/02 Paid Chk# 073656 6/10/2002 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS. IN E 101-42110*221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $18803 301950 Tout EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS. IN $188 03 Medical Supplies Paid Chk« 0736S7 6/10/2002 ERICKSON, KURT E 101-42110-437 Training A Development $35 24 5/24/02 Meal Reimbursement Total ERICKSON. KURT $35 24 Paid Chk# 073658 6/10/2002 GSK SERVICES E 602*49450*226 Clothing A personal equipment $26 44 223101 Uniforms E 101*43000*226Clothing A personal equipment $61 71 223101 Uniforms E 101-43000*221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $48.46 223101 Shop Towels E 613*49830*226 Clothing A personal equipment $7.72 223102 Uniforms • Steffenhagen E 601-49400*226Clothing A personal equipment $1408 223103 Uniforms • Rathbun E 101-43000-226Clothing A personal equipment $58 65 230100 Uniforms E 601*49400*226Clothing A personal equipment $1408 230100 Uniforms* Rathbun E 613*49830*226 Clothing A personal equipment $7 72 230100 Uniforms - Steffenhagen E 602*49450*226 Clothing A personal equipment $25 14 230100 Uniforms Total GAKSERVICES $264 00 Paid Chk# 073659 6/10/2002 OSPCABINETS E 601*49400*223 Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies $198.09 13453 Counter Top • Nvr Wtr Pint ToUl GAPCABINETS $198 09 Paid Chk# 073660 6/10/2002 GAPPA.GREG E 101*42400*331 Travel Expenses $18.63 5/16A)2 Mileage Reimbursement E 101*42400*437 Training A Development $106 95 5/16A)2 Mileage • Conference ToUl GAPPA.GREG "SI25.5V Paid Chk# 073661 6/10/2002 GERRING'S CAR WASH E 101 -42110-402 Repairs/Maint Auto Equip $12.50 S/21/02 Wash - Sqd 177 j CITY OF ORONO 06/07/02 8 48 AM Pag* 3 *Check Detail Register® JUNE 2002 fil Check Amt Invoice Comment Total GERRINQ'SCARWMH 112.50 Paid Chki 073662 6/10/2002 OOLF CAR MIDWEST £613^0830-415 Other Equipment Rentals Total GOLF CAR MIDWEST $1.740.00 9904 $1,740.00' Golf Cart Lease 5/2002 Paid Chk« 073663 6/10/2002 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE E 613-49630-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies $295.96 14902 E 613-49830-403 Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip $103 20 18032 E 613-49830-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies 19238 ToUl HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE $409 81 Grass Seed - GC Grass Seed • GC Spreader Rental - GC Paid Chk# 073664 6/10/2002 HENNEPIN COUNTY • HEALTH E 613-49830-437 Training & Development OronoGolf ToUl HENNEPIN COUNTY - HEALTH $70 00 4 Hour Foodbome Illness Class Paid Chki 073665 6/10/2002 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN E 101-41600-309 Jail Charges $126 00 533 Room & Board 4/2002 Total HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN $126 00 Paid Chki 073666 6/10/2002 HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE E 613-49830-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE $^507 $25C7 566715 Mat Service Paid Chki 073667 6/10/2002 HYDRO SUPPLY CO. E 601-49400-227 Utility System Maint. Supplies Total HYDRO SUPPLY CO. W.705^ $3,705 84 21263 Meters for Resale Paid Chki 073668 6/10/2002 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS E 101-41900-401 Repairs/Maint-Office Equip Total IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS $9,162.48 23219069 Maint Contract - Copiers Paid Chki 073669 6/10/2002 KENNETH N. POTTS. PA E 101-41110-101 Full-Time Employees Regular $2.391 66 6/30/02 Total KENNETH N. POTTS. PA $2,391 66 Prosecution 5/02 Paid Chki 073670 6/10/2002 KOEHNEN'S AMOCO E 101 -42110-212 Motor Fuels & Lubricants E 101-42110-212 Motor Fuels & Lubricants ToUl KOEHNEN'S AMOCO $20 75 $20 17 $40.92 5/20rt)2 5/20/02 Fuel-Squad 187 Fuel • Squad 192 Paid Chki 073671 6/10/2002 LAKE BUSINESS SUPPLY E 613-49830-201 Office supplies ToUl LAKE BUSINESS SUPPLY $17.64 14221 Office Supplies $1764 Paid Chki 073672 6/10/2002 LOGIS E 101-41900-329 Other Communications E 101-42110-329 Other Communications E10M2110-310 LOGIS-Applications E 101-41900-311 OaU Processing Communication E 01-41900-401 RepaIrs/Maint-Office Equip E 101-42110-401 Repairs/Maint-Offioe Equip ToUl LOGIS $183 00 $18300 $1,635.00 $30.00 $630 00 $630 00 21842 21842 21842 21842 21888 21888 Internet 4/02 Internet 4/02 Police Records 4/02 Henn County Connection GW Server Maint GW Server Maint $3,291.00 Paid Chki 073673 6/10/2002 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT E 101-43000-212 Motor Fuels 8 Lubricams $7 44 34548 Bar Oil CITYOFORONO *Check Detail Register® 06A)7/02 8 48 AM Page 4 JUNE 2002 Check Amt Invoice Comment Total LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT $7 44 Paid Chki 073674 6/10/2002 MAMA-GMC LABOR RELATIONS 8ERV E 101-42110-319 Other Professional Services $2,830 00 Subscnption Total MAMA-GMC LABOR RELATIONS SERV $2,830 00 Subscription Ser 3/15/02-03 Paid Chk» 073675 6/10/2002 MAS MODERN MARKETING. E 101-42110-201 Office supplies Total MAS MODERN MARKETING____ $23937 MMI004583 $239 37 Finger Pnnt Cards Paid Chk# 073676 6/10/2002 MCFOA E 101-41300-433 Memberships & Subscnptions E 101 -41300-433 Memberships & Subscriptions ToUl MCFOA $35 00 $3500 $70 00 Dodge Vee Membership 7/1/02-6/30^)3 Membership 7/1/02-03 Vee Paid Chk# 073677 6/10/2002 MCLEOD USA - PHONE DILLS E 601-49400-321Telephone $2363 3294018 Phone Service E 602-49450-321Telephone $3987 3294018 Phone Service E 601-49400-321Telephone $47.62 3294018 Phone Service E 602-49450-321Telephone $55.13 3294018 Phone Service E 101-42110-321 Telephone $21266 3294018 Phone Service E 101-41900-321 Telephone $4^21 3294018 Phone Service ToUl MCLEOD USA - PHONE BILLS $875 32 Paid Chk# 073676 6/10/2002 MIDWEST ASPHALT E 101-43000-224Street Maint Matehals/Supply $1,991 77 69990MB Patch E 101-43000-224Street Maint Matenals/Supply $761 25 70015MB Patch Total MIDWEST ASPHALT $2,753 02 Paid Chk# 073679 6/10/2002 MINN COMM E 101-42110-321 Telephone $^04 20261006025Police Pagers ToUl MINN COMM $38 04 PaidChkA 073680 6/10/2002 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $31.69 05020926 E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $15.85 5020927 Total MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY $47 54 Oxygen. Acetylene Medical Oxygen Paid Chk# 073681 6/10/2002 MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY E 601-49400-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $100.00 27170000301 Haz Mat Fee • N Wtr E 601-49400-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $100 00 27170000401 Haz Mat Fee - Nav WU E 101-43000-489 Other Miscellaneous Chaq^s $25 00 27170000601 Haz Mat Fee-PW Total MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY $225.00 Paid Chk# 073682 6/10/2002 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY-2 E 602-49450-441 Licenses & Taxes $23 00 Gregory E 602-49450-441 Licenses & Taxes E 602-49450-441 Licenses & Taxes Total MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY-2 $23 00 Oberanger $23 00 Skreen Col Oper Cert • Gregory Col Oper Cert - Oberanger Col Oper Cert - Skreen $6900 Paid Chk# 073683 6/10/2002 MTIDIST CO. E 613-49830-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories Total MTI DIST CO. $89 42 130998 Bearings. Seals $8942 Paid Chk# 073684 6/10/2002 MULLEN MARINE E 225-45211 -580 Other Equipment E 101-45200-223 Bldg/Grounds Main! Supplies $6,810 00 5/16A)2 $141 64 5/24X)2 Roll In Docks Dock Panel HWiaf . CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 06/07/02 8 48 AM Page 5 JUNE 2002 Check Amt Invoice Comment ToUl MULLEN MARINE $6,951.64 Paid Chk# 073685 6/10/2002 NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS G 101-21710 Life Insurance $240.00 6732602 PERAUe 6/2002 ToUl NCPERS GROUP UFE INS $240 OO" Paid Chk# 073686 6/10/2002 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS E 101-42110-321 Telephone $665 13 506573311 Police Cell Phones Total NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS $665.13 Paid Chk# 073687 6/10/2002 NORTHERN E 602-494S0.222 Vehicle Equipment & Parts $29819 6425189 Truck Tool Box Total NORTHERN $29819 Paid Chki 073688 6/10/2002 OFFICE DEPOT E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $42 75 159923623 Office Supplies E 10M1900-201 Office supplies $52.24 159923623 Office Supplies E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $146 32 159923623 Office Supplies E 101.41900-201 Office supplies $178 82 159923623 Office Supplies ToUl OFFICE DEPOT $420*13 Paid Chk# 073689 6/10/2002 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Resale-Txtol $^5 12 205416 Chips for Resale ToUl OLD DUTCH FOODS INC.$15.12 Paid Chk# 073690 6/10/2002 OMAN. LYLE E 101-42400-331 Travel Expenses $35 88 4/17/02 Mileage Reimbursement E 101-42400-331 Travel Expenses $36 57 4f22J02 Mileage Reimbursement E 101-42400-331 Travel Expenses $11.04 4/29/02 Mileage Reimbursement E 101-42400-331 Travel Expenses $26.91 5/13/02 Mileage Reimbursement E 101-42400-331 Travel Expenses $34.84 5/21/02 Mileage Reimbursement E 101-42400-331 Travel Expenses $2518 5/23/02 Mileage Reimbursement E 101-42400-331 Travel Expenses $30 36 6/3/02 Mileage Reimbursement ToUl OMAN. LYLE $20078 Paid Chk# 073691 6/10/2002 PIONEER E 101-42400-340 General Advertising $10149 149 Applications E 101-42400-340 General Advertising $4577 149-A Applications E 101-42400-340 General Advertising $2985 159 Applications ToUl PIONEER $177.11 Paid Chki 073692 6/10/2002 PRAIRIE OFFSET E 101-41900-201 OfTica supplies $449 49 117476 Envelopes ToUl PRAIRIE OFFSET $449.49 Paid Chki 073693 6/10/2002 PRESTIGE FLAG E 613-49830-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies $140 38 102740 Pm Flags ToUl PRESTIGE FLAG $14038 . Paid Chk# 073694 6/10/2002 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE G 101-15998 Non-Employee Health Ins $1 65 96234 Life Insurance 6/2002 G 101-21710 Life Insurance $89 70 96234 Life Insurance 6/2002 G 101-21710 Life Insurance $686 50 96234 Life Insurance 6/2002 ToUl PRUDENTIAL UFE INSURANCE $777.85 Paid Chk# 073695 6/10/2002 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC. E 602-49450-227 Utility System Main!. Supplies $258.85 10871 LS Parts I wcr>ur»wj*«. CITY OF ORONO 'Check Detail Register<g) 06/07/02 8 48 AM Page 6 JUNE 2002 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 602-49450^227 Utility System Main! Supplies E 602-49450-227 Utility System Maint Supplies Total QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC. $93387 10874 $46 74 10881 $1.239 46 Controller - IS #2 Relay Paid Chk# 073696 6/10/2002 QWEST E 613-49830-321 Telephone E 613-49830-340 General Advertising Total QWEST $58 74 9524739904 $240 60 9524739904 $299 54 Phone Service Directory Adv Paid Chk# 073697 6/10/2002 RANDY'S SANITATION E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds ToUl RANDY'S SANITATION $47.34 $4734 1-96412 3 Solid Waste Service - Open H PaidChki 073698 6/10/2002 REED VENDING E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Resale-Txbi $127 70 4367 Snacks for Resale Total REED VENDING $127 70 E 101-42110-381 Gas & Electric E 101-41900-381 Gas & Electric E 101-41900-381 Gas & Electric E 601-49400-381 Gas & Electric E 602-49450-381 Gas & Electric Tout RELIANT ENERGY $11824 $144 50 $39321 $62542 $1200 $1.29337 6750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service Paid Chk# 073700 6/10/2002 SAFE ASSURE E 101-43000-437 Training & Development Total SAFE ASSURE $3.195 00 1 $3.195 00 2002 Safety Training Paid Chk# 073701 6/10/2002 SKYWAY PUBLICATIONS E 101-42110-340 General Advertising $108^00 23868 Adv for Emp - Clerk Typist Total SKYWAY PUBLICATIONS $10800 Paid Chk# 073702 6/10/2002 STAR TRIBUNE E 101-42110-340 General Advertising $299 20 012757006 Adv for Employment E 101-42110-340 General Advertising $111 20 012757006 Adv-Sale of Squad ToUl STAR TRIBUNE $41040 Paid Chk# 073703 6/10/2002 STATE OF MN CPV PROGRAM E 602-49450-489Other Miscellaneous Charges $250 00 CPV CPV Membership 7/1/02-03 E 101-42110-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $150 00 CPV CPV Membership 7/1/02-03 E 101-41900-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $100 00 CPV CPV Membership 7/1/02-03 ToUl STATE OF MN CPV PROGRAM $50060 Paid Chk# 073704 6/10/2002 STEFFENHAGEN. RON E 613-49830-223Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies ^M95 5/29A)2 Bird Feeder • GC ToUl STEFFENHAGEN. RON $54 95 Paid Chk# 073705 6/10/2002 STREICHERS • E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $79.77 292857.1 Map Light. Battery Pack E 101-42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment $127.75 293337.1 Holster • Schoenhoff E 101-42110-226 Clothing & personal equipmertt $169 95 2953481 Boots • Tomczyk E 101-42110-401 Repairs/Maint-Offioe Equip $74.74 295891 1 Flashers E 101-42110-402 Repaifs/Maint-Auto Equip $50 80 2958912 Flasher System E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $56 82 296537.1 Headlight Flasher E 601-49400-240 Small Tools and Minor Equip $69.90 297032.1 IrriUnt E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment S Parts $119.95 297032.1 Flashlight • #710 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 06/07/02 8:48 AM Page 7 JUNE 2002 Checli Amt E 101-42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment Total STREIC»«tS $88M $838.58 Invoice Comment 297254.1 Uniform Pantt-Fischenich PM Chk# 073706 6/10/2002 SUBUREAN TIRE INC. E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip Total SUBURBAN TIRE INC. $995 56 $995 56 161495 Squad Tires Paid Chk# 073707 6/10/2002 SUN NEWSPAPERS E 613-49830-340 General Advertising $15000 502034 Print Adv • GC E 101-42110-340 General Advertising $171.15 511424 Adv for Clerk Typist Total SUN NEWSPAPERS $321.15 Paid ChM 073708 6/10/2002 THE HOME DEPOT E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $16169 4/25rt)2 Lumber for Open House E 101 -41300-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $36.30 5/13A)2 Fish Supplies E 613-49830-223 Bldg/Grounds Main!. Supplies $14547 5/13A)2 Lumber/Carpet - GC E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $42 69 5/91/02 Lumber for Open House Tout THE HOME DEPOT $38615 Paid Chk# 073709 6/: 0/2002 TWIN CITY OARAGE DOOR CO. E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $126.65 144494 Weatherstrip PD Garage Dr ToUl TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO.$12665 Paid Chk# 073710 6/10^2002 UNITED RENTALS E 101 -43000-415 Other Equipment Rentals $127 12 405537 Barricades E 101-42110-340 General Advertising $53 50 405537 Traffic Ctrl - Open House ToUl UNITED RENTALS $180 62 Paid Chk# 073711 6/10/2002 UNIV OF MINNESOTA E 101-42400-437 Training & Development $150.00 Boltermann Head of the Wtrshd Conference ToUl UNIV OF MINNESOTA $1M00 Paid Chim 073712 6/10/2002 VERIZON WIRELESS E 601-49400-321 Telephone $14 37 1003-4585141Cell Phones E 602-49450-321 Telephone $1437 1003-4585141Cell Phones E 101-41900-321 Telephone $35158 1003-5922058 CeU Phones Total VERIZON WIRELESS $380 32 Paid Chk# 073713 6/10/2002 VESSCO INC. E 601-49400-403 Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip $110.92 26498 Repair Pump ToUl VESSCO INC.$110 92 Paid Chk# 073714 6/10/2002 VILLAGE CHEVROLET E 601-49400-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $78.05 366948 Filter Asmbly, Pad Kit «712 ToUl VILLAGE CHEVROLET $7805 Paid Chk# 073715 6/10/2002 WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $37.86 15736 Misc Supplies E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Acoessortes $1161 15737 Misc Supplies ToUl WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT $4947 Paid Chk# 073716 6/10/2002 WIDMER INC E 601-49400-405 Repairs/Maint-Watennains/0tant $362 50 5337 Backhoe and Labor ToUl WIDMER INC $362 SO Paid Chki 073717 6/10/2002 WILLIAMS TOWING E 231-45650-436 Towing Charges $101.18 50973 Tow-2002 Chevy PU i CITY OF ORONO 0M7/02 8 48AM Pages *Check Detail Register® JUNE2002 CliecliAifit Invoice Total WILUAM8 TOWINO $101.18 PaidCM3 0737T8 6^10/2002 XCEL ENERGY E 601-40400-381 Gas & Electric E 101-42110-381 Gas & Electric E 101-48200-381 Gas 8 Electric E101-43000-381 Gas 8 Electric E 613-40830-381 Gas 8 Electric E 101-42110-381 Gas 8 Electric E 101-41000-381 Gas 8 Electric E 802-40450-381 Gas 8 Electric E 101-43000-388 Street Uotiting ToW XCEL ENERGY $2,081.67 $0.42 $15.31 $151.35 $330.28 $446.78 $1,186.13 $1,655.85 $1,305.06 Allocation Allocation Allocation Alocation Allocation Allocation Allocation Allocation StLIgM Electrical Service Electrical Service Electrical Service Electrical Service Electrical Service Electrical Service Electrical Service Electrical Service Street Lighting 5/02 $8,061.85 10100 RrifnaiyCMh $72.554 80 Cfmtk NumlMr Employ## ftom« Pay P#rlod 051207 051208 051209 051210 051211 051212 051213 051214 051215 051216 051217 051218 051219 051197 DOCX^E. RACHEL M. 051190 X)HNSON. MARY ANN 051199 LESKINEN. DENISE M. 051200 MOORSE. RONALD J. 051201 VEE. LINDAS. 051202 KUEHN. THOMAS M. 051203 OLSON. RONALD J. 051204 PETTIT. SANDRA K. 051205 ANDERSON. BRUCE L 051:06 BOBZIEN.SUEA. BORIS. SCOTT W. BUDIG. STACIE M. CARLSON. MICHAELS CORNICK. JAMES L DEMBOUSKI. JAY C ERICKSON. KURT R FARNIOK. CORREY L FISCHENICH.DANT. FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K. GOOD. STEPHANY R. HENDRICKS. RONALD J. JOHNSON. JEFFREY MADSON. ADRIENNE M 051220 MCNALLY. STEVEN A. 051221 MCNICHOLS. DAVID L MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES PERSELL. WILLIAM R SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. TOMCZYK.MARKW WTTTKE.ANTHONYA. ARNESON. JOSHUA A. LEE. JOSEPH P BOLTERMAN. MATTHEW A. BOTTENBERG. WENDY C DAVIS. MARC L. 051233 GAFFRON. MICHAEL P. 051234 GAPPA.GREGORYA. KANGAS. JAMES K. MEYER. WILLIAM C. OMAN. LYLE E 051238 WEINBERGER. PAUL E 051239 BRINKHAUS. JOHN F. DEBAERE. DONALD L GREGORY. JAMES D HANSEN. STEVEN 051243 OBERAIGNER. SCOTT G. 051244 OBRIEN. RANDY L 051245 PALMER. GREGORY A. 051246 RATHBUN. BARRY J 051247 SKREEN. DALE S. 051248 ABRAHAMSON.FREDW. 051222 051223 051224 051225 051226 051227 051228 051229 051230 051231 051232 051235 051236 051237 051240 051241 051242 CITY OF ORONO check register Ch#cli Amount $1,051.54 $591.48 $888.24 $135 22 $1.158 70 $1.10278 $269 94 $386 35 $602.65 $1.009 38 $382 61 $94514 $131.04 $1.487 99 $1.66673 $1.669 96 $1.89621 $1,452.95 $249 06 $2.04865 $1.094 31 $1,287 72 $636 70 $1,508.05 $639.78 $1.60919 $733 77 $1.444 07 $60891 $1,601.20 $1,163.83 $95071 $207.61 $1.16224 $1,195 16 $83687 $1,357 60 $1,946.41 $30069 $614.61 $103.13 $1,405 27 $1,251 92 $910.08 $1,050.66 $1,200.99 $938 34 $1.55087 $73203 $1.097 68 $1,020.07 $269.37 Check Date Check Status 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstaniiing 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29 02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29 02 Outstanding 5/29 02 Outstanding 5/29 02 Outstanding 5/29.02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29 02 Outstanding 5/29 02 Outstanding 5/29 02 Outstanding 5/29 02 Outstanding 5/29^02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29 02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 5/29<02 Outstanding 5/29/02 Outstanding 05/29/02 10:38 AM P#g#1 BMIML L n. .. CITY OF ORONO 05/29m 10:36 AM Pag*2 check register Cfitck Pay Chtck Check Numbif CmployM Nam«Ptflod Amount Date Check Status iry’ <^ *?**•'*/>^*^ ^ . -r^ 051249 KAMmO.MARSHALLJ.11 $11609 5/29/02 Outstanding 091290 MCINTYRE. WIUIAME.11 $319.70 9/29/02 Outstanding 091291 OAS. DANIEL 0.11 $246.67 5/29/02 Outstanding 091292 PEICKERT.OARYJ.11 $344.50 5/29/02 Outstanding 091293 ROSS. JOHN A.11 $14628 5/29/02 Outstanding 091294 STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD 11 $1,45541 5/29 02 Outstanding 091299 STORK. JOHN T.11 $257.93 $54,443.04 5/29/02 Outstanding j MfTEDfjQ JUN 1 6 2002 CITY OF OHONO information items COUNCIL MEETING Cni t/iccriNQ JU.^ 1 0 2002 CUY UfUHONU fci rr ..A.. O/MmCJ^JNG JUN 1 0 2002 4, ^ CITY Oh UHUNU CITYof ORONO Munklpil Officts Stmt Address: 2750 Kelley Pertiway Orono. MN 55356 Mslllni Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 0066 June 6,2002 Larry Palm Ace Properties, LLC 5S00 Anderson Estates Road Maple Plain, MN 55359 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Re: Illegal Dock, Illegal Dock Space Rental at 3445 Ciystal Bay Road Dear Mr. Palm: Hennepin County property records indicate you and/or Ace Properties arc the osMier of the property in Orono located at 3445 Crystal Bay Road. Within the past week the City has received a number of complaints regarding a dock that has appeared, extending from the City-owned lakeshoie across from 3445 Crystal Bay Road. Residents of the neighborhood have expressed great concern about the traffic, parking issues and activity this dock and the boats stored at it are causing. The City assumes, absent further knowledge, that this dock was constructed by you or your agents, or with your ‘permission’. If you have nothing to do with its being there, please inform the City immediately, as it is the City’s intent to have the dock removed. The following violations are noted: 1.The boats stored at the dock are not registered to the owner or occupant of the lakeshore property (i.e. the City) nor to the owner or occupant of 3445 Ciystal Bay Road. This boat storage therefore constitutes provision of a boat slip to a person who does not own or occupy the property, which is not legal except at licensed marinas in the B-2 Lakeshore Business District. 2.The dock as constructed does not meet minimum Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) requirements for setbacks from extended side lot lines and it may in fact encroach outside the allowable dock use area. 3.In addition to the above violations, the dock is considered as trespass on City property, and w ould not be legal regardless of the boat storage and dock location violations, because it constitutes an accessory structure without a principal structure, a violation of the Orono Zoning Code. You are hereby ordered to immediately remove the offending boats and dock from City property. If this is not done within 7 days from the date of this letter, the City will immediate^ commence legal action to have them removed. Tdephone (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.ci.oronojnn.as 3445 Ciystal Bay Road June 6,2002 Page 2 I would refer you to the attached sections of Orono and LMCD ordinances. If you have any questions, I can be contacted at 952-249*4600. Sincerely, Michael P. Ga.^n Planning Director cc: Mayor and Council Ken Potts, City Prosecuting Attorney Tom Barrett, City Civil Attorney Ron Moorse, Ci^ Administrator Greg Nybeck, LMCD Ace Properties, 5465 Highway 169 North, Plymouth, MN 55442 Engineering • Planning • Surveying Coilwrii meeting JUN I 0 2002 CIIYUI-OHOMO ■cCtttfnwlMliw Assiciaits.liic. May 2002 • i ' ’ Mayor Barbara Peterson City of Orono POBox66 Orono, Minnesota 55323 Subject: Growing Smart in Minnesota Dear Mayor Peterson: Enclosed is an article "Growing Smart in Minnesota." MFRA prepared this article at the request of the Consulting Engineers Council of Minnesota (CEC/M) to point out some of the unique planning and engineering issues of our high-density, mixed-use projects, such as Maple Grove’s Arbor Lakes and St. Louis Park’s Excelsior & Grand Town Centers. As communities across Minnesota consider the value of adding a Town Center development, we hope you will consider MFRA to assist your community or the developer with the planning, land surveying, and civil engineering components of these unique projects. With our award-winning experience in mixed-use developments, we believe our staff can offer your community value-added expertise in the design of a safe, aesthetically-pleasing, and marketable Town Center that brings out the best character of your community. If you or someone from your community is attending the League of Minnesota Cities annual conference, June 18-21“ in Rochester, we invite you to visit our exhibitor’s booth. MFRA will be hosting the first booth as you enter the door into the Exhibit Hall and we will be happy to discuss any of your community ’s upcoming projects. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact either one of us at (763) 476-6010. Sincerely, MFRA CiOS/jBl Jeffrey J. Roos, P.E. President Michael J. Gair, ASLA Senior Vice President 15050 23rd Avenue North • Plymouth. Minnesota • 55447 phone 763/476-6010 • fax 763/476-8532 e-mail: mtraSmtracom ^fowing Smart in Minnesota n>i\ jttii !f w.fs i !>\ K’ ^ 'iff ffw ( I •*> . * *1 f !.•''» * , u,tu tl t‘t Wr'iU'^* >t.t I f < \ I rtf As metropolitan areas respond to the growing pressure of expanding populations, city planners, architects, engineers and others are striving to bring back the character, convenience and intimacy of the 'town center* of yesteryear. Interest in 'new urbanism* or 'town center development* began just a decade ago and exploded in popularity in 2000. The October/November 2001 issue of New Urban News magazine lists more than 300 such developments planned or currently being constructed in the U.S. - a 38 percent increase over the prior year. • S it- I r ^ \ ■: r " New urbanism describes a modern development that provides communities with a central core - a gathering place that offers a wide range of uses, including shopping, recreation, housing and employment, in a limited amount of space. \iiny of Minnesota's leading cities ate following the trend: Clover Field in Chaska, fbrk Conunons in St. Louis l^rk, Burnsville's Heart of (he City and Maple Grove's Arbor Lakes [OPUS. City of Maple Grove, and MFRA received CFCM's 2001 Honor Award for Arbor Lakes). Why people want a town center People are busier today than ever. To conserve precious time and simplify their lives, they want to live closer to where they work and shop as well as to sports and recreational facilities that were once common to downtown areas. Serious traffic problems make town center development an issue of 'livability* for residents. City officials support them because town centers establish an identity or focal point for residents while providing additional hous ing options on limited land. Developers, responding to market demand, are also solidly behind the trend. Other key players driv ing new urbanism to the forefront include community business f ft k v%-f/» ; «r riiw\N.i fi M leaders. Over the last few decades, commercial development shifted to either 'big box" stores (a Wal-Mart or Target) or strip mall expansion. Some local business owners have had success competing with these developments by re-creating that 'small town* magic in their communities as an alternative to the mega store or strip mall. Common obstacles Demand for town centers continues to grow, but they take thoughtful planning and proper execution. Unless planned well in advance, urban developments often require extensive restruc turing of buildings, roadways and other infrastructure. Transportation and access are key design decisions that need to facilitate public access yet skirt primary roads. The Arbor Lakes development in Maple Grove is a recent example: located near several major interstates yet separated from them by a well- connected grid of arterial streets. Town center engineering challenges include: • Slonii water management. Innovative methods are needed to accommodate the large volumes of storm water created by higher density development. • Safety. The pedestrian and vehicle mix in an urban develop ment is an automatic challenge due to the condensed design of a town center area. • Weather. Minnesota's cold winters may decrease use of town centers that feature pedestrian-oriented designs. • Cost. The unique architectural features or landscaping often proposed for town center developments may increase costs beyond those already projected for less space intensive developments. Bob Cunningham, vice president of devel opment for TOLD Development adds that site designs must make intuitive sense to visitors and be financially feasi ble. 'ftrking can be very difficult to design cost- competitively," he explained. 'Not only is condensed parking usually more expensive, but determining the exact number of parking spaces needed can be quite difficult with the variety of site uses at different times of the day or week.* Cunningham also pointed out that building codes or ordinances may also be a i , .-, ’ - • A ** •• *•* • - ' ' ■ I ' ,•■,?••. - r «.A -----------------------------------------------------------------■ ------------------------- ^ ; 1 w ■'• “ffrf r.immwm m.uv. - .. - 4. v; Muml)lin^ hlix k in lommunilics where new urbanisni lodes afo onl\ bc»gm- ning lu be dr Aelnped All ‘hmgs cunsidennl, finding the optimal mix of suflu lent vehir ular traflK and sit(‘ exposure while pmperlv addrt*sMng ped(‘strian safeU i ofx erns tan limit a rommunitv s options for its tc*wn (enter dr sign. Overcoming the challenges Strong leadership. giKul planning and overall uKxdination are kev to the siKcess ot urban designs, lanel leremiah. planning sep« rvisor tor the citv of St. Louis Park, otters scame advice idur ating and promoting the small town J V i' <Su m M legi • ’ 1 W , C'*'"r«____ rr' ■ w—— ■ o . » X- a : < * f» t^J j Jk ev 1 1 lomept to numerous intertsted parties is c ritKal." she stale s. 1o at hieve th(*ir suicess, SI. louis Park imolvetl the lt:»cal school distriit. uunmunity groups the ( hamber of (omnu'rt e and park and ret re*ition start as well as Ivpual kev stakeholders -developer, landowner, utv planm rs future c»uu()ants ett •. IK involving a larg(‘r network of supporting grt-ups and organizations, leremiah vvitru ssed a gmundswell ot enthusKism tor design ing an area that brings a nostalgit Itual point to their lommumiv Today's engineers are active partners Ingineers art' irilical to the c reatit»n of v)und designs With new urbanism, ihev must work even more i loselv with [ilannt'rs. ari hitet ts laruitxvners. d(‘v«*lopers and municipaliti(*s to adtlress a wider range ot comerns than with olhi‘r tv()es ot projec ts Designing facilities for mixed public, use can be tar more c hallenging than a lvpic.al residential or commercial projH'rtv As a rc'sult enginerrs must be* tillc‘ntivc‘ to detail and flexible in pursuing creative design solutions. ( f.ji'-1 I»* "ifj-\(l)t >f i t •' CCm Today's Town Centers: Why They Work C haracteristics ol the modern town center are what make them so convenient, accessible and appealing - a practical solution lor today's urban wear^ public • 1 ively mix ol commercial, residential CIVIC and recreational establishments • Pedestrian Iriendlv movement and iral- he patterns including easv accc*ss to public transit • Ample on site or unobtrusive parking • Prominent anchor retailers intermingled with smaller specialty shops • I'stablishmenis vshich support typical household needs banking grocery, pharmaev etc • IVoximiiv to mai'»r roads and freeways • A central local point built around distinguishing natural or authentic architectural (eatures • Mousing uithm walking distance Contributing authors from McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.: \)ikvtuhr AS/A Cri'^funk Ht . t\iul fVjrsnn Pf , Kjth\ OConnvIl AS/ A Mui A/.in Dutt IhijUtnJ k(Liticn<hif's ud’i/f Drrr/opiMi; ( emmu'iitirs HcCfiBit rraali R ods Atsocijtes. IM. I’tmln » i’t SSl 1S0")0 :?Kd Avenue North I PIvmoulh. Minnesota SS44' 76V476-6010 I wwvv.mlra com MLR A Services rng/mrong / P/.inmng / £m ironmcntjl r.im/sc Anhitixturv L,ind Sur\c\inif / DevvU>f)nu.*nt (/<»//€■* /nbt^ ~^^Ute^ y^l Ap^o a^jLoo^ *"’••'•” «ipet ING oon I 0 2002 Uii * UHORONO o-^ct^ ________________________________ jj- ■* ^Ia^ujU‘A*’^ rAiui/%11 McpTiNQ JUN 1 0 2002 145 University Avenue West, St. Paul, MN Phone: (651) 281-1200 (800) 925-1122 Fax: (651) 281-1299 TDD (651) 281-1290 Web Site: http://www.lmnc.org May 31,2002 To: Managers, Administrators, and Clerks From: Jim Miller, Executive Director and Tom Grundhoefer, General Counsel Re: Revision to League of Minnesota Cities Constitution At its May 16,2002 meeting, the League of Minnesota Cities Board of Directors unanimously agreed to recommend to the membership, a comprehensive revision to the League Constitution. (A complete copy of the Constitution, showing the proposed additions and deletions is included with this memorandum.) The Board’s action was the culmination of a six-month study process that began at the staff level, proceeded through a Board appointed subcommittee and concluded with Board discussion and action at both the April and May meetings. The proposed changes to the Constitution will be presented to the members for action at the June 20,2002 general business meeting at the Annual Conference in Rochester. This memorandum will explain the reasons for the revision and offer the rationale for each of the proposed changes. References to particular Articles and sections are to the revised document included with this mailing. If there are any questions or concerns about the proposed changes, please do not hesitate to contact League staff or any member of the Board of Directors. Why was a comprehensive revision necessary? There are several motivations for the proposed changes. First, it has been many years since a comprehensive review has been performed. Accordingly, there are a number of housekeeping changes recommended to make the document easier to use. Second, there is a goal to modernize the document and to reflect more accurately the Board practices that have developed over the past number of years. Finally, there is a desire to modify some of the existing processes and procedures in order to encourage greater member involvement in key League decisions. What process did the Board use to evaluate prospective changes? The process for evaluating possible changes began at the staff level in December, 2001 . Senior League staff met over the course of about six weeks to evaluate the current Constitution and develop ideas for possible changes. The Board then received a report on the process at its January 17,2002 meeting. The Board established a Board Subcommittee to AN EQUAL OrrORTUNITY/AFnRMATIVE ACTION EMFLOYER I___ *1 • * study further the question of whether a revision to the Constitution was needed and if so, what changes were recommended. The Board Subcommittee, Chaired by Independence Mayor Marvin Johnson, and composed of Jordan Mayor Ron Jabs, Buffalo Councilmember Del Haag, and Prior Lake Manager Frank Boyles, met two times to study the issue. The Subcommittee submitted its recommendation to the full Board at its April 18,2002 meeting. After discussions at the April meeting, the Board again considered the revision at its May 16,2002 meeting. Following further discussion, the Board reconunended the proposed changes indicated in the attached document. What are the most significant changes affecting member rights? Some of the more significant changes that members will see in the proposed revision are as follows: Instead of a dues schedule being approved by the members at the Annual Conference, the Board would approve a dues increase only after at least 60 days prior written notice to the members and an affirmative vote of at least 12 of the 18 Board members. The Board felt that the added notice to members and the super majority approval process, actually would afford great member input into the dues setting process, since many cities are not represented at the Annual Meeting, held as part of the Annual Conference. Since there is already authority for a dues increase for the coming year, it is recommended that this new authority become effective for the 2003-04 fiscal year. The Board would be given the authority to set legislative policies and to design a legislative policy development process that “encourages and ma.\imizes” member input. The Board believed that the current process could be improved upon, to provide for greater member participation and to provide the Board greater flexibility to respond to emerging legislative issues. The existing practice of providing designated Board seats for the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, and for a representative from the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities and the Minnesota Association of Small Cities would be formally recognized. The Board believed that the make up of the Board was a core governance issue that ought to be reflected in the Constitution. Since the Board election process is already well under way for the current year, the Board recommends that this change take effect for elections in June, 2003. A formal Finance Committee would be established to take the place of the existing Budget Commillce, The Board felt a standing Finance Committee would be a better mechanism to assist the Board in reviewing and making recommendations on important League financial matters, such as meeting and conferring with the auditor, receiving regular financial updates, and making budget and dues recommendations. The existing Budget Committee, which met only once a year, had duties that were much more limited in scope. -- The Board would be given explicit authority to call special business meetings in conjunction with a statewide meeting of the membership. This change allows the Board greater latitude to call a meeting of the members when formal member input may be needed on a particular issue. What are the specific changes being proposed? Name of Document Change: The name of the document has been changed from Xonstitution" to “Constitution and Bylaws." Rationale: The addition of the term “Bylaws" is intended to reflect the fact that the document includes provisions that are more typically found in organization bylaws. (E.g., meeting procedures, quorum and voting requirements, etc.) Article 1 Name Change: The only change here is to create a separate Article for the name of the organization. Previously, Article 1 included both the Name and the Purpose of the organization. We have now made “Purpose" a separate Article II. Rationale: To conform the existing document to the typical form used with governing documents of other nonprofit entities. Article II Purpose Change-Section I: Minimal wording changes as reflected in the draft. Rationale: The rationale for some of the changes was to simply clean*up some of the wording and try to do a better job of accurately describing what the League is about and what it does. Change-Section 2: We have added specific reference to a regular strategic planning process. Rationale: With the emphasis that the Board and staff have been placed on a regular strategic planning process in recent years, the Board thought it was important to reflect this activity in the Constitution. Article III Membership Change-Section 1: Reference the specific authority of certain defined townships to be League members. Rationale: To clarify and be explicit about which townships are eligible for League membership. Change-Section 2: We have been more specific about the process for termination of League membership and have changed the “final ” date for paying annual League dues from January 1, to 180 days after the beginning of the League’s fiscal year (effectively, March 1). Rationale: The Board thought it would be good to have a specific “termination of membership section” and since membership is rarely terminated for late payment of dues, they thought the Constitution should better reflect actual practice. Six months into the fiscal year was thought to be a more realistic absolute termination date. Change-Section 4: The “Voting Privileges ” section is clarified to make clear who is entitled to vote at League business meetings. We make it the responsibility of the Member municipality to determine which of its delegates is entitled to vote at a League business meeting. The only exception being that the Mayor shall be the voting delegate in the absence of a Member decision to the contrary. Rationale: While it has never been an issue at a League business meeting, the Board thought it would be wise to clarify which of a city’s delegates is entitled to vote on behalf of the city. The proposed solution is not perfect, but it is probably better than requiring each Member municipality to formally designate by council action, which of its delegates is authorized to vote. Change-Section 5: An official and explicit status has been created for other non-city entities to participate in League programs and service. The designation is “Sponsoring Entities.” These entities do not have voting rights. Rationale: This gives legal recognition to some of our non-city participants. These entities do not have the legal status of Members, but because they take advantage of various League programs and services and provide revenue to the League, we thought we should formally recognize their status in the Constitution. We make it clear that their involvement is to help us better serve the interests of our Members. Other changes: The provision dealing with dissolution of the League has been moved to a “Miscellaneous ” article at the end of the document. Rational: Aggregate various miscellaneous governance provisions into a new “Miscellaneous ” article. Article IV Dues and Fees Change-Section I: The section on setting dues has been changed to give the Board the authority to increase dues upon an affirmative vote of 12 of its 18 members and after at least 60 days prior written notice to the Members. Since the members have already approved a dues schedule for the upcoming fiscal year, the Board is recommending that this change go into effect for the 2003-04 fiscal year. Rationale: The Board believed that since the League Board is a representative governing body, elected by the Members, the need to have a vote of the Members before going forward with a dues increase was contrary to the very philosophy that we have advocated against at the legislature. Moreover, members of the Board felt that the super* majority approval requirement, combined with prior written notice to the Cities, may actually provide members with greater input and protection in the dues setting process. Finally, they felt the fact that there are annual Board of Directors* elections, combined with the authority of Members to initiate a Constitutional amendment, provides sufficient authority to protect the Members from unreasonable Board action. The delayed effective date of this particular amendment recognizes the fact that authority for dues adjustments for the current year was already provided by member action in 2000. Article V Board of Directors Chang-Section I: The section on the composition and makeup of the Board of Directors has been changed to provide for specific Board seats for Minneapolis, St. Paul, The Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, and Minnesota Association of Small Cities. Right now, this is provided for through Board policy. The section has also been modified to make it clear that if any of the individuals holding these seats become oflicers, the entities do not then get an additional seat on the Board. Finally, an obsolete provision dealing with independent contractors has been removed. Since the Board election process is already underway for the current year, it is recommended that this change take effect for elections occurring in June, 2003. Rationale: The section on Board composition was changed to eliminate current ambiguity over the distinction between officers and other directors. The Board also thought it would be more appropriate to recognize in the Constitution - rather than Board policy - the Board commitments to Minneapolis, St. Paul, the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities and the Minnesota Association of Small Cities. These were viewed as core governance issues that ought to be reflected in the organization's governing document. The document also clarifies the question of whether these entities get another seat on the Board, if the entity's representative becomes an officer. The Board believed providing a city with more than one seat on the Board unduly limits the type of broad representation that cities would want to see on the Board of Directors. Finally, the deletion of the reference to independent contractors is meant to eliminate a provision put in to deal with a specific situation that is no longer relevant. Change-Section 3. Specific reference to the existence of a Nominating Committee has been provided. Rationale: Since the Board election process relies so heavily on a Nominating Committee, it was important to reference the existence of the Committee in the Constitution. Change-Section 4. The process for filling Board vacancies has been clarified to provide that a vacancy in the office of Second Vice President will be filled by Board appointment from among the members of the Board. The provision has also been changed to provide that if a vacancy occurs in a director or officer seat less than six months prior to the Annual Meeting, the Board may choose to leave the seat open. Rationale: This responds to the ambiguity that has risen in recent years over the amount of discretion the Board has in filling vacancies. Change-Section 5: The Attendance requirement has been changed so that the Board “may ”, rather than “shall ”, declare a seat vacant for excessive absences (three consecutive or four in a year.) Rationale: The change gives the Board greater discretion in deciding whether to declare a seat vacant. In essence, the Board is given the latitude to recognize what might be considered “excused absences.” Change-Section 7: The quorum requirement is changed from 8 to 9. Rationale: The Board felt that at least a majority of the Board should be present to transact business. Since a full Board i j at least 17 members, with the possibility of up to 18 members, 9 seemed a more appropriate number for quorum purposes. Change-Section 8: The section on Board “Powers” was rewritten to make it easier to read. Specific authority to create corporations or enter into appropriate partnerships with other public or private entities has also been added. Finally, the section provides explicit authority for the Board to delegate management powers to the Executive Director or to the Executive Committee, consisting of the officers and the immediate past president. Rationale: The changes are intended to reflect existing practices. While there is already implied authority to create corporations and enter into partnerships, we thought it might be wise to make this authority explicit. In addition, since on occasion the Board delegates authority to the Executive Committee, the Board felt that it would be good to formally recognize and define the Executive Committee and to formally authorize the practice that occurs from time to time. Change-Section 9: A provision dealing with the appointment of a chair in the absence of all officers has been added. Rationale: For Board meeting management purposes, it was good to make clear that the Board could chc a meeting Chair in the absence of all officers. Change-Section 10: A separate section on Executive Director powers has been provided. The only substantive changes being the clarification of the authority of the Executive Director to discipline and remove employees and the power to set terms and conditions of employment. It also eliminates reference to the “League’s official publication ” and to the requirement that the Annual Report be printed therein. Rationale: The change is intended to make the section on Executive Director powers easier to read. The section also tries to better describe the position's authority over personnel matters. In conjunction with the section on Board powers, the new provision is hf intended to recognize the existing practice under which new positions are authorized by the Board, but thereafter, the Executive Director establishes and implements the terms and conditions of employment for League employees. Regarding the “League’s official publication," the Board felt it was important to give the Board the utmost latitude to determine which publication method best conveys League information on any particular subject. Other Changes: The section bn affiliate organizations has been moved to the new “Miscellaneous" Article. Rationale:The affiliate section seemed better placed in the miscellaneous Article. Article VI Finance Change-Generally: A specific “Finances ” Article has been created, where a number of the existing finance provisions have been placed. Currently, the provisions are scattered in various provisions throughout the Constitution. Rationale: League finances. This aggregates in one place the Constitutional provisions dealing with Change-Section 3: The section is modified to clarify that an annual audit is mandatory and that the audit must be provided to the Board for review and acceptance. Rationale: Sound financial management practices suggest making this current policy mandatory. Change-Section 4: Reference to a formal “Budget Committee” made up of “two city officials from each congressional district" has been replaced it with a Board appointed “Finance Committee ” Rationale: The Board wanted to atTord itself the flexibility to constitute a more active committee to assist in working with the auditor, and monitoring, evaluating and making recommendations concerning League finances. While the work of the Budget Committee has been valuable, the Board thought that the stP'cture of the Committee and the fact that it only meets once a year, does not lend itself to providing the type of support that the Board is looking for in this important League function Article VII Membership Meetings Change-Generally: Reference to specific types of membership meetings other than the Annual Conference, has been eliminated. Rationale: The new provision allows the Board greater flexibility to hold meetings as it sees necessary. It was thought that it might be better to not be confined to a specific type of League Membership meeting. i Change-Section 3: Explicit authority for “Special Business Meetings" is provided, so long as they are held in conjunction with statewide conferences. Rationale: The authority for special membership meetings provides greater flexibility for the Board to call special business meetings to address particular relevant issues. Article VIII Legislative Policy Development Change-Generally: The Article on the legislative policy development process has been changed dramatically to provide that the League Board of Directors shall establish legislative policies and priorities, rather than have the Members formally adopt them. In addition, reference to a specific policy development process has been eliminated, with the intention of giving the Board the flexibility in deciding how to optimize member input into the process. Finally, we have included a provision requiring an annual report of legislative policies and priorities to the Members. Rationale: The Board felt that placing greater authority at the Board level recognizes the practical reality that most of our reaction to legislative initiatives must be fashioned based on Board action rather than membership decisions. The change also eliminates the existing, arguably meaningless, distinction between a “League legislative policy" and a “League Board commitment.” The elimination of a specifically defined legislative policy development process is actually intended to afford the Board greater flexibility to fashion a process that increases membership participation beyond that which currently exists. The current policy development process simply does not engender as much member input as the Board would like to see. The requirement for annual membership notification requires the Board to regularly report to the Members on important legislative activities. Article IX Miscellaneous Provisions Change-Generally: This is a new article where the provisions dealing with amending the Constitution, dissolving the League, and affiliate groups, have been placed. Rationale: It seemed like a good organizational mechanism. League of Minnesota Cities CONSTITUTION and BYLAWS As amended, June 20002 ARTICLE 1 Name and Purpose Section 1. This organization shall be known as the League of Minnesota Cities and shall be referred to in this document as the League, its purposes shall b e: ARTICLE II Puroose Section I - General. The purpose of the League is to sustain and advance the interests of its members by: A.First Advocacy - To b e Qn -efTective vehicle for the Promote and facilitate d evelopment the development and expression of enlighten ed policies and positions concerning the structure and powers of local government, and other issues of universal or speoifio represent those municipal interests before administrative, leuislative, and judicial bodies at the local, state, and national levels. B.Seeond Training.—Te Ddevelop and providerrcither alone or in concert with other governments, organizations; or groups—reonferences. seminars, workshops, and other training oppoitunities to help municipal officials better fulfill their responsibilities.proerams of-technical assistanc e and train in g-whieh will make available te-mun ietpalities and their employees advanc ed systems, conce pts, and techn iques applicabl e to various aspects of municipal operation s. C,Thifd - Services. Develop and provide services and products for which individual members mav not have adequate resources To foster and promote the di ssemination of information conc erning problems and issues affecting -local governm ent to special int erest groups and to the public at large. D. Information. Fourth—To Eencourage the improvement of all phases of municipal government by stimulating and fostering pertine nt research projeots-by collecting, developing, and providing information and advice on topics and issues affecting local governments, and bv stimulating and fostering pertinent research proiects.advice and bv hold ing convent ions and conf erenc es for the exploration of problems of municipal int erest. E. Facilitator. Fifth—To-Ffoster harmonious and cooperative relationships with local, state, and federal organizations and agencies tom exploremg common problems and developing mutually acceptable solutions to them. i Section 2. Strategic Planning. The l.eaeue shall reuularlv undertake a comprehe nsive stratecic planning process to develop goals and objectives that achieve the purposes of the League as described above. ARTICLE in Membership Section 1. Membership. Any Minnesota city munic ipality in ih # gtni o nf !Umm..rT^tn and any towmshi p having the powers of a statutor>’ city under Minnesota Statute Section 368.01 or other Minnesota general or special law mav. by proper action of its governing body and the payment of current member dues, become a member of the League, sholl be eligibl e t^memb ership in the Leagu e. Wh erever the word municipality is us ed in this const itution, it shall mean “city or urban town.” Section 2. Termination of Membership. Membership in the League is terminated or suspended whe never a member withdraws bv giving written notice to the Leaeue nr wh en a member fails to pav dues, fees or assessments established and required bv the b.caRue Board of Directors. Wh en a tmio io ipol iiy h «»miTUMi n mftmhar thi*? League, onv o fficial or officials of such municipa lity by the normal appointm ent procedure of such mun ioipolity may be come o dclcgot e or delegates to any official meeting of this Lcoguc; provided that th e mayor of such munic ipality shall b e c.k officio a delegate to the conv entions of th e League. Section 3. Any member -munic ipality which that has shall have failed to pay rts-dues_\vithin 180 davs of the becinninc of the League ’s fiscal year by-tlie first of January fol lowing th e due date, shall be stricken from the membership roll. Section 'll Any memb er in -good standing may withdraw from th e Leagu e at any time uptmoffi cial w ritten not ice, and shall receive a pro rata refund of its an nual dues payment. Section 3.S; Pclc2ates. Anv ofllcer or employee of a member mav upon payment of applicable fees and charge s, participate in League procrams and serx ices and shall be elicible to be a delegate at anv official League mceiimi. Section 4. Voting Privileges. Onlv members shall be entitled to vote at meetint?s of theXeauue. Each member is entitled to one vote on all matters. Fac^h member shall be thc^ole determiner of which of its delecates mav cast a vote on its behalf, except that the mayor of a member citv. if present, shall be the member citv\s voting delegate in the absence of a decision of the member city to the contrarx-. It. at any regulor-of -special meeting, thr ee fourths of the memb ers of th e League vote in favorof dissolution of th e Leagu e of Minn esota Cities, the Leogue shall be dissolved-within 90 days of th e date approving such action. SectioB <1 Immediot ely oft er a vote favoring di ssol ution the board of dir ectors shall proceed to settle any finonciot obligotions pending ogoin st <h» Leogue and to dispos e of all property held by the League. Any funds remaining after alt claims hove been settled and all property dispos ed of shall be returned to eoch port icipoting member in proport ion to the annual dues fee which the member paid : Section 5. Sponsoring Entities. In order to better serve the interests of its members, the Leaeue Board of Directors mav. subject to such reasonable terms and conditions as it may determine, authorize entities or organizations not othenv’isc eligible to be members, to participate in some or all of the League’s programs and services. However, in no event shall any such entity or organization be entitled to vote on any League matter. ARTICLE IVH Fees and Dues and Fees Section 1. Estabibhment.. Anv municipaKty in Minnesota de jiring to becom e a member of this Leogue may do so upon -signifying a de sire to do so ond poying of the annuol duej. and any outstand ing oss eonm ent. Sectio n 3i The dues for eoch municipality shall be based upon population as established by the latest fed eral d ecennial census, by on estimate mad e by-the Metropol itan Council, or on estimate by the state d emo gropher.-whichever has the latest stated dat e. This fee shall bo payable annually in advanc e on the' first day of September'. Sectio n 3i The annual dues for eoch member municipality shall-be-set-by-the League Board of Director s not to exceed the amounts established in-the schedule or schedules set out as append ices to this constitution, which shall be adopt ed or -amende d in the same manner as oth er port s of this-constitution. If no new dues schedule-is adopte d for a given year; the dues schedule in effect for the mo st recent prior year shaH-remain in effect; The total dues for each-member as thus calculate shall be round ed to the nearest do ttar The Teague Board of Directors shall set the annual dues for each member. The Board of Directors mav increase the previous year’s dues upon an affirmative vote of at least twelve (12) members of the Board of Directors. Before acting on a proposed dues increase, written notice of the proposed increase shall be given to the members at least 60 days before the meeting at which the proposed increase will be considered. Section 2. Basis of Dues. The dues for each member shall be based primarily on the population as established bv the latest decennial Census, bv an estimate made bv the Metropolitan Council, or an estimate by the state demographer, whichever has the latest stated date. Section 34t Special Assessments. A special assessment may be levied upon the members for League purposes upon recommendation of the Bboard of Ddirectors and upon approvaled by the rntnembership at an official business meeting held in the manner indicated in Article Vll. ARTICLE *V Board of Directors Oflicers-awd ComiiiiM«?4 »s Section 1. Composition and Terms. A Board of Directors composed as follows shall govern the affairs of the League: A. Three Ofllcers. consisting of a President, a First Vice-President, and a Second Vice-President, elected for one-vear terms: B. Twelve Directors, elected for three-vear terms (the terms shall he staggered so that at least four seats e.xpirc each vear): C. I he immediate Past-President of the Leauue. as lonti as that person continues to hold a Minnesota municipal office, ex-ofllcio i P. The president or a vice-president of the National i.eattue of Cities, if a Minnesota city official, ex-officio: and I'.. I he president of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities, ex-officio. The Board of Directors shall include individuals recommended t*v each of the following groups or entities: the citv of Minneapolis, the city of St Paul, the Association of Small Cities, and the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities. Individuals recommended by these groups or entities shall go through the Board election process. Except for ex- officio scats, no citv may have more than one representative on the Board at anv given lime. The n.embers of the Board of Directors shall hold office for their designated term. and until their elected or appointed successor has signified their acceptance. The new members of the Board of Directors shall take office immediately after the close of the annual business meeting. The offic ers of the League-shall b ean elected president, an elt?cted first vice presid ent, an elected second vice presid ent, the immed iate past preskient e.\ ofilc ierthe presid ent of the Association of Metropo litan Municipalities ex olTic io, the presid ent or q vice presid ent of the National League of€ities if a Minnesota city official e.K officio,-and twelve elected dir ectors. The offic efs-acting-os a group shall-constitute the board of di rector s. Section 2^ The presid ent and vice presid ents shall each b e elected annually for one- yettf termfr. Twelve dir ecto rs shall b e elected for three year ov erlapping terms. In 1974 feuM>Tthese shall b e elected fof-t hree year terms, four-fer two year terms and four for one-year terms; thereafter four shall b e elected annually for three year terms. Elections shall b e held at the offi eiai business meeting at the onnual convention. Ofilcers shall hold of fice-for their-d esignated terms, and until their elected or appointed successors bas e signified their acceptanee.-The newly elected offi eers shall take offic e immediat ely after the clos e of -the annual convention.-The immed iate past presid ent shall sen e as a member of the board of dir ecto fi»-ex -ofr icio for one year, so long-as he or she holds municipal offic e ond the president of the Asoociotion of Metropol itan-Munio ipol ities shall serve ex offioio; Section 2.-3i Eligibilit\- to Serve. To be eligible to be elected and to.serve, or continue to serve, as an elected officer of the League, a person shall be an elected official or an appointed employee. Section 3. Election of Board of Directors. Each year the President shall appoint a committee that shall evaluate prospective candidates for the Board of Directors and make a recommendation to the members at the annual business meeting. The Board of Directors shall be elected at the annual business meeting. Section 4. Vacancies. Vacancies on the Boaid of Directors shall be filled as follows: A. Officers. A vacancy in the office of President shall be filled bv the succession of the First Vice-President. A vacancy in the office of First Vice-President shall be filled by succession of the Second Vice-President. A vacancy in the office of Second-Vice President shall be filled bv appointment bv the Board of Directors from the members of the Board of Directors. B. Directors. Anv vacancy in the office of a Director shall be filled for the remainder of the term bv the Board of Directors, subject to approval bv the members at the next annual business meeting. C. Vacancies of six months or less. Notwithstanding the above, if a vacancy occurs less than six months before the date of the annual business meetinu. the Board of Directors mav choose to leave an officer or director position vacant and have it filled bv the members at the annual business meeting. or independent oontravtor who is on offic er of a membo r municipaiity. except beginning with the 1997 election an independent contractor serving os on office r of a mentber municipality shall no long er be eligible unless currently serving otHh e Board and oth erwise eligible to serve. Any member of the bo ard of director s who is absent for three conse cutive regular meetings or who is ob sent-fo f-ony four regular meetings during any con secutive 12 month period comm encing July 1, shall be deemed to have resigned from the boa rd, ond the-vaconcy shall be filled as prov ided in-this section. Any -voconcy in on elective off ice shall be declared bv reso lution of the board of director s and-be filled for tlte remainder of the term by the board of directors subject to the approval of the membership at the next annual meeting, exo ept-that a vacancy in the offic e of president shall be filled by the succession of the first vice president: A vacancy in the offic e of first vice president shell be filled by succession of the second vice president. A vacancy in the-offio e of director occ urring ot the annuol conv ention shall-be filled by election o t the conv ention for the remainder of the term. Section 5. Attendance Requirements. If a member of the Board of Directors is absent for three consecutive meetings or is absent for anv four regular meetings during anv consecutive 12-month period commencing July 1. the Board of Directors mav declare that person ’s seat vacant and the vacancy shall be filled as provided in section 4. •a\ 0 Section 6-4-Mcctin2s. The Bboard of Ddirectors shall meet at such times as may be determined by the Board k. er-by-the presid entPresident. or by any three members, but shall assemble to meet at least four times annually. Meetings shall be in person with the exception that non-assembled meetings by telephone conference call; or other media, shall be authorized if the presid ent President and ex ecutive dir ectorExecutive Director agree in advance that a non-assembled beard -Board meeting is desirable. Notice of the beard-Board meeting shall be provided in the manner established by board resolution. Section?. Quonini, A quorum of the Bboard of Ddirectors is nine eight members and action by the Board of Directors shall require the favorable vote of a majority of those present, but not less than five members. Section 8. Powers. The Bboard of directors shall be responsible for the general management of the affairs of the League, subject to the provisions of the Cconstitution.Jt may do all things reasonable and necessary to further the purposes of the League, including but not limited to: A. Appoint the Executive Director and fix the rate of pay and benefits for the position. B. Authorize other League staff positions C-lt-shall establi sh th e positions and fix the rote of pay for employees of th e Leagu e^ h-shaU^-adopt a budget for League operations for each fiscal year^t which fiscol year shal l b e th e year ending August 3 1. D. It shall Ddetemiinc the various committees to be appointed. E.Th e board of dir ectors shall hav e th e power to Ppurchase, own, mortgage; or convey such real estate and other property in the name of the League, in the name of a non-profit corporation governed by the Mmembers of the League Bboard of Ddirectors, or in the name of any Mmember when authorized by that Mmember, as may be necessary' for the purposes of the League. This grant of authority shall include power to purchase or sell on a contract for deed or conditional sales contract or otherwise. F. Th e board of dir ectors may Aauthorize officers, agents; or employees or any of (hem-to enter into any contract or execute and deliver any instruments or obligations in the name of and on behalf of the League. G. Create corporations or enter into appropriate partnerships with public or private entities. H. Unless otherwise prescribed bv the terms of this Constitution, the Board of Directors may delegate the management of League affairs to the League Executive Director or the Board Executive Committee, consisting of the Officers and the immediate Past-Presidenu provided the League Board of Directors retains ultimaie responsibility for management of League affairs. Section 9S Duties of President . The President shall be Ghaif-chair of the Bboard of Directors. The President shall preside at the annual business meeting and all other meetings of the League, but may designate others to preside instead. Except as otherwise provided bv this Constitution. tThe Ppresident shall appoint all committees established by the Bboard of Ddirectors or by the Ceonstitution and shall appoint representatives of the League to such non-League bodies as may be appropriate. Section 6 i In the absence of the President, the First Vice President shall act as president President . In the absence of both the President and First Vice President, the Second Vice President shall act as President. In the absence of all Officers, the Board of Directors shall choose a chair from among it members. Section 10.7 Executive Director . The Executive Director shall be the chief administrative officer of the League, subject to the general supervision of the Bboard of Ddirectors. The Eexecutive Ddirector shall be appointed by the Bboard of directors for an indefinite period and may be removed at will bv the Bboard of Ddirectors. The E.\ccutive Director shall appoint the League employees^ except that the appointment, discipline^ and removal of the General Counsel is subject to approval by the Board of Directors. The Executive Director shall establish terms and conditions of employment for League employees.-odmin ister the Leag ue office and the League services. The executive director shall prepare an annual budget of revenu es and expend itures for the consideration of the board of directors and shall limit expend itures to the total budget approved by the board of directors. The Executive Director shall submit to the Board of Directors and to the membership an annual report of League affairs, services, and finances which shall be published in the Leagued magazine or such other communications tool that the Board of Directors mav deem appropriate, official publication. The Executive Director shall be responsible for all have ohareoof-4hc League records, accounts, and property. The Executive Director shall cause an official record of all meetings of the League to be made. The executive director shall act os treasurcr-and handle all League fun d-?? The Executive Ddirector and employees designated by the Executive Director shall post an employee dishonesty corporate surety bond at League expense. The accounts and financ es of the League shall be post-audited each y ear by a public-accountant selected by the board of directors. Section 8. The boord of directors may, on application, recogniz e as offiliates of the Leag ue organization s whose membership consists predominantly of Minn esota mun icipal officials or employees. The g en eral purpose of such affiliations shall be to encourage the maximum cooperation among the various mun icipal functions, among admini strative department s and councils, and umong the munic ipalities of the state through the League; The board of directors mav require for affiliate recocn ition such conditions a& to activities, membershiprand financ es as it deema appropriaterin no event, however,-shall recogniz ed affiliates advocate legisl ative proposakr in conflict with Leag ue leg islative policies without-adherin g to the procedure set forth in -r\rticle VI, Section 7. Article VI Finances. Section I. Fiscal Year. The fiscal year of the League shall be from September 1 through August 31 of the following year. Section 2. Duties of Secrctarv«Treasurcr. The Executive Director shall act as the Treasurer and handle all League funds. The Executive Director shall prepare an annual budget of revenues and expenditures for consideration bv the Board of Directors and shall limit expenditures to the total budget approved bv the Board of Directors and anv fiscal policies adopted bv the Board. Section 3. Audit. The Executive Director shall have an audit of the accounts and finances of the League conducted at the end of each fiscal year. The audit shall be conducted bv a certified public accountant selected bv the Board of Directors. The results of each annual audit shall be provided to the Board of Directors for its review and acceptance. Section 4. Finance Committee. Section 9. A budg et committee shal l b e appointed by Tthe President shall appoint a finance committee, subject to approval of the Board of Pirectors.r-The budget commiMi«<i is to b e comprised of two city officials from each oonpressional district and th e board of directors fu st vice president. The First Vice President shall serve as Ghaif chair ofthe committee. Budget committee memb ers will serve-for o term of thr ee years and-terms shall b e staggered. To initiate th e staggered terms,- in 1992-th e president shall appoint six people to serve a thr ee yeor term, five people to serve a two year term, ojkI five people to serveo one year term; Vacancies sholl b e filled for th e remainder of tiie term by appointment by th e president. The finance budget committee shall review League finances and services, study the League’s dues structure, and recommend to the Bboard of Ddirectors a budget for each fiscal year, receive and review the annual audit results, confer with the auditor and perform such other financial functions as the President and Board of Directors mav direct. Additionally, special committees moy be authoriz ed by the board of directors for th e purpose of-studying municipal problems' conducting schools, making legislative recemmendations, or oth er appropriate League service. Th e cha ir of each such committee oppointed by the president sha ll, on th e completion of th e committee’s work, make o report to th e board of directors.-convention, or legislative conference in such ibrm os the e.secutiv e directorE.xecutiv e Director moy request. ARTICLE VII Meetings Section 1. Annual Conference. The League shall hold an Annual Conference on the dates and at a place fixed bv the Board of Directors, general, statewide cnnyt^ntimi eoch y ear, o legislative conference at least bienniotiy-,-and-6uoh oth er meetings os may bo coll ed by th e board of d irector s. Such meetings may for educational or legislotivo purposes, moy be stot ewid e or regional meetings, and moy be for speoiol doss es of ofi io ers or employ ees or for municipal ofT icers generally; Section 2. Annual Business Meeting. An annual business meetin2 convention of th e Leogue shal l be h eld on th e dat es-and ot a ploo e fix ed by th e board of dir ectors. The o fficial business meeting shall be held during the Annual Conferenceo onvention at such time as the gboard of Ddirectors shall fix and announce in advance with the program. The President shall appoint aA nominating committee and such other committees as the gboard of Ddirectors may authorize by th e presid ent at or before the beginning of the convention Annual Conference to make reports at the business meeting.to th e business session. Section 3. Special Business Meetings, ITie Board of Directors may schedule and hold other member business meetings in conjunction with other statewide League conferences upon at least GOI davs prior written notice to each member. Section 4. Quorum and Voting Requirements. At any the business meeting,session delegates from at least tiventv-20 mmembers municipalities shall be considered a quorum. Each represented mentber municipality shall be entitled to one vote (which shol l be th e major ity expression of d elegates from -that member municipolityV Action on legislative matters and on amending the constitutionConstitution shall conform to the voting requirements set forth in Articles VllL-fespectively: Section 5. Other Meetings. The Board of Directors may hold other member meetings for educational, leeislativer or other purposes, which mav be statewide or regional, and mav be for special classes of officers or employees or for municipal officers generally. Section 6. Parliamentary' Rules. At anv business meeting the members conference may adopt further rules governing its proceedings. Otherwise, parliamentary' procedure shall be according to the latest revision of the Robert ’s Rules of Order. ARTICLE VIII Legislative Policy Development Process Pfoc edure Section I. Board of Directors Roles. The Board of Directors shall establish policies and priorities to guide the League’s legislative advocacy efforts. Section 2. Policy Development Process. To assist in the development of legislative policies and priorities, the Board of Directors shall establish a policy development process designed to encourage and ma.\imize member input. The process mav include but is not limited to strategies such as: a) Creation of specific legislative policy committees or task forces. i b) Solicitation of member input through surveys or questionnaires. c) Statewide and/or regional membership meetings. Section 3. Member Notification. At least once annually, the Board of Directors shall submit a report of the proposed legislative policies and priorities to the members. A-fegular legislative conf erence shati-be held befor e or during eoch session of the state legislature, to approve ofTiciol League legislative polici es. The board of director s may authorin e special legislative conf erences when necessary. No pol icy shait-becom e an official League legislative pol icy unless first opprov ed by the members as provided in Section 2. Section 3i The proc ess of odopting official -Leogue legislotive pol icies may occur in any-o f-the following three ways: (1) Each year the Leogue shall convene legislative policy committ ees to study and make recomm endations to the League board of directors conc erning legislati» e policies. The board of director s shall establish the number of committ ees and the focus of their study:-Upon receipH>f the recomm endot ion s from each of the po licy comm ittees the board of <tirectors may either accept-, fcject, of mod ify a propo^ polic y-.--Once approved b)r-the-bo ard-of directors the propos ed polic ies sho il be submitted for consid erot ion by the members ot the regular or g specially called legislative conf erence to which all members are invited. Polici es shall becom e off icial Leogue legislative pol icies upon approval by a two thirds favoiable vote of alt-municipahties voting. How ever, no po licy shall become an official Leogue legislative po licy if the municipahties voting ogainst- h-include oil the ekies of on e clutis and if the propo sed pol icy is by its terms opplicablc to such class of municipatity. f3)-At-a regular or special legislative conf erence, members may-propos e polici es on subjects net-meiuded in the pol icies recomm ended and submitted by the poli cy comm ittees and the-board of directors. How ev er, no propos ed policy shall be consid ered unless first opprov ed for consid eration by-a major ky-of the niembers voting. If opprov ed for con sideration;'any-propo sed policy shall-becom e an offic ial League legislative policy upon a favorable two thirds vote of the ntembers vo ting. How ever, no policy shol l becom e an offic ial League legislative po licy if the municipol ities voting against it include all the cities of on e class and if the propos ed po lk?y is by ils^erms apphcobl e to such class of municipality." A policy propt>sed for cons ideration that do es not r^eis e the requisite number of votes for consid eration o r passage shall be referred to the appropri ate policy comm ittee for further'study. f3> Inlieu of approval at a regular or special legislative conf erence, un offici al-League legislative po licy may be made by mail ballot on any subject of legislotion when outhoriH ed by the beard of directors. No commkm ent shall be made by mail ballo t-unless ballot s-are-cast on tlre-question by ot ieast 20 percent of the member municipalities throu gh action of their governing bodi es and at least two thirds of the municipalities voting opprov e the commitm ent.-At leost ten days sho ll elapse between the mailing of the ballots and the countin g'of the marked bollots. At a regular or special legislative conf erence tho members may adopt rules not incon sistent with tite provisions of this Constitut io n-goveming prixeedings. Otherwise, par4iamentary-proc edure-shall be oocording to the most recent revision of the Roberts Lk.. Rules of Order; SeetioB 3* The board of directors may, by a two thirde vote of all its membets, make ftconun itment on -any bill then pending-when the-bill is, in ine judgment of the-beardT ef sufficient general municipal importance oed urgency to require sucl> action. A coBuniUn ent adopted under this section shell be presented to the legislature as a League board commitm ent ond not on officiol League legislative pol icy. Section 4. Afliliiite Legislative Policies. Subdivision 1. Affiliate organizations may adopt legislative policies and commitments in accordance with their organization's by-laws. Such policies or commitments shall be submitted to the League Executive Director, as soon as is practical after being adopted^ and, if possible, prior to the League’s legislative conference so that the membership may consider League legislative policy in light of affiliate positions. Such policies and commitments as-thatare. in the judgment of the Executive Director, m conflict with adopted or pending League policy shall be submitted by the Executive Director to the Bboard of Ddirectors for review and comment. If the League Bboard of directors determines that the policy or commitment is-in-conflicts with an adopted League policy or pending policy, the submitting affiliate organization shall be so notified in writing within 10 days and said affiliate shall not advocate such policy to the Lkgislature except in accordance with Subdivision 2. Subd. 2. An affiliate organization upon notification from the League that a legislative policy or commitment mn-conflicts with an adopted or pending League policy, may proceed to advocate such policy or commitment only under the following conditions: (1) The conflicting policy or commitment in confl iot is resubmitted for a vote at an annual, regular^ or special membership meeting of the affiliate and is approved by a two- thirds vote of the delegates present, by voteing or by mailed ballot, provided that the policy or commitment hod beenwas mailed eut-to members at least seven days prior to the meeting if the ballot is taken at a meeting, and provided that at least 40 percent of the affiliate members are participating; (2) Provided that Tthe League Executive Director shall also be provided, within seven days, written notice that such meeting or mailed ballot is to be held and for what purpose, and that the affiliate members shall be informed in the notice that the League Bboard of Ddirectors heckleciared such policy in conflict; and (3) A policy or commitment adopted pursuant to this section shall be presented to the ^legislature as an affiliate policy or commiunent wbieb-that differs from a League policy. ARTICLE iXVM Section 1. Amendments, This con stitution Constitution may be am Jed after the first day of the annual meeting by a two-thirds vote of all municipalities members voting, provided that the proposed amendments shall have been prepared in writing on or before the first day of the meeting and distributed to the delegates. An amendment in writing, offered from the floor without prior notice to the delegates, shall be permissible if it is an amendment to a proposed amendment, is on the same subject as the amendment it is proposed to amend, is germane to the amendment it is proposed to amend, and is approved by a two-thirds vote of the delegates in attendance and voting. Section 2. Pisaolution. If. at anv regular or special meeting, three-fourths of the members of the League vote in favor of dissolution of the Leacue of Minnesota Cities, the League shall be dissolved within 90 davs of the date approving such action. Immediately after a vote favoring dissolution, the Board of Directors 'hall proceed to settle anv financial obligations pending against the League and to dispose oi aH propeitv held by the League. Anv funds remaining after all claims have been settled and all property disposed of shall be returned to each participating member in proportion to the annual dues fee paid bv the member . Section 3. Affiliates. The Board of Directors may, on application, recognize as affiliates of the League, organizations whose membership consists predominantly of Minnesota municipal officials or employees. The general purpose of such affiliations shall be to encourage the maximum cooperation among the various municipal functions, among administrative departments and councils, and amonu the municipalities of the state. The Board of Directors may require for affiliate recognition such conditions as to activities, membership, and finances as it deems appropriate. In no event, however, shall recognized affiliates advocate legislative proposals in conflict with League legislative policies without adhering to the procedure set forth in Article VIII. ARTICLE XVW The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Section 1. The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities, to include Mmmembers of the League of Minnesota Cities situated in counties within the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities area,T may be established within the League in accordance with this article. Section 2. The bylaws establishing the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities shall include provisions of membership, dues and finances. Board of Directors and officers, meetings, committees, and such other matters as are deemed appropriate, including the adoption of legislative commitments applying specifically to the Twin Cities metropolitan ama. The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities shall be eonsidered as an affiliate organization for purpo.ses of adopting legislative policy. Section 3. The bylaws establishing the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities and amendments thereto shall be submitted to the Bboard of Ddirectors of the League of Minnesota Cities for a determination of consistency with this constitutionConstitution. The Bboard of Ddirectors shall consider them forthwith, and if it finds the bylaws and amendments consistent with this constitutionConstitution. it shall approve them. Section 4. Establishment of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities does not prevent the funushing of ser\ ice by the League of Minnesota Cities staff to metropolitan area Mmincmbers in the same maiuier and to the same e.xtent as to Mmmembers in other parts of the state, but any speeial service to the Association by the League of Minnesota Cities staff shall be financed by the Association. Section 5. The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities may be dissolved by the procedure specified in its bylaws. Upon dissolution of the Association^ this article shall | have no force or effect. APPENDIX DUES SCHEDULE MAXIMUM FOR 2001X2001 MAXIMUM INCREASE OF 3% 249 OR LESS 25(M,999 5.000- 9,999 10.000- 19,999 20.000- 49,999 50.000- 299,999 300,000 AND OVER 3254 $88 PLUS 67.34 CENTS PER CAPITA $703 PLUS 55.03 CENTS PER CAPITA $1,520 PLUS 46.85 CENTS PER CAPITA $5,199 PLUS 28.46 CENTS PER CAPITA $15,394 PLUS 8.08 CENTS PER CAPITA $25,949 PLUS 4.56 CENTS PER CAPITA DUES SCHEDULE MAXIMUM FOR 2001/2002 MAXIMUM INCREASE OF S% 249 OR LESS $267 250-4,999 $92 PLUS 70.71 CENTS PER CAPITA 5,000-9,999 $739 PLUS 57.78 CENTS PER CAPITA 10,000-19,999 $1,596 PLUS 49.20 CENTS PER CAPITA 20,000-49,999 $5,459 PLUS 29.88 CENTS PER CAPITA 50,000-299,999 $16,164 PLUS 8.48 CENTS PER CAPITA 300,000 AND OVER $27,246 PLUS 4.79 CENTS PER CAPITA DUES SCHEDULE MAXIMUM FOR 2002/2003 MAXIMUM INCREASE OF 5% 249 OR LESS $280 250-4,999 $97 PLUS 74.24 CENTS PER CAPITA 5,000-9,999 $776 PLUS 60.67 CENTS PER CAPITA 10,000-19,999 $1,676 PLUS 51.66 CENTS PER CAPITA 20,000-49,999 $5,732 PLUS 31.38 CENTS PER CAPITA 50,000-299,999 $16,972 PLUS 890 CENTS PER CAPITA 300,000 AND OVER $28,609 PLUS 5.03 CENTS PER CAPITA