Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-09-2002 Council PacketAGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, DECEMBER 9,2002,7:00 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. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Apprr.ve/Amend ROLL CALL Cn» 9 2002 PUBLIC HEARING 2. 2003 Levy Adoption Hearing - Adoption of 2003 Budget and Tax Levy A. Adopt Final 2002 Levy Collectible in 2003 - Resolu:ion B. Adopt 2003 General Fund Budget - Resolution C. Adopt the 2003 Special Revenue Funds Budgets - Resolution APPROVAL OF MINUTES • 3. Regular Council Meeting of November 25,2002 • 4. Truth in Taxation Meeting of December 2,2002 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Rick Meyers, Representative PLANNING COM^USSION COMMENTS - Jeanne Mabusth, Representative PUBLIC COMM'SNTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Kris Rudd on behalf of Richard Rudd, 4575 Wayzata Boulevard - Extension of Final Plat Date - Resolution James Nystrom, 1725 Concordia Street - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution Peter and Amy Goshgarian, 100 Orono Orchard Road South - Variance Resolution ' Aulik Design, 955 Tonkawa Road -Variance/Conditional Use Permit - Resolution Kevin Manley, 1973 Fagemess Point Road - Variance/Conditional Use Permit 10. #02-2789/02-2840 Dahlstrom Development LLC, “2550” Wa>‘zata Boulevard West - Final Development Plan Approvals - Resolution * 5. #2587 * 6. #02-2847 * 7. #02-2848 * 8. #02-2853 9. #02-2854 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT 11. Orono/Long Lake Water System Interconnection Improvements ¥ I AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, DECEMBER 9,2002,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 12. Long Lake Fire Station Pay Requests 13. 2003 Fee Schedule - Ordinance and Summary Ordinance for Publication 14. 2003 Meeting Schedule 15. Council Liaison to Park Commission and Planning Commission Meetings in 2003 16. Appoint Auditor for Fiscal Year 2002 17. 2002 Interfund Transfers and Loan Payments 18. Authorization to Disburse City Funds for Claims Received 19. Receipt of the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the 2001 Financial Report - (Information Only) 20. Change in Name of Fleming Trail Addition Plat - Resolution 21 . Pay Adjustment - Chief Good 22. Police Capital Expenditures 23. Elimination of Facility Rental Charge from Police Service Cost Allocation 24. Police Wvb Page 25. Accept Donation to Police Reserves CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 26. LICENSES Liquor License • 27. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 2002 12/02 Planning Commission Work Session, 6:00 p.m. 12/05 Council Work Session, Thursday, 5:30 p.m. 12/09 Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 12/24 HOLIDAY, Observance of Christmas (Afternoon) 12/25 HOLIDAY, Observance of Christmas mi 01/01 . HOLIDAY, New Year's Day 01/06 - Park Commission Meeting, 7; 1 5 p.m. 01/13 -Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 01/20 - HOLIDAY, Martin Luther King, Jr. Day 01/22 - Planning Commission, Wednesday, 6:30p.m. 01/27 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. ioam Public A ttendance Meeting D ate / ^ O^OUSCIL □ PLANNING COMMISSION □ Park Commission □ Other Please fill out the information requested BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. AC. xNt «A<' » . I PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER , / 1. ^A'/i \a /t'Z/L’x ak/1U7'‘’^ ^/'ylJc/\. u \i‘) QJXK GW\jC».-^ 0>r-y^/v/v^/w. pW :\Jj ( -a \ !^ • .0 7 *^ - ‘(^ 7 3. kl|(ju4A ligfy^Uc^^Urut,_______________kI^ttzou '^A~I 4__________________________________ 5. 7.. 8. 9.. 10. 11. 12.. 13.. 14. 15.. XtVlkMVAl ifMFMHB • OMINfORMSVfVMJC. ATT REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DEC 9 2002 DATE: DeceSiSer^ ITEM NO: ^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Adminbtrator Adminbtrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Levy Adoption Hearing-Adoption of the 2003 Collectible Tax Levy and Annual Budget - Resolutions Attachments: 1. Resolution Adopting the Final 2002 Tax Levy Collectible in 2003 2. Resolution to Adopt the 2003 General Fund Budget 3. Resolution to Adopt the 2003 Special Revenue Funds Budget Lew Adoption Hearing This is the final hearing prior to the adoption of the 2003 budget and tax levy. Proposed 2003 Budget and Tax Lew The proposed 2003 budget reflects an effort to limit expenditures in order to comply with a state* imposed levy limit, as well as to deal with other limited revenues, while maintaining current service levels and providing funding for upcoming fire equipment and facility needs. General Fund Budget The proposed 2003 General Fund budget expenditures are $4,712,880. This is an increase of $105,283, or 2.28% over the 2002 budget. While the proposed budget reflects necessary expenditure increases related to items such as annual compensation adjustments, fire serv ice costs, enhanced information technology, and motor fuel; the small overall expenditure increase was made possible by a number of significant reductions in other expenditure items. The most significant expenditure reduction resulted from the elimination of two staff positions. Tax Lew. Tax Rate, and Impact on Property Owners The total tax levy required to fund the proposed 2003 budget is $3,098,400. This is an increase of $172,065, or 5.88% over the 2002 Levy. This increase is necessary both to fund the General Fund budget expenditures, and to provide funding for upcoming fire equipment and facility' needs. The estimated tax capacity for taxes payable in the year 2003 is $ 15,549,329. This is an increase of mxBmrrrzr:m...... $1,701,834, or 12.29% over the 2002 tax capacity. Based on the City’s increased tax capacity and the (Hoposed tax levy, the tax capacity rate will be 19.809%. This is a reduction of S.49% from the 2002 tax capacity rate. The reduction in the tax ctqMcity rate will result in a minimal increase in the City’s share of the property tax bill. Assuming a 10% increase in a home’s property value, the City’s share of the property tax bill will increase 4%. For a home valued at $20G,0('0, this is an increase of$ 16.60. For a home valued at $350,000, the increase is $29.05. For a home valued at $500,000 the increase is $41.49. Tinth-in-Taxai KU'lf U ]| The Truth-in-Taxation Hearing was held at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, December 2. Although an outline of the proposed 2003 budget and tax levy was presented at the hearing, there were no members of the public present at the hearing. AdoDtioB of 2003 Budaet and Tax Lew It is recommended that the Council adopt the 2003 budget and tax levy at this time. The necessary resolutions are attached for Council adoption. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Motion to adopt a resolution approving the proposed tax levy to fund the 2003 budget. 2. Motion to adopt a resolution approving the 2003 General Fund budget 3. Motion to adopt a resolution approving the 2003 Special Revenue Funds budget - r /i t niTiitiiifci ■ • 1 ■1 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE FINAL 2002 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 2003 BE IT RESOLVEDt by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the final 2002 Tax Levy Collectible in 2003, is determined to be as follows: GENERAL LEVY General Fund • Operations PIR Fund - Infrastructure • Roads Park Fund - Land Acquisition & Development Improvement & Equipment Outlay Fund - Capital Equip TOTAL GENERAL LEVY $2,509,684 35,450 5,000 -0- 12^550.134 SPECIAL LEVY, General Fund - PERA Rate Increases General Fund - COPS Grant Decrease General Fund - Capita! Equipment Cert. TOTAL SPECIAL LEVY-GENERAL FUND $ 4,980 14,786 75.000 $ 94.766 BONDED INDEBTEDNESS G.O. 1992 Sewer Improvement Bond G.O. 1997 Sewer Improvement Bond G.O. 1999 Sewer Improvement Bond TOTAL BONDED INDEBTEDNESS $ 45,000 15,000 ___15.500 $ 75.500 BONDS OF OTHER GOVERNMENTAL UNITS H.R.A. Refunding Bond 1998 H.R.A. Fire Facility and Equipment Bond 2003 S 250,000 $ 128.000 $ 378.000 TOTAL ALL LEVIES -^3.098.400 The City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 9,2002. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Pinal Tm 03.t. A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 2003 GENERAL FUND BUDGET BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the 2003 General Fund budget is determined to be as follows: ESTIMATED RRVFNl JFS Taxes - General $2,604,450 Licenses and Permits 362,520 Intergovernmental 226,410 Charges for Services 1,308.800 Fines and Forfeits 111,500 Interest Income 72,000 Miscellaneous 27.200 TOTAL $4,712,880 APPROPRIATED EXPENDITURES General Government $ 966,690 Public Safety 2,703,610 Street Maintenance 549,790 Parks and Recreation 63,070 Recycling Program 82,000 Engineering - Unallocated 10,570 Rein}bursable Expenditures 70,150 Special Projects and Contingency , 60,000 Capital Outlay 102,000 Transfers To Other Funds 105.000 TOTAL $4,712,880 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 9,2002. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Petenon, Mayor A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 2003 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS BUDGETS BE IT RESOLVED* by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the 2003 Special Revenue Funds budgets are determined to be as follows: Estimated Revenues Park Improve & Eauio Outlav Community Investment Taxes - General $ 5,000 $$ Interest Income 6,000 20,000 75,000 User Fees / Loan Payment - -5,750 . . Park Dedication Fees 30,000 • -• . Transfers from other Funds 105,000 33,000 Use of Fund Balance • -• •22.000 Total Revenues $ 41.000 $ 130.750 S 130.000 Appropriated Expenditures General Government $$ 29,350 $ Public Safety - -m m Streets - -92,000 Parks & Recreation 8,000 • • Transfers to other Funds 33,000 • •130,000 Increase to Fund Balance - •9.410 Total Expenditures S 41.000 S 130.750 J^l 30.000 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regult^inieeting held December 9,2002. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Ipwiil HrfMi 01 m Barbara A. P«crson, Mayor II Tniiii iiiiMitfirtt'tiitfii L ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY^ NOVEMBER 25,2002 ■ING OfC 9 2002 ROLL CirruroHONo 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. Representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, Planning Director Mike Gaffion, City Attorney Tom Barrett, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Alissa Wintemheimer. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/Amend Items 12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21, and 22 were added to the Consent Agenda. White moved, and Murphy seconded, to approve the consent agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 2. Commendation to Officer Mark Tomczvk Mayor Peterson had Officer Tomczyk come forward while she read the letter of commendation. She thanked him for his dedicated service. Chief Stephanie Good stated that she is especially proud of the excellent job Officer Tomczyk did under dangerous circumstances. Mayor Peterson stated she appreciates everything the police do for the citizens of Orono. PUBLIC HEARING 3. Charitable Gambling Ordinance —Proposed Revisions Gappa stated that the Public Hearing was to discuss an ordinance allowing the City td'take 10% of proceeds from charitable gambling within the City. Multiple Sclerosis Society at Narrows Saloon is currently the only charitable gambling operation in Orono. He stated they were notified of the Public Hearing. Mayor Peterson opened the Public Hearing at 7:10 p.m. Drew McDermott stated that the Parks Commission would like to receive the 10% from charitable gambling to help fund parks projects. 3 1 >^%'iirrnrfilhr ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 3. Charitable Gambling Ordinance —Proposed Revisions —Continued Gappa stated that lawful uses include the parks, but there were other options for spending the money. Sherokee Ilsc stated that Orono is the only city not collecting the 10% from charitable gambling in Minnesota. Mayor Peterson closed the Public Hearing at 7:14 p.m. S^severe asked if the Parks Commission wanted to take the 10% from the MS Society, or if it would only be from new operations. He stated that the MS Society donated $2,000 to the Parks for a handicapped water fountain at Navarre Park. McDermott stated they w’ould allow the MS Society an exemption. Another Parks Commissioner stated that he and some other commissioners disagreed and felt all charitable gambling operations should pay the 10%. Gappa stated that there was no “grandfathering” in, and that all charitable gambling operations would have to be treated equally. Sansevere stated that he could not support the gambling ordinance because it would force the MS Society to give up some of their money. He stated that the Council had always helped the Parks Commission find money for projects in the past and would continue to do so. Murphy asked how much the Parks Commission could gain from the 10%. Moorsc stated it would be about $1,500. Murphy stated that seemed like a small amount to worry about. McDermott stated the Parks Commission was in debt and any funding would help. Another Parks Commissioner stated that the gambling funds would go up and down, and some years could provide a significant income. Mayor Peterson stated she has trouble taxing any charitable organization when they already give so much to the community. Sansevere asked if the Parks Commission could get a charitable gambling permit themselves. McDermott stated he did not know, but would approve of it. Tom Barrett arrived at 7:22 p.m. Sansevere asked Barrett if the MS Society could be grandfathered in under the new gambling ordinance. Barrett stated that all cases would need to be treated equally, with no special circumstances. 1 I ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 3, Charitable Gambling Ordinance—Proposed Revisions —Continued White slated that he approved of the 10% tax. The MS Society has many av enues for fund raising. He suggested that the City make an annual fund from the pull-tab revenues and then decide each year what to do with the funds, including possibly donating some back to the MS Society. Nygard stated he favored the tax. Sansevere stated he was interested in White’s idea of donating back to the MS Society. Gappa stated that once the City receives the moiity, it is required to use it on lawful expenditures, and that donating it back would probably not be lawful. Use stated that the Parks Commission is in debt because they borrowed against the future Park’s budget. She stated that they are embarrassed to compare Orono ’s parks to those of other cities. Murphy asked if they have any budget allocation for the parks. Moorse stated they have a parks maintenance budget, ami a $5,000 annual levy for capital items, plus park dedication fees. Sansevere asked if the Council has ever denied the Parks funding. McDermott stated that the Navarre budget got cut and they had to back afterwards to put in things that w ere requested by the community. They had to get loans to purchase the Larson-Sohns property and Hackberry equipment. He stated there are not many large subdivisions left in Orono, and the Parks Commission is $100,000 in debt. Mayor Peterson stated they should budget more funding for the parks because the subdivision won ’t last. McDermott stated most cities budget $40-100,000 for their parks each year. Moorse stated that the last couple of years the City had been under levy limits. Murphy suggested taking money from a different budget and moving it to the parks budget. Barrett stated that on page 5 of the packet, item 3, it stated that the City was allow ed 10* use the 10% to contribute to charitable organizations. Gappa stated that it also said, “A contribution may not be made to an organization licensed to conduct lawful gambling that contributed to the fund.” So the City would not be able to give back to the MS Society. Murphy suggested the City match 10% of the charitable gambling profits, instead of taxing the charities, and then budget it into the Parks fund. White suggested they pass the ordinance to have it in place for future gambling operations and then opt to waive the tax. Barrett stated he would be concerned by such a system in i ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 3. Charitable Gambling Ordinance—Proposed Revisions—Continued that it wpuld not treat all operations equally. Sansevere stated that if the MS Society left, then would be the time to pass the ordinance. White stated that the City would be notifled of any new applications for charitable gambling within Orono, and they could revisit the issue if a new organization was coming in. No action was taken. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *4. Regular Council meeting of November 12,2002 V/hite moved, and Murphy seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 12,2002. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS—DREW MCDERMOTT, REPRESENTATIVE McDermott stated that they will not meet again until January. Other than Sherokec Use, who has completed the maximum number of terms, all commissioners up for reappointment have indicated they are interested in another term. The plans for the sidewalk along County 19 arc movin^ forward. Hackberry Park was practically complete and was already being used. He stated the consUiiction team did a great job and everything went quickly. He would like to hire them again. I He stated Gappa met with the Prairie Restoration people regarding French Creek. They felt the area was in good shape. In the beginning they hadn’t done soil amenities, but now the plantings are taking. Prairie Restoration recommended planting wildflowcrs along the borders for effect. McDermott stated that they now have an annual contract with Prairie Restoration so that French Creek will receive the care it needs, as needed. They will remove a road segment in Crystal Bay and reseed in the spring. Mayor Peterson stated that letters would go out to the Parks Commissioners regarding ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS—DREW MCDERMOTT, REPRESENTA TIVE —Continued their reappointment, but that the Council would like to meet with each one individually to discuss their appointment in January. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS —LIZ HAWN, REPRESENTATI\'E None. LMCD REPORT —LILI MCMILLAN McMillan stated that they had their annual meeting with the Hennepin County Water Patrol. They appreciated the two-year plan. This summer they had two drownings that involved long searches that were staff-intensive. If it weren’t for the two additional deputies, Lake Minnetonka wouldn’t have had a deputy at all for those periods of time. Overall, it was a safe summer. They plan to finalize their budget in the coming weeks and hope that Hennepin County will fund both of the deputies for next year. McMillan thanked the Council for helping to fund the project and getting it going. She stated that if Hennepin County docs not fund the project, they would have to design some sort of voluntary funding program. They bought a milfoil harvester a couple of years ago. The program began in the late 1980’s, when they bought five harvesters. Now they’ve replaced one, and plan to trade in two toward the purchase of a new one. They would like to have three to four new machines, and they still have money in the fund for the new machine. White asked about zebra mussels McMillan stated they are working with the Lake Minnetonka Association. They paid inspectors to check at water access points, but w'ould like people to volunteer to do checks. It’s a high manpower and education issue. She stated the-DNR focuses on the rivers. The LMCD revenues and expenses came in on-line this year. White asked if there was anything LMCD wanted from the Council. She suggested getting people to volunteer to give up some property for stormwater drainage to protect the lakes. White suggested they do another educational brochure regarding lakrshore landscaping that the City could distribute with water bills. i ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 PUBLIC COMMENTS None. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 5. #02>2711 Western Steel Erection, Inc., 2687 Wayzata Boulevard —Conditional Use Permit Amendment—Resolution No. 4892 GafTron slated that the Fire Marshall reviewed the site and approved it. They only needed to get the plan on paper. Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4892 granting a temporary amendment to certain conditions of Resolution No. 4727. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 6. tt02-2840 Dahlstrom Development LLC, “2550” Wayzata Boulevard West- General Development Plan Review GafTron stated tliat the applicants were there to present the final plan to Council. They were not asking for a specific motion from Council. The Planning Commission had seen the plan and held a public hearing. He slated that the Planning Commission had voted for approval 7-0. The vote covered: 1. Site layout, 2. Building styles and proposed materials and color palette, 3. Provisions for pedestrian circulation, accessibility and connectivity, 4. Recreation amenities, public and private, f>. Overall landscape plan. The plan may need some revision due to the Watershed District changes in wetland delineation. He suggested Council look at the streetscape of Kelley Parkway and comment on the affordable housing issue. Steve Johnston of Dalilslrom Development stated that the Watershed District declared just under I acre as wetland that had been previously delineated as upland. They agreed to accept the new line for now and pulled five units out of the development plan to balance the economics with the wetland impaet. The plan still centers around a roundabout and water area. They have ramblers, which are the single story units with a pitch roof on the north side of the development. There will be some varying architectural styles. On the south side, the townhouses will be two stories with tuck-under garages and porches that open onto the street. The lofts remain in the same location as before, with two underground parking spaces per im ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 6. M2-2840 Dakbtrom Development LLC, **2550” Wayzata Boulevard West— General Development Plan Review—Continued unit. He stated that the lofts were the least developed of all the plans, but that they would be back in 2004 for further review of the loft plans. Previously, the lofts had three entrances onto Kelley Parkway, now there are two. The development has three entrances to Kelley Parkway total now, plus an unpaved emergency vehicle access. The private and public open space includes a trail from Willow View, to Kelley, to Highway 12. There will be sidewalk along both sides of Kelley and trail along Highway 12. The trails will have safe separation betw'een the bikes and pedestrians. There will be a tot lot area, bocce ball, and possibly a fire pit. They w ere gathering amenities near the rainwater storage areas. There will be a gazebo in the roundabout area. The roundabout area will have limited access points with hedges and retaining walls making it unattractive to cross the street outside designated areas. The main entrance will have a monumcm with recirculated water in the fountain. He stated that the roads have sufficient width for moving vans. Mn/DOT was reviewing the permit for regional ponds. He stated he had heard it was doable and would be approved. Mayor Peterson asked Moorse if he had been to Plymouth. He stated he had been to see the lighting in Plymouth. He stated it is brighter than a shoebox light. He asked the applicant about their planned lights. Steve Johnston stated that the pole height is a variable to be decided based on the lighting intensity desired. White stated that the lights installed would be setting a precedent for the area along Highway 12. He suggested Council all go look at different lighting types around the area. Steve Johnston stated the lamp type would not need to be finalized for six to eight months. He stated-they prefer the Nostalgia series pictured in the packet, with a straight pole and an acorn light on top. ^ “** Gaffron stated sirectscaping was an issue because they wont the type of trees along the boulevard to be in sync with plans for future landscaping to the east. Steve Johnston stated that the retaining walls will be in limestone, a sort of riprap, dry stacked with landscaping fabric behind it. They will be using limestone throughout the development. Gaffron stated there was a transportation study underway. He did not anticipate any ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 &. M2-2840 DaMstrom Development LLC, “2550** Wayzata Boulevard West- General Development Plan Review—Continued significant changes to the traffic system outside the development. The study should be completed within a week. White stated that Council would be looking at the affordable housing issue for the City of Orono in regard to future projects. Gaffion stated that regarding development fees, the City had estimated the property value to be $8.92 million, but it was actually purchased for $5.86 million. The developer took issue with the residential minimum per-unit fee of $3,250 and proposed an 8% cap at $2,265. The developer suggested that the City’s fee structure did not account for the public and private recreational amenities provided in the development. Gaffron stated that only public trails could be subject for discussion in terms of reductions. The park fees estimated by staff were $683,400, and proposed by the developer were $468,737. The City estimated $726,216 for sewer and water charges, and the developer proposed $514,773. The developer wanted to pay the S&W fee only for the dry buildable portion of the land, ^ that is how the density is calculated. The fee had previously been charged on a unit basis and in 2000 was $3,645 per unit for sewer, and $5,050 for water. In 2001 the fee went to a per acre charge based on gross acreage, including wetlands. The per-unit fee based on gross land area comes to about $3,600 per unit. If the fees were still determined per unit, they would come to $9-10,000 per unit. While the former owner, and not the developer, benented from the restructuring, the City is obligated to have the development pay its fair share of the costs of the e,\isting infrastructure it benefits from. The developer suggests that the stomiwater and drainage trunk fee should be based on dry buildable land acreage. Based on the entire acreage, the fee comes to $299,752. Based on dry buildable, it comes to $213,872. Gaffron stated that as noted in a recent staff memo and code amendment regarding the SW&DT Fee for 2-acre and 5-acre zones, the original ordinMce established a fee structure based on the entire acreage of the various zones of the City and did not exclude wetlands from the calculation method. The developer was requesting credits for the trunk water and storm sewer facilities constructed by the developer in the amount of $16,912 for provision of excess capacity in water lines the City has required to 12” vs. 8 ”. and a credit for $151,088 for construction of the regional pond, as well as construction of facilities to serve the property to the west. Gaffron stated staff would review the fees proposal and make a recommendation to Council on December 9,2002. Steve Johnston stated that they felt the 8% park dedication fee is preferable and the high level of recreation facilities that are being constructed in the development should be 8 r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 6. §02-2840 Dahtstrom Development LLC, **2550" IVayzata Boulevard finest— General Development Plan Review—Continued considered. He stated they do not have the same per-unit costs as single-family homes that are being built. The people they will attract in the development will not be heavy park users as they will not be families with children. Sansevere stated plenty of applicants have claimed that they wouldn ’t be using the parks, but still were not exempt from the fees. McDermott stated that they have ambitious plans for the trails in that area and want them to connect to surrounding parks. White asked if 8% was the norm, and if that developer was being treated differently. He suggested Council discuss it at a work session. Steve Johnston stated that regarding the trunk fees, their site is larger than the dental office, but their rate per acre is the same. He stated the fees should be applied toward their construction costs of the trunk drainage system. White and Mayor Peterson agreed Council should discuss the fees at a work session. Gaffron stated they would provide additional plans regarding the engineering issues. He also had copies of the covenants available to bring to the work session. White questioned the commercial piece of the development on Willow and Highway 12. Steve Johnston stated that the project was not dependent on the commercial area and they could proceed with construction as soon as possible. No action was taken. *7. 1102-2834 Robert and Julie Wiens, 1425 Bay Ridge Road—Conditional Use Permit—Resolution No. 4893 White moved, and Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4893 granting a * conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 to permit in excess of 500 cubic yards of fill to be brought onto subject property for the purpose of constructing a berm along the northern border along North Shore Drive. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 *8. #02*2839 Boyer Building Corporation, 3320 Watertown Road—Preliminary Subdivision —Resolution No. 4894 m White moved, and Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4894 granting preliminary approval for a two*lot subdivision of property located at 3320 Watertown Road and owned by Boyer Building Corporation. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *9. #02*2846 Loren Pellett, 4753 North Shore Drive —Variances—Resolution No. 4895 White moved, and Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4895 vacating a portion of an unimproved street within the plat of Bergquist & Wicklund’s Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *10. #02*2849 Steve Jacobson, 4185 Sixth Avenue North—Variances—Resolution No. 4896 White moved, and Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4896 granting a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.27, Subdivision 5(B) to ailow construction of an attached garage/bedroom addition to the existing house to be 41.3 from the front lot line where 100’ is required in the RR*1 A zoning district. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *11. #02*2851 Kevin CurleyAVendy Kellett, 1291 Briar Street—Variances- Resolution No. 4897 White moved, and Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4897 granting a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5(B) to allow construction of a front porch to the existing house to be 22.4 ’ from the front lot line where 50’ is required and 24.8’ from the side lot line where 30’ is required in the RR-IB zoning district. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Mayor Peterson stated that she had received a request from the Minnetonka City Attorney for high-speed Internet service. Moorse stated that no service providers would go out to the fi ve-acre zone, and some cities are financing the business themselves. If they were to go wireless, they would need to construct towers with antennas. Murphy stated it’s not a business for the City. r. m P ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT—Continued Murphy stated that the bid letting for Highway 12 would be delayed until May. The feds used to permit the starting of a project without the purchase of all the necessary properties being complete. Because of too many issues with property owners wanting to change terms of the purchases afler projects were begun, they no longer allow that. Now they require the Mn/DOT to own all properties along the right-of-way. Moving of the railroad portion will be delayed by one year, and the entire project will be delayed some. The railroad will now start in 200S, instead of 2004. Murphy stated the Orono and Long Lake Fire Advisory Committees would be meeting regarding Long Lake picking up Navarre. He stated that Long Lake had that day received notice that the fire chief was quitting his job as of December 2"*^, and that there would be a special election held on December 2"** as well. He stated that there was the question of how much authority was held by the City and how much by the fire chief. He also stated it was an opportunity to get fresh leadership in the fire department. PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT *12. Casco Circle Drainage Project White moved, and Murphy seconded, to accept quotation in the amount of $10,950.00 from Red Pederson Utilities, Hopkins, Minnesota for completion of the Casco Circle Drainage Project, to be funded from the Stormwater Utility Fund with the appropriate budget adjustment. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. *13. Hennepin County' Property Information Data Base Agreement—Resolution No. 4898 White moved, and Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4898 authorizing the City of Orono to execute an agreement for the use of Hennepin County’s Property Information Data Base. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. . —* *14. Extension of Hennepin County Agreement for Mapping Data Use—Resolution No. 4899 White moved, and Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4899 authorizing extension of the agreement with Hennepin County for use of computerized mapping data. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. OivGNO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 *15. Accept Doaation irom Trinity Lutheran Church for Seven Nations Park White moved, and Murphy seconded, to accept an $800 donation from Trinity Lutheran Church for Seven Nations Park Improvements. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *16. Long Lake Fire Station Pay Requests White moved, and Murphy seconded, to approve the requests for payment as follows: BKV Group in the amount of $4,898.86, and GME Consultants, Inc. in the amount of $4^66.77, to be funded from the Joint Fire Account. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *17. Application and Certificate for Payment No. 7—Long Lake Fire Station White moved, and Murphy seconds!, to approve Application and Certificate for Payment No. 7 from Rochon Corporation in the amount of $220,035.00, to be funded from the Joint Fire Fund. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *18. Extend Moratorium on Telecommunications towers—Ordinance No. 223,2”*' Series White moved, and Murphy seconded, to approve Ordinance No. 223, Second Series, extending an interim moratorium on the granting of building permits, land subdivision, rezoning applications, conditional or special use permits, variances, or other authority’ relating to the siting of wireless telecommunicathm facilities and structures in all zoning districts in the City of Orono. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *19. Appreciation to Minnetonka Portable Dredpi^ig Companv—Resolution No. 4900 White moved, and Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4900 in appreciation to Lake Minnetonka Portable Dredging for their assistance with the Big Island clean Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. __ r > :.t ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 *20. Letter of Intent to Purchase Replacement Squad Cars White moved, and Murphy seconded, to approve a letter of intent to purchase three replacement squad cars for 2003 on the state bid to Superior Ford. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *21. Elimination of Facility Rental Charge from Police Service Cost Allocation White moved, and Murphy seconded, to approve the elimination of the facilit)’ rental charge from the police service cost allocation process. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT None. *22. LICENSES % One Day Gambling—Resolution No. 4901 Orono Hockey Boosters, Inc. Pancake Breakfast—Orono High School Cafeteria Sunday, January 19,2003 White moved, and Murphy seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4901 approving the application of Orono Hockey Boosters Inc. for a one-day off-site gambling license. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Aunual Liquor Licenses Club On Sale Liquor Spring Hill Golf Club 725 Sixth Avenue North Navarre Liquors Inc. 3421 Shoreline Drive Wayzata Country Club 200 Wayzata Boulevard On Sale 3.2 Beer Lakeview Golf of Orono, Inc. 405 North Arm Drive Woodhill Country Club 200 Woodhill Road Orono Golf Course 265 Orono Orchard Road South Off Sale Liquor 12 Hi Liquor 2160 West Wayzata Boulevard Off Sale 3.2 Beer O'Sullivan's 2420 Shadywood Road -an. ....a... ! ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2002 O’Sullivan’s II 3340 Shoreline Drive On & Off Sale 3.2 Beer Navarre Lanes 3435 Shoreline Drive White moved, and Murphy seconded, to approve the above listed licenses. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *23. BILLS White moved, and Murphy seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.I ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor I i ROLL MINUTES OF THE CITY OF ORONO TRUTH-IN-TAXATION HEARING '^’ ** •*•• * *-^NG Monday, December 2,2002 5:30 p.m. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------City UF unu^n DEC 9 2002 The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson; Council Members Jay Nygard, Bob Sansevere, and Jim White; Representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, and Finance Director, Tom Kuehn. Absent was Council Member Jim Murphy. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 5:39 P.M. L Tmth-in-Taxatlon Hearing. Mayor Peterson opened the public hearing at 5:40 p.m. Moorse summarized the proposed 2003 budget and tax levy information, and its impact on property owners. There being no members of the public present, the Mayor closed the hearing at 5:45 p.m. Nygard moved, White seconded, to announce that the final 2003 budget and tax lesT will be adopted at the levy adoption hearing, which will be held at 7:00 p.m. on December 9,2002. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Nygard moved. White seconded, to adjourn the Tnith-in-Taxation Hearing at 5:48 P.M. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor PAGEl ‘ -.-L j. I i §ma ntr OKOiNO COUNCIL C11A.MUERS, 2780 KELLEY PARK'WAY, 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 Pacxet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL -| UEC 9 2002 Cl I r UF uMUrno CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approvc/Amend PUBLIC HEARING 2. 2003 Levy Adoption Hearing - Adoption of 2003 Budget and Tax Levy A. Adopt Final 2002 Levy Collectible in 2003 - Resolution B. Adopt 2003 General Fund Budget - Resolution C. Adopt the 2003 Special Revenue Funds Budgets - Resolution Orono, Minnesota Bering Index Map ITaS APPROVAL OF MINUTES • 3. Regular Council Mcciing of November 25,2002 • 4. Truth in Taxation Meeting of December 2,2002 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Rick Meyers. Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS — Jeanne Mabusth, Representative PUBLIC CO.MMUNl S - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Kris Rudd on behalf of Richard Rudd, 4575 Way7ata Boulevard • Extension of Final Plat Date - Resolution James Njstrom, 1725 Concordia Street - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution Peter and Amy Goshgarian, 100 Orono Orchard Road South - Variance - Resolution ' Aulik Design, 955 Tonkawa Road - Variancc/Conditional Use Peniiit - Resolution Kevin Manley, 1973 Fagemess Point Road - Variancc/Conditional Use Pen., : 10. «02-27S9.'02-2S40 Dahlstrom Development LLC, "2550" 'Vay/ata Boulevard West - Final Development Plan Approvals - Resolution MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERN'ICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 11. Orono/Long Lake Water System Interconnection Improvements AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, DECEMBER 9,2002,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA issu A lux. O'**north prvisco* tc#t •Of. f, WfO•a,fM Mt AM 1. Ittl •UC. M.SM If.Ittf AOtt. •. Iff} JSA If, Iff S CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 12. Long Lake Fire Station Pay Requests • 13. 2003 Fee Schedule - Ordinance and Summary' Ordinance for Publication 14. 2003 Mcciing Schedule 15. Council Liaison to Park Commission and Planning Commission Meetings in 2003' 16. Appoint Auditor for Fiscal Year 2002 17. 2002 Interfund Transfers and Loan Payments 18. Authorization to Disburse City Funds for Claims Received 19. Receipt of the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Repotting for the 2001 Financial Report - (Information Only) 20. Change in Name of Fleming Trail Addition Plat - Resolution 21. Pay Adjustment - Chief Good 22. Police Capital Expenditures 23. Elimination of Facility Rental Charge from Police Service Cost Allocation 24. Police Web Page 23. Accept Donation to Police Reserves CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 26. I.ICEN.SES f • I • • r •NG REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DEC 9 2002 Department Approval: Name: Wendy ^ttenberg Title: Zoning Administrator ciiy ut OhONo ^ DATE; ITEM NO. S Agenda Section; Zoning Item Description:#2587 Richard Rudd 4575 Wayzata Boulevard Preliminary Road Plat Amendment Exhibits: A Resolution to Amend Resolution #4479 B Letter from applicant C Preliminary Plat Resolution #4479 D Staff Report and exhibits of 6/5/02 Background: Townline Road was closed at Highway 12 in conjunction with the proposed intersection changes and signal planned for the Highway l2n'ownline Road intersection. As part of this project several access points to Highway 12 will be eliminated or changed. To be eliminated is the access east of Townline Road that serves four Orono residents. This frontage road will be built from Townline Road to the east to serve the residents. MnDot will frmd the gravel base portion of the road. This road will go thru the Rudd's property. To receive MnDot funding for the frontage road, Medina needed an exact location of the road and submit a request by September 2000. The Rudd's preliminary subdivision was in June 2000. However, they did not want to proceed with the final subdivision at that time. In Resolution #4479, item #4, the one year requirement for final approval was waived extending the final plat application deadline to December 3 1 ,2003. This date was based on MnDot's intent to let the project in the fall of2002 and construction would be in 2003. The MnDot timetable has changed to letting the project in the fall of2003 with construction in 2004. Because of this the effective period of preliminary plat approval needs to be extended one additional year. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution which amends Resolution #4479 allowing the final plat to be submitted by December 31,2004. L. - A 11 1 I >1. n M ... A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 4479 FILE NO. 2587 WHEREAS, on June 12,2000, the City Council of the City of Orono (the “City”) adopted Resolution No. 4479 granting preliminary platting of a section of public road easement located at 4575 Wayzata Boulevard approval; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 4479 required that Richard Rudd and Shane Rudd (the Applicants”) submit final plat for approval no later than December 31,2003; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (“MnDot ”) has delayed construction of an access road which will serve the Rudd’s property; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have requested an additional year before having to submit the final plat as a result of MnDot ’s postponement of the road way project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, as follows; 1. The effective period of preliminary plat approval is hereby extended to December 31,2004; and 2. All other terms and conditions of Resolution #4479 are hereby reaffirmed. Adopted by the City Council of the City or Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting hejjl on the 9th day of December, 2002. ‘ ~ ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 1 of2 'VS STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of December, 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 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of December, 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 -i Page 2 of 2 October 11,2002 t '(-.til- CkyofOrono Attn: Wendy Bol POB0X66 CrysUlBay,MN 55323-0066 * 0 rg RE: Rcaohition 4479; nie No. 2587 Dear Wendy: Per our oonversation last month, I am writing to request that the City of Orono extend the final plat q)plication deadline for this project to December 31,2004. As you re^’l this project has been delayed due to MNDot ’s changed timetable. This project also involves the City of Medina, who has already extended their final plat appbeation deadline. Thunk you jo advance for your hel^. Feel fiee to contact me with questions at 952-473- 2488. Kris^udo^ •* w i. v.V-t . .A: ■■ . -dJ 7-7'CO ^i’4, CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A A 7 9 A RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY ROAD PLAT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4575 WAYZATA BOULEVARD pm 30-118-23 310004 FILE NO. 2587 WHEREAS, Kris Rudd (hereinafter the "subdivider") on behalf of Richard R. Rudd, filed an application with the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") requesting preliminary platting of a section of public road easement located on property at 4S7S Wayzata Boulevard. The property is legally described as follows: The West Half of the West Half of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the east 148.50 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter all in Section 30, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Miimesota. (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 164 et. seq. and the City of Orono's Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May IS, 2000, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application we^ given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on June 12,2000 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the subdivider noting the following findings of fact: FINDINGS 1. * The property is located within the RR-1A Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum lot size of five acres dry buildable land. ~~ 2.The property contains less than 10 acres of dry buildable land and 473.11 feet lot width. Page 1 of 6 itdfeiaiiriiiii Ism €ITYofOROXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 44?9__ 3. Subdivision of property in the RR>1 A zoning district requires a minimum of 5 acres ofdiybuildable land and 300 feet ofwidth along a public road. Subdivision of the property is not permitted based on the lot area and lot width requirements for the zoning district. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Platting of the road would result in the lot remaining conforming for lot area and lot vddth. Orono, Medina, Mn/DOT, representatives of the Burlington Northern Railroad and adjacent property owners have been discussing providing access to several properties in Orono that currently have direct access to Highway 12 over the Burlington Northern railroad tracks. Access to the properties has been in place for many years and continued by a licence agreement between the railroad and the properties. The railroad has indicated that their long range goal is to eliminate this crossing for safety reasons. The road layout indicates a road that will serve a proposed subdivision to the north in Medina and provide access to the potentially landlocked properties in Orono. The Medina property is zoned for single family residential use at a 30,000 s.f minimum lot size. The properties in Medina would be served with sewer and water which is available in Townline Road. No utilities will be extended to properties in Orono as the Comprehensive Plan has guided the properties for rural residential services. The properties in Orono are Qot within the Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA), and therefore are not allowed to be provided with sanitary sewer service. The proposed storm water management plan will include construction of a pond on the 4575 Wayzata Boulevard lot. A MCWD permit will be required for tbp grading, storm water management and erosion control on the site, including the future lots in Medina. It is the intent of the subdivider to not file an application for a final plat approval in Medina and/or Orono until 2003 due to funding availability from Mn/DOT. 10. Most of the proposed road is in Medina; therefore, it is appropriate to plat and develop the right-of-way to standards in Medina to maintain consistency. Medina Page 2 of 6 1^: iimnw-i Ml rin ikiafL f' 1 \ GITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO------44-V 9----- will require a 60' right-of-way which is shown on the preliminary plan. The road width and size of cul-de-sac will also be developed to standards set by the City of Medina. The cul-de-sac shall be a minimum paved width of 80* and a minimum right-of-way width of 100*. 11.Owners of property located at 4545 and 4301 Wayzata Boulevard require private easements to provide access from the road to the properties. They would access the proposed cul-de-sac via a private easement over the 4555 Wayzata Boulevard property. Access to the 4301 Wayzata Boulevard lot • tUu require a legal easement over the property located at 4545 Wayzata Boulevard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary road plat application for Kris Rudd per the preliminary plat drawings by Otto Associates Engineers and Land Surveyors, Inc., attached to this resolution as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions: 1.The storm water retention pond shall be developed to NURP standards and be protected by granting of a drainage and utility easement to ensure the area will not be developed, and drainageways are protected. 2.The road shall be dedicated as a public road and developed to standards established by the City of Medina, subject to a Developers Agreement to be executed between the City and the developer. Road construction can begin as soon as the engineering plans for the road as well as stormwater management plans have been approved by the City, the Developers Agreement has been executed, and the final plat has been recorded with Hennepin County. 3.Subdivider is hereby advised that the City will not grant final plat approvatuntil the MCWD has approved all grading and drainage-improvements on the pro^rty. 4.The Council recognizes the applicants may not proceed with a final plat application in Medina until 2003. Therefore the Council agrees to waive the one year requirement for final approval, and agrees to extend the final plat application deadline to December 31,2003. Should the subdivider fail to complete the filing of the final plat application within the deadline, it shall be necessary for the subdivider to file a new preliminary application with the City. Page 3 of 6 GITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4479NO. 5.Prior to Final Plat approval, a final grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be approved by the City Engineer. Final Plat Submittals: The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows: 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City's records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" 200'. Drawing to include: a.' Road platted per preliminary survey by Otto Associates H.’’; ’Jneers and Land Surveyors, Inc. b. Dedication of drainage and utility easement over the area of the NURP pond. c. The naming of plat and public road. Legal documents required: a.Title information addressed to the City, acceptable to the City Attorney, indicating ownership of the property. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b.Signed and executed Developer ’s Agreement and letter of credit foripproved site improvements, landscaping and construction of private road (Outlot A), stormwater and drainage facilities, etc. c.Signed and executed Drainage Easements to be taken over draiiugeway and detention areas within plat. Page 4 of 6 t ft-/ » •_____ CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 44 YQ 3. Fees to be paid: Total due: $400.00* a. Final plat fee = $200.00 b. Legal review and filing fees for subdivision and associated documents = $200.00 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 12th day of June, 2000. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk GabrieNabbour, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) )ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of June, 2000, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. MARY ANN JOHNSON NOTARY PUaUC - MNNESOTANrCflnmWwEjiptwjiiij 4 *** Notary l^blic P^Sofd Li L'J P*: Li, 4\,s r ^ N 2: ^•j P*: t__ i/9 9^ mm 9/9^ mi, 9/$ ^ wm tm t/^ mftm. M Pag* 6 of 6 _J f? ) ' Application Date: Completion Date: Deadline: 4/20/00 4/20/00 8/18/00 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 5,2000 ITEM NO. Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2387 Richard Rudd 4375 Wayzata Boulevard Preliminary Road Plat Zoning:RR'I A, One Family Rural Residential, 3 Acre Minimum lot size Application: To plat the eastern portion of a public road to provide potential access to four lots in Orono. List of Exhibits: A B C D E F Resolution Property Owners Map Proposed Plan Notice of Planning Commission Action Planning Commission Minutes (May IS, 2000) Planning Report Background: Orono, Medina, MNDOT, representatives of the Burlington Northern Railroad and adjacen^property owners have been discussing providing access to several properties in Orono that currently have direct access to Highway 12 over the Burlington Northern railroad tracks. Access to the properties has been in place for many years and continued by a licence agreement between the railroad and the properties. Please refer to Exhibit F indicating the location of the railroad crossing and potentially “landlocked ” parcels. The railroad has indicated that their long range goal is to eliminate this crossing for safety reasons. It is also an objective for MNDOT to eliminate this hazardous direct driveway access to Highway 12. Representatives from all agencies involved and the property owners have considered several options to develop a permanent and safe access for properties that could potentially become landlocked in the future. A concept plan was reviewed by the Orono City Council on April 10,2000 that has proposed a public road with access to Townlinc Road in Medina. This option would eliminate the access over the railroad to Highway 12. Greg Gappa has noted in his memo to the City Council, dated April 10, 2000 (attached to Planning Report), that MNDOT has offered to pay for the road construction and provide access to the properties that will lose access across the railroad provided that the Cities or property owners provide the necessary right-of-way and easements. Also, please read the attached minutes from the Council meeting. This proposal would create the road segment in Orono to provide access to the properties. It appears the property owners to the east (Slaughter and Hickey) have existing easements in place over the Fraizer property to accommodate a shared driveway. Proposed Plan: The plan indicates a road that would serve a proposed subdivision in Medina and provide access to the potentially landlocked properties in Orono. The Medina property is zoned for single family residential use at a 30,000 s.f. minimum lot size. The properties in Medina would be served with sewer and water which will be extended from Townline Road. No utilities will be extended to properties in Orono. The proposed road in Medina will be public and it is recommended by Staff the road in Orono will be public as well, primarily due to maintenance issues. Only the eastern 450* of the road will be in Orono. Surrounding Properties: The properties located in Medina are zoned for a minimum lot size of 30,000 s.f. A proposal has been made by the applicant to have that subdivision completed this summer. The lots in Orono are all zoned for a 5 acre minimum lot size, and guided by the Comprehensive Plan for single family residential. With the exception of the Rudd property, no lots in Orono will be impacted for zoning purposes by the proposed road. The Rudd property would maintain a dry buildable area of approximately 7-8 acres. If the dry buildable area is less than 10 acres dry, the property would not be able to subdivide into two 5 acre lots. The total frontage along the proposed road is only about SOO' which does not provide the total lot width required in the zoning district. New lots require a minimum lot width of 300* in the RR-1A distict. Road Standards: Because most of the proposed road is in Medina it is appropriate to create a right-of-way to standards in Medina to maintain consistency. Medina will require a 60* right-of-way which is shown on the preliminary plan. The road width and size of cul-de-sac will also be developed to standards set by the City of Medina. The cul-de-sac shall be a minimum paved width of 80* and a minimum right-of- way width of 100*. Ponding and Grading: The applicants are developing a ponding and grading plan for the road. This is an on-going project involving the platting of tte land to the north in Medina. They have proposed a NURP pond south of the road, in O^no. The pond would collect runoff from the new r^ and from the newly platted f area to the north. The ponding calculations and grading plan, when complete, shall be submitted to both cities for review and approval prior to the final plan set being approved and recorded. Final Approval and Time Schedule: It is the intent of the applicant to have the preliminary platting completed for the lots in Medina this summer. However, final platting and road construction will not be complete until about 2003. The Rudds have stated MnDOT will pay for the road and engineering costs if it is constructed in 2003. The applicant has stated there are two primary reasons to not plat the road this year. The first is MnDOT would only reimburse for the materials, not engineering and other costs. Secondly, if the new lots in Medina are recorded the property owner may be subject to a higher tax obligation on six buildable lots rather than one that exists today. The applicant will be requesting the preliminary subdivision approval be granted automatic renewals through 2003 when they will complete the final plat. Burlington Northern Railroad has indicated to the City of Orono they would be willing to pay for completing a road plat across the property located in Medina. Please read the attached comments from Burlington Railroad. Prior to final plat the following additional information shall be provided by the applicant and approved by the City of Orono. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Final grading and erosion control plan set Stormwater calculations for the drainage area that will drain towards the pond in Orono List of all easements that are recorded on the Rudd property Easement documentation indicating legal access to the Slaughter and Hickey properties over the Fraizer property Final construction plans for the road Final plat drawing for recording the right-of-way Applicant shall dedicate to the City an easement for the NURP pond. Planning Commission Recommendation: At their May 15,2000 meeting the Planning Commission recommended approval of the 'pr^iminary* plans by a vote of 5 to 0. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat based on the resolution attached. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the attached resolution. 'kOk A RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY ROAD PLAT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4575 WAYZATA BOULEVARD PID 30-118-23 31 0004 FILE NO. 2587 WHEREAS, Kris Rudd (hereinafter the "subdivider") on behalf of Richard R. Rudd, filed an application with the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") requesting preliminary platting of a section of public road easement located on property at 4575 Wayzata Boulevard. The property is legally described as follows: The West Half of the West Half of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the east 148.50 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter all in Section 30, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota. (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 164 et. seq. and the City of Orono's Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 15,2000, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on June 12,2000 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the subdivider noting the following findings of fact: FINDINGS 1.The property is located within the RR-IA Single Family Rural Residents*Zoning District requiring a minimum lot size of five acres dry buildable land. 2.The property contains less than 10 acres of dry buildable land and 473.11 feet lot width. Page 1 of 6 'Itn liill&IBilhaihtiiiiii 3. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Subdivision of property in the RR-1A zoning district requires a minimum of 5 acres of dry buildable land and 300 feet of width along a public road. Subdivision of the property is not permitted based on the lot area and lot width requirements for the zoning district. Platting of the road would result in the lot remaining conforming for lot area and lot width. Orono, Medina, Mn/DOT, representatives of the Burlington Northern Railroad and adjacent property owners have been discussing providing access to several properties in Orono that currently have direct access to Highway 12 over the Burlington Northern railroad tracks. Access to the properties has been in place for many years and continued by a licence agreement between the railroad and the properties. The railroad has indicated that their long range goal is to eliminate this crossing for safety reasons. The road layout indicates a road that will serve a proposed subdivision to the north in Medina and provide access to the potentially landlocked properties in Orono. The Medina property is zoned for single family residential use at a 30,000 s.f. minimum lot size. The properties in Medina would be served with sewer and water which is available in Townline Road. No utilities will be extended to properties in Orono as the Comprehensive Plan has guided the properties for rural residential services. The properties in Orono are not within the Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA), and therefore are not allowed to be provided with sanitary sewer service. The proposed storm water management plan will include construction of a pond on the 4575 Wayzata Boulevard lot. A MC WD permit will be required for thr^ding, storm water management and erosion control on the site, including the future lots in Medina. It is the intent of the subdivider to not file an application for a final plat approval in Medina and/or Orono until 2003 due to funding availability from Mn/DOT. 10. Most of the proposed road is in Medina; therefore, it is appropriate to plat and develop the right-of-way to standards in Medina to maintain consistency. Medina Page 2 of 6 igton Northern Railroad and ig access to several properties k'ay 12 over the Burlington lieen in place for many years oad and the properties. The ninate this crossing for safety ed subdivision to the north in ed properties in Orono. The use at a 30,000 s.f minimum ith sewer and water which is led to properties in Orono as rural residential services. olitan Urban Services Area with sanitary sewer ser\ ice. de construction of a pond on I be required for thrgrading. e, including the future lots in >n for a final plat approval in bility from Mn/DOT. it is appropriate to plat and aintain consistency. Medina mm roiMUi RTiTiRl % 5.Prior to Final Plat approval, a final grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be approved by the City Engineer. Final Plat Submittals: The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows: 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City's records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200*. Drawing to include: a.Road platted per preliminary survey by Otto Associates Engineers and Land Surveyors, Inc. b. Dedication of drainage and utility easement over the area of the NURP pond c.The naming of plat and public road. Legal documents required: Title information addressed to the City, acceptable to the City Attorney, indicating ownership of the property. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b.Signed and executed Developer ’s Agreement and letter of credit forlpproved site improvements, landscaping and construction of private road (Outlot A), stormwater and drainage facilities, etc. c.Signed and executed Drainage Easements to be taken over drainageway and detention areas within plat. Page 4 of 6 A 2a 3. Fees to be paid: Total due: $400.00* a. Final plat fee *» $200.00 b. Legal review and filing fees for subdivision and associated documents $200.00 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 12th day of June, 2000. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of June, 2000, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Mirmesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 Application Deadline: 10/28/02 60 Day Deadline: 12/26/02 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name: Wendy Bottenberg Title: Zoning Administrator Item {Icseription:#02-2847 James Nystrom 1725 Concordia Street Conditional Use Permit ▼inG D6C 9 2002 Cl I y UHUNd DATE: ITEM NO. (r Agenda Section: Zoning Exhibits: A Resolution B Staff Report and exhibits of 11/18/02 Application Summary: The applicant has requested a conditional use permit to permit a cupola to 1m constructed on a new residence. The cupola is proposed to be located within the central portion of the structure. Pertinent Code Section: 1. Section 10.75, Subdivision 1: Height: To permit a cupola to be constructed on the roof of a residence to be 34.5 ’ where 30 ’ height is the maximum for the LR-IC zoning district. The code reads as follows: “No structure or building shall exceed 2 '/j stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. Section 10.75, Subdivision 1: Special Provisions. The height limitations imposed by other provisions of this Chapter may be increased by conditional use permit by 50 per cent when applied to the following structures: A. Church spires B. Belfries C. Cupolas and domes which do not contain usable space. D. Monuments. F.. Water Towers. * F. Fire and hose towers. G. Observation towers. H. Flagpoles. I. Chimneys. J. Smokestacks. K. Parapet walls extending not more than three feet above height of the building. L. Cooling towers. M. Elevator penthouses.” The plans ibr the new residence includes two cupolas. One on the residence and the other on the garage. The cupola on die garage meets the 30’height requirement The cupola on the residence is proposed to be 34.S’ in height and 4 ’ X 4 ’ in size. The property is located on Lake Minnetonka. The cupola does not change the lot coverage by structure or hardcover on the property. The cupola is decorative and will not be used for living space. Dbcttssionl This property was formerly two lots-1725 and 1745 Concordia Street. The new owner has purchased both lots, demolished the two residences and legally combined the two lots. The new residence is currently under construction. The residence meets all hardcover, setbacks, lot coverage by structures and height requirements. PLANNING COMMISSION: Planning Conunission recommended by a 6 to 0 vote to: Approve application as presented. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.75, SUBDIVISION 1, FILE NO. 02-2847 WHEREAS, James Nystrom, (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 1725 Concordia Street (hereinafter “the property ”) within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lots 13 and 14, Coffee’s Addition to Shadywood, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.75, Subdivision 1 to permit a cupola to be constructed on the roof of a residence to be 34.5 ’ where 30’ height is the maximum for the LR-IC zoning district. WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Platming Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 18,2002, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. Minnesota: 1. FINDINGS a This application was reviewed as Zoning File #02-2847. 2.The property is located in the LR-IC Zoning District, One Family Residential Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this iqpplication on November 18,2002 and recommended approval of the proposed conditional use ;‘ermit by a 6 to 0 vote. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: Page 1 of 5 ------ A. The cupola is decorative, does not increase living space. B. The cupola is in character with the neighborhood. C. Hardcover and lot coverage by structures does not increase with the cupola. D. There is no access from the residence to the cupola. E. The residence meets all hardcover, setbacks, height, and lot coverage by structures requirements. 5. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, will not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will its use depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicants and the affect of the proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional .use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.75, Subdivision L to permit construction of a cupola on the roof of a residence to be 34.5* where 30 ’ height is the ma.x-»lhum for the LR-IC zoning district, subject ,o the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or these variances will expire on that date (December 9,2003). Page 2 of 5 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The undersigned owner and applicant have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City or Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of December, 2002. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Cleric Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Applicant (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of December, 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 3 ofS STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of December, 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 On this before me. day of ,2002,personally appeared who is personally known to me whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of .a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN before me. On this__day of , 2002,personal ly'Tkppeared who is personally known to me whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of ,a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 . US' 4. • ...V’ ^ TO; FROM: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE: November 15,2002 SUBJECT:#02-2847 James Nystrom 1725 Concordia Street Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (.5 acre) 39,450 s.f. (.90 acre) Eibibits: A Application B PlansA^icws C Plat Map D Property Owner’s List Application Summary: The applicant has requested a conditional use permit to permit a cupola to constructed on a new residence. The cupola is proposed to be located within the central portion of the structure. Pertinent Code Section: 1. Section 10.75, Subdivision 1: Height: To permit a cupola to be constructed on the roof of a residence to be 34.5’ where 30’ height is the maximum for the LR-IC zoning district. The code reads as follows: “No structure or building shall exceed 2 'A stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. Section 10.75, Subdivision 1: Special Provisions. The height limitations imposed by other provisions of this Chapter may be increased by conditional use permit b^ 50 per cent when applied to the following structures: A. Church spires B. Belfries C. Cupolas and domes which do not contain usable space. D. Etc.’ The plans for the new residence includes two cupolas. One on the residence and the other on the garage. The cupola on the garage meets the 30’ height requirement. The cupola on the residence i.< proposed to be 34.5’ in height and 4 ’ X 4 ’ in size. The property is located on Lake Mimietonka. The cupola does not change the lot coverage by sbuctuie or hardcover on the property. The cupola is decorative and will not be used for living space. #02-2147 James Nystrom 1723 Concordia Stnwt II/IS/2002 Page I of2 & Dbcustion: This property was fonnerly two lots*I72S and 1745 Concordia Street. The new owner has purchased both lots, demolished the two residences and legally combined the two lots. The new residence is currently under construction. The residence meets all hardcover, setbacks, lot coverage by structures and height requirements. Issues for Consideration: 1 . Does the Planning Commission feel the cupola is in character with the neighborhood? 2. The cupola is decorative, not increasing living space. 3. The cupola does not increase hardcover or lot coverage by structures. 4. The new residence meets all requirements for hardcover, structural lot coverage, setbacks and height. S. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation: If the Plaiming Conunission concludes that the cupola will have no negative impacts on the neighborhood, then approval of the conditional use permit to allow construction of the 4 ’ X 4 ’ cupola on the top of the residence would be appropriate. M2-2I47 JauiMNyiti«n I72S CoMOfdia Saeet ll/IS/2002 Pi«e2or2 ----- f# O', o «. . * •- --ly / r • ^••. T" n .*l*vtT.r • ^ i CITY OFIORONO - GEI^RAL LAND USE APPLICATION ApplkatkmO O 2 -2g V 7 Date Received fc-^-OZ. Amount Paid , PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 6o<\c^rA?a. cje^ Type of Application to be Filed C. U r - M t*«) U.-f Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) - U'V ~ OOHH APPLICANT Phone (home). .Wta &UdL City l^A^W^tjejr\ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name J3a»v\€i:^ Phone (home) U5t-* 2Z>-Aziy Phone (work) tail," >tt~ Address t^\ HWi>At4>/vA VwJr »>g City Zip Date Property Acquired Juac PtHSt _____(roonth/year) I (do) not}Atlso own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 75.00 For each variance request with 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 $250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) ' ^ After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$275.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) • S300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$375.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule pimanUC_Z^22U teRgcdvcd lountPaid ^ , ■ftOSH____________ me)________________ to___Zip_555ai___ me) i»yi* 2Z>«Ar» ffk) >ti* SH^l ►aUis Zip yy4i^ mn (month/year) ices) 7. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS ~y^ Completed Application Forai. 2* - Describe request in detail. ^ Ccrtifi^ Property Owners List of owners within 350’, labels and plat mab fvou murt ob^ this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance -A-603, Government Center, 348-U?i^).5^tO ^ Sfo^Sion*^ Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey -------Attach legd description to application if not included on required survey. ------- opograpluc survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes m elevation (grades). uivuivc List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the R property. This wodd include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owncr(s). ?• ConstrucUon plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY suBMnrro VS—1/‘* * *'or all documents sutodttedl*^*^ drawings of alf documents, plans, etc. to be Property Ovvner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. CctrificatiOT by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Imtials of Clerical Staff: ___________________ Dajg APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicMt hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Admimstrator agrees to pay addiUonal fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) Date io/ot AApplicant's signature OWNER'S SIGNATU im:. - Owner's signature Date /g/g/ Planning Commission Meeting. “as a* T"" •* -•••. « r.( :t Ln i -t V ..................... - - --\ f -T-^ /iJ =.■•- the house is optional. ./A^fH^UT S,-!.>«» ufc • r* O"!):■'“Ocyof y*V commission and city council approval. Conua Kyle Hunt J/^ before any construction ofthe cupola occurs. r • ----a - c .. .1. su - Cy.BTAu ______ I^OPP- ggCtt-0 _____________/ ScgPpgai. r- • --r -- — J......... T U i-.i..r;r;: ------1«— i i r - t. i* i~4 ------fi------------------^jQ" ___ ::."i .1;......—--tr; —4-4. •'r I • * 1 _ T-r . T-Y > - ^ I ) I I • { ♦ > !••j •> •: ? ............... I I JR r" jfq:7 I V ir- • I I r ____ll 1\ /s:“3:t?^:ixrrx I ■A till-.r i_. n T* 1^ • • i I. ! I' — f- - 21^ J .......-/--------- ' ^!p;N6»-rrp- ■ f P'l&uP?S^r<^>>iB. PI9^ viAuu^- rxr. n _ f /4^- S.j--CP /t'. ^ p NOTE: TTic cupola at the house U optional. ONiMnienon of the cupla can only occur after the Qty of Onm VP<»«I uM. .hid. coyuMoaanJ City council apprmal. Contact Kvlc Hunt PAfcrir^u / •1-0 NOTE: The cupola at tlic house is optional. Construction of the cupola can only occur after the City of vwvv ( Cy 0 ^ ^ - ~ HeijilihQpin County Taxpayer Services Department / il • I I 1 imMia M >» «i LJ n rr. 8 m§ at i m 1 ml ati (2) Al {^) /7- //7-^3- Parcel Information Parc«l ID 1711723220020 Houm Numbar 1728 Straat Nama CONCORDIA ST •*. •• •• •. f. • * . -V ' . V.' * ) This Is not a legaity reconM map. ttmpnsantsacompBMonofInfemiMon, and data from Oty, County, and State nad authoribas and other aounaa. iUN DATE lt/fl/12 iATCN S12 ICfMCrXN COUNTY flNIfCRTY INFOOtUTlON SYSTEN mOfCRTV ONN»tS LIST REPORT NO. PXASMtl PACE 20 PROP AODR ONNER mm TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR SO 17-117-2S 22 ms •1025 CONCORDIA ST L P t S L OENL CARRY • SHARON OENL 1025 CONCORDIA ST NAYZATA NN 55S91 SO 17-117-2S 22 •114 •1705 CONCORDIA ST K T DUtIN IOC DULIN KEVIN DULIN I OAROARA DULIN 1705 CONCORDIA ST NAYZATA NN 55S91 SO 17-117-2S 22 ••17 •1741 CONCORDIA ST D NOLSTE I n HOLSTE DAVID I NARCARET HOLSTE 1741 CONCORDIA ST NAYZATA NN 55SY1 PROP AODR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR SO 17*117*2S 22 OOIO •1755 CONCORDIA ST OERALD N KLECKNER CERALO N KLECKNER 1755 CONCORDIA ST NAVZATA NN 55S91 SO 17-117-2S 22 •mM^M •1745 CONCORDIA ST JAN^S T NYSTRON JANES T NYSTRON 1751 NAOISON ST N E NPLS NN 55415 -117-2S 22 %%2% COrC^DIA ST / / lite H E So 17-117-2S 22 %%2% •1725 JANES JANES 1751 NA NPLS NN 55415 7 PROP AODR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR SO 17-117-25 22 ORZl •17R5 CONCORDIA ST J J I T R SACHS ET AL STEVEN H SACHS ••74 PEONY LA H NAPLE DROVE HN 55511 SO 17-117-2S 22 0022 •1405 CONCORDIA ST T L PALN ANA PALN TNONAS L PALN 1405 CONCORDIA ST NAYZATA NN 55391 SO 17-117-25 22 ••2S •1495 CONCORDIA ST D J A D R OELANSKI DONALD JOHN OELANSKI S019 COLORADO AVE N CRYSTAL NN 55422 ADOft OWNER NAHE TANPAVER NAHE/AOOR M 17-117-2S 22 ••24 •1M7 CONCOROXA ST J H 6EHRXN0/K REIIUE 0EHRXN8 JOHN ■ KRISTIN 6ENRIN0 IM7 CONCORDIA ST WAYZATA NN SSS91 SO 17-117-23 22 M25 •lOOA CONCORDIA ST P D A K J HANSEN PAUL A KAREN HANSEN lOAO CONCORDIA ST NAYZATA NN 55S91 SO 17-117-2S 22 0024 •1700 CONCORDIA ST CITY Of ORONO CITY Of ORONO P 0 SOX 44 CRYSTAL DAY NN 5532S ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE SO 17-117-2S 22 0027 •1740 CONCOROXA ST N D NOLD A S L HOLD NINTSN D NOLD 174A CONCORDIA ST NAYZATA NN 55S91 SO 17-117-25 22 9$29 •1750 CONCORDIA ST PAUL J OOZONXE PAUL J DOZONIE 1755 fAOERNESS POINT RD ORONO NN 55S91 SO 17-117-2S 22 ••29 •1755 f AOERNESS POINT U PAUL J OOZONXE PAUL J OOZONXE 1755 f A6ERNESS POINT RO ORONO NN 55S91 PROP ADDR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR SO 17-117-2S 22 ORSO •174R CONCORDIA ST D J DEUNSKX ADC OELANSKI DAVID J A DAYNA C OEUNSlfl' 1740 CONCORDIA ST NAYZATA NN 55S91 SO 17-117-25 22 AASl •1499 CONCORDIA ST RICHARD f A KRISTIN L PALN RICHARD f A KRISTIN L PALN 1490 CONCORDIA ST NAYZATA NN 55S91 SO 17-117-25 22 ••52 •140R CONCORDIA ST 0 N NILLIANS/J A fESENNAXER DRXAN N NXLLXANS JUDY A fESENNAXER 1409 CONCCNVIA ST NAYZATA HN 55S91 ifdtltiiiiMttiMiittHNbL .r* RUN DATi li/tl/iZ iATCH 112 NiNNSrXN COUNTY PROTCtTY XNFORtlATZON SYSTEN fiOfERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PlASMil PACE 29 TARPAYER NANR/ABM SR I7-117-2S 22 MSS •IRIS PARERNEtl POINT N 0 R D L NCEEE NRiVm D NOCER IRli PARERNEtR POINT RO MAY2ATA fM SSS91 SR 17-U7-2S 22 OMR •loss CONCOROU ST HOWARD R ALTON III NONARO R ALTON 1X1 IRIS CONCOROU ST RSS91 SR 17-117-2S 22 RMS R1R7S CONCOROU ST HELEN K TRAINOR NEIL J A RAROARA L TRAUDR 1R7R CONCOROU ST WAYUTA HN 55S91 TARPAYER NANE/ADDR TOTAL iATCH S12 RRR21 1 CiRTXPY THAT THE PACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESOfTATXON OP INPORNATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DAU ON THE RECORK OP THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTNENT OP PROPERTY TAUTION^ TO THE REST I*; v*i- .o 4 ryw 'it ! ^ J Application Deadline: 10/21/02 60 Day Deadline: 12/19/02 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name: Wendy ^ttenberg Title: Zoning Administrator Item Description: #02-2848 Peter and Amy Goshgarian too Orono Orchard Road Variance 9 2002 Cl I r Oh Omu/vo DATE: ITEM NO. 7 Agenda Section; Zoning Exhibits: A Front View of Proposed Addition B Survey C Resolution D Staff Report and exhibits of 11/18/02 Pertinent Code Sections: % 1. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B): Side Yard Setback: To permit the conversion of attic space to living space by raising the roof where the existing residence is 28’ from the side lot line whe’-e 30' is required for the RR-1B zoning district. Application Summary: The applicants have requested a side yard setback variance to convert attic space to living space. The existing residence is located 28’ from the side lot line where 30 ’ is required in the RR-IB zoning district. Discussion: The existing residence was built in 1960. The property is located in a two acre zoning distric* . However, the property is in a neighborhood of substandard lots more in character with one acre zoning standards. If one acre zoning standards were applied to this property the residence would meet the 10 *" side yard setback. ' _J, 1 he proposed project will not increase the amount of lot coverage by structures. The footprint will remain the same. PLANNING COMMISSION: Planning Commission recommended by a 6 to 0 vote to: Approve application as presented. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. mm COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or aimnd the enclosed resolution. r U * A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10J8, SUBDIVISION 5 (B), FILE NO. 02 2848 WHEREAS, Peter Goshgarian and Amy Goshgarian, husband and wfe, (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 100 Orono Orchard Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot I, Block I, Orchard View, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property*); and lyHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to allow conversion of attic space to living space by raising the roof where the existing house 28’ from the side lot line where 30 ’ is required in the RR- IB zoning district. WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 18,2002, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. Mimiesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, 1. 2. FINDINGS 4 This application was reviewed as Zoning File #02-2848. The property is located in the RR-IB 2^ning District, where 2.0 acres is the minimum required lot area. The property consists of approximately O.S 11 acres. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed thi.s application on November 18,2002 and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: Page 1 of 5 5. 6. A. The existing residence was built in 1960, prior to city adoption of the current 2 acre zoning standards. The hardship is the existing house location in relation to the side lot line. C. The raising of the roof will not affect the adjacent neighbor. D. Lot coverage by structures is not increasing with the project. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the v^ances will not adversely affect traffic conditions, ight, air, nor posc ^ fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property: would not nerely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonitrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of tt\e applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code ai.d Comprehensive Plan of th : City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono Ci* • Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to allow conversion of attic space to living space by raising the roof where the existing residence is 28' from the side lot line where 30’ is required in the RR*1 B zoning district. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the aj^Ucants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within Pi^e 2 of 5 ( one year of the date of Council approval, or these variances will expire on that date (December 9,2003). 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City or Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of December, 2002. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN i The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of December, 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 3 of 5 STATE OF MINNESO'i A COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of December, 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 On this before me. day of ,2002,jsersonally appeared who is personally known to me whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath/aflirmation of..a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN before me. On this__day of ,2002,j)ersonally appeared who is personally known to me whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity 1 proved on the oath/afTirmation of.., a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, aixl acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of^ I r-r — — D iriilbll k ' CERTIFICATE OP SURVEY FOR PETER GOSHGARIAN OF LOT 1. BLOCK 1. ORCHARD VIEW HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA N N 4«*10' M* Ets.os PcrhcY^ Ge LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lot 1. BLOCK 1. ORCHARD VIEW This survey intends to show the locotion of on CKlstinQ house in reiotlon to the East line of the obove described property. It does not purport to show any other improve ments or encroochments. • Iron marker found Bearings shown ore based upon on ossumed datum cJi-4B5 CKMHKAA Ipif M ti Mr HI If M V iriv ttm Page KALI f-ao* IMTI . t!/a/02 TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner November 15,2002 SUBJECT:#02-2848 Peter and Amy Goshgaiian 100 Orono Orchard Road Variance -• Public Hearing ZoDing Distrk't: Lot Area: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre) 22,278 s.f.(.5Il acre) Exhibits: A Application Surveys Elevation Views (3 options provided as of 11/15/02) Photos of Property Plat Map Property Owner’s List B C D E F Pertinent Code Section: 1. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B): Side Yard Setback: To permit the conversion of attic space to living space by raising the roof where the existing residence is 28’ from the side lot line where 30’ is required for the RR-IB zoning district. Application Summary: The applicants have requested a side yard setback variance to convert attic space to living space. The existing residence is located 28’ fiom the side lot line where 30’ is required in the RR-IB zoning district. Discussion: The existing residence was built in 1960. The property is located in a two acre zoning drsinct. However, the property is in a neighborhood of substandard lots more in character with one acre zoning standards. If one acre zoning standards were applied to this property the residence would meet the 10’ side yard setback. The proposed project will not increase the amount of lot coverage by structures. The footprint will remain the same. #02-2848 Peter/Amy Goshgarian 100 Orono Orchard Road 11/15/2002 Page 1 of 2 Turning the attic space into living space requires raising the existing roof. The applicant has not provided floor plans but has provided 3 optional views of the new roof line. The new roof line will need to meet the 30’ height requirement. Based on the elevation view provided by the* applicant, it appears this will not be an issue. The ^licant is aware of the height limitation and will design the project to meet it. Statement of Hardship: The an>licant has included their statement of hardship in Exhibit A. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration: 1. The existing residence was built in 1960 prior to current zoning standards. 2. The raising of the roof will not affect the adjacent neighbor. 3. If the subject property were in one acre zone, it would meet the side yard setback requirement. 4. Lot coverage by structure is not increasing with the proposed project. 5. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval ot the side variance to convert the attic space into living area of the existing residence with the condition the project meets the 30’ height requirement. Additional Survey Work Required Applicants have provided a partial survey confirming the existing right side setbacks which are the subject of the requested variance. However, the only other survey on file does not confirm the setbacks for the remainder of the house. Staff is concerned that the addition and/or the proposed overhangs on the rear of the left side of the addition may encroach into the 50 ’ t^uired rear yard. Applicants will be required to provide a survey confirming setbacks for the entire house before this is forwarded to to Council. M)2>2848 Peter/Amy Goshgarian too Orono Orchard Road 11/15/2002 Page 2 of2 A Applkatton Date Received CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Ajf)>lication Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non*conforming structures $250.00 Afier-the>Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 100 CiLtNO 0iLa4^rt4> € O . Amount Paid 6 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.),ft2.//7>g3 4?/ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_______7 ^_________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ✓presidential o ther (specify). Zoning District: R g 1 D .(month/year) APPLICANT . Name PtercR ~~ *** Address: loa ^fcOA/o City:. OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home ) ^S’Z - V73”^ Phone (work ) ^ ef£0*/D Zip:. Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Ck>nstniction Cost $ eoo _______ Describe request in detail: /fttyix\7iA/c 4 to /^r77c 70 Uit'Fut Sv 4SA/S/A/4 77fr /t04^ _ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED ___Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover 4 Rear .Lot CQverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance^^j^Zoning Code requirements: Cud£th/r jrxtfcruMg /j l-i»v%r K/fi Amur tvtK. \ - (attach additional sheets if necessary) O 1. 2. 3. required submittals AM,of tilt following information mutt h.> fry thf aPDllcatioii d^dlin# for^your application to he tonitldgrgil ff»naplgt>; Completed Application Fonn Certified Propci^ Owners List of owners within 150’, labels and plat map (you must and map froin Hennepin County Department of ^ Finance, A-603, Govt Cefet*. 348-5910). fgr - tce«ue i»f|f Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 854" x 11" for reproduction. - $upr. To^graf^c survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing g^e are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 854" x II" for reproduction. /•r,e#r . , “3? sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 854" x 11").^ $«r*» 6. 2L List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons wdth an interest in sa*w as ^ _ fte property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendim to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. — Additional items as may be requested by City staff. — _ \ • The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour yinin€C..applicati,On is not complete if the above information has nnf h>en ineiudgrf, APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) Md/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the uiformation supphed is true a^^rrect to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature X = 5. 6. 7. ^ 8 Date /^//t/^z. OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this appIicaUon and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of inviMtigation and verification of this request. /^// 2.Owner’s Signature —___________Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be preteni at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building « Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. “V W 7 “— T’ * « '/ JOO Ororo s. / y\. h li »^AS0Plat o for Coorfjo Toman* in Lotfj M, 74, find 75» Crono Orchards Honn-jpln County, Kinnosota / /< \ Csrtiflcate of Svanfcy; \ I hereby certify that this is a true and cor­ rect roprosentation of a survey of the boundaries of: (a) ^t 61 except tho Southwesterly 15 feet thereof, Crono Oi'chards, and (P) Lot 74, the Southwesterly 15 feet of Lot 61, and tho Southensterly 35 fe>t of Let 75, Oreno Orchards, o!ic of the location of nil build! thoivcn. It dees not purport to show other if.provoiuents or cncroach- Bonts, Sgalo: 1" = 50* ■’ttito : C.-5-75 o I Iron nerkor i Cordon u. Coffin Roc. 6064 Land Sut~/oyer and Planner Lone Lako, Mirjiusota THIS SORm HAS DONE FOR THE PREVIOOS OWNER OP THE HOOSB (OBORaB TOKAN) BBIORE Tt WAS PDRCHASED BT PAin. SCRIEICH. THE "PROPOSED DlflDIlO LINE” ON 8WIX 15PEET OP-LOT 6l IS NOW THE ACTVAL DITIDINO LINE. D 1U- -J> J'.'/ 0 ICC C ' C1 ^ 1<‘ ''' : A rl''tm > •> Tt^Arr M 'tit ,-;.-^S I a '"; S' hi P-V“rif'.sf^t. irry-' .••; r'.^ i • 9 Y“ • ^ - -> ' ; • • ir •- • V - ,v^ ■' W.‘- ^p- -V L 3. - • • ' * If • ; ■ ^ V TmCWC r ‘-y. ■P'-' ! V\ l ; ^■y‘* ' ' • i;u.%-r^r'' i- i'f* : 4 .4". •• , . L D c •> ■•. ^ / > ' C C'C I \C ^ >' M •*.ir</f'' ,r.^;\4,. tV < . !w a»'.«•• -V' ;- - -ii^:-r.yjr fe "♦ ^: viiu^. -SCI ‘ *• •«r, . . »'t •'’f^v; ■isn ri•. ^ V' v; \ 7 '•(I^ ^' '•* I » , . ■/! . VI ' <■ ' ^- ’W>^ ... tlftr r’."'. r Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Departniehii i-w- '••/.f f' Parcellnfbmmtlon • •. ^c:4y PaPMl ID 0211729210032 Noum Number 100 Otr««t Nmim ORONO ORCHAIID RD ^i9not9l$g$»yncotdtam$p.itntn$9nu»e cmfiaa e onetMonMiion liliiif-riiiiTMliffiMBiii 1'A f#m Vi- mJN DATE lt/lt/i2 iAKH StA HENNiPlN COUNTY fROmiTY INFORHATXON SVSTCN fROfCRTY ONNCIIS LIST OMCR NAfC TAXPAYER NANE/AMW SR RE-Iir-ES 21 itIR ••US SiaTH AVE CRAXO NERT2ENKRO ETAL CRAXO NERT2ENRER0 115 SItXTH AVE NAYZATA m 55S91 ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR •• i2-117-2S 21 ••S2 ••!•• ORONO ORCHARO RO % P S OOSH6ARIAN ET AL PETER 5 OOSNBARXAN ANY GOSNGARXAN !•• ORONO ORCHARD RD $ NAYZATA NN SSS91 PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AODR SR •2-117-2S 22 •••§ •R2RS ORONO ORCNARO VILLAOE OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO P 0 iOX •• CRYSTAL RAY NN S5S2S RO S K REPORT NO. PIAS5R01 PARE 22 SR R2-117-2S 21 RR22 ••UR ORONO ORCNARO RD $ J L NYFFELS R N J NYFFELS JANES L R NAUDE J NYFFELS IIR ORONO ORCNARO RO S NAYZATA NN 55591 SR RZ-llT-ZS 21 RRSl •••95 SNITN AVE J R D ANLRERO JANES N R DIANNE R ANLRERO 95 SNITN AVE*) NAYZATA NN. 55S91 SR R2-117-2S 21 RRSS ••129 ORONO ORCHARD RD S VINCENT DAVID COLLINS VINCENT DAVID COLLINS 120 ORONO ORCNARO RO S NAYZATA NN 55S91 30 EZ-llT-ZS 21 RES7 ••••• ORONO ORCHARD RD S D E R C N NNXTELEY D NHXTELEV/C NYERS-NNITELEY RR ORONO ORCNARO RD S NAYZATA NN 55S91 TOTAL RATCN 5RR ••••/ X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OP XNFORNATIQN AS XT APPEARS TNIS DATS ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY OEPARTNENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE REST OF NY XNONLEDOE AND RELIEF. • • I #2848 A ■■ a iiTiimn .lift 11 rtiaTtftiii iii i ■'NQ Application Deadline: 11 /OS/02 60 Day Deadline: 01 /03/03 OEC 9 2002 Cl nr u^ OHO/VO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name: Wendy ^ttenberg Title: 2U)ning Administrator DATE: ITEM NO. f Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#02-2853 Aulik Design Group 955 Tonkawa Road Variance and Conditional Use Permit Exhibits: A Resolution B Staff Report and exhibits of 11/18/02 Pertinent Code Sections: 1. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) (6): To permit an encroachment into the average lakeshore setback. The total encroachment is approximately 42’ for the new residence and 62’ for the lakeside pool. 2. Section 10.03, Subdivision 19: Conditional Use Permit: Land alteration of greater than 500 cubic yards. The total fill to be brought onto the site is approximately 2,360 cubic yards. Application Summary: The applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback variance and a conditional use permit for land alteration to construct a new residence on the property. Discuuion: The existing residence was built in 1967 and has been demolished. Currently the property is vacant. The proposed location of the new residence is further back on the lot than the old residence. However, there is an existing sewer easement and sewer line which prohibits the new residence to be any further back on the lot towards the road. The proposed residence will encroach 42' and the pool will encroach 62’ into the average lakeshore setback. ' The property and adjacent properties are heavily wooded and at different elevations. The topographic map indicates the elevation change from the north to the south of the property. Conditional Use Permit for land alteration: The property owner has requested a conditional use permit to permit land alteration on the property over 500 cubic yards. The proposal indicates approximately 2,360 cubic yards of fill will be brought onto the site. The fill will be used to create a level area to locate the house, provide good drainage and create access to the site for motor vehicles. Average Lakeshore Setback: The proposed residence encroaches 42' and the lakeside pool encroaches 62’ into the average lakeshore setback. The proposed residence is located further back on the property than the previous residence. However, it cannot be moved further back due to the location of the sewer and a sewer easement. Planning Commission should review whether there are any potential view impacts to the northerly adjacent neighbor. Enginccr*s Report: The City Engineer has reviewed the plans. The applicant agrees to the five bullets items in the letter. However, the last item regarding grading along the south lot line did raise a concern with the applicant. It was suggested in the City Engineer's letter it may be necessary to construct a retaining wall along the south lot line to direct flows into the proposed swale and towards the lake. Also, a letter from the property owner to the south regarding grading and drainage was received and presented to the Planning Conunission. The applicant prefers to design the grading and to control drainage on the site with berms and swales rather than a retaining wall. Since the Planning Commission meeting the applicant and the City Engineer met regarding the grading plan. The applicant proposed a berm along the south lot line and a swale. The City Engineer does not have issues with the plan, however a final grading plan shall be submitted for City review prior to the building permit being issued. PLANNING COMMISSION: Planning Commission recommended by a 6 to 0 vote to: Approve application as presented. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution with the following condition: A final grading plan be submitted to the City for review prior to the building permit being issued. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1(B), AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16(C)(6), GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE NO. 02>2853 WHEREAS, Russell Schumer and Judy Florestano, (hereinafter "the applicants") arc the owners of the property located at 955 Tonkawa Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 5, Block 1, Vasa Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter “the property ”) and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1(B) and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(CX6) to permit an encroachment of 42* to construct a new residence on the property and 62’ to construct a lakeside pool into the average lakeshore setback; and a conditional use permit to allow land alteration of greater than 500 cubic yards to be brought onto the site per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19. WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 18,2002, at which tini? all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. FINDINGS 1. litis application was reviewed as 2^ning File #02-2853. 2. This property is located in the LR-1B Zoning District, where 1 acre is the minimum lot area. The property consists of approximately 3.4 acres. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 18,2002 Page 1 of7 ► ' 5. 6. 7. and reconunended approval by a vote of 6 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The proposed residence is set further from the lake than the old residence B. C. The lot and adjacent lots are heavily wooded. The proposed residence and lakeside pool will not obscure neighboring properties views. D.The proposed residence meets hardcover, lot coverage by structures and height requirements. E.The sewer line prohibits the proposed residence from being located further back on the property (towards the road). The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air, nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow land alteration of more than 500 cubic yards of fill to be brought onto the property willTlot to be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments Page 2 of 7 ■aw». V->V4 ^r: .rr^ui.aa uku— by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1(B) and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(CX6) to permit an encroachment of 42' to construct a new residence on the property and 62 ’ to construct a lakeside pool into the average lakeshore setback; and a conditional use permit to allow land alteration of greater than 500 cubic yards to be brought onto the site per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan may require itulher Planning Commission and City Council review. 2.The applicant shall submit a final grading plan to City Engineer for review prior to issuance of the building permit. 3.The applicant shall obtain a land alteration permit from the city prior to hauling fill to the site. 4.The applicant must contact Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for an erosion control permit. 5.Erosion control measure shall be taken by installing a silt fence around the construction area upon receiving permit from City and MCWD and priortb any land alteration activity. Applicants and their contractors shall follow the “Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Quality in Urban Areas.” 6.A route map shall be provided to the city prior to the start of construction showing which county/city street are to be used. 7.The applicant shall televise the sewer between the north and south lot lines prior to any grading activity and again after the project is complete. Page 3 of 7 ------- 8.The applicant shall provide the City with a new easement for the existing sewer and shall take appropriate action to vacate the existing unused easement. 9.Authorities granted by these variances and conditional use permits run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or these variances will expire on that date (December 9,2003). 10. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of these variances and conditional use permits shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 11. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, their successors and assigns, hereby aaree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of December, 2002. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Cleric Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner (s) Page 4 of 7 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of December, 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 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of December, 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 On this day of .20. personally appeared before me, ____who is personally known to me ____whose identity I proved on the basis of • ____whose identity I proved on the oath/afTirmation of a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/shc/they e tecuted the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public Page S of 7 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ■n On this day of .20 personally appeared before me, ____is personally known to me ____v^ose identity I proved on the basis of ____whose identity I proved on the oaUv'affirmation of a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public X V. mmm P«ge 6 of 7 »T3 (U OQ (0 O »-h CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR AULIK DESIGN GROUP OF LOT 5. BLOCK 1. VASA PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA gji •O T> >.•:> T?5' B- ?^ ^ eg ^ o 6 f 5 ?o, ^ P r- ' •J' ^ f Soi:? §T- t r ^ I ^ a: A i •' ■MWMIIM LAKE MINNETONKA MORTH «RU tttK PCtOHWitti 9 >«0»«tCl Ul %. •••«• t. ««U MMIM Irw «WR«* R»*4 •'•••K r *. t, ft* f » •M IR^I ••Itf ■R IR**! RRI^ T».« !• «R m IM IRR R« «RR R»R i^M, •»« <M Imr MR* R< «• R«'R«>*f »—■■ anR RRRR *RI R«>Ra«l >R RfcRR R<*f Rt»«* tH .<Cm* **t»*mf R f§t < !##• Ra RW/. «RRRrife«a ■ Ri»»a<tR. |ii ‘ IK S3S ou “Jo i: 0. rt X=r H*cr H* rt :^rin TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE:November 15,2002 SUBJECT: #02-2853 Aulik Design Group 955 Tonkawa Road Variance and Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) 147,935 s.f. (3.4 acre) Exhibits: A /\nalysis Worksheet Application Hardship Statement Survey Topographic Map Hardcover Calculations Sewer Location Elevations Floor Plans Engineer Comments B C D E F G H I J Pertinent Code Section: 1. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) (6): To permit an encroachment into the average lakeshore setback. The total encroachment is approximately 42'. 2. Section 10.03, Subdivision 19: Conditional Use Permit: Land alteration of greater than 500 cubic yards. The total fill to be brought onto the site is approximately 2,360 cubic yards. Application Summary: The applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback varimee and a conditional use permit for land alteration to construct a new residence on the property, l?: Discussion: The existing residence was built in 1967 and has been demolished. Cunently the property is vacant. The proposed location of the new residence is further back on the lot than the old residence. However, there is an existing sewer easement and sewer line which prohibits the new residence to be any further back on the lot towards the road. (See Exhibit F). The proposed residence will encroach 42* into the average lakeshore setback. it02-?953 AulOc Design Group 955 Tonkawa Road i 1/15/2002 Page I of3 The property and adjacent properties are heavily wooded and at different elevations. The topographic map (Exhibit D) indicates the elevation change from the north to the south of the property. Conditional Use Permit for land alteration: The property owner has requested a conditional use permit to permit land alteration on the property over 500 cubic ya^. The proposal indicates approximately 2,360 cubic yards of fill will be brought onto the site. The fill will be used to create a level area to locate the house, provide good drainage and create access to the site for motor vehicles. Average Lakeshore Setback: The proposed residence encroaches 42’ into the average lakeshore setback. The proposed residence is located further back on the property than the previous residence. However, it cannot be moved further back due to the location of the sewer and a sewer easement. Planning Commission should review whether there are any potential view impacts to the northerly adjacent neighbor. Statement of Hardship: The applicant has included their statement of hardship in Exhibit B. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Engineer’s Comments: The City Engineer has reviewed the plans. The comments are attached as Exhibit G. The applicant has reviewed the comments and agrees with the five items indicated in the letter. Vacation of the sewer easement may require a separate application process depending on how the original easement was worded. Issues for Consideration: 1. The proposed residence is set further from the lake than the old residence. 2. This lot and the adjacent lots are heavily wooded. 3. The proposed residence will not obscure neighboring properties views. 4. The proposed residence meets hardcover, lot coverage by structures and height requirements. S. A route map shall be provided to the city prior to the start of construction showing which county/city streets are to be used for hauling fill. #02-2tS3 Aulik Design Group 9S5 Tonkawa Road 11/15/2002 Page 2 of 3 6. The sewer line prohibits the proposed residence from being located further back on the property (towards the road). 7. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the average lakeshore setback variance and conditional use permit for land alteration to construct a new residence on the property with the following conditions: 1. The an>licants must obtain a land alteration permit from the city prior to hauling fill to the site 2. The applicants must contact Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for an erosion control permit. 3. Erosion control measures shall be taken by installing a silt fence around the construction area upon receiving permit from City and MCWD and prior to any land alteration activity. 4. A route map shall be provided to the city prior to the start of construction showing which county/city streets are to be used. 5. The applicant shall televise the sewer between the north and south lot lines prior to any grading activity and again after the project is complete. 6. Applicant shall provide City with new easement for existing sewer and shall take appropriate action to vacate the existing unused easement. (Applicant should provide City with a certified copy of existing easement to allow staff to verify what type of vacation process is required). /r tJrLv'.: •. o i a.*• 'y^ , W2-2IS3 Aulik Design Group 9SS Tonkawa Road 11/15/2002 P%e3of3 iwpi ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot Area: LR-IB Lot Area Required 43,560 s.f. (1 acres) Actual 147,935 s.f. (3.4 acres) Hardcover Calculations: Distance from shoreline Total area in setback Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75’ *4.(605 4430 s.f.0 s.f (0%)-Mfrs.f. (4^%) % 75-250 ’34,825 s.f.8,706.25 s.f. (25%)8,013.25 0.4. (23%) 250-500 ’id^s.f.s.f. (30%) Ui^!‘Z S - S' 4t?^.f. (^:24%) 500-1000’44,000 s.f.KM0OT5.f. (35%).2i000 s.f. (44%) ♦♦At the time this report was written the only hardcover numbers provided by the applicant were for the 7S-2S0’ setback zone. The other setl^k zones were estimated and will be verified by the applicant. As shown above, hardcover is not a concern in any of the setback zones. iiiUHidfeaia A Application U Date Received Amount Paid vi&4*7)! r</ CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Type of Application to be Filed UAufa AjermB<Aitiei4 - 4 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) _________ APPLICANT Aauig. taefei^M Phone (home) ISOO Phone (work). Address ^ia^ja jag^A. ftuJfa City <rr.LoUt^ PA>^ Zip OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (homeASZ Date Pro l(do) Acquired (month/year) also own the adjacent parcels of land. 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 $250.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain y 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 from original application) After-thc-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$275.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$375.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ______$100.00 App^s Other < see Fee Schedule I. */ h'JT' Q' ;.'0 f-A * e> • \ Sip-20-2002 09;3Im Froi-CITY OF OROMO ♦85224946 IE T-084 P.flflr/IIIS F-I7I Application U 0^ - 3 Amount Paid CITY OF C^tONO - variance appucahon Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) , •Renevtal Vatitoee Fee $150.t)0 (no cbanjge'firom oiiglinal i^licatiori) Variance for non-confonning stnictwes* $250.00 •Afier>the-*Faot Fees Rouble application fee) Date Received PROPERTY INFORMATION . _ , SheAddiess_______ ^55 TonlCflW/^ M. in-2.^-2]Ptopeity Iddntifioation Number ^JD.). Attack'legal description to appM^oq if not included on required survey. Date PiopsdX Acquired,02>'lopttjiA I (do) ki^also cwh tiie edjaeent'paicels of Imd tuseofiJ ,(month/year) • Plresent usToi proper^: , ;>^ i«adential __ Zoidng District: ptiier (specify) APPLICANT Name Address:^ Phone (borne). ____ Phone fwodd~^ City: MH Fa/’K Zip;_g OVWER rtf diffeiTOt than vP*icanp^jyAt«ft> ___ 'Name KlJfi&SdttMlOr/M^ Jurft/ pJoVeMrifi Phone (woik) Address: Phone (horne d ^*f3’*'3o3l Phone rt’te. Cityr. CHd$fa 2ip:J9S3ie DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: __ Bstiinated Constm^on Cost $ OOO ~~ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width ,Lot ’Cbvange ^ Setback: __Front Side Hardcover __ „ Rear Average Lakeshoie Otiicr (specify) HARDSmP/DESaUPnON OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or "unusual property conditions prev compliaoee with Zoning Code reomtements : tiorial sheets If necessary) b City of Orono - General Land Use Application Description of Request The request is being made to bring in over 501 cu. yd. of fill to 955 ^onkawa Road. Since this is a steep sKe, it is needed to create a level area in whidi to locate the house, provide good drainage and create access to the site for motor vehicles Due to the current zoning ordinances, the proposed house can not be located on the level area where the previous house was located where the lot is more level. A sewer easement prevents the proposed house from being located behind the average distance from the shoreline of the existing houses on adjacent properties (Orono Zoning Ordinance Sec. 10.22B). If the house were located closer to that line, it would require even more fill than what is proposed. The existing house shown on the survey has been removed. The current site is a vacant lot. , ^ L L - i ' » ifiSkitMA.'vU' a “4 ‘ irrfTfwilInTirhiitfttt 1 1 •■IKf MCS CVIttf* V__/l*Mi •11HAii • C • ittCMI ------------6*«la« •till ttIC C CJD tUMT c^mi 0 i|»U — —•*ic •HI tZD •wUBi r-—-> •wiiti •CZJ tliwci a COK« m 1 __1 ■tc«t« f ticat O IM* •me t »flU» ••fiiit • *••liti o M0t«r A -----laM* -------------lall*- — ••tUia a tU •ti«t 1 'ft $•••• •• €••«••• !•* HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75*250-500'500-1000* EXISTINC HAWl A. Houm tKi: Leofth Width B. Oarage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Pat(d/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Q. Other X X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ _ _ _ _ B PROPOSED HARDCOVI A. House :r in zone Lcfiffh X X X WiAh 30^ D. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Pitio/Dcck F. LaadKape Undeflaiiti By Plastic lo.< X X X X X X X X X X o. A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B X 100 + 2- X 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 03 S.F. S.F. ( i-r) .¥ \ *», S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F Oi S.F. A S.F. B % ^2.^% S.F. CC) S.F. <S> S.F. (S) ___6Lai2L___S.F. ^ S.F. (g) Lfi)4- S.F. (D 3^.S.F<g) S.F S.F. S.F. vc^v^'(V ‘iifO S.F. (g) S.F. a'^’^oi 3 ^.02,^ S.F. B ^ ^^oio - ■■ < I hardcover SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) CULATION WORKSHEET 75>2S0' 250-SOO*500-1000’ PTAUnCOVER IN ZONE A. Hottl* ______• • *S.F. LMf&WkUi X' X X S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Oanie • • % . • •• •••• • * ft* . ••• S.F. C. Driveway X X S.F. S.F. D. SIdewdk X X S.F. S.F. E. Pado/Dcck X X S.F. S.F. F. Undscqie Uadectaln By Plastic Or Fabric X X X SE. S.F. S.F. O. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE •A • • •________. ® . S.F. S.F. XIOO .- ^•40 i^noci S.F.hHL PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ____________ S.F. Li:|Si X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garige C. Driveway S.F. X X S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. Patlo/DMk X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. O. Other S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE • A _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ♦ ».xlOO « i4. •ICO S.F. S.F. f. , I t I • ? • M*.••l* hardcover calculation work sheet SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75* 75-250’500-1000' yyCTTNO WARPCOVER TN ZONE A. House ______■ • * Lni6 X X X B. -Oinse •*, • » •* . 0. Driveway D. Sidewdlc E. Patlo/Deek F. Ijuidsc4)e Uoderiain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X X X X X X X O. other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A __ _ _ _ _ _+ B .xlOO ypOPOSEP HAM)COVER IN ZONE A. House Lt:|Si Widih B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck p; Ludseape Uodedaln By Plastic OrP^rie X X X X X X X X X X X X inirV Oe 0±tt TOTAL HARDCOVER DC ZCME TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE • A ____________ ♦ B. S.F. • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. *100 - jz/agQ. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJ. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. I S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % • f • ••• * I I easdcover calculation worksheet SETBACK ZC»«E: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75* TSJSO' 250-500''500-1000 ]nngrPIO HARDCOVER IN 2 A. Home _ _ _• ;*KP iMngSk VWi X % X .. B. -Oinie- . . V-• . .. , <'. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Eado/Deck F. Landscqie Uadedaln By Plaatlc Or FAcic *«* : .t .. ^ ^• •.• w X’ X X X X X X X X S.F. • S.F. S.F. s.if. S.F.• S.T, S.F. S.F. 1S.F. S.F. ‘S.F. S.F. "s.F. "S.F. C. Odier S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A :_________+. B .X100 - _________S.F. s.f. TOOPOSEO HABPCOVER Ei ' A. House _____________ X WM& B. Oaraje C. Driveway D. Sldewdk E. Paclo/Deck F. Laadsei{pc Underlain By Plastie OrPabtte X X X • ^ • X X X X X X X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ’S.F. S.F. S.F. • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F O. Other S.F TOTAL KANKXIVER IN ZON TOTALPROPERTY AREA DC ZONE * A _____________ ♦ »xlOO " J-CCO _S.F O-Q-rr^r) _-B.F •• . ^ V-:-''.— w',#''- 7^'>'V:.,v . *.X'T=^ ' -1 ' •A‘’S|^..J(J. • -. V'^'-Vti' ■ • '.a.v .-.iai'. .•' « w- -'•^•s .'4^^ ^ 1 » ..x »^ » • >jj . '' A''4 mi •.^>v ■•vi'j' i . • ^ *► ■>i>V ,:t^.' '- V ’V'WV^ i*. •,'( ^.VV‘ i'-?^\^ V-V4W I \J* "V -'^ *:-^ygajfe Ifa s.^v ii-M i' Mii. tl u ■Mi^,mmismm '•) >. . .».' ^'i‘v W\^ » i 1^1 !SsI!i mc^s! i S-5^ ^.v !*? - ’ JJI^^■ ^■ir^ F yiu^'-r-o* F -H- V-i'-o" ’ .4 j jTri; I I I Ii.: I J.-iXninHi:'mBwfi 1lI1 p^£ = r\11 WiMf. ChUAf^ ,\i l[ I \ y '0 ^ it4^ ft \ ,i'-' 'i :, _U\vEf. V-r*cf t ' l:\ V . 9;v A r r . \ 4-u»* . rT*#'.Ht»-^ r HC?-o" Now 08 8002 lOiSORN BONESTROO R08ENE RNDERLIK 6516361311 P- 1 ••n€tcroo. toi€fi6. An^crNk jntf AiiocUttf. N»c. Ii 8«i Acffon/f^iMl O^porttmJty tiwipl«.y6f ^mclpkli: Ocio G ton«stroo. P€ • Mjrvm l. iorvMS. PJ. • Otenn V Cook. Pf • Pobtrt Q. Schuntchc. PJ • Jtffjf A. BoufOOA, P^. S#«Uor Cofitulcantt: RobPft W ioiee^e, Pt. • Jattph C Anderitk, PM • fficriar^ C. 1Un«f. PC. • SutJfi ML CbtfMv CPA. Afs«ciat6 PfhHipMti: Keith A Gordon. PC • CoOen «. Pfeff^le. PC. • Pichord W foiier. PC. • Oevtd O Loikoia pk . Mark A. Manioa PC . Michoel T Cautmonn. PC • Ted K. Pitid. PC • Kenneth P Andtrion. pI . Mere K Poift W . David A Bonetcroo. MB A. • Sidney P WnKjmson. PC, LS. • Agnes M. Bmg. MBA • Al«i Kick Schmidt. PC. • Thomas W. Ptitrton. PC. • James K Meland. PC • Mifes f Jensen. PC • L PrwNip Gravel «. PC. • Daniel J. Cdoerton. PC. • Ismael Martinet. PC • Thomas A Syfko. PC. • Sheldon J. Johnson • Dale A. Grove. PC. • Thornes A Koushar PC. • KoOeri J Oevery. PC. Offices: St Paul. St Cloud. Kochester er^ WiUmar. MN • kKIweukee. Wl • Chicago. H, W%Bslto: MrMnarBonesiroo.com M/ji Bonestroo fjgRdsene vS Anderlik & B vj C Associates engineers & Architects ® m November 8,2002 Wendy Bottenberg Zoning Administralor/Planner City of Oiono Post Office Box 66 Crysul Bay. MN S3323 Re: 9SS Tonkawa Road File No. 139-02-000 Plat No. 02-2853 Dear Wendy: We have reviewed the cenificate of survey and proposed grading plan for the property located at 955 Tonkawa Road. The proposed work includes grading and construction of a new home. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: • Drainage and utility easemenu should be provided 5-feet wide along the north and south lot lines and 10-feet wide along the Tonkawa Road frontage. • There Is an existing sanitary sewer located east of the proposed home. The sewer is outside of the sanitary sewer easement shown. The existing sewer easement should be vacated and a new easement 20-fect wide centered over the existing sewer should be provided. • The proposed grading will place approximately 5-feet of fill over the existing sanitary sewer. The sanitary sewer record plans show the sewer os 9-inch PVC. The additional Till could impact the existing sanitary sewer. As a condition of plan approval the applicant should televise the sewer between the north and south lot lines prior to any grading activity and again after the project is complete. The applicant should provide a Tinancial guarantee to the City sufficient to cover any repairs that may be necessary to the sanitary sewer. • Heavy duty silt fence with wire fence backing and steel t-posis should be installed between the lake and the home and along the south lot line to prevent any sedimentsiirom being transported to the lake or neighboring property. The silt fence should be inspected and approved by the City prior to any construction or site grading. • Grading along the south lot line should be revised to direct runoff towards the lake and away from the adjacent property to the south. It may be necessary to construct a retaining wall along die south lot Lne to direct flows into the proposed swale and towards the lake. If you have any questions please call me it (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK S: ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Cc: Greg Cappa. City of Orono 233S West Highway 36 • St. Paul. MN 55113 • 65f-636-460d • Fax: 651-636-1311 i ; • - \ BUM—W ^NQ 12/6/02 ADDENDUM DEC 9 2002 cirvoFoRofVQ' #02-2854 Kevin Manley, 1973 Eagerness Point Road - Variance/CUP Applicant’s landsa^)e designer on Thursday 12/5/02 submitted additional plans for consideration, labeled as Options 1,2 and 3. Staff has not had an opportunity to review these in any detail. Option 1 is intended to address the issue of the unapprov^ lakeshore grade lowering by raising the grade 2'just lakeward of the walkout, incorporating a short wall and step-up from the walkout level. Option 2 makes use of walkout grades as they exist today. Option 3 shows cross-sections of the site. The applicant’s designer, Ed Suarez of Gustafson Design, will be at the Council meeting to describe these proposals. 4 *1 Date Application Received: 10-23-02 Date Appiicatlon Coniidercd ai Complete: 11-12-02 00-Day Review Period Expires: 1-11-03 60-day Review Period Extended on 12-5-02 to: 3-12-03 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: December S, 2002 Item No.: ^ Department Approval: Name: Michael P. GafTron Tilk: Planning Director Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #02-2854 Kevin Manley, 1973 Fagemess Point Road - Variance/CUP List of Exhibits A - Notice of Planning Commission Action 12-5-02 B - Memo and Exhibits of November 16,2002 C - Draft November 18 Planning Commission Minutes f* Application Summary Gustafson Design, Inc. on behal f cf Kevin & Janet Manley, owners of 1973 Fagemess Point Road, has applied for approval of a boulder retaining wall system and landscape plan for the westerly lakeshore bank of the property. The proposal requires a conditional use permit and variance for land alteration and hardcover within 75'of the shoreline. This if a newly remodeled house for which no Certificate of Occupancy will be required. There arc a nui.<ber of unresolved issues related to this property which are enumerated in the November 16 staff memo. Plauning Commission Recommendation On November 18 Planning Commission held a public hearing and reviewed the request. Although Planning Commission offered to table the proposal for further review and potential modification, applicant requested that a recommendation on the current proposal be forwarded to the Council. Planning Commission voted 6-0 to deny the request for the reasons noted in the minutes anddid no' formally address each of the issues noted in the staff memo. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the application as proposed. The initial 60-day deadline is January 11, 2003. Council s next meeting is January 13,2003. If Council denies the application, a resolution for denial w ould not be presented for adoption until after the 60-day deadline. Therefore, the 00 day deadline must be formally extended, which staff has done in the Notice of Planning Commission Action. If Council chooses to table the application for revisions and'or further review by the City Engineer, then Staff recommends the following: #02-2854 December 5,2002 Page 2 1.Table the application to allow staff and City Engineer time to consider whether it is an appropriate plan, and to allow staff, applicant and applicant’s consultant to confer on the plan. 2.Provide direction as to whether the grades in the west lakeshore yard should be restored to match those that existed prior to remodeling in 1998. 3.Provide applicant with direction as to whether the deck on the lake side of the house might be approved if a formal variance request is made. 4.Any forthcoming' approvals ultimately should be conditioned on timely remova* ofthe illegal shed in the eastern 0-75' zone, and removal oi the gravel parking urea in the same zone, returning both to grass. The applicant was ordered to remove the shed in July but to date he has failed to comply. A variance should not be granted for these improvements if applied for, as staff believes there is likely no hardship to support such variances. 5.Applicant should be advised to work with the adjacent property owners in rcacliing a suitable conclusion in terms of ownership claims regarding the “accretions” east of the road. 6.The survey should be revised to verify the encroachment of the concrete stairway into the City right-of-way. Could this stairway be angled toward the driveway to avoid this encroachment? 7.Because it is likely the necessary work will not happen until next spring, applicant should be advi.sed to maintain erosion controls on the site as necessary to avoid sedimenution to the lake or to the road. This means adding silt fence along the road and beefing up the silt fencing at the west shoreline. Council also, has the option of sending any revisions back to the Planning Commission. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Take a formal action to do one or more of the following: I. Deny the request, direct staff to draft a resolution of denial for review on January 13. 2. Table the request, provide direction to the applicant and staff regarding items 1 -7 above. 3.Table the request, provide direction io the applica,it, and refer back to Planning Commission for further review. 1 i CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 952-249-4600 ZONING FILE #02-2854 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: December 5, 2002 ft-r-ov TO:Kevin Manley 1973 Fagemess Point Road Way^at£. MN 55391 Eduardo Suarez Gustafson Design 1845 Wisconsin Avenue North Golden Valley, MN 55427 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance / Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: November 18, 2002 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Motion to recommend denial of application #02-2840. t ote: 6 lit Favor. 0 Against Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confimied as: City Council - Monday, December 9, 2002; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. 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 cotnpicted application. The statute also provides that the City may extend the review period for an additional si.xty days upon written notification to the applicant. Your application was received on 10-23-02 but not deemed complete until 11-12-02. The initial 60-day period will expire on January II, 2002. The City of Crono hereby extends the review deadline for application #02-2854 an additional 60 days to March 12, 2003. ■fhe reason for the extension is that the City Council does not have a second meeting in December, hence final action on the application cannot occur until after the initial 60-day period expires. If the application is tabled on December 9 and/or referred to the Planning Commission for further review of revised plans, the Platming Commission does not meet again until January 22. 2003, after expiration of the initial 60-day review period. 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, 'f you have questions, please call Planning Director Mike Gaffron at 612-249-4600. — 9 Dale Application Received: I0-23-02 Date Application Considered as Complete: 11-12-02 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 1-11-03 E To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Smith and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mike GaHron, Planning Director November 16,2002 #02-2854 Kevin Manley, 1973 Fagemess Point Road - Variance/CUP - Public Hearing Application Summary Gustafson Design, Inc. on behalf of Kevin & Janet Manley, owners of 1973 Fagemess Point Road, has applied for approval of a boulder retaining wall system and landscape plan for the westerly lakeshore bank of the property. The proposal requires a conditional use permit and variance for land alteration and hardcover within 75’ of the shoreline. This is a newly remodeled house for which no Certificate of Occupancy will be required. There are a number of unresolved issues related to this property which will be enumerated in this memo. No.AoDlicant Z yes Resolution Date #524 Backstrom%Var (No resolution)1979 #2410 Boynton Var No. 4328 1999 #2668 Kurtis Manley CUP No. 4661 2001 #2778 Kevin Manley Var No. 4788 2002 Prior Zoning Applications Affecting Property Subject HC/setback var. for new 20x28 det gar and 8x28 addn. HC/width^arca vars. to replace house; 0-75 grading denied; replacement house never constructed Setback vars for dormer windows, deck above garage; existing house remodeled 2001-2002 Setback var. for roof line expansion; denied variances for greater than 25% 75-250' HC & greater than 15% lot coverage for tunnel deck List of Exhibits A - Application B - Topographic Survey Dated November 5,2001 C - Topographic Survey Dated July 20, 1998 / Revised 9/22/98 / Revised 12/16/98 D - May 2002 Surv'ey - Proposed retaining Walls (Plan abandoned, never approved) E - Proposed Boulder Wall & Landscaping Plan F - Before/Aftcr Photos of Site G - Building Plans ‘ , ; H - Staff Sketch - Cross Section • “ 1 - Lyle Oman Letter 7-25-02 re: Violations J - Assessors Records Showing Prior Deck K - Plat map/property owners list L - City Engineer Comments November 15,2002 Unresolved Issues 1 . Shed (8x8) illegally constructed/located on east side of road, within 2' of shoreline 2. Gravel parking area (20* x 32' approx.) constructed within 75’ of shoreline along east side of road, without City approvals and constituting illegal hardcover. No evidence on file tha: this area was formerly a parking area; in fact, photos in file suggest a minimal single grassy parking space was all that was previously here... #02-2854 1973 Fagerness Point Road November 16,2002 Page 2 3. 4. 5. 6. Thdmost recent (2002) surveys includes property located on the east side of Fagemess Point Road, which consists of “accretions”, i.e. land that has been created since Fagemess was platted in 1886. Manley is intending to claim the areas surveyed east of the road via a land title registration (torrens) process. It is staffs understanding that the neighbors to the immediate north will be disputing this claim. Therefore, the actual area Manley owns within the east 0-75' lakeshore yard is at this time unknown. Concrete stairway alongside garage is constructed within road right-of-way, may be hazardous for road maintenance, other options may e.xist... Deck (approx. 5x10) constructed on west side of house without zoning .approval, constituting 0-75' structure encroachment and excessive hardcover. Deck was not shown on any plans or surveys used in approval of prior zoning applications. Deck was not shown on any surveys or plans used to obtain the remodeling permit in September 2000. Deck first appeared on a plan used to obtain a permit for basement remodel and deck over garage in February 2002, however, the deck was not part of that plan review and the fact that it appeared on the plan is inconsequential. Staff maintains that this deck exists illegally and should bo removed. Staff can confirm that a 160 s.f, deck existed in the past (see Exhibit J, assessors records) but it was completely removed sometime prior to or during the remodeling process, and construction of the new deck has never been addressed. An alternative would be to require that an after-the-fact variance be applied for; PC may wish to provide applicant with direction on this matter. The deck constitutes additional hardcover and lot coverage above the previously approved amounts. This deck is not the subject of the current application, and given the May 2002 hardcover and lot coverage denials for this property, it would seem to be unlikely this would be ^proved. Grade of the walkout level in the westerly 0-75' zone has been lowered by approximately 2', in violation of denials in 1 998. This grading w’ork was not covered by any permits isued to date and has never been approved as part of any prior zoning, pplication. This grading was apparently done to create a ‘better’ walkout situation. Old and new topographic surveys as well as old photos of this side of the house clearly show that the entire west lakeshore yard has been excavated and the west facade of the house has been opened up to a much broader width and height than the original house. This activity flies in the face of long-standing City policies and ordinances which prohibit 0-75' land alteration to create a walkout situation. The grading activity to date on the west side of the house has left almost no vegetation intact and 90% of the lakeshore yard in a state of bare unprotected soil. Staff and MCWD have required that hay bates and silt fence be in place during the past few months until proper plans were submitted and approved. r #02-2854 1973 Fagcrncss Point Road November 16,2002 Page 3 7. Undercutting of the lakeshore bank due to high water wave action is to some extent a separate issue from the work that has been done in the lakeshore yard. The bank at the immediate shoreline is very steep, approximately 60% slope (steeper than 2:1) with little vegetation to stabilize it. Without riprap and some method of shoring it up, this bank has a potential to erode and/or slump off in the foreseeable future. Review of Proposed Boulder Wall Landscaping Plan The current topographical survey and boulder wall plans were received on November 12, leaving staff and the City Engineer little opportunity to react to them. The City Engineer’s initial comments are attached as Exhibit L. While the proposed boulder wall design does not include proposed contours, it does define proposed spot elevations at critical points. The boulders will add significant amounts of hardcover to the west 0-75' zone (39.5% per the submitted calculations). The Engineer has asked for a number of additional details to clarify the plan. In pcneral, the proposal appears to continue the applicants’ apparent goal of creating a wide yard that walk;' out from the new door elevation where a narrow, higher yard previously existed. Please review the pre- and post construction photos attachei ?«• LxUibit F. The photos also show to some extent the degree of clearcutting that has resulted from the grading vork in the west 0-75’ yard. The staff sketch (cross section at survey line) attached as Exhibit H depicts the grade changes that have been made. Notwithstanding the obvious need to protect the undercut shoreline from further erosion, the current plan has a number of aspects which require Planning Commission consideration so that the applicant can be directed as to how to proceed. Planning Commission should consider the following in reviewing the proposed boulder wall / landscaping plan: 1. Should the grades be returned to their pre-construction status as part of the boulder wall project? The impacts of this arc that: a) A much narrower exposure of the w'est facade will result. b) An outside bclow-grade landing and steps will be required to entcr/exit the walkout door; a short retaining wall system within a few feet of the house may be necessary to retain walkout window exposures (the new windows are much closer to the ground Ulan the original windows) (see photos and staff sketches). Perhaps Uie windows should be replaced with windows Uiat are not so low to the ground, and the grade brought back up against the house where it was originally. c) Maintenance of the restored steep slopes may require special attention. 2. An option to consider is allowing a narrow walkout corridor at an elevation that will drain to the lake, i.c. the width of a walking path. This would be similar to what existed prior to the grading work, but 2-3 ’ lower in elevation. It should be noted that the 1998 topographic survey does not reflect the walkway Uiat is shown in the photos, nor does it reflect the short retaining wall along the north side of the old walkout level. F #02-2854 1973 Fagcrncss Point Road November H, 2002 Paged 3.Does Planning Commission agree with the general concept of retaining walls in the 0-75' zone for this property, or should grades be changed to minimize the need for walls? Remember that the CMP states in Section #3A, Urban Area Policies for Natural Resource Management, as follows: “2. Retention of natural vegetation will limit the impact of urbanization as visible from the lake. Building heights will be limited to less than the typical tree height. Minimum green bells will be provided with prohibitions against clearcutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on siupes. Retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation.” Preservation of the lakeshore bank as it has long existed may in fact require retaining walls of wme sort, be they wood timbers, boulders, keystone blocks, etc. Other methods for maintaining the shoreline might be possible, including vegetative plantings, for instance. However, more intrusive methods to ensure no future slump of the lakeshore bank would entail a wholesale reshaping of the shore with a gradual slope from the house to the lake incorporating layered fabric. This method would not be in keeping with the goal of preserving the character of the shore. Due to the last minute nature of the submittal, the City Engineer ’s comments have yet to be suitably addressed. While staff would prefer that this shoreline restoration be completed as soon as possible, we are not in a position to recommend approval of this plan as of this writing. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the following: 1.Table the application to allow staff and City Engineer time to consider whether it is an appropriate plan, and to allow staff, applicant and applicant’s consultant to confq- on the plan. 2.Provide direction as to whether the grades in the west lakeshore yard should be restored to match those that existed prior to remodeling in 1998. 3.Provide applicant with direction as to whether the deck on the lake side of the house might be approved if a formal variance request is made. Any forthcoming approvals ultimately should be conditioned on timely removal of the illegal shed in the eastern 0-75* zone, and removal of the gravel parking area in the same zone, returning both to grass. The applicant was ordered to remove the shed in July but to date he has failed to comply. A variance should not be granted for these improvements if applied for, as staff believes there is likely no hardship to support such variances. #0^2S54 1973 Fagcrncn Point Roid November 19,2002 Pages 5. Applicant should be advised to work with the adjacent property owners in reaching a suitable conclusion in terms of ownership claims regarding the “accretions” east of the road. 6. The survey should be revised to verify the encroachment of the concrete stairway into the City right-of-way. Could aiis stairway be angled toward the driveway to avoid this encroachment? 7.BecauM it is likely the necessary woric will not happen until next spring, r^iplicant should be advised to maintain erosion controls on the site as necessary to avoid sedimentation to the lake or to the road. This means adding silt fence along the road and beefing up the silt fencing at the west shoreline. Note that as a remodeling project, no Certificate of Occupancy is required, so that occupancy is not a tool the City can use as an incentive to resolve the outstanding issues. However, continuing work on this project has become disruptive to the neighborhood, and needs to come to a timely closure. AppUcation M Date Received /O-^'^-oz. Amount Paid_OO CITY OF*GRONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION — ^ j Site Address f ^~7 A roftA^ ’kbcx J______ Type of Applicition to be Filed 0_ i) 0^7 ^ 2^no/ /? Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)____________________________________ APPLICANT Name ‘^^Ag.typ A. Address Avic t«J OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Y^Ar^^Ji^________ Address Phone •74»V2«ac-^Z4>2- ______ Phone (work) "7L*, S44- 4z/<r City iflkmmm Zip ss^z.7 Phone (home)_ Phone (work)_ City .. Zip. Date Property Acquired____________________________________ I (do) (do not) also ourii the adjacent parcels of land. FEES^ CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - P\ $ 75.00 For each variance request with 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 $250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or mere K Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75‘ of lakeshore »RDy . (month/year) PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$275.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$375.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals _____Other - see Fee Schedule L REQUIRED SUBMITTALS ____Completed Application Form. ____Describe request in detail. -------Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350', labels and plat map^ (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, -A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. -------Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. -------Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). -------List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). _____Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). — ■ A* addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (II" X 17 = OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember th^t your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete, dnitials of Clerical Staff:______________ Date 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her imowledge.■aucLApplicant's signatiue Date 2.1^ OWNER'S SIGNATURE , The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consu'tants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the Cit> ofTices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all Kheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise Ifae Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. rjLpl<m ^A- % • % ^0O2^ TZ?POA/L/Jp ‘VY \% %% % B % ,e 'Mso \\\\\\ 0 P U)s E =1^ 2 z S o o ADVANCE SURVEYING A ENGINEERING CO. 5300 S. Hwy. No 101 Minnetonka. MN 55345 Phone<*>52»474 TOM Fax (052)474 X267 SURVEY FOR KEVIN & JANET MANLEY^ SURVEYED November 2002 DRAFTED November 5.2002 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Loi 7, Ka|2cniCNv Hennepin County. MinncMita. ami the accanionN to !iaKj lot lyine Kriween the extensions souUieasierly to the shore of Lake Minnetonka of the mmheasierly ami southwesterly lines of said lot and southeasterly of the southeasterly line of Under the Linden Avenue, as dedieated in said plat, which southeasialy line is 40 feet southeasterly, as measured at nghi angles, from the southeasterly line of said lot LIMITATIONS A: NOTES. 1. Showing the length and direction of boundary lines of the legal description you furnished 2. Showing the location of existing improvements we deem'^J important. 3. Setting new monuments or venfying old monaments to mark the comers of the property. 4. While we show proposed improvements to your property, wc are not as familiar with your plans as you a«e nor are we as familiar witli the requirements of governmental agencies as iheir employees arc. W> suggest that you review the survey to confirm that the proposals are w hat you intend and submit the surv ey to such governmental agencies as may have jurisdiction over your project to gam their appmvals if you can STANDARD SYMBOLS K CONVENTIONS Denotes I ID pipe with plastic j’lug bcanng Stale License Number *>235. set. unless otherwise noted l»V V XI L48 23 X944 8! 944.22 i40S5 iS.66 J 47 94S.06X I hereby certify that this plan, specification, repttn or suney was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am u licensed Prolessional Engincx'r and Professional Sut veyor under the law s of the State of Minnesota II Parker P E & P S Nrt. 9235 949 46 >X946 ,4^^ — ^^944 03 X9431. y 3.27 X94I. / :934 20 0^ 2;^ / / UM 132.56 932.29 X97i.72 93VM X GRAPHIC SCALE / / X93I 49 931.610 V/ // & // 92i4A^^ :929.n LllMi Mtmnm»0M40 DWG. NO. 080S05 iDVANCE SURVEYING A ENGINEERING CO, 300S.Hwy.No. 101 MtaoMoolu, MN SS34S Fhoo* (932)474 7904 Fn (932) 4741207 LiRmFOR. KEVIN A JANET MANLEY URVBYBD: M4y.2002 DRAFim Miy22.200l2 •EVISBD: An 4.2002 to idd pnpoMd tcttlalflf 1^ (by otfMn) «JAL raSaUPTION; -— - «l7,F4tinMn,Hcaa^Counly,MiiiMMto,MidlhaMelAoutoMidlotlytagbctwente rtntieM Mttthntotly to tha ibon of Ukt MiiiiwtookaorOw nofOntiMy aia miOlwtiialy Um* of MIM aad MtohoMtorty of Iho ModtoMtoriy Um ofUate too Lbite Avna^ to didicaiid to nid pliy, ftoidlot. IMirATIONS to NOTES: ItBgthioddtractioiiofbouodiiyliiieiofdiskgildcscnpboiiyoii . SlmiQ|ibilocatk«oftxiitiiigiai|»ovciiMatiMdi«B0diinpofittiL . SiCiqgotwimmumfDii or vilifying old momacati ID Biifk the ootncn of ttw IQpOQf. JWha^ ibow propoiid improv w^tt to your propwly, wi iit not u (kmiliaf with «s?4 / Zeo fU-^Huy/y^ i/iAUS. / 7 —^ lAw tourv^ w HKB pmrvBi m Jofiidietion over your pfojoGi to fj^n itieir qipiovils if you ^0. TANDAXD SYMBOLS to CONVENTIONS; •*DaolM 1/2* ID p^Mwitoplutkptug bearing Stale Liccaae Number 9233, ■et.uiitaM V // ^/ •« 3.x #7. <jr y *» y ,57,7 bnoby oettiiy that this plan, ipccificatioii, report or survey was prqmed by me or Oder my direct supervisioa and tost I 'alta a licensed Professional Eoginaer and (oftsdonal Survqfor under toe laws of the Stole of Mim^to. 1^ H. Parker P.E to P.S. No. 9233 GRAPHIC SCALE DWG. NO. 0D050& csc;ct gr ^ ST ^ slU I s I J5ill I M II Ji|i 11 } ! ! -1^ V.’ :. £« mmM- KW3fr!-i J5Jv%'-- ■ •■ wxmy “/* 'i%' -.•atss-ssa > > . ■ ^, • •. # •f••%.-/ /*/ ■ <2ij: -Jr iv .* r *-■*•. ^ ->^'**>irC,. ■ \ I ^ yi I- •5^:.A.-iSii . .Xr :.: mmh. jik . * ifc* - *»T^> . "T. r *. *(H V ^. ;*» • r '^' v»' V->" L' i ^:T.2^.. -^ste^^taliViir '« »• . • ■ - M' i‘-\ . :•>- i —il ’inu?fbr. ^ J!.. .. 1973to9emM8 3JPG IRffiOH 1973 f^jcmm 6JPG ¥Zw^ 1973lagemeM9JPG mr.'sir"' 0j V .*.»/■ X» 1973f89Bmess4JPQ lU'' y * 1/ V - 1973figemess7 JPG N' ' *f i 1973fagerrms JPQ FS 1973 fsgemess 5 JPG ^. j fi;i l« L5.II % » / ^. «. ■ ' -0 ^ .- ^ ' Tv. 1973fagemess8 JPG K^Eiil icLL 1973figem€:s-2JPG f ;^4 '■• 1 # •, - r • k\-*'^* -. • mI \t. w I lW •VI B • •• *5^*^v*^* V •■^*tN - .4r »U.T'. ’ '•'-^ 7} ^ ^ ^ * • " ■ ' ^ V' *"' ' - A ^ .‘T,-^ ' . mr [*.Vt ,:-j .'\rf,Mr..4^. ,' ^' ■ 4-, -i 'yjjL^ "k ■ V ‘WBm 6'3 •M r . * , I * I i • • « *.J . ■* W/U. LtC RAT tic tt: I I - tiHiSt ro ctM? IS) rn CZ] - «»/ WAi. - tew rvM« - DOSI^ fMi. 1 i nOVIDe TREATED PLATCS WHEN LAVED ON COMOtElE 6-V ^-11 l/Z" . y-r f »■-<> !/*• 4 r 4-T —-------J,H . iP-P (C£K it»«« *-4 i/r l' __1 mre 5TCPS M 0 N LCU ^ WFHyS. TO ruvc MEN PC6IEi^ A MAKMM 6^7t fOIRfe PRC5<IF JASV Psr /w A LAftFA. PRC' 45 rr wiL fc nc RWPO«e€JTY or ontFS TO VERTY nt« d/PA-lTCO o ^ORTs ^1 AL RC^UrayCNTd tv A4 - b IKE56 5fE^TEP tCiON, ca^cRcrt wsT ntMti rrc raxONHEf fT3UXHT^>etS or If* PAY UM>9r*^Z 6TRCN&ni (T i/aron, rams may ec wiam RCTAf#«» I^ALL V FtK^^!Nr mw fj comtkiT^i wtt- PQSTK& /:^3NSrRUST^ o nc caoFj^rcRf, eriAu. vr> PY rnp otrur^ all 6iZL6. PtOlS^^NS. QJD/AT^JHS. U^ATIPNS. cr QTKCNTe « eXBfNP COHSTFUOT^ / WLATivc nc rcw ^^ISTRLI^rm b ALL r Wms. me NT^ ^ 6MF9C1 eXSTUEf C^NSmjOT^ 91AL f HELP OTOrrO PY nc ^^KTRA AK> nFN»CP TO nc VtCaOlUcTOfK PRk^R TO fAPR^r^ m ^FTfV P^CN5^4e 6riALL ATT: <V4^ PC Nprrp AS suc^ oi m 6h0P PRAwte afMrrrtP c nc tNEACER^IAS MAPC a66imtk^ OfkXFHEib nr 60M4CS6 PP nc DOSrNP PUPtes AM> ncsc asoattv ARC niAf n«s PtiPte vvas ccsiepcp Ai^ £:^»erRuprEP »4 carcrnMn wrm eooo vcstun c^4smjoTioN FR/^Tvcs nc cmhaactor ptiall tape cxnupRPtMY Ca^catHHb R»CRVAr^ ^ 1 PUPPe putte ccMPtrrm Ar rcw C(H5TK)0^\^ fHJRF. ru.l rc snALL ACRS rp Asofc a msRCNeeury roF nc PRcscKVAr^ or nts mm' d nc *mL mt! nc AR^^fn::^r/tN&frtR P4CPIATELY dr AWr PtSCRCPA. Pcrrco4 ddNSTKLprm PdUMMTS ATT Z^njAL ffLP ddmTKM atSTb NTW PLQgR n AM i/r.^V ' r X GITYoT ORONO Municipal Ollkcs StTMtAddnsS: 27bO Kelley Parkway OrOR9. MN S5356 NailiBi Mdrtsi: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Kevin Manley 10778 Alison Way Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 RE:. Work Without Permits -1973 Fagemess Point Road Dear Mr. Manley: It has come to the attention of this department that you have recently done work on your property at 1973 Fagemess Point Road that is beyond the scope of the permits that have been approved. A shed has been placed on the property which is located where no structures or hardcover is allowed. A deck has been added were no structures or hardcover is allowed. Grading has occurred within the 75* of the lake where no grading is allowed. This letter is to require you to remove the sl.cd and deck from the propeitv and restore the grade to the oripnal elevations. A deadline of August 5,2002 has been established for compliance. If this deadline is not met the City will forward the matter to the City Attorney for legal action. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at my office. Sincerely, Building Official Cc: Kevin Manley 1973 Fagemess Point Road & Wayzata, MN 55391 4179 Ethan Drive Eagan, MN 55123 TUfphoii«(9S2)14. Xl - ' I • Fai («52) 24Mil< IA hi : •■'.M. a -f * mm J„ ‘^■^■'^I" Extras: Fireplace Fireplace Range-Oven Dishwasher Baths Finished Bsm*t«;£ W.O. Bsm't Air Cond... ^J'ao isa Brick or Stone Trim. Drive __________ ' Total Extras: I ( I LAND; » -itdo t I Landscaping __ i i _________* Dimensions Sq. Ft.Rate Value i4 X z>s - T x_«e - VtiA X 02-0-3^^ - 3aea4 * 2A m 2-t*f ® - X - irz<n X ■ Porch:. 4 ■ -144 « 4 \%0 ■ A H ) Extras: Gara9a:-jCr Com* X*JA- M ? ft « wCpO .. X .m ® Totals i anam Total Land $Ja^ Total Replacement Lets Depreciation: PARTIAL Q Value of Improvement i Physcial Functional Economic Net Value Other Buildings Total Value Improvemenu Lind Value Total Estimated Market Value ZSL_% ___________% ___________% S- OQ :H K-lt raxj l)ayer ^Seivices b(»pa iirtm<srit-A'■; wm date ts/ia/tz DATCN SEE raop Aoet OMNE* NAM TAXPAVn NAM/AOm M 1E>117-E5 14 EEEA *?V» J'^WWSS fOlNT SO •MW K PUtOV ETAL •MW K f^MOV 197S EAMIMESS PT DO WAVZATA NN S5S41 wrap ADOS OWIED NAM TAXPAVEI NAM/ASM M 1S-117-ES 14 Etta OA*y ERIOP / CATNV LEE 1S4S PAOEEMSS PT RD WAVZATA m 5SS91 % I // • »w* (■■' en•/ I 4 ^ I “TSiSS^SS”" SE 1E-117-2S 14 EEBZ pacermss point ro ML DELAY E L A DEUV «UXAN L E LORX A DELAY 1S71 PADERMSS POINT RD WAYZATA NN 55S91 M 1E-117-2S 14 ERIE EIESS eagerness POINT RO H S IVES t K P CENPLER (URIS IVES ■ KARLTON 6EHPLER 1E5S EAGERNESS POINT RO / NAYZATA HN 5SSE1 ' report no. PX4S54E1 PAGE S SG ia-117-2S 14 EEEE .•'^'MESS point RD MANLEY DROTHERS CONST INC M^EY SROTNERS const INC *44 LEXIE CT EAGAN HN S51Z3 TOTAL BATCH SEE EEEES nmsnn^ S'nmunM'u^Snm tn S^” ** ™* . * gMglyM •• i .1 • 1 1 •. « • • } 1/1 Bonestroo ffjg Rosene Anderlik & ^ I Associates Engineers & Architects ion«tlroo« ITotcn#, Andtrlili «nd Aisecfalcf. Ific. If Affipmjilv# Action/Cqu«l Opportimtfy fmpfoytr and imployaa Ownad Frincipalt; Olfo G Bonejtroo. Pf • M<»rv*n L Sorv.ti.t. Pf • Glenn ft Cook. PE • Robert G Schunichf. PE • Jerry A Bourdon. PE L Sanlor Comufianlt: Robert W Rotene. PE • Joieph C Anderitk. PE • Richard E Turner. PE • Susan M Eberlin. C PA Assocfaia Princtpali: Keith A Gordon. PE • Robert R Pfe^ferie. PE • Richard W Foster, PE • David O loskota. P£ • Mark A Hanson. PE • Michael T Rautmann. PC • Ted K Field. PE • Kenneth P Anderson. PE • Mark R Rolfs PE • David A Bonestroo. MB A • Sidrtey P Williamson. P£ . L S • Agnes M R-ng, MBA* Allan Rick Scijmidt. PE • ?tK3mas W Peterson. P£ • James R Maland. PE • Miles 6 Jensen. PC • L Phillip Gravel III. PE • danrel J Edgerton. P£ • Ismael M<trtine/. PE • Thomas A. Syfko. PE • Sheldon J Johnson • Dale A Grove. PE • Thomas A. Roushar. PE • Robert J Devery. PE November 15,2002 Offices: St Paul. St Cloud. Rochester and Willmar. MN • Milwvauk.ee. Wl • Chicago. IL \Mbslte: WWW bonestroo com Mr. Mike Gaffron Planning Director City of Orono Post Office Bo.x 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Re; Manluy Property File No. 13902-000 Plat No. 02-0000 Dear Mike: Wc have reviewed the proposed landscaping plan for the Manley property at 1973 Fagemess Point Road. The proposed landsc.aping is being considered to stabilized an eroding shoreline. Wc have the foliowip;^ comments in reganb to engineering matters. • • 1. Tlic plans should include existing and proposed contours. 2. liardcovci calculations should be included with the submittal. Section 1 A ■ i should include the e.xisting grade. A minimutn of two additicna! section: w i'jrin 10-teet of either lot line should be provided. 4. The plans .should identify the boulder sizes and types to be used for the retaining walls. 5. Proposed plant types should be identified on the plans. 6. Elevations should include the proposed natise pl;uitings to review the amount of serrening provided. 7. All tree and plant removals should be ide.mtied on the plans. 8. More detail, including materials, drainage area sened. storm event sizing, etc. should be provided regarding the "First Flush Drain Zone". “ 'I he plans should identify erosion control measures proposed to protect the lake during construction. iO. Pl.'U'.s should be submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Distiicl for review and comment Please eontati me at <651) 604-4863 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours .eiy truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK &. AS.SOCI.\TES. LNC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 233S West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 651-636-4600 • Fax: 65I-636-I3I1 J r' MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 d:30 o’clock p.m. c iJ-f-OJ. copies they would require of the applicants. Gaffron explained tha^^hqwpIicants could obtain certified copies qpheifeasements from abstracts or titles held at the Bremer moved, Rahn seconded, to|:fiedmme^tkqDproval of Application ff02-2852, Jennifer and Troy Koopmpa'^^3 Tonkaview CouH>q^ Patty and Dwight Affeldt - 4765 TonkaviewJ^Mf^Tgranting the subdivision of a Lot Liob'RMrrangement subject to the threp<e6nditions summarized in the staff report dated Novem^bs 18,2002. VOTEtAyes 6, Nays 0. (#9) #02-2854 KEVIN AND JANET MANLEY, 1973 EAGERNESS POINT ROAD, VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND REVIEW OF LANDSCAPING PLAN 8:51 • 9:30 P.M. Kevin and Janet Manley, Applicants, were present, as was Ed Gustafson, their consultant. Gaffron explained that Gustafson Design, Inc., on behalf of Kevin and Janet Manley, owners of 1973 Eagerness Point Road, has applied for approval for a boulder retaining wall system and landscape plan for the westerly lakeshore bank of the property. The proposal requires a conditional use permit and variance for land alteration and hardco^ er within 75’ of the shoreline. This is a newly remodeled home for which no Certificate of Occupancy would be required. Gaffron reported that at least four prior zoning applications accompany this property. A " hardcover setback variance to construct a garage and addition was filed in 1979 without resolution. In 1999, hardcover/ width, and area variances were granted to replace the existing house, although grading in the 0-75’ was denied and the house was never constructed. In 2001, dormer w indows, a deck above the garage, and the existing house was remodeled based on setback variance approval. Finally, in 2002, a setback variance PAGE 19 of 28 --——--- ¥ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 6:30 o ’clock p.m. for roof line expansion was granted; whereas variances for greater than 25% hardcover the 75-^50’ setback and greater than 15% lot coverage for a tunnel deck were denied. Gaffron pointed out that there are a number of unresolved issues related to this property which he enumerated as follows; 1) 8X8 Shed illegally constructed/located near the cast side of the road, within 2* of shoreline 2) Gravel parking area (20’X32’approx.) constructed within 75’ of shoreline along e »st side of road, without City approvals and constituting illegal hardcover. No evidence on file suggests this was formerly a parking area, photos suggest a minimal single grassy parking space at best V. 3) 2002 Surveys show property located on the east side of Fagemess Point Road, which consists of “accretions”. Manley is intending to claim the areas surveyed east of the road via a land title registration (torrens) process. Although staffs understanding is that the neighbors to the immediate north will be disputing this claim. 4) Concrete stairway alongside garage is constructed within the road right-of-way, and may be hazardous for road maintenance 5) Deck (approx. 5X10) constructed on the west side of the house without zoning a^Kval, constituting 0-75’ structure encroachment and excessive hardcover. Deck was not shown on plans or surveys used in approvals for prior zoning applications. Deck first appeared oft a plan used to obtain a permit for basement remodel and deck over garage in February 2002, however, was not park of that plan review. Staff maintains that this deck exists illegally and should be removed. Although a 160 s.f deck existed in the past, it was completely removed prior to or during the remodeling PAGE 20 of 28 iteii iTliiiiil k minutes OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. process, and construction of a new deck has never been addressed. An alternative mi^Fbe to applj^for an after-the>fact variance. The deck constitutes additional hardcover and lot coverage above the previously approved amounts. 6) Grade of the walkout level in the westerly 0-75’ zone has been lowered by approximately 2’, in violation of denials in 1998. This grading work was not covered by any permits issued to date and has never been approved as part of any prior zoning application. This grading was apparently done to create a better walkout situation. Old and new surveys and photos clearly show that the entire west lakeshore yard has been excavated and the west facade of the house has been opened up to a much broader width and height than the original house. GalTron pointed out that the grading activity to date on the west side of the house has left virtually no vegetation intact and 90% of the lakeshore yard in a state of bare unprotected soil. Staff and MCWD have required that hay bales and silt fencing be in place during the past few months until proper plans were submitted and approved. 7) Gaffton noted that undercutting of the lakeshore bank due to high water wave action may be a separate issue from the work that has been done to the lakeshore yard. However, the bank at the immediate shoreline is very steep, 60% slope with little vegetation to stabilize it. Without riprap and some method of shoring it up, this bank has the potential to erode and/or slump off in the foreseeable future. ‘ -.i With regard to the proposed boulder wall and landscaping plan received on November 12, 2002, Gaffron indicated that the City Engineer has had little time to comment, however, * his initial comments were as follows: 1) the plans should include existing and proposed contours 2) hardcover calculations should be included with the submittal 3) Section lA-1 should include the existing grade, along with 10* on either side PAGE 21 of 28 ifirt a - I tlirfitti MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 6:30 o’clock pan. 4) plans should identify the boulder sizes and types to be used for retaining walls 5) prop<2sed plant types should be identified on the plans 6) elevations should include the proposed native plantings to review the amount of screening provided 7) all tree and plant removals should be identified on the plan 8) more detail, including materials, drainage area served, storm event sizing, etc. should be provided regarding the ‘Tirst Flush Drain Zone” 9) plans should identify erosion control measures proposed to protect the lake during construction 10) plans should be submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for review and I comment Gafifron pointed out that the proposed boulders will add a significant amount of hardcover to the west 0-75’ zone (39.5% per the submittal calculation). Gaffron maintained that the current proposal appears to continue the applicants’ apparent goal of creating a wide yard that walks out from the new door elevations where a narrow, higher yard previously existed. He encouraged the Plaiming Commission to review the pre- and post- construction photos, which further show the amount of clearcutting that has resulted from the grading work in the west 0-75’ yard. Gaflfron displayed a sketch depicting the grade changes that had been made. Notwithstanding the obvious need to protect the undercut shoreline from further eros^, Gaffron noted that the current plan has a number of aspects, which require Plarming Commission consideration so as to, direct the applicant how to proceed. Gaffron encouraged the Commission to consider the following three options or questions when reviewing the boulder wall/landscaping plan. 1) Should the grade be returned to their pre-construction status as part of the boulder wall project? Impacts of which would be PAGE 22 of 28 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMIvnSSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. a) a narrower exposure of the west facade ■ ^ b) (mtside below grade landing and steps would be required to enter/exit the walkout door; a short retaining wall system would be necessary to retain walkout window exposures. Or perhaps the windows should be replaced with windows that are not so low to the ground, and the grade be brought back up against the house where it was originally c) maintenance of the restored steep slopes may require special attention 2) An option worth considering would be to allow a narrow walkout corridor at an elevation that would drain to the lake, i.e. the width of the walkway path. This would be similar to what existed prior to the grading work, but 2-3’ lower in elevation. 3) Does the Planning Commission agree with the general concept of retaining walls in the 0-75’ setback zone for this property, or should grades be changed to minimize the need for walls? Gaffron reminded the Commissioners of the CMP, Section #3 A, Urban Area Policies for Natural Resource Management which reads that “Retention of natural vegetation will limit the impact of urbanization as visible fixim the lake”, and further defines natural resource management. Gaffron acknowledged that preservation of the lakeshore bank as it has long existed may in fact require retaining walls of some sort, be they wood timbers, boulders, keystone blocks, etc. However, other methods for maintaining the shoreline might be possible, including vegetative plantings, for example. Gaffron maintained that more intrusive methods^ * * ensure no future slump of the lakeshore bank would entail a wholesale reshaping of the shore with a gradual slope from the house to the lake incorporating layered fabric. He reminded the Commission, that this method would not be in keeping with the goal of preserving the character of the shore. While staff would prefer that the shoreline restoration be completed as soon as possible, Gaffron felt that staff was not in a position to recommend ^proval of this plan due to the PAGE 23 of 28 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. fact that the City Engineer ’s comments had not yet been suitably addressed and suggested that the Planning Commission table the application. Gaffron laid out a series of seven recommendations for the Planning Commission to consider: 1) Gaffron suggested the Planm'ng Commission table the application to allow staff and City Engineer time to consider whether the plan is appropriate, and to allow staff, applicant and the applicant’s consultant time to confer. 2) Commission should provide direction as to whether the grades on the west lakeshore yard should be restored 3) Commission should provide direction as to whether the deck on the lakeside of the house might be approved if a fonnal variance request was made % 4) Gaffron maintained that any forthcoming approvals should be conditioned on timely removal of the illegal shed in the eastern 0-75’ zone, and removal of the gravel parking area in the same zone, returning both to grass. The applicant had been ordered to remove the shed back in July but to date has failed to comply. Gaffron indicated that staffs perspective would be that the variances for these improvements, if applied for, should not be granted as there is likely no hardship to support such variances. 5) Applicant should be advised to work with adjacent property owners in reaching a suitable conclusion in terms of ownership claims regarding Ae “accretions" east of tfi^; road 6) The survey should be revised to verify the encroachment of the concrete stairway into the City right-of-way. Gaffron questioned whether angling the stairway toward the driveway might avoid the encroachment 7) Because it is likely the necessary work would not take place until spring, the applicant it 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETLNG Monday, November IS, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. should be advised to maintain erosion controls on the site as necessary to avoid sedimerUation to the lake or road. Silt fencing along road and adding to silt fencing along the west shoreline With regard to the unresolved issue item #7, Chair Smith asked what constituted the foreseeable future. Gafiron indicated that staff really had no idea when the undercut bank of the shoreline could erode or slump off into the lake, it could be next week, this winter, next spring. He stated that he had no clear answer to when the foreseeable future might happen. Chair Smith asked why the Planning Commission was reviewing this application at this time, in light of the numerous unresolved issues. Gaffion stated that the City published that the public hearing would happen tonight expecting to have a plan well in advance to review, but it was a bit late to call the neighborhood and say don’t show up. There was also the situation here that if there were issues that could be resolved which could direct the applicant towards some resolution prior to January he would like to do so. While thanking City staff for their understanding and polite demeanors, Mr. Manley stated that the process has gone very slowly. He indicated that he first submitted his applications in April 2002 after purchasing the property in February and did not get return phone calls regarding his application for several months. He maintained that he hadn’t removed^y soil since purchasing the property and was only responsible for what’s happened since April. He maintained that the only thing he’s done wrong was to construct the 8X8 shed '* across the street, which could be removed. He had already ripped out the illegal retaining walls built by a previous owner. Manley reiterated that he has had little luck getting the City to tell him what he can and cannot do on the property. Chair Smith reminded the applicant that, as the current owner, ultimately, he may be held PAGE 25 of 28 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETDIG Monday, November 18,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. responsible. Rahn asked whether the previous owner had been the applicant ’s brother. Manley confirmed Rahn’s statement, however, did not see any significance in that fact. Manley continued, stating that the City Council had given him permission to lower the lower level and construct two decks - one on the front and one on the back. As far as the sidewalk, Manley could not understand what the problem was with his stairway as opposed to others in the neighborhood. With regard to the parking lot area, Manley asserted that the gravel parking area had alwa}^ been there, and that neighbors could attest to this. He indicated that the City Council had already stated they would give him approval for a parking lot across the street as soon as he got it in his name. As a building contractor, Manley reiterated that he could not understand the delay and was concerned about getting a decision made after six months of waiting. He asked to be allowed to move forward and be given direction. Chair Smith asked if the applicant had shared these concerns with staff. Manley stated that he had absolutely shared his concerns and had received a return call finally after approximately ten attempts. He suggested they go down the unresolved list one by one. * First, the shed, Manley stated that he would remove the shed only after the City agrees to give him some sort of resolution. While he understood that he had been asked to remove it" several months ago, he maintained that he had asked the City to do many things six months ago. With regard to the gravel parking area, Manley reiterated that the paridng area was not new, it had always been there. All of the neighbors have and use parking areas across the PAGE 26 of 28 )rothcr. ;nificance in that fact. nnission to lower the the back. As far as the th his stairway as opposed i, Manley asserted that could attest to this. He t him iq;)proval for a i building contractor, concerned about getting a ed to move forward and ti stiff. I received a return call own the unresolved list y after the City agrees to id been asked to remove it‘ do many things six months e parking area was not t parking areas across the MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 6:30 o ’clock p.m. road and theirs may have been overgrown. Again, Manley stated that the City Council and Weinberger had given him the indication that they would approve his parking area once it was put in his name. Having been before the Commission in February asking for additional hardcover, Rahn asked the applicant whether the parking area was included in any of the hardcover calculations. Since the hardcover figures had been looked at in such detail in order to allow construction of the deck, he wondered where this additional hardcover had come from. Manley stated that the parking area had not been used in any hardcover calculations in February since it was not in his name at that time. Rahn asked if he had built the shed on the property, even though it was not his. Manley indicated he had done so. Janet Manley stated that no one owns the property and they are in the process, as is one other neighbor, of claiming it through the state. Gaffron indicated that property owners can take action to lay claim to property, then it goes through a process where people can respond to their claim, and the Hennepin Count> courts decide who owns it. . ^ •t Manley stated that the property claim process was not part of the proposal. Manley maintained that the only reason they were before the City today was because they had the City come out and recommend Ed Gustafson to design a layout for the shoreline. Manley stated that this proposal is what the City and Ed came up with. Gaffron disagreed, inteijecting that the City, at the applicant’s request, recommended PAGE 27 of 28 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING CO>fMlSSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. someone who could design a plan for him. Gaffron stated that the City supplied him with a name,jiothing further, they did not suggest to Ed he design a boulder wall, they merely asked him to give the City a plan that might work. The City got a plan, we are starting to react to it, and we are now asking the Planning Commission whether this is a plan that will function aesthetically, and fiom an engineering standpoint, if this is a plan they could support. Ed Gustafson agreed that there were many issues to resolve and that he had been working with MCWD and the City to design a plan. He pointed out that the plan suggests boulders as a technique of dealing with the erosion problem. Manley explained that, previously, there was no riprap along the shoreline and when he approached the City to obtain a permit to restore the shoreline, the City told him to get a permit from the MCWD. He indicated that they had obtained the MCWD permit and began restoration using riprap until the City told them to stop and obtain a permit from them as well. Since that time, several staff members have met at the site and advised Gustafson and the applicant on the design plan. Manley indicated that he had assumed the entire project would be done this year, as he was sure the neighbors had hoped as well. He asked whether they should continue to go through each item. Chair Smith agreed that they could attempt to work through each item, however, she was uncertain how much could be decided this evening because so many of the issues required further discussion with staff.• Based on the applicant’s ear lier acknowledgement. Chair Smith noted that the shed would be removed. With regard to the gravel parking area, Hawn stated that it should not be included in the discussion since it was not his property. PAGE 28 of 28 ;1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, Novcnd>er 18,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. Gaffron shared photos from 1998 depicting the gravel parking area at the time, a much ** smallerjrea. Chair Smith stated that she was personally familiar with the property and paricing area as it looked in 1998. She agreed that they should not include this in the discussion until the County decides whether to combine the parcels. With regard to the stairway. Chair Smith asked for opinions on the concrete stairway within the right-of-way. a GafBron stated that he could not find the stairway on a site plan and was unsure whether it was approved. Hawn asked whether this could be put on a to do list to investigate whether the stairway was built as a specified part of an approval. Next, Chair Smith asked about the deck built on the west side of the house, apparently built without plans or surveys. Hawn stated that Mr. Manley claims to have a stamped plan, but it was not permitted as a part of this process. Manley reiterated that he has a permit for two decks, and tlje City should have recor£^ these as well. Gaffron stated that staff believes that there hasn ’t been a permit issued for a deck on the west lakeside of the residence. Chair Smith suggested this item be put on the to do list for both parties to further investigate. PAGE 29 of 28 n K I »nNUTESOFTHE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 6:30 o ’clock p.m. Rahn abated that this would be easy enough to confirm after the City has looked at the permit record description. Manley stated that if the City were willing to allow him to keep his small west lakeside deck he would reapply through the variance process. Hawn stated that the west lakeside deck would fall within the 0-75 ’ setback, which if he came before the Commission for approval, she suspected they would be reluctant to grant She was hopeful that things could be determined based on previous applications. Manley reminded the Conunission that the home possessed a huge deck on the lakeside of the residence before his remodel. Manley stated that one way or another he would like the Commission to give him a decision this evening. He asked them to make a decision based on what was in fi^ont of them in order for him to move on to City Council. Chair Smith stated that the Plaiuiing Commission could, indeed, act on what was in front of them, and not table the application if the applicant so chose, although she was hesitant to do so. Bremer suggested the Commission finish their discussion 8p that the City Council, a&ast, would have enough information and direction from this evening to base their decision. Once again, Rahn was hesitant to discuss specific hardcover issues without concrete numbers. Manley suted that he wished for riprap to restore the shoreline and a 3:1 slope to provide a mere path to his boat. He thanked City staff and consultant Gustaflron for their helpfulness. PAGE 30 ef 21 aiimu ,1 .■) MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COM^HSSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. Rahn iciterated that the City would either locate a permit for the deck or not, and if not, the applicant would have to apply for an after*the-fact variance. With regard to the unresolved item #6, Hawn stated that, while she believed the applicant had not committed this himself, she believed this to be the most offensive of the violations. Manley reiterated that he had not changed the plan or grade, and in fact, his original proposal stepped up the grade. Hawn wrestled with the fact that in 1999 the application to grade in the 0-75’ setback was denied, and here today, it has been done anyway. Manley, again, maintained that it was a previous owner who had committed this wrong. Bremer pointed out that, it is only at times when homeowners come before the Plaiming Commission, that the City is given the opportunity to correct these past indiscretions. Rahn stated that the shoreline and riprap restoration projects are different issues than the grading. To be consistent, Rahn felt the grade should be restored to its original state. Gaffron stated that Weinberger had believed the grading was done illegally and not according to code when the property was purchased. i Manley reiterated that he never did any of the grading and questioned why the City allowed him to put in his windows and door and step down basement if they had a problem with it. Rahn stated that the Plarming Commission was attempting to give the applicant the guidelines he so desired. PAGE 31 of 28 minutes OF THE ORONO PLANNING COiMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. Chair South stated that it seemed to be the consensus of the Commission that the shoreline be restored and, hopefully, there were some creative measures that could accomplish this without some major reconstruction. She inquired whether the applicant should be given further direction with regard to maintaining the erosion control throughout the winter, item #7. While erosion control was necessary, Gaflron could not predict when the shoreline might fail. Gaffron had no further recommendations other than to ensure the erosion control measures stay in place. Hawn asked if the Plaiming Commission could approve the riprap portion of the application if something other than boulder walls were proposed. GafBx>n indicated that the City does not, technically, get involved in the riprap part of th( application, however, the riprap becomes an integral part of the whole proposal. He indicated that he would check with the City Engineer to see if he thought the applicant could do riprap without doing the rest of the work that ’s needed out there. Although separate issues, these all fit together as part of the system that goes together. Manley agreed that, likely, the entire issue would need to be resolved together. He asked, once again, for someone to tell him what he could do. Rahn stated that he could not vote on a motion without kno\\ing hardcover figures. Gustafson stated that the hardcover figures were included on one of the survey proposals and that he intentionally left off the deck in the calculations due to the controversy around It. Manley asked what the City considered an acceptable slope, 3:1 or 2 1/2:1. PAGE 32 of 28 ii MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 6:30 o’clock pan. GaffrooLindicated that he would not identify what the right slope would be for this application before spending considerable more time with the Engineer. He stated that, now that the City has a plan to work from, they could move forward in addressing its points. Manley asked whether they could put a deadline on the discussion. Bremer stated that the next City Council meeting would be December 9,2002, if they could address the concerns by then. % Manley repeated his frustration over the lengthy process. Chair Smith j^ted that she had difficulty believing that this many issues could get resolved by December 9. She was hesitant to move this forward to Council with so many open ended issues. Hawn reminded the Commission that the applicant had asked them to vote up or down on this incomplete application tonight. Rahn stated that, speciflcally, U6 would need to be changed a great deal if they wanted City Council support. Chair Smith cautioned the i^)plicant that the City Council i^ght send the application^ck to the Planning Commission for fruther discussion. Bremer stated that the applicant would not be losing any time by moving forward to Council at this time, since the Planning Commission w’ould not be meeting again until mid January. Gafifron questioned whether the work would begin during the winter months even if the PAGE 33 of2l MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18,2002 0:30o*dockp.m. applicant were to get approval. Gustafson indicated that it would depend what work and which contractor the applicants chose to do the woric. He believed a reputable contractor with the right equipment, who knew how to use boulders could begin sooner than later. Manley inquired whether he should give the City Council two options to review, one with boulders and one with slope. Council Member Murphy usked staff what they viewed as most important, getting the * riprap on the shoreline first or getting the outstanding back issues resolved so that the shoreline could be restored. Although not an engineer, Gaffiron believed that in order to do the riprap, potentially, additional damage would be done to the shore that you need to be working on immediately following that. One would need to be working fi’om the bottom up sequentially. He didn’t believe they could just do the riprap without causing impacts that would need to be immediately followed up on elsewhere. Gary , 1965 Fagemess Point Road, stated that he believed that the riprap could be done from the shoreline or off of a barge firom the water. He indicated they could do the work from above, however, they would totally destroy the shoreline with a bobcat. Gustafson pointed out that he had reviewed the site with a contractor who believed the work could be done firom the ice, or if the right person were to do the job, the same could be accomplished with a backhoe fi^om above. Bill Delay, 19 Fagemess Point Road, commended the applicant for his beautiful building and for keeping the neighbors in the loop. He did, however, have issue with the gravel parking area as it encroaches over his property. He noted that the 8X8 shed impedes his PAGE 34 of 28 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COiVLVHSSION MEETING Monday, November IS, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. views of the lake and should be removed also. Mr. Delay felt the deck over the garage ^as done W£ll, but voiced concern over the steep grade created by the proposed boulder wall. As a parent, he felt this could be hazardous. Chair Smith asked the applicant, once again, if he would rather Uie Commission table or vote on the application. Manley asked for a vote. Hawn moved, Fritzler seconded, to deny Application #02-2854, Kevin Manley, application to increase hardcover and put hardcover in the 0-75* setback to construct a combination boulder wall and riprap system for the purpose of containing the bank. VOTE; Ayes 6, Navs 0. * • • * « (#11) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS OF OCTOBER 28, 2002 AND NOVEMBER 12,2002 October 28 - Fritzler reported that the Hope Chest for Breast Cancer application was approved. As of the October 28 meeting the Professional Properties of Orono wetland delineation issue was unresolved. November 12, 2002 Chair Smith and Gaffron reported tjiat the MCWD had ruled tot the wetland on the proposed Professional Properties of Orono site was an incidental wetland and did not require additional mitigation. Council liaison Muiphy reported that Council representatives had approached MnDOT about the construction of the trail within their right-of-way casement. Although the City feels this to be the best location, MnDOT has its reservations, however, agreed in principal that if the highway were returned to the County, they would likely support this location. Muiphy indicated that the City would still require easements from the applicants as a back PAGE 35 of 28 mmm Gcaeral Concept PUn Approval Date: Au|uit 26,2002 (Resolution IM052) Concept Plan Approval Efrcctive Period: August 26,2002 - Fdiruary 26,2003 Final Development Plan Approval Application Date: September IS, 2002 Initial 60-Day Deadline: November 17,2002 Eitended Deadline per Applicant ’s 10-28-02 Letter: December 10,2002 DfC 9 2002 Cl I Y UF ORO/VO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: December 6,2002 Item No.; ^ | 0 Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name:Michaei P. Gaffron Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #02-2789/02-2840 Dahlstrom Development, LLC, “2550" Wayzata Blvd - Proposed Residential Development - “Stonebay ” 1. General Development Plan Approval 2. Preliminary Plat Approval 3. Rezoning List of Attachments A - Draft Resolution for Prelim. Plat Approval and General Development Plan Approval B - Ordinance for Rezoning C - Staff Memo 12/4/02 re; Fees D—LoteshPlan Sets reeeired-|^/3/02* (\i^ ~rt>o ft'fr rt> Applicants have requested that Council grant the above noted approvals at your December 9 meeting. They have also requested final plat approval for Phase I of the development; however, the potential for additional changes as described below suggests that may not be prudent, and therefore stafThas not prepared final plat documents. Unresolved Issues As of this writing, there are a few unresolved issues, relating primarily to engineering matters and stormwater management. 1.The MC WD has yet to grant stormwater/drainage plan approval. Neither applicants nor staff can predict with any certainty whether MCWD approval will result in changes that impact the plat layout, such as whether they will accept the proposed wetland impacts and mitigation plan. Per the Concept Plan Approval resolution. General Development Plan approval will not be granted until MCWD permits are in hand... M2-2789/02-2840 December 6,2002 Page 2 2.Th<fCity Engineer has just a few days ago received the drainage calculations, and he and Greg Gappa have done an extensive review of the stormwater management aspects of the proposed development, and have been reviewing this issue with Chris Cunnington, applicant’s engineer. An unresolved issue is that the City is asking for an overland outlet to accommodate back to back superstorm events, rather than relying on culverts which could be plugged and cause potential flooding of walkout levels in this development as well as affecting homes in Willow View, the Middle School, and City offices. An option currently under consideration is creation of an overflow outlet swale to the north between Willow View and the school property. 3.The most recently received Plan Sheets have not been completely reviewed by staff due to their submittal just a few days ago, and arc still potentially subject to revision. I would not at this point say that we have a “Final” final set of plans to adopt, although we may be very close, pending any changes that might be needed due to MCWD action. Fees Council reviewed the Developer’s fee proposals on December 5. Council should take final action on each of the fees as noted in the staff memo of December 4. Staff recommends: 1.No per-unit reduction of Park Fees, but allow crcdit/rcbatc for construction of the public trails along Willow Drive and Highway 12 (but not for sidewalks). 2. 3. 4. 5. No reduction nor calculation method revision for Sewer and Water connection charges. No change to method of SW&DT Fee calculation. Credit allowed for upsizing of water main. Credit allowed for the portion of storm sewer facilities constructed across Outlet D for the sole purpose of serving the properties to the west. ‘ *,4 6.Partial credit for regional pond based on the difference in capacity required for the development and capacity required for regional purposes. M2-2789/02-2840 December 6,2002 Pages Staff Recommendation Because the Developer has requested final General Development Plan Approval prior to MCWD approvals, which suggests final action may be premature. Council may wish to consider these options. Note that as drafted, the resolution contains statements which will not be valid until future actions take place or until final plans are found acceptable. Staff would be most comfortable with Option 3, although that may not meet with the wishes of the Developer. Option 1.Adopt the Draft Resolution and Rezoning Ordinance subject to MCWD approval, and if significant changes result from MCWD action, it would come back to Council for further review. Staff would fill in the blanks as engineering issues get resolved and final plans are found acceptable. Option 2.Conceptually approve the Draft Resolution and Rezoning Ordinance, with final adoption of withheld until MCWD approval is gained by applicant and engineering issues have been completely addressed. Option 3.Table formal action until MCWD approval is complete and all issues have been addressed. Options 2 and 3 require further extension of the 60^ay review period, which currently only extends to December 10,2002. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Take formal action regarding the fees issue. Take formal action regarding one of the 3 options of action noted above. 4 Third Draft 12/i/02 A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL AND GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 4 FOR DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT, LLC - FILE #2789/2840 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter “City Council”) has adopted land development regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, Dahlstrom Development, LLC (“the Developer”) has an interest in property located at ‘2550 ’ Wayzata Boulevard and legally described as: Outlot B, Willow Properties Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except Parcel 201 and 201a Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 27-57. (hereinafter the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application by the Dev<;Ieper for development by the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process of the Property; and WHEREAS, on August 26, 2002 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 4852 granting General Concept Plan Approval for the proposed development, which approval included the following elements: 1.Rezoning of the portion of the Property north of Kelley Parkway from RR-1B Single Family Rural Residential District to RPUD Residential Plaimed Unit Development District for construction of 167 residential multi-family dwelling units on a portion of the site comprising approximately 41 acres. Page 1 of 17 A r-'-f i !■ ' f'l 2. 3. Creation of two commercial outlots on the remaining 10 acres to be rezoned and developed at a later date. As part of the residential development, construction of Kelley Parkway as well as construction of municipal sewer, water, and storm sewer systems to serve the proposed development; and WHEREAS, the applicants have submitted a Preliminary Plat and General Development Plan for approval by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Orono Planning Commission on November 19,2002 pursuant to public notification held a public hearing on the application for Preliminary Plat and General Development Plan approval, at which time all persons wishing to comment on the project were provided the opportunity to comment; and WHEREAS, on November 19,2002 the Orono Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend ^proval of the General Development Plan, including the proposed rezoning to RPUD, the various elements of the Plan, preliminary plat approval for the entire plat, and final plat approval for the portion of the Plan designated as Phase 1, subject to a number of conditions; and WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings regarding the General Development Plan: 1. 2. The De- eloper has provided a Development Plan for the residential portion of the development that substantially conforms to the Development Standards for Attached and Multi-Family Dwelling Structures for the RPUD District per Zoning Code Section 10.33, Subd. 5(G) and has demonstrated to the satisfaction of.the City Council that alt RPUD standards have been met or will be met, and has demonstrated where such standards are not met, and has satisfied the City Council that non- compliance with said standards is remedied in a maiuier acceptable to the Council. The Developer has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Council that the RPUD standard of 10% of the gross project area has been set aside for private recreational uses. The Developer has ag^ to install a Tot Lot as one of the private park & recreation amenities of the development. Page 2 of 17 10 acres to be rezoned and Kelley Pa^k^^ ay as well as ewer systems to serve the iminary Plat and General ember 19,2002 pursuant to :liminary Plat and General mment on the project were ig Commission voted 7-0 to )roposed rezoning to RPUD, : plat, and final plat approval of conditions; and tdings regarding the General the residential portion of the iment Standards for Attached 9 District per Zoning Code the satisfaction of..the City be met. and has demonstrated the City Council that non- er acceptable to the Council. f the Council that the RPUD aside for private recreational as one of the private park & 5. 6. 7. The Developer has provided a landscaping plan and a proposed ‘streetscape for Kelley Parkway that has been reviewed by the City ’s consulting landscape planner and by the City Council and has been found to substantially meet all of the requirements of the RPUD District and is satisfactory to the City Council subject to conditions to be specified in this resolution. The landscaping plan provides for a “parkway” character through substantial landscaping along Kelley Parkw ay. The Orono Fire Marshal has reviewed the General Development Plan and finds it generally in accordance with applicable codes and standards. The Plans include a provision for emergency vehicle access between Kelley Parkway and East Lane. The Developer has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Cuy Council that the development as proposed is in compliance with all the wetland protection and mitigation requirements of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as administrator of the WCA regulations on Orono’s behalf. The Developer has provided market study information confimiing that the proposed residential units at the proposed pricepoints are marketable and will provide housing options generally needed within the Orono area. The Developer has submitted a Preliminar>' Plat providing for the creation of Lots, Outlets, drainage and utility easements and public right-of-way dedications generally in conformance with the approved General Concept Plan. * WHEREAS, the Applicants have agreed to execute Planned Unit Development No. 4 Agreement providing for the installation of certain public and private improvements as a condition of General Development Plan approval, which agreement will additionally documents the general and detailed conditions for use and development of the Property, and WHEREAS, the Developer has completed or has agreed to complete all other requirements of the Zoning Code and related Ordinances of the City including but not limited to: 1. Provision of evidence to the City of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) permit approval for the grading and stormwater management facilities plan for the development of the Property. Page 3 of 17 2. 2. 3. 4. Provision of evidence to the City of Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) drainage permit approval for construction of the regional storm water pond within Mn/DOT right-of-way, and of Mn/DOT permit approval for construction of public street, street amenities and utilities within the Mn/DOT right-of-way. Payment to the City of Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fees for the development of the Property in the amount of $_____. Payment of Sewer and Water Connection Charges in the amount of S________. Payment of Park Dedication Fee in the amount of $ WHEREAS, the City Council, City staff and consultants have reviewed the plans for this PUD application and hereby specify approval of each attached plan and identify them as part of the ofTicial record for Planned Unit Development No. 4: 1. 2. 3. etc. ., subject to_ ., subject to, ., subject to. (Final plan sets are not approved as of 12/9/02; all approved Sheets will appear in this list) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based on the findings of Resolution No. 4852 and on the findings enumerated in this Resolution, the City Council of the City of Orono docs hereby grant Preliminary Plat Approval and General Development Plan Approval for Planned Unit Development No. 4, subject to the following conditions: 1. General Development Plan Approval is granted subject to conditions established within Resolution 4852 and enumerated herein, and subject to the conditions to be established within the Planned Unit Development No. 4 Agreement and other pertinent documents. Page 4 of 17 2. RPUD Development Standards and General Conditions. a) The total number of residential dwelling units shall be 162 units including 62 LoHs units, 47 two-story townhomes and 53 rambler townhomes, as configured on the approv^ site plan, Sheet ____. b) 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. Public street lighting along Kelley Parkway shall be installed and maintained by the utility company through a standard agreement between the City and the appropriate public utility company. Interior private street I'^uing shall be at a low level consistent with the * surrounding rural residential character while providing the necessary level of security. Such lighting shall be of a style, number, height and location approved by the City Council. Interior street lighting shall be maintained by the homeowners association. c) Final decisions by the Developer regarding colors, types and qualities of building materials shall be subject to City staff approval, and shall be in conformity with the sample colors, t)pes and qualities documented by reference in Exhibit __. Final building designs shall be reviewed by the Planning Director prior to issuance of building permits to ensure compliance with the architectural standards of the RPUD District. d) The separation distances between townhome buildings are acceptable as shown on the approved General Development Plan, with the majority being at least 15' at the nearest point with greater separation as the building walls diverge. Within each Phase of development, ifany changes to plans result in separations less than 15', such plans shall be subject to review by the City Council and Developer shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Council that suitable architectural styling, building orientation or other methods will be used to mitigate the lack of separation. e) Any revisions to building separations, hydrant locations or fixture sizes/types deemed necessary by the Orono Fire Marshal as required for fire-protection purposes shall be made by the Developer. Page 5 of 17 'r ij-i- fi) i) The bcmi along the Public Works site cast boundary may be extended eastward as shown on Sheet_____to assist in establishing a buffer to the LoAs; however, any buffer walls, plantings or other improvements shall be located on the LoAs site as shown in the approved General Development Plan. The Developer shall take extraordinary elTorts to minimi/.e impacts on existing vegetation and enhance screening and buffering in the area northwest of the LoAs west building. The City’s Public Works operation may be a 24- hour operation dependent on weather and other emergency situations. A disclosure regarding the LoAs buildings proximity to Public Works shall be required of LoAs buyers to help limit the expected complaints about City activity and noise from the Public Works site. All residential buildings including the LoAs shall have pitched roofs as shown on Sheet___ to maintain a rural residential character. Roofs for the LoAs units shall be low-pitched rather than steeply pitched to decrease the impact of excess building height. Developer shall submit proposed conditions for development of the commercial outlols to maintain the natural amenity values of the pond and protect the perimeter of the pond from encroachment by commercial development. Final landscaping plans shall be subject to the recommendations of Wallace Case as enumerated in his letter dated 11/6/02. The pertinent Homeowners Assoeiation(s) shall be responsible for pennanent maintenance of landscaping per the Landscaping provisions of the RPUD District. As a condition of the PUD No. 4 Agreement, Developer shall provide landscape pcrfomiance security as required in the RPUD District standards. j) The follow ing variance to the RPUD development standards is hereby granted: Building height variance for LoAs building from 30' to 38 ’ defined height (measured from final average grade at high side). P«ge6of 17 V-’ dsiM 3. Transportation Kelley Parkway shall be platted and constructed by the Developer as a t\\ o- lane public roadway with appropriate turn lanes per the design and specifications as shown on the approved design, Sheets___. Appropriate trafTic control and parking signage on Kelley Parkway shall be installed by the developer subject to the City Engineer’s review and approval. Developer shall also be responsible for construction of public road improvements to Willow Drive as shown on Sheet___. The City Engineer shall inspect all road construction at the appropnate stages to ensure specifications are met. The Developer shall provide a 12-month warranty on all street construction including utilities, sidewalks, landscaping and lighting. On-street parking will be allowed on the north side of Kelley Parkway only, within the 8' parallel parking ‘bump-outs’ as indicated on the approved Plans. The final road design shall ensure ease of maintenance for snow removal. The interior street system and sidewalks within the common areas of the residential portion of the development shall be privately owned and maintained, with the exception of the Public Trail located along Willow Drive. The appropriate City standard private street and utility easements shall be required over all streets and utilities within the common areas. Maintenance of the private streets and sidewalks will be the responsibilityofthe Developer or an incorporated homeowners association. The interior road system shall be constructed per the specifications as shown on the approved plans. Sheets______. Appropriate traffic contrQr«ignage for all interior streets shall be installed by the developer subject to approval of the City Engineer. There shall be no parking on interior streets except at designated parking areas. The emergency-use-only connection between the East Lane cul-de-sac loop and Kelley Parkway shall be constructed, maintained and signed to ensure emergency veUcle access is maintained in all seasons while physically prohibiting general traffic use. Final design shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer. An 8' wide bituminous surfaced public pedestrian/bicycle trail Khali be Page 7 of 17 g) i) j) constructed by the Developer within Outlets B, C, F and G in a curvilinear fashion as depicted on Sheet C2.1 . This trail system shall be constructed in conjunction with Phase I of the development. An 8' wide bituminous surfaced public pedcstrian^icycle trail shall be constructed by the Developer within Outlot A along Willow Drive in conjunction with Phase 1 of the development to ensure that tiic area designated for trail use is not commercially developed. An 8' wide bituminous surfaced public pedestrian/bicyclc trail shall be constructed by the Developer or his successors in ownership within Outlots A and D along Highway 12. connecting to the trails constructed in Phase I. The construction of the portions of said public trail adjacent to Highway 12 within Outlots A and D ma> be deferred until a determination is made whether the Highway 12 boulevard area will be converted from a rural section to an urban section and/or until Outlots A or D are developed for commercial uses.. The trails along Highway 12 maybe located within the Highway 12 right-of- way if a 20' separation is maintained from the traveled roadway of Highway 12,and ifMnDOT approval is obtained. Portions of the trail maybe located within the right of way of Kelley Parkway north of the stormwater pond. The trail shall provide a continuous connection along Highway 12 from the cast boundary of the property to the west boundary; connection across the stormwater pond area may be along Highway 12 or may jog up to and back down from Kelley Parkway along the stormwater pond perimeter. The City shall be responsible for maintenance of the public trails upon their completion and acceptance. Public easements including a suitable shoulder width shall be granted over all the public trails not located in dedicated right- of-way. Sidewalks along both sides of Kelley Parkway shall be provided by the developer as depicted on Sheets_______, including 5' concrete sidewalks separated from back of curb by 8’ to accommodate deciduous trees and landscaping in boulevard. All trails and sidewalks, whether public or private, shall be installed concurrently with the residential development phases and prior to occupancy of residential units. Page 8 of 17 I) Maintenanceresponsibilityforthesidewalkswithintheright-of-wayofKelley Parkway shall be the responsibility of the Developer or the homeowTicrs or commercial maintenance association(s). 4. Utilities and Stormwater Management a) Developer shall construct municipal sewer and water lines as shown on Sheets ______, subject to final design detail approval by the City Engineer. The Developer shall provide a 12-month warranty on all utility construction. b) The City will own and maintain the sanitary sewer and water mains within the development. The City will inspect these systems during their construction to ensure proper installation. Developer shall grant Drainage and Utility Easements to the City of Orono over all municipal sewer and water lines and facilities, including the rights of way necessary to maintain sanic. c) Applicants' architect shall submit final 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. d) Developer shall construct stormwater management facilities as shown on the approved plans. Sheets______. The stormwater drainage system will be owned and maintained by the homeow ners association. c) Developer shall constract a regional stormwater pond within Outlots B and C and within the MnDOT right-of-way per the designs and specifications as shown on Sheets______, subject to Developer obtaining the appropriate permits for such use from MnDOT. Tire regional pond is intended to accommodate stormwater runoff from the development as well as for the entire upstream watershed. The regional stormwater pond shall be maintained by tnc Developer during all phases of development, after which the Stonebay Community Association shall be responsible for maintenance. In the event that MnDOT approvals require that the City be responsible for maintenance of the regional stormwater pond, the aforesaid As^iation shall accept the financial obligation for such maintenance. 0 Developer shall provide record plan sets for all utility construction in a timely manner. Page 9 of 17 5. Wetland Impacts Orono ’s 26* wetland setback requirement (Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subd. 8) which disallows filling, grading, dredging, excavation, hardcover, temporary or permanent structures, obstructions, septic systems, wells or other construction, is in effect on the site. Final grading and site plans, Sheets ___♦ indicate those locations where grading or filling within the 26' setback is necessary to accomplish the Plan. A variance to Section 10.55, Subd.8 is hereby granted to allow the minimal filling within the 26' wetland setbacks where buildings abut the 26' setback line as shown on the approved plan sheets. However, no encro?chment of buildings, retaining walls or other constructed features into the 26' w'etland setback will be allowed. TheCity specifically acknowledges that____acres ofCity protected wetland are to be filled or otherwise impacted as part of the project. The Developer shall comply with all requirements of the MCWD in regards to mitigation and protection of wetlands on the site. 6. Grading, Erosion Control a)Erosion control shall adhere to "Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas". The Developer shall comply with all conditions enumerated in the Erosion Control memo by Bonestroo & Associates dated October 3,2002. All erosion «u)ntrol measures as required by the City and the MCWD shall be in place, ins|.<ected and approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing excavation on the site. All such erosion control measures shall be maintained in working order prior to, during and after the project until released by the City Engineer, subject to weekly inspection or as necessary until the site is revegetated. Page lOof 17 1 'I 7. 8) Due to the Phasing of the project and the resultant lengthy period of time the site will be under construction, the Developer shall as a condition of the PUD No. 4 Agreement provide an escrow (amount to be determined) to cover the inspection costs of ongoing erosion control inspections. The Developer shall obtain all necessary permits (including but not limited to NPDES, MCWD and MnDOT permits) from the appropriate agencies for erosion control prior to commencing excavation on the site. In the event that the Developer ’s NPDES permit requires a Best Management Practices Plan, such plan shall be submitted to the City prior to commencing excavation on the site. The construction limits shall be clearly marked with adequate fencing to prevent any construction damage or disturbance of any trees and vegetation outside of the construction limits area Prior to commencing excavation on the site. Developer shall identify trees to be preserved, shall mark them on a site plan, and shall take extraordinary measures such as fencing, signage, etc. to ensure they arc not disturbed. Other General Conditions Monument signs as depicted in Sheets___may be provided by the developer at each entrance to the RPUD development site. The signage shall be limited to a development name and/or logo and street address on the monument signs. Any changes to the final design/matcriids of monument signage from those shown on the approved plans shall be subject to approval by the City Council. Any design, material or specification revisions from the approved plans involving streets, utilities, storm sewer facilities, grading or the regional pond shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to implementation of such changes. Any design, material or specification revisions from the approved plans involving dwelling unit design guidelines, architectural styles, building location, site landscaping, and other approved/required site amenities, shall be subject to approval by the Planning Director and may be subject to review and ^roval by the City Council at the discretion of the Planning Director. Page 11 of 17 8. rL Prior to release of the final plat. City Attorney shall review and approve the covenants and documents describing the creation, structure, rights, obligations and responsibilities of the various homeowners associations serving the development. The covenants shall include conditions of this resolution that h-'ve not been met as of the release of the plat, provide common access easements for each lot that receives access from a shared private street or drivew ay, and shall provide for maintenance of all common areas. Preliminary Plat Approval. Preliminary plat approval is granted for the entire plat. Final plat approval will be granted for each Phase of the residential development upon submittal and approval of the required final plat documents for that Phase, including final engineering plans for all improvements. The required submittals for Final Plat Approval are as follows: Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City’s records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200 ’. Drawing to include: I.Lot lines platted per preliminary plat drawing by Land form, Sheet C5.1, dated September 18,2002. II.Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" over the common lots within each Phase ofthe residential development as the Phases are brought forward for final platting. * » • III.Dedication of 10 ’ drainage and utility easements along all perimeter lot lines of Outlots A and D. Dedication of a 30* drainage and utility easement along the south lot line of Outlot D. IV.For approval of Phase 1, dedication of 10'drainage and utility easements over the north and east boundaries of Outlots F and G, and along the west boundary of Outlot D. Page 12 of 17 I 9. Legal documents required: I.Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and alt other documents afTcctcd by such interest. II.Certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. iii. Final copies of Master Declaration and individual Community Declarations pertinent to the phase being final platted. i V. Standard private road easement document over the private road ways within each Phase, granting the City the right to maintain said roads (may be incorporated into the Declarations). Final plat approval fees to be paid for each Phase: Final Plat Review Fee...........$250.00 minimum plus incurred legal, engineering, and planning consultant charges Document Filing Fees............$220.00 minimum plus incurred costs Development Agreement. General Development Plan approval is contingent upon the successful execution of a PUD No. 4 Agreement between the applicant and the City. • - 10. Financial Guarantee. The PUDNo.4 A^eementshall 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 public and private streets, curb & gutter, stormwater management facilities, landscaping, grading, erosion control, utilities, driveways and parking areas, trails, sidewalks, and retaining wall construction. Page 13 of 17 .-V 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Developer shall provide to the City a financial guarantee of 150% of the improvement costs prior to commencement of construction for each Phase. At no time during any Phase will the flnancial guarantee be reduced to to less than $100,000. This amount shall not be released until all improvements and obligation covered by the financial guarantee have been completed, including delivery of record plan sets to the City. Upon the final approval and execution of this resolution and the Planned Unit Development No. 4 Agreement, the City Council shall fonnally approve an ordinance amending the official zoning map of the City to rezone the portions of the Property north of Kelley Parkway to RPUD Residential Planned Unit Development, and amending the Orono Zoning Code by adding language establishing Planned Unit Development No. 4 (PUD-4) to include all portions of the property. Upon approval of this Resolution the City Council shall direct the Mayor and Clerk to execute other documents required by this PUD rezoning, including but not limited to the “Planned Unit Development No. 4 Agreement”, all subject to approval by the City Attorney. Minor changes in the location, placement and height of structures maybe authorized by the Development Review Committee if required by engineering or other circumstances not foreseen at the time the final plan was approved and filed with the Zoning Administrator. Changes in uses: Changes to the approved final development plan deemed by the Planning Director to be significant maybe madeonly after a public hearing cwducted by the Council. Any changes shall be recorded as amendments to the recorded copy of the final development plan. Ifsubstantial development of Phase 1 has not occurred within one year after approval of PUD No. 4 as set forth in the Planned Unit Development No. 4 Agreement, the City Council may declare the approvals granted within this resolution and within said Agreement as null and void. Approvals for any future Phases for which substantial development has not occurred within four (4) years after the date of approval of PUD No. 4 as set forth in the Planned Unit Development No. 4 Agreement, may be declared by the City Council as null and void. Page 14 of 17 T! inriitiuiMirtri 16.The approvals granted in this Resolution shall not become effective until such time that the Developer successfully completes purchase and provides evidence suitable to the City Attorney of ownership of the Property. 17.The approvals granted in this Resolution shall become effective only when all conditions of approval requiring actions by the Developer have been satisfied. Adopted by the City Council of Orono this 9th day of December, 2002. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Developer (On behalf of Dahlstrom Development Corporation LLC) Page 15 of 17 F 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 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of________, 2002 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk i»f the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed jr, behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 16 of 17 iii&iiiidkiiiariiliaMiei STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of .20 personally appeared before me, ____who is personally known to me ____whose identity I proved on the basis of, whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of, a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of ..20 personally appeared before me, ____ who is personally known to me ____whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath/aflirmation of, a credible witness and who ex^uted the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executedjhe same as his/her/their free act and deed. * Notary Public Page 17 of 17 F S ORDINANCE NO. SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF ORONO AND AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN OUTLOT B, WILLOW PROPERTIES ADDITION, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA FROM RR-IB SINGLE FAMILY RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO RPUD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND ADDING SECTION 10.53 SUBDIVISION 11 REGARDING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 4 - FILE 1102-2789/02-2840 WHEREAS, the City ofOrono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has conceptually approved the rcpIattingofOi tlot B, Willow Properties Addition. Hennepin County, Minnesota into Lots, Blocks and Outlots within the proposed plat ofSTONEBAY, Hennepin County, Minnesota; including the dedication of public road and utility rights-of-way for Kelley Parkway. Willow Drive and U.S. Trunk Highway 12; and WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the rezoning of proposed Lots hru 41. Block I and Outlots E, F and G, STONEBAY, per the findings, terms and conditions of Resolution No.___adopted December 9, 2002, subject to execittion of PUD No. 4 Agreement between Dahlstrom Development Corporation and the City of Orono, and subject to completion of the platting of said STONEBAY. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORONO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. • The Municipal Code ofOrono is amended by amending the official zoning map and zoning district boundaries for the property described as follows; Lots 1-41 inclusive. Block 1 and Outlots E, F and G, STONEBAY, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Said property is hereby rezoned from RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential District to RPUD Residential Planned Unit Development District. Page 1 of3 f . _____ Section 2. The Municipal Code of Orono is amended by adding Section 10.53, Subd.11 to read as follows: “Subd. 9. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 4 - DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT corporation PUD: A.Legal Description. PUD NO. 4 is legally described as Lots I through 41, inclusive. Block 1, and Outlets A, B, C, D, E, F and G, STONEBAV, Hennepin County, Minnesota. B.Incorporated herein by reference are the DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PUD plans attached as exhibits to the PUD NO. 4 agreements on file in the Office of the Zoning Administrator under File #02-2789/02-2840. D. Allowable Uses. The uses allowed in the PUD arc as follows: Outlets A and D, STONEBAY arc platted as Outlots for fiture development in accordance with the uses .uided within the 2000-2020 Orono Community Management Plan (CMP), and may not be used until such time that they have been rezoned via the Planned Unit Development process and platted into buildable Lots. Outlots B and C, STONEBAY, are platted as Outlots for stormwater management and utility purposes, and trail purposes only. Lots I -41 inclusive. Block 1 and Outlots E, F and G, STONEBAY are platted to be used for multi-family dwelling purposes subject to the previsions and standards of the RPUD Residential Planned Unit District and as further limited within City Council Resolution No. the PUD NO. 4 Agreement on file in the Office of the Zoning Administrator under File #02-2789/02-2840. Outlots E, F and G shall not be developed for the approved uses until completion of final platting into Lots and Blocks. E.Development Standards. Development standards shall be as indicated on the approved PUD General Development Plan as documented within City Council Resolution No._____and the PUD NO. 4 Agreement on file in the Office of the Zoning Administrator under File #02-2789/02-2840.” Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective upon execution by the City of Orono and Dahlstrom Development Corporation of the aforesaid PUD NO. 4 Agreement, and upon City approval and filing of the final plat of Phase I of STONEBAY with Hennepin County. Page 2 of3 Section 4. This ordinance shall be published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspaper and shall be effective upon publication. Adopted b^ the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of December, 2002 by a vote of___ayes and___nays. ATTEST:Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk • 9- Page 3 of3 A. To: From: Date: Mayor & Council Mike Gaflfron, Planning Dir Deceinber4 2002 \7^-C0-Ol, •V Subject: Dahlstrom • StoneBay Development Fees List of Attachments A - Staff Fees Estimate - August 2002 B - Applicant’s Fee Proposal C - Park Dedication Fee Ordinance D - Park Fee Analysis, December 2001 Applicants have submitted a development fee proposal in response to staffs Fee Estimate provided to the developer in August (Exhibits A & B). TTie essential di^erences between staffs estimates and the developers request are noted below, followed by a staff recommendation regarding each fee. I. Park Dedication Fee City Estimate August 2002: Commercial: • « Estimated Land Pre-Dev Fair Market Vahe: 9.90 acres @ $6.00/s.f. ^9.90 x 43,560x $6.00 = $2,587,500 Estimated Commercial Park Fee = 0.08x $2,587,500 = $207,000 Check: $207,000 / 9.90 acres ■= $20,910/acrc (over required min-max range) Maximun*. fee applied: 9.90 acres x $13,875/acrc «* $137,400 Residential: Estimated Land Pre-Dev Fair Market Vc.lue:4I.55acres@$3.50's.f. ^4I.55x43,560x$3.50 ^$6,335,000 Estimated Residential Park Fee “ 0.08 x $6,335,000 ° $507,000 Check: $ 507,000/168 units * $3,018/unit (below required min-max range) Minimum Fee applied: 168 units x $3,250/unit = $S46,000 City Estimate Revision December 2002 (based on purchase price per developer): Commercial: Land Fi -r Market Value : $1,272,054 (based on 7.393 acres @ $3.95/s.f Developer's valuation, which includes just the area within the commercial outlets) Commercial Park Fee = 0.08x $1,272,054 » $101,764 Check: $i01,723 / 7.393 acres = $13,764 (within required Atin-max range) Residential: Land Purchase Pric.:per Developer: (Total purchase price - comm ’/ portion) * $4,587,155 Residential Park Fee: 0.08 x 24,587,155 » $366,972 Check: $366,972/162 units $2,265/unit (below required min-max range) Minimum fee applied: 162 units x $3,250/unit» $526,500 Developer Proposal November 2002: Residential Developer does not want to accept the minimum fee of $3,250/unit which results in a fee of 11.5%, but wants to stay at the 8% level ($366,972). Commercial Developer is net questioning the revised staff estimate of $101,764 i r MllBl StoneBay Fees December 4,2002 Page 2 SUMMARY Staff Estimate August 2002 Revised Staff Calculation December 2002 Developer Proposal Commercial S 137,400 S 101,764 8%S 101.764 8% Residential S 546,000 $ 526,500 11.5%S 366,972 8% lOtMl $ 683.400 $ 628.264 10.7%S 468,736 8*i Analysis tT*l The basic park dedication requirement is 8% of the land being platted or subdivided. The ordinance calls for the dedication requirement to be roughly proportional to the projected impact of the proposed development on the City ’s park system. Because of the vastly differing land values in Orono, the 8% park dedication requirement could result in park dedication requirements that are either significantly greater than or significantly less than the amount which is roughly proportional to the impact of the proposed development on the Citys park sj'stem. Therefore, per the ordinance requirement, the City has established via resolution both a maximum aa d mimmutq park dedication amount per dwclline unit based on an updat'-J projection of the cost of the City's park system, and the proportionate share of this projected cost to be borne by new dwelling units in Orono (see Exhibit D). The current (2002) residential minimum and maximum are p250/umt Md S5550/unit. Neither the ordinance nor the fee analysis distinguish beftveen the impacts on the $3^tem of single-family and multi-family development. Developer IS taking issue with the residential minimum per-unit fee of $3250 and proposing an 8% cap at $2,265 per residential unit. Reduction below the minimum per-unit fee would set a precedent multi-family ^vclopments, and would suggest there is a significant difference betw een SFR and MFR, which the City has not concluded to date. Developer suggests that our fee structure also does not account for the public and private recreational amenities provided in the development. However the private amenities are a separate RPUD requirement, so only the public trails might be a subject for discussion in terms of reductions. There is a recent nearby precedent (Willow View) for reducine or rebating the park fee by the developer’s cost of public trail construction. Staff Recommendation Staff finds no justification to reduce the minimum per-unit fee from $3250 to $2265 merely to keep the dedication at 8%, given the language in the ordinance. If Council concludes a reduction is appropnate. staff would recommend that the developer be credited for the costs of construction (but not the land cost or easement cost) of the approximately 3400 lineal feet of public trail that will be required along Willow Drive and through the commercial outlots, not including sidewalks along Kelley Parkw ay or within the residential development. At an estimated construction cosref $20 per lineal foot, these trails would generate a total reduction of about $68,000 ,r’ 'i 4# SloneBay Fees December 4,2002 Pages II. Sewer ond Water Connectioo Charges City Estimate August 2002: S726.216 Developer proposal: $514,773 1.Sanitary Sewer Connection Charges 1989 Highway 12 Area ............................ $5,320.00 per acre Residential Portion: 41.55 acres x $5,320.00/acrc = $221,046 Commercial Portion: 9.90 acres x $5,320.00/acre = S 52,668 2.Municipal Water Connection Charge 1989 Highway 12 .Area ............................ $8,795.00 per acre Residential Portion: 41.55 acres x $8,795.00/acrc = $365,432 Commccial Portion: 9.90 acres x $8,795.00/acic “ $ 87,070 The August staff estimate includes the area of Kelley Parkway. This would be slightly less if the area being dedicated for Kelley Parkw'ay is excluded. ♦ The essential difference between staff and developer calculations is that developer wishes to pay the SieW fee only for the dry buildable portion of the land, since that is how the density is calculated. However, up to and including 2000, this S»&W connection fee was charged on a unit basis, and for 2000 was $3,645 per unit for sewer and $5,050 pt- unit for water. In 2001 the fee was restruelwred tc Ve an acreace charge, based on gross acreage (including wetlands ) since the City had no clear pic ^tc of how much of the developable Hwy 12 assessment area was wetland. The fee was based on the dollar amount needed to recover City ’s costs of the original project, divided by the gross remaining undeveloped acreage. Hw" titc restructuring not occurred, the S&W unit fee for 2002 would have been $9-1 0,000/unit. For 2002, the S&W connection charges total 514,115/acre. For the residential portion this represent" a W unit fee of about $3600. While the prior owners and not the developer benefitted from this rci ..cturing, the City is obligated to have development pay its fair share of the costs of the existing inf asiructure it benefits from. It also could be noted that the dental office on 2 acres-^vill use appro.ximately 4 S&W units, i.e. paying $28,000 total or ’$7,000 per unit. The^toncBay development will use 160 units on 40 acres, or only paying only half the per-unit cost as the dental office Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that there be no reductions in the S&W Connection Charges StoneBty Fees December 4,2002 Page 4 • •• III. StoriaWater & Drainage Trunk Fee Staff Calculation Based on Ordinance: Multi-Family: 4 or fewer Units/Acre.................... $4,860.00 per acre Multi-Family: Greater than 4 Units/Acre............... $5,670.00 per acre Commercial:.................................................... $6,480.00 per acre *. r, Residential Portion: 41.55 acres @ 6 units/acre = 41.55 x S5.670 $235,600 Commercial Portion: 9.90 acres x $6.480.00/acre = $64,152 Developers Proposal; 1. Base the fee on dry buildable acreage only: Residential Portion: 27.72 acres x S5670 = $157,172 Commercial Portion: 8.75 acres x $6480 = $56,700 2. Grant credit of $15,100 plus 12% design cost for oversizing of watermain 3. Grant credit of SI 17,160 plus 12% design cost for entire construction cost of regional stormwater pond. 4. Grant credit of $17,740 plu' 12% design cost for incremental cost/benefit of providing storm sewer to the properties to the west (2 dental office sites). Total credit or reimbursement proposed by Developer: $168,000 Staff Analysis and Recommendation Again, developers suggest that the fee should be based on dry buildable land acreage. However as noted m the recent staff memo and code amendment regarding the S W«S:DT Fee for 2-acre and 5-a'cre zones, the original ordinance established a fee structure based on the entire acreage of the various zones of the City and did not exclude wetlands from the calculation method. Fee should he h;,.^d on entire acreage. ----- ------------ * Developer is requestingcreditsforS16,9I2for provision of excess capacity in water line^e City ^^uired to be 12'' vs 8". This was done with the Willow View project and is a reasonable Developerisrequestingcreditfor$131,219forconstructionoftheregionalpond. StafTwouldnntv SUBP9rt a p^rttjil pry^it, based on the difference between the cost of a pond with capacity needed to serve just the Stonebay and associated commercial development, and the cost of the regional pond Developer would be required to calculate this cost differential and City Engineer would verify. Developer also requests credit for construction of storm sewer facilities constructed to serve the _A UPDATED FEES ESTIMATE - «^02-2789 Dabbtrom Development-August 2002 This estimate of fees is divided into three categories: l. Base application fees per City Fee Schedule, intended to cover City costs of / processing the application n. . Development fees per City Fee Schedule, related to the costs of providing infr^tructure ^arks, sewer & water system, stormwater management) m. Ancillary administrative costs (based on pass-through legal, engineering and planning consultant costs incurred by the City) I. Application Fees a. Initial application fees Commercial Site Plan Review....................................... $ 250.00 PUD Rezoning ............................................................. 375.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment................................. 375,00 Sketch Plan Review..................................................... 275.00 SI,275.00 Amount Paid 4/17/02 (Receipt #17664) 1.225.00 Balance Due S 50.00 b. Development application fees Note: Fees in column A are/were due with Concept Plan Application; unpaid fees from column A and fees in column B based on approved numbers of units or footages will be due upon Concept Plan Approval. _A_ ____B_____ PUD / Rezoning : Residential Portion .............................................. S375.00 (pd) plus $40.00 per unit 168 units X $40.00 » $6.720 Commercial Portion ............................................ $175.00 /acre (Defer until Outlots are replatted/developed) Preliminary Subdivision Application ..................... $400.00 $400 Special Improvement Fees: -• - Proposed Public Road (Kelley Parkway).............. $950.00 plus-$0r50 per l.f. $950 + (1.950 if X $0.50) » $1,925 .. — - Proposed Private Roads ................................ $650.00 plus $0.50 per l.f. (i.e. private roads that arc not individual driveways) $650 + (3.400 if X $0.50) = $2,350 - Proposed Storm Sewer System........................ $250.00 $250 • Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension.......... $275.00 plus $25.00 per stub (Res. only) $275 + 168 unitsx $23.00 ■ $4,475 • Proposed Water Main Extension..................... $275.00 plus $25.00 per stub (Res. only) $275 + 168 units x $25.00 " $4,475 - Future Commercial Sewer & Water (Same unit rates as residential, total fee dependent on number of units required by future commercial development) Page I of 3 ■--------------- - > - Application Fees Summary: Item £is Amt. Pd. Estimated Amount Due Balance of initial fees S 1,275.00 $1,225.00 S 50.00 Residential PUD/Rezoning S 7,095.00 375.00 6,720.00 Preliminary Subdinsion S 400.00 400.00 Special Improvement Fees $ 13,475.00 (SI,925 + 52,350 + 5250 + $4,475 + $4,475) Total Application Fees Due 13,475.00 $ 20,645.00 (Future commercial PUD/Rczoning and S&W stub fees deferred until commercial outlots arc developed and final unit counts established) f II. Development Fees Ac'diUonal fees you should expect when the application proceeds to the development stage a.Park Dedication 1. - 2. Residential 8% of Landi or Cash Contribution in Lieu of Land (Council Discretion): 8% of Predevelopment Fair Market Value (Subject to min. fee of $3,250 per dwelling unit, max 55,550 per dwelling unit per Resol. #4738 and 2002 Fee Schedule) Estimated Land Pre-Dev Fair Market Value: 41.55 acres @ $3 50/s f. = 41.55x43,560x53.50 =$6,335,000 Estimated Residential Park Fee = 0.08 x 56,335,000 = 5507.000 Check: $ 507,000/168 units “ S3,0I8/unit (below required min*max range) Minimum Fee applied: 168 units x$3,250/unit=* $546,000 Commercial 8% of Und; or Cash Contribution in Lieu of Land (gouncil Discretion): 8% of Predevelopment Fair Market Value (Subject to minimum fee of $8125/acre, maximum S 13,875/acre per Resol. #4739 and 2002 Fee Schedule) Estimated Land Pre-Dev Fair Market Value: 9.90 acres @ 56.00/s.t « 9.90 x 43.560x 56.00 = 52.587.500 Estimated Commercial Park Fee = 0.08x 52,587.500 = 5207.000 Check: $207,000 / 9.90 acres " $20,910/acre (over required min-max range) Maximum fee applied: 9.90 acres x S13,875/acre « $137,400 Page 2 of 3 r b. Local SewerAVater Connection Charges 1.Sanitary Sewer Connection Charges 1989 Highway 12 Area ........................... $5,320.00 per acre Residential Portion: 41.55 acres x $5.320.00/acre « $221,046 Commercial Portion: 9.90 acres x $5,320.00/acre ■> S 52,668 2.Municipal Water Connection Charge 1989 Highway 12 Area ........................... $8,795.00 per acre Residential Portion: 41.55 acres x $8,795.00/acre ■> $365,432 Ccmmercial Portion: 9.90 acres x $8,79S.00/acre > $ 87,070 c. Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fees Multi-Family: 4 or fewer Units/Acre.................... $4,860.00 per acre Multi-Family: Greater than 4 Units/Acre............... $5,670.00 per acre Commercial:.................................................... $6,480.00 per acre Residential Portion: 41.55 acres @ 6 units/acre - 41.55 x $5,670 « $235,600 Commercial Portion: 9.90 acres x $6.480.00/acre » $64,152 Development Fees Summaty * % Residential:Park Dedication Fee.................................. Sanitary Sewer Connection Charge ............ Municipal Water Connection Charge ........ Storm Water & Drainage Trunk Fee.......... Residential Total S' 546,000 221,046 365,432 235.600 $ 1,368,078 Commercial:Park Dedication Fee................................. Sanitary Sewer Connection Charge ......... Municipal Water Connection Charge ....... Storm Water & Draiiuige Trunk Fee......... Commercial Total $ 137,400 52,668 87,070 (>4Ji2 S 341,290 III. Ancillary Administrative Costs* i Final Plat Review Fee.......................$250.00 minimum plus incurred legal, engineering, and planning consulunt charges* «. Document Filing Fees....................... $220.00 minimum plus incurred costs* Residential Administrative & Legal*......................... $ 25,( Commercial Administrative & Legal*........................$ 10,( *This is a very rough estimate of legal/engineering/planaing consultant charges not covered by application fees, inclusive of the concept plan and final development plan stages of the review process, and is inserted for discussion purposes only! Note: Costs of improvements to be provided by developer (subject to the Development Agreement yet to be drafted) are not addressed in this document. Page 3 of3 HI «--4 Si ' u.- “ 1 •:fe J^U Cfexrr? P^^CiSAc Park Dedication City ’s Calculation Coinmcrcinl EstiinnIctI L4ind Pre-Dcv Fair Market Value: 9.9 Acres @ $6.00/S.f. »* 9.90 .X 43.560 .x $6.00 - $2,587,500 Estimated Commercial P.ark Fee ** 0.08 .x $2,587,500 = $207,000 Cheek $207,000 / 9.9 Acres ■ $20,910 Acre (over ma.xinuim) Maximum fee applied: 9.9 ^cres .x $13,875/acre ” $137,400 Kc.xi(lcnlinl E.stimatcd Ixmd Pre-Dev Fair Market Value: 4 1 .55 acres @ $3.50 / S.f. 4 1 .55 .X 43,560 x $3.50 = $6,335,000 EstimalctI Residculial Park Fee « 8% ,x $6,335,000 = $507,000 Check: $507,000 / 1 68 units = $3018/ unit ("ndcr minimum) Minimum fee applied » 168 x $3250/unit «■ $545,000 Total Dedication $683,400 Developer ’s Calculation Overall# Purch.ase Price of Land (fair market valuo); $5,859,209 Total Estimated Park Dedication; 8% of fair market value 0.C8 X $5,859,209 = .$468,737 Commercial Estimated Lind Pre-Dev Fair Market Value: '.39 Acres @ $3.95/S.f. 7.39 X 43,560 x $4.00 = $1,272,054 Estimated Commercial Park Fee » 0.08 x $1,272,054 » $101,764 Cheek $ 1 01 ,764 / 7.393 Acres » $ 1 3,764 Acre Residential Estimated Ijmd Pre-Dev Fair Market Value: Total minus Commercial $5,859,209 - $ 1 ,272,054 - $4,587,1 55 Estimated Residential Park Fee - 8% x $4,587,155 - $366,972 ;; $366,972 / 162 units = $2,265 Total Detlicatinn $468,737 Applying the City’s minimum park fee results in an 1 1.7% fee, wiiich is in excess of what may be considered a*asonable. TIic minimum and maximum park fee policy adopted by the City Council does not reflect the lower per unit land value of higher density / lower cost housing. Tliey aI.so do not take into account the minimal impact the target buyer of these townhomes will have on the City’s Park System. Nor docs the policy adequately address the private recreational facilities and public traits and walks that ^tl be constructed by tlie developer as part of the PUD. ■ iiii tiiwiirliiitaiini II I itij Local Sewer / Water Connection Charges and Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fees City’s Calculations Developer’s Calculations Cnniinry Sewer Connection Charges 1989 Highway 12 Area .......................................$5,320 per acre Kcsidcnliai Portion- 41.55 Acresx S5.320/ncre = $221,046 Coinnivreial Portion: 9.90 Acres .\ $5,320 / acre = $52,668 Sanitary Water Connection Charges 1989 Highway 12 Area .......................................$8,795 ,«;r acre Residential Portion: 41.55 Acres x $8,795 / acre = $365,432 Commercial Portion: 9.90 Acres x $8,795 / acre » $87,070 Total Coii'iectioii Charges $726^16 We' licvc reviewed the trunk fees basco on tlic Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee Ordinance report dated December 10.2001. It notes that the fees are based on tlic land use and the area of land developed. Deemise the Zoning Ordinance only allows development - density to be calculated on the upland area of the property, we interpret “area of land developed” to mean the developable, or upland area of the properly. It certainly .seems reasonable to as.sumc that undevelopable or wetland areas would not generate demand for the .services and, therefore, would not be i..sed to calculate connection fees or assessments. Stomiwater and Dniinage 1‘runk Fees Miiltidamily: greater than 4 units per .acre. $5,670 per acre Commercial: $6,480 per .acre ResideminI portion 41.55 acres x $5,670 => $235,600 Commercial portion 9.9 x $6,480 “ $64,152 Sanitary Sewer Connection Charges 1989 Highway 12 Area .......................................$5,320 per .acre Residential Portion: 27.72 acres x $5,320 / acre = $147,470 Commercial Portion: 8.75 Acres x $5,320 / .acre « S464«50 Total Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fees: $299,752 Sanitary Water Connection Charges 1989 Highway 12 Area ......................................$8,795 per acre Residential Portion: 27.72 Acres x $8,795 / acre » $243,797 Commercial Portion: 8.75 Acres x $8,795 / acre = $76,956 Total Connection Cliargc.s $514,773 Stormwater and Draina^.. Tnink Fees Residential portion 27.72 acres x $5,670 »• $157,172 Commercial portion 8.75 x $6,480 = $56,700 Total Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fcc.s: $213,872 AiiUl Credits for Trunk Water and Storm Drainage Facilities Constructed by Developer Developer ’s Calculations There are construction costs that will be incurred as part of the StoneBay project that have area wide benefit. These include the construction of a regional storm water pond," trunk storm sewer lines that serve adjacent properties and ovcrsi^ing of watermain. The following is an estimate of the costs associated with each. It is the developer's opinion that these costs should be reimbursed by the City’s Tivnk Funds or that t*- e costs should be deducted from the trunk assessments and connection fee; paid by developer. L Unit Unit Cost 1 Quantum'1 Amount | VII. Trunk Watermain Costs 12" versus 8" DIP L.F.(5.00)2,020.00 (10,100.00) 12 ” versus 8" Valves#Each (400.00)2.00 (800.00) Fittings LBS (1.50)800.00 (1,200.00) Connect to existing (reconfigure)L.S.(3,000.00)1.00 (3.000.00) ISubtotal (15,100.00)1 IX, Regional Pond & Outlet Pipe Costs -• •—V Excavation CY.S8.00 10,000 $83,000 Seeding Acre SI,000.00 1.5 $1,500 Outlet control structure L.S S2.500 00 2 $5,000 15 “ RCP LF.S28.00 45 $1,260 Jack/Bore 18 “ RCP \v/36 “ casing pipe L.F.S220.00 120 $26,400 18 “ Apron Each $750 00 1 $750 Rip Rap C Y.$75.00 30 $2,250 .* Isubtotal $117,160 1 X. Storm Sewer Co'.ts to Serve Property to West 30" RCP L.F.$50.00 560 $28,000 Storm Manhole Each $4,000.00 1 $i.poo 30 ” Apron Each $1,250.00 1 *51,250 K^p Rap C.Y.$75.00 30 ...$2;250 Sublotiil !^,soo i X’ XI. Storm Sewer - LaternI Benefit From Pipe Installed to Ser>'e Property to West C,'* ' . ^ 18 “ versus 30 “ RCP L.F.$31.00 460 $14,260 48“ \s. 60 “ Storm Manhole Each $2,000.00 1 $2,000 18 vs 30 “ Apron Each $750.00 1 j $750 - Rip Rap C.Y.$75.00 10 $750 I Subtotal $17,760 1 -riy' Trunk Storm S*w«r Cost of Stetion .\l - X TotftI Trunk Drain.igc Cost • Ats'jmed R«imbursemci.'t by CItv SI 7.740 SI34.900 ^ c ORDINANCE NO. 173 . SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 11.62 REGARDING DEDICATIOIS* OF LANDS FOR FUBLIC USE for PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS IN CONJUNCTION WITH CLASS II AND III SUBDIVISIONS The City Council of Orono ordains as follows: Section 1. Municipal Code Section 11.62 is hereby amended as follows: t 0/A SEC. 11.62. PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS, CLASS II AND III SUBDTVTSIONS. Subd. 1. Lands For Public Use. The City finds that when land is subdivided, including a planned residential development or a planned unit development, the resulting additional housmg units or commercial/industrial buildings have an impact on the City’s park system. Therefore, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, (1989), Section 462.358, subd. 2b, the City requires all persons, corporations oi other legal entities that subdivide land within the City' of Orono; as a prerequisite to approval of a lot division, final plat, planned residential development or planned unit development; to convey to the City or dedicate to the public, for use as parks, playgrounds, trails, or open space, a given percentage of the land being platted or developed as hereinafter specified, said portions to be approved by the City. In lieu thereof, the subdivider shall, at the option of the City pay to the City, for use in the acquisition, development or improvement of public parks, playgrounds, trails, wetlands or open spaces and debt retirement in connection with the foregoing, an equivalent amount in cash based upon the fair market value of the land to be developed. The form of contribution (cash or land, or any combination thereof) shall be decided by the City Council based upon the need and conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The amount of the dedication requirement shall be roughly proportional to the impact of the subdivision on the Cit/s park system. Subd. 2. Dedicated Land Requirements. Any land to be dedicated as a requirement of this Section shall be reasonably adaptable for the above public purposes. Factors used in evzJ^ting the adequacy of proposed dedicated areas shall include size, shape, topography, drainage, geology, tree cover, access and location. Subd. 3. Land Dedication Minimum Area. Subdividers shall be required to dedicate to the City for parks, playgrounds, trails, open spaces and other public purposes as a minimum that percentage of gross land area, or other such amount as may be determined by the City Council, as set forth below: A. Residential/agricultural/multiple residential zoned land. Dedication requirement of 8% of the land being platted or subdivided. TTie dedication required shall be roughly proportional to the projected impact of the proposed development on the Cit> 's park system. Because of the vastly differing land values in Orono, the 8% park dedication requirement could result m park dedication requirements that are either sigiuficantly greater than or significantly less than the amount which is roughly proportional to the impact of the proposed development on the City ’s park system. Periodically, therefore, the City will establish both a maximum and minimum park dedication amount per dwelling unit based on an updated projection of the cost of the City's park system, and the proportionate share of this projected cost to be borne by new dwelling units in Orono. This will be donejby a resolution of the City.Coimcil. * B. Commercial/industrial zoned land. Dedication requirement of 8% of the land being platted or subdivided. The dedication required shall be roughly proportional to the projected Impact of the proposed development on the City ’s park system. The City finds that the employee.s of commercial/indusUial developments in the City make use of the City ’s park system, particularly trails and natural areas. Because the City ’s park system is focused on trails and natural areas versus active community parks and ballfields, commercial/industrial employees use the City ’s park system in ways similar to City residents. Therefore, the commercial/industrial dedication requirement will be tied to the residential dedication requirement by determining the number of employees that is equivalent to a residential dwelling unit in terms of impact on the City ’s park system. Periodically the City will establish both a maximum and minimum park dedication amount per employee based on this determination and the determination of the residential dedication requirement as set out in Paragraph A of Subdivision 3. This will be done by resolution of the City Council. / r\ J C. Because the Cit)' of Orono ’s park system is focused on trails and natural open space areas, the City does not have a broad system of neighborhood parks. If a subdivision is \ planned to be served by a neighborhood park, this subdivision will receive a greater benefit from the City ’s park system than that received by the general population. Therefore, the maximum park dedication amount as determined in Paragraph A may be exceeded up to the fiill 8% dedication ) requirement in the case of a subdivision that is planned to be ser\'ed by a neighbo'^hood park. Subd. 4. Cash Contribution in Lieu of Lands. In those instances where a cash contribution is to be madA by the subdivider, in lieu of a conveyance or dedication of land, the cash contribution to be contributed shall be equivalent to the fair market value of the equivalent undeveloped land that would otherwise have been conveyed or dedicated. The City shall account for such funds in a special fund named Park Dedication Funds. These funds are to be used only for the acquisition, development and improvement of public parks, playgrounds, trails, wetlands, or open spaces, and debt retirement in connection with the foregoing. Subd. 5. Fair Market Value of Lands. "Fair Market Value’’ for purposes of this Code shall be the land pre-development value to be determined by the City Council as df the time of preli(ninary plat application in accordance with the following: A. The CiQr Assessor shall recommend to the City Council as to the fair market value of the land after consultation with the subdivider. ~ B. If agreement is not reached be^vccn the City Assessor and subdivider, then the fair market value shall be determined in accordance \vith the following: 1. Fair market value as determined by the City Council based upon a current appraisal submitted to the City by the subdivider, at his expense. The appraisal shall be made by appraisers who are approved members of SREA or MAI, or equivalent real estate societies. . 2. If the City disputes such appraisal amounts, it may obtain an appraisal of I the property by a qualified real estate appraiser which the City Council selects and which appraisal may be accepted by the City as being an accurate appraisal at fair market value. The cost of the appraisal shall be paid by the subdivider. 3. The subdivider may appeal any final delcnninalion of fair market value as provided by Minnesota Statute Section 462.361. • C. The determination of fair market value of the undeveloped land by the City Assessor, City Council, or designated appraisers, shall be determined at the time of preliminary subdivision approval provided that there is final plat approval within the time limits as set forth in this chapter. TTie time of preliminary plat approval is utilized because the nature of the subdivision, its probable population, lot size and value, and other relevant factors are known. If an extension of the time limits in this chapter is approved by the City Council, the fair market value shall be determined as of the time of the approval of that extension. In determining the fair market value as of time of preliminary plat application, or the extension thereof, the factors to be included in the analysis shall include any and all facton which are generally accepted and used by approved members of SREA or MAI or equivalent real estate appraisal societies. Subd. 6. Development of Land Previously Platted. (Repealed per Ordinance #89, Second scries, adopted October 8, 1990.) Subd. 7. Future Subdivision. Any land which is further subdivided, divided or replatted or applied for such subsequent to May 1,1990, shall be subjec(.to the requirements of th^rdinance then in effect concerning dedication of land for public purposes, and credit shall be given for any charges previously imposed upon that land if the subdivider can prove that fees were previously paid. In no event shall the City be liable for any payment which may be due because of a subsequent reduction in the application percentage of land or equivalent market value in cash to be dedicated. Subd. 8. Administrative Procedures. The City Council shall establish such administrative procedures as they may deem necessary or appropriate to implement the provisions of this section of the Code. r< c\} •• • » Section 2. Adoption and publication.. This ordinance shall be effective after the date of approval and publicadon. 4 % • • • Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota on this 13th day of April 1998 by a vote of -S ayes and 0 navs. * ;• ATTEST: c6i Linda'S. Vee, City Clerk GabrielJabbour, Mayor a^ • Publish in the Laker and Pioneer newspapers the week of April 1998. ; i ~zt*- m Fark System Analysis for Determining Park Fee (Rei^ewed and updated December 2001) The City’s park dedication ordinance calls for minimum and maximum park dedication fees to be set by Council resolution. The minimum and maximum dedication requirements for residential property are established based on the proportionate share of the cost of the City's park system to be borne by new residential units. Based on the City’s plans and policies regarding parks, open space and trails, staff has calculated the proportionate share of the projected cost of the City's park system to be borne by new residential units as of December 2001 is an average of $4,630 per projected new dwelling unit. The calculation of this amount is based on tlie accompanying table, and sununarized as follows: Summary Total Property Acquisition Intended Expected Park Development/Improvements (December 2000 value x I.0375**) “ Trails ^ « j Subtotal Added Parks Land/Items Since 1997-98 1997-1998 Existing Parks Value X 1.10 1998-2000 Value Increase x 1.07 2001 Land Value Inflation Factor S 6.474.000 Total Projected Parks Value **E*timaled average CPI inflation factor for December 2000 to December 2001 $ 5,874,000 799,000 3.424.000 $ 10,097,000 $ 1,966,000 S 18,537,000 • i. Dwelling units at full development per 2000-2020 CMP Current dwelling units per 2000 Census (2766 households / 95.1 % occupancy) Number of future dwelling units to be added 3,990 2.909 1,081 Projected » dwellings to be added is 1081/3990 = 27% of total projected dwellings. The added 27% of dwelling units should pay 27% of the projected value of the City’s park system. 27% of $18,537,000 is $5,004,990. $5,004,990 to be paid by 1,081 dwelling units is $4,630 per unit Ranee Establishment Because of the vastly difTcring land values in Orono, the application of the general 8% park dedication requirement would result in properties with lower values paying less than the $4,630 average and properties with higher values paying more than the $4,630 average. ' .. ‘ The Cash Contribution was established at the fair market value of the 8% of land that would have othcnvisc been contributed. The establishment of a minimum and ma.\imum park dedication fee ^ount is needed to address the requirement for rough proportionality between the park dedication fee and the impact of residential development on the park system. The initial differential from the average was set in 1998 at ptus'minus S1000 or approximately +25%, yielding a range of fees from $2,900 to $4,900. In December 2000 the average value was $4,428 per unit and, with a range of S3100 minimum to $5300 ma.\imum per dwelling unit, or 70% to 120% of the $4,428 value. The ^uivalcnt scenario for December 2001 would be (0.70 x $4630) to (1.20 x $4630) c. a range of $3250 ininlliiluin to $5550 maximum per dwelling unit. This represents an increase of approximately 4.8 % over the current fee range, falling between the 3-4% inflation rate and the 7% increase in value of non-lakeshore lands. Projected Park Land Acquisitions as of 12/2001 Property Total Price/Total Cost Acres to be Cost Acres Acre Acquired (12/2000) , Cost (12/2001) >ote; Properlief lobold ttrilcceat arc no longer available for acquisition, and not included in the totals Note: New additions to list arc in italics Dayton property (Cty 6 @ Orono border) 91 $3,003,000 45 acres $1,485,000 $1,589,000 Properties west of Orono Golf Course 142 $5,500 $ 780.000 70 acres $ 385,000 $ 412,000 Hackbeny • house/lot in park $275,000 $ 275.000 $ 294.000 Kingsley Murphy property (Crystal Bay)49 plus house $82,500 $6,500,000 - Option • Purchase 25 acres of Non- lakcshore $55,000 1 25 acres $1,375,000 $1,471,000 Luce Line Access to Lowry Woods Bayside Road Access to Lowry Woods 7 1 $22,500 plus house $157,500 plus house 7 acres $ 275,000 $ 20.000 $ 294.000 $ 21,500 Property east of Stubbs Bay Road south ofRR 88 acres r$22,500 $1,980,000 50 acres (?) $1,125,000 $1,204,000 Camp Teko Trail underpass at CR 6 and Old Crystal Bay Road 18 $192,500 $3,465,000 —— • •$150,000 $ 160.500 Neighborhood Park near Hwy 12 and Old Cr) stal Bay Road $250,000 $ 267.500 Hennessy property near Saga Hill Park $150,000 $ 160,500 Sub Total _______S5,690,000 Added Park Land and Improvements Since 1997-98 $5,874,000 Larson site in Navarre. CarUon site (Cr>-stil Creek) Lunon site (Lake Classen area) Trails in Bancor site Navarre Park Improvements Saga Hill Park A:ccss and Parking Sohns Property in Navarre 29 Acres S200.000 $15,000? $20,000 ? $60,000? $100,000 $ 30,000 ? $200,000 (2000 Est.) $ 200,000- S -;35,ooo‘? $ 77O,C0O ? S 824,000? $ 60,000 ? $ 100,000 $ 30,000? _________ _________________Sub Total_________S1,S95,0(X) *5235,000 purchase price plus $25,000 in site costs such as building and debris removal, ^ $ 214.000 $ 465.000? $ 64,000 ? $ 107,000 $ 32,000? S 260.000' $1,966,000 I ^*'* **•**•• • «•><ING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION OfC 9 2002 Cl I y Oh UHONO DATE: December 12,2002 ITEM NO.: \ DepartmcDt Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Tilk Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Public Service Director’s Report Item Description: Orono/Long Lake Water System Interconnection Improvements There is currently an interconnection between the Orono/Long Lake water systems located in the southeast quadrant of the T.H. 12/ Willow Drive intersection. This interconnection is normally closed and is used for emergency purposes such as fires or when system maintenance or repairs need to be performed on one of the systems. The existing interconnection is located in an underground access pit that is approximately eight feet deep and requires entry into the pit to operate the valves. Entry of this pit requires the use ot confined space entry safety procedures. Also the pit is usually full of water, so pumping is required for fifteen minutes before a person can gain access to the pit. In the event of a fire, when quick access to the interconnection is needed, the current situation is unacceptable. The valves are rusting because of the water in the pit and will eventually become unserviceable, fhe location of the pit also creates a traffic safety hazard when it is open. Tlie proposed project is to remove the pit and install standard gate valves that can be operated from the surface with a valve wrench. This will allow for immediate access to the valves without having to enter a confined space. We arc recommending approval of this project. Long L.ake has solicited quotes for this project and we are recommending that project be completed by Valley Rich Construction at a cost of $6,100 to be split between the two Cities. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: * Motion to authorize the expenditure of $3,050 for a joint project with the City of Long Lake to install a new valve s> stem for the interconnection between the City *s water systems with the project funded from the Water Fund Capital Outlay Budget. Also, approval of a budget adjustment to the year 2002 Water Fund Capital Outlay Budget to reflect this expenditure. da REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION •—-TING DEC 9 2002 OnYUHOftONO DATE: Dcccnbcr 5,2002 ITEM NO: | JL Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Naac RonMoorw City Administrator's Title City Administrator Report Item Description: Payment Request ts^ong Lake Fire Station The City has received four invoices for payment for work related to the fire station. In addition, the prior approval of invoice number 19856 from BKV Group did not include $167.33 of miscellaneous expense. BKV Group, for architectural services in the amounts of $4,707.85, $2,545.69, and $167.33. Great Plains, for an air separator for the air compressor being installed in the fire station, in the amount of $87.94. Herc-U-Lift, for a power washer and electric chain hoist, in the amount of $4,999.87. These items were included in the list of miscellaneous equipment that was approved in September. These items are within the budget amount approved at that time. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the requests for payment as follows: BKV Group in the amounts of $4,707.85, $2,545.69, and $167.33; Great Plains in the amount of $87.94, and Hcrc-U-Lift in the amount of $4,999.87, to be funded from the Joint Fire Account. w BKV 0 t o u r AitMtodur* M«riorOMi9A IxfiAMrlng KfM« V«f«l Oriup lA4 222 Norlii SacMid SlTMt Utfhmm, tH3»Sf32 fatMm 4022942Q www.bkv|roup.com tot Invoice hveiwNuater 20118 * Invoke Dim : Augun25,2( Cifv of Lone Lake P.O.BOX606 LantUke.MNSS3Stf AtleaiioD: MidtiUe MO cm Preface ISIS.OI Ciqr of Long Lake Proftaaiooal Sanicaa tbrounb 8/25/02 BWagGroepi CoBBaetd: lira Stmiea fat: AnbolaaeaSarvlea Ahornatt: TOTAL m: »22^ s 2300 8215400 Contract Amouac Peroeni Complair Faafiancd: Prior FaaBUUnil: 5225400.00 94.00% S211J94.00 5207.092.00 Pnutct I5IS.01 AuKUSt25.2002 Paft2ef2 i Reimbursables jliBmi C^PaperS 1/2x11 EX|inn Mail SnvieM Fax Mflea|e/Tiav«l PhoaoPiaiih Foataie Rdmbuixai] Chtff ; 109J5 26^ 3.00 24.82 20.08 22.20 bles Totals $203.85 : Cnvp UMB Tiiali; fiOUngOraap Total:$205.85 *4^*ttl^ V Arcki«clw* lni«rtor 0««ign Inyintcring toarmoft Kr««« Voflal 0/Mo i«*c 222 North Second Street Mbwoopalit, MN S5A01 Wtphona A12J39J7S2 ^OCtifUilft dl2J29.A2I2 www.bkvgreup.cem COE Billiiig Creup 002 Teiale: COO/ZOO*0 0210# Invoice lavoiec Number: 20310 Invoice Daa: Noveiriber 25,2002 Ciiv on.one Lake P.O. Box 606 Lout Lake. MN 55356 Anemiotu Midtello hfone Prajecr. 1515.01 City of Long Lake Profetaional Services through 11/2S/02 Billieg Group: Contract #: Fire Stadon Fee: Ambulaoca Service Alternate: TOTAL FEE: S222.600 $ 2^00 S22S.100 Conirect Amounc Pereem Complete: Pee Earned: Prior Pec Billing!: Current Fee Total: Billing Croup Total: Billlag Creup: REIMB Comraci0: 5225.100.00 99.00% 5222.849.00 5220.598.00 S2.251.00 12 1.00 I : : .-S ♦. .t* . • . .iS •. • %•-I V*ill I. •J ei l| - • fie • . •! i| • _________________________I I usn ONOT JO UI3 ZZ96 9Li lit 0»tZI ZOOZ.ZO’OSQ BnUaiCrMp REIMS Total*] COO/COO‘4 02109 Pnyect; I5li.0l Noveoriier 25.2002 Pag* 2 on Reimbursables EipgfUt Copy Papers 1/2x11 S^qncu MaO Service* Fax MiWagen'nvcl PliotoFiiuah Poaagc Reimbursables Totals Chanto 170.10 14.01 2.00 76.68 20.07 11.83 S294.69 Rilling Group Total: Project Totals: $294.60 Or**Invoice Total $2^4S.69 Curraftt Ecifit Tftta Proltutonal Se ''ice*SI.958.50 $210460.97 $212419.4: RaimburfaMe Expenaet:$294.69 $14,816.04 $15,110.73 Outtide Servicer.$292.50 SIO.237.03 $10,529.53 Other Sofviect and Fee*;S0.0O $0.00 SO.OC Finaoc* Chartes:$0.00 $0.00 S0.0( Tancs:$0.00 $0.00 SO.OC Total:$2,545.69 $235,414.04 $237,959.7- VNT ONOl JO iUXO 2296 91.1 2S6 0l<21 2002.20*210 * GiF 2800 SOUTHCROSS DRIVE P.O. BOX 1219 BURNSVILLE. MN 55337-0219 952-095-6878 ARHeipO«tkOf>orthemtool com TERMS: NrHO days -1 1/2% FINANCE CHARGE (16% ANMUAL RATE) DATE 11/05/02 CUSTOMER NUMBER 3201666 INVOICE NUMBER 7211277 Rl ORDER NUMBER 7724288 SO Bill To: MUUICKMM Ship To: 87.94 CP FZSCI t05«0030r Pag* I OF I CITY OF LONG LAKE 1964 PARK AVE PO BOX 606 LONG LAKE MN 55356 CITY OF LONG LAKE 1964 PARK AVE LONG LAKE MN 55356 IN VOICE AETUim THIS portion with payment to. nm W9 8umamimi55nT-Ki§ 'I f >•) CUSTOMER NUMBER: 3201666 QUANTITY 1 0 ITEM 159673 FREIGHT CUSTOMER P.O.:INVOICE NUMBER:PURCHASED BY: NEW STATION 7211277Rl DESCRIPTION PRICE F-R DUO 1/2 ’NPT METAL UPS BUSINESS 76.00 6.57 EXTENDED PRICE 7600 6.57 Due Date 12/05/02 Tax Rate: Subtotal; • 82.57 Sales Tax:537 ? iAlHMC-miw DHH^P wMw.haro-u-llfl.eemaMHnHMMvitwair.ao.aox« wi»Nu.ujirMmM« |IOUlMUt.lOS7104(Wiumtm »n. OMNOIMnOI.IMilT4« (tIDSIHtM IT.CUMO,IM8l3fr REMITTO: MaaHKlHWNirVV^StMlBGKeS xwauwiatMN iBWoeii iMni auuN. MMMaoU MSiaaoN «wrai4MM»Meo mx(7Hj4raaaM m. (Its) 4714801 eMr.Na 14275 PAGE 01 INVOICE NUMBER 01E7276430 DATE 11/25/02 Oust. NO. 99999 CITY OP LONG LAKE 1964 PARK AVE FIRE DEPARTMENT LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55556 j *WIB a TCIUMB TCTMO -NFT 10~ 11KC THOMPSON VIA 10/10/02 DELIVERED 1 1 1 1 8900 POWER WASHER C-TECH 2752.43 8970 ELECTRIC CHAIN HOIST W/CONTAINER 1942.28 MODEL ELC4008110/ELC400B 2752.43 1942.28 20* OF LIFT BUB-TOTAL SALES TAX 8 6.500% 4694.71 305.16 TOTAL 4999.87 # # • • • • 1* .•/ * ** ■ 'f - Hamnmmre 190/200*i UlOf ORIGINAL COPY IXVI ONOl 10 11X3 2290 911 206 90:CT 2002.00*320 INQ 9 2002 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cl rv of Oflo/vo 13 DATE: December 9,20O2 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Lin Vee v Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Proposed 2003 Fee Schedule Attachment: A. Summary Ordinance B. Proposed 2003 Fee Schedule Ordinance The proposed 2003 Fee Schedule Ordinance and Summary reflecting the proposed changes are attached. The proposed changes include: Increase in various conditional use permit fees related to zoning applications Increase in various subdivision fees related to zoning applications Increase of 2.3% in all sanitary sewer and water connection charges 2.8% increase in sewer rates and 2.8% increase in water rates Increase in Home Occupation License initial review fee Remove fee for Solicitation License Addition of charge for electronic labels/address list Decrca.se fee for Firearms Permit to Carry Remove charge for Firearms Permit to Acquire Increase to golf course league rates Monday thru Friday COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached ordinance adopting the City's Fee Schedule for 2003 and Summary Ordinance for publication. J J \ 0 ORDINANCE NUMBER SECOND SERIES SUMMARY APPROVED The Council hereby determines that the text of the summary of this ordinance marked "Official Summaiy of Ordinance Number __, Second Series," and a copy of which is attached hereto, clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. The Council further determines duit the publication of the title and such summary will clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. i ■ I Bifani _____________All SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NUMBER SECOND SERIES ORDINANCE NO.SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 2003 FEE SCHEDULE AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 212, SECOND SERIES The following is the ofTicial summary of Ordinance Number Council of the City of Orono on December 9,2002. Second Series approved by the City The following sections have changes, additions and/or deletions: DESCRIPTION 2002 FEE 2003 FEE CODE $EC. ZONING APPLICATIONS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (One 10.09, charge per project)Subd3 Residential Accessory Use (Animats, etc.)W5.00 S2S0.00 Duplex Credit (per building)$260:60 $250.00 Guest House/Guest Apartment $225.00 $250.00 Amendment $166:66 $250.00 Subdivision 11.10, Subdivision Application $375.00 $400.00 Subd 17 (Class 1 & II Subds, Lot Line (AXB) Rearrangement) Final Plat Review (Class III)$225.00 ^ Special Legal $250.00 + Special Legal Engineering Charges HnRineerina'Consultant Charses 11.10, Filing Fees: a) Subdivision only $110.00 $110.00 Minimum olus anv Subd 17 additional costs (AXII) Easement Vacations not Associated with $260.00 $250.00 Sec 10.11 Subdivision Applications LICENSES A MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES Home Occupation License (Level 2)$50.00 Initial Review Fee $100 00 Initial Review Fee • Sec 5.40 plus a^iuai costs up lo •See. 5.30 $*7500 Transient Merchant/ Peddler License SI00.00 plus actual costs up to $100.00 plus actual costs up to Sec. 5.30 SI.SOO $1,500 General Administrative Documents f;lectrppi($50.00 Police Department Administered $25:66 Firearms Pennit to Cany $56:60 $10.00 $50.00 or $200.00 if over 200 $50.00 or $200 00 if over 200 Sec. 6.08 (includes Paiades. Noise Exemotion. Use people; actual costs up to people; actual costs up to of Public Propertv^SI.500.00 $1,300.00 SEWER PROJECTS By DbIricI - Project 1963 ST-IA, LS-IA, ST-IB, LS-IB I964LS-lAorLS-IB I96S LS-I 1965 LS-IA 1967 LS-I 1969 LS-I Shore Hills 1969 LS-2 Chevy Chase I97C LS-I Saga Hill 1971 LS-I Dunwoody 1973-1 1980-1 M'nnetonka Bluffs 1980-1 West Femdale/County Road 15 1980-1 Orono Lane 1980-1 County Road 15/Marinas 1980- 2 North Shore Drive/Scotch Pine Ln 1981- I North Shore Drive/Highwood 1982- 1A Navarre Utilities 1982- 1B Navarre Utilities Northern Ave 1985-1 Crystal Bay 1983- 1 Highway 12 Orono-LongLake-Medina 1989 Highway 12 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer I Stubbs Bay NE/NW-Bayside East II Bederwo^ III Bayside North ' IV Oxford V Cygnet and Leaf 1997 Sewer 97-1 North L.LyL.L.C.C. 97-2 Bracketts Point 97-3 Bay Ridge 1998 -1999 Sewer 1998 Shoreline/Heritage 99-1 Orono Orchard 99-2 Edgewood Hills 2000 Sewer 2000-1 Webber Hills 2002-2 Fox Ridge* 2000-3 East Long Lake Unit Charge 2002 2003 $5,650.00 $5,650.00 $5,650.00 $5,650.00 $5,650.00 $14 ,025.00 $9;840.00 $9;840:e0 $9;«40re0 $14 ,025.00 $«;4 ?$d)0 $2 8,280.00 $22,630.00 $9rt80:00 $28,280.00 $I4 ;560.00 $-3;095.00 $505:00 $14 ,725.00 $h44 0.00 $16,570.00 $2 5,660.00 $2 h725.00 $30,665.00 $2 4 ,785.00 $2 1;590.00 $36 ,940.00 $I9;I90.00 $18,130.00 $23,890.00 $30,360.00 S7;870.00 $17,370.00 $3-3.790.00 $5.780.00 $5.780.00 $5.780.00 $5.780.00 $5.780.00 $14,350.00 $10.065.00 $10.065.00 $10,065.00 $14.350.00 $12.455 00 $28,930.00 $23.150.00 $9.695.00 $28,930.00 $14.895.00 $3.165.00 $515.00 $15.065.00 $L475.00 $16.950.00 $26,250.00 $22.225.00 $31.370.00 $25.355.00 $22.085.00 $36.765.00 $19.630.00 $18,545.00 $24,440.00 $31.060.00 $8.050.00 $17.770.00 $14,105.00 Area or Acre Chet Credit to Area (I) (I) (I) (I) (I) (I) (0 (t) (1) (I) (I) (I) (I) (I) (I) (I) Trunk Area $t-2 ?0-.0e $1300.00 $3:956:60 $3.430 00 Per Acre (1) (I) $6:32 0 $5.440.00/acre (1) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (6) (6) (6) (7) (7) (7) (I) (I) Excludes Grinder Allowance (8) Excludes Grinder Allowance (8) Excludes Grinder Allowance (8) 1984 Forcemain and Lift Station #7 Existing Properties/Increase New Bldgs Replacing Existing Bldgs New Residential w/Existing Stub New Residential without Stub Freshwater Biological (incl ‘*Mwsh k Lara.veuc” Lots) »6 Bv Pam- $510.00(2> $520.00 m $5*0.00121 $520.00 rn »7 Forcemain $666r00$580.00 $566:0e$580.00 $*:630:00$ 1.665 00 $3:690:00$ 1.665 00143 $636:0e$650.00 (4) edit to Area (4) (4) (4) (l)and(4) (l)and(4) 5 1989 Gravity Line and Lift Station (see map for affected areas) Fixed Charge -i- $225.00 eitf-By P«it $286600 $2.930 00 Credit to Area (I) ntliiftlffiMrrfii WATER PROJECTS Unit Charse ^Area/AcreascFront Foot Credit to Area £ht±Chg • By Dbtrict - Project 1967 LW-1 Highway 12/Crystal Bay Road S4:?0f:ee $4,895.00 $35:66 $36.40 0) 1969 LW-2 Chc^ chase S4:?85:ee S4.89S.00 (i) 1970 LW-I Navarre Residential $2:390:66 $2,425.00 ■$23:66 $24.15 (1) 1970 LW-I Navarre Commercial S3:$«6:66 $3,640.00 $35:66 $36.40 (1) 1982-1 A Navarro $2:^2600 $2,585.00 (1)1989 Highway 12 $8,793.00 $8.995.00/acre (1) 1999 Navarre Water Treatment Plant $396:66 $400.00 (1) Rehabilitation PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES MUNICIPAL SEWER RATES 2002 Ffe 2003 Fee by unit; 1st $86:45 per quarter $88.85 oer quarter 2nd $76.30 per quarter $80.50 Dcr quarter by flow:$-3:24/1000 gallon plus S 3.3S/1000 gallon plus $-9.15 per quarter per S 8.3S oer quarter per connection connection MUNICIPAL WATER RATES Navarre Area Billing A Ready to Serve Chg $ 24.70/qtr $25.45/otr Water Usage Rate $-2:69/1000 gal $ 2.1^/1000 gal Unconnected Property Chg $24.70/qtf S 25.45/otr Highway 12 Area Billing & Ready to Serve Chg $ 9.00/qtr $ 9.2?/qtr Water Usage Rate S“i:90/1000 gal $2.96/1000 gal Chevy Chase Area Billing & Ready to Serve Chg $^9:66/qtr $ 9.2yqtr Water Usage Rate S-JtW/IOOO gal (no change)S 2.24/1000 gal (no change) Bulk sale to Minnetonka Beach for Lafayette Ridge S24.70/qtr billing charge plus S25.45/Qtr billing charge plus Aiea $2:09/1000 gallon total flow at S2.15/1000 gallon total flow at 1 border meter border meter • ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------—---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------—-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------— ^ y GOLF COURSE CHARGES • Effcclivc date 2003 Season Lcagac Rates Monday tkru Friday 2002 Fee S-9.50 2003 Fee SJO.OO A printed copy of the 2003 Fee Schedule Ordinance is available for inspection by any person at the oflice of the City Clerk during regular office hours. This ordinance becomes effective the week of January 1,2003. K’ rr Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on this 9th day of December, 2002, by a vote of____ayes and____nays. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ■ X ■ . •• .»..^; r>'v* •■ • ‘ '-'.S DIRECTORY FOR 2003 FEE SCHEDULE Lkensa A Mlscettantoiu Aftcr>Thc-Fael Fees AnascMckl Devices AaimI l■ipo«Ml Fees Beer, Wise A Liqaor Licease Caaoe Reatai Slip Coaiaiercial Mariaa Lkease DegLkease PabUcDaace Liccatc CaaibHag/Raflle Lkease 5 22 21 22 19 19 21 22 20 Copy Charges Page Licenses A Miscellaneous (Cont.)Page Permits (Cont.)Page Admiabtratka 20 Garbage Haulers Lkcose 19 Sprinkler Systems - Accident Reports 24 Home Occapatkn Lkensc 19 Commercial 18 Aadk Recording Daplkatkn 20 Joint Use DMk Lkensc 19 Tree Removal 8 Bailding Phn Copies 20 Kennel Lkensc 21 Underground Tank Removal 9 Copy Mkrofkhe FUe • PD 24 Returned Check Charge 20 Wa(cr Meter Fees 9 Copy Service • Pdlke Dept 24 Solkitation Lkensc 20 1 Driver's License Record 24 Temporary Traikr/Building 19 Services Reprint Oversized Docamenb Tobacco License 20 Fingerprinting (Police)23 On Mkrolilm 20 Transknt Merchant/Pcddkr Lkensc 20 Water Turn-Off Charge 25 Sammary Data Report 24 Water Tum-On Charge 25 Tape Daplkatkn (Police Dept.)Maps For Sale 20 Aadk 24 Signs Video 24 Public Works Supplies A Services Street Signs (Pubik Works)28 Address Change 28 Temporary A Permanent 17 Connection Charges Driveway Cuhrerb 28 Temp. "No Parking" (P.D.)24 Saaitary Sewer 10 Driveway/Curb Cut Permib 28 Temp. "No ParMng" (P.W.)28 Maakipal Water 15 Unit Adjastment 16 Permits Utility Rate A Miscellaneous Ancr-Thc*Facl Fees 5 Annual Service Charge - Documents Building Permit Fees 8 Septk 17 Comprehensive GaMe Plaa 19 Burning Permib 18 Munkipal Sewer 25 Carrent Street Address Book 20 Cert of Occupancy 8 Munkipal Water 25 Labeb 20 Demolitkn Permit Fee 8 Recycling Charge 26 Lbtiag Info - Realtors 20 Docks:Recycling Replacement Bins 26 Maakipal Codc/Ordkaacc 19 CommcrckI 8 Stormwater Utility 26 SpeckI Assessmeat Searches 20 Rcsidcntkl 8 Fire Protcetkn IS Zoning An>licatioHS False Alarm User Fees 23 Firearms Discharge Permit 23 After-The-Fact Fees 5 Firearms Permit To Carry 23 Amcndmcab 3Goff Course Charges 26 Fireworks Permit Fee 22 Appeal of Admin. Dccbkn 4 Gradkg, Excavating, Filling 17 CommcrckI Site Pkn 2 Inspections Large Assembly Permit 22 Comprehensive Pkn Amend 3 Contractual Inspcctkn Service 18 Lawn Sprinkkr System 18 Conditknal Use Permit Fees 1 SpeckI Inspcctkn Charges 18 LtanMcd Trapping Permit 23 Industrial Revenue Bond AppL 4 Mechaakai Penait Fees Maakipal Hook Up (SewerAVaier) Oa-Sile Systeau (Septk) Oathoase Coastractioa (See Oa>Siie Systems) Special Events Plambing Permit Retainins Walls 9 17 17 K cT.4 23 9 9 Park Dedkatka Fees PUD Reioaiag Rezoaing Appikatka Fee Rip Rap Appikatka Fee SpeckI ImproveoMats AppL § Stormwater/Drainate Trank fiees §| Sabdiviskn Appikatka Fee Q ^ Sarckarge for Staff Espease S Vacatkn Appikatka Fees 3 Variance Appikatka Fce»i 1 *ladex Begins on Page 29 ^_T > jB ORDINANCE NO.. SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 2003 FEE SCHEDULE AND AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 212, SECOND SERIES ’*! The City Coaacil of the City of Orooo ordaias: SECTION I. Ordlaaocci Ropcaltd. Ordiaaacc No. 212, Sccoad Series, ealitled 2002 Fee Schedule is hereby repealed, f Coaoeil of Orooo per Sectioa I.OS of the Maoicipal Code hereby ordains the following fees effeclive during the calendar year 2003: SECTION 2. Fees. ZONING APPLICATIONS All fees are application fees and are noa'cefundable after staff work has begun on the application. Application Tvne VARIANCE (Flciiblc applications involviag norc than one variance will require an r*tditioaal SS0.00 payment per each variance) Ess S2SO.OO Applicable Code Section 10.06, Subd 3(D) Variance for Non-Confoming Structures RENEWAL VARIANCE (No change from original application) S250.00 $150.00 10.06, Subd 3(D) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (One charge per project) Residential Accessory Use (Animals, etc.) InstUutioaal Use (School, Church, etc.) Duplex Credit (per building) Gnest House/Guest Apartment Commercial/Industrial Use Non-Conforming Use Amendment $250.00 $250.00 $250.00 $250.00 $325.00 $250.00 $250.00 10.09, Subd 3 200J Fee ScheJule-Page I fidiii I ' V ■^.1 H«W|J T <4 ZONING APPLICATIONS fCONT.^ APDllcailoa Type CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Coptippcd (Opc Char^gc per Project) Laid AReratioa: Gradiagt filUag, etc. (over 500 cobk yards) Sea walls, retaiaiag walk withia 0-75' bkeshore PRD AppUcalioo with Sobdivisioa PRD Appikatioo withoot Sobdivbioo PID AppIkatioRS Renewal CoaditioRal Use Permit (no change from original appUcation) Conditional Use Permit with Variance ARcr-thc-Fact Fees COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW SUBDIVISION Sketch Plan (Class I, II, & 111) Snbdivbion Appikation (Class IA II Snbdivisions, Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement) Preliminary Review (Clau III and all non-residential) Final Plat Review (Class III) Filing Fees: a) Sobdivision only b) Sobdivisioa * Easements ACi Renewal of SnbdiVisioo Application (Class IA II, Sobdivisioa of a Lot Line Rearrangement) (No Change From Original AppUcaBoa) Appikabk Code Section 10.09, Subd 3 S250.00 permit V"l Snbdivbion Fee plus S35.00 per dwelUng unit S 40.00 per dwelling unit (minimum SI 50.00) $175.00 per acre (minimum S350.00) SI50.00 Add S 75.00 for each variance Doubk Appikation Fee Res. «I306 A #1309 S275.00Consultant Fees $275.00 $400.00 11.10, Subd 7(A) il.l0,Subd 10(A) (B) $400.001- $30.00/lot ($460/2 lob; $490/3 Into; $520/4 lots, etc.) 11.10, Subd MKC) $250.00 + Special Lcgal/Eagiaeeriag/ Consultant Charges I I.IO, Subd 17(A) (9) SI 10.00 Minimum plus any ll.l0,Snbd 17(A)(I1) additional cosb $220.00 Minimum plus any additional costs $200.00 2003 Fee Schedule-Page 2 ZONING APPLICATIONS fCONT.1 ApDiteatloM Type SUBDlVlSION'CopliPMcd Rcpcwal orPrclimiaaiy Sabdivbioa Applkalkta (Class III) (No ebaage frooi origiaal appUcalioa) Rcacwal of Fiaal Sabdivisioa AppUcalioa (No chaage froai origiaal appUcalioa) PUBLIC ROAD VACATION EASEMENT VACATIONS WITH SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS EASEMENT VACATIONS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS ZONING AMENDMENTS INCLUDING REZONING PUD Rctoaiag - AHowed oaly wilhia area adjaccal lo Highway 12 as dcliacd ia Coaiprchcasivc Plaa Aawadaical No. 2 PUD Rcaoaiag: Rcsidcalial CoaiBicrciaPladasiriai REQUEST TO AMEND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN I III 'll nil iiiiiiaitiiTiidhiiiiiitftrriif^hirttiiiirt^^ •ri $200.00 SI 50.00 $ 75.00 per bcoefllliag properly (UOO.OO miaimum per applkalion) $100.00 $250.00 $350.00 $375.00 + $40.00 per dwelliog aoil $175.00 per acre (alia. $350.00) $375.00 Applicable Code Seclioa Seclioa 10.1 1 Scclioo 10.11 Seclioa 10.11 Seclioa 10.11 Ord. 74,2ad Series Seclioa 10.53 Scclioo 10.11 2003 Fee Schedule-Page 3 ZONING APPLICATIONS rrONT.^ AnnllcattoB Tviie SPECIAL IMPROVEMENTS Noa-rcfiiadable charges for City Eaginccr's review for appIkatioBS aod dcsiga drawiag, iaclvdiBg coBSIraclioa iaspcclioa fees. Ifimprovcmcals arc proposed as part of a Sabdivbioa, Review Charges arc payaf W with Prelimiaary Plat applicatioa. Proposed Private Roads Proposed PaUic Roads Reqaest for City to accept esistiag private road Reqaest for City to aiaiataia unimproved puhlic road Proposed Saaitary Sewer Mala EiteasioB Proposed Watermaia Esteasioa Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding cuKcrts) Ou'SHe System - Site Evaluation Review (applicahic to rural snhdivbioB appUcations) RIP-RAP Staff Review (aoimal rip-rap) Uaasaal Rip-Rap: a) New installation h) Repair previously approved APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND APPLICATIONS Miaimam Project Valaatioa: S290,000.00 Appikatioa Fee: •"! Applicahfe Code Sectioa Section ll.l2,Suhd4 5650.00 plus 504/lincal fool 5950.00 plus 504/lincal foot S9S0.00 $225.00 $275.00 plus $25.00 per stub $275.00 plus $25.00 per stub $250.00 $ 60.00 per new lot proposed for on-sile No Charge (MCWD Permit Required) $100.00 CUP review Staff permit “ $100.00 $100.00 Sectioa 10.65, Sabd 3(D) 0.1% of project valualioB ($250.00 miaimBm) plus $5,000.00 deposit for legal/ admiabtrativc expenses 2003 Fiv Schetiule- raj;e 4 ZONING APPLICATIONS rCONT.^ Application TvDt SURCHARGE FOR STAFF EXPENSE IN EXCESS OF APPLICATION FEES Per Fee Schedule set forth below: Professional Time Clerical Time Lccal/Enginccring Consultants M ileagc/Copies/Postage/Etc. AFTER-THE-FACT APPLICATION INVESTIGATION FEES (Resolution 1306) (Applies to all application types including variances, conditional use permits, subdivision, toning amendments, rip-rap permits, special improvement reviews, grading permits, moving permits, business licenses, kennel licenses, all building permits and all general permits.) This permit fee may be waived by staff for resident property owners who have not involved a contractor in tlu u nork, have no previous history of work without a permit and where such work docs not entail any zoning violations. Whenever any work, use or division of bnd for which a formal application is required has been commenced without first making such application and receiving City approval therefore, a special invcstigalion of the circumstances shall he made during the application process. B***ns* ®f Ihe extra adminbtrativc costs involved in the special investigation, the minimum application fee for aficr-tbc-fact applkations shall be twice the fee set forth in the bask fee Khcdule, whether or not the appikation is thereafter approved or denied. Payment of an after-the-fact appikation fee shall not constitute approval or authorkation of Ihe work, use, or divbion of land, and shall not constitute a penally or a waiv er of the right of the City to inslilule civil or criminal legal actions against the appikani for commencing such work, use or divbion of land without the required prior approval of the City. Aftrr-lhe-fact Investigation Fee Amount: Fee Applicabk Code Section Section 10.11 $ SO.OO/hour $ 30.00/hour Actual Billed Cost Actual Cost Equal to and in addition to the bask fee amount (total fee b iwkc Ihe basic fee amount).Res. 1306 200J Fee SeheUulc -Page 5 L ZONING APPLICATIONS fCONT.t PARK DEDICATION FEES I L4IMiI Dtdkalioii MiniiiiMin Area - Subdividcirs shall be required to dedicate to the City for parks, playgrouads, trails, open spaces and other public purposes as a minimum that percentage of gross bud area, or other such amount as may be determined by the City Council, as set forth below: (I) Residentbl/Agricultural/Multipic Residential Zoned Land. Dedication requirement of 8% of the land being platted or subdivided. (Eaclusive of lot that includes an esbting residence.) (2) Commcrcial/lndustrbl Zoned Land. Dedicated requirement of 8% of the land being platted or subdivided. Cash Contribution in Lieu of Lands. In those instances where a cash contribution is to be made by the subdividcr, in lieu of a conveyance or dedication of bnd, the cash contribution to be contributed shall be cquivaleni to the fair market value of the equivalent undevebped bnd that would othcrw'se have been conveyed or dedicated. The City shall account for such funds in a specbl fund named Park Dcdkatbn Funds. The City Council has established by resolution a minimum resideutbl park fee of $3,250 per dwellbg unit and a maiimum of $5,550 per dwelling unit The City Council has established by resolution a minimum commercbl/industrbl park fee of $8,125 per acre and a maximum of SI3375 per acre. •'I Applicable Code Section Municipal Code Section 11.62 Res. 4738 (12-10^)1) Res. 4739 (12-10-01) 2003 Fee Scheduie-Page 6 ZONING APPLICATIONS (CONT.> STORM WATER AND DRAINAGE TRUNK FEES Applicablg Cod* ScclioR 1 Ord. No. 214,1’* Series Ord. No. 222,2*^ Series Storm water tmak tees apply to sew dcveloppieat aod rcdevelopoieot of eiatiag properties and provide foadiai; for the storm water iafrastructarc aecessary to serve the The tmak fee is based oa the laad ase aad acreage of the property beiag developed. Aa equivalcacy factor malliplicr is assigacd to each laad asc type, with a 2-acrc nsidcatial lot considered as the staadard ia the City with aa cquivaleacy factor of 1.0. The table below lists the storm water trunk fees per acre for the various zoning dbtricts and bad uses in the City, with a base fee of $2,700 per acre. 2003 Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fees New Devciopmeiit Trunk Fee/ l^iiid Use Acre Single Family Rcsidcnliul 5 Acre /one (1)$2,160 Single Family Residential 2 Acre /one $2,700 Single Family Res Jcntiul 1 Acre /one $3,510 Single Family Residential */i Acre /one $4,050 Multi Family Residential 4 Unils/Acrc or 1 css $4,860 Multi Family Residential Greater than 4 Units/Acrc $5,670 Commercial or Industrial $6,480 (I) MtiHcf I asciMcnl RcJiktion I ui the 5 -acre /mmig iiisUict, a fcUuctiofi of up to 50% of the trunk fee for tlic lot will he allowed f(»f the |K'fccntagc of tlic lot piutcctcd by pcnmctcf und/or drainage way buffer easenKnts. These bufler casement areas shall remain in a natural ct>nditu>n (7) Maximum I cc hir the 5-acrc zoning diftricl. any ItM exceeding 7 0 grms acres including wetland, sliall be charged a noxinium trunk fee equal to the trunk Ice for n 7 0 acre parcel Such lot shall remain eligible for the up to 50% rcductnei iHitcd in (I) above, such reductitm based on the percentage of 7 0 seres that is placed in buffer casements (3) Maximum fee For the 2-acrc ziHung districts, any kit exceeding 4 0 gross acres mciuding wetland, shall be charged a maximum trunk fee equal to the trunk fee for a 4 0 acre pa*ccl" Redevelopment projects will be denned as any project to cither remove and rcphcc csisllag stractares or to enlarge ciisting stmcturcs. These projects « m be charged a portion of the base trunk fee adjasted for tkc area of expansion of impervioBS surface above the csiating conditions. The table bebw listo the base trunk fee baaed oa the area of impervioas sarfacc expansion and adjasted for the type of bad asc. The trank fee shall be determined by mnitiply lag the appropriate fee by the acreage of the devebpamat site. Area of Imperviouf Surface Capansion Residential Redevelopmenl or Eipansion of Ciisting Devx opment Trunk Fec/Acre Commercial or Industrial Redevelopment or Cipanslon of Ciisling Devetopment Trunk Fec/Arre 0-1000 Square Feet $950 $2,270 lO'Xl-iOOO Square Feet SI.890 $4.5J5 More than 2000 Square Feet $2,700 $6,480 2003 Fee Schedulc-P.nx 7 CONSTRUCTION PERMITS AND INSPECTION FEES Permit Tvne BUILDING PERMIT Miaimiim Fee Normal Fee Plaa Review Fee: Commercial Rctidealial Boildiag Valaatioa SlaadanI ZONING CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WITHOUT BUILDING PERMIT (chaage ia aie) Applicable Code Sectioa Ord. 216 S 23.50 (per 1997 UBC/SBC Slaadard Schcdole) (per 1997 UBC/SBC Slaadard Sebedvie) 65% of Baildiag Permit Fee (per Correal I.CB.O. Boildiag Staadards/Boildiag Valoalioa Data) $50.00 RETAINING WALLS (ia ciccss of 42" also multiple tiered walk that cicccd 42" aad Bot located ia lakcshore protected area) NOTE: Rclaiaiag walls ia 0-75' tekeshore protected coae - see Coad. Use Permit section of fee Khcdolc. $23.50 miaimom (per 1997 UBC/SBC Standard Schedolc) TREE REMOVAL WITHIN 0-75* DOCKS - RESIDENTIAL (Pcrmaacat (CUP Rcqnircd)aad lailial Seasonal) DOCKS - COMMERCIAL DEMOLITION PERMIT Principal Strocinre $30.00 $30.00 Ord. 10.22, Subd 3 Ac c c isory Structure Per 1997 UBC/SBC Standard Schedule OnL2l6 $ 50.00 Initial iaspcctioa $ 25.00 for each reqaested or required iaspcctioa beyond initial inspec tion $ 30.00 Initial bupediaa K- 2003 Fee Schedule-Page 8 ! CONSTRtJCTION PERMITS AND INSPECTION FEES fCONT.> Typt PLUMBING PERMIT Mait-ia p<»ta|c A haadliag ckargc MECHANICAL PERMIT RcskleatiaL Siaak Faaiilv A Duplea bv Uall Tvne Miaiaiaai Fee for aay Mecliaakal Permit Mail-ia postage A haadliag charge Uader Groand Taak Reaioval Coaimercial. ladastrial A Maiti-Famitv Resideatial bv Uail Tvne MUNICIPAL CONNECTION PERMIT (together with arm coaoectioa charges) Sewer Water S/r* (l/4"i7'/,*') meter iacladiag sales tax 3/4" (J/4"x9") aieter iacladiag sales tax I" aieter iacladiag sales lax brger awter Mail-ia postage A haadliag charge (sewer aad water permits oaly) I Applicable Code SectioB 1.25% of coalract price or $ 35.00 miaimam per project S 1.50 1.25% of coalract price or S 35.00 miaimam per project S L50 Per mcchaakal permit fees S 35.00 miaimam fee or 1.25% of cootract price S 35.00 $35.00 $130.00 $1SO.OO $200.00 qaote bask $ 1.50 2003 Fee Schcdule-Pnge 9 ALL SANITARY SCWLK AND MUNICIPAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES (If not prcvionsly nsscsscd or if in improvement project w not deemed to be required in Ike sole diKretion of Ike City. If an improvement is required, the connection charge may be in addition to any assessment.) The connection charge for properties wishing to connect to the sewer or water but wn?ch arc located outside the delineated'boundaries of the affected project area shall be charged the connection fee for that area. Such connections arc subject to City Council approval. SEWER PROJECTS By District - Project Unit Charge +Area Or Acreage Charge Credit To Area 1 1963 ST-IA, LS-IA, ST-IB, LS-IB $5,780.00 (1) 1964LS-lAor LS-IB $5,780.00 (1) 1965 LS-1 $5,780.00 (1) 1965 LS-1 A $5,780.00 (1) 1967 LS-1 $5,780.00 (1) 1969 LS-1 Shore llill.v $14350.00 (1) 1969 LS-2 Chevy Chase $10,065.00 (1) 1970 LS-1 Saga Hill $10,065.00 (1) 1971 LS-1 Dunwoody $10,065.00 (1) 197.3-1 $143.50.00 (1) CREDIT TO AREA; (I) M^J7h9l Sewer Operating (4) 40b-J7i9l PIR Fund «7 LS A Forvemain (9) 30S>37h9l 1992 Improve Stubbs Bay (6) 311-37691 1997 Improvements (7) 313-37691 1996-1999 Sewer Improvements (t) 314-37691 2900 Sewer Improvements 200 J Fee Se/K‘Jule-Page 10 •I ALL SANITARY SEWER AND MUNICIPAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES (If not previously assessed or ifan improvement project is not deemed to be required in the sole discretion of the City. If an improvement is required, the connection charge may be in addition to any assessment.) llie connection charge for properties wishing to connect to the sewer or water but which are located outside the delineated boundaries of the affected project area shall be charged the connection fee for that area. Such connections are subject to City Council approval. ' SEWER PROJECTS 1980-1 Minnetonka BlufTs $12,455.00 (1) 1980-1 West Ferndale/County Road IS $28,930.00 (1) 1980-1 Orono l^ine $23,150.00 0) 1980-1 County Road 15/Marinas $ 9,695.00 0) 1980-2 North Shore Drive/Scotch Pine l>ane !>2S,930.00 (I) 1981-1 North Shore Drive/llighwood $14395.00 (1) 1982-lA Navarre Utilities $ 3,165.00 Trunk Area $1300.00 (I) 1982-111 Navarre Utilities Noiibem Avenue $515.00 (trunk unit acrc/unit) $3,430.00 Per Acre (1) 1 1985-1 Crvstal Bav $15,065.00 CREDIT TO AREA: (I) M2.37MI Sewer Operating (4) 406-37MI PIR Faatl «7 LS A FnrecMain (5) 30S-3749I 1992 Imptnre Stobka Bay (9) 311*37991 1997 Impravemcats (7) 313-37991 I999-I999 Sewer laproveaients (Q 314-37991 2900 Sewer Impiwvenwtt 2003 Fix' Schedtde-Fuf^i I / ^ -r/’l' ' •'•-*.T-»->ry4. »%5 ‘.1, ■• ;•*^ ^ - ;,=.^ V*' ‘’. ALL SANITARY SEWER AND MUNICIPAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES (If aol prcvioMsIy assessed or if an improvement project b not deemed to br required fat tke sole dberetfam of the CMy. If an impravement b required, the connection chaq^ may be in addition to any assessment) The coancctioo chai|c for properties wbhios to connect to the sewer or water but which arc located oubidc the dcHncai*d ^undarics of the affected project area shall be charged the connccthm fee for that area. Such conacctions arc subject to City Council approval 1983*1 Highway 12 Orono*Long Lakc- Mcdina S 1,475.00 (1) 1989 Highway 12 $5,440/acre (1) 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer I Stubbs Bay NE/NW • Bayside East II Bederwo^ III Bayside North IV Oxford V Cygnet and Leaf $16,950.00 $26,250.00 $22,225.00 $31370.00 $25355.00 (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) CREDIT TO AREA? (I) M2-37MI Sewer Operatiag (4) 40M749I PIR Fand #7 LS A ForcoaMln (5) 301^7491 1992 Improve Stobha ROy (4) 3IL37491 1997 Improvements (7) 31347491 I994-I999 Sewer Improvements ^ 31447491 2444 Sewer Improvcmentt 200 J Fee Schedule-Page 12 iibateaauna4uuLiiiSBndhMitfiEiM^j Bbthoa umfai ALL SANITARY SLWER AND MUNICIPAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES (If oot prcvioiisly assessed or if an improvement project is not deemed to be reqnired in the sole discretion of the City. If an improvement b rcqnircd, the connection charge may be in addition to any assessment.) The connection charge for properties wbhing to connect to the sewer or water but which are located outside the delincatctf boundaries of the affected project area shall be charged the connection fee for that area. Such connections arc subject to City Council approval - ' 1997 SEWER 97-1 North L.L7L.L.C.C $22,085.00 (6) 97-2 Bracketts Poiat $36,765.00 (6) 97-3 Bay Ridge $19,630.00 (6) 1998 -1999 SEWER 1998 Shorclinc/Heritngc Sewer $18,545.00 (7) 99-1 OroBO Orebard Sewer $24,440.00 (7) 99-2 Edgewood Hills Sewer $31,060.00 (7) 2000 SEWER 2000-1 Webber llilb $8,050.00 Excludes Grinder Allowance (8) 2000-2 Fox Ridge $17,770.00 Excludes Grinder Allowance (8) 2000-3 East Long Luke $14,105.00 Excludes Grinder Allowance (8) TOAREA: (I) <02-37(91 Sewer Operating <4) 4M-37<9I PIR Fnnd »7 LS A Forcentain (5) 30I-37<9I 1992 Improve Stnbbs Bay (0 311-37691 1997 Improvemento (7) 313-37691 I998-I9M Sewer Improve (S) 314-37691 2000 Sewer Improvements 2003 Fee SchcJulc^Pagf !3 iT* ALL SANITARY SEWER AND MUNICIPAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES (IfMoi previously assessed or if an improvcnicnl project is not deemed to be required in the sole discretion of the City. If an improvement b required, the connection charge may be in addition to any assessment.) The connection charge for properties wbhing to connect to the sewer or water but which are located outside the delincate«r|iottndaries of the affected project area shall be charged the connection fee for that area. Such connections arc subject to City Council approval. 1984 Forcentuin and Lift Station 87 upgrade: (An additional fee is charged for properties benefitting from the 1984 forcemain and lift station 87 upgrade, as follows, sec map for affected areas): #6 Hy l*ass -f H7 Forcemain Credit To Area KnUting Propcrlii*5i/lncr€ii!\ic $ 580.00 (4) 1 New Bld|»s Kcpiacinfs R&Mlinf’ DMg5i (If usage increases from eiisling) $580.00 (4) New Kesidenlial w/KiLstingSlub $1,665.00 New Kesidenlial without Stub S52U.UO(l)$1,66.5.00(4)(l)and (4) 1 Freshwater Biological (Inch "Marsh at Lafayette' 1 Lob) $520.00(1)$ 650.00 (4) Per unit on connection (previously assessed $2,000/acre) (l)and (4) 1989 Gravity Line and Lift Station 810 By Pass: An additional fee is charged for properties benefitting from the 1989 gravity line and lift station 810 by-pass per Resolution 82671: Fixed Charge +810 By Pass Credit To Area 1 (see map for affected areas)$ 225.00 $2,930.00 (1) * CREDIT TO AREA: (I) 602-J769I Sewer Operating (4) 406-3749I PIR Fund «7 LS A Forccmabi (5) 3tW>3769| 1992 Improve Stubbs Boy (4)311-37691 1997 Improvements (7) 313-37691 1998-1999 Sewer improvements (8) 314-37691 2000 Sewer Improvements 2(M)J FciT Schcduli'-Piigc 14 r ALL SANITARY SEWER AND MUNICIPAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES (If not previously assessed or if an improvement project is not deemed to be required in the sole discretion of the City. If an improvement is required, the connection charge may be in addition to any assessment.) The connection charge for properties wbhing to connect to the sewer or water but which arc located outside the delineated^undarics of the affected project area shall be charged the connection fee for the area. Such connections arc subject to City Council approval WATER PROJECTS By District - Project Unit Charge +Area Or Acreage Charge + Front Foot Charge Credit To Area 1967 LW-I Highway 12/Crystal Bay Road $ 4,895.00 $ 36.40 (1) 1969 LW-2 Chevy Chase S 4,895.00 m (1) 1970 LW-1 Navarre Residential $ 2,425.00 S 24.15 (1) 1970 LW-1 Navarre Commercial S 3,640.00 $ .36.40 (1) 1982-1A Navarro $ 2,585.00 (1) 1989 Highway 12 $8,995/acre (1) 1 1999 Navarre Water Treatment 1 Plant Rehabilitation* $ 400.00 (I) served with municipal water service via the Navarre Water Treatment Plant) which were either not assessed or not fully assessed via special assessment for the 1999 Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation Project shall pay a connection charge of S390.00 per unit upon connection to the municipal water system. Such charge shall be collected at the time a building permit is issued for new construction, or at the time a connection permit is issued for existing structures. CREDIT TO AREA; (1)601-37391 Water Operating ? SEWER AND WATER UNIT ADJUSTMENT CHARGES CHARGES • Charges shall result from either an intensification of an existing non-rcsidential use or a new non-rcsiderttial use that replaces a former use on a property located within an area already assessed and served by municipal sewer and water. CREDIT Credit for previously assessed sewer or water units shall be applied against the total number of sewer and water units established for the new use. UNIT CHARGE Each sewer and each water unit adjustment charge shall be equal to the current Service Availability Charge established by the Metropolitan Council Wastewater Services or its successor and shall be payable to the City of Orono upon application /or a building permit. r'n-si ; • * * .♦k’ 2003 Fee ScheiMc-Page 16 Mduiiiitd CONSTRtJCTION PERMITS AND INSPECTION FFF.S Permit Tvfit ON-SITE SYSTEMS Dc*i|a Review Fees Sabdivkioa Site Evaliialioa Report Review Rctklntial System Psrmit: Repair csbtiac system Ncw/Rcpiaccmeat System Noa-Residcatial System Permit: New or Total rcplacemcat Partial replacemeat Aaaoal Service Charge GRADING. EXCAVATION, PILLING 500 coble yards or less 501 -i-coble yards Applicable Code Sectioa V|Ord.210 locioded with permit fees S 60.00/per aew h>t $50.00 SIOO.OO -<* $20.00 per each iospectioii over 3 (lacludes outhouse oa Big Island) $100.00 $20.00 per each inspection over 3 $ 60.00 + $20.00 per each inspcctioa over 3 $ 50.00/syslcm/ycar plus Scctioa 12.30, Subd 8(C) an additional $10.00 fee for late penalty plus 8% interest for unpaid charges certified $ 50.00 (staff permit) + actual eagino’ring fees if required ($100.00 if CLginccriag fee necessary ) $ 25.00 per each iaspectioa over 1st $50.00 CondUbnal Use PSrmit ($100.00 if cnginecriag fee necessary) $25.00 per each iaspectioa over 1st NOTE: 5®l cubic yards or more requires a Conditional Us* Permit unless approved as part of buBdtag permit SIGNS Temporary renuMnt Per IWTGBCySBC Standard Schedule MiufaHuni $35.00 Fee !7 CONSTRUCTION PERMITS AND INSPECTKIN FEES fCONT.l Penult Type SPECIAL INSPECTION CHARGES Site luspeciloii wiikom pencil (whea called by owner) laspcclion nrcluirtc for work or ■ppMcalion on Bis Islaixl or Dccring Island Rcinspcction fee after faiinre lo comply with Buildins, Septic or Zoning Code Correction Notice - 3rd trip FIRE PROTECTION Fire Preventioa Inspection Fire Code Permits Commercial Fire Ahrm Plan Review Fee Fire Sprinkler Systems - Commercial Kitchen Fire Estingnbhiag System - Commercial LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEM BURNING PERMITS Up to 5 times per year For Each Rcinspcction More than S times per year (for aU organiiations and iadivklHab regardicss of tax status) CONTRACTUAL INSPECTION SERVICE Monthly Rataiacr Fee (IncIndM derkal fknc) laapcoMan Charge Clerfcal Fee (Only chaigcd if derkal nee k esceadve) 1 •> Applkabk C^e Section S 30.00 S30.00 per trip + boat rental if transportation b not provided by owner S 30.00 per trip -*■ S30.00 per hour after 1st hour Ord. 223 No Charge $ 30.00 each Per 1997 UBC Schedute 6S% of permit fee S 35.00 minimum fee or 1.25% of contract prkc Surcharge based on valuation Per 1997 UBC/SBC Standard Schednk $35.00 No Charge $20.00 $100.00 Per Contract $ 25.00 per month $ 25.00 per inspectioo Prr 1997 UBC/SBC Standard Schedule $ 20.00 per hoar 2003 Fee SckeJule-Page IS Siam r LICENSES A MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES COMMERCIAL MARINA LICENSE AppUcatioii Fee (iaittel) Rcacwal Applicitioa A lupcctioii Fee (Mini) pl«s: Late fee JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE AppUcatiM Fee(laitial) Reaewal Applicalioa Fee Phil eaeh slip Late Fee CANOE RACK RENTAL GARBAGE HAULER LICENSE - flat rate - per hauler • transfer fee HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE (Level 2) TEMPORARY TRAILERS A BUILDINGS LICENSE ZONING DEPARTMENT DOCUMENTS 2000-2020 Comprehensive Plan Mnnieipal Code Book - complete (Ch. M2 w/revWons) Mnakipal Code Book • PMrtions Ch I thm9(Book I)w/revisioos Ch 10 thru 12 (Book 2) w/ievisions Ch 10 only (Zoning Code) w/revisions Ch 11 only (Snbdk. Code) w/revisions Other Individnal Chapters Binder Comp. Plan AnMndment 02 (Hwy 12) Applicable Cq^ Section 5300.00 5200.00 "I SHW.00 $50.00 $20.00 $ 2.00 $25.00 $40.00/slip $50.00 $ 15.00/tmck $30.00 Section 5.35 $ 100.00 Initial Review Fee Section 5.40 $30.00 (Annual Review Fee) $30.00 $75.00 $ 40.00 w/binder $35.00 loose $3$00 loose $25.00 loose $15.00 loose $ JS/page $ 5.00 $ 5.00 200J Fee Fchedule-P/fite 19 LICENSES A MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES fCONT.l DocMiMt Type City Maps Topographic laformatioa BaUdiag A Plaaaiag Pablicalioiis Gcacral Admiabtrailvc Lkcatw/Fiacs Tobacco LkcBMs Lkcascc or Employee Violatioas witbia 24 moath period It! Oircaw 2ad OITcaw 3rd OfTcaM A Over Gambliag A Kafllc LkeaM Traasteat Mcrcbaat/Pcddicr Lieeose Geaeral Admlahtralive Poeamcats Lisliag laformatioa Assenmeat Search - Wrilica (Verbal searches oot givea) Fas Charge Copy Service (for pablic CUy records oaly) II'*« 17” copies ladivMaal copies of Ordiaaaces (I copy) Repriat of Oversiaed Docaamals that have beta mkrolilawd BaMdiag Pha Copies Carreat Street Addrem Booh Labek from UiBity BiHiag System Aadio Record Ug DapHcatioa Rstaraed Check Charge Eketraak Laheb . ^ AppIkabk Code SectioB£sc S 2.00 each $ i2.00 per acre cngiaecriag coasaltaal fee if computer diskette is required As Posted - Prices subject to chaage SIOO.OO Section 5.24 S 75.00 $200.00 $250.00 $10.00 Section 5.2J $100.00 plas actaal costs up to $1,500 Section 5.30 $10.00 $ 15.00/parcci No charge up to 6 pages; $.25 each additional page $ .25each $ 1.00 each No Charge Cost of copying service, Mcsscagcr service A Mia. Ckrkal Fee of $5.00 Cost of Copying, Messenger Service A Mia. Ckrkal Fee of $5.00 (satire amoaat to be paid apon request) $25.00 $.05 per label (apprdiimatcly $150.00) S 10.00 per tape S2R00 $50.00 2003 Fee SchcJuIc-Page 20 vmt I iriiHr 1 V 1. < i i1 ( ; I 1 ] 1 1 h 4*i' i11r\ LICENSES A MISCELLANEOUS CHARGKS rCONT.> Penwit Tvag Polk« PcPTliiiciit Admtohiertd BEER, WINE A LIQUOR LICENSES liiitMl lavcslicalioa Oa-SalcN)fr-Sale Liqvor/3.2 Bcrr On Sale/ J.2 BccrOITSalc/Wiac la slate iavcsliitalioa Out stale iavestigation OfT-Sale Liquor Licease Bead Rcquircmeal Oa-Saie Liquor Licease Oa-Sale Wiae Licease J.2 Beer OITSale (Aaaual) 3.2 Beer Oa-Sale (Aaaual) Selup( Aaaual) Club Liquor Licease (weekday) (Suaday) Teasporary Set -up Peraiit (oae day) Temporary Beer Permit (oae day) Liquor Viohlioas r Violalioa 2*^ Violalioa 3** Violalioa o*** Violalioa AMUSEMENT DEVICE LICENSES Per Esiablishmcal (Annual) Per Macbiac Fee PUBLIC DANCE LICENSE (aaaual) (Individual Permil) LARGE ASSEMBLY PERMIT (over 300 people) FIREWORKS PERMIT id ■.4^ Fee Applicable Code Scctiop •'!$1,000.00 per License Collected al Applkalloa Actual cost up to $10,000 Actual cost Section 4.02 $150.00 $5,000.00 Section 4JO $5,000.00 Section 4J0 $2,000.00 Sectioa 4.40 $ 50.00 Sectioa 4.20 $ 100.00 Section 4.20 $ 100.00 A Section 4.60 $ 200.00 Sectioa 4.50 $ 200.00 Sectioa 4.50 $ 50.00/cach Section 4.61 $ 50.00/caih Section 4.21 $500.00 $1,000 A 3 day license suspension $2,000 A 2 week Ikease suspension Licease revocation Section 5.20 $100.00 nuchiae fee $ 25.00 each $100.00 $ 10.00 Sectioa 5.21 Section 5.21 $200.00 + $60.00 each Sectioa 5J5 additional day; actaal costs up to $1,500 $50.00 ScctioB6.10 2003 Fee Schedule-Page 22 FIREARMS PERMIT TO CARRY LIMITED TRAPPING PERMIT SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT (ImIikIcs Parades, Noise EicoiptioD, Use of Pablk Property) FALSE POLICE ALARM USER FEES First false alarm/cakadar year Secoad false atarai/calcadar year Third false alana/cakadar year Foarth false alarai/cakadar year Fifth aad over fake alana/cakadar year FALSE FIRE ALARM USER FEES First fake alarai/cakadar year Sccoad fake afama/rakadar year Third fake alarai/cakadar year Foarth fake alarai/cakadar year Fifth A over fake alarai/cakadar year FINGERPRINTING SERVICE Appikabk Code Seclioa SeclioB 9.10 S 10.00 S 20.00 Sectioa 9.11, Ord. 232 & Ord. 243 S 50.00 or S200.00 if over Section 6.08 200 peopk; actual costs up to 51,500 Section 9J5 No Charge $50.00 5100.00 5150.00 $250.00 Section 9J5 No Charge 5 75.00 5250.00 5350.00 5500.00 each caU $ 25.00/appUcatioB for 2 cards RESIDENTS ONLY 513.00 each a dditioBal card (CkkcBship No Charge) 200S Fte ScheMe~Page 2S rihliMU. LICENSES A MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES fCONT.^ Apolicaiiow Tvac Police Dtoartifi Adwtobtei COPY SERVICE • PMce Records Pint Two Copies AddMooal Copies SUMMARY DATA REPORT COPY OF ACCiDENT REPORTS Accidcot Photos COPY OF DRIVER'S LICENSE RECORD COPY FROM MICROFICHE FILE First Two Copies Additiooal Copies "NO PARKING ORDER OF POLICE" paper sigos (ao lath iaclodcd) AUDIO TAPE DUPLICATION VIDEO TAPE DUPLICATION < ' Applicable Code Sectioii •*! S S.00/nrst page S.2S each additiooal page $ 0.25 each S 10.00 $ 5.00 each $ 25.00 mioimuni or actual cost S 5.00 each $10.00 S .50 each S 1.00 each S 10.00 each $50.00 each 2003 Fee Schedule- Page 24 iniBLIC WORKS l)KPARTMKNT MISCICLLANKOUS CI1AK(;KS AppUcatlon Tvnc Fee Applic;tblc C ode Si-clion Utility S«rvk< Rates - EfTcctivc bcjiianiag First Quartrr 2003 MUNICIPAL SEWEK RATE by uait: 1st 2ad by flow: $ 88.85 per qaartcr $ 80.50 per quarter $ 3J5/I000 galloa plus S 8J5 per quarter per coauecUoa •'I MUNICIPAL WATER RATES BUbac A Ready to Serve Cfag Water Usage Rate Uacoaaected Property Chg (ready to serve/hydraat chg) Area #1 Area #2 Area 83 Navarre Hwv 12 Chew Chase $25.4S/qtr $9.25/qtr $9.25/qtr $2.l5dOOOgal $2.98fl000gal $2.24/1000 gal $25.45/qtr -O- -0- Federally Maadated Safe Driakiag Water Testiag Program (Charged per service coaacctioa) $ 5.21 per year on second quarter hilling Quarterly Service Charge for Non-Functioning $ 50.00 or Inaccessible Water Meter Ord. 218,2*^ Scries Bulk sale to Minnetonka Beach for Lafayette Ridge Area - Area 81 Rate $25.4S/qtr billing charge plus S2.I5/I(M)0 gallon total flow at border meter. Bulk sale - All Others - $25.00 per location plus area rate pcr/1,000 gallons. Le. Fill swimming pool or watering sod. Penalty for late payment of sewer/water bilb - 8% after 30 days from billing date (applied to the total unpaid bahnee). Interest nt 8% on unpaid watcr/sewer biUs certifled. Wa:erTum-On Water Tum-off $ 20.00 Minimum $ 20.00 Minimum Water System Rcpair/Rcpbccmcnt if damage caused by property owner: Labor - Current liourly Rate Parts • At Cost 200} Fee Schedule-Page 25 iBBIilb^f II III itnr8b>ir.wc.^ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MISCELLANKPUS CHARGES fCONT.^ Application Type MUNICIPAL STORM WATER UTILITY RATES Applicable Code Section Ord. No. 21J, Series The basic intent of stom water reenhtioM b to minimize the impact of development on natnral drainage systems. . ' Any development in an area wHI change the natnral conditions by increasing the total volume of mnofTand the level of poUutant loading. The storm water utility provides dedicated funds to operate, maintain, manage, construct or reconstruct the municipal storm water drainage system. Residential properties will be charged one residentbl unit fee for each residential unit on the property. Non-resideatial p.-opcrtics will be charged the appropriate number of residential unit fees based on the **Residential Equivalent Factor ” for the property. One resideatial unit: S 9.00 per quarter Non-resideatial unit: Hased on "Residential Equivalent Factor” RECYCLING CHARGE Recycling Container - Initial for new residence Rcpiaccmcnl Container (including sales las) Wheel KM $ 23.08/year No Charge $ 3.00 each SS.00 GOLF COURSE CHARGES - Eflcclive dale 2003 Season Monday thru Friday (eichiding HoUdsys) Begin Play Before 12:00 Noon 1st Nine Holes $9.S0 2nd Nine Holes S 7.00 Alter 12:00 Noon and Weekend Rates 1st Nine Holes $12.00 2nd Nine Holes S 9.00 2nd Nine Holes (Wcehday After 12:00 Noon) $7.00 League Rales Monday thru Friday $10.00 Senior CHizea (Over <0 years old) Begin Play Before'l2:00 Noon - Weekdays 1st Nine Holes $0.S0 2nd Nine Holes s d.80 Season Ticket (Senior CMiiens Only)SldO.00 .. 1 -i i • % 200J Fee Schedule Page 26 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES fCONT.^ AnalicatioB Tvne Applicable Code Scctio* . GOLF COURSE CHARGES • EITeclivc date 2003 Scasoa (coniiaHcd) GOLF CART RENTAL Molorlicd: 1st NiM Hola (After 12:00 & Wcckcads) 2mI Ntac Holes S 11.00 $ 9.00 Bcgia Play Before 12:00 Noon 1st Nioc Holes 2nd Nine Holes Pall Carts - Per Roond Golf dabs - Per Roaad S 9.00 $ 7.00 S 2.50 S 3.00 STUDENT RATE (AGES 12 • 17) Begia Play Before Nooa Monday - Friday, Eicluding Holidays 1st Nine Holes 2nd Nine Holes $ 6.50 $ 6.50 FALL GOLF RATES Will begin the third Monday of September. - Weehend Rates: 1st Nhw Holes 2nd Nine Holes RMhigCart S 10.00 $ 7.00 S S.00/peraiae • Weekday Rates: 1st Nint. Holes 2nd Nine Holes Sr. A Jr. RidiagCart $ 7.00 S 4.00 $ 4.00 S 6.00(peraine CONCESSIONS As Pasted m 2003 Fee Schedule -Page 2'f PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES A SERVICES Street or Tnillk Sigos (tale iaclodes iostallalioo) Driveway Calverts (sale oaly, sot iastalled) Water Meter Saks (See BoUdiag Permit Scctioa) $IOO.(M)/std. siga Oa Qaote Bask Teaiporary No Parkiag Signs (withoat bth)S LOO each Drivcway/Carb-Cat Permiu ladividaal Driveways $ 30.00/permit New Street latersections (See zoning section - Special improvement fees) Address Change Reqaest by Owner $50.00 per address SECTION 3. This ordinance establishing the 2003 Pee .Scheduk shall be pnblished as a Snmmary Ordinance in the Laker and Pioneer Newspaper and shall be eircclive the week of Jannary 1.2003. Adopted by the CHy Council of the City of Orono on this 9th day of December, 2002 ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, CHy Ckrk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor V,. -. -I. ^ M 200} Fee Schedule- Page 2S A AccWcnt Reports .......................................24 Adiirets Book ...............................................20 Address Chsn^...........................................28 Administration Document Copies .................20 Afler>The^act Fees .......................................5 Amusement Devices .....................................22 Animal Impound Fees .................................21 Animals at Large ...........................................21 Appeal of Administradve Decision .................4 Assessment Search .....................................20 Audio Recording Duplication .................20,24 i Beer, Wine A Liquor License .........................22 Building Permit Fees .....................................6 Building Plan Copies ...................................20 Burning Permits ...........................................18 C Canoe Rental Slip.........................................19 Certificate of Occupancy ................................8 Code Book Copies .......................................19 Commercial SHe Plan Review ........................2 Commercial Marina License ........................19 Comprehensive Plan Amendment .................3 Comprehensive Guide Plan CopiM..............19 Conditional Use Permit Fees ..........................1 Connection Charges ...............................10-16 Contractual Inspection Service .....................18 Copy Charges - Administration.....................20 Copy Microfiche File • PD ............................24 Copy Service • Police Dept ..........................24 Culverts.......................................................28 D Dance License ............................................22 Demolition Permit Fee ...................................8 Docks • Commercial .......................................8 ^^k)cks - RaeMenlial .......................................8 Dog License ...........•.................................21 Do^ at Large ..............................................21 Driver's License Record ................................24 Drivewmf/Curb Cut Permits ..........................28 Driveway Culverts........................................21 INDEX FOR 2003 FEE SCHEDULE E Easement Vacation.........................................3 Electronic Labels .........................................20 F False Alarm User Fees. . . . . . . . .23 Fingerprinting (Police)..................................23 Fire Alarm Permit .........................................18 Fire Protection .............................................is Fire Sprinkler Permit ....................................18 Firearms Permit To Carry..............................23 Firearms Discharge Permit ..........................23 Fireworks Permit Fee ....................................22 G Gambling/Raffle License ..............................20 Garbage Haulers License ............................19 Golf Course Charges ...................................26 Grading, Excavating, Filling .........................17 H Home Occupation License ..........................19 ! impound Fees ..............................................2I Industrial Revenue Bond AppI.........................4 Inspections ..................................................is J Joint Use Dock License ................................19 K Kennel License .............................................21 Kitchen Fire Extinguishing System ................18 L Labels from Utility Billing ............................20 Large Assembly Permit ................................22 Lawn Sprinkler System ................................18 Licensea ............................ 19.22 Umltod Trappirtg Psrmit ..............................23 Liquor Ucenaea ...........................................22 Listing Info - Realtora ..................................20 M Maps For Sale ...............................................20 Marina Licenses ...........................................19 Mechanical Permit Fees ..................................9 Microfiche Copies (PD) ................................24 Municipal Water Annual Service Charge .... 25 Municipal Code Copies ................................19 Municipal Water Connection Charge ...........IS Municipal Connection Permits (Sewer/Watcr). 9 Municipal Sewer Annual Service Charge .... 29 N ' No Parking" Signs ...............................24,28 Noise Exemption Permit ..............................23 O On-Site Systems (Septic)..............................17 Ordinance Copy...........................................20 Outhouse Construction (See On-Site Systems)! 7 Oversized Document Reprint .......................20 P Parades Permit .............................................23 Park Dedication Fees .....................................6 Peddler/Transient Merchant License ...........20 Plumbing Permit .............................................9 Public Dance License ....................................22 Public Works Supplies A Services ................28 PUD Rezoning ................................................3 B Raffle License ...............................................20 Recycling Charge .........................................26 Recycling Replacement Bins.........................26 Reprint Oversized Documents On Microfilm . 20 Retaining Walis...............................................s Returned Check Charge ................................20 Rezoning Application Fee ..............................3 Rip Rap Ap^icadon Fee ................................4 t S Sanitary Sewer Cormecdon Charge ..............10 Sepdc Annual Service Charge .......................17 Septic System Permits ..................................17 Sewer Connection Permit Fees .......................9 2003 Fee SchcJuIc-Pagc 29 ■ mliiiii iBBinriiiI MTT ’ • ‘ ^ g S (cont) Sewtr Projects (1963>1973)..........................10 Sower Project* (1980*1992)....................11,12 Sewer Project* (1997*2000)..........................13 Sewer Pr^ect* (Lift St*tion*).......................14 Sewer Rat** ................................................25 Sign*...............................................17.24,28 Sketch Plan...................................................2 Special Event Pennit*.................................23 Special Improvement* ApplicaSon.................4 Special Inspection Charge*..........................18 Special Assessment Searches.....................20 Sprinkler Systems * Commercial and Lawn .. 18 StormwaterfOrsinage Trunk Fee*...................7 Stormwater Utility.........................................26 Street Address Book...................................20 Street Sign* (Public Works)..........................28 Subdivision Application Fee..........................2 Summary Data Report .................................24 Surcharge for Staff Expense..........................5 I Tape Duplication (Admin) • Audio.................20 Tape Duplication (PD) * Audio.......................24 Tape Duplication (PD) * Video.......................24 Temp. “No Parking” (P.W.) Sign*.................28 Temp. "No Parking” (P.D.) Signs...................24 Temporary S Permartent Sign*.....................17 Temporary Trailer/Building..........................19 Tobacco License ........................................20 Topographic Information..............................20 Traffic Signs ................................................28 Transient Merchaitt License........................20 Trapping Permit..........................................23 Tree Removal ................................................8 U Underground Tank Removal..........................9 Unit Adjustment Connection Charge............16 Use of Publie Property.................................23 USiMy Rale Armual Service Charge.........17,28 y Vacation AppScation Fees..............................3 Variance ApfSicaSon l^ees..............................1 Video Tape DupUcaden (PD)........................24 W Water Connection Permit Fee.........................9 Water Meter Fees..........................................9 Water Projects ............................................15 Water Rates..................................................25 Water Tum*Off Charge..................................25 Water Tum*On Charge..................................25 Wheel Kits for Recycling Bins.......................26 z Zoning Amendments..................................3 Zoning Document Copies ...........................19 2003 Fee SchcJulc-PuKc 30 attUgu r- f V.i ■ING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DfC 9 2002 CIIYUFQRO mq DATE: December 2,2002 ITEM NO:I Department Approval: Name LinVee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Proposed 2003 Meeting^hedule Attachment: Proposed 2003 Orono Meeting Schedule On the attached ^hedule, Council meetings are scheduled for the 2nd and 4th Monday of the month at 7:00 p.m. As in the past, only one Council meeting is scheduled in December. Note that in May the Council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday because of the Monday holiday. Planning Commission is scheduled to meet the 3rd Monday of the month at 6:30 p.m. January and Febru^ are the exceptions because of Monday holidays. In those months, the meetings will be on the third Wednesday. In past years, there has not been a meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled in December. Park Commission meetings are scheduled for the first Monday of the month at 7:15 p.m. An exceptions is the September 1 meeting which has been rescheduled for Tuesday because of the Labor Day holiday. There is no December Park Commission meeting scheduled. The City schedules eleven holidays throughout the year, which are indicated with an "X” on the c^endar. Staff is recommending that this year’s floating holiday be used for the day after Christmas. Since Christmas is on Thursday, it makes sense to use the floating holiday on Friday. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to amend/approve/tabIc the 2003 Meeting Schedule. ? 2003 City of Orono Meeting Schedule - Council Chambers JANUARY MAY SEPTEMBER S-M-TWT F SISMTWT F sis MTW 2 3 4 A 7 8 9 10 11 [ill 14 15 16 17 18 21 @ 23 24 25 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 A 6 7 8 9 10 11 M 13 14 15 16 17 18 @ 20 21 22 23 24 2S:ir[2| 28 29 30 31 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 ^ 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 10 17 22^ 24 29 30 12 3 4 5 A 7 8 9 10 11 12 P 14 15 16 17 18 19 53 21 22 23 24 25 26 Ea 28 29 30 31 MARCH JULY NOVEMBER S M T W T F S S MTWTFSiSMT W T F S m 03 1 2 3 >< 5 6^8 9 10 11 12 13 P 15 16 17 18 19 20 gp 22 23 24 25 26 27 m 29 30 31 1 2 A 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ex 12 13 14 15 16 a? 18 19 20 21 22 23 y 25 26 XX 29 30 APRIL AUGUST DECEMBER SMTWT F SISMTWT F sIs M TWT ^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 A 8 •’ 9 10 11 12 13^15 16 17 18 19 20 @ 22 23 24 25 26 27 l28l 29 30 1 2 3 A 5 6 7 8 9 10 jn] 12 13 14 15 16 17 @ 19 20 21 22 23 24 m 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [U 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 XX 27 28 29 30 31 C. 7:00 p.iti. Couocil meeting 2nd dc 4th Monday O 6:30 p.m. Planning Commission 3rd Monday ^ 7:15 p.m. Park Commission 1st Monday V Other Event X Official Holiday •PLANNING COM3nSSION - May through October - 1st Tuesday is an alternate meeting date. Adopted: 12/9/02 J REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DEC 9 2002 DATE: 6meaiNiFibA6Pi ITEM NO: /5 Department Approval: Name LinVee vjJ Tllk City Clerk T Administrator Reviewed: L Wj1 Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Cowcil Liaison to P/rk Commission and Planning Commission Meetings The foliowing is a proposed schedule for Council Member attendance at the monthly Park commission and Planning Commission meetings during 2002. SCHEDULE PARK COMMISSION PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Dale Representative January 6,2003 Jim \V1iite February 3 Mayor Peterson March 3 Jay Nygard April 7 Jim Murphy May 5 Bob Sansevere June 2 Jim White July 7 Mayor Peterson August 4 Jay Nygard September 3 (Tuesday) Jim Murphy October 6 Bob Sansevere November 3 Jim White Meeting Dale Representative January 22,2003 (Wednesday) Mayor Peterson February 19 (Wednesday) Jay Nygard March 17 Bob Sansevere April 21 Jim White May 19 Jim Murphy June 16 Mayor Peterson July 14 Jay Nygard August 18 Bob Sansevere September 15*Jim White October 20 Jim Murphy November 17 Mayor Peterson COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: loMon 2001 wpd i ------^ING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 9 2002 DATE: Decei(^ Vt2O0lif^Q ITEM NO: Department Approval!^ y ; Administrator Reviewed: Name Tom Kuehn Title Finance Director Item Description: ^ Appoint Auditor for Fiscal Year 2002 m Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report We have requested a cost estimate from the audit firm of Malloy, Kamowski, Radoscvich & Company for performing the 2002 fiscal year audits. The estimated cost for the 2002 fiscal year audits, including the Minnesota legal compliance audit and assistance with the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Program, is $23,670 excluding direct expenses. The total cost for the 2001 audit, related .services, and direct expenses wr.< $24,235. There are several activities the City is now involved in that we were not previously. The City has a Tax Increment District, which will require specialized record keeping and reporting. The City is also using Community Block Grant Funds for affordable housing grants and loans. The City is also involved in a joint fire hall project with the City of Long Lake. The audit of these activities will quite possibly require substantial additional time and expense from the audit staff, and therefore could result in significantly higher than estimated audit costs. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Council appointment of the audit firm of Malloy, Kamowski, Radosevich & Co., P,S. to perform the required audits for the 2002 fiscal year records at an estimated cost of $23,670, excluding direct expenses. Wof4 NKMToMUMtt oumkM -“^iNG Rf C^I FST FOR ( OI M IL \( I ION Ofc ^ 2002 tllY Ut OROfurx I)AI F,: December 4. 2^)02 ' ITFMNO: /? I)ep»rimenf Approval: L' f Name l orn Kiiehn lille f inance Director Administrator Rt-siessed: m Agenda Section: ( ity Administrator's Report Item Description- 2002 Intertiind Iransters and I.oan Payments Attachment: Schedule of 2002 Interfund I raiisfers and I oan Payments l ach year the Council is re».|ucsted to authori/e transfer of monies between funds. I hcse transactions tall into two categories: 1. ) Hudgeted I ransfers - Items designated in that year s budget when originally adopted for the purpose of pros iding support from one fund to another 2. ) Fund Obligations - (a) Payments from one fund to another to reimburse expenses incurred by one fund »m behalf on another. This is generally for City portions of special assessments, or for equipment capital mitlay. (b) Foan payments Irom c>ne fund to another I oans are generally made to eonstruction funds for the purpose of payment of expenses incurred prior to the .sale of bonds and the lewing of .special assessments. In addition , certain loans are necessary to fund major undertakings \shen the fund incurring the expense does not have adequate cash flow av ailable to - complete the prirjecl. I his would include such situations as the loan from the Community Inve.stniMt f und to the W ater Operating Fund for the Nav arre water plant rehabilitation project. ( Ol N( IF A( 11().\ Rl yi FSI FI): Approval of transfers as indicated on the attached schedule. SCHEDULE OF 2002 INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND LOAN PAYMFNTS FROM FUND Generfll General Community Investment Water Operating Sewer Operating Park TOFUND AMOUNT PURPOSE Imp & Equip Outlay $ 105,000 Annual operating transfer for capital equipment purchases, as budgeted. Imp & Equip Outlay $ 8,400 Budgeted annual payment from police operating budget for city network improve­ ments. 1998 Public Facility $ 130,000 Reftuiding Bond Debt Community Investment 1999 Improvement Bond Debt Community Investment $ 52,130 $ 13,110 $ 33,000 Annual operating transfer for debt service support of HRA building bonds, as budgeted. Budgeted loan payment for Navarre water treatment plant rehabilitation project. (Pripc Paid. $31,660; int paid, $20,470. Loan balance at 12/31/02, $348,360). Annual operating tr''.nsfer for debt service support of non- assessed properties, as budgeted. Budgeted loan payment for land purchase.! Loan balance at 12/31/02, $87,000). Wot# Peif«Kf\To«\MMw4:i A4HiiKaP02Ti ■Mltoj.l T. ------------------ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 9 2002 DATE: December ITEM NO: / S' Department Approval Name Tom Kuehn Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed: m Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Authorization to disburse City funds for claims received Typically during the month o/'Dccember the City has only one Council mcctinp. The second Council meeting, which falls on or near the Christn.as holiday, has been canceled. We will have the next scheduled Council meeting on Monday, January 13,2003. We therefore are requesting authorization to do a normal claims processing for the canceled Council meeting. This practice has been done in December each year with the Council then formally approving the claims at the first meeting in January of the following year. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to authorize the City Treasurer to disburse City funds in payment of claims received for the December 23"* Council meeting, which has been canceled, and that such paid claims be presented for formal approval at the January 13,2003, Council meeting. ---------------------•NG REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 9 2002 Cl IY Or ORq/uq DATE: December 4,2007 ITEM NO = 19 Departmeat Approval; y s Name Tom Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Receipt of the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the 2001 Financial Report Attachments; • Notification leticr from the Government Finance Officers Assoc., dated 11/22/02 • Sample news release. • Award of Financial Reporting Achievement. The City of Orono has teen awarded the G.F.O.A. Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended December 31,2001 . This is the fifieenth consecutive year that the City received this prestigious award. The Certificate of Achievement is the highest form of recognition in governmental accounting and financial reporting, and its attainment represents a significant accomplishment by a government and its management. 1 would like to thank Assistant Finance Director Ron Olson and Payroll/Utility Billing Specialist Sandy Pettit for their ongoing efforts and assistance in again achieving this award, and the audit staff of Malloy, Montague, Kamowski, Radosevich and Co., for their valuable assistance, and the City Council for their leadership in supporting and encouraging the City to seek this award. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Information item, no action requested. WPW1Nb(IMVM)dC5\Tu«VGf OACLRT wptf GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION SOS North LaSalle Street, Suite S700, Cnicago. Illinois 60601-1210 312/977-9700 • Fa*; 312/977-4906 November 22, 2002 The Honorable Barbara Peterson Kayor City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Mayoi Peterson: We are pleased to notify you that your comprehensive annual finan cial report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001 qualifies for a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. The Certificate of Achievement is the highest form of recognition in governmental accounting and financial reporting, and its attainment represents a significant accomplishment by a government and its management. The Certificate of Achievement plaque will be shipped to: Mr. Thomas M. Kuehn Finance Director under separate cover in about eight weeks. We hope that you will arrange for a formal presentation of the Certificate and Award of Financial Reporting Achievement, and that appropriate publicity will be given to this notable achievement. To assist with this, enclosed are a sample news release and the Certificate Program "Results” for reports with fiscal years .nded during 2000 repre­ senting the most recent statistics available. We hope that your example will encourage other government offi cials in their efforts to achieve and maintain an appropriate standard of excellence in financial reporting. ' - Sincerely, GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Stephen J. Gaii^ier Director/Technical Services Center SJG/ds WASHMCTON OFFICE 1>S0 K StreaC, N.W, Suto 350. Wafhinaton. OC 20006 202/429«7SO • Fax: 202/ Waahington, 202/42&27 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION 203 North Labile Suite 27CD. Chicago. Blinois 60601-1210 November 22, 2002 >go, _ _ 312/977-9700 • Fax: 312/377-4B06 For information contact: Stephen Gauthier (312) 977-9700NEWS RELEASE (Chicago)--The Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Finan­ cial Reporting has been awarded to: City of Orono> MM by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) for its comprehensive annual financial report (CAFR). The Certificate of Achievement is the highest form of recognition in the area of governmental accounting and financial reporting, and its attainment represents a significant accomplish ment by 'a government and its management. ■ An Award of Financial Reporting Achievement has been awarded to the individual(s), department or agency designated by the government as primarily responsible for preparing the award­ winning CAFR. This has been presented to: Thomas M. Kuehn, Finance Director The CAFR has been judged by an impartial panel to meet the high standards of the program including demonstrating a construc­ tive "'spirit of full disclosure" to clearly communirate_;Jj.ts financial story and motivate potential users and user groups to read the CAFR. The GFOA i.g a nonprofit professional association serving approximately 14,000 government finance professionals with offices in Chicago, Illinois, and Washington, D.C. WASHM6T0N OFFCE 1790 K 8bwt N.W.. Sum 390. VNMhmoton. DC 20006 202/42»2790 • Fsc 202/ wigton 4^: •V!Ty ,' '>" ./I * ^ / The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada presents thisr AWARD OF HNANCIAL REPORTING ACHIEVEMENT Thomas M. Kuehn Finance Director City of Orono, Minnesota ThtAamd tf FuunuUl Rtpartit^Athievemaa ufmtnted hy the Go vernment Finnnce Officers Attmuttion to the ineUviiu*t(t) Jesiputteti m imtmmenutl in their gooemsnent unit nehirvii^ a Certificate of Achievement for ExcrUence in Financial Fepartittg A Certificate ifAchievement it fresemed to thorn government unit: whose annnalfinancial reports arejtifgisl to adhere to program ttandanlt and rep,tsents the higfoest award in governsnent finatwial reporting. Exentivt Direct Date • •* a < November 22, 2002 r! *-* REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DEC 9 2002 DATE: Dc(ifcfairb#9/««» ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name RonMoone TUk City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:0.Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Change in Name of Fleming Trail Addition Plat-Resolution The covenants placed on the Fleming Trail Addition property in Long Lake require that the City of Orono approve the platting of the property. The City recently approved the plat, but the developer has now changed the name of the plat to Stoneridge Colony. This change requires an approval by Orono. At its December 5 worksession, it was the consensus of the Council to approve the name change. A resolution approving the name change is attached for Council adoption. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the change of the Fleming Trail Addition plat to Stoneridge Colony. I A RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE IN NAME OF PLAT OF FLEMING TRAIL ADDITION WHEREAS, the Cit) of Orono previously a^^roved the propose*! Plat of Fleming Trail Addition <hy Resolution No. 4888, dated October 28,2002; and WHEREAS, the name of the proposed plat has changed from Fleming Trail Addition to Stoneridge Colony. THAT; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA, 1, For the purposes of correcting the record, the previous Resolution No. 4888, dated October 28,2002, shall be revised to refer to the new name of Stoneridge Colony. Adopted by the City Council of Orono this____day of December, 2002. CITY OF ORONO By:. Barbara Peterson, Mayor ATTEST; Lin Vee, City Clerk II3I29.I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ING OfC 9 2002 Cl I Y UH OflOMo DATE: [)eceinber 6,2002 ‘ ITEM NO = A( Department Approval:\dministrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Naaic Ron Moorse City Administrator’s THIc City Administrator _______________________ Report Item Description: Pay Adjustment-Chief Good Police Chief Stephany Good was to receive a pay adjustment on her one year anniversary, subject to satisfactory performance. Due to conflicting schedules and workload priorities, the performance evaluation was delayed, with the expectation that the pay adjustment resulting from the evaluation would be made effective as of the one year anniversary date. The performance evaluation has now been completed. Chief Good has been performing at an outstanding level. Based on the outstanding level of performance, it is recommended Chief Good's salary be increased by 3.75%, effective February IS, 2002, which is the same increase provided to ail non-union employees for 2002. Council Action Requested : Motion to approve a salary increase of 3.75% for Chief Stephany Good, effective February 15,2002. • , ^ " W ! i t I • ;i ' -------— ii REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DEC 9.2002 Date: 12/09/0^,;n y OF orono Item No: Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name: Title: Stephany Good Chief of Police Item Description: Police Department Purchase Request DISCUSSION The police department has refrained from purchasing items approved for the 2002 budget due to concerns with personnel costs and other possible budget shortfalls (i.e. squad maintenance, fuel, etc.). A conservative approach has been taken throughout the year and it appears funds will remain in the 2002 budget for several approved purchases. The police dcpu.1mcnt requests council approval for the following priority expenditures: 1) Furnish sergeant office with three workstations $5,000 I Replacement radar $1,900 1 computers, I printer (sergeant office) $2,000 Digital camera: Crime scene & evidence $ 600 Cabcling and data-ports_________ $1,000 2) 3) 4) 5) Total $10,500 It is necessary to account for all outstanding 2002 obligations in order to accurately deicmiine the amount of surplus funds. Because invoices may not be received until January or even February, the amount of the surplus will not be known until that time. At that time, the Council will be asked to approve a budget carryover from the 2002 budget based on the surplus funds available. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to authorize all or a portion of the above expenditures using 2002 budget dollars, subject to approval of a budget carryover in 2003, based on the surplus funds available from the 2002 Police budget expenditures. c i REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DEC 9 2002 CITY OF ORONO DATE: December 5,2002 ITEM NO Department Approval: Nanc Ron Moorse THIc City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Elimination of Facility Rental Charge from Police Service Cost Allocation In a recent worksession, the Council determined that the charge for facility rental should be deleted from the police service cost allocation calculation. A motion approving this change is needed to formalize the Council’s action. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the elimination of the facility rental charge from the police service cost allocation calculation, effective January 1,2003. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: 12/9/02 ......-^ING 9 2002 ClfYOFOflO/VO Item No: Dq)artment Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Exhibits: DISCUSSION The police department is interested in improving its relationship with the community, assessing needs and expectations and by providing information regarding services and resources. One way to do this is via a web page. In 2001, Officer Scott Boris designed a web page for the police department that links to the city of Orono web page. It is found at Ihttp://www.nronopolice.org.1 It was a great start towards achieving the above goal, but proved challenging technically and is time intensive. Eirly in 2002, police and community service officers successfully resolved a case that had plagued an Orono neighborhood for a period of time. One of the residents expressed gratitude and offered to assist the department in developing a “marketing" plan. She happens to be extremely talented in web page design and has graciously offered her services to the department free of charge. The police department would like council to consider accepting this offer of assistance by Ms. Stephanie Grande (Senior Business Analyst, ING Employee Benefits, Office: 612.342.301 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to accept assistance from Ms. Stephanie Grande, for the development of a business “marketing" plan which includes redesigning the Orono Police Department web page. Dec ■INQ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION cirroF ^ 2002 ^^PNq Date: 12/09/02 Item No: ^ ^5 Dqiartment Approval*Adrti' listrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Exhibits: DISCUSSION On September 23,2002, the Orono Police Reserves assisted the Long Lake Volunteer Fire Department by helping with trafllc control at a training exercise. On November 4,2002, the Long Lake Fire Department sent a check for $250 to help ofTset costs that the reserves may have. The police department would like council to consider accepting this gift on behalf of the police reserves. The police department and the City of Orono have invited the police reser\ es to the Chria,mas luncheon on December 13,2002 and plan to recognize them for all their hard work at this time. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to accept check in the amount of S2S0 from the Long Lake Fire Department on behalf of the Orono Police Reserves. r Date; 12/05/02 To: Lin Vee m From: Kurt'Erickson Ref: Narrows Saloon - License Renewal Pursuant to the liquor license renewal process I have reviewed the police department records. I found that the Minnesota criminal history data base shows no convictions on file for James Anderst. The Minnesota driver license records show no entry since the last renewal. The police records show no problems in the business since the last renewal. Mr. Anderst has been cooperative in supporting the police departments efforts. Mr. Anderst has been a leader in the Navarre area for business promotion through his efforts to support the Navarre Dog Days event. He has cooperated with the police request to make these events safe for everyone. There are two incidents that should be mentioned in the renewal consideration though. The first incident involves a non sufficient funds (NSF) check that was issued to the City of Orono on 02/14/02 for a water bill. 1 his check was for $879.36. This matter is reflected in Orono Police file 02-0920. The check has not been made good. The other matter deals with an incident on 07/26/02. It is documented in Orono Police file 02- 3543. Orono Police conducted an alcohol compliance check on that date. An employee of the business, Kara Thill sold beer to an underage buyer without asking for any identification. Ms. Thill was charged criminally. She plead guilty to the offense of providing liquor to a minor. On October 22,2002 1 sent Mr. Anderst a letter advising him of the $500.00 civil penalty due the City for the violation. Mr. Anderst has not made this payment. I would note th'tt Mr. Anderst did make a $ 1,000 contribution to the North Tonka Crime Coalition (NTCC). This money was used by NTCC to contribute to the police departments new lifle fund. This payment was made this fall. In general 1 l^lievc Mr. Anderst tries to run a good business. I would recommend the renewal of the license if Mr. Anderst makes good on the NSF check and pays the civil penalty for thirfirst compliance check failure. • 1 would like to ask that the City consider stressing to him how committed the City is to under age compliance checks and the enforcement of all laws. Mr. Anderst has been notified of all of our seminars on responsible beverage service and compliance checks. He and any of his staff are free to attend any of the seminars we conduct. No one from the Narrows attended the 06/06/02 seminar. Mr. Anderst and another employee did attend the 10/28/02 seminar. 1 did not research prior years rosters. 1 would also ask that Mr. Anderst be reminded of the civil penalties in the City’s fee structure. He should know that his first violation has occurred and what the future penalties will be. I feel the more we stress this up front, the better the chance for compliance. This also prevents arguments of not knowing and not understanding ETC. 1 » . ' - -I I 1 i*' . *. •. .. . • ••v. i. 1 Minnesou Dc|>artinem of Public Safety Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement 444 Cedar Street. Suite 133 Sl Paul.MN 53101-5133 651-296-6979 • TTY 651-282-6555 • Fax 651-297-5259 RENEWAL OF LIQUOR. WINE, OR CLUB LICENSE No license mUI be approved or released untiJ the S20 Retailer ID Card fee is received by NIN Liquor Control Lksi:iMS- Please verify your license information contained below. Make corrections if necessary and sign. City Clerk/County Auditor should submit this signed renewal with completed license and licensee liquor liability for the new license period. City CTerk/County Auditor are also required by M5.340A.404 S. 3 to report any license cancellation* License Code 0|v|55 City/County where license approved.Qpono License Period Ending 1 ypnnPiD# PSAI Licensee Name Orono Liquor Inc. Trade Name Narrows Saloon Licensed Location address •33B0 Sh o r e 1 i n e Dr City, State, Zip Code Orono, MN 55392 Business Phone 952/471 -3352 UCENSE FEES Off Sale SO. 00 On Sale S 40Clir,Tf0 Sunday S 200.00 By signing this renewal application, applicant certifies that there has been no change In ownership on the above named licensee. For changes In ownership, the licensee named above, or for new licensees, full applications should be used. See back of this application fur further information needed to complete this renewal. Applicant's signature on this renewal vjiHTiiTsthe following; Failure to report any of the following will result in fines. 1. Licensee confirms it has no interest whatsoever, direedy or indirectly in any other liquor establishments in Minnesota. If so. give details on back of this application. 2. Licensee confirms that it has never had a liquor license rejected by any ciiy/iownship/county in the state of Minnesota. If ever rejected, please give details on the back of this renewal, then sign below. 3. Licensee confirms that for the past five years it has not had a liquor license revoked for any liquor law violation (state or local). If a revocation has occurred, please give details on the back of this renewal, then sign below. 4. Licensee co.Jinns that during the past five yc;us it or its employees have not been cited for any civil or criminal liquor law violations. If violations have occurred, please give details on back of this renewal, then sign below. 5. Licensee confirms that during the past license year, a summons has not been issued undci the Liquor Liability Law (Dram Shop) MS 340A.802. If yes, attach a copy of the summons, then sign below. 6. Licensee confirms that Worken Compensation insurance is in effect for the full licenv.- period. Licensee has attached a liquor llabllily Insurance certificate that correspond.s with the license period in city/county BablHt**^”** ^ $I00,0(M) In cash or secuHUes or $100,0M surety bond may be submitted In lieu of liquor ’ Licensee Signature Dale (Si^maiure certifie; aJi<J?o\e infomiation to be correct and license has been approved by city/county.) City r,HLrk/County Auditor Signature Date (Signature certifies that renewal of a liquor, wine or club license has been approved by the city/county as stated above.) County Attorney Signature Date County Board issued licenses only (Signature cenifies licensee is eligible for license). Police/Sheriff Signature Date (Signature certifies licensee or associates have not been cited during the past five years for any state/local liquor law violations (criminal/civil). Report violations on back, then sign here. PS 9093-98 iWii hffcnr lit <-St nnontk ofllctw. nartngw. home addreasM or telmhone imiwhow iDdicitE briftw IBY Inlercitf whalwtrer. diitcUv or indiwctiv in ath^r nauor hikhni>«t€. jftyrt bywddalbflf Ikii iftdiw Ytolittoat(dvll oryriminal) that have occumd within the last tiv* mat*, ilnci or oflier IWIialtles. tnehutlng Llonor rnntrnl^nnlZ" willlin Hit IMI tlVt YCaW. tWfW. iHTfl n/a Bcport bctoy dctinil IhvoIvIm anv llcenae re lections or iwvnmHnn«» n/a atv/Cnunty M H I U il ft^iinlitiitilBiWtrrtiiiiriiiiiii ■ill inlilihrtTltffrilitl • * •* * * ^4 State of Minnesota County oif Hennepin City of Orono License No: |200311> Amount: I $5200.00 t*; o\ Upon investigation and satisfactory evidence of the qualification of the licensee, this license is granted and pursuant to application and payment of fee thereof, and is subject to all the provisions and conditions of the laws of the United States, the laws of the State of Minnesota, the regulations and ordinances of the City of Orono, and the rules and regulations of the Liquor Control Commissioner, pertaining to such; and subject to revocation according to law for violation thereof. This license is not transferable except by consent of the issuing authority. Granted To: Business Name: Business Address: Commencing: Terminating: Business Description: Orono Liquor Inc. Narrows Saloon 3380 Shoreline Drive January 1, 2003 December 31, 2003 On Sale Liquor Establishment Issued by authority of the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota on: December 9, 2002 Attest: Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk ii imsm Orono Uquor Inc.i* 3380 Shoreline Drive t I TIm fdllowing conditions have been piaced on this license: I 5 •' 1. Delinquent water bill In the amount of $879.36 (plus $25.00 late fee) must be paid prior to issuance of the 2003 license. 2. $500.00 civil penalty for failure of an alcohol compliance check must be paid prior to issuance of the 2003 liquor license. 3. $2,600.00 (balance of the 2003 liquor ••'*ense fee) must be paid by December 27,2002 prior to Issuance of the 2003 liquor license. • r. .w* r' K * tf '' tfiiiSnMliihiiiaTti'i 1^1 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 12/04A>2 1 05 PM Page 1 ------TING DECEMBER 2002 Cheek Amt Inveiee Comment “fc 9 m / S{iy Cliv'Ur-Uflo/vo 10100 Primary Cash * Paid Chk« 074906 G 101-21711 4 12/4/02 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Credit Union $0.00 Total CITY COUHTY CREDIT UNION $0 00 SAVINGS W/H & TRANSFERRED Paid Chk« 074907 12/4/02 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES G 101-21701 Federal Withholding $7.110 02 FEDERAL W/H G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholdrr;g $247 94 FICA & MEDICARE W/H G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholding $247 94 FICA & MEDCr; CITY SHARE Total FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES $7.61*390 Paid ChM 074908 12/4/02 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 G 101-21705Other Retirement $0 00 DEFERRED COMP Total ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 $0 00 Paid Chk« 074909 12/4/02 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE G 101-21707Union Dues $0 00 UNI.'^N DUES Total LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE $0 00 PaidChk# 074910 12/4/02 MN CHILD SUPPORT PMT CTR G 101-21712Other Deductions $0 00 MOROWCZYNSKI #0014456477 Total MN CHILD SUPPORT PMTCTR $0 00 Paid Chk« 074911 12/4/02 MN DEPT OF REVENUE G 101-21702 Siate Withholding $1,779 49 STATE TAX W/H Total MN DEPT OF REVENUE $1,779 49 PaidChk# 074912 12/4/02 ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST G 101-21705Other Retirement $0J)0 MN STATE RETIREMENT Total ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST $0 00 PaidChk# 074913 12/4/02 PEBSCO/OBRA G 101-21705Other Reliren^ent $0 00 OBRA DEFERRED COMP Total PEBSCO/OBRA $0 00 Paid Chk« 074914 12/4/02 PEBSCOIUS CONF OF MAYORS G 101-21705Other Retirement $0 00 USCM - ENTITY 2339 Total PEBSCOrUS CONF OF MAYORS $000 PaidChk# 074315 12/4/02 PUBUC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT % G 101-21704PERA $2.520 48 ‘ PERA CITY SHARE G 101-21704PERA $1.680 30 PERA EMPLOYEE W/H Total PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT $4.200 78 Paid Chk# 074916 12/4/02 UNITED WAY G 101-21708 United Way $0 00 CHARITY DONATIONS Tout UNITED WAY $0,00 PaidChk# 074917 12/4/02 WISCONSIN SCTF G 101-21712Other Deductions $0 00 JOHNSON # 0002756898 Total WISCONSIN SCTF $0.00 10100 Primary Cash $13,594.17 j CITY OF ORONO 11/26A)2 7:07AM Pagel 052092 052093 052094 052095 052096 052097 Ch6ck Nuffibor Employe Namo . > - y tz:- 052086 DODGE. RACHEL M. 052087 JOHNSON. MARY ANN 052088 LESKINEN. DENISE M. 052089 MOORSE. RONALD J. 052090 VEE. LINDAS. 052091 ZIMMERMAN. MARILYN L KUEHN. THOMAS M. OLSON. RONALD J. PETTIT. SANDRA K ANDERSON. BRUCE L. BOBZIEN. SUE A. BORIS. SCOTT W. 052098 BUDIG. STACIE M. 052099 CARLSON. MICHAEL B. 052100 CORNICK. JAMES L 052101 DEMBOUSKI.JAYC. ERICKSON. KURTR FARNIOK. CORREY L. FISCHENICH.DANT. FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K GOOD. STEPHANY R. HENDRICKS. RONALD J. JOHNSON. JEFFREY MADSON. ADRIENNE M. MCNICHOLS. DAVID L MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES PERSELL. WILLIAM R. SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B. TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. TOMC2YK.MARKW WITTKE. ANTHONY A. ARNESON. JOSHUA A. HERMAN. JOHN R LEE. JOSEPH P 052120 BOLTERMXN. MATTHEW A. 052121 BOTTENBERG. WENDY C GAFFRON. MICHAEL P. GAPPA. GREGORY A. MEYER. WILLIAM C. OMAN. LYLE E. VANG.BRUCE L BRINKHAUS. JOHN F. DEBAERE. DONALD L GREGORY. JAMES D. HANSEN. STEVEN OBERAIGNER. SCOTT G. OBRIEN. RANDY L PALMER. GREGORY A. RATHBUN. BARRY J. SKREEN. DALE S. STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD 052102 052103 052104 052105 052106 052107 052108 052109 057110 052111 052112 052113 032114 052115 052116 052117 052118 052119 052122 052123 052124 052125 052126 052127 052126 052129 052130 052131 052132 052133 052134 052135 052136 Pay Pariod 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 check register Chack AfiKMint $991 69 $307.37 $791.74 $7.60 $1,194.99 $599.16 $990.31 $10207 $439.38 $1,665.11 $627.65 $1,166.64 $489.53 $622.39 $1,426.04 $1,541.14 $1.533 02 $2,045.30 $1,801.14 $290.70 $1,839.60 $1,374.17 $1.060 07 $60859 $596.16 $1,643.98 $408.07 $1,446.39 $316.30 $1,412.52 $1.240 85 $82881 $87267 $31867 $1,016.13 $1,339.48 $1,351.13 $1,760.33 $647.60 $153 98 $1.270 98 $1.319 70 $1,237.06 $986.11 $1,033.18 $670.11 $952.31 $765.06 $1,052.79 $1,080.58 $1.34962 Chack Data Chack Status 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding ^ 1/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27A)2 Outstamfing 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding 11/27/02 Outstanding CITY OF ORONO ch«ck rtgistor 11/26«2 7:07AM Page 2 Ctiecic Number Employee Name PMkMf Check Amount $50.76617 Check Dale Check Statue :rv ‘“r. imm ► CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 11/26A)2 7 42AM Page 1 NOVEMBER 2002 Check Amt Invoica Comment 10100 Primary Cash Paid Chic# 074094 11/27/02 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION G 101-21711 Credit Union $10.63500 SAVINGS W/H & TRANSFERRED Total CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION $10,635.00 Paid Chki 074895 11/27/02 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES G 101-21701 Federal Withholding $9.748 97 FEDERAL W/H G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholding $4,253.17 FICA S MEDICARE W/H G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholding $4,253.17 FICA & MEDCR CITY SHARE ToUl FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES $18.25531 Paid Chk# 074^M 11/27/02 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST • 497 G 101-21705 Other Retirement $300 00 DEFERRED COMP Total ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST- 497 $300 00 Paid Chki 074897 11/27/02 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE G 101-21707 Union Dues $583.16 UNION DUES Total LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE $58316 Paid Chki 074898 11/27/02 MN CHILD SUPPORT PMT CTR G 101-21712 Other Deductions $24227 MOROWCZYNSKI i0014456477 ToUl MN CHILD SUPPORT PMTCTR $242 27 Paid Chki 074899 11/27/02 MN DEPT OF REVENUE G 101-21702 State Withholding $3.94569 STATE TAX W/H Total MN DEPT OF REVENUE $3.94569 Paid Chki 074900 11/27/02 ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST G 101-21705 Other Retirement $2.66968 MN STATE RETIREMENT Total ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEeClIST $2.66968 Paid Chki 074901 11/27/02 PEBSCO/OBRA G 101-21705 Other Retirement $0 00 OBRA DEFERRED COMP ToUl PEBSCO/OBRA $0 00 Paid Chki 074902 11/27/02 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS G 101-21705 Other Retirement $2.362 00 USCM - ENTITY 2339 Total PEBSCOAJS CONF OF MAYORS $2.362 00 Paid Chki 074903 11/27/02 PUBUC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT G 101-21704 PERA $6.767 75 ‘ PERA CITY SHARE G 101-21704 PERA $5.232 53 PERA EMPLOYEE W/H Total PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT $12000 28 Paid Chki 074904 11/27/02 UNITED WAY G 101-21708 United Way $4500 CHARITY DONATIONS ToUl UNITED WAY $45 00 Paid Chki 074905 11 /27/02 WISCONSIN SCTF O 101-21712 Other Deductiont $184 62 X)HNSON i 0002756898 Total WISCONSIN SCTF $184 62 10100 Primary Cash $51.223 01 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 11/26A)2 7:42AM Page 2 NOVEII8EII2002 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND i ChecliAnit Invotee CowmiwR 10100 Primely Cesli $51,223 01 $51,223.01 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Registei® 12/06/02 11:40 AM Page 1 DECEMBER 2002 Ctiecic Amt Invoice Comment 10100 Primary Cash - Paid ChM 674918 12/5/2002 PETE'S PIZZA E 101-41110-439 Meeting Expenses Tout PETE*8 PIZZA $34 00_ 12/5/02 $34~00 PUza-Work Session PakJChK# 074919 12/9/2002 ACTION RADIO & COMMUNICATIONS E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $2,m4^ 2260 Total ACTION RADIOS COMMUNICATIONS Install 800 Mhz $2,260.46 Paid Chk« 074920 12/9/2002 ALL STEEL PRODUCTS CO INC. E 651-49910-227 Utility System Maint. Supplies $1.013 88 3848 Culverts. Bands Total ALL STEEL PRODUCTS CO INC.$1.013 88 PaidChk# 074921 12/9/2002^ APPLELAND LAW ENFORCEMENT E 101-42110-228 Training Supplies $2,630.18 608 Ammo Total APPLELAND LAW ENFORCEMENT $2,630.18 PaidChkA 074922 12/9/2002 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $78.50 6013-285345 Coffee E 101-41900-201 Office supplies _ $54.50 6013-286273 Coffee Total ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES $133 00 Paid Chk« 074923 12/9/2002 AT S T WIRELESS SERVICES E 602-49450-321 Telephone $6 08 3419397 E 101-4190C-321 Telephone $22 26 3419397 E 601-49400-321 Telephone $6 0^3419397 ToUl AT & T WIRELF^SS SERVICES $34 43 Ceil Phones Cell Phones Cell Phones PaidChk# 074924 12/9/2002 BRINKHAUS. JACK E 101-43000-226 Clothing & personal equipment $100.00 12/5A)2 Safety Shoes Tout BRINKHAUS. JACK $100.00 Paid Chk# 074925 12/9/2002 BROCK WHITE COMPANY E 101-45200-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies $642 00 SP29877701 Landscape Fabric • Hackberry Total BROCK WHITE COMPANY "$842 00 PaidChk# 074926 12/9/2002 BUDGET PRINTING E 101-42110-201 Office supplies E 601-49400-322^ Postage Total BUDGET PRINTING $20 77 23997 $81^^550622 $28.93 Stamp Shipping - Dept of Health PaidChk# 074927 12/9/2002 CENTERPOINTENERGY E 101-41900-381 Gas & Electric E 602-49450-381 Gas & Electric E 601-49400-381 Gas & Electric E 101-41900-381 Gas&Electnc E 101-42110-381 Gas S Electric Total CENTERPOINTENERGY $274 58 $11.50 $55276 $92849 $22466 060006750600 Gas service 060006750600 Gas service 060006750600 Gas service 060006750600 Gas service 060006750600 Gas service $1,991.99 Paid Chk# 074928 12/9/2002 CITY Of LONG LAKE O 601 -16300 Fixed Asset-Other improvements E 101-42260-318 Fire Services Total CITY OF LONG LAKE $3.050 00 102902-4 $36,935.00 112602 Orono/LL Water Interconnect Fire Service 4th Qtr 2002 $39,985.00 Paid Chk# 074929 12/9/2002 CITY OF ST. PAUL E 101-42110-437 Training S Development $350 00 76113 BackgroufKl Invest • Famiok L CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 12A)6A)2 11 40 AM Page 2 ToUl CITY OF ST. PAUL DECEMBER 2002 ChecliAmt^lnvojc# Comment $350 00 Paid Chk# 074930 12/9/2002 CITY OF WAYZATA E 101-42260-318 Fire Services $7,561.25 11/26/02 Fire Service - 4th Qtr 2002 ToUl CITY OF WAYZATA $7,561.26 Paid Chk« 074931 12/9/2002 CORNICK, JAMES E 101-42110-322 Postage S67J1 12/3AJ2 Shipping Charges ToUl CORN i':K. JAMES $67.91 Paid Chtdl 074932 12/9/2002 OAHLKE TREE SERVICE E 101-45200^04 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $1,211.67 12/4/02 Tree Tnmming/Grinding E 101-43000-408 Contracted Street Ma«nt $75000 12/4/02 Street Banners E 101-43000-408 Contracted Street Maint $2,423 33 12/4A32 Tree Tnmming/Gnnding ToUl OAHLKE TREE SERVICE $4.M5 00 Paid ChWH 074933 12/9/2002 DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT CO. E 602-49450-227 Utility System Maint Suppliet $608 27 3146423 Start Capacitor - GS 2 Tout DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT CO.$608 27 Paid Chk# 074934 12/9/2002 DCA - WIRE ONLY G 101-21719 DCA/Spending Accounts $900.73 11/27/02 Flex Spending 11/27/02 ToUl DCA-WIRE ONLY $k073 Paid Chk# 074935 12/9/2002 DEMBOUSKI. JAY E 101-42110-437 Training & Development $6.60 11/15/02 Lunch - Training Total DEMBOUSKI. JAY $6 60 Paid Chk# 074936 12/9/2002 DEPT OF ADM • INTERTECH GROUP E 101-42110-311 Data Processing Communication $37 00 DV020116 PVC Circuit - 10/2002 E 101-42110-321 Telephone $40 36 W02100603 Phone Service - 10/2002 E 101-41900-321 Telephone $9416 W02100603 Phone Service - 10/2002 ToUl DEPT OF ADM • INTERTECH GROUP $171 52 Paid Chk# 074937 12/9/2002 DIAMOND MOWERS E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $12 09 6051 Shall Seal ToUl DIAMOND MOWERS $12 09 Paid Chk# 074938 12/9/2002 E-Z RECYCLING E 101-43270-316' Contract Recycling Pickup $6.317 64 4535 Recycling 12/2002 Tout E-ZRECYCUNG $6.317764 ; S Paid Chk# 074939 12/9/2002 ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS E 651-49910-227 Utility System Maint Supplies $71500 188709 Livingston Storm Water Tout ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS $715 00 Paid Chk# 074940 12/9/2002 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECH INC E 101-42110-550 / emotive Equipment $2.614 98 13492 Set Up Squad 195 Total EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECH INC $2,614 98 t^aid Chk# 074941 12/9/2002 FARNIOK, CORREY E 101-42110-437 Training A Development $1100 11/15/02 Lunch - Training ToUl FARMOK. CORREY $1100 Paid Chk# 074942 12/9/2002 FBI-RA E10M2110-437 Training A Development $1000 12/12A)2 Training • Bank Robbery Tout FBI-RA $1000 ; CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 12/06/02 11 40 AM Pages DECEMBER 2002 Check Amt Invoice Comment :hk« 074943 12/9/2002 FORTIS BENEFITS G 101-21712 Other Deductions Total FORTI8 BENEFITS $936 26 4019825-1 LTD 12/2002 $9^26 Paid Chk# 074944 12/9/2002 G A K SERVICES E 602-49450-226 E 101-43000-226 E 613-49830-226 E 601-49400-226 E 101-43000-221 E 602-49450-226 E 101-43000-226 E 613-49830-226 E 601-49400-226 E 602-49450-226 E 101-43000-226 E 613-49830-226 E 601-49400-226 E 101-43000-404 E 101-42110-404 E 101-41900-404 E 101-41900-404 Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Equipment Parts 6 Accessories Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & persona! equipment Clothing & personal eCiUipment Clothing & jersonal equipment Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total GAKSERVICES $27 67 $64 54 $7 88 $1443 $51 76 $31 96 $74 '•e $7d8 $1443 $26 09 $6087 $7 88 $14 43 $9285 $83 19 $50 66 $50 66 $681 74 396670 396670 396671 396672 403612 403612 403612 403613 403614 410527 410527 410528 410529 410530 410531 410532 410533 Uniforms Uniforms Uniform - steffenhagen Uniform - Rathbun Shop Towels Uniforms Uniforms Uniform - Steffenhagen Uniform - Rathbun Uniforms Uniforms Uniforms Uniforms Mat Service PW Mat Service PD Mat Ser ice Ad Mat Service CC PcidChk# 074945 12/9/2002 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL E 601-49400-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $37.20 2100616 E 602-49450-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $37.20 2100616 Total GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL $74.40 October Locates October Locates Paid Chk# 074946 12/9/2002 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE E 651-49910-227 Utility System Maint Supplies 29825 Total HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE $4S94 Grass Seed Paid Chk# 074947 12/9/2002 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS - ASSESS G 101-15500 Prepaid Items $9.500 00 CA2241 E 101-41550-302 Assessing Services $47.500 00 CA2241 Assessing 1/2003 Assessing 8/1-12/31/02 Tout H SNNEPIN COUNTY TREAS. ASSESS $57.000 00 Paid Chk# 074948 12/9/2002 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-JAIL E 101-41600-309 JailChargM ToUl HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-JAIL $283 50 784 $283 50 Rm and Board 10/2002 -«-*% Paid Chk# 074949 12/9/2002 HERMAN. JOHN P 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories Total HERMAN. JOHN $379.14 11/22/02 $37914 Shelving - Equip Room Paid Chk# 0749S0 12/9/2002 HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE E 613-49830-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/GrourKis Total HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE $25 07 79426 $25.07 Mat Service - GC Paid Chk# 074951 12/9/2002 ICMA PRODUCT FULFILLMENT CTR E 101-41300-208 Books & Penodicals Total ICMA PRODUCT FULFILLMENT CTR $40 52 42805 $40.52 Stand for Eff Loc Gvmnt Paid Chk# 074952 12/9/2002 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS E 101-42110-401 Repairs/Matnl-Offloa Equip $225 60 23475255 Milnt* PD Copier 11/02-03 i CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 12/06A)2 11 40 AM Page 4 DECEMBER 2002 Check Amt G 101-15500 Prepaid Items Total IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS $1.^800 $1.353 60 Involc^Commenl 23475255 Maint - PO Copier 11/02-03 Paid Chki 0749S3 12/9/2002 ILSE, SHEROKEE E 101-41410-104 Temporary Emptoyeas Regular G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholding ToUl ILSE. SHEROKEE $45 50 11/5/02 $5 53 11/5/02 $51 03 General Election Taxes - Primary Election Paid Chk« 074954 12/9/2002 JUBILEE FOODS E 101-41300-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $77.99 12/13/02 Cake. Shrimp Platter Tout JUBILEE FOODS $77.W Paid Chki 074955 12/972002 KENNETH N. POTTS. PA E 101-41600-307 Legal-Consulting $2.391 66 12/2A)2 Prosecution 11/2002 Total KENNETH N. POTTS. PA $2~39166 ^aid dhlti 074956 12««002 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $87.10 143547 VHS Tapes Total KUSTOM SIGNALS INC $87.10 Paid Chki 074957 12/9/2002 LOOIS E 101-41900-401 RepairsffitaInt-Office Equip $170 00 22348 Innoculan Issues E 101-42110-401 Repairs/Maint-Office Equip $170 00 22348 tnnoculan Issues E 101-42110-310 LOGIS-Applications $1,635 00 22378 Police Records 10/02 E 101 -41900-329 Other Communications $183 00 22378 Internet 10/02 E 101-41900-311 Data Processing Communication $30 00 22378 henn Cty Connection 10/02 E 101-42110-329 Other Communications $183 00 22378 Internet 10/02 E 101-42110-401 Repairs/Maint-Office Equip $356 87 22437 Innoculan E 101-41900-401 Repairs/Maint-Office Equip $356 88 22437 Innoculan Total LOGIS $3.08475 Paid Chki 074958 12/9/2002 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT E 101-43000-403 Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip $78 67 41538 Pruner Repair Total LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT $78 67 >aidChki 074959 12/9/2002 MAMA E 101-41300-437 Training & OevelopmenI $16.00 473 MAMA Luncheon - Moorse ToUl MAMA $16 00 Paid Chki 074960 12/9/2002 MCLEOD USA - PHONE BILLS • E 602-49450-321 Telephone $59 30 604893 i Phone Service 11/2002 E 101-41900-321 Telephone $533 73 604893 Phone Service 11/2002 E 601-49400-321 Telephone $25 42 604693 Phone Service 11/2002 E 101-42110-321 Telephone $228 74 604893 Phone Service 11/2002 ToUl MCLEOD USA • PHONE BILLS $847 19 Paid Chki 074961 12/9/2002 MEOICA O 101-15998 Non-Employee Health Ins $1,529 37 102335102552 Medica High • 12/2002 G 101-21706 Hospitaiization/Medical Ins $10,357.92 102335102552 Medku High -12/2002 G 101 -21706 Hospilalizalion/Madical Ins $1,796 83 102335122585 Medica Low -12/2002 0 101-21706 Hosp4ali2alK>n/Medical Ins $8,707.20 102335125488 MadicaElact 12/2002 Total MEDICA $22.393 32 E 651-49910-227 Utility System Makit Supplies Total MIDWEST ASPHALT $133 39 70628MB ^ne Place Strm WIT $133 39 CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register© 11:40 AM Pages DECEMBER 2002 Check Amt Invoice CommentAmt i 2/9/2002 MIDWEST FUELS G101-14101 Gasoline Inventory $2.667 50 93906 2174 Gals Unleaded E 101-43000-212 Motor Fuels & Lubricants $645 13 93906 703 1 Gals Diesel Total MIDWEST FUELS $3,512.63 Paid CM* 074964 12/9/2002 MINN COMM E 101-42110-321 Telephone $36 04 20261011025 Police Pagers E 101-42110-321 Telephone $3661 20261012023 Pagers - PD E 602-49490-321 Telephone $3263 48300512026Pagers-PW E 601-49400-321 Telephone $3Z64 48300512026Pagers • PW Total MINN COMM $142.32 Paid CW^)749S5 12/9/2002 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories RI11020899 Totel MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY $15 34 Cylinder Rental Paid Chki 074966 12/9/2002 MOTOROLA E 101 -42110-402 Repain/Matnt-Auto Equip Total MOTOROLA $332 35 94064311 $33235 800 mhz Antennas Paid Chki 074967 12/9/2002 MTIDIST CO. E 613-49830-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories Total MTI DIST CO. $22C^ 336061-00 $22 05 Filter Assembly Paid Chk« 074968 12/9/2002 NCPER8 GROUP LIFE INS 0101-21710 Life Insurance Total NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS $240^ 67321202 $240.00 PERA Life 12/02 Paid Chk»(^4969 12/9/2002 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS E 101-41900-321 Telephone $647 63 506573311 Total NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS $647.63 Cell Phones Paid Chk« 074970 12/9/2002 NORLING'S E 651-49910-591 E 651-49910-591 Sewer/Water Utility Const SewerAA/ater Utility Const Total NORLING'S $5,964.50 17793 $13.418J2 17805 $19,382 62 Livlng^on Ave Storm Wtr CBR Storm Sewer Paid ChM 074971 12/9/2002 NORTHERN TRAFFIC SUPPLY E 101-43000-224^ Street Maint Materials/Supply $101 18 22-6216 Duck Crossing Signs Total NORTHERN TRAFFIC SUPPLY $10118 1 f Paid Chk» 074972 12/9/2002 OFFICE DEPOT E 101-41900-201Office supplies ($56 89) 1875174764X) Office Supplies oCM6ToUJOffice supplies ($46 56) 1875174764)0 Office SuppNet E 101-42110-201Office supplies $272 35 1878347404)0 Office SuppKat E 602-49450-201 Office supplies $222 06 1878347404)0 LSCelendars E 101-41900-201Office supplies $332.86 1878347404)0 Office Supphaa Total OFFICE DEPOT $72382 Paid Chk# 074973 12/9/2002 PET8MART E 101-42110-240Small Tools and Minor Equip $228.95 11/26A)2 Dog Kennel w/pad Total PETSMART $228 95 Paid ChW 074974 12/9il2002 FrUEOU E 602-49490-227 UtiMy Syatam MaM. SuppMaa $127.86 12710 StaMees Nuts 6 Bokt E 602-49490-227 UliWy Syelam MaM. Supplaa $52.36 12720 Stakiiees Nuts 6 Bolls E 602-49490-227 UWity Syatam MaM. Supplat $969 12730 Stainiess Nuts 6 Bolts 'f ^ mm I. CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 12A)6A)2 11:40 AM Pag«6 Total PHEOLL DECEMBER 2002 Clwclc Aim Invote* Commtnt S190.13 Paid Chk# 074975 12/9/2002 PIONEER E 101-41900-352 Printing & Publishing $242 63 0X10 2003 Budget Notice E 101-42400-340 General Advertising $69 65 431 applications E 101-42400-340 General Advertising $27.86 432 Application 02-2852 E 101-41900-352 Printing & Publishing $35 82 437 Gambling Ordinance E101-41000-3S2 Printing A Publishing $119.40 450 Ordinance 222 Total PIONEER $495.36 PaidChMI 074976 1279/2002 ORAIRIE OFFSET E101-41900-201 Office supplies $119.70 11/18X)2 Business Cards - Oman, Vang Total PRAIRIE OFFSET $119 70 PaW Chki 074977 12/9t2O02 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC. E 602-49450-406 Repairs/Maint-Swr lines/lifts $3,201.68 11705 Gate/Check Valves Total QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC.$3,201.68 Paid ChMI 074978 12/9/2002 QWEST E 61349830-321 Telephone $58.95 9524739904 Phone Service E 613-49830-340 General Advertising $240.80 9524739904 Directory Advertising Total QWEST $299.75 Paid Chk# 074979 12/9/2002 ROOT-O-MATIC E 602-49450-406 Repairs/Maint-Swr lines/lifts $260 00 2409M Swr Maint 2505 Dunwoody Total ROOT-O-MATlC $260.00 Paid Chk# 074960 12/9/2002 SECURITY RESPONSE SERVICES E 101-42110-401 Repairs/Maint-Office Equip $327.86 128865 VCR Repair E 101-42110-401 Repairs/Maint-Office Equip $32786 129867 VCR Repair E 101-42110401 RepairsMaint-Offlce Equip $65.00 130460 VCR Repairs Tout SECURITY RESPONSE SERVICES $720.72 Paid Chk# 074981 12/9/2002 SNYOER DRUG STORES E 10142110-201 Office supplies $8 88 11/14A)2 Kleenex E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $1.15 11/19A)2 Distilled Water E 10142110-201 Officesupplles $169.27 11/20X)2 Polaroid Film E 10142110-201 Office supplies $2 30 11/204)2 Distilled Water E 10142110-201 Offioesupplies $8 51 11/7/02 Photo Processing E 10142110-201 * Office supplies $33 76 11/84)2 Batteries, Tape ToUl SNYOER DRUG STORES $223.87 Fj d Chk# 074982 12/9/2002 STA-8AFE LOCKSMITH E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Qrounds $66 30 0014175 Lock-PW Bldg Total 8TA-SAFE LOCKSMITH $66.30 Paid Chk# 074983 12/9/2002 STEFFENHAOEN, RON E 613-49630-240 SmaN Tools and Minor Equip $210 86 11/254)2 Tool Sat Total STEFFENHAOEN, RON $210.66 Paid Chk# 074^4 12/9/2002 STEINKE. KARIA E 101-41410-104 Temporary Employees Regular $55 25 11/54)2 General Election Total STElNKEeKARIA $55.25 Paid Chki 074M5 12/W2002 TEfOVTORUU. GUNSMITHS, LTD E40Ma720-226 ClolMng A paiaonal aqulpmant E 231-4MS0-226 CMMng A pafaonal aquipmani SO.702.78 12^4)2 $e,702.a0 120A)2 Panthar RHIaa. Mags. Tae IJgh Ptnthar RMm. Mags. Tae r CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 12y06/02 11:40 AM Page? Total -TERRITORIAL GUNSMITHS. LTD DECEMBER 2002 Check Aiwt Invoica Comment $13.405 58 Paid Chk* 074986 li/9/2002 THE HOME DEPOT E 601-49400-223 Bidg/GroLfKlt Maint. Supplies $132.06 10/21/02 Sink/Faucet-Nvr Wtr E 101-41900-223 Bidg/Grountjs Maint. Supplies $33 95 11/01/02 Furnace Filters E 651-49910-227 Utility System Maint. Supplies $80.39 11/12A)2 Styrofim Cuffs Totel THE HOME DEPOT $246 40 E 101-42110-437 Training A Development Total TOMCHECK, LARRY $9 50 11/14/02 Meal • Training $950 P«ld Chki 074988 12/9/2002 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE E 101-41900^22 Postoga $66 00 Box 66 ToUl UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE $W0O ^aidChicS 074989 12/9/2002 US FILTER P 851-46910-227 Utility System Maint Supplies P.O. Box Rental $98 97 8952117 Total US FILTER 10"PVCPipe $98.97 Paid ChM 074990 12/9/2002 VERIZON WIRELESS E 602-49450-321 Telephone E 601-49400-321 Telephone E 101-41900-321 Telephone Totel VERIZON WIRELESS $16.69 $1669 $35Z53 $38S91 1003-4585141 Utility Cell Phone 1003-4585141 Utility Celt Phone 1003-5922058 Cell Phones Paid Chk# 074991 12/9/2002 VOGT HEATINO S AIR E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total VOGT HEATINGS AIR $190 00 5166 Exhaust Fan - Link Mens Rm $190 00 Paid Chk# 074992 12,3/2002 WINTERNHEUNER. ALISSA E 101-41300-319 Other Professional Services Tout WINTERNHENMER, ALISSA $160 00 36 CC Minutes 11/25/02 $160.00 Paid Chk* 074993 12/9/2002 XCEL ENERGY E 601-49400-381 Gas A Electee $1.989 30 Allocation Electricity E 602-49450-381 Gas 6 Electric $1,023.49 Allocation Electricity E IOt-45200-381 Gas 6 Electric $15 33 Allocation Electricity E 101-42110-381 GasA Electric $9 42 Alk'cation Electricity E 613-49830-381'Gas A Electric $106.80 Allocation Electricity - E 101-43000-386 Street Lighting $1,216.97 St Lights i Street Lighting 11/2002 S' Totel XCEL ENERGY K361 31 E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts S Accessories Totel ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS $249.74 87804 Svveeper Broom $249 74 10100 Primary Cash $212.936 05 CITYOFORONO *Check Detail Register<§> 12A)6/D2 11:40 AM Page8 DECEMBER 2002 CIteckAmt Invoice Comment Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 231 DRUO/FELONY FORFEITURE FUND 406 PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT REVOLVE 601 WATER OPERATINO FUND 602 SEWER OPERATINO FUND 613 GOLF COURSE 651 STORM WATER UTILITY OP FUND 10100 Primary Cash $165,720.3$ $6,702.60 16.702.78 $5,893.81 $5,754.95 $688.17 $21,473.19 $212,936.05 • ^ tkMi • •information ITEMS I COtJNCIL MEETING DEC 9 2002 ciiyui-OHONo OF % % i iiM i^iiriiiitrtiri OnffmtmtmCmtm H«yt.1Sftl9,Nmam Mai: 2500 Shadyvnod Road E«ooWor.MN 55331-9670 Rwna: (962) 471-0590 Rax (952) 471-0602 EmaR; adminOininnahahacraak.o(g WabSila: www.minnahahacraolLorg Board of Managars PamaiaO-Bial JamaaCaliina LancaFiahar MoniaQroas SoodThomaa Richard Miller Robart Schroadar Miiiehiha Creek Watershed District Improving Quality of Water, Quality ofLife • •—■'•mg OfC 9 2002 t^ilirur^OftONo TO:Mr. Steve Woods, Board of Water and Soil Resources Mr. Jeff Spartz, Hennepin County Administrator Mr. Richard Stoltz. Carver County Administrator Mr. Ken Wald, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Ms. Celine Lyman, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Mr. Mark Zabel, Minnesota Department of Agriculture Mr. Betty Wheeler, Minnesota Department of Health Mr. Mark Jouseau, Metropolitan Council All Cities in MCWD Townships of Waconia, Laketown and Watertown in Carver County FROM: Glenda D Spiotta, Planner/Program Manager DATE: November 20,2002 RE: Re-Distribution of Minor Plan Amendment to MCWD’s Water Resources Management Plan For Demonstration Program of Shoreline Stabilization techniques at Gray’s Bay on Lake Minnetonka The MCWD Board of Managers authorized re-distribution of this Minor Plan Amendment as part of the MCWD 2003-2007 Capital Improvement Program. Attached is the Minor Plan Amendment to the MCWD Water Resources Management Plan for the Gray’s Bay Demonstration Shoreline Stabilization project in the cities of Minnetonka and Wayzata. It is the same document that MCWD distributed in November, 2001 for all three program phases. The scope of work remains the same as described in the MPA document. In 2003, MCWD intends to focus on Phase II work at the Headwaters site in the City of Minnetonka. Therefore, more detailed construction costs for budgeting purposes were prepared in July, 2002. The Planning Level Construction Cost Estimate for Phase II Headwaters Site is amended to the MPA. Though a public hearing was held on December 20,2001 for all three phases of this project in the City of Minnetonka and Wayzata, MN., additional public meetings will be held; a. MCWD Board of Managers, November 21,2002 b. Hennepin County Board of Commissioners, December 3, 2002 Please direct your additional comments or questions to me at 952-471-0590 or gspiotta® minnehahacreek.org. by December 6.2002. Thank you. Cc: Joel Settles. Hennepin County w/attachments MINOR PLAN AMENDMENT Gray’s Bay Shoreline Stabilization Description of Project Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is participating in a project to acquire a private marina on Gray’s Bay; redevelop the marina as a public water access to Lake Minnetonka, stabilize and reconstruct the Highway 101 Causeway between Wayzata Bay and Gray’s Bay and to redevelop the area in the vicinity of the Minnehaha Creek Headwaters on Gray’s Bay. Funding sources for the project include; LCMR funds for land acquisition at the marina site, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources funds for development of a public water access and shore fishing areas. City of Minnetonka funds, Hennepin County funds to reconstruct the Highway 101 Causeway, local fund raising, and potentially Minnehaha Creek Watershed District funds to enhance and demonstrate environmentally sensitive shoreline treatments. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has acquired the marina site. Other easements and property associated with the project are under ownership of the Cities of Minnetonka and Wayzata, and Hennepin County, or are being acquired as highway right-of-way. The new public water access will be staffed and operated by the City of Minnetonka under an agreement with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Boat slip rentals (28 slips) and the on-site sale of fuel will pay for the cost of having full time staff at the public water access and the cost of maintenance. The project serves multiple public purposes, some of which are listed below: ■ It will reduce traffic safety problems and boat trailer parking issues. The new public access, in combination with closure of the makeshift launching area on the Causeway and the launch facility at the Headwaters area provides safer and better access to Lake Minnetonka. All three phases are expected to include better storm water management. With MCWD financial and technical participation, the project will demonstrate innovative environmental shoreline treatment as an example for lake shore owners and developers of land. The project is expected to stabilize hundreds of feet of shoreline erosion and include restoration of natural shoreline areas with native vegetation buffers. Minnehaha Creek could provide leadership, funding and in-kind technical expertise for shoreline treatments and demonstrations, and innovative storm water management. C \My OocumtiUtMCWDVOrays Bay Bk>\planam«fKlm6iil(loe 1 P- ..... . .... , The project will be implemented in three phases as follows: ■Phaee Deecription Gray** Bay Public Access and Launch (Attachment 1) Minnehaha Creek Headwaters Time Frame 2001-2002 2002-2003 Gray ’s Bay/Wayzata Bay Causeway (Attachment 2) 2003-2004 A cooperative agreement between the parties funding the project is needed to establish responsibilities and cost sharing. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District would pursue this agreement if the project were included into its Capital Improvement Plan. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District responsibilities for Phase I of the project are technical assistance and potentially cost sharing for storm water management innovations and demonstrations and native shoreline vegetation establishment. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District responsibilities and cost sharing for Phases II aruf lU could include design and construction ____ services for the shoreline stabilization demonstrations using native vegetation and soil bio-engineering, and paying for the incremental construction costs associated with innovative shoreline treatment demonstrations. Need for Project The muKi-jurisdictional Gray ’s Bay Task Force has developed the overall concept for the project over the last 3 years. A summary of the concept developed by the Gray ’s Bay Task Force is included as Attachment 3 and addresses the need for the project. An additional need, not addressed by the Gray's Bay Task Force involves demonstrating to the public that exclusive use of riprap on Lake Minnetonka shoreline is not necessary. The majority of developed property bordering Lake Minnetonka and other Lakes in Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has altered shoreline areas and consequently, natural vegetated buffer areas that protect lakes are largely absent. Alterations of lakeshore properties include removal of native vegetation; clearing or thinning of woody vegetation to improve views; grading to accommodate home construction, yard maintenance and use; and frequent treatment of shoreline areas with rip rap. Riprap treatment solves shore erosion problems but has often been placed as a cosmetic improvement on Lake Minnetonka residential lots. While rip rap, if properly installed, represents a solution to erosion and ice pressure damage, H also has destructive effects on C;\M)f Docum«iit\MCWDVOf*y« Bay Bk>\pl*'**>n*n<Xntfltdoc 2 littoral habitat and encourages the elimination of natural emergent and upland vegetation along the shore that acts as a buffer for the lake. There is a need for alternative shoreline treatments that are attractive, protect against erosion, protect natural littoral habitat and function as a vegetative buffer for the lake. Although alternative treatments exist, there Is a general lack of examples or demonstrations available for public viewing on Lake Minnetonka. Therefore, opportunities for interpretation and education, where lakeshore owners can visualize environmentally sensitive alternatives, do not presently exist. All three phases will include interpretive features and information at locations highly visible and accessible to the public. The Gray’s Bay Public Access and Launch is currently a private marina and is undergoing redevelopment as a public water access for boats on trailers. As such, the shoreline area, which has been used as a commercial site, could be restored with native vegetation to serve as a buffer to filter runoff. Runoff from the entire marina site currently drains directly to Lake Minnetonka. Redevelopment could correct the management of storm water using infiltration galleries and basins estimated to remove more than 90% of the sediment, nutrients and other pollutants entering the lake and that would greatly reduce the volume of runoff. There is an opportunity to vegetate infiltration areas with native prairie, shrub and woody species. ___ __________ The Minnehaha Creek Headwaters area is currently operated as a public boat launch and parking area, a City Park and includes the Outlet Control Structure and Emergency Spillway forming the outlet for Lai\e Minnetonka and the Headwaters of Minnehaha Creek. The area is expected to be redeveloped to exclude the public water access and associated parking. Restoration of selected shoreline areas could serve as a native vegetative buffer, hard cover could be reduc'd and an access for shoreline fishing could be built to compliment the outlet/headwaters area. Overall, operation costs associated with the Headwaters of Minnehaha Creek would be reduced and resolution of safety issues associated with the outlet is possible. Hennepin County will upgrade the Gray’s BayAftfayzata Bay Causeway (Highway 101). Much of the shoreline area on the Wayzata Bay side of the causeway is unstable and undergoing erosion from prevalent wind wave action. A portion of the east side of the causeway is currently used as a makeshift public access for boats and parking. Traffic and site distance related safety issues are involved with this access location. In addition, severe shoreline erosion and degradation is ongoing around the access area. The Causeway upgrade will involve a new urban section road surface and pedestrian path. The boat access location and associated trailer parking will be eliminated. Shoreline areas on both sides of the causeway could be stabilized by a variety of techniques including soil bio*engineered slopes with shrub and C:\My Oocum«ntsWCWDVOr*ys Bay B(o\planam*n<lmerrt doc 3 woody vegetation, restoration of native vegetation buffers, and combined rip rap and vegetation treatments. Public access for shoreline fishing will be included so these areas will be visible and accessible to the public. Active shoreline erosion and disturbance from boat launching could be eliminated from the Causeway. Enhanced sediment traps could be installed to pre-treat storm water runoff before it is discharged to Lake Minnetonka. The project also meets the objectives of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Distnct Water Resources Management Plan and is consistent with goals, actions and policies published in the plan, beginning on page 89: Goal To nduca the severity and fnquency of flooding and high water, and Improve the chemical and physical quality of surface water. The project is consistent with Actions 1 .2, and 3 if on-site infiltration basins are installed, it is also consistent with new proposed rules that establish vegetated buffers on Lake Shore. Elimination of trailer-launch boat activity at Minnehaha Creek Headwaters is expected to reduce the frequency and severity of weed buildup at the Outlet Control Structure, thereby increasing the ability of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to minimize high water conditions on Lake Minnetonka. Goal 2 - Control temporary sources of sediment resuldng from land development acOvIdea and to Identify, minimize, and correct the effects of sedimentation from erosion-prone and sediment source areas. The project will correct ongoing shoreline erosion on the Gray’s Bay/Wayzata Bay Causeway and will eliminate erosion and sedimentation caused by makeshift boat launching there. Goal 3 -Preserve existing water storage capacity below 100-year flood elevations on all water bodies In the watershed to minimize the frequency and severity of high water. The project is not expected to result in the loss of flood storage capacity on Lake Minnetonka. In addition, elimination of trailer-launch boat activity at Minnehaha Creek Headwaters is expected to reduce the frequency and severity of weed buildup at the Outlet Control Structure, thereby increasing the ability of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to minimize high water conditions on Lake Minnetonka. Goal 4 - Preserve the natural appearance and funcdon of shoreline areas and minimize degradation of surface water quality that can result from dredging operations. C:\My DocunMn(»\MCWD\Orayt Bay Blo\planamtn(lmafiLdoc 4 f • • No signiricant dredging is currently proposed. The project is consistent with this goal because of the potential for a strong shoreline re-vegetation component. * Qoaf 0 - Impnv wafer quality by nquiring Bast Managamant Practicaa (BMPa) which maat or axcaad MInnaaota Pollution Control Aganey (MPCA) guldallnaa, requiring Biair adoption In local managamant plana, and thair Implamantadon on davalopmant and radavalopmant altaa. The project is consistent with Actions 1 and 4. A potential strong component of the project is the use of highly effective and innovative BMPs and to demonstrate their use to the public as an alternative to more traditional and less environmentally sensitive approaches. Goal 7 - Protect the recreational opportunities aaaoclatad with all DIatrict water raaourcaa by Improving water quality and enhancing fiah and wildlife reaourcea. The project is consistent with Actions 1 and 2, and with the intent of Action 3. Lake Minnetonka has the highest recreational value of all the lakes in the metropolitan area. The use4)f altematives torip-rap to protectshoreline areas is— expected to enhance fisheries and wildlife resources. Goal 8 > Enhance public participation in Diatrict activitiea and provide Informational and educational material to municipalitiea, community groupa, bualneaaea, achoola, developera, contractora and Individuals. The project is consistent with Action 3. It is also intended as a high visibility demonstration of environmentally sensitive and effective methods to protect water quality. It is expected that educational materials, programs and accessible demonstrations will result from the project. Evaluation of Alternatives The overall project is approved and will be implemented with the LCMR funding; and contributions from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the Cities of Minnetonka and Wayzata, and Hennepin County. The alternatives to be considered by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District are whether or not to participate as a financial and technical partner leading the design and construction of shoreline treatments, storm water management and vegetative buffers. C:\My Ooeu.‘nenttWCWD\Orayt Bay BioWanamamlmaflLdoc 5 .1^ Pha«» I - Gray*# Bay Public Acc#aa and Launch The alternative to Phase I would be to not participate as a financial • partner. The public water access site would develop according to existing regulatory standards. If Minnehaha Creek Watershed District decides not to contribute financially, the District would not be in a position to guide designs of natural shoreline treatments, demonstrate innovative methods of fish and wildlife improvements and more effective ways of managing runoff. This site is on Lake Minnetonka, it is publicly owned, it is visible, it is accessible, and will be well maintained and highly used. There are no land acquisition costs to the District. Therefore, it represents a rare and cost effective opportunity for environmental improvement, demonstration of alternative shore land protection techniques and public education. Phase II - Minnehaha Creek Headwater# The alternative to Phase II would be to not participate as a financial or technical partner. The Headwaters area would be redeveloped according to existing regulatory standards. The boat-launching site would be closed to boats on trailers. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District would not be in a position to guide designs of natural shoreline treatments. ----------demonstrate innovative methods offish and wildlife improvement# and — more effective ways of managing runoff. Since this site incorporates the Headwaters area and the outlet of Lake Minnetonka, it is a location of unique importance and responsibility to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. There are significant operation, maintenance, safety and aesthetic issues associated with infrastructure owned by the District that could be directly addressed and financed by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District in the redevelopment. Also, this site is on Lake Minnetonka, a visible public access, will be well maintained and highly used. Therefore it represents an opportunity for demonstration and public education that involves both Lake Minnetonka and Minnehaha Creek. Phase III - Gray’# BayfWayzata Bay Causeway The alternative to Phase III would be* to not participate as a financial or technical partner. The Causeway area and Highway 101 would be upgraded according to existing regulatory standards. The makeshift boat launching area would be closed. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District would not be in a position to guide designs of natural shorelino treatments, demonstrate innovative methods of fish and wildlife improvements and rrwre effective ways of managing runoff. The Causeway is a primary location for demonstration of soil bioengineering, particularly on the west shore. Soil bioengineering is viewed as a more environmentally sensitive C:\Mjr OocumcnttVMCWOVOray* Bay Blo\planaiiMndimfll<loc 6 • • • altemative for riprap to prevent shoreline erosion. Both the east and west shores will be accessible to the public and represents a visible opportunity for public education. Estimated Costs The LCMR funding paid for the acquisKion of the private marina property that will become a public water access. The City of Minnetonka funding is estimated at $1 million. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources funding is estimated to be $800,000 for the public water access and shore fishing areas. The cost to Hennepin County to upgrade Highway 101 (which would include standard shoreline treatments) is unknown. The costs to each funding partner for staff time, expenses and design costs are also unknown. For the purposes of this Minor Plan Amendment, only the estimated costs for Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to participate in the project is of interest. A conceptual level estimate for Minnehaha Creek Watershed District participation in the project follows: Estimated MCWD Costs J^hase.l t Oray's Bay.Publlc Access and Launch Proiect Element Tvoe of Cost Estimate Planning Staff Consultants $ 15,000 $ 5,000 Technical Review Consultants $ 3,000 Design $ 0 Construction Cost Participation S 200.000 Phase 1 Annual O&M Staff Cost Participation $ 500 S 1.000 Annual Total $ 223,0 $ 1,800 (Note: The City of Minnetonka estimates total costs for design and construction at $1,570,000) C:\My DocumMSW/ICWOOrt^ B«y Bio\ptan»wnilnMntdoo 7 h IL Estlmatod MCWD Costs (contlnusd) Phast II • Minnshaha Craak Haadwatars Project Etement Type of Coat Rannjfig Staff Conauitanta Technical Review Conauitanta Dealgn Conatruction^'*Coat Participation Phase II Annual O&M Staff Cost Participation Annual Phase III • Cray's Bay/Wayzata Bay Causeway Project Element Type of Cost Planning Staff Consultants Technical Review Consultants Design Construction'*’Cost Participation Phase III Annual O&M Staff Cost Participation Annual Total MCWD Project Estimate Total Annual Estimate C:\My DocuiMfll»\MCWDOrayt B&t BioWMWwndmMiaoe 6 Estimate $ 20.1 $ 5.1 $ $ 30.000 $ 150.000 $ 500 $ 1.000 $ 15.000 $ 5.000 $ 75,000 $500,000 $ 205.000 $ 1.500 Estimate Total $-505.' $ $ 1.0 5.01 $1,023.1 $ V -udallilSi Sch*dul« of Construction Phase I is currently under design, with the City of Minnetonka being the lead * agency. Demolition of the buildings and marina infrastructure wiil begin in November 2001. The cieared site will be ready for development as a public boat access by April 2002. Substantial completion of the site is expected in 2002 with landscaping and establishment of shoreline buffers and infiltration area plantings possible in the Spring/Summer of 2002. Phase II design will begin in 2002 with implementation expected in 2003. Phase III design will begin in 2002 with implementation expected in 2004. Method of Financing Implementation of the portion of the project that Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has responsibility for could be financed through an ad valorum tax levy pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 103B.251, or other sources of funds not identified at this time. Other possible sources include LCMR, local funding by one or more municipalities, local fund raising, other agencies such as the Minnesota Departntent of Natural Resources, the State of Minnesota, Hennepin County, sp^al assessments, grants, subwatershed taxes and contributions. Each 4)rcjecthaeunique.cii£uffl8tances-thatwill determine appropriateiunding ______ sources. Most such projects will involve a combination of cost sharing. In developing a funding plan, the District will consider such factors as the extent to which cities or subwatersheds receive particular benefits, including flood control, water quality and aquatic habitat benefits, recreational benefits, educational benefits or demonstration of environmentally sound methods, or increased tax base from the project, and the extent to which similar projects have been or may be undertaken for similar programmatic or regulatory activities without District funding. Incremental construction cost increase attributed to the use of environmentally sensitive methods instead of traditional and structural approaches r C:\My OocumefltsVlICWtnarsys Bay no^plaiiainsndmanLdoc 9 Attachment 1 6ray*s Bay Public Access and Launch Concept 'll in'i itirtitimliiBfiiifii I ti GRjW S BA^’MAKliNA VV/\ ri:KM<ON I DliSlCi.N' C'CiN'CIiP I !//)(</ , Ijiii^netonkn r !i >s /««Nf H' ' r 9§ pfn m»sr.r I V|s| |\i; M, ppoP( )M l> SHOMI 1 !M ri>\r^H h M MM'IW Sf n ~ n I. VI ^ ti. '\ ' f ^hr| f/n» SM' PI n S \ P M MM >HI t IM I'I V\* »NV| p.wu »N ,\K|.\ \M<:| n » »l II Olkp U V pi MI f u 'N* I • Min- n I f* I I < I • » SI I • ' ► R om i«^ii\t H *vA f f m POM WA. *• w^> I I 1\ ?i M VI mm; I—y t M V P V ' — RM^ f si in - .v^ ‘ i«\ " .» tv AJt> W. 4 > o ^ - irAc!#ifNcr*-^‘ . V?’f II K MAS I S’1 S\APIS A I'M P.s I . : '^-1 Ir 1 AAIIJ/H » ASI • HI VM iHl . SAP ipAi Mil IMI IJSI I *IMON' l> M M *N AK> A \ APiriV 1 »| f I I U> ^ I. A p' 'S' AiiTi' 'SA trMmrni •- r • P AIS «. AMI t|N INUI 1 HA lli>S APhA PIMOSA THAIIONAPIA) ,V BSri i k • ' * rUKl AKCA»OII r rauc \ccrxs w vv.M I HI Rt.iN'i I )rsic;N coNctrr i-----I PNAMtS I U » I NC iSv au >m; WALK fro I'pcmia T 'MOPI UNf i5 I MOM t MIVV ’» ’ Ml'iu »’Si. V. AiJ ------•» '!> .AP *I SI c rr A 1. *> A's* . M Ml s V V*.A ^ •» •> API A (53^ ■' ' NAOJP.Al Oi.iTAnvi H: HIM n U > I V Ml r m :t PPU # *** <vs nATA H'’OBfM <U»0' Attachment 2 t3ray’s Bay/Wayzata Bay Causeway Concept c I?*. ,>v . j vr * ■ iiA s = 2C my^jitassi^ ■ ••■■•?:-■• Y'*";;. .JWSSSS^ _ • 'v. m “ ■5 '" SSi?' W' Vi; X '■ ■"rM‘“f,t r s.y.;av i VII jr: ^ t=r.r'i* r /^3l^'. I •A >Cvi “\/ / Attachment 3 9 ' I Gray’s Bay Task Force Summary 11/ #/ui 0:^/; * NCW-07-2001 09:37 aivo^iuess •> MSNCK assoc .; Psgs is tllhtCHPHR CREEK URTERSHED 6124710602 P.13>^ s Okay 's B ay Task Fowi CONSiNSUt B ackground Information The Qfty's Bay Task Force has studied the issue of pubHc boat access on Gra/s Bay since the summer of 1998. They have reached agreement on a concept that removes public boat access from the Gray's Bay causeway and the Gray's Bay dam and instead consolidates it at a new pubiic boat launch at the current Gray's Bay Marina. The plans are conceptual at this point and win be further refined. The fbllowing summarizes the concept New Public Access Site at tha Marina • Thera would be 112 car/trailer parking stalls to replace current parking (i 7 free spaces on the causeway, 22 free spaces at the dam. 73 paid spaces at Gr^s Bay Marina). Four of these would be handicapped stalls. • 28 boat slips and related parking spots would be provided as a way to fund an attendant on site. It is proposed that these would be paid for uy the City of Minnetonka and would be available only to Minnetonka residents based on a system yet to be determined. A gas dock might also be included, but this needs to be studied further. The perking lot would be at a lower level than nearby homes, and the area around the parking lot would be bermed and landscaped to buffer nearby residences. The entrance would be designed to prohibit exiting onto Gray's Bay Boulevard and to discourage entering from any direction other than 101. The driving aisles in the parking area would be approximately 21 feet wide. This would provide plenty of room tor vehictes to pass vehicles waiting to launch If the lurking fUn. the vehicles would then have to exit out onto 101 rather than going through the neighborhood. *Fuir signs would not be posted on lOlbecause if they vwre posM. pe^le might then drive through the neighborhood. Without the signs. There would be fewer boats on Lake Minnetonka from this one site than from the current three sites. The number of reliable parking spots for ofMake boats would number of docks would be reduced from 120 to 28. See ResWente in the area wimout direct access to Lake Minnetonka could launch their The eke would be closed with gates during the winter. According to a trafllc study, there would be e 15% reduction In vehicle trios durina summer i^kdays. 6% reduction in aflermon peak ho^and a 3% surnmer Sati^ays (an additional 11 trips in and 11 trips out) Employee traffic end customer traffic to the Marina retail store and repair se%ice would be elimi^^d^ 11/ r/01 «t>7| Namfl7-2O0i 09:38 eia47ioaaa -> wbnck Aaaoc.j p*0« i« CREEK URTERSCD 6124710682 P. 14/22 • Tte Marina currandy pays approxirnatiiy $61,000 pw^ year in proptrty taxes. The dt/* •tiara ie about $11,000. That laa vary small portion of the total taxes radaivad and would Hkaty be replaced by new developmante occurring in other parts of the dty. Causeway 8Ke • The aesthetios of the site would be significantly improved with landscaping, cityantraiKe monuments, and a reduction of pailcing to 15 car*only partdng sp^. • Safely would be improved by defining and limiting the aceesa points to 101 aridproviding a pedestrian walkway along the road and under the brl^. • Fishing on the Wayzata Bay side would be allowed In an area Improved with rock slabs or bouldare similar to the fishing site next to Lord Retchar's. • loe fishing access to the lake would be provided on the causeway not at the new launch. • According to the traffic study, there would be a 32% reduction in vehicle trips during summer weekdays. 33% reduction during afternoon peak hours on summer weekdays and a 57% reduction on summer Saturdays. • There Is room for a bike lane on the new bridge, but whether the bUce lane continues north along 101 requires approval of the City of Wayzata and Hennepin County 0am BMa • The paridng at thfs' sHe would be rirtooBd to 10 can only. The existind boat laimS area would be dosed and landscaped. * SSm and?ttn^le^^ headwaters of Minnehaha Creek, with picnic • The area north of the dam would be landscaped to discourage public use. * would result In an 86% reducti^ invehicle tripe during summer weekdays, 71% reduction during afternoon peak hours on summer weekdays, and a 60% reduction on summer Saturdays. General • An three sites must be looked at together. The changes to the causeway and the In toeareT^ ^ *^^****^ ****** launching is moved to another location • According to ^ traffic study, overall traffic would be reduced: 40% reduction on March 2001 I MATERIAL CALCULATIONS com ROUS $ 10,210 com EROSION CONTROL FABRIC 1 5.787 DUCKBN.L ANCHORS S 6.200 HERBACEOUS PLANTS $ 5.400 WOODY PLANTS ShorNItw $ 10.800 WOODY PLANTS abov* Shoralln#$ 8.520 SELECT FtU MATERIAL S 6.600 LABOR CALCULATIONS LABOR & MATERIAL CALCULATIONS ADDITIONAL COST CALCULATIONS r GRAND TOTAL COIR ROLLS S 27.300 com EROSION CONTROL FABRIC S 0.600 WOODY PLANTS ABOVE SHOREUNE $ 11.028 DEAD STOUT STAKES $ 170 HELD STONE (PLACED)t 24.200 OrMtM, SmIqm A FofbM $ 10.000 CReOERRACE SHORE ACCESS STRUCTURES $ 4.200 JOINT PLANTING THE CONCRETE MATTRESSES O SPIUWAY $ 3.000 SMAU EQUIPMENT RENTAL S 7.000 TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL $10.800 MAINTENANCE FOR 2 YEARS $27.000 MOBILIZATION / DEMOBILIZATION $16.900 CONTINGENCY $31,500 PROFIT s 21.000 2S0.118 I RoMlnB.SoUr&AsBOdates^ Inc iji ii|iiii»iiii nil Tffi ai CM PrefMrad A Subtnldid July 26.2002 jatOiBiBilanasu,ft f. i RBSQLVnONNO. 01-12411 AgmdaNo: 10 00168S The following Resolution wu offered Conuniuioner Teihbomino, seeoodcd by Commissioner Stenglein: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Minor Flan Amendment proposed by the Minnehaha Cktek Waterahad District tot Phase I of the Oray's Bay Shoreline Stabilization I^ect, be approved; and Aat a^oval of die Phase il ^ PhiM HI portions of die Gray ’s Bay Shoreline Stabilization hejeet be deferred until Hditionel wonnation tegatduig die design and estiinated cost of each phase is lu^tted by t^ C^k watershed District in separate Minor Plan Amendments. Coitunisa ioner Tambomino offered to amend by adding the following olaose , seconded by Commissioner Stcite* BE IT Fl^THER RESOLVED, That to ensure adequate opportunities for public input and AiU. infomifd consideratioa of ftitute applicatmia for minor plan amendments, applications for minor plan amendments wiUnot be considered complete, and the county's sixty day period fiir review and action will not begin, until a formal request for minor plan amendment hu been received by the County accompanied by a fcuibility study describing project design, coats and benefits, and the record of the Minnehaha Creek Watenhed District's pubhc hearing on the project Chair Opat called for a vote on the amendment and it was ADOPTED unanimously. NAYS, as follows COUNTY OF HENNEPIN BOARD OP COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Mark Stenalein OailDorfiiian YEA X ■OTHER Peter MoLauahlin Randy Johnson Mary Tambomino 2^ X Penny Steele Mike Ooat Chair RESOLUTION ADOPTED 12/1S/2001 aiTBCT. ^ >f the CeuB^Seaid ftijO IctcZbrii De cwihir II, ISOI 4‘07:4ZPM Pl|S I MEMORANDUM TO: MCWD BOARD OF MANAGERS FROM: GLENDA D. SPIOTTA, PLANNER/PROGRAM MANAGER SUBJECT: PUBLIC MEETING FOR MINOR PLAN AMENDMENT GRAY’S BAY SHORELINE STABILIZATION, PHASE II. HEADWATERS DATE: 11/1/2002 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: SET A PUBLIC MEETING FOR THE BOARD OF MANAGERS MEETING ON NOVEMBER 21,2002 FOR THE MINOR PLAN AMENDMENT FOR GRAY’S BAY SHORELINE STABILIZATION PROJECT AT THE PHASE II, HEADWATERS SITE. NO SIGNIFICANT PLAN CHANGES OCCURRED TO THE PHASE II HEADWATERS SITE SINCE ITS SUBMISSION FOR MINOR PLAN AMENDMENT APPROVAL IN NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2001. THE HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS APPROVED A MINOR PLAN AMENDMENT FOR ONLY PHASE I. MARINA SITE IN DECEMBER 2001. THE MINOR PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS REOUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING AND MCWD HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON DECEMBER 20, 2001 FOR ALL THREE PHASES OF THE GRAY’S BAY PROJECT, INCLUDING THE HEADWATERS SITE. MCWD HAS MET THE PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENT FOR PHASE II BUT AS IT WAS NEARLY 1 YEAR AGO, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE MCWD HOLD A PUBLIC MEETING ON NOVEMBER 21, 2002 WITH PUBLIC NEWSPAPER NOTICE AS A GENERAL PROJECT UPDATE. THIS DATE WOULD OCCUR PRIOR TO THE PENDING DECEMBER 3. 2002 PUBLIC HEARING AT THE HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS. Metropolitan Council Building communities that work December 4,2002 Sara Irvine, City Administrator City of Minnetonka Beach 2945 Westwood Road PO Box 146 Minnetonka Beach, MN SS36I DEC 9 2002 Cl IY OH OHOno ••• : "O r,.v t s rr ') Qlt or UriONO RE: City of Minnetonka Beach Comprehensive Plan Update Metropolitan Council District 3 Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 18600-1 Dear Ms. Irvine: The purpose of this letter is to confirm recent communications between the City of Minnetonka Beach and the MetropoliUn Council regarding the plan review process and the current City Council's proposed agenda to take final action to adopt and implement the comprehensive plan at its December 9,2002 meeting. Please be advised that the Metropolitan Council has not yet completed its formal review of the plan. Minnesota Statutes Section 473.175, Subdivision 2 says in part: No action shall be taken by any local governmailal unit...to place any such comprehensive plan...into effect until the (Metropolitan] Council has returned the statement to the unit and until the local government unit has incorporated any modifications in the plan required by a final decision, order or judgement pursuant to section 473.866. Minnesota Statutes Section 473.175, Subdivision 2 also says in part: Within 120 days following receipt of a comprehensive plan of a local governmental unit, unless a time extension is mutually agreed to, the [Metropolitan] Council shall return to the local governmental unit a statement containing its comments and, by resolution, its decision, if any, to require modifications to assure conformance u ith the metropolitan system plans Metropolitan Council records indicate that the Metropolitan Council received the City's comprehensive plan on August 9, 2001. Metrop«>litan Council staff found the comprehensive plan incomplete fiw review purposes at that time and the review was suspended. I\>llowing a Submittal received by the Metropolitan Council on July 18, 2002, Metropolitan Council staff found the City’s comprehensive plan submittal complete for review and the Metropolitan Council ’s fonnal review commenced. In a letter dated July 3 1, 2002, sent by Phyllis Hanson. Manager of the Council ’s Office of Planning and Technical Assistance, the City was notified that the Metropolitan Council expected to complete its review by November 15, 2002, which is I20da>s from July 18, 2002. On September 23, 2002, the Metropolitan Council received a faxed copy of a letter from Minnetonka Beach Planner and Zoning Administrator, Richard Krier. requesting an e.xtcnsion to the review period from 120 to l80-da>s to allow additional time to resolve the County Road designation and regional trail identification issues. The letter noted that the 180-day review period extends to January 14, 2003. WWW mnnMiMMM »l Mrtio Inifi i.itii* |H>iM 2 K4«%i lilih Slrm • Si raul Miiutrs^Ha VilOl • |6S11 602* 1000 • FaAGC^1550 • FH 291 OIK)! Sara Irvine, City Administrator December 4.2002 Page 2 The Metropolitan Council has scheduled the Minnetonka Ucacli comprehensive plan review for public hearing before its Livable Communities Committee on Monday, January 6, 2003 and action by the full Metropolitan Council on January 8, 2003. Both dates are within the 180-day extended review period requested by the City. The Metropolitan Council staff review report finds that the plan is generally acceptable, e.xcept with respect to the proposed regional trail. We believe that the need for, and Minnetonka Beach ’s cooperation in incorporating the regional trail into its plan, is a matter of regional importance. I would encourage the current City Council to consider removing the proposed final adoption action from its December 9, 2002 agenda to allow regional stakeholders the opportunity to express their comments and instead adopt a resolution requesting a further 30 day extension of the review period. This also would allow the new ly elected City Council the opportunity to consider the matter before the Metropolitan Council takes action on the plan. Staff will be forwarding a copy of the revised staff report by December 16. 2002. If you have any questions concerning the above noted statutory citations, please contact David riicisen. Offue of General Counsel at 651-602-1706. Ifyou have any questions about the plan review process and the staff review report please contact Robin Caufman, AlCP, Senior Planner and Principal Reviewer, at 651-602-1457. Sincerely, Lee SHeehy, Regional Adminis|fetor Metropolitan Coum CC:David Uergerson, Minnetonka Beach City Council John Breon, Minnetonka Beach Citv’ Council James Gasch, Minnetonka Beach City Council, M.iyor Plect Nell E. Mathews, Minnetonka Beach City Council Joann Anderson, Minnetonka Beach City Council Elect Jack Foss. Minnetonka Beach City Council Elect Senptor Ed Oliver, District 43 Representative Tom Workman, District 43A Senator Elect Gen Olson, District 33 Representative Elect Barb Sykora, District 33.\ Richard Kricr. Midwest Planning Ronald Moorse, Orono City Admini.strator Kandis Hanson, Mound City Manager Dean l.otter, Minnetrista City Administrator William Weeks, Spring Park City Administrator Brenda l isk, St. Bonifacius City Clerk John Gunyou, Minnetonka City Manager Susan Amt/, WaconiaCity Administrator Al Orsen, Wayzata City Administrator Marsh Wilda, Hennepin County Rail Authority ^ \ Sara Irvine, City Administtator December 4,2002 Page 3 Dave Drealan, Carver County Planning Director Mary Hill Smith, Metropolitan Council District 3 Jules Smith, Metropoliian Council District 4 Douglas Bryant, Superintendent Three Rivers Park District David Engstom, Chair Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission Phyllis Hanson, Manager, Planning and Technical Assistance Arne StefTerud, Planning Analyst, Regional Parks/Planning and Growth Management Department Robin Caufman, AlCP, Principal Reviewer, Office of Planning and Technical Assistance V I il*i ui i a l l ,11 li» K I -— .7 ---- a HUGH BISHOP MEMBER. AMERICAN ACAOEMif OT AITERNATWE DISPUtE RESautlONAtTORNErS .A December 9, 2002 Via email to: Janet L. Manley Kevin D. Manley 4179 Ethan Drive Eagan, MN 55123 ManleyBconttnic4933@mtn.com 651-454-6030 (h) 612-961-1568 (Janet) 612-275-8722 (Kevin) Re: Title registration of Lot 7, Fagemess Dear Mr. and Mrs. Manley: You have asked me to give a description of our title registration that could be shared with the City at the City Council meeting this evening. The question you think they would most like addressed is. “Who owns the land between the street and the water?" When Fagemess was platted into lots, each lot was defined as extending to the water. There was a street across the lots, but each lot went to the water. Each lot still extends to the water. What about the "new" land that has been slowly accreted and keeps extending a little further out into what had been lake water many years ago ... who owns that? The typical view of the rules of property law is that if new land is s/owfy added to the shore, then the owner of the land on the shore owns the new land. But who is the owner of the old shore? Is it the owner of the lot... or is it the City, as the owner of the street? The street was defined by the plat as extending only 40 feet in width, and the lot was defined as extending all the way to the water. Therefore as the water has slowly deposited more land against the shore, that "new" land belongs to the owner of each lot, rather than to the City I believe the City has recognized this as the rule specifically for Fagemess for many decades. Each time I have done a title registration for a lot in Fagemess we have served the City with notice and the City has never argued. What a title registration does is to confirm the ownership of land. You already own the accreted land, because it is defined as being a part of your lot. But if someone asks you for a piece of paper that shows the court has passed judgment on your title, we need to complete a title registration ac­ tion. A registration is in essence a giant quiet title action, saying to the whole world, "Speak now or forever hold your peace." S508 WEST 66'" STREET MAIL STATION 39730 EDINA, MN 55439-0730 HughBishopO«srtMink.n«l FAX: 1-677-281-6168 phone : 612-590-9000 Kevin and Janet Manley, December 9,2002, page two When our court action is completed, the court will have confirmed -• just ns it did in the previous registrations ~ that you own your own lot all the way to the water, subject to the 40-foot street. You also asked me to speak to how the Ekiofs fit into this. Let's review first the order of the lots. If you were standing at Fletchers and looking across, you would see, from left to right; Lot 5 (Purdy), Lot 6 (Delay), Lot 7 (Manley), Lot 8 (Ekiof). and Lot 9 (Gempler). I have helped the Purdys and the Delays register the title to their individual lots down to the water, subject to the street. Another attorney. Dale Moe, helped the Gemplers register theirs. The Purdys and the Delays each registered land described as their lot, including whatever accre ­ tions lay between their lot lines, extended out to the water. This is what you started registering as well - simply whatever lies between your lot lines as they are extended out to the water. The rea­ son for registering this description is that it is what you already own. The Gemplers requested the court to confirm in them title to something slightly different. I have a copy of the registration order and decree for them, and it appears that they requested title not only to the land between their own lot lines extended, but also to a pie-shaped piece of the accreted land that actually lies between the extended lot lines of the Ekiof \ol When your surveyor placed survey stakes to show the extension of your lot lines out to the water, I understand the Ekiofs asked if they might be able to acquire from you a pie-shaped piece of the accreted land that lies between the extensions of your lot lines, in order to make up for the part of their property that was awarded to the Gemplers. I understand you told them you would be glad to convey some kind of pie-shaped piece to them, but you are presently still waiting foi them to give you survey and a legal description of the parcel they would like you to convey to them. When they do this, we will prepare a deed conveying to them, and notify the Examiner of Titles that we now wish to confirm our owm title only to what remains. In the meantime though, our request to the Examiner of Titles has been to confirm your ownership of all the land lying between your lot lines extended to the water, subject to the street. Finally, you asked about the word "seisen" or “seizen". What it means, is the naked legal title -- or ownership -- of real property. It is sometimes called the fee simple absolute title. Whoever has the seizen is the owner of the land. You see it used in mortgages, <^en you warrant to your lender that you are %vell-seized of the land being mortgaged". Seizen is always somewhere, and in this case ypu have the seizen of the lot all the way to the wa ­ ter, and the seizen for the lake bottom is elsewhere. Please let me know if I can be helpful further. Cordially yours, Hugh Bishop ! ■ ^->-'1 ‘ 1 J FTT *«« »->' k iPi»- , >7 • :x i'j/57; h V' 1} s' ^ r i ' ^ L-h f . ^*A^, 1.- > Typical limestone retaining wall for over 4 feet high wall T^r7 T ••> ■ *-1., 'V . %/•<*" ■ x,5 Typical limestone retaining wall for 4 feet high wall (maximum) >'» :r7r.7T^^T-^ J.tl f r J M.y-.' ‘ r*^ V • LANDFORM- STONEBAY ORONO, MINNESOTA •* . v*^ •^-***^^*~- see SHeer l?.i r-oa eocwc spec«HCATiON 4* - 3/4* aeAC LMeSTOKt BASe MnOOT CLASS V 0P6AP see sweet l2.i eoc eociNC specucAtioN 4* riN. TCJPSOt ceoteKTie fabbic MOtei MnOOT CLASS V RP8AP SHALL BAWC6 N S«e fCOM 30* TO 6* OlAMeteC. ADJUST azes and combinations to MAxnzes STABUTY. Twe LABCeST STONBS SHAU BB PLACeO AT TWe BOTTOM OF Twe WALL. 6* - 3/4* aeAB LfieSTONB BASe COMPACTeO BACKFLL RIPRAP RETAINING LUALL NO SCALE EXHIBIT LANDfORM m I «kt **Bk • . •!••€» • SrONEOAY TP01002 Vp*- , iftiiVvAA ..iiiibitiiiriiik Kry^T’ 4* MN. ropsot see SH66T L?.i FOR eociNC specif-icATioN 4 ’ - 3/4* afcAR LUtSTOtJe BAS£ rtOOT CLASS V RPRAP WATER LEVEL CE0TEXTL6 FABRIC NOTE: MnOOT CLASS V R»>RAP SHALL RANC6 H SIZE FROn 30* TO 6* DIAriETER. ADJUST SIZEf -'O COMBNATIONS TO MAXMZES STAt THE LARGEST STONES SHALL BE aACEU «l THE BOTTOM OF THE WALL. 6’ - 3/4* CLEAR LMESTONE BASE COMPACTED BACXFR.L RIPRAP RETAININ<3 OJALL ADJACENT UJETLAND no scale iBSk EXHIBIT ■W LANDFORM ST0NE5AY TD01002 I ii ^—-