Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03-27-2000 Council Packet
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCtL MAR 27 2000 C»TY of orono DATE: March 27, 2000 ITEM NO.; / Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Eogineer's Report Item Description: Navarre Park DNR Grant Public Hearing Project Scope The Park Commission has been working on developing plans for upgrading Navarre Park. No improvements have been made to this park for many years, as the playground equipment is from the 1960's. This equipment was originally located in the parking lot until the current pa^ was developed from Tax Forfeit parcels. Navarre Park is an important park because it is located in the most densely populated area in the City. Many homes are located on small lots without room for recreational opportunities on their property. The proposed project includes new playground equipment, trails, landscaping improvements, lighting, disabled accessible parking, picnic tables and benches, tree planting, and installation of water service for a drinking fountain and yard hydrants. Public Involvement The plans for these park improvements have been developed with substantival involvement of the neighborhood residents, and the area resident’s strongly support this project. The Park Commission has already held a neighborhood informational meeting for the area residents. Several Park Commission members and neighborhood residents have worked together to develop a concept plan for the park improvements. This group looked at playground equipment at several parks in neighboring communities. They liked the new playground equipment at Cottagewood Park in Deephaven. This park contains two separate play equipment modules from Landscape Structures, Delano Minnesota. Project Schedule Part of the City’s cost contribution to this project will be payment of the engineering costs for this project. This will allow for early completion of the plans and specifications, and bidding of the project, in order to be ready for a contract award and project construction upon final approval of the grant agreement. This will provide for a prompt and efficient use of grant funds and provide the neighborhood with an upgraded and improved park as soon as possible. March 31, 2000 Grant application deadline preliminary Grant Approval Completion of plans and specifications and project bidding. 8 week duration Grant Agreement Approval Award of contract, mobilization, and order equipment 4 week duration Demolition Removals and Earthwork 2 week duration Playground and Other Equipment Installation 4 week duration • Trail Installation and Site Restoration 4 week duration Project Completion 14 weeks after approval of grant agreement Project Financing The City of Orono will match 50% of the project construction costs from the Park Dedication Fund account. No project costs will be assessed to the community residents The project engineering and bidding costs will be paid for by the City and not be included in the request for grant funds. The City will be completing the engineering work and project bidding prior to approval of the final grant agreement to expedite construction of the project in order to benefit the area residents sooner. Hem QasL Mobilization and Grading Playground Area Improvements Trails and Walkways Site Amenities Planting Beds & Tree Planting Lighting Drinking Fountain and Yard Hydrants Parking Reconfiguration $10,500 579,559 $12,258 $7,720 $11,288 $16,000 $13,350 $9,500 Estimated Year 2000 Construction Costs $160.175 Operation & Maintenance Costs The City has an annual operating budget of $60,000 for parks. This includes $23,000 for public works personnel labor, and $25,000 for repairs and maintenance of buildings and grounds. There are also other line items for employee insurance and benefits, utilities, equipment rentals, etc. With the exception of the contracted park mowing, the public works complete most of the park operations and maintenance work, so the repairs and maintenance budget is mainly used for the purchase of materials and supplies. The City budgets conservatively, and in the past the entire parks operating budget has not been utilized. There is adequate annual funding for the operation and maintenance of the proposed improvements to Navarre Park. This is an existing park, so we are currently incurring costs for, such items as mowing and trash collection. This project should not have any impact on these costs. Costs for equipment maintenance will increase somewhat because there will be more equipment in the park. There will also be additional annual operating costs for electricity for the park lighting. Annual Costs Equipment inspection and maintenance Maintenance of wood chip play equipment surfacing Contracted park mowing (Total cost for all parks $13,9(X)) Lighting electricity and maintenance Parking and cross walk striping $2,000 $500 $500 $1,000 $200 Three to Five Year Costs Bituminous path crack sealing Entrance sign maintenance Planting beds maintenance III$1, $500 $1.Ill Ten Year Costs Split rail fence maintenance $2.Ill Twenty Year Costs Overlay Bituminous Paths $5,000 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Conduct Public Hearing on DNR grant for the Navarre Park improvement project Approve of Local Government Resolution for Navarre Park Improvement I Outdoor RecreatioD Grant Program Navarre Park Renovation City of Orono March 28, 2000 Local Unit of Government: City of Orono Contact Person: Title: Address: Zip: Daytime Phone: Fax Number: Irene Silber Park Commissioner 4625 West Branch Road. Orono. MN 55364 County: Hennepin (65n642-4047 r65 11642-2050 Project Name:Navarre Park Project Location:Section/Township/Range 17/117/23 Proposed Acquisition:N/A (land already owned bv the citvl Facilities to be Developed/Renovated: The project consists of engineering, landscape architectural design and all materials, equipment and labor necessary to renovate and replace the 1960s era playground. The work will also substantially improve the remainder of the 0.92 acre Navarre Park. The park improvements consist of: ■site grading ■parking area reconfiguration to provide parking for persons with disabilities ■a painted cross walk •interior bituminous wallo^'ays ■benches ■picnic table ■connection to city water supply ■hi lo drinking fountain ■yard hydrct.its ‘future historic fountain ■site lighting ■tree planting » •two composite play structures: one for preschool age children 1-5 years old and a separate play structure for 5-14 year old children •new swings •renovation of existing slide •safe and accessible play surfacing •curb ramp and connection to future city sidewalk system •a split rail fence •planting beds •topsoil and seeding and other landscape improvements Total Cost: $160,175 Grant Request: $80,000 Item 2 - Project Narrative Since prehistoric times, the area now known as Navarre has been a crossroads - a way to traverse between the bays of Lake Minnetonka. In»-ian trails ran from north to south and east to west The point where they converged was an x-shaped bi^ of land nearly in the center of Lake Minnetonka. It took 100 lumbeijack-S to clear the big woods of Navarre and make way for the railroads. Along the way, the area changed its name several times - from Tazasl a to Island City to Langdon and finally to Navane, after a park in Paris. Throughout the nineteenth cenUiry, the railways brought day trippers and summer people to grand hotels and lakeside cabins in the area. Navarre was such an important destination that, in 1853, it was proposed as the capital city of Minnesota. In 1955, when Orono was incorporated as a village virtually all the open space in the Navarre area - both lakeshore and inland - was gone. Navarre featured a small neighborhood business district: several gas stations, a hardware store, grocery store, pharmacy, tavern and other assorted shops. Orono, still predominantly rural, had few development guidelines to handle this urban area in its midst. Parks were never a - priority, because the lake, and large lot rural development, so dominated the city’s concept of recreation. When, in 1979, Orono acquired by tax forfeiture a prominently situated .92 acre lot fronting County Road 19, it became a park in name only. Over the years, Navarre Park gained some “improvements” like a rusty slide, a creaking merry-go- round, and a chain link fence. No thought was given, no money appropriated, to accessibility amenities like paths, benches, picnic tables and modem play equipment that \\ ould make the park hospitable to children and families. Yet, Navarre Park is the front yard of the City of Orono and the only park within a two-mile radius. Today, with an active Parks and Open Space Commission, Orono is addressing the deferred needs of its parks, many acquired decades ago in a haphazard fashion. Navarre Park, although small, is the most visible of all Orono parks, and serves the area of highest need. Navarre is by far Orono ’s most densely populated neighborhood. Its houses - the smallest, oldest and least expensive in Orono - are turning over from elderly couples to young families. Navarre’s households report the lowest income in Orono - 53 percent less than $50,000 and 71 percent less than $70,000. They are also the most in need of recreational options because of the smaller homes and lots. With a DNR grant to supplement the city’s limited park dedication ftmds, Navarre Park can be a welcoming oasis for children and families. The park ’s natural attributes include its visibility to passers by, tall trees, a gentle slope and an ideal site for modem play stmctures. The park can be accessed by car from County Road 19 and through the municipal parking lot on County Road 15. Families can walk to the park on quiet back streets, without braving the narrow shoulders of hazardous county roads that lack sidewalks. Navarre Park is too small to be a showpiece and too noisy for contemplation. Yet in a densely populated neighborhood without any green space, it has an important role to play in community life. Nmtt* Ml tfnprov«mcAli. Orofio^ MN Cot Iruiidown for Mi Otviopwitm Artiv W— Morcuai.mo t<irv'> 4- Ql^ aod Elittiwot Moonzatton Common EjieovatfOA-offiiit Pioygi ndAmo TfoisondWaBcwayt SOoAmonMoi NowStng Ploy Atm Cutmg 12* ComprosMd Oopm EnginoofoO Wood Fibor Muldi RKorFobnc Ploy A/m Undifdrainogo AocoMibtUiy RooMt Surfoomg Trai&ce«vt8on(CV) AggrogaloBoM Btuminous Woor CoufM (Typo 4t A) Topdroooma (Aaoumo 1* Avtrago Oopfi) OvffModbtg (Shady Mb) SpilRoiFMco Trash Rocopladot Bonch with Amvatts ADA AccooafMo Pionie Tobio Concrait Pad for Tobio ond Bonch m Ploy Aroo FllitShB B#^ and Pioninga Topooa Boiddof Bordort gvii yoon Tcm (T hi BAB^ Omomontol TrM (T CoL BAS) Dociduogo Shmbo UghOng Bolord UgNhg (Indiidbg ironching) Poctrtcoi Sonnet MooaupfTWnodock-Photocoa OnfddngFounloinond Yord Hydrants onm^ Fountain Mh Concroio Pod r CorporiOon Slop 1* Cufd Slop and Boa 1* Typo X* Coppor Walor Sonnet Yard Hydrant Unit Qfy. 1UnNPrteo fifidS LS 1 86.000 86.000 CY soo 811 $6,600 Subtotal 810,800 iLS 1 »2.000 852.000 LS 1 S2JOO 82.600 IF 275 820 86400 CY 22S 83S 87.87S SY 600 $1S0 $800 LS 1 84.400 84.400 5f 304 $21 $8,384 jSuMolol 879488 CY 130 $11 $1,430 TN 180 816 $2,880 TN 8S $80 $6,100 CY 64 826 81.600 AC 0.4S 82.600 $U48 Sublelai r24» L3 1 83.000 83.000 LA 3 8400 81400 EA 2 8760 81400 EA 1 $800 8800 SF 30S 84 81420 Subtotal 87.730 CY 100 826 82.600 IF 803 87S0 83.773 EA 8 8400.00 83400 EA 2 83oaoo 8600 EA 27 846 00 81415 Subtotal 811488 EA 10 $1,000 810,000 LS 1 86.000 86400 Subtotal 816400 LS 1 $6,760 86.790 EA 1 81.200 81400 EA 1 8800 $000 L«200 819 83.800 LS 2 8400 $000 SuMolal tllJIO Romovt Biuminouo Pavamont B612 Coneraia Cmb Concroio SidiwoOi Aggropoto Soso Bnummoua Woor Courao (Typo 41 A) HanBcappod Panang aign BSioLoop Pant CrootMOi SY LF SF 7N TN EA £A LS 16S 160 320 36 IS 1 2 1 S20.00 SIS S4 SIS S60 S100 S300 $300 $3,360 12.400 11.280 SS60 $800 $100 $800 $300 SiiBtotal 88J00 Combinod Subtotal $160,17$ Voor 3000 Conacruedon Coola 8160,178 tcM 3011 aS-Ob-10B WorrA3-21 •200C€jtimato Items* Project Time Frame Part of the City’s cost contribution to this project will be payment of the engineering costs for this project. This will allow for early completion of the plans and specifications, and bidding of the project, in order to be ready for a contract award and project construction upon final approval of the grant agreement. This will provide for a prompt and efficient use of grant funds and provide the neighborhood with an upgraded and improved park as soon as possible. March 31,2000 Grant application deadline Preliminary Grant Approval Completion of plans and specifications and project bidding. 8 week duration Grant Agreement Approval Award of contract, mobilization, and order equipment 4 week duration Demolition Removals and Earthwork 2 week duration Playground and Other Equipment Installation 4 week duration Trail Installation and Site Restoration 4 week duration Project Completion 14 weeks after approval of grant agreement i Item 6 Local Match The City of Orono will match 50% of the project construction costs from the Park Dedication Fund account. The project engineering and bidding costs will be paid for by the City and not be included in the request for grant funds. The City will be completing the engineering work and project bidding prior to approval of the final grant agreement to expedite construction of the project in order to benefit the area residents sooner. LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION NAVARRE PARK IMPROVEMENT BE IT RESOLVED that City of Orono acts as legal sponsor for the project contained in the Outdoor Recreation Grant Program Application to be submitted on March 28,2000 and that Ronald M. Moorse, City Administrator, is hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Natural Resources for funding of this project on behalf of the City of Orono. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVTD that City of Orono has the legal authority tU apply for financial assistance, and the institutional, managerial and fmancial capability to ensure adequate construction, operation, maintenance and replacement of the proposed project for its design life. BE IT FURTHER RESOL\*ED that City of Orono has not incurred any costs described on Item 4 and has not entered into any written agreements to purchase property described in Item 3. BE IT FURTHER RESOL\TD that City of Orono has not violated any Federal, State, or Local laws pertaining to fraud, briber>*, graft kickbacks, collusion, conflict of interest or other unlawful or corrupt practice. BE IT FURTHER RESOLNTD that upon approval of its application by the state. City of Orono, may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above-referenced project, and that City of Orono certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Ronald M. Moorse is hereby authorizes to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant. I CERTIFY THAT the above resolution was adopted by the Orono City Council of City of Orono on March 27,2000. ATTEST: Lin S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor 1 concluded icordof23- ihe season number one jr Irondale. il American Blaine, the Minnetonka It. District 5 d a fourth- 1 regional in b-op 11 Carly Leusner. ^ Lucy Massapusi. LisaCi _ Swanson. Molly Tierney, Bec.^^ MeVay, Maggie Herfurth, Laura ZuDcosky, Amber Minkin, and honorary forward Camilla Byers. Outstanding defense was provided by Joanna Veach, Sarah Stieve, Jane Larson and Brooke Gillen. Radloii ^ the parents anu ^ manger Vicki Raicn*.. help and support througuv.^ season. r \ ^ CA v"'\ / or a special checked the le Humane County in ou won ’t cces. There jp of pets homes, a loption Day Co-op on le Plain is March M. s from the at the co-op n. Cats and, the shelter ghway 12, a > from the ight County euiered and ;. Cats have cukemia and )rms. It 612-972- ion. slated rosis :k ;or Center is kshop on sday during resses the atr.tent of : specialized :d ways to ilance and itrcngih will :red in the : taught by ie St. Paul 3ck Senior register for . is SI per PUBUC NOTICE CITY OP LONG UKE Pos(«d: March 6.2000 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, mat the City Council of Long Lako has changed the data for their March 21. 2000 workshop meebng to Tuesday. March 28. 2000 in order to obtain a quorum. The meeDng will be held in the Lono Lake Council Chambers at City Han. 1964 Park Avenue. Long Lake. MN. The meeting time will remain 730 p.m. ^ Patty Sullivan City Clerk (Published in March 11.2000) The Laker and Pioneer Notice of Hearing on Improvement Nooce is hereby given that the Oror.o City Council will meet in the Council Chambers. 2780 Kelley Parkway, at 7:00 p m. on March 27. 2000 to obtain public comments on the Navarre Playground Improvement Project Such persons as desire to be heard leith reference to the proposed improvement virill be heard at this meeting. - . . Lnda S. Vee. Oiy Oerk (Published in The Laker and Pioneer March 4 and March 11. 2000)<1 CITY OF INDEPENDENCE ADVEATISEMENT FOR BIDS Sealed bcs will be received by March 13. 2000. opened and tabulated by the Public Works Director at 2:00 p.m. and considered by the City Courol at its regular meeting on March 14.2000 *or the following: 3/4* Class 2 Limestone 1 1/2* Ctar Limes*iOre 1/2* Was^ed Ice Matenai Class 5 Rec/ded Asphalt rClass SLmestone 1 1/2* Moefed Limes ’^ne Class 5 Recyded Conbit Washed Sa*d Bids sha:! s*.a:e the pree per ton at the quarry, price per ion delivered and placed on oty roads, 'and pnee per ton delivered to the ory and stockp ed. Bids will also be accepted for hauling ony. No depos.1 for bids will be required. All bids shall be aCd.'tssed to the Public Works Director. City of Independence. 1920 Couny Road 90. Indtoendence. MN 55359. staled and marked *Rcad Maitriais.* No faxes w*ll be accepted. Certt^cate of Insuranct it to be submined at Pr-e of submission of bid. The C«ty of independence reserves the right to reject a-/ and an b ds and waive any information rrs n Daniel P. Koch Putl.c Works Director (Published m The Laker and Pioneer March 4 and 11.2000) ORDINANCE NO. 195 .2ND SERJLS AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2000 FEE SCHEDULE The City Council of Orono ordomr. Sectloa I. Ordinencif Amended Ordinance No 194. 2nd Scr.es entitled *An Ordinance Adopting the 2000 Fee Schedule* is hereby amended to revise the ^aicr and sewer connection charges reloied to ihc 1919 Highway 12 Water and .Sewer Impruvement Frojcci. The amendment changes the connection charges from pcr-unii chorees to per-acre chrges The new charges are as followi: 1989 Highway 12 Sewer Connecuon Chaise: 1919 Highway 12 Water Connection Charge: K900/ocre Sl.lOO/acee 1983-1 Highway 12 Orono-Lnng l.ake- Medina 5 1.325 CO (1) (+) w Esepensioft If 19 IligKvirev m Mambar Smith Introducad and movad tha adoption of tha following rasolution: CITY OF INDEPENDENCE RESOLUTION NO. 0222-03 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 00-BY ’ TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS. Tha City Council of Ibe City of Independence has adopted Ordinance No. 00-. reianng to individual sewage treatment systems: and WHEREAS. ^Annesota Statutes. Section 412.191. subd. 4(1998) aOows pubGcabon by otle arul summary in the case of lengthy ordinartces: and WHEREAS, the Oty Counol believes that the following summary would dearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Counol of the City of Independence that the diy derk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. 00- to be published in the offidal newspaper m lieu of the enure ordinance: Public Nonce The City Council of the City of Independence has adopted Ordinance No. 00-. -AN ORDWANCEAMENDWG SECTION 705 THE INDEPENDENCE CITY CODE: RELATING TO INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEMS.* The ordinance amends the dty code to incorporate current Minnesota rules provisions. The ordinance provides that non-standard sewage treatment systems may only be used in Situations where an exisong septic system has failed. Trench systems constructed on an 18 percent slope is considered non-standard. The ordinance also reduces the required setback from wetlands from 75 feet lo 50 feet Toni Hirsch. City Clerk-Treasurer BE rr FURTHER RESOLVED that the city derk-tressurer keep a copy of the ordinance in her office at city hall for public inspeebon and that she post a fun copy of the ordinance in a public place in the City. 2000 Adopted this 22nd day of February. Marvn Johnson. Mayor ATTEST. Tor^i Hifsch. City Clerk-Treasurer The foregoing motion was duly seconded by member Cook and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor: Mayor Johnson. CounaTmtmbers Smith. Cook. Fisher. Emrrer and the follcwing voted agarnsr: None. V/^ereupon the resoiuuon was declared adopted. (Published in The Laker and Pioneer March 11.2000) Sanitajy S« Crack and Joint Press Testing Sanitary & Pipe Crack Joint Sealir Bids shaO that purpose if Documents p Hendrickson Ir Suite 200. Min dated March IS ad forms •' be seen at the c and at the o Engineers. Contractor Forms and Cor them from the Engineers in ac to Bidders upon should be nr Hendrickson provided. Bid tecurir bid must aecorr with the tnstruc* Bids shal Administrator. 5 upon the ou SANITARY REHABILITATIC The City 0 to reject any irregiHarides ar award the Conu City of Long Lak (Published March 11.18 ar AQYL Sealed bic Orono. Minne; Kelly Parkway Monday. April. be publicly op furnishing of e else necessary Webber Imnfovemen! 8.300 LF Sewer - Direct: Cut 9 EA Manholes and res'iOreton. an Pans and and contract d office of the C h'J'V, g REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: March 27, 2000 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engmeer's Report Item Description: Navarre Park DNR Grant Public Hearing Project Scope The Park Commission has been working on developing plans for upgrading Navarre Park. No improvements have been made to this park for many years, as the playground equipment is from the I960's. This equipment was originally located in the parking lot until the current park was developed from Tax Forfeit parcels. Navarre Park is an important park because it is located in the most densely populated area in the City. Many homes are located on small lots without room for recreational opportunities on their property. The proposed project includes new playground equipment, trails, landscaping improvements, lighting, disabled accessible parking, picnic tables and benches, tree planting, and installation of water service for a drinking fountain and yard hydrants. Public Involvement The plans for these park improvements have been developed with substantival involvement of the neighborhood residents, and the area resident’s strongly support this project. The Park Commission has already held a neighborhood informational meeting for the area residents. Several Park Commission members and neighborhood residents have worked together to develop a concept plan for the park improvements. This group looked at playground equipment at several parks in neighboring communities. They liked the new playground equipment at Cottagewood Park in Deephaven. This park contains two separate play equipment modules from Landscape Structures, Delano Minnesota. Project Schedule Part of the City’s cost contribution to this project will be payment of the engineering costs for this project. This will allow for early completion of the plans and specifications, and bidding of the project, in order to be ready for a contract award and project construction upon final approval of the grant agreement. This will provide for a prompt and efficient use of grant funds and provide the neighborhood with an upgraded and improved park as soon as possible. 5 V March 31» 2000 Grant application deadline Preliminary Grant Approval Completion of plans and specifications and project bidding. 8 week duration Grant Agreement Approval Award of contract, mobilization, and order equipment 4 week duration • Demolition Removals and Earthwork 2 week duration • Playground and Other Equipment Installation 4 week duration • Trail Installation and Site Restoration 4 week duration Project Completion 14 weeks after approval of grant agreement Project Financing The City of Orono will match 50% of the project construction costs from the Park Dedication Fund account. No project costs will be assessed to the community residents The project engineering and bidding costs will be paid for by the City and not be included in the request for grant funds. The City will be completing the engineering work and project bidding prior to approval of the final grant agreement to expedite construction of the project in order to benefit the area residents sooner. 3 ^ 0 V lism Cost Mobilization and Grading Playground Area Improvements Trails and Walkways Site Amenities Planting Beds & Tree Planting Lighting Drinking Fountain and Yard Hydrants Parking Reconfiguration $10,500 $79,559 $12,258 $7,720 $11,288 $16,000 $13,350 $9,500 Estimated Year 2000 Construction Costs $160.175 Operation & Maintenance Costs The City has an annual operating budget of $60,000 for parks. This includes $23,000 for public works personnel labor, and $25,000 for repairs and maintenance of buildings and grounds. There are also other line items for employee insurance and benefits, utilities, equipment rentals, etc. With the exception of the contracted park mowing, the public works complete most of the park operations and maintenance work, so the repairs and maintenance budget is mainly used for the purchase of materials and supplies. The City budgets conservatively, and in the past the entire parks operating budget has not been utilized. There is adequate annual funding for the operation and maintenance of the proposed improvements to Navarre Park. This is an existing park, so we are currently incurring costs for, such items as mowing and trash collection. This project should not have any impact on these costs. Costs for equipment maintenance will increase somewhat because there will be more equipment in the park. There will also be additional annual operating costs for electricity for the park lighting. Annual Costs Equipment inspection and maintenance .Maintenance of wood chip play equipment surfacing Contracted park mowing (Total cost for all parks $13,900) Lighting electricity and maintenance Parking and cross walk striping $2,000 5500 $500 $1,000 $200 i .Ml*.-..- - -I vi« a ^ ^ 5/ Three to Five Year Costs Bituminous path crack sealing Entrance sign maintenance planting beds maintenance $1,000 $500 $1,000 Ten Year Costs Split rail fence maintenance $2,000 Twenty Year Costs Overlay Bituminous Paths $5,000 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Conduct Public Hearing on DNR grant for the Navarre Park improvement project Approve of Local Government Resolution for Navarre Park Improvement yea Item 9 Operation & Maintenance Costs The City has an annual operating budget of $60,000 for parks. This includes $23,000 for public works personnel labor, and $25,000 for repairs and maintenance of buildings and grounds. There are also other line items for employee insurance and benefits, utilities, equipment rentals, etc.. With the exception of the contracted park mowing, the public works complete most of the park operations and maintenance work, so the repairs and maintenance budget is mainly used for the purchase of materials and supplies. The City budgets conservatively, and in the past the entire parks operating budget has not been utilized. There is adequate annual funding for the operation and maintenance of the proposed improvements to Navarre Park. This is an existing park, so we are cunently incurring costs for, such items as mowing and trash collection. This project should not have any impact on this costs. Costs for equipment maintenance will increase somewhat because there will be more equipment in the park. There will also be additional annual operating costs for electricity for the park lighting. Annual Costs Equipment inspection and maintenance Maintenance of wood chip play equipment surfacing Contracted park mowing (Total cost for all parks $13,900) Lighting electricity and maintenance Parking and cross walk striping $2,000 $500 $500 $1,000 $200 Three to Five Year Costs Bituminous path crack sealing Entrance sign maintenance Planting beds maintenance $1,000 $500 $1,000 Ten Year Costs Split rail fence maintenance $2,000 Twenty Year Costs Overlay Bituminous Paths $5,000 '^0 P jfL-i C j(LZ 5 2. SI Two of the members shall reside in and be appointed to represent the Rural Service Area of the City as defined in the Comprehensive Management Plan, two members residing in and appointed to represent the Urban Service Area» one appointed that resides on Lake Minnetonka lakeshore property and two shall be appointed to represent the City At Large. The Council by majority vote may deviate from this policy to appoint persons without specific designation. The Zoning Administrator and one Council member shall be members of the Commission ex officio and without vote. Ordinance 31, 2nd Series Adopted: 3-17-87 Subd. 2. Powers and Duties. The Planning Commission shall be the Planning Agency of the City and be an advisory body to the Council. The Commission shall have the power, under the direction of the Council, to carry on the duties set forth in Minnesota Statutes, and those duties provided by this Code and such other duties as prescribed by the Council from time to time. The Commission shall hold a regular meeting once each month and-keep records of its proceedings. SEC. 2.52. PARK COMMISSION. Subd. 1. Establishment and Composition. A Park Commission composed of eight members, who shall serve staggered three-year terms, is hereby established. The Public Works Director and one Council member shall be members of the Commission ex officio and without vote and are in addition to the eight member Commission. Ordinance 59, 2nd Series Adopted: 10-24-88 , Rw /W J 93 ) Subd. 2. Powers and Duties. The Park Commission shall be only an advisory body to the Council. The Commission shall study and consider the continuing needs of the City for parks and recreation areas and facilities of all kinds, including, but not limited to, problems involving public use of Lake Minnetonka and other lakes in the City, and portions of its shorelines. The Commission shall report to the Council from time to time. ORONO CC (3-17-87) /1 ORDINANCE NO. 2nd Series AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORONO SECTION 2.52, SUBDIVISION 1, CHANGING THE MEMBERSHIP OP THE PARK COMMISSION FROM EIGHT TO SEVEN MEMBERS THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL HEREBY ORDAINS: Section 1.Orono Municipal Code, Section 2.52, Subdivision 1 is amended to read as follows: Establishment and Composition. A Park Ccnuinssion composed of seven members as of the rottnd of appointments made by Council after January 1, 1993 who shall serve staggered three-year terms, is hereby established. The Publxc Works Dxrector and one Council member shall be mer^oers of the Commission ex officio and without vote and are xn addition to the seven member Commission. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect upon publication. Adopted by the Orono City Council this 11th. day of January, 1993. Edward J. Caldahan7nMay< JANUARY 2000 8 M T W T F S 2^4 5 6 7 8 9 10 H 12 13 14 15 16 ^18 O 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 FEBRUARY 2000 8 M T W T F 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 ^8 9 10 H 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20^22 O 24 25 26 27 28 29 JULY 2000 8 M T W T F 8 . 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 018 19 20 2122 23 2425 26 27 28 29 30 31 AUGUST 2000 8 M t W T F 8 (1)2 3 4 5 6 ^ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 O 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 2000 PHONE NUMBERS MARCH 8 M T W T F 8 .^1234 5 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 APRIL 2000 SEPTEMBER 2000 8 M T W T F 8 1 2 - 34^^6 7 8 9 _ 10 11^13 14 15 16 17 0^ 20 21 22 23 - 24 S 26 27 28 29 30 _ OCTOBER 2000 - 14 ® 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ^ 30 31 19 ®21 220025 26 27 28 29 30 m JUNE 8 M T W T 1 2000 F 8 2 3 9 10 DECEMBER 8 M T W 4 7 8 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ® 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 2000 r F 8 3^ 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24^ 31 Bonestroo Roaene Anderllk & Aaaocfatea Enoln««ri A AreMI«e(ti 8t. Paul, Minnesota 96 97 98 99 30 838-4800 FAX (8S1) 838-1311 * TOM KELLOOQ DIRECT DIAL (681)804-4383 \t^\l f/o CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices Stratt Address: 2750 Kelley Paricway Orono, MN 55356 PARK COMMISSION MEMBERS 1/99 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Ciystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 UAm Susan D. Wilson 32S Brown Road South Long Lake. MN SS3S6 Appointed 5/14/90 Reappointed: 2/25/91-12/31/93 1/1/94-12/31/96 5/12/97-12/31/99 Appointed Chair: 4/28/97-3/2/98 PHONE 473-9113 FAX 473-0202 Sherokee Use 3630 Eileen Street Maple Plain, MN 55359 10/14/91 Reappointed: 1/1/94-12/31/96 5/12/97-12/31/99 476-2804 476-1303 Andrew McDermott 2702 Walters Port Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 7/24/95 Reappointed: 4/8/96-12/31/98 1/1/99-12/31/2001 Appointed Chair: 2/9/98 471-9898 (h) 713-5263 (o) 713-5291 James White 3515 Ivy Place Wayzata,MN 55391 4/26/93 Reappointed: 3/27/95-12/31/97 1/1/98-12/31/2000 Appointed Vice Chair: 2/9/98 471-8136 (h) 673-5170(0) 747-0421 (cell) 673-5111 Van D. Erickson 55 Golden View Drive Long Lake, MN 55356 4/28/97-12GI/99 475-1615 (h) 404-1509(0) 404-0442 Peter Welles 2160 6th Avenue North Long Lake, MN 55356 4/28/97-12/31/99 475- 3698 (h) 476- 5464 (o) 476-5492 Irene Silber 4625 West Branch Road Orono, MN 55364 3/23/98-12/31/98 Reappointed: 1/1/99-12/31/2001 472-6678 (h) 651-642-4047 (o) 868-1427 (cell) 651-642-2050 Tdcphonc (612) 475-7357 • FAX 47541510 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JANUARY 10,2000 \o SJ (»10) DECLARA TION OF LOCAL JURISDICTION RE: ISTS - Continued Jabbour said that Orono is presently complying with the MPCA regulations. Orono is substantially more restrictive on some of the regulations than the MPCA. Barrett asked if the City is agreeing, by this resolution, to conform its ordinance, Gaffron said this resolution is very focused. It says the City of Orono will maintain jurisdiction and it doesn’t commit to any of the issues about codes. Kelley moved, Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4409 Declaring that the City of Orono Will Retain Jurisdiction Over Individual Sewage Treatment System Regulation, and directing staff to send a letter to Hennepin County stating the City’s position. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#11) ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS - RESOLUTION NO. 4410 Jabbour suggested that Flint be named Acting Mayor for the year 2000, Peterson suggested that the State Bank of Long Lake be added to the list of Official DepositoriesAnvestment Vendors. Peterson moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve Resolution No. 4410 Designating Selected Appointments for the Year 2000, naming Richard Flint Acting Mayor and adding the State Bank of Long Lake as an Official Depository of the City assuming they meet the statutory requirements. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#I2) SELECTION OF DATE FOR 2000 LOCAL BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to establish April 26,2000 at 7:00 p.m. as the date and time for the 2000 Local Board of Review meeting. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#13) PARK COMMISSION REAPPOINTMENT Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to reappoint Sherokee Use to a three-year term on the Parks, Trails and Open Space Commission expiring on December 31,2002. (#14) ASSESSOR SERVICES CONTR.\CT Moorse said the City’s agreement with Hennepin County for property assessment services expires on July 31,2000. The City must make a decision by the end of February about whether the City wants to keep Hennepin County as its assessor for the next four years. Flint suggested that staff contact the prior assessor and see if he is stiU unwilling to serve. He thinks that person had better knowledge of lakeshore property than the County does. Page 19 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING 1 \ h MINUTES FOR JANUARY 11,1999 (iU3) OLD CRYSTAL BA YROAD TRAIL HIGHWA Y12 CROSSING - Mn/DOTLBUTED USE ^ PERMIT - continued Gappa said that the plans will be reviewed by the Planning Commission in March. Flint asked about the status of the bike trail contract for the north side of County Road 6. Kellogg responded that the plans are being completed and the intent is to bid the project in early March. Flint stated that the City staff should keep track of the progress of this project. Kellogg distributed plans for the Femdale Road reconstruction project A public information meeting will be held at the Plymouth City Council Chambers on February 4, at 6:30 p.m. The contract, will be awarded in April. Jabbour stated he is proud of the way the Femdale Road project has been handled. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#14) PARK COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS Moorse stated the terms of Andrew McDermott and Irene Silber on the Park Commission expired on December 31,1998. Both have expressed an interest in serving an additional term on the Park Commission. Kelley moved, Flint seconded, to approve the reappointment of Andrew McDermott and Irene Silber to additional three-year terms on the Park Commission beginning January* 1,1999 and ding December 31,2001. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#15) SELECTION OF DATE FOR 1999 LOCAL BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING Flint asked if this meeting could be combined with a regular Council meeting. Jabbour stated the review meeting would last too long and it is a two meeting process. Jabbour moved, Sansevere seconded, to establish April 28,1999 at 7:00 p.m. as the date and time for the 1999 Local Board of Review meeting. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#16) COUNCIL LIAISON TO PARK COMMISSION AND PLANNING CO.NLMISSION MEETINGS Kelley moved, Flint seconded, to approve the schedule for Council attendance at the Park Commission and Planning Commusion meetings during 1999. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 16 i MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 9,1998 '7/ (*#8) BID AWARD - 1998 MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to accept the bids as presented for the calendar year 1998. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#9) PLANNING COM>nSSION REAPPOINTMENTS Jabbour confirmed that Commissioners Smith and Hawn desire to continue serving on the Planning Commission. Flint moved, Goetten seconded, to reappoint Sandy Smith and Liz Hawn to additional 3- year terms on the Planning Commission expiring March 31, 2001. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#10) APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING COM>HSSION AND PARK COMNHSSION CHAIRS AND VICE CHAIRS Jabbour said the purpose of rotating chairs of these commissions is to allow the commissioners to gain experience. The Council members agreed that rotating chairs was a good idea. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to appoint Sandy Smith as Chair of the Planning ... Commission, and to appoint Andrew McDermott as Chair of the Park Commiision. V’ote; Ayes 4, Nays OT Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to appoint Liz Hawn as Vice Chair of the Planning Commission and James White as Vice Chair of the Park Commission. Vote: Ayes 4 Nays 0. (#11) APPOINTMENT OF PARK COM jVHSSION MEMBER Jabbour indicated that the Council believes the opening on the Park Commission should be opened to the residents to allow for community changes that have occurred since the last appointment. The Council decided that the applicants, who are currently on file for the position, will be informed that no resubmittal of application is necessary if renewed interest in the opening is expressed. Susan Wilson asked that the opening be filled as soon as possible. Goetten felt it was necessary to see who is interested in serving on the Park CommissiorL Flint suggested that Wilson encourage residents to apply if they are interested. Peterson inquu’ed of the time frame for the appointment. It was de* rmined that the process would require about 6 weeks time. d • ^ V) ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 28,1997 0'k MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT (#15) PLANNING COMMISSION REAPPOINTMENTS Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to reappoint Dale Lindquist and Janice Berg to three year terms on the Planning Commission expiring on March 31,2000. (#16) PARK COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS Jabbour commented that Mr. Erickson's point of view regarding organized sports would add to the Park Commission. Flint {.greed. Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, to appoint Van Douglas Erickson to a three year term on the Park Commission expiring on December 31,1999. Ayes 5, nays 0. Peterson moved, Kelley seconded, to appoint Peter Welles to a three year term on the Park Commission expiring on December 31, 1999. Ayes 5, nays 0. Jabbour suggested the City Administrator send letters of appreciation to all applicants for the Park Commission. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to appoint Susan Wilson as Chair of the Park Commission. Ayes 5, nays 0. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to appoint Andrew McDermott as Vice Chair of the Park Commission. Ayes 5, nays 0. Jabbour noted the policy of the Council is to rotate the positions of Chair and Vice Chair. ENGINEER REPORT (#17) PAY REQUEST #4, LIFT STATION #28 REHABILITATION Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Ford Construction Company, Request for Payment #4 in the amount of $3,760.06, for installation of the emergency monitoring system dialer in Lift Station #28. Ayes 5, nays 0. Kelley asked for clarification of the situation on the Bcssesen and Sawicki properties. Cook responded that they had been working with Kathleen Ash to get an easement but she was not in agreement. Staff will have ftuther discussions >\ith her. A pond in the area may be a solution. Council urged resolve of this issue m a timely manner. 1 1 1 \)avJc\ 9 *7 *1 ** ••••♦ 44H1:14S iTATf Of MIMNaOTA OEfARTIIEirrOF REVENUE CONVCVAIiCf OF fONf ilTEO LANDS (liiur^ fiyfi4ttmiomiMi«i®liSUMlct.Sfciio« 2S3 0I.S«hdi»««Mirt n ....I9JEP. ^tiwcfNth« « _________________________ - P*My of the wci«i pill. WITKESSirrU: WHCRCAS. Ilif iMfclnaflct deicrtfccd tiRU July foifduJ lo Ibe SIjIc nf Mliuietola for llif MMipiy- Mfit of Nitt. aoS. I « 235^.rKriSr5Mt< kr n wdirtwlr iurk ind rKfCiUM------------------------------------------------- WHBMAS. IlM I«m4 *t CtmMt Coi—Iwlwin of At C«i«ly — —- SMt Of MImmoIi. kM mooii»w«»< lo Mm tooUrtoow of B w»*m ^ m^oIIoo Mtoplfd IfJL. IlMl MMh eoo»w»"<« k« <"*<*• NOW.TMEIUaOM.TlMSMMof IU«M«M<.punMl lo mM ■»«»«*<»; ^ 7.1!^ iMt, 4o« kmbif vwl. W»|MO. ■■ »* ntnn ooio «k« r*fit *k* mwoM P**- *"**V • jjyJjJI?!!* Of MMtliof laoSlylotMiS bdHflo llMCoiMiiyof_ilfiDudtilL.______________- . Suic of MIiimiou . on the lot 22, Block 1 Min 0 *4jy ••onor r' is.4Z]io-4iao ( I Lot 27, Bloch C *Uvirre ‘leloht'. n. Boot iMftVy mmU Nf|No. ma too coovey mom im w ffOMdiof iMiBlyliiOMB bdoflo llMCoiiniyof.JlfiDUCSUn mriboB ai foUovio lo-wN: l-.ev Iut a, aiKt a * ,y:* Mill 0 UOy l••00^ 38-42110-7400 fr Lot 26, BlocrsA KK lUvorro HtiQkts \ 3S>4274 0-S100^ Lot ?.*?, Slock f rtovirTf Melohtj ‘ 3C-42740-S?n0 TO NAVB AND TO MOLD TUB lAUB, looitlwf «rilli oH tlic hcitililiilNNU iiid typurUoiom llitif *«lo«OiNMiorlo«ytMiiopf«toldiN.lollMtdBFMly of lilt lifoiid yjfl lo loiig Of It iholl cnj. Mmmi MM mM H i* -iwmm •fwM—M mmI immmi rniMUlliiii ttiit If itiHi iim ■liallceatt tdd If 44K1.'I45 '•;ii *iy J5C7I>S STATE DEED tlnOrf Mmocm U Sla4olr«. ScdiiNi aia^l.SiABitliiy I. Taa liaitMnift L« At irM p«Off*tt 4r •rtOrf ■ ilMt iMinitti AmM kt Mm to ••I STATBOPMUtMCSOTA TO llto City of Mrono c/o •.falter E. fenion, nt> fdolnlttralcr Orofio, Mlmesoti .*•1 gfCt tf cauaii M.xonaM«|»H C<X V N iru atiitnru* *« *i p|.». ISnJUM25 AN |i0« •' 44HliJ4S •* -i’M r />w.m tOCUlRNT jAaccMi % *’t):4 -il OPFKXOP RGCISmOF DEEDS STAnOPIBNNESOTA CoMilyof. T«!S DOCUlIBHT IS BECOtOEO ON BOTH ABSTRACT AND TORBENiSlMPERTr I', I 1 iMtcLw cMtify litol tW vnyn DmB MM fM M Ikb offiot for toCioB oo llw No Otfer^Miii ••0 MtotOar ^ ^ fNMNCC 0tv.niO4 HlAtotoiCOl-rilr. •• •! Btyof. A.D. 19 ___.o*docA of DooB s, M yofr a jO JWI W7V Em* \' XL mOVA OOUCTOII Dcrurr M.. ■ri^iltr of Psofc !•• too*«.*« • Cwo •»« •««« «■ mom Ma MO OooipoO . iOTO rnmxmmm BqiiSy. vA'/v: / -•-.>5 /t:) I#• •<y Fo» »n M5 (Ii«w, «1.'7S» l!V-«2n7Z-i.'i •' U(x^O\YV’e f(?^f\c nr ATE CF .v;iN;\’Lsor.\ JI-!*AKTV.E:n OP K. VtjiUf 47n.5'm CCNVRYANCS of FOBFEllTiri LANDS (li.«UMt punuaM to M'trtfMvntM Statutei, S«riio«i 282.01, Sutxtlvision 1) THIS IMOENTD&E. matlv ihl« 5t^. day of I’eVu^ry, J912, ihe Stole of rniMUThri;:, «o pari/ of .(•« first port, am! City of Ortwio, a Gov-rn-ii»;ntol 5'i.NJivision, A> por.v of :>ic iicoiK) part. W1TNES8BT1. WNERBAS, the !vfl*} hsrrioe/^ described <*!i4 duiv faffe.'».1 v> Iho it’.tta of Minpoiot-i for Iho o»>np«ymeot of taxes, snS, NHLi.^AS, pupjuont to Mintxsota .Statutes S.'.'tior Je2.‘U. StlaJIvaloi 1. the party of tha secufwl part Ivn app'ie<] to the CommSsaioner of R-jvsnaf f-;r the conveyance of taa»ts hercinaft?<* described to *>c ai»*d by it evelusiva!/ for psri« and reereatieo. road and jitPiity purposes, and, -------------------- —-^■—-> ffiiBRHAS, the Board of •..'our.’y Commissirint'ri of t.nc County of Hcrnapi.n, State of Minn^tta, Ih0 recutntnendca to tl'«e Centmissidner of Revenue by reaohition adoctfti oo the X7lb uuy of Nweitioei', li*el, :.nnt sacfi conveyance made. MOW, THRSKKORE, the State of Minnesota, pursuant to s<.W Uws and C.i eonfidaratlon of the pramiveH, hereby grant, ba.'gnin, s«3 and eunvev unto tne perty of Uie second part, .'orever, aU the tracts or pareels of land lying and being In tha County of Kcimeoin. State of Minnosola, describoi ns foUews, t-o*wit; District PJ.O. - 38 ;>3 I" : 17-23 44 (1003 07-J 17-23 44 0001 Tnwrxite .if Lnngdori Peru Lot S, Block 3 Com 4t a pt in w line of Lot 3 dis lOS 5710 ft S from NW sot thereof ih C to a pt in Wly line of rd GO fi SEly from Nly lim: of tot 5 tnSEly along seid road line iS ft th d 74 Ueg 24 Mir. W 100 ft th SWly to a pt in W line of Lot 5 dis 304 S/10 ft N from SW eor thereof th S to Peg. That pert of G..'t. Lot 3 lying N of the S 1174 7/iO ft thereof and E of elr line of Rd. an rued Section *. ToH*.T9hip 117, Range 23 Ooo<3 V Have A*.U to U0LI> TKB same , together with all tha hereditamanta end eppurtenonaea thereunto betonguig or in anywise .appertaining, to the said parly of tha ■eoond part so long as it shall eonttnua to um said land for the p«irpoee aforesaid, and igion condition that If .sucit usu shall cease said Isnd shall r* • art to the party of tha first part as provided by law. Mo deed lax will be payable on this oxiveyanee. .‘•i . •• •v'frMi* *c: 4 %0-IMS la? w .V..-.‘v •/.•V••r. y,r.- .• * m Bintt ol *' :isn, AS 5kttte of h« party ;ane« of osd and Stilt* i)f )pt«l on and in he (Nirty Countv ;ntH And ' of the ind upon part as W TESTIMONY WHKSZdF, iho Stats of ■Vinneso'ta, par^y v*f Ine fir*f part, has ciii;je.'l tJiw Joed lo be execuicd In its name in the City of St. Pe'il, Rainsoy County, t!:nner.-ta, the day nr.il vsnr tifjt above written. »n (*r«K.-acft oft •l-Ci./L-\ .• -»* OTaTB OK MiHKfiiOTA CLYDE E. AL>^, 4li. CotamiMioner of Eeven^ / y gys A S-i’ATB OF MIXNErkftA ) C>inty of Ranisey ) On thli 3th day of tebruary, 1992, before me pei'Aontliy eupoared DENMiS J. ERNO. .Ascistanl Comnfiisnionar of Reventic of the Suie of Minne.«cta, lo me Unown to be tha perviii wou ejcoitute*) ihe forefcoin^ conveyai oe in tefialf of the State cf Minn«<ote. and acknowtedfct! t:Mt he executed the same as the frea act .md deed of said state pursuant to ttvj statutes in such ci'sc made and provided. ) ^ 5;*', -*»••• c I . *: • •*V. .• • • • • *•• f A • ^ V. Thv< Instrument was Drafte.t i>y The ConimiMioncr of Revenue* SUU of Minn^te DopartmonI of Revenue SL Fault Minnesota 55145 y • . • v:• • la :f -t -V «. A ••I* »:.£ id Vj ••••isvt m • • >?•^ »T 'iw Xfissu 1 'T'x \1 '{(/ ■■•'•■■ '•' y??«f3555?®i39'. • ■ 4704411 i ibiK.i I L C h 'jXU jj •^ix *.• 0' «*v •*.* %*; n • . city of Orcw>o e/o Alberts M Orono, Hinn. ■ •■•&!Strora, City Cleriyl t^C FEE REQUWEO • •t %N, .!»• •*;rt>.:; .’vri • M • t li37Ma-3 AHI|:43 4704411 / ---------------- .V _ • • • «. - -W .• - * 4^^- L2IC«ACtaH'^'YBanun • atati^ ''A. SJ«lr«-n»r laa I n -«■■ ^nm 1 ■■ ~l M *■ ^rV'aBV^'4 . SOParmnCin** %i7ti MV<Oa720l 4 k f v« ^ > «« *? N. > fee; tTATr OP MiNNtSOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE CONVEYANCE OF FORFEITED LANDS (Ittued pursuant to Minnesota Sututes, Section 2S2.0I Subdivision 1) THIS INDENTURE, made thh 1?th October _______________ « A ^ A nwnt’SS5J^id!“desclibed was duly forfeiitd to the State of Mbmesoia for the nonpay h' ■ , P“7“"< *® Mtaneaota Suiutea Scetten 28101, SubdNWon I. the oartv of the ewiMA ** >«'i* bwiinSto dete-<bj^ .and.**>r V.- • Is »• .tie*' • • .*•• on tilt • *.• , .A 1* t f. *v2i»t •' i- ■■'••••?';'•. • !> • . • r »* ' ,, 7 <4, ••, >«• •; •*** Cdunly Commiaioneii of the County of Kennanin __________ ~ sr,si5 s?a? a sr. ?ss • ^®"®^2j^^*23*d4*0050 • Lot 69 Hl9hwood Lake Minnetonka J8-17-117-23-V1-001S . Coo 10 Ft E of ?W Cor of Lot 23 HI leys Navarre Addn th S par with u lint of said Lot 23 01s 137 1 4 10 Ft actual pt of beg th deHectlng 117 deg IS rin to the left 91 3SM00 ft to west line of Co Road Ho 19 th sly along said road line to a pt 60 ft S of 1 lint of Lot 5 Blk 3 T'rwnsite of Langdon Park tl. H to a pt In H line of said Lot 5 dls 100 5 4 10 ft S of . . most «11y cor thereof th H to beg ea Road. _____________________________ »».,TOor».nm».. u,. N, aiSraiSS ’iS lopwMnKttf; STATE OF MINNESOTA a;sL5i*iP,'.4!i. V. 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA--^ » ‘ ^ ) It. County of Rimscy ) On this 17th I.- l;‘ -------------------------da\ of October_______ fh^ ' "AssTsuHt , i-ommiiiionef of lUvimic of Ihf 5l4te of .Minnesota, to me known to be thr peraon who executed the foceiok.^ rnnvpvancr m behxlf of the Sl^lp> of ..4 --L___*s._. . •VT • a before ne pertonelly , Commiiiionef of Revenue of T»«.i trvMfwdesaiM OrttfaV Vv T>w Cap wNtiiowf •! Wt»bw trwa •! %b«M««M0 CWpftmDWt of ntONMO fef Vawi. MlasAoeou UUf --------- me onown lo Di inr pcrtoA wlio executed the foceiobu rnnvrj wcr m behalf of the Suie of Minnesota, and •eknowl«d|ad that he oe^ the wmp lA the free act and deed of laid stitc punuxnt lo the elitutet in auch nudr and provided. .......... V.*.’-.wy-•• • j • f *.••; ' . f u*}^ la m mMHk • • •• * % ' .5* • *i» kk • '* ■ •* • A . .M. • a.sr.lPUMT; * •* -»'• > ,^Be I. V%a Y f S. • \ < . . - ■ li^VA [] :f‘ -I •-•rf > *•.- *• ‘-^v *•• .. ’.‘•i .;*'. • t . AV . ' ••. ■ * • . .\:?;;:v.,v.r- ' ': •• '•v'V7*:- i'•:5v^-vV- •A*./w ■*••.•>*• fVA-v ?**•»•• .*•. . .• . . I •»• • .. / I 7 5.'•:>■. . ^.- •*• A. /. f j1402263 ^ , l^gw«ais£i/No. STATE DEED UniItT MinneMta Suiulea, Section aiOLStibdWon 1. Tax fliitmcati for iIm imI property KriM in thit iMtmatti ihoold be mi to: STATE OF MlBIPfCSOTA TO City of Orono ftilifiB- Uilttr R. Btnson, City Adalnlftrator Orono, Hinnosota orricc OP tmc moisTaaii Of TITUS NIMNCPIM COUfirr. mNNCSOTA CtRTinEO F1LC0 ON e NOV 6 1980 Of TITUS ocpvrr OFFICE OF REGISTER OF DEEDS STATE OF MINNESOTA j Counlv of.) 1 Kf rcby certify thr * tlie withia Deed wM filed in this offke for record on the day of._________________ ^4 *u* >*r. ^ *i%ti tn ’ >\N• %. • A.D. 19__.at o'clock •ml was duly recorded in Book of Deeds, on pa|e_ . tiov s SCO Bv_________ Refiftcrof Deeds. > Douty. NO FEE RCQUIRCO •V •• ‘ * •> \L ■ T'iZ'<-r.V\''S C CITY OF ORONO PARK LAWN MAINTENANCE 2000 SEASON Quotations will be received by the City Orono, Minnesota at the City Hall until 4:30 p.m. on Monday, February 28,2000 for City Park Lawn Maintenance for 2000. All quotations shall be made on the forms provided by the City and shall be directed to the City of Orono, P.O. Bo.x 66, Crystal Bay, MN 55323; Street Address, 2750 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN. 55356 Quotations submitted by FAX machine are not acceptable. The City reserves the right to reject any and all quotations, waive any technicalities and select the company in the best interest of the City. Mowing Locations Lawn maintenance shall be completed at the following sites: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 11) 12) 13) 14) Antoine Park Bederwood Park Casco Point Beach Casco Point Ice Rink City Offices (Includes w-eeding of landscaping in front of City Hall) Crystal Bay Park Hackberry Park Livingston Tower Park Lvdiard Beach Swim Area Navarre Playpround ^ Sandy Reach Swim Area Summit Park Swim Area Water Plant - Navarre Water Plant - Highway 12 Description of Work All sites will be mowed as necessary to maintain a well kept lawn appearance. It shall be unnecessary for lawns to be mowed more than once every seven days. Grass shall be trimmed around trees, foundations, rocks, displays, fences, light poles and other objects every time the lawn is mowed. Grass will be removed from walks, patios and driving surfaces at the time of each mowing. Also, included is completion of routine weeding of the landscaping in front of the City Offices each time mow ing is completed. Trimming of the landscaping is not required. 2-, Navarre Park 'BS- +,iw5Q_S2_i # So 2 OTo 134.5 Navarre Park Playground Equipment 1 grounded picnic table 2 picnic table 3 large slide 4 large swing set 5 play jungle set Section number 17 Approximent acreage: .75 Municipal Parking ranee Location too Distance in feet 0 • 00 200 SitePlan as of 6/96 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: March 13. 2 ITEM NO • II ' • • Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer's Report Item Description: 2000 Season Park Mowing We have obtained quotations for park mowing for the 2000 season. Requests for quotations were sent to six area firms. Quotations were received from two firms Lawn Detailers, Medina Minnesota Shaughnessy Lawn Services, Orono Minnesota $15,225 $ 13,900 We have checked references for Shaugnessy Lawn Service, and the reference check was positive. This firm has been completing park mowing for the City of Long Lake for the past several years. We are recommending accepting the quotation from Shaugnessy Lawn Service for the 2 season park mowing. Ill COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to accept quotation from Shaughnessy Lawn Service, Orono Minnesota for the 2 season, park mowing in the amount of $13,900. III VjUcfWfci 1-V(YAy^ Company SL,6^l Address Contact /^lu ^r ' '^€fltyj Telephone No. /f City, State. Zip C\A{j /fi/C Fax No. . C^<'6 PROPOSAL FORM 2000 SEASON PARK LAWN MAINTENANCE CITY OF ORONO City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323-0066 The undersigned, being familiar with your location conditions, having made the field inspections and investigations deemed necessary, having studied the specifications for the work including and being familiar with all factors and other conditions affecting the work and cost thereof, hereby proposes to furnish all labor, tools, materials, skills, equipment and all else necessary to complete the work in accordance with the specifications, as follows: I/we propose to furnish all materials and labor for work for the LUMP SUM of: 2000 Seaso!<s /3 y fWo? rD^l/^Vfa\lcvi {uWy 5"6ry7? c>i tl/or\c 15 Acr^y W\J nuvf\t';v- d{ aL\A\(\\\P^ Lnu'o r I.'\?VY> \l V.6 In submitting this quotation, it is understood that the Owner retains the right to reject any and all quotations and to waive irregularities and informalities therein and to select the company to the best interests of the Owner. Respectfully submitted. 1/1 S Ac.c^oU/1« Name oration) Indiv!3uaI7_} (A Partnership) TSigner V Title Printed Name of'Si^er v • . f . References . . r •'4: i . .. r VI- Ij Name tfo Compute ^ /^C9 Par/i^<c/P Street City * Telephone Fax tc^/n ffa^(/Qjr^-f~ Name Telephone Company P^hc Aa^L /) / Street Fax f {/ / ^ nSS;---- J----- CjS'fvT^ / /-^ g __ Company Fax /£2£^4J1L^_ l n}m^f f CiSj > Telephone ';^i Item 13- Eavironmental Intrusions The eastern boundary of Navarre Park is Shadywood Road (County road 19). The average daily traffic on this road is 5,400 vehicles. The southern boundary of the park is Lyric Avenue, a low volume residential street, with an average daily traffic count of only several hundred vehicles. In order to minimize the traffic and roadway impacts, the main park entrance and vehicle parking area will be located along Lyric Avenue. The playground equipment will be located in the northwest comer of the park to maximize the distance from the higher traffic county road. The City is also planning on a future sidewalk along the western side of County Road 19 to provide for safer pedestrian access to the park. Single family homes are located along the northern and western boundaries of the park. There is an existing overhead power line along the northern park boundary that serves the homes to the north. To minimize the impacts from the homes and power line, a split rail fence will be installed to delineate the park boundary and trees will be planted along the north park boundary. There are no other environmental intrusions that adversely affect the park. resistant surface. ADAAG 4.5.1. The walks/trails will also connect to a future city sidewalk via a curb ramp. ADAAG 4.7. All overhanging branches will be removed above the walks and play equipment ADAAG 4.4.2. Benches will have backs, arm rests (proposed ADAAG) and there will be a level 30 X 48 inch space adjacent to all benches for wheel chair and companion seating ADAAG 4.32.2 fig 45. Accessible benches will also be disbursed in both sunny and shady locations. The picnic table will have an accessible path to it an extended end. The picnic table will also have a 34-inch high table top and a 27-inch high, 30-inch wide and 19-inch deep knee space ADAAG 4.32.3. The drinking fountain will be a “hi-low ” style fountain that will allow easy use by chair users and also by persons who have problems bending ADAAG 4.1.2 (10) (a). The low portion of the drinking fountain will comply with ADAAG 4.15. Play equipment consists of two composite play structures and both will be accessible. The play areas for a 2-5 year old and 5-12 year old children will be separated in accordance with ASTM F 1487-95. There is a resilient rubier surfacing to both play structures and safe and firm manufactured wood surfacing around the rest of the play equipment. The engineered wood fiber mulch conforms to ASTM F1292-99 and ASTM F1951 -99 standards for resiliency and accessibility. A portion of the interactive play components will be within the appropriate reach range for children with disabilities. The component for the older children will have transfer steps and platform that will allow a child to transfer from their wheelchair to the play equipment. The swing set will also include one full molded bucket seat swing to provide for accessibility. ADA ACCESSABILITY CHARTS 2-5 Year-old Plav Equipment Total elevated play components Total accessible ground level components shown Total elevated components accessible by transfer Total elevated components accessible by ramp 5-12 vear-old Plav Equipment Total elevated play components Total accessible ground level components shown Total elevated components accessible by transfer Total elevated components accessible by ramp = 9 = 9 (5 required) =7 (5 required) =0 (0 required) = 12 = 10 (6 required) =7 (6 required) =0 (0 required) ' I \. .}/\w7xy V \ ' f-\\^ V'. I \ Y 0 r ji/ ni in // \ r, -I 1 f/ iV'i*''.• ) ***>■iuctr m^r •*. r»1^ I 'C r •> '•A' tl-k^iiLlli mm &m »'i****^ mim rm^w* ^PiP4^ iKIii|wv Sml ;• ’ ^.%y-'« ‘•t''AI •:’* ■. .-.r' (1 ',n.' L'^Waa m.m - V V ?V m iBii' • - >:\ 1 • w 1^.. V l k ji-5'iK4 :> Hi iuH mm 5» ‘ ’‘■‘^ tf' jM.^‘ ^**1 rl»*ii E 'iW??,:.H T .‘ji.: .V^,r. - 4 •i m a? r. <> 'A"t’'? ifiElif - J/’ y i • ■'>, p% it • '■■ .U ■4 ; ?., »• ■ • r b'.V %'"^1 »O'* 4' lt:i'-£ I V^ t«,, l^ji___ iiiilp Clli& . • y* — ... . .».. . -., , \ ... •jI aa» li •♦' •*m liem 17- Location Map jsi: 1 L>X3 LAKE ■ il, H U«€ ZSi i iftETRSTA A. \ -:oo p MOUND **••<• k. I 9 ooo «s;* 0^k MINN& •3^ ‘WCRl-J 1.0 m /:I LiAirf/crcM %^= iV 4500 4-tCO B 4CCO 36w 5^ / • ■Hat aMat 3200 24 CO 2000 1600 t200 City of Orono, Minnesota Street Numbering Index Map m^varre PAkClc Tax ten. ycoejL 4 mx, TrS2"»*« IZ / CONCf^C FAO fAau NTV PUV STRUCTIACS AMO SWMCS. see >LAVCII0UN0 PLAN rOR OCTAILS -------- c^NCRceN scNeer SiNCie fAMR.Y HOM S MTN AM M CCSS«L ANO ocn :h with m^eiCMAtfi SPLIf R/ll rCNCC PCfiC COMPANION PAD.—I eXfiTiNC sw fO PCMAIN sp CiC rMNiv Hones \ SVflfHCTC (fi^NT— SillTAClNC'--' ^ PMK PROPeNTV 80UN0ANV- LYRIC AVENUE PIANTNC KO (Trt«*l)-'1 P AN!»« ISLAND—/^ fUlURC rpUNTAIN OR GA2CB0 LOCATIONL(X^ BOilARO IICHTINQ 0^ wi6^~ eiiuMiNOuS trai CXiSliNC COMMCRCM. LANO use >MN a 6pCSSI0LC PAMUNO SIALL V LEGENDv r777Z2E3 FUTURC CITY TAL PARK ARCA t CeOAR 0ITUMMOUS Tl rCNCC nStING SK)C«MLK III 1$ \ V.. 4 P 2.0 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 13,2000 3 coi iwr.iL msetw Q ROLL MAR 27 2000 CITY OF ORONO The Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Council Members Richard Flint, Charles Kelley, Barbara Peterson, and Bob Sansevere. Representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Barrett, Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gafifron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Alissa Wintemheimer. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Discussion of Item #1 follows Item #2 CONSENT AGENDA 2. Approve/Amend Items 6,7,9, and 12 were added to the Consent Agenda. Petenon moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1. Park Commission Interviews The first applicant interviewed was Mr. Jim Morgan. Mayor Jabbour asked him to tell the Council atout himself. Mr. Morgan stated that he grew up in the Twin Cities, and has lived in Orono for the past two years. He has also owned a small business, Mitten Software, Inc., in Long Lake since 1988. He is interested in the Park Commission because he wants to make a positive impact on the community. Mr. Morgan stated he has 3 major concerns with the parks which he calls “The 3 T’s: 1) Trees, creative landscape work to beautify the parks; 2) Trails, better network between parks and more of a community system of trails for various users; 3) Treasury, creative ways to fund raise for the parks. Mayor Jabbour asked if Mr. Morgan had reviewed the Park Commission’s comprehensive philosophy. Mr. Morgan stated he has not reviewed the philosophy. Mayor Jabbour asked if he is familiar with most of the parks. Mr. Morgan stated he has been to many of the parks, but cannot claim to have intimate knowledge of them. 1 . . I ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 13,2000 /. Park Commission Interviews-Continued Kelley asked why he moved to Orono. Mr. Morgan stated he grew up in Woodbury and likes a more open, country feel. Flint asked where he lives. Mr. Morgan stated he lives just south of the old ski hill on Bayside Road. Sansevere asked if any of Orono’s parks are distressing to him. Mr. Morgan said none were distressing, but he felt some of the parks could be made more appealing with some creative landscaping. San'^cvere asked how expensive is the landscaping Mr. Morgan had in mind. He replied mat the community should be encouraged to donate funds for trees. Kelley asked if he was married. Mr. Morgan stated he is married and has a fourteen-year- old son. Mayor Jabbour stated that almost 100% of the City ’s parkland has been donated. He then informed Mr. Morgan that the City has more applicants than positions available, and he encouraged Mr. Morgan to apply for future positions if he is not selected for a current opening. The second candidate interviewed was Ms. Debora Halvorson. Mayor Jabbour asked her to tell the Council about herself Ms. Halvorson stated she lived in Orono for eight years, then moved to Bloomington in 1994, and mo\ ed back to Orono last November. She found a list vf parks that she didn’t know had existed, even though she had lived here for eight years. She stated she has the time available and would like to give something back to the community. Sansevere asked what Ms. Halvorson thinks of the Cit> ’s parks. She stated she has driven around and visited about 90% of the parks. Many are neighborhood parks. Ms. Halvorson stated she likes the idea of hiking trails. She also said it is difficult to walk or bike along some residential streets because they don’t have sidewalks. Ms. Halvorson stated she does not have a personal agenda, but is interested in acting on behalf of the community. Flint asked where she lives. Ms. Halvorson stated she lives half way between Noereiiberg Park and Bohn’s Point Road on North Shore Drive. Kelley asked why she moved back to Orono. Ms. Halvorson stated she missed the open land and privacy here. Mayor Jabbour informed Ms. Halvorson that the City has more applicants than positions ORONO CITY COUTs’CIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 13,2000 I. Park Commission Interviews-C^ontinued available, and he encouraged Ms. Halvorson to apply for future positions if she is not selected for a current opening. The third candidate interviewed was Ms. Pauline Bouchard. Mayor Jabbour asked the candidate to tell the Council about herself. Ms. Bouchard stated she has lived in Orono for 23 years and has never been involved in civic activity at the municipal level. She retired last summer and decided it is time to give back to the community. She feels the parks are not promoted actively enough to the community. She would also like the citizens to know they have a sympathetic ear on the Parks Commission. She would also like to poll citizens about their park use. She has not looked into whether there is an extensive city plan regarding parks, but she would like for there to be one. Mayor Jabbour stated that the present Comprehensive Plan for the City does not promote parks. The Council, the Park Board, and the City Planner have decided to change that. He then asked what Ms. Bouchard thinks about the City's desire to change the Dakota Line to a trail. Ms. Bouchard stated she is very much in favor of making the Dakota Line a trail because there are no sidewalks along County Road 15. If appointed, Ms. Bouchard would work hard to see the conversion happen. Flint asked where she lives. Ms. Bouchard stated she lives between Fox Hill and Sailor ’s World on County Road 15. Mayor Jabbour informed Ms. Bouchard that the City has more applicants than positions available, and he encouraged Ms. Bouchard to apply for future positions if she is not selected for a current opening. APPROVAL OF MINUTES '*'3. Council Work Session of February 14,2000 Peterson moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Council Work Session of February 14,2000. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *4. Regular City Council Meeting of February 28,2< Peterson moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council meeting of February 28,2000 as sLbmitted. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 13,2000 PARK COMMISSION COMAffiNTS - RICK MEYERS, REPRESENTATIVE Meyers brought a number of items to the Council’s attention. In regard to Navarre Park, the grant application will be ready to submit by the deadline of March 31, 2000; and they should hear back on the grant by mid-April. The Commission is still wondering about other sources of funding. They believe the City should explore the possibility of funding from pull-tabs. In other cities, 10% of revenue generated by pull-tabs stays with the city. The Commission feels the City should ask for the money before pull-tabs grow in popularity. The Commission has not yet addressed the Comprehensive Plan. One major problem facing them is that many residents are unaware of the parks in Orono. Parks need to be better defined in terms of signage, access, and boundaries. Meyers also stated they need to address access to the parcel of land at Lowry Woods if tfiey are going to have it as a park. The Commission also discussed Hackberry Park. Staff have met with the property owner in the middle of the park. He is willing to sell his property to the City. The Commission feels that park would be ideal as a baseball park. It is important the City get something in writing from the property owner stating he will come to the City first when he is ready to sell his property. The Commission also discussed the Crystal Bay Park. It has two parcels split by a road. If they eliminated the road and joined the parcels, the park would make an excellent soccer park. Peterson stated there was also discussion of putting in a skating rink. Mayor Jabbour stated the Council couldn’t have an opinion regarding the matter until there is a public hearing on the issue. The Commission would like to have a trail access from Navarre Lane. The Lafayette Circle neighbors are interested in having a trail in that area. Mayor Jabbour stated the City should work diligently to establish pedestrian paths in this area. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS-JAY NYGARD, REPRESENTATIVE Nygard stated the Commissio* .ealizes the importance of growing Hackberr>' Park, and that the City is lucky the property o\%ner there likes the kids and the park u ound his home. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 13,2000 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 5. #2556 Barbara and Collins Cavender, having an interest in 1395/1405 Rest Point Road - Variances - Resolution No. 4430 Mr. and Mrs. Cavender were in attendance. Weinberger stated that the Cavenders were seeking variances to permit construction of a new residence on two properties: 1395 and 1405 Rest Point Road. The south lot (1405) is developed; the adjacent lot to the north (1395) is vacant. The current house sits 41 feet from the lakeshore; it is a one-story house similar to other houses in the neighborhood. fhe Cavenders want to remove the existing house, purchase the north lot and combine the parcels into one tax ID, making one legal lot. The required setbacks allow a very small building pad. Any construction would require variances for lakeshore setback. Another consideration is the City has a lift station on the property. The Cavenders would allow a utility easement on the property. Also, the Cavenders want to keep the house as far from the lift station as possible. The proposed house is two stories above ground. A basement is not possible due to the water table. The house would include a two car attached garage. The Cavenders want to maintain as much front yard as possible and create a buffer zone between the house and the lift station. The lift station will require weekly maintenance and could sometimes emit an odor. The current proposal has moved the house back creating a 34-foot setback from the lake and the house has been reduced to meet the 15% allowance on the propert)'. The average setback is actually closer to 40 feet, but the lakeshore cuts into the propert>’ and the setback is measured from that point. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the plan with a 4-0 vote based on the following hardships: it is nearly impossible to build 75 feet from the lakeshore, the lift station requires vehicles to pull off the road for maintenance and may emit an odor, the lot has been developed and used as a residential property for years. A condition of approval would be that both lots are combined into one tax parcel and filed with Hennepin County before any building permits are issued. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 13,2000 5. §2556 Barbara and ColUns Cavender, having an interest in 1395/1405 Rest Point Road—Variances -Resolution No. 4430-Continued Mrs. Cavender stated that the existing house, which they own, actually extends into the road. Kelley asked if the Cavenders understand the City’s hardcover issues. Mayor Jabbour added that the Cavenders current plan maximizes use of the lot, and structural coverage has been maximized at 15%. As a result, the Cavenders would not be approved in the future for any patios or decks. Mayor Jabbour moved, and Kelley seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4430 approving the existing resolution with the addition to the language that no additional hardcover will be allowed on the property. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Mayor Jabbour stated he had been approached by Mr. Kent Carlson of Ryan Company who wants to buy Washington Scientific and tear down the building, then build a pharmaceutical company office and small warehouse on the property. He wants to work with the City regarding environmental clean up of the property. He is also interested in working with the City on developing building standards. Kelley asked if the Fire Marshall has ever visited the site. He stated that most large fires happen in vacant buildings and that he would like to see a report on the W.S.I. and V.C.I. buildings. Mayor .tabbour stated he is not certain a fix)ntage road serving the industrial area is a good idea becjuac it would push traffic into residential areas. Mayor Jabbour stated he had attended a positive Big Island Committee meeting. A resident asked about parties. Mayor Jabbour stated that it should be considered the same as any other party permit. Mayor Jabbour stated he has viewed a potential r<. ignment of the lots in Fleming Addition in Long Lake. An issue everyone should consider is that they could serve the subdivision by doing a curb cut on the private road. He asked if the Council wants a new road dissecting what might be considered parkland in the future. He asked for a copy of the subdivision plan so that the Council could discuss the plan. Sansevere asked if the Council has ever considered changing the Regular City Council Meeting meeting day. Mayor Jabbour stated they don’t want Council meetings to conflict with other community meetings so they have a chance at receiving press coverage. Kelley stated that if the Orono/Long Lake merger occurs they will have to reconsider the meeting day. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 13,2000 Mayor/Cottncil Report-Continued Mayor Jabbour spoke to the School Board about the City ’s purchase of School Disrtct orooerty for public works use. He informed them that the City has never burned bi^h or branches so children with asthma will not be affected. The School Board wants the City to identify mo parcels: 4.42 acres and 6.6 acres. The City needs to put out stakes so they c^ walk the property. He woula like the Council to authorize staff to make an offer on the property if necessary. Staff should attempt to get the 6.6 acres and should offer $30,000 per acre for the first 4.42 acres and $15,000 per acre for the extra 2 acres in the 6.6-acre parcel. Flint moved, and Peterson seconded, that the Council authorize staff to make an offer on the land. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Sansevere attended a Healthy Communities meeting. The school is cutting a n^ber of programs, such as JV basketball, dance, and cheerleading unless they ^ be funded too^ fees Too many programs are in need of money, such as band and gifted and talented. The quality of life in Orono will be affected if the school district is perceived poorly and the school continues to lose students and prestige. Kelley stated he attended a Fire Department meeUng last week and pushed the architect on site selection. A 20,000 s.f. building requires a 60,000 s.f lot. He also mentioned Swond Call a fund raising group for the Fire Department. Those who make a donation are given a tour ’of the fire station. Flint stated that the Long Lake Consolidation Comimttee ^blic Hearing minutes claimed Orono is only in favor of the merger because Orono wants the ire department here. Kelley, Peterson, and Mayor Jabbour all stated that is not true. ENGINEER REPORT *6. Park Mowing Contract Peterson moved, and Sansevere seconded, to accept the quotaHon from Shaughmasy Lawn Service, Orono, Minnesota for the 2000 season park mowing m the amount of $13,900. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. *7. Approve Purchase of Fuel Tank for Golf Course Peterson moved, and Sansevere seconded, to accept the quotation from Equipment for a 500/500 gallon dual compartment concrete vaulted fuel storage ta in the amount of $19,170. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 13,2000 *7. Approve Purchase of Fuel Tank for Golf Course-Continued Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 8. Schedule Council Work Session The Council wall hold a work session on Monday, April 10,2000 at 4:00 p.m. The Council will hold a workshop on April 14 and 15,2000. *9. 2000 Insurance Award and Resolution to Not Waive the Statutory Tort Limits for Insurance Purposes - Resolution No. 4431 Peterson moved, and Sansevere seconded, to award the 2000 insurance package effective January 1, 2000 to the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust for the worker compensation coverage, $34,592; for the comprehensive municipal property and casualty package, $83^30; for the umbrella excess liability, $18^48; for the petrofiind reimbursement, $595; for the open meeting law, $939; for the boiler and machinery, $1,585; for the surety bonds, $780; and for the golf course liqu::tr liability, $625. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Peterson moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt Resolution No. 4431, a Resolution Making a Selection to Not Waive the Statutory Tort Limits for Liability Insurance Purposes. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 10. Community Endowment Fund Mayor Jabbour stated that the Council should either buy back the city facilities bonds, or develop a policy regarding how to use the money in the City’s Building Outlay Fund. He stated that he felt buying back the bonds would be a mistake. Kelley stated that the money is excess revenue over expenses from years past. Flint asked about purchasing some open space areas to set aside for future use. Mayor Jabbour stated he would rather see the money set aside and the city could use 90% of interest earned each year. He also stated that the City could borrow against the interest, but the money should be kept in case of large, unexpected future expenses. Kelley asked how much open space or parklanc the City would want to maintain. He also asked if they move the money off of their balance sheet and place it into a fund, if it would affect the City’s Moody’s rating and bonding ability. 8 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 13,2000 10. Community Endowment Fund-Continued Mayor Jabbour reiterated that he feels the City should place the money in an endowment fund so the City will have a long term source of funding for capital needs. The Council decided to continue discussion of this issue at their work session. 11. Development of Highway 12 Design Standards Moorse stated that Long Lake has contracted with a firm to develop a master plan and design guidelines for the commercial area of Long Lake. Orono city representatives have been invited to participate, since design guidelines should be consistent across the two cities. The total cost of the project is $20,000. Long Lake is going to see if Mn/DOT will finance the project, but Orono is welcome to help with the financial burden. Mayor Jabbour stated the two cities’ Planning Commissions should meet jointly to work on the project, and that meetings should be open to any Council members who want to attend. Kelley, Flint, and Moorse all expressed interest in attending the meetings. Mayor Jabbour moved, and Peterson seconded, that Orono should pay 50% of the expenses not covered by Mn/DOT for the Highway 12 commercial area master plan and design guideline development process. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *12. Reappoint Planning Commission Members Peterson moved, and Sansevere seconded, to reappoint Jan Berg and Dale Lindquist to three year terms on the Planning Commission expiring March 31, 2003; and to reappoint William Stoddard to a three year term on the Planning Commission beginning April 1,1999 and expiring March 31,2002. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT There was no City Attorney ’s Repwrt. *13. LICENCES Peterson moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the following licenses. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 13,2000 *13. Licenses-Continued SET-UP LICENSE 1. DonScherven Navarre Lanes, Inc. 3435 Shoreline Drive RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE 1 . Tris Strulde KJohn 4455 North Shore Drive *14. BILLS Petenon moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 19. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Jabbour moved, and Peterson seconded, to adjourn at 9:18 p.m. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor :a CniiMr.ii meeting HAR 2 7 2000 Application Date: 10/1/99 Completion Date: 10/29/99 Deadline: 3/31/00 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 3/27/00 ITEM NO ‘ ¥ Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2540 Bradley A. Hoyt 2523 Kelly Avenue Conditional Use Permit Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District Application Extension Request: List of Exhibits: A B Draft Resolution 2/14/00 City Council Report A letter requesting extension of the application to 3/31/00 was delivered to the City from Mr. Sheridan on behalf of Mr. Hoyt. The purpose of the letter was to extend the application deadline for Mr. Hoyt and allow him to m^e a complete variance application to the City. The application would have required a public hearing and review by the Planning Commission March 20th. No application has been submitted. The next available Planning Commission date for the variance application to be reviewed is in May, past the application deadline. A letter was delivered to Mr. Hoyt at the December 13,1999 City Council meeting explaining to Mr. Hoyt what was required to continue the land use application. The Planning Commission has held public hearings regarding the conditional use permit application on November 15,1999 and January 19, 2000. The public hearing scheduled for January 19, 2000 wa*: not attended by Mr. Hoyt or a representative in his place. The Plaiming Commission had forwarded the request to the City Council. The City Council first reviewed the application on December 13, 1999 and recommended the applicant provide additional information and complete a variance application. Since this meeting no application has been received from Mr. Hoyt. Again the Council reviewed the request on February 14, 2000 and continued the request to the Planning Commission for review based on an amended application, to include new evidence. On behalf of Mr. Hoyt, Rick Sheridan, submitted a request in writing to the City of Orono to extend the application deadline to March 31,2000. The ; I . . ' intent of the extension to the end of March was to permit the application to be amended, reviewed by the Planning Commission on March 20,2000, and forwarded to the City Council. No additional information or application has been submitted by Mr. Hoyt since the meeting on February 14th. The City of Orono has long had a policy to retain natural vegetation and limit the impact of urbanization as visible from the lake. Natural vegetation has been preserved on slope.s and retaining walls have been discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case natural vegetation screening has been a condition of approval. Staff has drafted a resolution to present to the Council. A copy of the draft resolution for the conditional use permit request is attached for your review. Staff has recommended denial of the application request for a conditional use permit based on the Zoning Chapter requirement that conditional use permits meet all other provisions of the Code. Because the retaining wall is hardcover and structure within 75' of the lakeshore it is not permitted without variances. OPTIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION 1. 2. To deny the conditional use permit application based on the findings noted in the attached draft resolution. To continue the application based on any new information that the applicant may provide, subject to the applicant extending or waiving the application deadline. WHEREAS, an application for a conditional use permit was received on October 1, 1999 for an after-the-fact conditional use permit. WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application; the recommendations of the City staff and the Planning Commission; and the comments and written statements submitted by the applicant. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby denies the requested conditional use permit as des':ribed above based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning this property: FINDINGS 1. The property is located in the LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District. 2. The property consists of 21,700 s.f. in land area within 75' of the shoreline where hardcover, structures, intensive vegetation clearing, and land alteration are prohibited by the Orono zoning code. 3. Without obtaining permits the applicant constructed a retaining wall within IS' of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. 4. The boulder wall constructed on the lakeside of the property is hardcover . Section 10.02, Definition 29 defines Hankover as “Any structure, blacktop or other material which interferes to any degree with the direct absorption of rainfall into the ground. 5. Section 10.02, Definition 69 defines Structure as "Anything, or part thereof, which is built, constructed or erected, an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner, which requires a location on, below, or above the ground, land, or water, or attached to something having a location on the ground, land, or water." 6. I he 1980 City of Orono Community Management Plan ("Comprehensive Plan") contains a number of general land use and environmental protection goals and policies with which the wall would be inconsistent, as follows; A. Surface Water runolTis alTected bv urbanization and how these factors intum Page 2 of 11 directly affect the water quality of Lake Minnetonka. Development density will be limited to a level which will not overload the natural surface water drainage an filtration system. Direct runoff into the Lake will be avoided whenever possible. B. Retention of natural vegetation will limit the impact of urbanization as visible from the lake. Minimum green belts will be provided with prohibitions against clearrutting or e.xcessive thirming of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes and retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. 7. After the fact variances and a conditional use permit are required for the retaining wall. The applicant has submitted an application only for a conditional use permit. Approval for a conditional use permit per Municipal Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 requires the project to meet all other provisions of the Municipal Code. \'ariances are required to permit hardcover within 75' of the OHWL of929.4' designated for Lake Minnetonka. 1) Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 (Regulations for the Lakeshore Residential Districts), 2) Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 (Flood Plain and Wetland Management) and 3) Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) do not permit hardcover within the 75' setback zone. The applicant was given an opportunity to amend the land use application to include after the fact variance for the structure and hardcover. .A letter was delivered to the applicant (attached as Exhibit A) on December 13. 1999 describing the information requested by the Cit>'. 8. A letter dated January 6,2000 by Thomas J. Barrett, City Attorney (Exhibit B) was delivered to the applicant's attorney to further address the steps necessar>' to present its case for a variance from the Municipal Code. 9. The application was first reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 15, 1999 and the Planning Commission recomm.ended denial of the conditional use permit request based on Section 10.09 of the Municipal Code which requires conditional use pennits to meet all other provisions of the Municipal Code. No information had been made available to the Planning Commission to review the preconstruction conditions on the property. Page 3 of 11 10. The City Council reviewed the application on December 13, 1999 and voted to continue the application to a future meeting of the City Council. Staff delivered a letter to the applicant requesting additional information as follows: A. Completed variance application form, including statement of hardship/unusual property' conditions, etc. B. Name/address of any landscape designer who may have been involved in designing the improvements. Name/address of contractor who completed the work. C. D. E. F. The plans given to the contractor defining what work was intended, such as existing and proposed contours; retaining wall specifications; engineering calculations on any segments of wall in excess of 48" in height; any pre construction surveys you may have available; cut and fill calculations indicating the volume, in cubic yards, of material proposed to be moved on the property, etc. Any as-built specifications provided by the contractor, especially if the final result was different than the proposed plan. We do have your post construction survey on file as submitted. Any photographs or other documentation of the condition of the shoreline prior to construction of the walls, especially any tree damage, or any documentation from any tree service which may have removed storm- damaged trees. Any additional information which you believe will enhance the City’s understanding of what work was completed and the reasons it was undertaken. 11. The Planning Commission met for the purposes of holding a public hearing on January 19,2000. Neither the applicant, nor anyone on his behalf was present at the meeting. The Planning Commission voted to recommend denial and referred the matter to the Citv Council. Page 4 of 11 12. The City Council had the application on the February 14, 2000 agenda. Mr. Rick Sheridan, applicant’s attorney, appeared and asked for an extension to the application deadline to March 31,2000. The intent of the extension to the end of March was to permit the applicant to submit further information for review by the Planning Commission on March 20, 2000. No additional information or application was submitted by the applicant. 13. The granting of after the fact variances require a hardship being inherent to the property. An after the fact variance application has not been received and no supporting documentation has been submitted to support the applicant’s position that the preexisting condition of the property would require a retaining wall to prevent erosion. 14. The granting of the requested retaining wall structure and hardcover as a conditional use permit w ould be contrary to the provision of the Municipal Code Section 10.09, Subdivision 6 because the after the fact conditional use permit doer not comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. The following sections of the Zoning Chapter prohibit the retaining wall structure and hardcover within 75' of the OH WL of Lake Minnetonka. A. B. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 (Regulations for the Lakeshore Residential Districts) Prohibits hardcover within 75’ of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 (Flood Plain and Wetland Management) Prohibits land alteration and hardcover w ithin 75' of Lake Minnetonka. C.Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(L)(Shoreland Ordinance) Prohibits hardcover within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. 15. The City Engineer reported that in his opinion... 16. The Comprehensive Plan stales natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes and retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. Page 5 of 11 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on this 27th day of March, 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 27th day of March, 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. Notar>' Public Page 6 of 11 Exhibit A Page 1 of 2 CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Bradley A. Hoyt 2523 Kelly Avenue Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Application #2540 Dear Mj. Hoyt: The Planning Commission review on November 15 resulted in a recommendation for denial of your CUP request, based partially on a lack of sufficient information to support a variance approval. We believe that the following information is critical to a variance review for your project, and should be submitted if you wish to proceed with amending your request to include the necessary variances: 1. 2. J. 4. 5. 6. Completed variance application form, including statement of hardship/unusual property conditions, etc. Name/address of any landscape designer who may have been involved in designing the improvements. Name/address of contractor who completed the work. The plans given to the contractor defining what work was intended, such as existing and proposed contours; retaining wall specifications; engineering calculations on any segments of wall in excess of 48" in height; any pre-construction surveys you may have available; cut and fill calculations indicating the volume, in cubic yards, of material proposed to be moved on the property, etc. Any as-built specifications provided by the contractor, especially if the final result was different than the proposed plan. We do have your post-construction survey on file as submitted. Any photographs or other documentation of the condition of the shoreline prior to construction of the walls, especially any tree damage, or any documentation from any tree service which may have removed storm-damaged trees. Any additional information which you believe will enhance the City’s understanding of what w ork was completed and the reasons it was undertaken. Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 Page 7 of 11 Page 2 of 2 Bradley Hoyt December 13, 1999 Page 2 You should set up a meeting with City staff prior to your submittal, so we can assist you in making your application as complete as possible. Submittal of the above listed information by noon on Wednesday, December 22 will allow this item to be placed on the Planning Commission ’s January 19 agenda. Please call me at (612) 249-4600 should you have any questions. Sincerely, Paul Weinberger Zoning Administrator/Planner end.: Variance application packet Page 8 of 11 .1/^. 7R0M Exhibit ^THU) 2. 10 ’00 14:42 OT. 14:26 NO. 2760044705 ? 2 Page 1 of 3 hiKSHAW & CULBEKl Sv. AfrLnx)M.wiscoNSLN ULLEV1LLE.ILUNOIS •ItoOKPttlfi. WIVOOKSIN CUAMTAION, ILLB<0I3 CMlCAOO.ILUNOU CRTSTAL I.AKI. lUINOlS rr. LAUPVIOALt, FUORIDA JaCKJOM VIUI, Fl/OWDA lOLST, ILLOfOU tttu,n.LWots FLOitTDA PimiAFFSArTOWMl sumtioo )sa aovni Mnnv MINMEAP0U\ MEIHE3CTA IM« hlbfax Thonui J. Barrett Dkect 612.334^676 TB «cTftt<2ihin<^xMwlaw .com MILWAUKW. WIBCON51H MVHJrrmiuiKz>tAi4A ftORWi,ILUWOI» f nOKTO, ROCICJORD.•T. Loui«. uaiouRt JAN FFASC18CO, CAUTORNIA APSmoFl£LD. flXIHOlS TAiiPA,FlO»lI>A WaUKIGAK. !LUN0U January 6, 2000 Rick J. Sheridan, Hsq. Continental Property Group, Inc. 253 East Lake Street Wayzata, MN 55391 VIA FACSJUm ^ VNITF,T> STATES M4& Re: Bradley Hoyt v. City of Orotto, et al. Court File No.: 99-CV-I034 (JRT/FLN) OttrFlle No.: 41288 ’75203J Dear Rick; This letter is written to further address the steps which your client should^e in order to present iis case for a variance firom the requirementfl of the Orono City Ck)dc. rccjuircffien Lises out of your cUem’s application for a Conditional Use Pennii for a waU w^t^hc constructed near the shore of Lake Minnetonka without a permit. As wc hava dkeussed^e CxindiUonal Use Pennit for which be made application requires conformity to aU parts of the City C^de. Smcc me City Code prohibits hardcover or structures in the area of shore land wit^ 7 5 feet of the lake, it wmbe neceasary for your client to sock and obtain a variance from those ordinance in order to bnng the retaining wall within the requirements of the Code. The Ordinances in question are; Section 10.22. Subdivbbn I and 2 Section 10.55. Subdbnskm 8 Section 10.56. Subdivision 16(L) Section 10.56. Subdivision 16(C)(5) The Planning Commission, at its November 15,1999 meeting, recommended denial of the • request for a Cbndhiinal Use Permit, because it concluded that the waU ^uld not have been snuited a variance under the code and because it had difficulty understanding the nature of e erosion problem which it was claioaed that the wall would prevent. The City Council remand e to Planning Commission in order to allow yOur client to make an appropriate record of c need for variance from the requirements of the Code. The City of Orono has a long atanding policy against allowing hardcover or stnictura wiahm 75 feet of the lake. The City’s comprehensive plan also discourages devices like a wall on the nCMDftV 479T/ 1<SM3142.v2 L'7/IOM A » AMWHIW IWaiJMMO mJflWIC»«Al. CDMOtATIOJO Page 9 of 1 1 r AW Page 2 of 3 2 10'00 14:42, 31. 14:S6 MC. S76004470i ? S Rick J. Sheridan, Esq. January 7,2000 Page 2 lakefront. The City must look to a demonstration of hardship by your client as defined by Minn^ota Statute 462 358-462.359, and Orono Code Section 10.08 as a necessary condition of granting a variance. The burden of demonstrating the hardship is on your client. As 1 understand it, your client constructed the ■wall in order to deal whh the results of certain stoma damage. Had this matter been brought to the City’s attention before the waU was buUt, the City staff would have discussed with the applicant various possibilities for minimiring the impact of any erosion control measur^, and would have recommended to the applicant and the Council a proposal which would accomplish the needed erosion control with the least impact on the natural shoreline. In this after-the-fiict situation, the City staff seeks to have in hand evidence which will help it understand the condition of the shoreland before and after the storm damage, and which will allow it to determine whether the w’all as constructed or another less intrusive scheme would accomplish the preservation of the sUoielaud. This evidence is required in order to evaluate the clumed hardship which is legally necessary for a variance. Your client should provide the following information: 1. A detailed description and explanation of the specific problems the wall was installed to address. 2. A topographic survey of the site showing the condition of the site prior to any work being done to remedy the problems. As well, please provide any photos showing the condition of the site prior to any work being done. 3. Information indicating any other options considered besides the wall to address the problems documented. 4. An explanation as to whether you believe the w'all is superior to other less intrusive options. This matter is scheduled to be hoard on January 19^ before the Plying Commission and a public hearing on the variances required and on the Conditional Use Permit be noticed for that date. It would be most helpful if you could provide the factual information requested by January 15‘. Finally, l understand that as a legal matter you contend that your clieoi docs not need any permits or variances for the construction of the wall At ftie City Council Meeting on December 13, 1999,1 imderstood you to assert that the wall ■wdiich your client constructed was not "hardcover" or a "structure" within the meaning of the Orono Code. For what it is worth, the longstanding interpretation of hardcover and structure which the City Council applies has consistently included impervious elements like the wall which your client constructed. I understand further that you disagree that the City may require a Conditional Use Permit for such structures if they are permitted by reason of hardship within 75 feet of the shoreline. The City Code and the City Practice have required such Permits for some time. The idea of the Permits is to allow the City and the applicant to have a clear understanding of exactly what is allowed and permitted in the zone, so that it cannot be changed over time without further evaluation or permission. a • * •'-vrtem* I PtOFOTCHAL CXWPnRATKM Page 10 of 11 4 r4 v/<»* Page 3 of 3 (THU) 2. 10*00 14:43/ST. 14:36. N'0.376004470S 3 4 Rick J. Sheridan. Esq. January 7,2000 Page 3 Please provide the information requested. If you should have any questions please don ’t hesitate to call me. TJB/Ilc c: William R. Skolnick, Esq. (via Facsimile and U.S. Mail) Peter E. Hinz, Esq. (via Facsimile and U.S. Mail) • MB* • m mm* m • 0 mm • .44 * 0m t A rAlOMtlimir S4CXMIOIO nimaaoNAL oc«MftA»a»tt Page 11 of 11 Application Date: 10/1/99 Completion Date; 10/29/99 Deadline: 2/26/00 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 2/14/00 ITEM NO.V Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:tl2540 Bradley A. Hoyt 2523 Kelly Avenue Conditional Use Permit Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District List of Exhibits: A B C D E F Draft Planning Commission Minutes (January 19, 2000) City Council Minutes (December 13, 1999) Planning Commission Minutes (November 15, 1999) Request for Council Action (December 13, 1999) Letter Dated December 13, 1999 Letter Dated (January 6, 2000 - Thomas J. Barrett, City Attorney) Planning Commission Recommendation The applicant was not present at the January 19, 2000 meeting of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission recommended by a vote of 5 to 0 to deny the application for a conditional use permit. The applicant had not submitted any additional information or an application for an after- the-fact variance to permit hardcover w ithin 75 feet of the lakeshore. The applicant has been sent notification outlining the requests for additional information for the City to review. Without an application for an after-the-fact variance the City of Orono is not in a position to approve a conditional use permit. Staff Recommendation The Staff recommendation remains for an After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit be denied or if the applicant requests to table and revise the application, and agrees o waive the application deadline: Approval for a conditional use permit per Municipal Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 requires the project to meet all other provisions of the Municipal Code. Variances are required to permit hardcover w ithin 75' of the OMWL of 929.4' designated for Lake Minnetonka. 1) Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 (Regulations for the Lakeshore Residential Districts), 2) Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 (Flood Plain and Wetland Management) and 3) Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) do not permit hardcover within the 75' setback zone. If the applicant wants to proceed with the request they must make an application for variances, and it is Staffs position additional land alteration occurred on the propert)' simultaneously with construction of the retaining walls. Any land alteration would require additional permits. Based on the topograph; of the land it appears some regrading occurred within 75 feet of th.* lakeshore to support the boulder wall. Staff has requested additional information from the applicant to demonstrate the requirement of a retaining wall. We do not know the condition of the property prior to the construction period of ihe wall. Without this information it is difficult to demonstrate a hardship for the granting of variances. It is Staff s position the property should be restored to the condition prior to any land alteration and construction of the retaining wall in 1998. Staff is again requesting the applicant provide the following information: 1. 2. a. Variance applications for hardcover within the 75' lakeshore setback. Information regarding the property conditions prior to construction of the wall. This information should include pi.i is submitted to the contractor, photos and site survey. Information relating to the ccii-iactor and plans the contractor used for the project. All the above information is required for a detailed review of a variance application. Application Summary Mr. Hoyt tiled an application for an after-the-fact conditional use permit. The application is a result of a request made by the City of Orono to bring the property into conformance. The need for the CUP results from lakeshore land alteration and construction of a retaining wall. Staff indicated to the applicant that the property must be restored if permits are not granted. Consequently, the applicant has applied for a CUP for the retaining wall. As indicated above, because the retaining wall involves hardcover in the lakeshore setback area, the approvals necessary for the retaining wall include variances as well as a CUP. It is the City’s position the boulder wall constructed on the lakeside of the property is hardcover . Section 10.02 Definition 69 defines Structure as "Anything, or part thereof, which is built, constructed or erected, an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts Joined together in some definite manner, which require j a location on, below, or above the ground, land, or water, or attached to something having a location on the ground, land, or water." Section 10.03 Definition 29 defines Hardcover as "Any structure, blacktop or other material which interferes to any degree with the direct absorption of rainfall into the ground." COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to direct staff to draft a resolution to be adopted by the City Council at the next available meeting. JMAFTORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR _______1^,2000 Kluth inquired whether steel trusses inside the building had been considered by Hennepin County. Nowlan stated to his knowledge that has not been explored, noting that due to the salt beini stored inside the facility, corrosion may be a factor into why steel was not chosen. Smith suggested this item be tabled to allow the Applicant time to explore other sjH^s for the facility. Smith stated she also has concerns regarding the size of the buildiQi^s well as the need for a zoning code amendment. Chock remarked it would be difficult for the Hennepin to meet th^teeds of this area with a smaller sized building. Nowlan stated the County would like to have this buildjji^constructed in time for next year's winter season. Nowlan stated if the application i^rabled, completion of the building by that time would be questionable. Hawn stated the Applicants can either U^e the Planning Commission vote on this application as it has been presented tonight o^o table the application to allow the County additional time to review other sites. Hawryrommented in her view it appears the application will be denied. Nowlan requested the Pranning Commission act on this application. Hawn moved, St^dard seconded, to recommend denial of Application #2555, Hennepin Gdunty, 3880 Shoreline Drive, Zoning Code Amendment, Conditional Use Permiy^d Variances based upon issues dealing with the City's Comprehensive Code aoo Zoning. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (Recess taken from 9:2C p.m. • 9:28 p.m.) PUBLIC HEARINGS. CONTINUED (#1) #2540 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELLY AVENUE, AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMITA/ARIANCE, 9:28 p.m. -9:31 p.m. Page 24 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEEl ING MINUTES FOR**Y»IM« 11,2000 The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was not present. Hawn inquired whether the Applicant had submitted any additional information on this application. Weinberger stated he has had very little contact with the Applicant, with no additional information having been submitted. Hawn noted this application has been called on two separate occasions, with no appearance by the Applicant or a representative on his behalf. Hawn stated this application cannot be approved without the additional information being submitted. Hawn Inquired whether the 60 day review period needs to be extended. Tom Barrett, City Attorney, stated the City does have the right to extend the 60 day review period under State Statutes without the Applicant's consent. Hawn suggested this application be extended to allow the Applicant time to submit the additional information. Hawn moved, Kluth seconded, to continue the denial of Application #2540, Bradley Hoyt, 2523 Kelly Avenue, After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit/Variance, and to return this matter back to the City Council for their review. Barrett noted the Applicant has received two letters from the City outlining the requirements of the City relating to the variances. Barrett stated without the additional information being submitted by the Applicant, a hardship has not been demonstrated and the application can be ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13, 1999 PUBLIC COMMENTS None. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT {nS) #2418 RELEASE OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FROM CRYSTAL BAY PRESERVE - RESOLUTION NO. 4399 Peterson moved, Kelley seconded, to approve and adopt Resolution No. 4399 Releasing Lots 1 Through 8, Cr>stal Bay Preserve from Resolution No. 1757. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (=6) #2522 BANCOR GROUP, INC., SOUTHWEST CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 6 AND WILLOW DRIVE, CLASS HI SUBDIVISION, PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WILLOW VIEW This item was continued on the agenda. (#7) #2540 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELLY AVTNUE - AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Rick Sheridan, Continental Property, and William Skolnick, Esq., represented the applicant, Mr. Ho>l, regarding an application for a Conditional Use Permit at 2523 Kelly Avenue. Weinberger stated that Mr. Ho>l filed an application for an After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit. The application is a result of a request made by the City of Orono to bring the property into conformance as there was some work completed on the property without contacting the City about permits to complete some retaining wall work. Staff had told the applicant that the non-permitted work could be remedied by appKing for a conditional use permit or he may have to restore the property. Consequently, the applicant agreed to apply for after-the-fact permits which included a conditional use permit and variances for the retaining wall work on the property. Weinberger displayed an existing survey of the conditions on the property. Weinberger said this is Minnetonka lakeshore property on Kelly Avenue. It a triangular, narrow lot with somewhat of a steep grade fi'om the building area on tb'’ property down to the lakeshore A boulder retaining wall is shown on the current survey. Sometime in September of 1999 Mr. Hoyt requested a conditional use permit application. The application was completed and brought into the City of Orono on October I. Staff at that time had determined the application for a conditional use permit was incomplete. Staff had requested some additional information that included survey work showing conditions of the property prior to any construction on the lot and also requested surveys and as-builts for the property as the construction was completed. The applicant submitted the current survey on October 29th and stated there was no other information available. Staff had also requested Page 3 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13,1999 (§7) U2540 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELL YA VENUE - Continued information regarding cut and fill calculations to determine the amount of land alteration on the property. Although the property owner stated he had not done any land alteration at that time, it is staffs belief that land alteration had occurred simply because building a retaining wall in most cases would require some land alteration. The retaining wall and slope area are located within 75’ of the lakeshore. Weinberger stated the code requirements for granting a conditional use permit in this case would also require approval of variances. The variances required would be for hardcover within 75’ of the lakeshore. The applicant has not submitted an application for a variance. Weinberger said the notices for the public hearing before the Planning Commission did note that variances were being requested because staff felt the application for variances would be submitted; however, the variance application has not been submitted up to this time. Weinberger cited the three sections of the code that would require variances in order for the retaining wall to be approved. Section 10.22, Subd. 2, Section 10.55, Subd. 8, and Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L). Weinberger said this application is only for the retaining wall. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 15th and recommended denial of the application for the Conditional Use Permit based on not having enough information to proceed with the application. They did not have an application for variances to review. The applicant’s request did not meet the requirements of the code; therefore, the Planning Commission was not in a position to make a recommendation of approval. The Planning Commission commented that additional information such as photos and information fi'om the contractor would be helpful. Weinberger said that typically, if a resident were to make an application for the work that was completed on this property prior to it being an after-the-fact situation, staff would have required a current survey showing all existing grades on the property, a survey showing the proposed topographic changes, additional engineering details on the walls, and a drainage study. Weinberger said that staff recommends the application for an After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit be denied or, if the applicant requests, to table and revise the application. He requested that the applicant provide a variance application for the hardcover within the 75’ lakeshore setback, additional information regarding the property conditions prior to construction of the wall such as plans submitted to the contractor, photos and site survey, and information relating to the contractor and plans the contractor used for the project. The information that the contractor would have used would be very important in determining hardship on the property as well as the impact of the conditional use permit. Jabbour stated that filing an application for a permit does not ensure it will be approved. Rick Sheridan stated that Mr. Ho>t is present at the meeting. Sheridan said he wanted to clarify some points from the staff report. He referred to the first paragraph of the report which Page 4 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13,1999 (»7) U2540 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELLY A l^NUE - Continued states, “Consequently the applicant has applied for the necessaiy permits for the boulder retaining wall.” He feels this is a statement that his client has applied for all the necessary permits for the boulder wall which is contrary to Weinberger’s assertion that Mr. Hoyt has not applied for the variance. Jabbour asked if Mr. Sheridan was reading from the most recent staff report. Sheridan agreed that he had received the most recent report. He referred to the Background section of the report which states, “Mr. Ho>1 had requested a conditional use permit application.” He said that is an incorrect statement Mr. Hoyt came to the City Offices and asked for an application for the necessary permits the City was requiring that he have for his property. Sheridan said his client maintains that he didn’t need any permits or variances for Iiis property. Sheridan referred to a letter that was sent to Mr. Ho>i in response to his application that indicated that more information was required. That letter said the information was requested for consideration of the conditional use permit and variances. They supplied the survey that is being displayed and told Mr. Weinberger that, at that time, they did not have in their possession a pre-existing survey. They didn’t say that there wasn’t one available, but that they didn’t have one in their possession. Sheridan said it is their position that they have made all the applications that are required. Sheridan referred to the second paragraph on page 2 of the staff report regarding the action taken by the Planning Commission. He feels the entire paragraph is inaccurate. The next paragraph says the Planning Commission offered the applicant an opportunity to re\ase the conditional use permit application to include variances, but went on to deny the application. Sheridan said he does not understand what the basis for denial was. He does not agree that they were offered an opportunity to revise the application. He does agree that they were offered an opportunity to come back with a variance application. Sheridan said his client maintains that he has not regraded within the 75’ lakeshore setback or filled the shoreline with rip rap, which staff says his client has done. Sheridan said he w ould like to discuss the issue of the conditional use permit. He and Mr. Barrett had a discussion about this application and that Mr. Barrett told him one of the conditions of the conditional use permit is getting a variance for hardcover. Mr. Barrett said tl.it misstates their conversation. Barrett said Ho>"t could apply for a conditional use permit. The condition that is set out with respect to the retaining wall is that such permit is subject to the other prohibitions and regulations of the City Code and other applicable statutes and ordinances As it stands, Mr Hoyt’s application is in violation of several salient city ordinances Most specifically. Section 10.55, Subd. 8, says “Except as Paj;c 5 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEEITNG MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13,1999 (»7) #2540 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELLY A VENVE - Continued specifically permitted, no hardcover, temporary or peimanent structures.... shall be permitted on any land within 75 feet of the ordinary high v/aier elevation.” He asked if Mr. Sheridan understood that. Sheridan said he understood, and also that Mr. Barrett was drawing the conclusion that the retaining wall is hardcover. Barrett said he is drawing the conclusion that it is a temporary or permanent structure or hardcover. He asked if Mr. Sheridan denies that it is a permanent structure. Sheridan said that based on the City Code ’s definition of what a structure is, yes. Barrett asked if he denies that it is hardcover. Sheridan said that is correct. Sheridan said the City is asking for his client to apply for a conditional use permit and some variances. He said that a conditional use permit and a variance are two different government actions that can be taken with respect to use of property. He read to the Council from a case that the Minnesota Supreme decided regarding what a conditional use permit is and its affect, Chanhassen Estates v. City of Chanhassen. Minnesota Supreme Court, 1984, which states, “By express designation as a conditional use in a particular zone, such a use is deemed consistent with the public healtli, safety and general welfare and consistent with goals of the comprehensive plan of that municipality. Until the district is rezoned or the zoning ordinance is either amended or successfully challenged, that determination is conclusive.” Sheridan said Orono ’s conditional use definition says that conditional uses are permitted and, therefore, that a conditional use is a use permitted in a particular zone subject to conditions. A variance is an attempt by someone to come in and get a variance for a use that would not otherwise be allowed in a particular zone. He said you can’t have a permitted use subject to conditions and say that you need a variance for a permitted use. Barrett said the conditional use permit does not fall under the difficulties that Mr. Sheridan suggests If you want a conditional use permit, all you need to do is demonstrate that you are in compliance with the city ordinances and the city will grant one. If you wish a conditional use permit when you stand outside of compliance with the city ordinances, then it follows that unless you get a variance from those ordinances, you cannot have the conditional use permit and that is why the variance question arises Sheridan said he disagrees for the reasons he has stated. Jabbour said the City asks someone that wants to put less than three yards of sand on their beach to obtain a conditional use permit. He does not feel it is out of line to ask Mr. Sheridan Page 6 ORONO cm COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13,1999 (»7) U2540 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELLY A VENUE - Continued and his client to present the City with information for a conclusive and accurate summary of the facts. Jabbour said he is obligated on behalf of the City and Mr. Hoyt to perform due diligence because the conditional use perrrii must be filed on the deed for the land. He said the City needs additional information to make a proper decision. Sheridan said he does not know what addidonal information the City needs. He said City staff has been to the property and seen the retaining v» all. He feels that is better than a dra'ving. Jabbour said the person that the City asks to get a conditional use permit for three yards of sand on the shore would be extremely disrjrbed if the City doesn ’t know how many yards of dirt Mr. Hoyt put behind the retaining wall, if the City doesn ’t know how far he went into the lake or if the City doesn ’t know if he obtained the appropriate permits fi’om the Watershed District or the Corps of Engineers or the DNR. All of that is part of the City’s due diligence. He said the Council could table this item and give the applicant a list of the documents necessary for the Council to make a decision. Sher.dan said he and his client do not agree with that. He said the City has a current survey and a survey from 1990 prior to when the house was built and based on comparing those two surveys, staff has concluded that the applicant put rip rap in the water. He said that is an erroneous conclusion. He does not believe that the retaining wall is a structure or hardcover and there is a structural engineer present who will testify as to why he doesn ’t believe that either. Jabbour said they should figure out exactly what the Council needs to facilitate the application. Sheridan said if Jabbour is going to ask his client to concede that the retaining wall is hardcover, they will not do that, Barrett said Sheridan is correct, that if he wishes to make a legal argument that the retaining wall is not hardcover, he can make one ar.d the City will make a legal argument that it is. He does not feel it is fhiitflil to make that debate since it is clear that the City’s position is that it is hardcover Jabbour said there is a substantial amour.; of information that the City needs. He suggested that the list be sent to the applicant in writing. Sheridan said it should be contemporaneous with the decision they are making and not after- the-fact. Jabbour said this is a fluid issue and other issues might arise. He said the Council is trying to bring this after-the-fact issue into compliance or find out if it is appropriate for the Council to Page 7 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13,1999 (n?) U2540 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELLY AVENUE-Continued grant the appropriate approvals. The only way they can do that is by knowing the facts. He said they need to know who the contractor is, the amount of dirt moved, and the condition of the property before, during and after. Sheridan asked what the benefit would be of knowing who the contractor was. Barrett asked if the applicant takes the position that the entire retaining wall was built without moving any dirt on the property. Sheridan said he could not speak to that issue. Barrett said the reason the City would like to see the contract and to speak to the contractor is to find out what he did on the property. Sheridan said that assumes there was a contractor. Barrett said someone moved the rocks and the City would like to know who did that and how much dirt was moved. Sheridan said the City is telling his client that he has done regrading and presumably has done more than ten yards, so why doesn ’t the City tell them how it was done. Barrett said the applicant is being asked in good faith to submit the facts which support the application. Jabbour said the City' could obtain the aerial photographs from prior years. Sheridan said the City has engineers on its staff and they can give the Council their calculations. Barrett said that does not preclude the City ’s right to ask the applicant for valuable information in his possession. That is what the City is doing and he asked why the applicant is refusing it. Sheridan said he would let Mr. Skolnick respond. Kelley said if the applicant is not willing to supply the information, he will make a motion for denial at this time. He asked Mr. Sheridan if he is willing to supply the information to the City. Sheridan said the information was supplied with the application. Pages ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13,1999 (U7) #2540 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELLY A VENUE - Continued Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to deny Application #2540, from Bradley A. Hoyt, 2523 Kelly Avenue, for an After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit Flint said he is willing to look at further information if it is submitted, but he will vote in favor of the motion. Jabbour moved, Flint seconded, to table Application #2540, from Bradley A. Hoyt, 2523 Kelly Avenue, for an After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit. He requested permission for staff to visit the site in order to determine the information they need, he requested that staff send Mr. Hoyt a letter telling him what the City needs, and he requested that the applicant be given notice of a 60-day extension to act on this application. William Skolnick said he is an attorney for Mr. Ho>l in a lawsuit with the City of Orono. He said that when there is a request for information, there ought to be a good faith belief that the City needs the information and that they don’t have the information. He said the statement in the staff report that Mr. Hoyt has filled and extended the rip rap approximately five to ten feet into the lake is an outright lie. He said Bruce Vang, the City Inspector also said it is false in his deposition. He said Mr. Haffiier also said it is not true. Jabbour said that most of the Council members are oblivious to the lawsuit. They know there is an action, but they don’t know what it is about. Skolnick said he does not believe that is the case. He said there has been correspondence between his office and the City ’s attorneys talking about Mayor Jabbour’s own deposition. Jabbour said he understands that. Skolnick said the Council is not oblivious to the lawsuit. Jabbour said he would like to go on record that most of the Council members know nothing about the law suit. Barrett asked Skolnick to specify the statement in the staff report that says that Mr. Hoyt extended the rip rap into the lake. Skolnick quoted, “The most recent survey indicates the slope has been regraded creating a flat area on the lakeside of the boulder retaining wall, and the shoreline has been filled to extend into the rip rap approximately 5-10 feet into the lake.’’ Skolnick said that is not a true statement. Barrett asked if Skolnick is saying that what is described there is not true, that the difference in the surveys doesn’t show that. Page 9 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13,1999 (U7) #2540 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELLY A VENUE - Continued Skolnick said the entire statement is not true. Barrett asked if Skolnick is saying there is no rip rap that has been extended five to ten feet into the lake on the comparative surveys. Skolnick said that is correct, that they have the sworn testimony of the DNR, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Mr. Hafher, who said he has no facts to support an allegation that Mr. Hoyt did anything or that the rip rap has been altered. Barrett said Mr. Skolnick is making two different statements. One is what his client did and the other is that there is an alteration. That is a disputed fact about whether there has been any alteration. Skolnick said he wouldn’t say it is a disputed fact. He asked who says it. Barrett responded that City’s staff says it. Skolnick said the City employee that was in charge of it, that made the claim, later admitted that he had no factual basis to make that statement. He said that the indication that the flat land between the boulder wall and the water was something that was done by his client is also not true. Barrett asked if his client changed the topography in order to install the wall. Skolnick said no and that they have engineers present who will tell the Council that that flat surface was there prior to Mr. Hoyt’s owning the property. He wants the record to reflect that there are some assertions that are not supported by anything. He said they are present because they asked the City what they need to do to satisfy the City. They were told to submit the conditional use permit application and it was done. The City requested additional information and it was submitted The application was put on the Plarming Commission’s agenda and then they were told that despite the agenda saying it was on a permit and variances, that it was only oi. the permit and, therefore, they really could not decide the issue because they hadn’t applied for the variances His purpose in making a statement tonight is to get the truth out. He said his client did put boulders on the property, but he did not do anything else. Skolnick said that the people that have testified from the other agencies cannot tell them what is wrong with the boulder wall or what code it does not meet. He said it is encouraged to put rip rap, to make sure there isn’t soil erosion into the lake and that is what has occurred. He said there has been a lot of information developed so far, including a visit to the property and an inspection by three of the City’s staff members and the City’s independent attorney. He said they walked the property and they were given free access to look, take measurements and take pictures. Page 10 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING NUN li iT.S FOR DECEMBER 13,1999 (U7) U2S40 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELL Y A VENUE - Continued Jabbour said that some members of the Council are not aware of the litigation. He said that most of the Council did not know the content of the lawsuit or what issues are pending. Barrett said that because the applicants have suggested that they are unclear about the facts that the City seeks, he would support the Mayor’s motion that the matter be tabled and extended for 60 days. He asked that the City staff prepare a letter to Mr. Hoyt which lays out precisely what is required of him if he wishes to be successful in his application for a conditional use permit. It doesn’t mean that if he applies for the variances, that they will be granted. It does demonstrate what the City needs in order to evaluate the variances. He said he has a copy of the letter and he would be happy to give the letter to Mr. Hoyt or his attorneys at this time. He suggested that the matter be heard after better notice to the pubUc and a reopened public hearing on January 19th for the purpose of having a public hearing in front of the Planning Commission with all the facts which the City believes are necessary. At that hearing the Planning Commission will make a recommendation and then the Council will make a final decision. Jabbour suggested that perhaps the City staff should change its way of wnting reports. He said the report should refer to the land instead of sa>nng that Mr. Hoyt filled in the lake. He said the applicant is probably right that no one can say that Mr. Hoyt physically took a shovel and started filling. He said the only thing the City has in its records is what was from the last application versus today. He said the City and the applicant can work together to obtain data between 1990 and 1999, such as aerial photographs, and if something has changed, then there is a problem with the land and the present owner is stuck with that problem. Until the City has all of the information, there is no way to make an educated decision regarding the land. Sheridan asked if the 60-day rule is being started over based on an incomplete application or if this is an extension. If this is an extension, he would like to know what the reason is. Barrett said the City will send him a letter pursuant to the statute which extends for 60 days the time within which the City has to maike a decision on this matter. He said the letter he will give Mr. Sheridan now will suggest the information and the form the City needs in order to be certain that the variances are properly noticed and applied for. Sheridan asked why they are getting this information now and why they didn’t get it previously. Barrett said he does not know whether the applicant has willfully misunderstood the requests of staff or whether staff has misstated the requests. He said this letter will clarify the issues, the matter can go before the Planning Commission for proper consideration with the facts and it can go before the City Council for a final decision. That is the reason for the extension. Sheridan said he does not understand what is written by the City staff. Page 11 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13,1999 (»7) U2S40 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELLY A VENUE - Continued Jabbour said the state statutes give the City the right to have 60 days, so they are not asking for any concession. Sheridan asked why they are getting a request for additional information now instead of in response to the application that was made by his client. Jabbour said that if Mr. Sheridan reads his own correspondence, it shows that the variances needed are to expedite the application and make sure that it doesn’t have to be readvertised. Staff did put the ad in the paper for the public hearing on a conditional use permit and a variance, hoping the applicant would present the information necessary to review the variances. Jabbour said that the applicant can continue or discontinue suing the city. The City will treat the applicant the same regardless of the lawsuit. Skolnick said he would like to believe the Mayor. Mr. Hoyt had offered to sign a document saying that if there is anything that needs to be done to fix this property, he would be responsible and post money to fix the problem. The City said they would not give him such a document and continued to threaten Hoyt with prosecution. Jabbour said he will get due process independent of the litigation. Skolnick said that hasn’t been their experience. Jabbour said again that the majority of the Council are totally oblivious to 90 percent what Skolnick is referring to in litigation. Sansevere said he was completely unaware of the lawsuit until the Planning Commission meeting, and he is not aware of the particulars of the lawsuit. Barrett said the application process is independent. If Skolnick wants to put information into the application process that he has garnered from depositions, he may do so. Sheridan asked if Barrett is suggesting that the information provided as part of the application will not be forwarded to the City’s counsel in regards to the lawsuit. Barrett said that if the counsel for the City wants it, they can have it because it is public information. Liz HawTi said she would like to clarify the Planning Commission’s position. She said they were only dealing with the conditional use permit. As a practical matter, particularly because there was reference to storm damage which compelled the building of the retaining wall that had accelerated the erosion of the slope, they needed a reason to grant a conditional use permit because, generally, such retaining wall structures are not permitted in the 0-75 ’ Page 12 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13,1999 (U7) U2S40 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KELLY A VENUE - Continued setback. She said in fact that retaining walls of this nature are referenced in the comprehensive plan as not being a desired alternative. Without compelling information presented to the Planning Commission suggesting that the conditional use permit should, in fact, be granted because of a severe circumstance of erosion that came as an act of God from this storm, they were not in a position to grant the conditional use permit or to grant variances when and if they should be proposed to them. This is why they would like information suggesting what the property was like before hand and what it was like after the storm. Unfortunately, if people choose to proceed in building in these areas without coming to the City, they destroy the very evidence that would compel the Planning Commission to believe that this was an appropriate action to take. It would be her hope that evidence suggesting that the shoreline was sufficiently degraded and that it needed help could be provided by historical surveys. Without such information, the Planning Commission is not go'mg to be in a position to take a different position than the one which they have already taken. She said they need information simply to decide whether or not what they consider to be hardcover and have always consideredjo be hardcover in the 0-75* setback should have been permitted. Mayor Jabbour said there is a motion to table seconded by Flint which supersedes Kelley ’s motion to deny. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Break, 8:10 p.m. - 8.15 p m. (#6) U1511 BANCOR GROUP, INC, SOUTBTWEST CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 6 AND WILLOW DRIVE, CLASS IH SUBDIVISION, PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WILLOW VIEW Dave Newman of The Bancor Group and Marty Campion, Project Engineer, were present. Weinberger presented the staff report. He said this application is for a subdivision of property with a conditional use permit for a Planned Residential Development for a 58-acre parcel which is located at the south and west comer of County Road 6 and North Willow Drive. The property is located just east of the new middle school property, to the west of the Shadowood neighborhood and to the northeast of the City Offices. It is located in the two-acre residential district within the MUSA where sewer service is available. The proposal is for 25 lots on 51 acres of dry buildable land which would maintain a one dwelling per two-acre density. The proposal was reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 15th and recommended for approval. A conservation easement would serve as a buffer zone around the proposed development The Planning Commission recommended the developer amend the site plans to include a vegetation plan and berming plan that would help to buffer the development from the surrounding properties C'ld provide for areas that would be more aesthetically pleasing and protect vegetation on the property. The trail plan would include a trail along Willow and along County Road 6 The only concern staff has with the location of the trails is it appears there may be some areas where the trail would be in the lowest portion of the ditch. Staff w ould Page 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15,1999 NEW BUSINESS (#6) #2540 BRADLEY HOYT, 2523 KEI.LY AVENUE - AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMITA/ARIANCE, 7:03 p.m. - 7:58 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Richard Sheridan. Attomey-at-Law, and William Skolnick. Attomey-at-Law. were present. Bradley Hoyt. Applicant, was not present. Weinberger stated the Applicant has filed a general land use application for an after-the-fact conditional use permit, which also requires variances for hardcover. The application is a result of a request by the City of Orono to allow the property to comply with Code requirements and have the necessary permits issued. The application deals with the construction of boulder retaining walls within the 0-75’ lakeshore setback but not with any lakeshore land alteration that may have occurred on the property. City Staff has indicated to the Applicant that the property can be restored or an application for after-the-fact permits can be filed with the City. The Applicant has chosen to apply for the necessary permits for any work that has been completed on the property. The Applicant has indicated he is unaware of any lakeshore land alteration that may have occurred on the property. However, it is the belief of Staff that some land alteration may have occurred with the construction of the retaining wa Is. The Applicant has stated he did construct a retaining wall in a letter dated October 29.1999. which is attached to this report, but denies doing any land alteration work within the 75 foot lakeshore setback. The property surveys indicate that substantial regarding has occurred on the property within 75 feet of the lakeshore. Typically this would be considered extensive grading withiri the 0-75’ sc-ioack since it is Staffs belief that more than 10 cubic yards of fill have been moved in this area. Weinberger noted that the only application that has been filed by the Applicant is for the retaining walls. The land alteration work is not a part of this application. Mr. Hoyt acquired this property in approximately 1996 or 1997. Weinberger stated that it is City Staffs position that Code Section 10.03. Subdivision 19. has been violated, which states that it is unlawful for any person to perform or have performed the following land alteration activities without a conditional use permit issued by the Council; C. Build, alter, cr repair any seawall, retaining wall, cr otherwise change the grade or shore of lakeshore property, which would require the issuance of a conditional use permit. A conditional use permit can be granted in this case if the proposal meets all the other sections of the zoning code. Weinberger stated, however, this proposal would not meet the other sections of the zoning code since the retaining walls would constitute hardcover within 75 feet of the lakeshore. If the retaining wall had been constructed outside the 0-75' setback, a conditional use permit may not be required and would be subject to other restrictions. Weinberger stated a variance v;ould be required under Section 10.55, Subdivision 8. which states that no filling, grading, dredging, excavation, hardcover, temporary or permanent structures, obstructions, septic systems, well or other construction shall be allowed within the Flood Plain and Wetlands Conservation Area; nor on any lands within 26 feet thereof; nor on any land within 75 feet of the ordinancy highwater elevation of any lake shoreline. In order to grant a variance, a definite hardship must be demonstrated by the Applicant. In addition, variances to permit the construction of the retaining wall would also fall under Section 10 22. Subdivision 2, and Section 10.56. Subdivision 16(L). for a .jtal of three variances being Page 5 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15,1999 2rty. de lining jired tales ^ and 75 feet ifinite iction ing (fr2540 Bradley Hoyt, Continued) required for the construction of the retaining wall. Weinberger noted that regardless of the conditions that existed for the regrading of the property demonstrated by the two property surveys, after-the-fact permits are still required on the property to bring the property into conformance with the City's Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. City Staff is recommending the application for a conditional use permit be denied based on the adverse impacts of hardcover within the shoreland area as well as the lack of an application by the Applicant for variances. However, in discussions held with legal counsel for the Applicant today, Mr. Sheridan has indicated that they would be willing to apply for variances, but based upon the application before the Planning Commission tonight, City Staff is recommending denial of the application. A recommendation of denial is also based upon the findings within the Comprehensive Plan and the fact that variances are required in this case, noting that the conditional use permit cannot be granted since it is in violation of the regulations governing this application. Weinberger stated a second alternative available to the Applicant would be to request that this application be tabled to enable City Staff to meet with the Applicant's representatives and to allow the Applicant time to submit a revised and complete application. Weinberger reiterated that this application deals only with the construction of the retaining wall. Richard Sheridan. Attorney-at-Law, commented that the language included in the Planner's Report stating that the Applicant was informed by City Staff that the property can be restored or he can file an after-the-fact permit is the Trsl time they have seen anything in writing by City Staff that the Applicant is able to restore the property. Sheridan remarked that restoration of the property was raised in connection with some litigation regarding this matter. Sheridan staled a conclusion is being drawn by City Staff that substantial grading has occurred on the property based on a 1990 survey and a 1999 survey. Sheridan stated to his knowledge Staff has not viewed the property to make that determination. The property was acquired by Mr. Hoyt in late 1996 or early 1997, with the residence being constructed in 1990 or thereabouts. The most recent survey indicates the slope has been regraded creating a flat area on the lakeside of the boulder retaining wall, and the shoreline has been filled to extend into the rip rap approximately five to ten feet into the lake. An issue of contention in this matter is whether Mr. Hoyt actually placed the rip rap into the lake, which is being adamantly denied by the Applicant during his ownership of the property. Sheridan commented that these changes to the shoreline could have been undertaken prior to his purchase of the property, and the Applicant is objecting to any conclusion that grading work has occurred within 75 feet of the lakeshore during his ownership of the property. Sheridan stated that some of the ordinances that City Staff is contending the Applicant has violated did not become effective or were not modified until the late or mid 90s, and that the conclusion being drawn by City Staff is.incorrect as it relates to Mr. Hoyt undertaking the grading work. As it relates to the three variances that City Staff has indicated are required. Sheridan stated in his view only one variance is actually required since they all deal with the 75' setback. Sheridan stated that the first lime they were informed of the need for a variance is when they received the legal notice from the City that their application was for a conditional use permit and variances. Sheridan indicated that the Applicant is willing to apply for after-the-fact variances at this time, noting that Weinberger indicated that he did have sufficient information to file an application in their discussion earlier today. Page 6 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15,1999 (#2540 Bradley Hoyt, Continued) Sheridan requested that the Planning Commission consider the application before them tonight. Skolnick commented that the Applicant has found himself involved in litigation with the City and being threatened with criminal action concerning this boulder retaining wall when there is no basis in fact for it, with a potential sale of tlie residence being lost. Skolnick stated that most of the information is inaccurate; such as, placement of rip rap in the lake. The Applicant denies placing any rip rap in the lake. Chair Hawn remarked that the rip rap is not an issue before the Planning Commission tonight. Skolnick stated the Applicant is also denying doing any grading in the 0-75* setback. Due to the windstorms approximately a year and a half ago, some trees were blown down and removed, with some boulders being placed in the area to prevent erosion. Skolnick commented that that 1990 survey does not depict the concrete wall which has been in existence for 30 or 40 years on the property. Skolnick commented a survey should be obtained showing the topography of the land just prior to Hoyt’s purchase of the property. Skolnick stated the Applicant is attempting to work with the City by filing an application for a variance. Skolnick noted that the Applicant was not informed that the application is incomplete until recently. The matter before the Planning Commission tonight deals with an after-the-fact variance for the boulder retaining wall. In regards to the Comprehensive Plan as the basis for denial, Skolnick remarked that the Applicant has complied with the Comprehensive Plan. An expert hired by the Applicant has found that the retaining wall has been constructed to industry standards and does not present any issues relating to water drainage or runoff into the lake. Skolnick indicated that the Applicant is willing to continue to work with the City on this matter, noting that they are willing to submit additional paperwork if needed, but that they are objecting to any decision that is made on inaccurate information. Skolnick stated he has not heard anything tonight which would prevent the Planning Commission from granting the after-the-fact variance except for the lack of some forms being submitted by the Applicant. Sheridan expressed a concern with the 1990 survey being the recorded topography of the property, noting that he is unsure what that means, and would not like the decision of the Planning Commission to be based solely on that survey. Sheridan commented regarding the hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback, a stairway previously existed in that area, which are allowed in the area. Sheridan stated that the amount of hardcover in this area has not changed significantly and questioned whether rocks should be counted as hardcover. Skolnick stated as it relates to an adverse impact on the shoreline or hardcover, the boulder retaining wall does not present an adverse on the shoreline, the water, or the hardcover. With the removal of the stairway, the hardcover in this area has been diminished. There were no public comments regarding this application. Kluth inquired about the nature of the litigation that relates to this property. Skolnick stated that there is presently a lawsuit filed in federal court relating to defammation of the Applicant as well as the loss of the sale of the residence. The parties are currently in the process of discovery in that lav/suit. Page 7 ORONO PLANNING CO\EVnSSION MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15,1999 (#2540 Bradley Hoyt, Continued) Kluth inquired what the defammation lawsuit resulted from. Skolnick stated that it is alleged in the complaint that Mr. Vang made some untrue statements to a realtor representing a buyer and as a result of those statements, the buyer cancelled the purchase agreement with the Applicant. Kluth inquired whether the statements made by Mr. Vang related to the retaining wall. Skolnick stated they related to the retaining wall as well as the rip rap. Skolnick remarked that a statement was made that the Applicant has altered the rip rap, which caused a problem for the City, and that the rip rap will need to be removed as well as the retaining wall. The buyer decided at that point to cancel the sale. Skolnick stated in his opinion there is no issue relating to the rip rap and there should be no issue regarding the boulder wall. Kluth commented that the matter before the Planning Commission tonight relates to the boulder wall, which the Applicant has admitted to constructing. Skolnick stated the Applicant Is not denying that he had the retaining wall constructed after the windstorms. Kluth questioned whether the Applicant and the contractor hired on his behalf were unaware that they were violating policies of the City at the time this retaining wall was constructed. Skolnick stated he cannot comment on v/hat the Applicant or his contractor knew. Sheridan stated the Applicant is not present tonight due to the legal action that has been threatened against him by the City. Kluth stated in his view the two matters are interrelated and impact one another. Skolnick stated they were told by the City Attorney that the two matters would not impact one another. Skolnick commented they are appearing tonight before the Planning Commission in good faith and that the permit should be granted. Kluth inquired what impact a decision would have on the litigation. Skolnick stated the claims alleged in the lawsuit would not be settled tonight. Kluth inquired whether this matter should be tabled to allow the other items to be resolved. Skolnick remarked this application should not be tabled because they were promised by the City of Orono that this would be a fair process. Kluth commented he was merely asking if the Applicant's representatives thought it would be a good idea to table the application tonight. Skolnick stated they are in favor of obtaining the permit, and if there are still some unanswered questions, they are willing to address those, but they would like to avoid this becoming a long-drawn out affair. Lindquist inquired when the retaining wall was constructed. Page 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15,1999 (#2540 Bradley Hoyt, Continued) Skolnick stated to his understanding it was constructed in 1998, with the issue being raised in April of 1999 relating to the boulder wall. Lindquist inquired how the City became aware of this matter. Skolnick stated the house was listed for sale, a buyer was interested in acquiring the property, an agreement was signed, and the realtor checked with the City on some items, with Mr. Vang maki ig some statements that resulted in the buyer cancelling the sale. An effort at that time was made to try to resolve this matter with the City, with Mr. Hoyt then being threatened with legal action, which has led to the application tonight. Lindquist stated if this matter appeared before the Planning Commission in June of 1998, he probably would have voted against the retaining wall at that time and would have liked to see other options pursue in an attempt to lessen the impact on the 0-75 ’ setback. Lindquist commented he is familiar with the area and that there have been a tremendous amount of changes made to the shoreline over the years. Chair Hawn commented in her view the Planning Commission is looking at a conditional use permit application after-the-fact, and the issues relating to the rip rap and land alteration is not before them tonight since the Applicant has not filed that application with the City. Hawn stated it is unclear whether the retaining wall was truly needed after the windstorm, noting that the Planning Commission has lost the opportunity to review the situation at the time the wall was constructed due to the lack of an application being filed by the Applicant. Hawn stated due to the loss of that opportunity, under Orono ’s ordinances, the Applicant needs to demonstrate the need for the retaining wall, which will be difficult at this time. Hawn stated absent a showing of need by the Applicant for the retaining wall, given Orono's ordinances and Comprehensive Plan, she would not have voted in favor of the retaining wall at the time it was constructed and is not in a position at this time to vote in favor of the after-the-fact. Kluth stated he was in agreement with Lindquist and Hawn regarding this issue, noting that a hardship has not been demonstrated by the Applicant. Kluth noted that in general the Planning Commission docs not look on this type of application favorably when it relates to land alteration v/ithin the 0-75' setback. Chair Hawn stated the Planning Commission will approve after-the-fact permits if they would have approved them in the first instance. Hawn commented there appears to be consensus among the Planning Commission that absent a showing of hardship, it is unlikely that the retaining wall would have been approved at the time it was constructed. Hawn stated as a matter of public policy, the City should not give a benefit to a property owner who does not comply with the City’s ordinances in the first place and then later approaches the City requesting after-the-fact variances. Hawn commented it is doubtful that this application would have been granted in the first instance. Berg commented that every community has ordinances regulating shorelines, noting that it has been well published in this area that Orono takes a very proactive approach to protecting the lakeshore. Berg inquired why the Applicant chose not to ask the City what steps need to be taken to address this issue before any work was commenced in the 0-75* setback, noting that an answer to this question has not been given tonight. Smith commented that some of the issues relate to work that has apparently occurred between the time of the two surveys. Smith inquired whether there were any neighbors or witnesses or tests Page 9 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15,1999 (^2540 Bradley Hoyt, Continued) that could verify when the work was completed. Weinberger stated the City has not heard anything from any of the adjoining property owners. Nygard inquired whether there were any other surveys previous to 1990. Weinberger stated the City is in possession of a topographic map taken from some 1990 aerial photographs, noting that the map does depict a rather significant drop to the lakeshore. Weinberger stated the City does not have any other surveys on file subsequent to 1990. Smith inquired whether the Applicant and City Staff could work together on restoring the property should this application be denied tonight. Weinberger stated City Staff is willing to work with the Applicant, noting that it is unlikely that City Council and the Plannig Commission would recommend approval of any after-the-fact permits if the property remains in the same condition that exists today. Weinberger remarked it is possible-due to the nature of the lakeshore that a retaining wall may be necessary due to erosion concerns, but the Applicant will need to be willing to make those changes to the property and obtain the necessary permits for that work. Nygard inquired what will happen with the rest of the property. Weinberger stated the Applicant will need to obtain the three variances discussed earlier before any other work can be commenced on the property. Weinberger stated this application only deals with the retaining wall. Nygard commented that photographs showing the condition of the property prior to the retaining wall would be helpful in considering this application, and encouraged the Applicant to obtain some photographs which might assist in this matter. Skolnick inquired whether a permit would be necessary if the retaining wall were removed. Nygard stated that a permit would need to be issued to remove the retaining wall. Skolnick questioned what would happen if the City denied issuance of a permit to remove the retaining wall. Skolnick inquired what action the Applicant should take in this matter. Smith stated that City Staff would be willing to work with the Applicant on this matter to address the concerns regarding erosion and water runoff. Sheridan commented that there has been a lack of cooperation on the part of the City in this regard. Sheridan stated as it relates to hardcover, it was his understanding that hardship applies to variances and not to conditional use permits, and that perhaps the appropriate standard should be defined. Sheridan remarked as it relates to denial of the retaining wall in the first instance, he has not heard one single reason for the denial and what adverse impact the retaining wall has on the 0-75 ’ setback. Chair Hawn stated it has been determined that hardcover in the 0-75' setback, which is a public policy in Orono, does have a more severe impact on the drainage issue. Hawn commented she is hopeful that this situation can be resolved amicably. Hawn indicated she would like to deal strictly with the conditional use permit after-the-fact application tonight. Page 10 ORONO PLANNING COM\USSION MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15,1999 (#2540 Bradley Hoyt, Continued) Kluth commented in his view, due to the litigation, the parties have taken more of an adversarial role versus that of attempting to assist the Planning Commission in resolving this issue. Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to recommend denial of Application #2540, Bradley Hoyt, 2523 Kelly Avenue, based on the adverse impacts that the hardcover would have in the 0-75 ’ setback and the incomplete application that has been submitted by the Applicant. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS (#4) #2522 THE BANCOR GROUP, INC., SOUTHWEST CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 6 AND NORTH WILLOW DRIVE - SUBDIVISION FOR PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, 8:00 p.m. • 9:13 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. David Newmann and Marty Campion. The Bancor Group, were present. Weinberger stated the City of Orono has received a new Preliminary Plat applicalfon for a 25 lot development on 58 acres for property located at the southwest comer oj^ounty Road 6 and Willow Drive North. Previously the Planning Commission had reviewed a o^osal for a 49 unit development at this site. The City Council and Planning Commission ha\^reviewed this development as part of an application for rezoning. The proposed rezgwng was denied by the City Council. This application also includes a continuation of the conditional permit for a PRD. The purpose cf a Planned Residential Development is to enhance the apo^rance of neighborhoods through p'^eservation of natural open spaces, to counteract the effa^ of urban congestion and monotony, to provide cohesive structure to neighborhood design, to^ffer recreation opportunities close to home, and to aid in improving the welfare in generalo^ity residents. Weinberger stated the City has changed its Comgfrehensive Plan to reflect medium density residential for the property located directly souln of the proposed development. Medium density residential will likely be townhomes. It is tyTntention to extend Kelley Parkway to Willow from Old Crystal Bay Road. Properties locate^^ the south of Kelley Parkway and north of Highway 12 are guided for offices use: The lots located to the east of th^^bdivision. on average, are smaller than those lots to the south and west. The PRD would alloyme lots to be developed at the sizes shown on the site plan, with the overall density of the sut^iwision not exceeding one unit per two acres dry buildable. The City has approved PRD's in th^past with an allowance of property being dedicated for other purposes such as roadways and oimding to count towards the lot area with the idea that the PRD would meet all the other criteria U^d in the City Code. The roads are pci^^sed to be developed to City standards and dedicated as public streets. No lot within this pro^^ed development would have direct access to Willow Drive or County Road 6. All lots would bi^equired to access a newly platted street. The Applicant in their original application had proD#^d a trail along Willow Drive and along the south side of County Road 6 The intent of the tra)i^ to connect to the larger regional system towards the school property and eventually west to ailwr Park. This trail would provide future access to the middle school property. This latest Page 11 Application Date: 10/1/99 Completion Date: 10/29/99 60 Day Deadline: 12/28/99 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 12/13/99 ITEM NO.: 7 Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2540 Bradley A. Hoyt 2523 Kelly Avenue Conditional Use Permit• Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District Exhibits: A Application B Plat Map C Property Owners List D Site Topography E 1990 Survey F 1999 Survey G Comprehensive Plan pg. 3-20 H Comprehensive Plan pg. 4-13 I Applicant Letter (10/1/99) J Applicant Letter (10/29/99) K Hardcover Calculation Worksheets Summary' of Request Mr. Hoyt filed an application for an after-the-fact conditional use permit. The application is a result of a request made by the City of Orono to bring the property into conformance. The need for the CUP results from lakeshore land alteration and construction of a retaining wall. Staff indicated to the applicant that the property must be restored if permits are not granted. Consequently the applicant has applied for the necessary permits for the boulder retaining wall. The surveys indicate work w ithin 75’ of the lakeshore, please refer to Exhibits E (1990) and F (1999). Rack-round Mr. Ho>t had requested a conditional use permit application, at that time an application was delivered to Mr. Hoyt. Mr. Hoyt made a conditional use permit application with the City on October 1, 1999 that was reviewed by Staff and determined to be incomplete. A notice of incomplete application was sent to Mr. Hoyt on October 8, 1999 requesting some additional information, including an updated survey and information regarding the condition of the property prior to construction of a retaining wall. On October 29,1999 an updated survey was delivered to the City which determined the new retaining (boulder) wall was in fact within 75’ of the lakeshore. Staff had indicated to Mr. Hoyt that variances would be required for hardcover within the 75' setback. Mr. Hoyt and his representative Rick Sheridan again stated no information was available regarding grade changes that likely occurred during construction of the boulder retaining walls. The Planning Commission reviewed the conditional use permit and Code requirements for granting the conditional use permit. They determined for approval of a conditional use permit variances must be applied for, no approval can be granted without variances. Staff had notified the applicant variances are required for hardcover within the 75' lakeshore setback. Based on no application for variances the Planning Commission could not properly make a recommendation on the variances or undue hardship to support the granting of a variance. Therefore they could not conclude that the CUP could be granted because the retaining wall did not conform with City Code. The Planning Commission did offer the applicant an opportunity to revise the conditional use permit application to include variances. The Planning Commission also had requested additional information about the property, to include photos and other property information. Mr. Hoyt’s representatives stated it is there position to resolve this matter without any delays. The Planning Commission, based on the statements made by Mr. Sheridan to move the application forward, did not table the request but chose to recommend denial. Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 permits a CUP to build, alter, or repair any seawall, retaining wall, or otherwise change the grade or shore of lakeshore property' if the w’ork meets all other requirements of the Code. Mr. Hoyt has stated he did construct a retaining wall in his letter dated October 29, 1999 attached to this report, but also stated he had not regraded within the 75' lakeshore setback. The property- surveys indicate regrading has occurred on the property below' the retaining wall. Mr. Hoyl has refused to apply for conditional use permits for the regrading on the property'. The most recent survey indicates the slope has been regraded creating a flat area on the lakeside of the boulder retaining wall, and the shoreline has been filled to extend into the rip rap approximately 5-10 feet into the lake. The surveys indicate the 929.4' shoreline has been extended into the lake. .Attached (Exhibit I) Mr. Rick Sheridan, in his letter dated October 1,1999 has stated "Bradley Hoyt makes this request for an After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit based upon the request of the City of Orono and its attorneys, Greene & Espel, P.L.L.P". The application is only for retaining walls within 75' of the lakeshore. No other application has been received for any additional land alteration or variances for hardcover. Based on the surveys the follow ing is a list of the ordinances which we believe have been violated when grading and retaining wall work was done. Code Section 10.03 Subdivision 19. Land Alteration; Prohibition. It is unlawful for any person to perform or have performed the following land alteration activities without a conditional use permit issued by the Council: B.Fill or reclaim any land by depositing such material or by grading of existing land to elevate or alter the existing natural grade. C. Build, alter, or repair any seawall, retaining wall, or otherwise change the grade or shore of lakeshore property. All of the above-referenced land alterations involving filling and grading shall be performed only with "clean fill" as defined in Section 10.02. Granting of such permits is subject to other regulations and prohibitions of the City Code, and other applicable statutes or ordinances of other goveri^ental bodies. Some of the other "Regulations and Prohibitions of the City Code" which govern this matter include. 10.55 Subd. 8. Development Restricted; Prohibition. Except as hereinafter specifically permitted, no filling, grading, dredging, excavation, hardcover, temporary or permanent structures, obstructions, septic systems, well or other construction shall be allowed within the Flood Plain and Wetlands Conservation Area; nor on any lands within 26 feet thereof; nor on any land within 75 feet of the ordinary high water elevation of any lake shoreline, nor on land abutting, adjoining or affecting said area if such activity upon those adjacent areas is incompatible with the policies expressed in this Section and the preservation of those conservation areas in their natural state. 10.56 Subd. 16(L) & 10.22 Subd. 2 Hardcover Retaining walls constructed constitute hardcover within 75’ of lakeshore where no hardcover is allowed. A variance is required. Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variances Required 0'-75' 1 21,700 s.f.433 s.f. (2 %) none j (0%) 1 j 433 s.f. ! n %) To permit hardcover for the retaining wall. 75 ’-250’27,800 s.f 9,630 .;.f ,34.64“, 0 6,950 s.f (25%) 9,630 s.f (34.64%) none 250’-500'3,670 s.f 400 s.f (10.90%) 1101 s.f (30%) 0 none Issue for Discussion The application made by Mr. Hoyt is only for the retaining wall. The recommendation of denial was based on the conclusion that the retaining wall does not comply with all requirements of the Code. No after-the-fact permit has been received for the regrading required for the wall and variances for the hardcover within 75’ of the lakeshore. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission has recommended denial of the application for a conditional use permit because vari?nces required have not been applied for. The Planning Commission commented that a hardship may be difficult to demonstrate based on the total hardcover and other unresolved issues. Staff Recommendation Staff Recommends the application for an After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit be denied or if the applicant requests to table and revise the application: Approval for a conditional use permit per Municipal Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 requires the project to meet all other provisions of the Municipal Code. Variances are required to permit hardcover within 75' of the OHWL of 929.4' designated for Lake Minnetonka. 1) Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 (Regulations for the Lakeshore Residential Districts), 2) Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 (Flood Plain and Wetland Management) and 3) Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) do not permit hardcover within the 75’ setback zone. If the applicant wants to proceed with the request they must make an application for variances, and it is Staffs position additional land alteration occurred on the property simultaneously with construction of the retaining walls. Any land alteration would require additional permits. Staff is again requesting the applicant provide the following information and application: 1. 2, 3. Variance applications for hardcover within the 75’ lakeshore setback. Information regarding the property conditions prior to construction of the wall. This information should include plans submitted to the contractor, photos and site survey. Information relating to the contractor and plans the contractor used for the project. All the above information is required for a detailed review of a variance application. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to direct staff to draft a resolution to be adopted by the Cit>' Council at the next available meeting. CITYof ORONO Municipal Offices Stnet Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-CC56 REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION October 8,1999 . Bradley A. Hoyt 2523 Kelly Avenue Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Application #2540 The City of Orono is required to notify you mthin ten (10) business days as to the status of your application. The following information is required before we can proceed with your request for a Conditional Use Permit and Variances. 1. The survey you have provided to us indicates existing structures and the shorclme of Lake Minnetonka, however the survey is required to show previous and existmg topography over the intlre property. 2. Cut and fill calculations for the amount of fill, in cubic yards, that has been added within the 75' lakcshore setback. This information needs to be submitted by October 29,1999 to remain on the November 15.1999 Planning Commission agenda. Please call me at (612) 249-4600 should you have any quesuons. Sincerely, Paul Weinberger Zoning Administrator/Planner Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fxx (612) 249-4616 :E':-0?-l?rf 115 26 COnTUeiTAL FPOFEPTr-12473I7C0 P.02 O' 1 V'-STAL * Inc. December 7,1999 Mr. Paul Weinberger City of Oiono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Application of Bradley A. Hoyt No. 2540 Dear Mr. Weinberger This letter concerns the planning application of Bradley A. Ho>1 for an afler-the-fact conditional use permit and variances for his property located at 2523 Kelly Avenue. As you arc aware, the Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of Mr. Hoyt’s application for an afler-the-fact conditional use permit. The Plaiming Commission, on the recommendation of statf and despite the request o'f Mr. Hoyt’s representatives, refused to consider Mr. Hoyt’s application for certain variances. « At the Planning Commission, the record 'vill reflect the follovring: 1. It was the City that identified the ncc essar>' after-the-fact permits required upon inquiry from Mr. Ho>1. 2. An applicatior w .-.-, t ?o Mr. Hoyt by yourself and marked as to the type of permit - *-*o by die application. A variance was not indicated as required. “3. A letter dated October 8,1999, from yourself in response to Mr. Hoyt’s application identified certain items necessary for consideration of the CUP and the variances. This information was either provided in a timely manner or not available. 4. Per your own admission, the public notice for the • application included the CUP and variances, and no additional information to what was provided by Mr. Ho>t would be necessary to consider any variances as part of the application. hi?. 47; I7«X) X(N» T>l-Ih-*,S foli 47 00 I- 253 Easr lake Screec, Wayzau, Nliiioesoca 55391 DEC-OS-1999 11:27 COMTI h e IT hL F ROFERT.'6124732700 P.03 0 Mr. Paul Weiuberger December 7,1999 Page 2 Despite these facts, the Planning Commission refused to consider the vsiiances as part of Mr. Hoyt’s application. Mr. Hoyt now dem^ds that the City Council consider all necessary permits, including any variances, at the December 13,1999 meeting. c: William Skolnick, Esq. i : • 1 1^ ■ "4'^ P .4 • TOThL P.03 L ■ A Application # Date Receh*ed ~ JO / // ^ ^ Amount Paid ^ S'OO * CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAM) USE APPLICATION PROPERTY'LOCATION ,, ^ Site Address T>T:e of ADpUcation to be Filed ' t ^ ::T>'pe of Application Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ______ fACT CkJ^ APPLICANT Name A. n6'^ Phone (home). ■ n^'fT Address j -Jc. 7 ______ Phone (work) /v/J *7^^ City nHo/^ C_______Zip, OWNER (if different than applicant) Name________ Phone (home). Phone (work). Address City Zip, [Date Pro I (do) Acquired Qc^ ! 0 (month/year) also ovvT* *jie adjacent parcels of land, FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERNDTS - _____S 75.00 For each, variance request with CUP application _____S175.00 Residential Accessor)' Use _____S250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____S225.00 Guest Kouse/Guest Apartments ______S200.00 Duplex CredR/Bldg S300.00 Commercial/Ir.dustrial Use / *»^**.« \ .// 5250.00 Land Alteration yC. Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain _____ Grading and fillhig - 501 cu. yd. or more Grading; sta'.vaVg retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule 5150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) ^ After-the-fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee A V/. OTHER APPLICATIONS _____S250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____S300.00 Vacatic.n _____S200.00 Easement Vacation _____SIOO.OO Easem.ent Vacation With Subdivision _____S350.00 Rezoring (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____S350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____SIOO.OO Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule Sis'..?•: • *• V** ^ A ittni uaie ®i/oo/h nAicii sol r»nP AODR OUIICR NAHC TAXPAYER MAIIE/AODR Sa 20-117-23 11 0022 02S2S KELLY AVE K C IIEinOACII ORE ilEIHBACII K 0 IIEIMBACII IRE IIElflOACII 2525 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR HM 55331 IICIIIIEPItl COUMTY PROPERTY tflfORHATlOM SVSTCH PROI’EIMY OMHLKii LIST 30 20-117-23 11 0023 02SAS KELLY AVE R II PONZETTX t 0 A POMZETTX ROBERT ll/BARBAHA A POHZETTI 25A5 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR HM 55331 REPORT MO, P1A35A01 PACE A 30 20-117-23 11 002A 03333 SHORELINE DR MCT COMPANY SUPER VALU STORES INC CORPORATE TAX DEPT PO BOX 090 HPLS MM 55AA0 PROP ADDR miflER NAME TAXPAYER IIAME/ADDR 39 20-117-23 11 0032 00030 ADDRESS UNASSICNCD DAVID J DELANEY DAVID J DELANEY 9000 CASAHZTA RO EXCELSIOR MM S5SS1 30 20-117-23 12 0037 02509 KELLY AVE etc NADLER CHARLES 0 CANDICE NADLER 2509 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR MM 55331 30 20-117-23 12 0030 02515 KELLY AVE DAVID R lURDTEN DAVID R IIARDTEN 2515 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR MM 55351 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 20-117-23 12 0039 02523 KELLY AVE IIRADLEY A HOYT CONTINENTAL PROPERTY ORP INC 253 LAKE ST E WAYZATA MM 55391 30 20-117-23 12 0090 00030 ADDRESS UNASSICNEO CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO BOX 90 CRYSTAL BAY HM 55323 30 20-117-23 12 0099 02505 KELLY AVE BRADLEY A HOYT CONTINENTAL PROPERTY GRP INC 253 LAKE ST E WAYZATA MM 55391 30 20-117-23 12 0052 02999 KELLY AWE R V DAHL I H S DAHL SYLVIA A BERTACNOLI 2999 KELLY AVE EXCELLSIOR HM 55331 30 20-117-23 12 0097 00030 'ADDRESS UMASSICMED BRADLEY A HOYT BRADLEY A HOYT 253 LAKE ST E WAYZATA HM 55391 30 20-117-23 12 0053 02501 . KELLY AVE TODD JONES TODD JONES 3555 CO RD HO 99 HINMETRISTA HM 55349 X . PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 20-117-23 12 0059 02503 KELLY AWE DTL one INC JOHN E KUPFER 2503 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR HN 55331 30 20-117-23 12 0055 00030 ADDRESS UNASSICNEO KELLY COVE HHOWNRS ASN/ORONO KELLY COVE HHOWNRS ASN/ORONO 2997 KELLY AWE EXCELSIOR MM 55331 30 20-117-23 19 0019 02595 KELLY AVE E J SCIIROEOER ET AL TRUSTEES E J SCIIROEDER 2595 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR MM 55331 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR TOTAL BATCH 501 00015 .'I 7 :/ • / • •' •• • •• #. Uy rvLVj i O i L.I OsrfivVL.1 r«v^. iTtLu £ 4 . IV- > . vV.- • • ♦' / y- , ■•/ •v'A- •% Iffby ctrlify that this turvty has htta priperti mi or uftdir my dirtet tuptrviiieo ond that I em o f llctnsid Load Surviyer ondtr Iht ts«s of th« sto of lilonosoto. IFFIN a GRONOC^G,ltVC. y.. ________ irh 8. GrortDeirg MlnncMto^ciMi Na 12755 SCALE »I INCH*30 FEET DATE • APRIL 30,1982,-"^ « DATUM :MEAN SEA LEVEL note *not all trees on tract HAVE BEEN LOCATED 7 7/ /: // '\ / c..; 4s:.\-7 . I' ■ *7 -J: ' A.\'>.v- • / \ ‘'-t* ** ^ •\ V V:* V. ^ \ \ »i . /> -rw. '■ •* V *•. .•• V * \ • *• ’• \ **. **• \*N •* ■\' \ V A V \ \V \ V ' V. •>, X-’V \\ \ ^ ^ \V\- •• *\\ ■• • '. ‘ ‘i • ' •.\ .^v. % :\ \ • *. COFFIN a GR0NBER6.INC. ENGINEERS S LAND SURVEYORS LONG LAKE, MINNE?^ • N X F -■m- jj;g/;pipTiCM or ppevises : 0, Rcqistvfco Lond Sufvty No. 1423. trr!r of TUlci. H<nn«o»n County. Uimcsolo. •t^TOitA)! *roo mc'U«» (11*00^1^ «pol ct««Qtion. nu*cn u^u *ltilufn rinnotes t^isllnq contoiif *•««. mer/i sto *€v« outum sho^n cfc Oosfsd upon on cssun^cd dct^^*. iufvcy Inttnds to iho-t Iht OOundcrTts of coove icol?on of on tiistinq house, end me locol.cr. of ol sn. It does not purport to sho*» cny other ir-srovefr.en! • Due to sro- end ice cover, iccction of d her property. :co^er“ :rocchmcni j. cmvtrqNHENT JUNE, 1980 6.THE WETLANDS AND MARSHLANDS OF THE CITY WILL BE PROTECTED AND PRESERVED AS WILDLIFE HABITATS, AS UNIQUE OPEN SPACES, AND AS THE ONLY ECONOMICAL PRACTICAL METHOD OF FLOOD PROTECTION AND STORM WATER RUNOFF FILTRATION. The Karza Study, the 208 Water Quality Managenent Study, and Orono's surface Water Management Plan all recommend this approach to permanent water quality management for Lake Minnetonka. In addition, the Orono Plan goes on to identify individual wetlands and marshlands that require protection as part of the City's storm water management prograr It is the policy of this plan to effectuate the policies and recommen dations of the 1974 Orono Surface Water Management Plan. 7.PROTECTION OF THE CITY'S MARSHLAND, WETLANDS AND DRAINAGEWAYS SHALL INCLUDE PROTECTION OF ADJOINING LANDS AND PREVENTION OF DRAINAGE, FILLING, DREDGING OR WETLAND'S VEGETATION REMOVAL. Ordinances will establish setbacks for all land alteration or c'onstruction. Wherever possible, the City will acquire open space and flowage easements for conservation of these lands. 8.PROTECTION OF LAKE RESOURCES WILL ALLOW REASON.ABLE ACCESS, USE AND ENJOYMENT WHILE PREVENTING OVERCROWDING AND EXCESSIVE ENCROACHMENT. In conformance with Mn. DNR Shoreline Management regulations for recreational development lakes, the City will prohibit overly dense development within 1,000 feet of Lake Minnetonka. Lake use regulation will be promoted to limit excessive boat density and overuse of sensit bays. Land use regulations will be developed to provide reasonable control over building density, land alteration and lakeshore encroachm 9.LAKE SHORELINES WILL BE PROTECTED FROM ALTERATION. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reasonab in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clearcutting will be prohibited. In areasof soil or wave action erosion, natural stone rip rap shoreline protection wil be encouraged. 10. LAKE BED ALTERATIONS WILL BE DISCOUR.AGED BECAUSE OF ADVERSE SHORT-TER> AND LONG-TERM EFFECTS ON WATER QUALITY. Dredging of lake-beds release large amounts of otherwise trapped nutrients and silt which adversely affects water quality for long periods of time. Dredging of new channels or inlets will not be approved to provide riparian access where none existed naturally. Dredging will be permitted in limited circumstances only where absolutely necessary to maintain existing natural riparian access permanently lost by something beyond the control of the landowner. Periodic low water conditions or the owner desire for deeper draft watercraft are not sufficient reasons for disrupting sensitive lake beds. CMP 3-20 w I AND U.S£JUNE, 1980 3. 4. 5. 6. DEVELOPMENT DENSITY WILL BE LIMITED THROUGHOUT THE CITY TO A LEVEL WHICH WILL NOT OVERLOAD THE NATURAL SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE AND FILTRATION SYSTEM. Urbanization increases the speed and quantity of surface runoff while decreasing the water quality. Developed land use densities will be deterained by coaparison between known levels of volume and pollution generation and known marshland capacity for ponding and nutrient assimilation. THE WETLANDS AND MARSHLANDS OF THE CITY WILL BE PROTECTED AND PRESERVED AS WILDLIFE HABITATS, AS UltIQUE OPEN SPACES, AND AS THE ONLY ECONOMICALLY Ph.\CTICAL METHOD OF FLOOD PROTECTION AND STORM WATER RUNOFF FILTRATION. Wetlands, drainageways and floodplains will be protected from encroachment and from alteration or destruction by filling, grading, excavation or drai.nage. Wherever possible, the City will acquire open .ipace and flowage ease ments for conservation of these lands. PROTECTION OF LAKE RESOURCES WILL ALLOW REASONABLE ACCESS, USEAND ENJOYMENT WHILE PREVENTING OVERCROWDING AND EXCESSIVE ENCROACHMENT. In conformance with Mn. DN?. shoreline Management regulations for recreational development lakes, Orono will prohibit overly dense development within 1,000 feet of Lake Minnetonka. Lake use regulations will be promoted to limit excessive boat density and overuse of sensitive bays. Land use regulations will be developed to provide reasonable control over building density, land alteration and lakeshore encroachment. LAKE SHORELINES WILL BE PROTECTED FROM ALTERATION. Shoreland areas, whether bluff, beach or floodplain, are sensitive environmental features with significant impact on lake water quality, aesthetic values and land use function. These same factors act to draw development which can be destructive if not properly regulated. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reason able in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilise excess nutrients. Clear- cutting will be prohibited. In areas of soil or wave action erosion, material stone rip rap shoreline protection will be encouraged. CM? 4-13 CONTINENTAL 3 • -3 ; • :; V C f 0 i 3 . t n c . gWi'T 'SCc- - w* ■v45^'■ .'P -*'• •• i»» mtje-. tT^%^yi • i ■ ■■ > LI' ‘‘ ^TrCS'-f'.•5>-’. SiTis^gv-rt October I, 1999 ? vIOO"/ Ere r>j?g.TS ft lk.M«mm Mike GafFron Senior Planning Coordinator City of Orono Orono, Minnesota Re: Application for Conditional Use Permit of Bradley A. Hoyt for Property Located at 2523 Kelly Avenue, City of Orono Dear Mr. Gaffron: On behalf of Bradley A. Ho>i, enclosed and hereby submitted is a General Land Use Application for an After-the Fact Conditional Use Permit for landscaping work performed at 2523 Kelly Avenue. I understand that Mr. Hoyt’s application will be submitted to the planning commission at its review meeting at the ne.xt available opportunity. When Mr. Hoyt obtained this application from the City, Mr. Paul Weinberger of your office placed an *‘x” ne.xt to “S250.00 Land Alteration” and an “.x” ne.xt to “Grading and filling designated wetland or floodplain". Since Mr. Hoyt performed no land alteration within the wetland or floodplain, we do not believe that Mr. Weinberger’s designation is appropriate. The only appropriate designation, if applicable, would be “Grading, seawall, retaining walls wi^his 75 of lakeshore , as alleged in the City ’s counterclaim against Mr. Ho>t in his lawsuit pending in United States District Court, Case No. 99-CD-1034 (JRT/FLN). Since the only ponion of that designation that may be applicable is “retaining wall within 75’ of lakeshore” we have appropriately checked and modified this box. We have also checked and hereby submit an “After- the-Fact Fee” in the amount of S500.00 for processing this application. Please be advised that Bradley Ho>t makes this request for an After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit based upon the request of the City of Orono and its attorneys, Greene & Espel, P.L.L.P., and by making this application, in no way intends this application to constitute an admission of any liability of the allegations contained in the City of Orono s counterclaim. cr>-r'=r •r / -•% J i ‘-.r 253 East Lake Scree:, Vayiau, Minnesota 55391 u. V* We trust that Mr. Hoyt's application will be treated in a fair and objective manner, notwithstanding the pending litigation between the parties. If there is any way to expedite this process, please let me know. - •/ X-Ve^ry )i^ly/yours. /. UcK J.^neridan — n CON'TINEKTAL . I - • • • V c f . lie. W-'icif'/j H .“-V-t V-. . iTt:-• I -3Li i7 fc. ^ f* .5«V~Vi.w4iX^^■>4 wS< >-i 5^^ -T msm KMfe? feft* ' ■ ^&jnSrS:^iTZr.. J October 29,1999 Mr. Paul Weinberger Zoning Administrator/Planner City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, Minnesota 55356 Re: Request for Further Information on Application No. 25^0 Dear Mr. Weinberger: I write in response to your letter of October 8,1999 in which you request the following additional information relating to m^/ application for a conditional use permit on my property located at 2523 Kelly Avenue. The survey you have provided to us indicates e.xisting structures and the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka, however the survey is required to show previous and existing topography over the entire property. 2)Cut and fill calculations for the amount of fill, in cubic yards, that has been added within the 75’ lakeshore setback. In response to your first request for a previous and existing ^ topography over the entire property, I am unable to fully comply your request because 1 am not in possession of a preexisting topographic suivey of my property. However, I have had prepared an existing topographic survey, a copy of which accompanies this letter. I do not understand your request for a topographic survey of the entire property when only lakshore area is the subject of my application. During the Spring and Summer of 199S, wind and rain storms toppled several tress, which was likely to cause the soil to erode on the hill facing the shore e of my property. For this reason, I placed boulders on my property to prevent erosion of the hill. Other than this landscaping, no change to e topography has taken place. In response to your second request for cut and fill calculations within 75 feet of the lakeshore setback, I reiterate that nothing has been added or removed from the property* other than the boulders placed at^ e edge of the hill. No soils were added in connection with the landscapmg. and the grade is substantially the same as it was before the trees were 253 ^asr Lake Street, Wayiata, Minnesota 55391 Mr. Paul Weinberger October 29,1999 Page 2 toppled. I can give you no additional information on this issue othrr than what has already been provided. If there is any specific information you would like to loiow other than that which you already observed on the property, please let me know. Sincerely, Bradley A. Hoyt • . • c: WilUam R. Skolnick, Esq. p B rad HARDCOVER jC^ * SETBACK ZO^^E: (CIRCLE ONE) (p^ M ^-^7. EXTSTINC HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House' Leasei X X X B. Ganse C. ‘Driveway ••• X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Oeck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic. Or Fabric • Coajc. coall /iau<.a fH. ——— * _________ X G. Other . TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A -r B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN 7QNR House LenjLh X X • X B. Garage»• C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other 75-250' Wid'Jl TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZON: total PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _______• B WldA • • /OKivbhUriE I 25-500*500-1000*Kc m •S.F. ** • Si S.F. ■*•s.Fr'- • •• •S.F. • 1 S.F. •• SI • S.F. » .S.F. S.F. »•S.F.1 11•••90 • S.F. S.F. "?9 a-S.F. S.F. S.F. •• • •• « • • 1 • .S.F. ■fS3 S.F. A m 7.\noo t S.F. . B X100 “2.0C t • % ^ • • • • • i • • • S.’r. S.F. ;..... S.F. • >. S.F. W' • •S.F. • • •• S.F. • —S.F. • CS: • •.• • S.F. ; . S.F. S.F. n S.F. S'.F. ' 'S.F. •S.F." • . S.F. • •S.F. ® X100 -f# • • • • •.• •Id • . biR>^o 14 HARDCOVER CALCULATlJi£OVOi<i^5tlfc:ii i SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-7S’ ^-250^) gXTgnNC HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. Homs _______ x _____________ 25-500’500-1000' SOOB S.F. Lxnj^ X» X X B. .Ganse _ C. Driveway _ D. Sidewalk ^_______ • ’ ••• • • • E. fatio/Dcck-t- 17.3 U3 40 F. Landscape __ Underlain By Plastic. , I 0*T Of Fabric • X X X X X X X X X G. Other B ock. 'v«.^irie. TOTAL HARDCOVER LN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A __________ B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________X . Le- ;-■> B. Ga.-age C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Paiio/Deck F. Landscape Ucderlaln By Plastic Or Fabric X X X X X X X X X G. Oier jr S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. • • T.blOt S.F. S.F. 5.9 \07. • • •5*50- .1 S.F. .S.F. S.F. •S.F. bS2.__S.F. _________S.F. Tio S.F. ZiQ S.F. t S.F. - A X 100 zy.e'DOt S.F.;b tv.. % •• « • VfulA S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ST. S.F. 'S.F. r*. 0 • S.F. S.F. S.F.. ‘ 'S.F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total property area in zone X •*- B X 100 - . S.F. " S.F." r* .A 5 • • •* 14' MoVT * SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75 HARDCOVER CALCULATlOiN VVUKK5jit;^j 7S-2S0*0^500^SQ04QQO' -2-27- EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House - _______________X Lesjei S.F. widd X X X i.S.F. — S.F. . S.F. B. Ganse C. Driveway S.F. X X j^O'O S.F. S.F. I D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. Pacio/Deck • • • X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic. Or Fabric • X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ _ _ _ _ «(• B • • PROPOSED HvVRDCOVER IN ZONE A. House LeajA X X ••X • • • B. •Ca.-age C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Ucderlun By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ _• **• B . .1 . S,F. •S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 4oj> X 100 /^^.ycx S.F. ^ • • • S.F. *A S.I % 'i ► S.F. WidCi 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. X ICO - . S.F. “ S.F. "■ fi A B • • •• • •* 14 • 1 I « u * ■ * ^GlTYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parltway Orono, MN 55356 Malllni Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066 December 13,1999 Bradley A. Hoyt 2523 Kelly Avenue Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Application #2540 Dear Mr. Hoyt: The Plan ning Commission review on November 15 resulted in a recommendation for denial of your CUP request, based partially on a lack of sufficient information to support a variance approval. We believe that the following information is critical to a variance review for your project, and should be submitted if you wish to proceed vnth amending your request to include the necessary variances: 1.Completed variance application form, including statement of hardship/unusuai property conditions, etc. Name/address of any landscape designer who may have been involved in designing the improvements. Name/address of contractor who completed the work. 3.The plans given to the contractor defining what work was intended, such as existing and proposed contours; retaining wall specifications; engineering calculations on any segments of wall in excess of 48" in height; any pre-construction surveys you may have available; cut and fill calculations indicating the volume, in cubic yards, of material proposed to be moved on the property, etc. 4.Any as-built specifications provided by the contractor, especially if the final result was different than the proposed plan. We do have your post-construction survey on file as submitted. 0.Any photographs or other documentation of the condition of the shoreline prior to construction of the walls, especially any tree damage, c' any documentation from any tree service which may have removed storm-damaged trees. 6.Any additional information which you believe will enhance the City’s understanding of what work was completed and the reasons it was undertaken. Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 Bradley Hoyt December 13,1999 Page 2 You should set up a meeting with City staff prior to your submittal, so we can assist you in making your application as complete as possible. Submittal of the above listed information by noon on Wednesday, December 22 will allow this item to be placed on the Planning Commission’s January 19 agenda. Please call me at (612) 249-4600 should you have any questions. Sincerely, Paul Weinberger Zoning Administrator/Planner end.: Variance application packet •ROM •THU; 2. :0‘00 14:42/01. 14;36 NO. S76:)04470: 2 2 hiKSHAW & CULBEKl .s ArrLnoH,wMCONsu« uLUvauLiLUiion •loomus. wiiaDKiLN CMAMrAlON. IU.IHOI9 ciacAOo.axiNou OtTStAL un. lunois rr. LAUMtOAU. nAMPA JACMONVIUI.FLOWDA MLSr.lLUMOU unAiLUxou MiA>a,n«ftnA PIFUlAmAYlUVtt sumiiflft mmiEAf OUS, MWHE90TA »>49t ilMSUill nUTAX 4tUlA. ThonxftS X Bsirtti Dkvct 612.334.3676 jBaa«tt^lunAc«vlAW.eom J&nuary 6,2000 wu.wAUKn.wBeoii9it< MVMriU.B(BIAMA f80*U,ILU»»» niOS<S(.AlUtOHA ROCKTOKD.ILUMOIS wr. LOUIA. MDSOURI $AN rVAHClSCO, CALIFORNIA UPtmoFIBLO. (LLIHOIS TAli?A.Fl011DA WAUKIOAV. ILUNOti Rick J. Sheridan, lisq. Contkicotal Propeity Group, Inc. 2S3 East Lake Street Wayzata, MN 55391 VTA FACSiMTr eANn STATES MAIL Rg: Bradley Hoyt v. City of Orono, et cl Court File No.: 99-CV-1034 (JBT/FLN) Our File No.: 41288^752031 Dear Rick; This letter is written to further address the steps which your client should t^e in order to present its case for a variance £rom the requirementa of the Orooo City Code. Tto , erises out of your cUent’s appUcatbn for a Conditional Use Permit for a waU which he near the shore of Lake Minnetonka without a pennit. As we hnva discussed, foe tondilional Use Pennit for which be made application requires conformity to all parts of the City C^de. SinM City Code prohibits hardcover or structures in foe area of shore land wh^ 75 fe« of the lal^^ it vm be necessary for your client to seek and obtain a variance from those ordinance in order to bring foe retaining wall the requirqnenta of the Code. The Ordinances in question ate: Section 10.22. Subdivision I and 2 Section 10.55. SubdivisioaS Section 10.56. Subdivision 16(L) Section 10.56. Subdivision 16(CX5) The Planning Commission, at its November 15,1999 meeting, recommended denial of the ' • request for a Conditional Use Permit, because it concluded that foe waU should not have been gmitod ft variftncc under the code end bectusa it had difficulty understanding the nature of e erosion problem which h was claimed that the wall would prevent. The City Cou^il rcmatMCd e jnatfAr to Planning CoounissioD tti ordcf to sUow yOUT cUeQt to make an ^piopriate record o e need for variance from the requirements of the Code. The City otOroifo has a long standing policy against altowing hardcover or stiucturwwitlun 75 feet of the lake. The City’s comprehensive plan also discourages devices like a wall on. the nCMDSV 4t9T/ t4M3142.vS yiOMO A»AJOVinBD> WOLUDIMO ntcn«n9«ALOORrosAirato -r A>r r Avift (THU) 2. 10’00 14:42/31. 14:S6/XC. ••;;:4470' ? S t Rick J. Sheridan, Esq. January 7,2000 Page 2 lakefront. The City must look to a demonstration of hardship by your client as defined by Minnesota Statute 462.358-462.359, and Orono Code Section 10.08 as a accessary condition of granting a variance. The burden of demonstrating the hardship is on your client. As I understand it, your client constructed the wall in order to deal whh the results of certain storm damage. Had this matter been brought to the City’s attention before the ■wall was built, the City staff would have discussed with the applicant various possibilities for mmimiring the impact of any erosion control measures, and would have recommended to the t^plicant and the Council a proposal which would accompUsb the needed erosion control with the least impact on the natural shoreline. In this after-the-&ct situation, the City staff seeks to have in hand evidence which will help it understand the condition of the shoreland before and after the storm damage, and ■which will allow it to detemune whether the wall as constructed or another less intrusive scheme would accomplish the preservation of the shoxclaud. This evidence is required in order to evaluate the claimed hardship which is legally necessary for a variance. •w Your client should provide the following information: 1. A detailed description and explanation of the specific problems the wall was installed to address. 2. A topographic survey of the site showing the condition of tlie site prior to any work being done to remedy the problems. As well, please provide any photos sho^wing the condition of the site prior to any work being done. 3. Information indicating any other options considered besides the wall to address the problems documented. 4. An e:q>lanation as to whether you believe file ■wall is superior to other less intnistve options. This matter is scboduled to be heard on January 19^ before the Planning Commission and a public hearing on the variances required and on the Conditional Us# Permit udll be noticed for that date. It would be most helpful if you could provide the fkctual information requested by January 15 ‘. Finally, i understand that as a legal matter you contend that your client docs not need any permits or variances for the construction of the wall At the City Council Meeting on December 13, 1999,1 understood you to assert that the wall which your client oonstnicted was not 'hardcover** or a "structure” within the meaning of the Orono Code. For what it is worth, the longstanding interpretatbn of hardcover and structure which the City Council applies has consistently included impervious elements like the wall which your client constructed. I \inderstand further that you disagree that the City may require a Conditional Use Permit for such structures if they are permitted by reason of hardship witlun 75 feet of the shoreline. The City Code and fiie City Practice have required such Permits for some time. The idea of the Permits is to allow the City and the applicant to have a clear understanding of exactly what is allowed and permitted in fiie zone, so that it cannot be dhmged over time without further evaluation or permissioa 11 a nytwt^mp mn i nwn proftoiowal oof rrmATKjHi FROM (THU) 2.10*00 14:43/cT. 14:36. MO. S760044705 ? 4 Rick J. Sheridan, Esq. January 7,2000 Page 3 Please provide the information requested. If you should have any questions please don’t hesitate to call me. TJB/lIc c; William R. Skolnick, Esq. (via Facsimile and U.S. Mail) Peter E. Hinz, Esq. (via Facsimile and U.S. Mail) A rBCWDCHO ntOrUdlOKAL OOWOKAlttlNa COi rwr.ii. MEETJNO MAR 2 7 2000 Application Date: Completion Date: Deadline: 2/11/00 2/11/00 4/10/00 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 2/28/00 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2562 Cornerstone New Testament Church 850 Wayzata Boulevard West (Wayzata Christian Center Property) Conditional Use PermitA^ariance Zoning:RR-IB, One Family Rural Residential, 2 Acres Application: Conditional Use Permit for a church in a residential zoning district and a variance to permit a 32 s.f. identification sign where 12 s.f. is allowed. Application Summary: Cornerstone New Testament Church has made application for a conditional use permit to permit a “church” on property located at 850 Wayzata Boulevard. The propert)' has an existing building that was constructed in 1966 most recently known as the “Wayzata Christian Center” and “Wayzata Learning Center”. A special use permit was granted in 1965 to permit the church use on the site. The current zoning code was adopted in 1975 pennitting churches as conditional uses in “R” districts. The property is owned by adjacent property owners to th » north of the site who would lease the building to the Cornerstone Church group for an undetermined period of time believed to be 2 to 4 years. A variance to Section 10.61, Subdivision 2 (A) is required to permit a sign to exceed 12 s.f. on thii' property. The Cornerstone Church has proposed to construct a 32 s.f. sign and attach the sign to the existing posts located at the entrance to the property. The previous tenant had used the posts for identification signage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the application of the Conditional Use Permit and variances for the sign, PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION On a vote of 5 to 0 the Planning Co.iimission recommended approval of the variances and conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: 1.The City reserves its right to recall or reconsider the conditional use permit as it relates to additional parking needs or future pai Ag improvements. 2. 3. 4. Any change or more intense use of the property vsill require an amendment to the conditional use permit. A conditional use permit shall remain in effect as long as the conditions agreed upon are observed, and the use does not cease for a period of more than 6 months. If the use of the property as a church would cease for a period of 6 months a new conditional use permit is required. The applicant shall be advised the existing septic system has been determined to be non- compliant and is required to be replaced before December 31,2007. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the attached resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 3 AND A VARIANCE PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.61, SUBDIVISION 2 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 850 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST FILE NO. 2562 WHEREAS, Cornerstone New Testament Church (hereinafter the "applicant") has an interest in and Karen Proft and Patrick Proft are owners (hereinafter the "owners") of property located at 850 Wayzata Boulevard West within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City"); and 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 March 20, 2000 at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.61, Subdivision 2 to permit a 32 s.f. identification sign where 12 s.f. is permitted; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a conditional use pennit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 to permit a church use on the property in the RR-IB zoning district. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2562. 2. A church is a conditional use permitted in the RR-IB zoning district, subject to the proposed use meeting all requirements of the Zoning Chapter. Page 1 of 6 3. The proposed use meets all requirements of the Zoning Chapter. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Municipal Code permits churches as conditional uses in the RP-IB zoning district. The proposed use will be entirely within the existing building and will be limited to weekly services and office one staff person. On occasion there would be special events that would be consistent with the church use of the propeny A special use permit was granted in 1965 to permit a church. The existing building was constructed in 1966. There is no conditional use permit on file for a church use although the building had been used as a church in the past. A conditional use permit was granted to permit the Wayzata Learning Center for 30 daycare students. A conditional use permit amendment was applied for in 1995 to allow the daycare to expand to 66 students. The application was not reviewed by the Planning Commission or City Council and was later withdrawn. The site plan provided by the applicant indicates a parking plan for 30 cars. Required parking for a church is one space for each four seats based on the design of the main assembly hall. The parking spaces provided would accommodate a main assembly hall capacity of 120. The church seating capacity is 120. If parking is required to be increased in the future the existing parking area could be realigned to permit additional spaces. The Council approves a variance to permit the sign to be 32 s.f. based on the hardship that a 12 s.f. sign is not large enough to include the information so it can be read from Highway 12. The speed limit near the sign is 55 mph and the sign is located near a curve in the highway. The two factors make it difficult to see the sign from a distance on Highway 12. The Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship Page 2 of 6 or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 9. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit for the identification sign will not 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 property, 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. 10. 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 variance 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 Zoning Code Section 10.61, Subdivision 2 to permit a 32 s f. identification sign where 12 s.f. is permitted; and Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 to permit a church use on the property in the RR-IB zoning district. Approval is subject to the following conditions- 1.The City reserves its right to recall or reconsider the conditional use permit as it relates to additional parking needs or future paving improvements. Any change or more intense use of the property will require an amendment to the conditional use permit. A conditional use permit shall remain in effect as long as the conditions agreed upon are observed, and the use does not cease for a period of more than 6 months. If the use of the property as a church would cease for a period of 6 months a new conditional use permit is required. The property shall reh.ain in conformance with Page 3 of 6 4. 5. 6. 7. the site plan attached as Exhibit A to this resolution. Any future alteration to the site plan, that will expand the conditional use, shall require an amendment to this conditional use permit approval. The applicant shall be advised the existing septic system has been determined to be non-compliant and is required to be replaced before December 31, 2007. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owner, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit and land alteration permit within one year of the date of Council’s approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (November 22, 2CKX)). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of itself, its successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. ATTEST: Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 27 day of March, 2'mil Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owners Page 4 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 27th day of March, 2000 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and 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 ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 20 ___before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _________________________________________ known to me to be the persons described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same as their free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 20 ___before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _________________________________________ known to me to be the persons described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same as their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: RE: Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner March 20,2000 #2562 Cornerstone New Testament Church 850 Wayzata Boulevard West (Wayzata Christian Center Property) Conditional Use PermitA^ariance Zoning:RR-IB, One Family Rural Residential, 2 Acres Application: Conditional Use Permit for a church in a residential zoning district and a variance to permit a 32 s.f. identification sign where 12 s.f. is allowed. Exhibits: A B C D E F G H Application Statement of Hardship Plat Map/Location Map Site Plan/Survey/Landscaping Plan Parking/Lighting Plan Septic System Inventoiy' Septic System Map Property Owners List Application Summan*: Cornerstone New Testament Church has made application for a conditional use permit to permit a “church ” on property located at 850 Wayzata Boulevard. The property has an existing building that was constructed in 1966 most recently known as the “Wayzata Christian Center ” and “Wayzata Learning Center ”. A special use permit was granted in 1965 to permit the church use on the site. The current zoning code was adopted in 1975 permitting churches as conditional uses in “R” districts. The property is owned by adjacent property owners to the north of the site who would lease the building to the Cornerstone Church group for an undetermined period of time believed to be 2 to 4 years. A variance to Section 10.61, Subdivision 2 (A) is required to permit a sign to exceed 12 s.f on the property. The Cornerstone Church has proposed to construct a 32 s.f sign on the locations indicated on the site plan attached as Exhibit D. The previous tenant had used the posts shown on the survey for identification signace. _______ 1^2562 Cornerstone Testament Church 850 IVay'zata Boulevard Hest (Hdyzata Christian Center Property) Conditional Use Permit Variance March 20 2000 poge-l ANALYSIS Conditional Use Permit: Municipal Code permits churches as conditional uses in the RR-IB zoning district. The proposed use will be entirely within the existing building and will be limited to weekly services and office one staff person. On occasion there would be special events that would be consistent with the church use of the property. A special use permit was granted in 1965 to permit a church. The existing building was constructed in 1966. There is no conditional use permit on file for a church use although the building had been used as a church in the past. A conditional use permit was granted to permit the Wayzata Learning Center for 30 daycare students. A conditional use permit amendment was applied for in 1995 to allow the daycare to expand to 66 students. The application was not reviewed by the Planning Commission or City Council and was later withdrawn. A conditional use permit is required if the use of the property as a church lapse for a period of six months. Since the building has not been in use in the last six months any conditional use requires a new permit. The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a conditional use permit if the following findings are made: 1. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan; The proposed conditional use is in accordance with the Municipal Code as churches are listed as a conditional use in the "R" Districts. The proposed use is historical on the property and would be confined to the existing structure. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and. The proposed conditional use would not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare. The property has been used as a church and daycare since the building was constructed in 1966. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. The use will not conflict with other provisions of the Zoning Chapter. Only the sign would require 1^2562 Cornerstone Sew Testament Church 850 IVay^ata Boulevard l^esf flTay-zata Christian Center Property) Conditional Use Permit Tariance March 20, 2000 page-2 a variance. The need for a variance for the sign should be considered as a separate issue as the property could be used as a church site without the granting of a variance to permit a 32 s.f. sign where a 12 s.f. sign is permitted. Parking and Liehtine The site plan provided by the applicant indicates a parking plan for 30 cars. Required parking for a church is one space for each four seats based on the design of the main assembly hall. The parking spaces provided would accommodate a main assemble hall capacity of P The applicants have stated they intend to have a seating capacity of 120. The intended seating is also indicated on the site plan submitted and attached as Exhibit E. If parking is required to be increased in the future is appears the existing lot could be realigned to permit additional spaces. The parking area is lighted by several light poles that exist on the property. The property owner has indicated the existing lighting will remain on the property. If it is necessary box lights can be installed on the poles. Staff has communicated to the property owner new lights that would deflect all light down should be installed. The code does not permit the direct source of light to be visible from the property lines. Landscaping Plan The existing trees are shown on the Landscaping Plan (Exhibit D). The property owner has indicated they would be planting additional trees ovei the north and east portions of the property. No planting schedule or plan has been submitted or will be required with the CUP. Additional Requirements A conditional use permit shall remain in effect as long as the conditions agreed upon are observed, and the use does not cease for a period of more than 6 months. CUPs may be revokable, may be granted for a limited time, or may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. Septic The property conlaim a private sewage treatment system. Routine inspections have determined the septic system on the property is non-compliant and must be replaced by 2007. The current septic code does not prohibit use of the property due to non-compliant systems. However, if it should be determined the system is failing the system would require immediate replacement. The Septic Inspector has reviewed the proposed use of the property and has determined the existing septic system has the capacity to handle anticipated water use. §2562 Cornerstone Se\¥ Testament Church 850 H'ay'zata Boulevard iTest (Wayzata Christian Center Property) Conditional Use Permit Tariance March 20. 2000 page-5 Variance: A variance has been applied for to permit a 32 s.f. sign at the entrance of the building. The proposed sign would identify the church and service times. The sign is located on Highway 12 were there is a 55 mph speed limit. The applicant has stated they request to erect a 4' X 8 ’ wooden sign on the existing posts. The posts supported the previous signs on the property. A larger sign is necessary to attract attention on the highway curve where vehicles axt permitted to travel at speeds of 55 mph. Please review the applicants sign proposal narrative and statement of hardship attached as Exhibit B. Staff Recommendation: To approve the conditional use permit for the Cornerstone New Testament Church to allow the existing building located at 850 Wayzata Boulevard West finding all pertinent standards of the zoning code have been satisfied and no new uses or more intense use is proposed over previous use of the property. Further, no improvements to the exterior of the building will be required based on the following conditions: 1. The City reserves its right to recall or reconsider the conditional use permit as it relates to additional parking needs or future paving improvements. 2. Any change or more intense use of the property will require an amendment to the conditional use permit. 3. A conditional use permit shall remain in effect as long as the conditions agreed upon are observed, and the use does not cease for a period of more than 6 months. If the use of the property as a church would cease for a period of 6 months a new conditional use permit is required. Staff recommends approval of the variance to the sign requirements to permit a 4' X 8' sign for the church based on the applicants hardship statement. Most churches in the area have a sign consistent w ith the size proposed. The signs are used to provide information other than the name of the church they also are used to post service hours. The property is located on Highway 12 where the traffic is permitted to travel at speeds up to 55 mph and the sign is located on a curv e in the highway making it difficult to read the sign if it is constructed at the size permitted by the sign ordinance. The church will not own the building, but intends to lease the property for 2 to 4 years. They would prefer to use the existing posts that were used by the previous tenant for installation of the sign. The posts require a sign 8' in width. ^2562 Cornerstone AVu Testament Church S50 i^'ciyzata Boulevard Hest (Wayzata Christian Center Property) Conditional Use Permit Variance March 20 2000 page-4 A Application # Date Received" ^lujnn Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address . <^75 ue*^*"* CtWC<_ Type of Application to be Filed /-/uMa / US€ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 3^ -! t ^ - 7. b ^ w oooH APPLICANT Name Cjorhtr^{t^ CkwK^L Phone (work) (pi3l- HTS'~ !<i%b Address ^73^ Jx.______City ________Zip ^jT¥w7 OWNER (if different than applicanO Name ck A i^lreK rrofh Address Phone (home) Cal2 ^ ti91<r _____ Phone (work) <V7^-7fo/ City lAJAsjX*^)^ Zip f Dal^Property Acquired ^ /9/N K , / ^ n t_ I WjOT (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of la .ci (month/year) 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 $300.00 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 _____$250.00 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) _____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule IQ CORNERSTONE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH APPLICATION TO CITY OF ORONO FEBRUARY 14,2000 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON SIGN Term- At the present time, the Church considers its occupancy of the property to be temporary. The Church is therefore asking that the requested sign be approved for a 24 month period, at which time the future of the Church in that location will be much clearer. Sign Construction- The requested sign will be a 4 ft. by 8 ft. wooden sign. The existing sign supports as noted on the survey will be used to attach the sign approximately 6 to 7 ft. off the ground. This is the same set-up used to support the previous sign of the same size. The background of the sign will be white with black letters. The letters in the church name will be 12 inches high while the letters for other information on the sign will be 6 inches high. Lighting- The sign will be lit by a small external spotlight situated near ground level in front of the sign. Reason for the Request- Almost all churches have a sign at least 4 ft. by 8 ft. since the signs are used to list information other than just the name of the church, such as service times and the type of church. A 12 sq. ft. sign is not large enough to include the information so it can be read from the highway. The speed limit near the sign is 55 mph and the sign is located near a curve in the highway. These two factors make it more difficult to see the sign from a distance making it easy for people to miss the driveway to the building. Slowing down to read a small sign on a busy highway could prove to be a hazard to people. .1 i 4 . • ■» •• ' V. ■*. ji.-l/S-as3^ C ' 7»• f >\ * > -» !' • • t • - ' ?• - V SiFPTJr SYSTEM INVENTORY Address: 850 Wayzata Blvd. Building Typ church #BRs/GPD: Permit#: 1306 Date of Permit: 10/6/66 System Type standard trench Experimental; PID: 35-118-23 44 0004 #Systems 1 Units Billed 1 Installer: Murphy Plbg. no Appliances toilet,sink SYSTEM CONDITION Conformity: 3 Tank Condition: 5 DF condition: 11 Failure Pot: medium SEPTIC TANKS Material: concrete block Setback to Bldg; Capacity; 1000,500 Cesspool: unknovni DRAINFIELD Length of Lines 400 # Lines: Trench Width: 2 Treatment Area: 800 Type of Filter rock Soil Boring: yes Tile Size: Under Tile Perc Rate; Setback DF-Bldg; DF Ht above Wt: 0 Soil Type: sandy loam, loam, clay loa Limitations: water table WELL DATA Setbacks - Well-Tanks: Pump Type: subm. INSPECTION RECORD f DATE mini 5/12/80 8/25/86 8/30/90 9/21/92 6/14/94 8/19/96 4/15/98 8/31/99 Well-DF: Report in File yes Depth: 167 Diameter: 4 Method; drilled PUMPOUT RECORD COMPLIANCE DATE GALLONSDESCRIPTION no surfacing no surfacing no surfacing-need risers,pump tanks no surfacing-need risers,pump tanks locate system by 9/1/94 system located,non-compliant-repair by 1 non-compliant-need risers-repair by 12/3 s 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 non-compliant-need risers-repair by 12/3|y/2at3 So ©iw G u>fc 1 ••» •• • •■ ^ ^ ^ ^ Z' A* A A» A« — _ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ iUN DATE 02/d7/00 BATCH SOS rSOf ADDB ONHCII NAHE TAXPAYEII NAME/ADDB 38 35-118-23 ^1 0006 00920 NAYZATA BLVD H D C AmERSON ETAL DARIIELL E ANDERSON 920 H NAYZATA BLVD NAYZATA NN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 35-118-23 A1 0010 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY NN 55323 REPORT NO. PI9S5901 PAGE 18 38 35-118-23 61 0020 00038 ADDRESS PENDING STATE OF HINNESOTA DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES TAX SPEC BUREAU OF RE HGT 500 LAFAYETTE RD ST PAUL NN 55155 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR 38 35-118-23 44 0004 00850 WAYZATA BLVD W P N PROFT 1 PROFT TRUSTEES KAREN PROFT 60 HYRTLEWOOD RD WAYZATA NN 55391 38 35-118-23 44 0005 00875 WAYZATA BLVD W SBS DEVELOPNENT LLP NEW HORIZON 16355 S6TH AVE N 8700 PLYNOUTH NN 55447 38 35-118-23 44 0007 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED STATE OF NINN STATE OF NINN (DNRI CLUCE LINE TRAIL! PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 36-118-23 23 0002 00038 ADDRESS PENDING STATE OF NINNESOTA DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES TAX SPEC BUREAU OF RE NOT 500 LAFAYETTE RD ST PAUL NN 55155 38 36-118-23 33 0003 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STATE OF NINN STATE OF NINN fDNR) CLUCE LINE TRAIL! 38 36-118-23 33 0012 00090 NYRTLEWOOD RD KEVIN L TNONPSON KEVIN L TNONPSON 90 NYRTLEWOOD RD WAYZATA NN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR 38 36-118-23 33 0018 00070 NYRTLEWOOD RD R J WELLS JR ET AL R J WELLS JR 70 NYRTLEWOOD RD WAYZATA NN 55391 38 36-118-23 33 0020 00060 NYRTLEWOOD RD P W PROFT SR 8 K J PROFT KAREN 8 PATRICK PROFT SR 60 NYRTLEWOOD RD WAYZATA NN 55391 72 35-118-23 44 0002 00915 WAYZATA BLVD W E J BOULEY ETAL E J BOULEY 915 W WAYZATA BLVD WAYZATA NN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR 99 01-117-23 22 0003 00490 WAYZATA BLVD W CITY OF WAYZATA CITY OF WAYZATA 600 RICE ST WAYZATA NN 55391 99 02-117-23 11 0004 00500 WAYZATA BLVD W CITY OF WAYZATA CITY OF WAYZATA 600 RICE ST WAYZATA NN 55391 99 35-118-23 44 0008 00500 WAYZATA BLVD W CITY OF WAYZATA CITY OF WAYZATA 600 RICE ST WAYZATA NN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR TOTAL BATCH S L O4J^ - 503 00015 I f ' ' i * / 0 1 ;» I 38 02 117 23 11 0003 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED BURLINGTON NORTHERN RY BURLINGTON NORTHERN RY i: . .> rniiMrii mpeti N® M&R 2 7 2000 qVIY OflONOREQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: March 24, 2000 ITEM NO: (p Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: 'A Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Parks, Open Space and trails Commission Appointments The Council, at its March 13 meeting, interviewed three candidates for two vacant positions on the City ’s Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission. The candidates are: Jim Morgan, Debora Halvorson, and Pauline Bouchard. The Council indicated to the candidates that a decision regarding appointments would be made at the regular Council meeting of March 27. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to appoint two candidates to three-year terms on the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission expiring December 31, 2002. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MAR 2 7 2000 CITY OF ORONO DATE: March 27. 2000 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Administrator’s Report Item Description: Seasonal Employees for Golf Course I have attached a memo from Ron Steffenhagen, Golf course Superintendent, regarding seasonal employees. We are proposing a pay range of $6.80 to $7.65 per hour for this season. Thi^is an increase of 2.5% over the 1999 season hourly rates. The attached memo contains a list of employees and open positions for this season. After the interviewing process is complete, we will provide the Council with a list of new employees recommended for hiring. The employees are hired under two different provisions of the PERA rules. Three employees will be hired under the 6-month rule which allows unlimited earnings for a 6-month maximum time period. These are the main employees with the majority of the hours during the season. The remainder of the employees work fewer hours and will be hired under the PERA maximum earning' provision which limits earnings to $425 per month without any restrictions on the number of months worked. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve a seasonal employee pay range of $6.80 to $7.65 per hour for the 2 season. • Ill Motion to hire the employees listed at the proposed wage rates and under the applicable provisions of the PERA rules. TO:Greg Gappa, Public Services Director FROM:Ron Steffenhagen, Golf Course Superintendent DATE:March 23,2000 SUBJECT: Golf Course Superintendent LIST OF PROPOSED SEASONAL GOLF COURSE EMPLOYEES Employee 20000 Hourly Wage Rate Bill McIntyre (6 month employee) Jack Peterson (6 month employee) Open Position (6 month employee) Dan Oas John Ross Jan Blair Vicki Raiche Fred Abrahamson Open Position Open Position $7.65 $7.45 $6.80 $7.45 $7.45 $7.45 $6.87 $6.87 $6.80 $6.80 • Returning Employee The employees listed as 6 month employees will be hired for a 6 month time period under the PERA rules with no limit on earnings. All of the other employees will be limited to ma.ximum earnings of $425/month under the PERA rules. There are seven returning employees. The proposed hourly wage rate range is from $6.80 to $7.65 per hour. This is an increase of 2.5% over the 1999 wages. The wage rates for returning employees are based on previous work experience and the number of years they have worked as seasonal employees. 1 have placed classified ads in the newspaper for additional employees and have only had several responses. I am currently in the process of interv iewing employees to fill the open positions. REVISED TO;Greg Gappa, Public Services Director FROM:Ron Steffenhagen, Golf Course Superintendent DATE:March 23, 2000 SUBJECT: Golf Course Superintendent LIST OF PROPOSED SEASONAL GOLF COURSE EMPLOYEES Employee 2000 Hourly Waye Rate Bill McIntyre (6 month employee) Jack Peterson (6 month employee) Open Position (6 month employee) Dan Oas John Ross Jan Blair Vicki Raiche Fred Abrahamson Open Position Open Position $7.45 $7.45 $6.80 $7.65 $7.45 $7.45 $6.87 $6.87 $6.80 $6.80 Returning Employee The employees listed as 6 month employees will be hired for a 6 month time period under the PERA rules with no limit on earnings. All of the other employees will be limited to maximum earmngs of $425/month under the PERA rules. There are seven returning employees. The proposed hourly wage rate range is from $6.80 to $7.65 per hour. This is an increase of 2.5% over the 1999 wages. The wage rates for returning employees are based on previous work experience and the number of years they have worked as seasonal employees. 1 have placed classified ads in the newspaper for additional employees and have only had several responses. I am currently in the process of interviewing employees to fill the open positions. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION cniiwrii MW 2 7 2000 qvvy oh orono DATE: March 23,2000 ITEM NO: ^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Adoption of an Ordinance to Create a Community Investment Fund Attachment: Ordinance Creating a Community Investment Fund Background In the years prior to the construction of the new City facilities, the City annually set aside General Fund surplus amounts to reduce the need to bond for the City facilities project. When the facilities project was approved, the City determined that due to the City’s excellent credit rating, it would be more advantageous to bond for the entire cost of the facilities rather than using the Building Fund reserves to reduce the need for bonding. The Bui.ding Fund reserves have increased over the years through interest earnings and through transfers to the fund from other sources. The Council has recently discussed putting in place an ordinance to ensure the principal amount of the fund is preser\ ed and grows over the long term, while the interest earned is available for priority capital projects. Current Status of the Building Outlay Fund The resolution establishing the Building Outlay Fund indicates the fund was established to reduce the need to bond for City facilities. The current Building Outlay Fund balance is $2.4 million. However, $400,000 of this fund balance is encumbered as an internal loan to the Water Fund to pay a portion of the costs of the Navarre Water Plant Rehabilitation Project. This is a 15-year loan that will be fully paid in 2013. Approximately 90% of the interest earnings in the fund ($130,000) is used to pay a portion of the debt service on the City facilities bonds. When the City initially proposed the funding for the City facilities, the City indicated the tax levy for the facilities project would be limited to 1.75% of the City’s tax capacity. This was approximately $250,000 in 1992. The interesteamings in the Building Outlay Fund are needed to bridge the gap bemeen the amount of the tax levy for debt service and the total debt service payment. It is important the principal amount in the Building Outlay Fund be preserved, and that the interest earnings be dedicated toward the City facilities debt service until the bonds are retired in 2007. If the interest earnings available for the debt serv ice were to be reduced significantly, the City would have a difficult time finding an alternative source of funding tor the debt service. Request for Council Action continued March 23,2000 Page 2 Adoption of an Ordinance to Create a Community Investment Fund_______________________ Endowment Fund Concept and Long-Term City Needs The basic concept of an endowment fund is to manage the expenditures from the fund, such that the principal amount in the fund will be preserved or increased over the long term to enable the fund to serve as an ongoing source of funding. The City will always have needs that are beyond its ability to fund. It is difficult to project future priority needs and future ability to fund those needs. An endowment fund would ensure a source of funding to assist in meeting long-term needs. Establishment of a Community Investment Fund The attcched ordinance establishes an endowment-type fund called the Community Investment Fund. The key element of the Community Investment Fund is that the principal amount is preserved or increased over the long term by making available only the interest earnings from the fund for expenditure. Because of the existing commitments related to the City facilities debt ser\ ice, the interest earnings in the Community Investment Fund would be primarily reserved for this debt service through 200/. The interest earnings would become available for other projects in 2008. The level of expenditure proposed from the fund on an annual basis is not sufficient to fund large capital projects. Large projects will need funding sources beyond the Community Investment Fund. The Community Investment Fund will provide resources for smaller projects, or can be used to leverage other sources of funds such as grants, or funding from other organizations or jurisdictions for larger projects. The Community investment fund ordinance does provide for expending more than the annual interest earnings in any one year; however, this requires a plan to repay the fund over a multi-year period. In addition to the benefit of providing a long-term funding source to help meet future needs, because the Community Investment Fund uses the endowment fund concept, it could be an attractive option for potential donors who want their donation to pro\ ide a long-term legacy rather than a one-time impact. The City's bond consultant has indicated that the creation of the Community Investment Fund would not have a negative impact on the City's credit rating. She believed the fund would have a positive impact on the City's credit rating. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the attached ordinance creating the Community Investment Fund. ORDINANCE NO., SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORONO CITY CODE TO ESTABLISH A COMMUNITY INVESTMENT FUND THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1. The following language is hereby added to the Orono City Code as Section 2.8 - Community Investment Fund. SEC. 2.8. COMMUNITY INVESTMENT FUND. Subd. 1. Fund Created. There is hereby created a separate fund to be designated as the Community Investment Fund. This fund shall be maintained in the official city records and administered by the Treasurer in accordance with the provisions of this section. All moneys in the Building Outlay Fund shall be transferred to the Community Investment Fund. In addition, the following shall be deposited in this fund: Investment Fund, and A. Investment earnings generated by the moneys in the Community of the fund. B. Any other moneys appropriated by the Council or donated for the purposes The principal of the fund shall consist of all transfers from the Building Outlay Fund and other moneys appropriated or donated to the fund. In addition, the principal shall be increased annually by an amount equal to ten percent of the investment earnings generated by the fund in the previous year. The remaining investment earnings shall not accrue to the principal and shall forever be treated as investment earnings available for expenditure in accordance \%ith this section. Subd. 2. Purpose of Fund. This fund shall be used solely to pay the capital costs of projects of general benefit to the City of Orono. Subd 3. Expenditure Limitations. A. Expenditures from the fund shall be made only from accumulated investment earnings whenever possible. B. Expenditures may be made from principal, but may not exceed an amount greater than the equivalent of the fund's investment earnings for the prior two consecutive years. If expenditures from principal are made, either they must be structured as a loan to repay the principal, or no further expenditures of any kind may be made from the fund until investment Page 1 of 3 earnings have reestablished the principal at an amount equal to that existing before the expenditures plus ten percent of the investment earnings that would have been earned per year if the principal had not been reduced. Subd. 4. Funding Preference. Expenditures from the fund for competing projects shall be granted in the following order of preference: A. First Priority: Prior to the retirement of the bonds used to fund the 1992 City facilities project, the first priority will be funding $130,000 of the debt service on the City facilities bonds. B. Second Priority: Projects which can be funded within the amount of the available investment earnings. C. Third Priority: Projects using expenditures from principal funds which have the capacity to repay the principal amount borrowed. D. Fourth Priority: Projects using expenditures from principal funds which have no other reasonable funding source, are non-revenue producing, require significant funding, and will provide otherwise unattainable community benefit. Subd. 5. Funding Procedure. Expenditures from the fund, other than those related to the debt service on the 1992 City facilities project, listed as the first funding priority above, may be made only after compliance with the following procedure: A. The project to be funded must have been included for at least two years in the city’s formally-adopted capital improvement program. B. The City Council must hold a public hearing on vvhether the proposed project should be funded. Notice specifying the date, time and place of the hearing, the project to be funded, and the amount of funding must be published at least ten days before the hearing in the city’s official newspaper. C. The City Council must make the following findings which shall be incorporated into an adopted resolution: 1. The pioject has sufficient community-wide benefit as determined by a review of its intended users, the degree to which it addresses a community-wide need or problem, and its consistency with other city goals, programs or policies. 2. The project to be funded could not occur but for the use of the Community Investment Fund. 3. The Community Investment Fund is not replacing the funding from another previously programmed or available source. Page 2 of 3 4. The project has been included in at least two consecutive formally- approved capital improvement programs. 5. If principal is used, the project has the abilit>‘to reasonably repay the funds, and use of the principal does not exceed the equivalent of the Iasi rvvo years’ investment earnings from the Community Investment Fund. 6. An estimate of the ongoing annual operating and maintenance costs has been made and the source(s) for paying such costs identified. D. If any of the findings in Paragraph C cannot be made and the project meets the expenditure limitations imposed in Subd. 3, expenditures may be made from the fund only after the affirmative vote of at least four Council members. Subd. 6. Administrative Expenditures. The limitations imposed in the sections above shall not apply to reasonable expenses necessary for the administration of the Community Investment Fund. Subd. 7. Amendments. No amendments may be made to Section 8 except upon the affirmative vote of at least four members of the Council. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be published in THE PIONEER and THE LAKER and shall be effective upon publication. Adopted by the City Council of the Cit>' of Orono on the 27th day of March. 2000, by a vote of___ayes and____nays. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 3 of 3 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION coi iNr.n, meeting m 2 7 2000 C»1Y OF ORONO DATE: March 21,2000 ITEM NO:q Department Approva^ ^ Name Tom Kuehn/^»^r 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 1998 Financial Report Attachments: • Notification letter from the Government Finance Officers Assoc., dated 2/15/00 • Sample news release. • Award of Financial Reporting Achievement. The City of Orono has been awarded the G.F.O.A.'s Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for its Comprehensive .Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1998. This is the twelfth 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 the finance department support staff for their ongoing efforts and assistance in 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. TO>rAISA'^CFOACERT February 15, GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOClAi iON 100 North Michigan Avenue. Suite 800. Chicago. Illinois 60601 2 Q Q Q 312/977-9700 • Fax; 312/977-4806 The Honorable Gabriel Jabbour • • Mayor - •- City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Mayor Jabbour: We are pleased to notify you that your comprehensive annual finan cial report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1998 qualifies for a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. The Certificate of Achievement is the highest Jorm of recognition in governmental accounting and financial reporting, and its attainment represents a significant accomplishment by a government and its management. When a Certificate of Achievement is awarded to a government, an Award of Financial Reporting Achievement is also presented to the individual designated by the government as primarily responsible for its having earned the certificate. Enclosed is an Award of Financial Reporting Achievement for: Thomas M. Kuehn, Finance Director. The Certificate of Achievement plaque will be shipped under sepa-^ rate cover in about eight weeks, vie 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 ended during 1997 representing 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. Gautnier Director/Technical Services Center SJG/ds WASHINGTON OFFICE 1750 K Street. N W.. Suite 650. Washington. OC 20006 202/429-2750 • Fax: 202/429-2755 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION 180 North Michigan Avenue. Suite 800. Chicago. Illinois 60601 February 15, 2000 3ia/977.9700.Fa.:312/977-4B06 For infomation contact: NEWS RELEASE Stephen Gauthier (312) 977-9700 (Chicago)--The Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Finan cial Reporting has been awarded to: City of Orono, MN 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 finan cial reporting, and its attainment represents a significant accomplishment by a government and its management. An Award of Financial Reporting Achievement )ias been awarded to the individual(s), department or agency desig:iated 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 communicate its financial story and motivate potential users and user groups to read the CAFR. The GFOA is a nonprofit professional association serving approximately 3.3,500 government finance professionals with offices in Chicago, Illinois, and Washington, D.C. - 30 - WASHINGTON OFFICE 1750 K Street. N W. Suite 650. Washington. DC 20006 202/429-2750 • Fax: 202/429-2755 The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada presents this AWARD OF FINANCIAL REPORTING ACHIEVEMENT to: Thomas M. Kuehn Finance Director Citv of Orono, Minnesota The Axuinl of l-iiiundal Reporting Achievement is piesental by the Coveniment FinanceOjjiceis Association totliosf individiiu/s mIidhave been instiumcntalinthclr government unit achieving a Certi/uate of Achievement for Fxcellence in Financial Reitoiting A CertiJicaleoJ Achievement is presented to those government units whose annnal/inancial reportsaie judged toadheretoprogram standardsand repiesentsthe highest award ingoirrmiiefit jinancial reporting Executive Director Date February 15, 2000 I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION coiJNrii msetinQ MAR 2 7 2000 CITY OF ORONO DATE: ITEM NO: /C Department Appro^ Name Tom Kuehn Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Police Department Conversion to LOGIS Police Records System - 1999 Police Budget Amendment As part of the 2000 budget process it was decided to discontinue using the Leaders police records system and to install the new LOGIS police records system. To that effect the 2000 Police Department Capital Outlay Budget includes $4,300 for hardware and related costs to the initial set up and conversion to the new system and an additional SI ,500 for the software required to operate the system. However, the router, cabling, and other equipment was received and installed at the police department in December, 1999. As the equipment and installation was done in December, 1999, the payment of those costs will be reflected as a 1999 expenditure. The costs incurred in December, 1999, total $4,220. At this time an amendment to the 1999 Police Department Capital Outlay Budget is required to provide the necessary funding in the 1999 budget. The 2000 Police Department Capital Outlay Budget will be reduced by a like amount. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of the installation of the LOGIS police records system at a cost of $4,220; to be funded from the 1999 Police Department Capital Outlay, with a budget amendment of $4,220; and that the 2000 Police Department Capital Outlay Budget be decreased by $4,220. WPDOCS\TOM\Bud9'»tdj I .w pd COONCII mretinq REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ CirYOH OHONO DATE: March 24,2000 ITEM NO:// Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Resolution in Support of a Planning Grant from the Metropolitan Council Resolution A request has been made to the Metropolitan Council for a planning grant in the amount of $ 10,000 to offset a portion of the costs of the Long Lake/Orono Consolidation Study. The Metropolitan Council is considering funding the study as part of its planning grant program, which has assisted cities in the update of their Comprehensive Plans. The Metropolitan Council has requested a resolution from the City Council in support of the planning grant. A resolution is attached for Council consideration. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached resolution in support of a planning grant from the Metropolitan Council to offset the costs of the Long Lake/Orono Consolidation Study. and A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF A PLANNING GRANT FROM THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL TO OFFSET A PORTION OF THE COSTS OF THE LONG LAKE/ORONO CONSOLIDATION STUDY, WHICH HAS GREATLY BENEFITTED ORONO IN THE UPDATE OF ITS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Orono is in the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan; WHEREAS, the Cities of Orono and Long Lake are interrelated in relation to many elements of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHFREAS, the cities aie in the process of studying whether the two cities should be consolidated; and WHEREAS, the consolidation study process has involved the clarification of shared values and goals among the tw o cities regarding land use, housing, transportation, and other elements of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the discussion of values and goals by the Consolidation Study Committee has been a great benefit to Orono in its Comprehensive Plan update process; and WHEREAS, the funding of the Consolidation Study, in addition to funding the Comprehensive Plan update, has been difficult as the City has many competing interests for limited funding. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED -.nat the Orono City Council does hereby indicate its support oi'a planning grant from the Metropolitan Council to offset a porti •'>f the costs of the Long Lake/Orono Consolidation Study, which has been a great benefit to Orono m the update of its Comprehensive Plan. Page 1 of2 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 27th day of March, 2000. ATTEST:Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Page 2 of2 COnw^ii Mt=ETlNG MAR 2 7 2000 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION cWiOt- ohuno DATE: March 23,2000 ITEM NO: y Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Lin Vee . ^ Title City Clerk Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT 1. Applicant: Gear West - Event; Location: Date: Time; Run Bike Run Duathlon Starting at Orono Middle School May 21,2000 8:30 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE 1. David and LuAnn Runkle 2684 Casco Point Road COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the above listed licenses. PARADES & SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Permit #: Fee: S50.00 . Date Received: ^J^/oo Phone Number: '4'T^ 'OO^i 3 Name Address: /7/^ u!)clx '\ City, State, Zip: kf'y^ K a JU ^'V'O Location of Parade or Event: ^f^cyio /yy<.(^eiju. — DCyf^— dc^ -h U Lc) -H> 2.0 i a J, tfc ii Ix 4u>4L rcytlM\y ^ L *C^ U t uL* ^ — ------ C'A ‘ 2" lot,o. n^>j> Date of Event: :2J ________ Hours of Event:__^ JO- Type of Event: yhj.Ml -ht/tj ^ ^{J J'in ^ y Insurance Company: SrHlh l^U^yyx^ ) Amount:_________________ (Copy of insurance certificate, on which the tity, its agents and employees are named as additional insured, must be submitted with this application.) I am aware of all applicable State and other laws rej”^rd:’‘ . -laia- es and special events and will abide by same. I also agree to hold the C':v; harmless from all liabilities that may arise directly or indirectly from the parade of special event approved by the granting of this permit. I understand some events may require off-duty or reserve officers and a fee may be required for these services. Signature (J Date Approved: D Remarks: Denied: □ By: Q ' Hie I (f Date:March 22,2000 To:Lin Vee. City Clerk From:Garv Chesvvick, Chief of Police Subject:Special Event Permit I have reviewed the application for a special event permit submitted by Gear West. I have no objection to the permit being issued, providing it is understood if traffic control is r.ecessary, an off duty officer will be needed (if a reserve officer is not available). To hire an officer, cost is $50 per hour per officer (two hour minimum). KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION Effective January 1, 200 _to December 31, 200 __ Owner: cv Property Address: dPv^Co Pr>ir>-V "^o?sC^ f\\^ S539 (include city and zip) Mailing Address (if different):___________________________________________ Phone: (home)^/^. J-J7 J- OfS O ^ (work) RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Fee: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time:______^ (over 6 months of age) Principal Breed: '^v f iT 404 - Z^ob Purpose for more than 2 dogs: 5 koco _____ Dogs normally kept: ____inside ^^^'^ennel structure COMMERCIAL Kennel License Fee: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: Business Activities:_______________________________________ (example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name) (phone) jjog runs/exercise areas are:inside outside both The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigned hereby grants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. 3/b / ZcszrO Date For City Use OnN Kennel inspected by Recommends: Approval Denial Date REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION nniiMrti MAR 2 7 2000 cn Y OF ORONO DATE: March 24,2000 ITEM NO; Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title Cin Administrator Administrator Reviewed: /f Agenda Section: Cit>' Administrator's Report Item Description: Kevin Garnett Application for Kennel License at 450 Orono Orchard Road South Kevin Garnett has applied for a kennel license to allow the keeping of 9 dogs on the property at 450 Orono Orchard Road South. The dogs are Rottweilers, Mastiffs and Pit Bulls. Staff has two concerns regarding the application. First is the large number of dogs. The second is the ability of the property owner to ensure the dogs are secured on the property. The City normally provides kennel licenses to residential properties for 3-4 dogs. When the number of dogs is as large as 9, the Council may want to consider the potential affect on neighboring properties. The owners of dogs have the responsibility to keep them within their control or secured on the property. Attached is a letter from a neighboring property owner expressing concerns regarding the ability of the existing fence to ensure the dogs are secured on the property. Attached also is a letter from the Police Chief regarding the application. Staff recommends that if the Council approves the application, the approval be subject to adequate security of the dogs as approved by the Police Chief; and making it clear that negative impacts on the neighboring properties, such as noise, could result in the revocation of the kennel license. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the Kevin Garnett application for a ketmel license at 450 Orono Orchard Road South, with conditions if desired. Owner:Ke KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION Effective January 1, 200_to December 31, 200 0 i/\n G c\r Property Address (mclude city and zip) Mailing Address (if different): Uo\ C&v"\so»sj fv<K> Phone: (home)_________________________(work) (o[0-'y a RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Fee: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time:______ (over 6 months of age) . r i n t ! Principal Breed: t.o’&ilpc^ M 0 i i I DO /! Purpose for more than 2 dogs:__ Dogs normally kept: ^^Inside kennel stnicmre IfiSlide.. C0MMERCL4L Kennel License Fee: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: Business Activities:_______________________________________ (example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, reciil. etc.) Normal Business Hours: _____________________ After Hours Contact: (name) (phone) Dog runs/exercise areas are:inside y outside Vboth The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigned hereby grants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requiremenisof Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special conditions, jmposed by the^City CounciTH^part of any kennel license approval. Applicant Dat; ! For City Use Only Kennel inspected by Recommends: Approval X Denial Dati Orono, March 14*, 2000 To: City of Orono Legal department From: Frans R Van Woensel Hanlon Avenue 520 Orono Subject: Official complaint RSCEiVHD MAR 1 6 2000 Cl IY Or OnOiVO Dear Sirs: Hereby 1 file an official complaint related to the presence of nine, in my opinion, fighter dogs on the property of Mr. Kevin Gametl, which property is adjacent to Hanlon Avenue, in the absence of the proper* kennel licenses. It is my opinion that these dogs pose a significant threat to the children and adults. Not only do I believe they not sufficiently trained, but 1 believe they are not properly cared for, and will therefore turn agressive at some point in time. Furthermore, the gate surrounding the property of Mr. Garnett, is insufficiently high to guarantee confinement of the fighter dogs to his property. In my opinion this situation is a timebomb waiting to explode. It has come to my attention that more complaints have been made regarding these dogs, and therefore I believe it is time for the authorities to act to avoid liability to certain parties in case one of the dogs escapes and attacks somebody. Today my wife did not dare to take our paper out of the mailbox, because two dogs, leaning with their fi’oat legs on the top of the fence, were barking and expressed e.xtreme aggressive behavior, three feet away firom the mailboxes. I have a nine month old child, which will not be safe this summer, if nothing is done. Children walk along the fence each day on their way to the school bus. as this bus does not stop near Hanlon Avenue. 1 have send this letter to be signed upon receipt, to make sure this serious problem catches somebody ’s attention and proper steps are taken. I would furthermore like to receive written notice of the steps the citt; is planning to undertake in response to this letter, even in the event that the city plans no action. Sincerely yours. J Frans Vanwoensel 520 Hanlon Avenue 55391 MN Orono Tel: 612-404-0583 TO;Ron Moorse FROM; Chief Cheswick DATE; March 24, 2000 SUBJECT; Garnett Kennel License Kevin Garnett had purchased the property at 450 Orono Orchard Road that consists of 14-3/4 acres with outbuildings. While remodeling of the home is taking place, Mr. Garnett or his handler, Mr. Manson, has brought out to the property eight or nine large dogs described as follows; 3 German Rottweilers, 1 American Rottweiler, 2 pit bulls, 2 Mastiffs, and 1 Rottweiler-Mastiff mix. Since December 1999, the police department has received several phone calls and a letter of complaint from neighbors regarding the excessive number of large dogs as well as the concern by two neighbors of their fear of these types of dogs. An inspection of the property was conducted by Community Service Officer Ron Hendricks and myself Observation of the property showed that it is secured by a 6-foot w ire fence between the Garnett property and 360 Orono Orchard Road, the home to the north. This same fence then continues across the east side of the property to the south comer at Dickenson Street. At this point, the fence decreases in height to 4 feet and then continues west to the bam where the kennels are kept. There is no fence from that point north along Orono Orchard Road to 360 Orono Orchard Road. As 1 continued to observ e the 4-foot fence, I noted several points of concern. The first is that the 4-foot fence would not provide much of a deterrent if a large dog w anted to get out. Secondly, there is a gate on the south fence that is only 3 to 3-1/2 feet high that decreases the height even more. Finally, kenneling of these many dogs has not been allowed in Orono in past history due to concerns of neighbors having to deal w ith excessive noise, cleanliness, and dogs running at large. If City Council allow s this kennel license, the recommendation of the Orono Police Department is that the home owner provide for a minimum of a 6-foot fence installed completely around the property where the dogs will be allowed to roam. In addition, excessive barking complaints may result in revocation of this license. Gehrman Animal Hospital 12720 WAY2ATA BLVD.. MINNETONKA. MN 55305 545*9161 HI 1 CHARLES F GEHRMAN. D.V.M ROBERT S. GEHRMAN. D.V.M. ^ KIRCHGESSNER. D.V.M.. March 27, 2000 To Whom it might concern. CHARLES and LORAL I DELANEY 8404 161 St Avenue N.W. Anoka. Minnesota 55303 Tel: (612) A2JM71 To Whom It May Concern: The four Rottweilers (Gotti, Pun, Precious and Trigger) owned by Kevin Garnett and handled by Fred Manson have spent several , months at our kennel for boarding and training. The training received by the four Rottweilers was Basic Pet Obedience. All four dogs were doing well at obedience and demonstrated no signs of aggression towards other dogs or people whatsoever. We have never witnessed any signs of abuse towards Gotti, Pun, Precious or Trigger and we feel Fred Manson is a very dedicated capable dog handler. Gehrman Animal Hospital 12720 WAYZATA BLVO.. MINNETONKA, MN SS30S 545-9161§ CHARLES f. GEHRMAN. O.V M URB ROBERT S. GEHRMAN. O.V.M. K.P. KIRCHGESSNER. D.V.M. March 27,2000 To whom it may concern; We the receptionists at Gehrman Aniinal Hospital. P.A. would like to share our point of view on Mr. Kevin Garnett ’s dogs. Our personal fee'ing Is that (Pun. Gotti. Trigger, and Precious) are very well trained dogs that have never shown any aggression towards another client or their animal. They are very docile dogs — basically oversized lap dcgs. They are not a bit unruly. Fred (Mr. Garnett ’s personal dog trainer) has kept them very well trained and cared for. Mr.Gamett recently purchased five new pupoies (Nature. Mimi, Zeus, Ex and Eve) as Fred is currently training the dogs to be every bit as well benaved and docile as the adult dogs. They are very sweet and under control. We feel thai these dogs, while many of them, are well loved and under strict control. Mr. Garnett has been bringing his dogs to our hospital for boarding, vaccinations and various forms of medical attention that they require. When the dogs are boarded here Fred brings in special food for the dogs and proceeds to walk and continually train the dogs. Sincerely. Pcl^ob co up the Receptionists at the Gehrman Animal Hospital. P.A. March 25,2000 ..^p 9 7 2000 City of Orono Pkmmgi^eauBia^teR \^n0t%'0 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Dear Sirs: 1 have this date signed a circulating petition requesting the denial of a permit for a kennel license for the property located at 450/460 Old Orchard Road in the City of Orono. There are currently some nine dogs running on this property at various times. The property is not completely fenced and the dogs have never been restrained. And they are at times completely unsupervised. Such fence as does exist is not adequate to provide a barrier for dogs. Nor is it likely that it would ever be made suitable. This is a residential neighborhood of comfortable homes and a large number of dogs inhabiting this tract ifi not appropriate, nor is it desired by adjacent property owners. It is certain that degradation of property values and a loss in enjoyment of property would result. I urgently request that any such kennel permit for this location be clearly and expressly denied. Please make no further contribution to an already undesirable situation. Sincerely, ^ Nadine M. McGuire 315 Woodhill Road Wayzata MN 55391 March 26, 2000 City of Orono Planning Cijnmiisjiiott 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Dear Sirs: ‘■:q 9 7 9r..in v-' IV 0 A petition was recently circulated requesting denial of a kennel license for the property located at 450 Old Orchard Road in Orono. We enthusiastically signed the petition. We live in one of only three houses that directly abut the property in question, we are, of course, very concerned with what does occur or might occur there. The request for a kennel license does not bode well for our peace of mind. This tract was recently fenced on three of the fr... ides uith a fence that is completely out of character for the neighborhood. To my knowledge, this i\pe fence exists nowhere else in the county, and rightly so. And it is far from dog-proof. One side is about three and one half feet high and constitutes no appreciable barrier for a large dog. Along the rest of the fence several places have low spots where dogs could easily pass under with very little additional tunneling, an activity frequently engaged in by most dogs. At times we see a large group of dogs; up to nine, I believe, and some are very large; wandering about the property and frequently patrolling the fence line. Sometimes they are accompanied by a person, and sometimes they are unaccompanied and completely unrestrained. Why they do not occasionally exit the property via the unfenced Old Orchard Road side I do not knou. And for that matter they may well have already done so. I cannot conceive of anyone wanting to live next to or near a large group of dogs. No neighbor, regardless of proximity, would want such thing. They inevitably turn noisy and unruly. The results can easily be seen as reducing property values and depriving us of the right to reasonable enjoyment of our property and surroundings. You can rest assured that no one moved here, or would move here, know ing that they would be living next to a large dog encampment. We urge you to reject forthright any such kennel license application, and to do so in a positive manner that leaves no question as to intent. I b''lieve a meeting on this subject is scheduled for the coming week. Unfortunately a recent medical emergency prevents me from attending. Please use this letter in lieu of perstmal input from this household. Thank vou. Sincerely, Larrv C. McGuire June A. McGuire 2130 Dicken.son Street Wayzata MN 55391 1 j)l' ph 952-449-9603 --rC'Tjv-rn March 25, 2000 VAR ? 7 2000 Ciiy of Orono Planning €ommicciott 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Dear Sirs: I have signed a petition being circulated that requests denial of a kennel pennil for that piece of property located at 450/460 Old Orchard Road in the City of Orono. Some nine dogs ctirrently run unrestrained, and sometimes completely unsupervised, on this tract that is only partially, and inadequately, fenced Please do not contribute to any further degradation of pro|^rty values nor to a lessening of our ability to enjoy our property. Make a clear and definite denial of the request for this permit. Sincerely, Dr. William W. McGuire 1255 Woodhill Avenue Wayzata MN 55391 Ln.,, MAR ? 7 2000 Let us once again sum up the character of the Rottweiler and it’s pffhcipal features: He is a faithful and obedient dog, loyal to home and master, possessing medium temperament and sharpness; a bold and fearless dog who keeps the peace for a long time, but in case of need attacks swiftly and without regard for consequences, who combines joy in battle with readiness to guard, but soon changes to a peaceful mood and possesses firmness of nerves in all situations, that is the Rottweiler. There is one thing that he is not: he is not a dog to be kept in captivity or on a chain. Naturally one can occasionally keep even a Rottweiler in captivity or tie but if this is done all the time his characterhim up for a short time. will be ruined. The more he can be in the company of men, the more intimate the family relationship, the more firmly does he attach himself to man, and the more do the good, useful and aimable sides of his character reveal themselves. Thus there arises as Paul Eipper has so well expressed it, "A beautiful relationship based on reciprocity which may grow and deepen in an ummaginable degree." It has come to our attention that Kevin Garmett is applying for a kennel license for his 9 rottweiler/mastif dogs. The city of Orono requires residents who wish to have more than 2 dogs to apply for a kennel license. These are routinely passed. If you are concerned about this matter as others are please sign a petition to voice your opinion and show up and the Council meeting at 7:00 on Monday. With out your voice we face a time bomb that could effect us forever. This could effect your well being and yoiu property values. Petition against the kennel lisence At Orono Orchard Rd We the residents to Minnetonka Bluff and surrounding area neighborhoods oppose the kennel license being applied for at 450 Orono Orchard Rd. And want the City Of Orono to enforce the two dog maximum on the property. If at any time the numbers to the dogs Is over the two dog maximum we require the city to have permission to remove the animals. Name Address Phone 2> Z.O o/Zo^Jg o^C.GU/ivZjr^ ^”7S-<o2.o<^ ----- 5"3T (X^J^ . 7 . >/. cjcpc/a'be I ^2c> f o r. ^^^e 8.7^. ^d-~' 9_ n^v UfidiUpYx 'c^5 Pi (Jzjir&on 11.1'X^UL^Ticy yiV-^vlctcvuL, 3 /S' liJc^>vC^<lCC 12. y )Ca jX ^ ^ A\/Pc-t i ^ ___ ^ “^O ''^<XAAj2wOV\^ 14. JAfr-TlAy' 15. VctttqStories I2?S hickiQi<s^ 9^ 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. ^?S -35TVj5 Voc^ - o's<S^ ^1 % - V(55^ - 9 c o j -9^^ y. <Tj S ^ A73 -T IS*- Orono, March 14'**, 2000 To: City of Orono Legal department From: Frans H. Van Woensel Hanlon Avenue 520 Orono Subject: Official complaint Dear Sirs: Hereby I file an official complaint related to the presence of nine, in my opinion, fighter dogs on the property of Mr. Kevin Garnett, which property is adjacent to Hanlon Avenue, In the absence of the proper kennel licenses. It is my opinion that these dogs pose a significant threat to the children and adults. Not only do I believe they not sufficiently trained, but I believe they are not properly cared for, and will therefore turn agressive at some point in time. Furthermore, the gate surrounding the property of Mr. Garnett, is insufficiently high to guarantee confinement of the fighter dogs to his property. In my opinion this situation is a timebomb waiting to explode. It has come to my attention that more complaints have been made regarding these dogs, and therefore I believe it is time for the authorities to act to avoid liability to certain parties in case one of the dogs escapes and attacks somebody. Today my wife did not dare to take our paper out of the mailbox, because two dogs, leaning with their front legs on the top of the fence, were barking and expressed extreme aggressive behavior, three fe^ away from the mailboxes. I have a nine month old child, which will not be safe this summer, if nothing is done. Children walk alijnj the fence each day on their way to the school bus, as this bus does not stop near Hanlon Avenue. 1 have send this letter to be signed upon receipt, tu make sure this serious problem ca,cnes somebody's attention and proper steps are taken. I would furthermore like to receive written notice of the steps the city is planning to undertake in response to this letter, even in the event that the city plans no action. Sincaely yours. Frans VanwoenscI 520 Hanlon Avenue 55391 MN Orono Tel: 612-404-0583 lyionday 7 September 1998 Dog attack... - City - The Ottawa Citizen Online http://www.ottawacitizen.eom/city/980907/1987367.html Ottawa Citizen Online City Index p” GO -Site Index-F \ •*mm Ottawa Citizen I: ■' I c l: = /J.V.-_'---M I ^rcmivhj I'OTTAWA CITIZEN Planning a vacation? Try the OS.iSGifiedj Archives Search Monday 7 faptember 1998 Dog attack sends man to hospital Vicious animal attacks two men, kills Sheltie near balloon festival Jake Rupert The Ottawa Citizen A pitbull/Rottweiler crossbreed dog that attacked and killed a Sheltie before attacking two men, is scheduled to be killed this week. The incident happened in the backyard of 103 Jacques Cartier St. in Gatineau at about 11 p.m. Saturday. The area faces the park where the hot air ballon festival is taking place, and several people had gathered there to watch the festival's fireworks. One man was injured while trying to rescue the Sheltie and had to be taken to the Gatineau hospital whore doctors operated to repair several gashes and ligament damage. He is still there and is listed in stable condition. Several people witnessed the attack, and police were ca'Ied to deal with the animal. Police say after several minutes of trying to corral the dog, which was trying to bite officers, the animal was finally cornered. The Gatineau Humane Society picked it up and took it to the pound, where it was to remain until being destroyed. After the dog was caught, police determined the dog was owned 1 of2 3/25/00 8:47 AM Monday 7 September 1998 Dog attack ... • City - The Ottawa Citizen OnDne htlp;/Awww.ottawacitizen.com/cjty/980907/196y367.htnril by a chip stand operator who was working on the fe.stival grounds about 200 metres away. The man told police he usually keeps the dog tied up, but it broke its chain and ran off at about 10 p.m. When the officer told him what his dog had done, he agreed the best thing to was to kill it. The injured man was visiting from out of town. He name is not being released. I ^P.OUT I c:iy I 1=?_RTS I =1J3,!N=S3 | MATICNAl | VyQRLD E iTER7A:-.V E-~ | 5IOC:-<SAl’.jJi.:A.S. | 'TSS-.ET | C^-53:F;ED | SEARCH | A9C hiV£3 Pra^ orcriiicism? Give us your REECE ack Copyright 1999 Th« Ottawa Citizen 2 of 2 3/25/00 8 47 AM protecting children http://wwwpets-unleashed.com/protectchildren.htm Unlaasheai V/ t M1 e -T s M i_*cl . c o; i U-1n I ■V»^ I 1 II Si ■A f II 1 of2 3/25/00 9 00 AM protectinQ. children http://www.pets-unleashed.com/protectchildren.htm ■••V , ■ '■ •' 'V* ■ '■% ■ • . ■ :vv v;iW .. ■■■A:; ■ "‘..V '' 'i ' •‘:'i . * ’ ■ .>:■ V* . •r ■'V. 't' rU-»•fe- 1. 2 of 2 3/25/OQ 9:00 AM tlewsNet^ • - Family Of Boy Mauled Sues Fence Company wysiwyg://21/htlp;//newschannel5CC0...ews/stories/news-980514-1 95723 html * e it) v v V/i/ in 0 riles yellowpages ) Win! nm , . SoecialAssignment The Investigator 7 ro’jbleshooter Yc’jr Health Digital Daily Akron Mev/sroom Hometown Heroes rievvsstan J .'lews Tips A3C Hev/s NIW5 WLAIMIR 5PORIS DtMOCHACY 2000 YOUR lURN MONLY rtCIINOlOCY HLALMI RLCAUS <4 5AKIY LNriRIAINMLNI FAMILY ft RLCtPlS lOUCATlON NLW5CHANNLl4i ; -COMMIRCL CARLLR PAIH APAHIMLNIS COM JU5I CO CVRSCOM home rmail iNich fit* map daily futnmafy *' Family Of Boy Mauled Sues Fence Company Jacobs* Attorney Says Fence Company Withheld Information CLEVELAND. Posted 8:52 p.m. May 14,1998 ~ A lawyer for a boy mauled by a dog that ran through an invisible fence is accusing the fence manufacturer of fraud for allegedly withholding information about an earlier lawsuit. A Rottweiler tore off the left ear of Joey Jacobs of suburban Chagrin Falls while he was helping two friends by distracting the charging dog in December 1993. Joey, who was 9 at the time of the attack, and his mother, Kathy C'^rroll, sued , • - . ^ f C t in 1996 in U.S. District Court and reached a settlement last summer. The family's attorney, James Lowe, said Invisible Fence withheld information about another lawsuit and settlement. Lowe filed a new lawsuit in federal court Friday, accusing the company of fraud. The lawsuit asks for $2.5 million as compensation for the boy's injuries and $2.5 million as punishment for the company. A judge will decide whether the fraud case should go forward. Jim Staples, a spokesman for Invisible Fence, based In Berwyn, Pa., said company officials would review the lawsuit but had no immediate comment. Check These Sites For Information On Stopping Dog Attacks: • T • - ^-4 -S'" 2 AlAT w I duel ccrvice iS “ Tips on protecting children. Copyright 1998 by The Associated Press AbVtltTiUNS^ 1 of 2 3/25/00 8:40 AM DOG OWNERSHIP LAWS FAIL TO CURTAIL FATAL ATTACKS http;//www.idir net/-wolf2dog/Anicle2.htm DOG OWNERSHIP LAWS FAIL TO CURTAIL FATAL ATTACKS The Washington Post, Tuesday, June 11 1996; Page Z05 Laws that restrict the ownership of certain breeds of dogs but fail to address the actions of their owners are likely to be ineffective in reducingthe number of fatal dog attacks, according to a study by federal health officials published in the current issue of the journal Pediatrics. Physician Jeffrey J. Sacks, an injury prevention specialist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and his colleagues analyzed data from 109 deaths caused by dog bites reported between 1989 and 1994. Using data compiled by the National Center for Health Statistics and the Humane Society of the United States, Sacks and his team found that while certain breeds of dog, most notably pit bulls. Rottweilers and German shepherds, are more often involved in fatal and non-fatal attacks, the problem is not confined to those animals, because many breeds bite. Fifty-seven percent of Americans killed by dogs were under the age of 10. In 11 attacks an infant less than 4 weeks old was killed while sleeping in a bed or crib. California, Texas and Illinois had the largest number of fatal attacks, while six states reported no dog bite deaths. There were more fatalities in the South than in any other region and fewest in the Northeast. The majority of attacks involved one dog, while 6 percent involved three to seven. In attacks on children between the ages of 1 and 9, 45 percent involved an unrestrained dog on the owner’s property; 29 percent occurred when a child wandered too close to a chained dog. Of the 41 fatal attacks in which there was detailed information about the animal, 25 involved a male dog, of which 20 were unneutered. Many dogs involved in fatal attacks had a history of previous aggression. Reducing the number of dog bites, the authors note, may require guidance from pediatricians as well as more stringent animal control laws that target "chronically irresponsible dog owners." Dog bites, they write, are a major, largely overlooked public health problem that has received far less attention than playground injuries. Parents should be instructed by pediatricians to choose a dog carefully and to have it neutered to reduce aggressive tendencies. Infants and young children should never be left alone vwth an animal, regardless of the breed. In addition, parents should be told that aggressive games such as wrestling or getting an animal to "sic" are potentially dangerous. Children should be taught never to approach a strange dog. never to play with a dog unless supervised by an adult and to avoid direct eye contact with 1 of2 3^5/00 8 26 AM Preventing Dog Attacks http;/^vvvw.animalgeneralhosp^tal.com/column8/petdoc063096.ht^1l • Scx:ialize your dog so that it feels at ease around people and other animals. • Don't put your dog in situations where it may feel threatened or teased. Taking a young, untrained, unsociaiized dog into a crowd is asking for trouble. On parade day, leave your puppy at home. This goes double for snakes and iguanas. • Obey leash laws - don't let your dog roam. When it's time to go for a walk, a dog on a leash can more easily be controlled when you meet a stranger, especially a child. • If a youngster reaches to pet your dog and frightens him, you can use the lease to pull the dog out of the child's reach. • Train your dog to respond to basic commands such as "stay," "leave it" and "come." • Maintain good health with proper vaccinations and internal and external parasite control. • Be alert to signs that your dog is uncomfortable or feeling aggressive or threatened. • Never leave a baby or small child alone with a dog. • Teach young children to be careful around pets. Children should be taught not to approach strange dogs and to ask permission from a dog's owner before petting the dog. • Never disturb a dog that has puppies or is sleeping or eating. Suppose you're alone with a dog you don't know; how do you protect yourself? Remember, all dogs can bite if provoked. 2 of 3 3/2SA» 8:29 AM Preventing Dog Attacks 3of3 http://Www.animtfgeneralhO8pital.com/columns/petdoc063098.httnl • Don't run away. Be still until the dog loses interest in you and leaves. If you must move, back away slowly until you're out of the dog's sight. Avoid eye contact and remain calm. Try to keep your fear hidden. • If you fall or are knocked to the ground, minimize injury by curling into a ball, placing your hands over your head and neck and protecting your face. Force objects of clothing or accessories between you and the attacking dog such as your purse, your jacket or your bicycle. Children can be taught skills to avoid dog bites through an Auburn University College of Veterinary Medicine activity book, "Fido: Friend or Foe?," available from State Farm Insurance Company by visiting these Web sites: or Other Internet sites of interest regarding dog bite avoidance include The Human Society of the United States, !. i: :; Centers for Disease Control, ; and Dog^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ‘O''' - -f ^^ • • Owner ’s Guide,d $ * i t i Z* Z. I .« I . w • • Next Column 3/2SAX) 8:29 AM Qehrman Animal Hospital 12720 WAYZATA BLVO., MINNETONKA. MN SS305 S45-9161 CHARLES F. QEHRMAN. O.V.M. ROBERT S. QEHRMAN. O.V.M. K.P. KIRCHQESSNER, O.V.M.. March 27, 2000 To Whom it might concern. This letter is to indicate that Nr. Kevin Oamett and his staff have dMionstrated to our office a caring concern for their pets. They ask questions about preventive pet care, keep necessary vaccinations and lab procedures current, and if aa animal is sick or injured it is attended to promptly. When the dogs have been boarded at our hospital, they have been frequently excerised by a staff member of Mr. Oamett's. Fred seems to CHARLES and LORAL I DELANEY 8404 161st Avenue N.W. Anoka, Minnesota 55303 Tel: (612) 427 1777 To Whom It May Concern: The four Rottweilers (Gotti, Pun, Precious and Trigger) owned by Kevin Garnett and handled by Fred Manson have spent several . months at our kennel for boarding and training. The training received by the four Rottweilers was Basic Pet Obedience. All four dogs were doing well at obedience and demonstrated no signs of aggression towards other dogs or people whatsoever. We have never witnessed any signs of abuse towards Gotti, Pun, Precious or Trigger and we feel Fred Manson is a very dedicated capable dog handler. Qehrman Animal Hospital 12720 WAYZATABLVO . MINNETONKA. MN 55305 545-9161 CHARLES F. QEHRMAN. D.V.M. ROBERTS. QEHRMAN. D.V.M. K.P. KIRCHQESSNER. O.V.M.. March 27.2000 To whom it may concern: We the receptionists at Gehrman Animal Hospital. P.A. would like to share our point of view on Mr. Kevin Garnett ’s dogs. Our personal feeling is that (Pun, Gotti. Trigger, and Precious) are very well trained dogs that have never shown any aggression towards another client or their animal. They are very docile dogs - basically oversized lap dogs. They are not a bit unruly. Fred (Mr. Garnett ’s personal dog trainer) has kept them very well trained and cared for. Mr.Gamett recently purchased five new puppies (Nature. Mimi, Zeus, Ex and Eve) as Fred is currently training the dogs to be every bit as well behaved and docile as the adult dogs. They are very sweet and under control. We feel that these dogs, while many of them, are well loved and under strict control. Mr. Garnett has been bringing his dogs to our hospital for boarding, vaccinations and various forms of medical attention that they require. When the dogs are boarded here Fred brings in special food for the dogs and proceeds to walk and continually train the dogs. Sincerely, The RecepBonists at the Gehrman Animal Hospital. P.A. t •-'n tlAR 2 7 2GOO March 27,2000 till t ur UriOiWO Dear Orono Planning Committee: 1 am writing this letter in regards to the kennel license requested at 460 Orchard Road. 1 am strongly opposed to licensing a kennel in our neighborhood community; it would disrupt our quiet neighborhood and would lead to more traffic. Please do not grant this license. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Tamara Strandberg law mill ■■■■!■ ami i^iii i mi i iini i ■ 11 ■Mfiiiiii .................rnaiHir Ml^laii^iiaiif i-al f Mar-2r-00 I2;08 pi Fron-UNITED HEALTHCARE FAX SHEET 6129360044 T-490 P 31/02 F-745 UnitedHealth Group David J, Lubben Office of the General Counsel UnitedHealth Group MN008-8302 9900 Bren Road East Minnetonka MN 55343 Tel 613 936 1854 Fax 612 936 0044 Date; March 27, 2000 To: The Honorable Gabriel Jabbour and Council Members From: David Lubben Fax: 249-4616 Number of Page(s): 2 (page(s) total, Including this cover sheet) ' Re: Kevin Garnett Application for Kennel License at 450 Orono Orchard Road South Please contact Wendy Bennis at 612.936.1876 if facsimile transmission is incomplete or cannot be read. Marr*27-00 12:08pin Fron-UNITED HEALTHCARE 612:330044 T-490 P 02/02 F-745 UnitedHealth Group March 27. 2000 David J Lubhan Cercrat Counted MNOOa*8302 i-ZZO Road East Mirrifiionla MN 55R43 Th!ol2 936 lie* Eii 6^2 936 Q04‘1 clavid..^lubbfi^'Srjhc.cc/ti The Honorable Gabriel Jabbour and Council Members City of Orono 2750 Kelly Parkway Orono, MN 55323 VIA FACSIMILE Re: Kevin Garnett Application for Kennel License at 450 Orono Orchard Road South Dear Mr. Jabbour and Council Members: I write on behalf of the property owners of 1250 Woodhill Avenue, a corporate house owned by UnitedHealthcare, of which I am an officer. We are vehemently opposed to the granting of this kennel license for nine dogs, which is extremely excessive. The operation of a kennel with nine adult dogs, and potentially many more under the age of six months, in the heart of a residential community would be a clear encroachment upon the quality of life of other residents within the neighborhood. I would find it difficult to believe that it Is the spirit or intent of Orono’s licensing guidelines to allow for a kennel of this size. Clearly, maintaining a kennel as proposed will result in a devaluation of properties within the neighborhood. It is respectfully requested that this kennel license be denied. If you have questions or wish to discuss this matter further, I invite you to call me at my office; 612.936.1854 or on my mobile phone: 612.865.5036. Thank you for your consideration. David J. Lubb DJL:wkb OJ/27/2000 12:46 9042855218 FV .XUB REALTY PA<5E 01 ooo fhfn 1 ^t>lL A^n / ooK'L ; *^arf" O^A^auAt OS'^rr ?'Lo (lAnst 6 '.,€nne 620 iScenii. ^p>pC^lTer> VJi <3r^ oppoS'-fe <^,onfTr^ liVeu^ 'll) OUV ore.'ne?^bor 5tAf/( C^(^e(/> Uj^ UJou/Ji *«? O j^q L <^^-i ^ , , . "TTcJe- ^ etojyidsv'i.'T^'-'^ <^^^Ca\cO i . CHX :^as& e Ait.A 0'iW)n L... 24 Mar 2000 ?ti 12t34 PM Check Register City of orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 61023 61023 ALISSA NINTERHEIMER 23-Har-OO ALISSA NINTERHEIMER Totals Check Number 61023 ALISSA NINTERHEIMER Check Number 61024 AT t T - 61024 61024 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO AT 6 T AT a T Totals Check Number 61024 AT & T - Check Number 61025 AT a T NIRELESS SERVICES 6102S 24-Maz-OO AT a T NIRELESS SERVICES Totals Check Number 61025 AT a T NIRELESS SERVICES Check Number 61026 BBRETTA USA 61026 24-Mar-OO BERBTTA USA Totals Check Number 61026 BERETTA USA Check Number 61027 BLACXONIAK a SON 61027 61027 61027 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO BLACKONIAK a SON BLACKONIAK a SON BLACKONIAK a SON Totals Check Number 61027 BLACKONIAK a SON Uieck Number 61028 BUDGET PRINTING 61028 61028 23- Mar-OO 24- Mar *0 BUDGET PRINTING BUDGET PRINTING Totals Check Number 61028 BUDGET PRINTING Check Number 61029 CHAMPION AUTO STORES 61029 24-Mar-OO CHAMPION AUTO STORES Totals Check Number 61029 CHAMPION AUTO STORES Check Number 61030 CITY OF LONG LAKE 61030 23-Mar-OO CITY OF LONG LAKE noi iMrii meeting MAR 2 7 2000 Page 1 Transaction CITY OF ORONO Amount Comments 175.00 175.00 25.68 33.84 59.52 11.83 11.83 200.00 200.00 191.72 19.73 78.90 290.35 5.39 29.30 34.69 23.42 23.42 2,250.00 MINUTES - CC 3/13/00 LONG DISTANCE FEES LONG DISTANCE FEES CELL PHONE CHARGES ARMORER TRNINQ COURSE GARBAGE SERVICE GARBAGE SERVICE GARBAGE SERVICE SHIPPING TO UNIFORMS ULM DRAINFIELD SIGNS FLOOR MATS 8422 1/2 EHLERS INV-CONSOLIDTN i * 24 Mar 2000 Pri 12:34 PM Check Register City of Orono Check MUsiber Date Name Check tfumber 61030 61030 CITY OP LONG LAKE 24-Mar-00 CITY OP LONG LAKE Totals Check Number 61030 CITY OF LONG LAKE Check Number 61031 CITY OP MOUND 61031 24-Msr-OO CITY OF MOUND Totals Check Nuntber 61031 CITY OF MOUND Check Number 61032 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH 61032 23-Mar-OO CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH Totals Check Number 61032 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH Check Number 61033 DCA 61033 61033 23- Mar-OO 24- Mar-OO DCA DCA Totals Check Number 61033 DCA Check Number 61034 DE LISH 61034 23-Mar-OO DE LISH Totals Check Number 61034 DE LISH Check Number 61035 DELL 61035 24-Mar-OO DELL Totals Check Number 61035 DELL Check Number 61036 DELTA DENTAL 61036 61036 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO DELTA DENTAL DELTA DENTAL Totals Check Number 61036 DELTA DENTAL Check Number 61037 DEMBOUSKI, JAY 61037 24-Mar-OO DEMBOUSKI, JAY Totals Check Number 61037 DEMBOUSKI, JAY Transaction Amount 31.009.50 33.259.50 24.014.75 24.014.75 200.00 200.00 60.50 1.495.33 1.555.83 70.30 70.30 4.961.87 4.961.87 147.00 1.083.80 1.230.80 81.17 81.17 Page 2 Comments 2ND QTR FIRE PROT 2ND QTR FIRE PROT SET UP 2000 CHANGE FUND COBRA ADM 2/00 SPENDING ACCTS - 3/19/00 BOX LUNCH - KS 3/13 DELL PHI 500 DENTAL INS 4/00 DENTAL INS 4/00 MEALS - TRAINING 24 Kar 2000 Frl 12s34 PM Check Number Check Number €1038 Check Regiater City of Orono Date Name €1036 DEPT OF ADM - INTERTECH GROUP 24-Mar-OO DEPT OP ADM - INTERTECH GROUP Totals Check Number 61038 DEPT OF ADM - INTERTECH GROUP Check Number €1039 DEPUTY REGISTRAR €1039 24-Mar-OO DEPUTY REGISTRAR Totals Check Number 61039 DEPUTY REGISTRAR nieck Number 61040 ESS BROTHERS & SONS 61040 €1040 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO ESS BROTHERS k SONS ESS BROTHERS k SONS Totals Check Number €1040 ESS BROTHERS k SONS Check Number €1041 FEDEX 61041 €1041 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO FEDEX FEDEX Totals Check Number 61041 FEDEX nieck Number 61042 FORTIS BENEFITS €1042 :4-Mar-00 FCRTIS BENEFITS Totals Check Number 61042 fortis benefits C.*eck Number €1043 G & K SERVICES Check Number 61044 61044 €1044 QAPPA* GREG 23-Mar-OO 23-Mar-OO Totals Check Number GAPPA« GREG GAPPA, GREG 61044 GAPPA, GREG Check Number €1045 61045 GEO ANALYTICS 24-Mar-OO GEO ANALYTICS Transaction Amount 235.97 235.97 8.00 8.00 85.20 154.43 239.63 17.67 17.67 35.34 799.48 799.48 65.57 43.63 109.20 9.429.11 Page 3 Comments PHONE SERVICE TABS FOR 170 ADJ RINGS CATCH BASIN PACKET TO R FLINT PACKET TO R. FLINT LTD INSURANCE €1043 24-Hax-OO Q k K SdVICES 9.67 UNIFORM -STEFFENKAGEN €1043 24-Mar-OO G k K SERVICES 15.28 UNIFORM -RATHBUN €1043 24-Mar-OO G k K SERVICES 77.62 UNIFORMS Totals Check Nurber 61043 G k K SERVICES 102.57 MILEAGE REI^®URSE^^NT PROP RECORDS. RULE BKS LAND MGMT SOFTWARE 24 Har 2000 Prl 12:34 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Rumber Date Name Check Number 61045 QBO ANALYTICS Totals Check Number 61045 GEO ANALYTICS Check Number 61046 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. 61046 61046 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. Totals Check Number 61046 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. Check Number 61047 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE 61047 23-Mar-OO HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE Totals Check Number 61047 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE Check Number 61048 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 61048 23-Mar-OO HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF Totals Check Number 61048 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF Check Number 61049 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 61049 23-Mar-OO HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Totals Check Number 61049 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Check Number 61050 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS. 61050 61050 61050 61050 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS Totals Check Number 61050 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS. Check Number 61051 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN 61051 23-Mar-OO HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN Totals Check Number 61051 HBINEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN Check Nu-'ber 61052 INFRATFCH 61052 24-Mar-OO INFRATECH Totals Check Number 61052 INFRATECH Transaction Amount 9,429.11 11.37 11.38 22.75 100.06 100.06 90.57 90.57 341.17 341.17 790.50 274.05 90.00 60.00 1,214.55 47.38 47.38 152.95 152.95 Page 4 Comments LOCATES 2/2000 LOCATES 2/2000 sumn GRASS seed RADIO REPAIR STOP SIGNS SPEC ASMNT SERV CHRG SPEC ASMNT SERV CHRG SPEC ASMNT SERV CHRG SPEC ASMNT SERV CHRG TAX BOOKS SAFETY VEST 24 Mar 2000 •ri 12:34 PM Check Nuinber Check Number 61053 Check Register Cit/ of Orono Page 5 Date Name 61053 INTERSTATE DETROIT DIESEL 23-Mar-00 INTERSTATE DETROIT DIESEL Totals Check Number 61053 INTERSTATE DETROIT DIESEL Check Number 61054 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC 61054 24-Mar-00 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Totals Check Number 61054 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Check Number 61055 LMCIT-BERKLEY ADMIN Check Number 61058 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT 61058 24-Mar-00 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT Totals Check Number 61058 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT Check Number 61059 MALEFI 61059 23-Mar-OO MALBFZ Totals Check Number 61059 MALEFI Check Number 61060 61060 MEDICA CHOICE 24-Mar-OO MEDICA CHOICE Transaction Amc*^t 14t.l3 14sM3 14:.53 14:.53 15“.:? iE-.:7 9:.:3 9:. 13 Comments TRANMISSION KITS VHS TAPES 61055 24-Mar-OO LMCIT-BERKLEY ADMIN 625.:3 LIQUOR LIAB INS 61055 24-Mar-OO LMCIT-BERKLEY ADMIN 18,845.:3 EXCESS LIABILITY INS 61055 2%-Mar-00 LMCIT-BERKLEY ADMIN 555.:3 PETRO FUND INS 61055 24-Mer-OO LMCIT-BERKLEY ADMIN 935.13 OPEN MEETING LAN INS 61055 24-.Mar-00 LMCIT-BERKLEY ADMIN 21.545.13 COMP MUNIC COV PYMNT ?1 Totals Check Number 61055 LMCIT-BERKLEY ADMIN 42«555.25 Check Number 61056 LOGIS 61056 24-Mar-OO LOGIS 2s:.:3 INSTAL REFLECTIONS-OTHER 61055 lO-Mar-00 LOGIS 4.211.::PIMS APPLIC DEC 99 Totals Check Nuinber 61056 LOGIS 4,451.:: Check Number 61057 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT 61057 24-Mar-OO LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT 41.44 CHAIN. OIL 61057 24-Mar-OO LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT 25.54 GASKETS, RING SET Totals Check Number 61057 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT €“.39 SNEEPER PARTS MALEFI CONF - T £CK MEDICA ELECT 4/00 r 24 Nar 2000 Fri 12:34 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Check Number Date Name 61060 HEDICA CHOICE Check Number 61061 MIND SHARP 61061 24-Mar-OO MIND SHARP Totals Check Number 61061 MIND SHARP Check Number 61062 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 61062 61062 23- Mar-OO 24- Mar-OO MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Totals Check Number 61062 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Check Number 61063 MN DEPT OF HEALTH 61063 24-Mar-OO MN DEPT OF HEALTH Totals Check Number 61063 MN DEPT OF HEALTH Check Number 61064 NATIONAL AITTOMATIC SPRINKLER 61064 23-Mar-OO NATIONAL AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER Totals Check Number 61064 NATIONAL AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER Check Number 61065 NSP Check Number 61066 OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY Transaction Amount 5,000.00 5,000.00 27.00 98.93 125.93 1,090.00 1,090.00 250.00 250.00 Page 6 Comments 61060 24-Mar-OO MEDICA CHOICE 2,022.30 MEDICA ELECT 4/00 61060 24-Mar-OO MEDICA CHOICE 202.23 MEDICA ELECT 4/00 61060 24-Mar-OO MEDICA CHOICE 606.69 MEDICA ELECT 4/00 61060 24-Mar-OO MEDICA CHOICE 202.23 MEDICA ELECT 4/00 61060 24-Mar-OO MEDICA CHOICE 3,879.50 MEDICA ELECT 4/00 61060 24-Mar-OO MEDICA CHOICE 202.22 MEDICA LOW 4/00 61060 24-Mar-OO MEDICA CHOICE 404.44 MEDICA LOW 4/00 61060 24-Mar-OO MEDICA CHOICE 558.62 MEDICA LOW 4/00 Totals Check Number 61060 MEDICA CHOICE 8,280.46 COMPUTER TRAINING oxyge:;, acetylene oxyge:l acetylene WTR CCN FEE 1/1-3/31/2000 ANNUAL FIRE EXT INSPECT 61065 24-Mar-OO NSP 492.43 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 61065 24-Mar-OO NSP 402.90 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 61065 24-Mar-OO NSP 124.34 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 61065 24-Mar-OO NSP 361.32 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 61065 24-Mar-OO NSP 163.51 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 61065 24-Mar-OO NSP 122.08 ELECTRICAL SERVICE Totals Check Number 61065 NSP 1,666.58 i 24 Mar 2000 Fri 12:34 PM Check Register City of Orono Page 7 Check Number Date Name Check Number 61066 61066 OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY 24-Mar-00 OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY Totals Check Number 61066 OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY Check Number 61067 PERSELL, WILLIAM 61067 24-Max-00 PBRSELL, WILLIAM Totals Check Number 61067 PERSELL, WILLIAM Check Number 6106S POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC. Transaction Amount Comments 233.99 233.99 TORCH 4.29 4.29 MEALS-DRIVINO SCHOOL 61068 24-Mar-OO POMERCLEAN COMPANY INC.1,441.93 CLEANING 61068 24-Mar-OO POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC.1,762.35 CLEANING Totals Check Number 61068 POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC.3,204.28 Check Number 61069 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE 61069 24-Mar-OO PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE 7.80 LIFE INSURANCE 3/00 61069 24-Mar-OO PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE 5.85 LIFE INSURANCE 3/00 61069 24-Mar-OO PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE 39.00 LIFE INSURANCE 3/00 61069 24-Mar-OO PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE 13.65 LIFE I*' URANCE 3/00 61069 24-Mar-OO PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE 3.90 LIFE INSURANCE 3/00 61069 24-Mar-OO PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE 15.60 LIFE INSURANCE 3/00 61069 24-Mar-OO PRUDENTI.\L LIFE INSURANCE 1.95 LIFE INSURANCE 3/00 61069 24-Mar-OO PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE 473.35 LIFE INSURANCE 3/00 61069 24-Mar-00 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE 16.45 LIFE INSURANCE 3/00 Totals Check Number 61069 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE 577.55 Check Number 61070 R.O.T.A. 61070 24-Mar-OO R.O.T.A.100.00 ROTA MBRSHP - 2000 Totals Check Number 61070 R.O.T.A.100.00 Oieck Number 61071 RC IDENTIFICATIONS 610*'l 24-Mar-OO RC IDENTIFICATIONS 3.19 ID CARDS 61071 24-Mar-OO RC IDENTIFICATIONS 3.20 ID CARDS Totals Check Number 61071 RC IDQITIFICATIONS 6.39 Check Number 61072 SAGE PUBLICATIONS 61072 24-Mar-OO SAGE PUBLICATIONS 25.00 PW MGKT AND POLICY SUBSC Totals Check Number 61072 SAGE PUBLICATIONS 25.00 24 Mar 2000 Fri 12:34 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check NunO»er 61073 61073 SHANK CONSTRUCTORS 24-Mar-00 SHANK CONSTRUCTORS Totals Check Number 61073 SHANK CONSTRUCTORS Check Number 61074 ST. CLOUD STATE UNIVERSITY 61074 24-Mar-OO ST. CLOUD STATE UNIVERSITY Totals Check Number 61074 ST. CLOUD STATE UNIVERSITY Check Number 61075 STATE TREASURER 61075 61075 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO STATE TREASURER STATE TREASURER Totals Check Number 61075 STATE TREASURER Check Number 61076 STREICHERS 61076 24-Mar-OO STREICHERS Totals Qieck Number 61076 STREICHERS Check Number 61077 SUBURBAN TIRE INC. 61077 24-Mar-OO SUBURBAN TIRE INC. Totals Check Number 61077 SUBURBAN TIRE INC. Check Number 61078 SUPERIOR FORD 61078 61078 61078 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO SUPERIOR FORD SUPERIOR FORD SUPERIOR FORD Totals Check Number 61078 SUPERIOR FORD Check Number 61079 TIM BUSSB 61079 23-Mar-OO TIM BUSSE Totals Check Number 61079 TIM BUSSE Check Number 61080 TOLL QAS k NELDINO SUPPLY 61080 24-Mar-OO TOLL QAS k WELDING SUPPLY Totals Check Number 61080 TOLL GAS k WELDING SUPPLY Transaction Amount 1.098.00 1.098.00 228.00 228.00 30.00 30.00 60.00 79.77 79.77 465.19 465.19 21.252.00 21.252.00 21.252.00 63.756.00 1.828.50 1.828.50 19.00 19.00 Page 6 Comments INSTALL VALVES-NVR PLNT DRIV3G SCHOOL-MCNICHOLS BLSG ZZZE SEMIXAR-DAVIS BLDG CCLE SEMINAR-OMAN BATON AND HOLDER 16- t:?.es CROWN *.*ICTORIA - SQD 189 CROWN -.^CTORIA - SQD 187 crow:; -/ictoria - sqd 188 CNSLOTJ; MTGS. NEWSLETTER NOZZLE I 1 24 Mar 2000 Fri 12:34 m Check Number Check Number 61081 61081 Check Regiater City of Orono Date Name 61081 TRACT TRIPP FUELS 24-Mar-OO TRACY TRIPP FUELS 24-Mar-00 TRACY TRIPP FUELS Totala Check Number 61081 TRACY TRIPP FUELS Tranaaction Amount 565.93 2«193.61 2«759.54 Page 9 Comnenta 500 GAL DIESEL 1587.1 GAL UNLEADED Check Number 61082 US WEST INTERPRISE 61082 23-Mar-OO US WEST INTERPRISE \ Totala Check Number t \ Check Number 61083 61082 US WEST INTERPRISE 61083 If.W. GRAINGER INC. 23-Mar-OO W.W. GRAINGER INC. Totala Check Number 61083 W.W. GRAINGER INC. 361.05 361.05 31.90 31.90 T1 DATA LINE SHOVEL Check Number 61084 WAYZATA BAY CAR WASH 61084 24-Mar-OO Totala Check Number WAYZATA BAY CAR WASH 61084 WAYZATA BAY CAR WASH 239.62 239.62 SO CAR WASH TICKETS Check Number 61085 61085 WESTONKA HEAIiTHY COM COLLABRTV 24-Mar-OO Totala Check Number WESTONKA HEALTHY CCM COLLABRTV 61085 WESTONKA HEALTHY COM COLLABRTV Check Number 61086 61086 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE 24-Mar-OO Totala Check Number WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE 61086 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE Check Number 61087 61087 61087 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO Totala Check Number WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC 61087 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Check Number 61088 61018 51088 YOUNGDAHL COMPANIES 24-Mar-OO 24-Mar-OO YOUNGDAHL COMPANIES YOUNGDAHL COMPANIES 25.00 25.00 106.50 106.50 25.91 7.99 33.90 565.00 910.00 COM DIRECTORY LISTING TIRE SEALER ELECTRICAL SERVICE ELECTRICAL SERVICE INS AGENT 2ND QTR INS AGENT 2ND QTR 24 Mar 2000 Pri 12t34 PH Check Register City of Orono Page 10 Check Number Date Name Transaction Amount Comments Check Number 61088 61088 61088 61088 YOUNGDAHL COMPANIES 24-Mar-00 YOUNGDAHL COMPANIES 24-Kar-OO YOUNGDAHL COMPANIES 24-Mar-00 YOUNGDAHL COMPANIES 75.00 175.00 75.00 INS AGENT 2ND QTR INS AGENT 2ND QTR INS AGENT 2ND QTR Totals Check Number 61088 YOUNGDAHL COMPANIES 1.800.00 Check Number 61089 ZIEGI£R 61089 23-Mar-OO ZIEGLER Totals Check Number 61089 ZIEGLER 76.68 76.68 FILTERS Grand Total 220.307.18 % m fmehs" ill■ ntfI ■ ■I liftiMik...k irvl'r-a-fii t tm PTIfAtMTt '■t H ■! TW¥111 ----------------------------------------*--------•- 21 Mar 2000 TUe 2:S4 PM Check Reglater City of Orooo Check (lumber Date Name Check Number €1008 61008 CITT COUNTY CREDIT UNION 22-Mar-OO CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNICH Totala Check Number 61008 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Check Number 61009 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES 61009 61009 61009 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Totals Check Number 61009 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Check Number 61010 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 61010 22-Mar-OO ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Totals Check Number 61010 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Cieck Number 61011 LAN ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 61011 22-Mar-OO LAN ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Totala Check Number 61011 LAN ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Check Number 61012 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT 61012 22-Mar-OO MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT Totals Check Number 61012 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT Check Number 61013 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 61013 22-Mar-OO MN DEPT OF REVENUE Totals Check Number 61013 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Check Number 61014 ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST 61014 22-Mar-OO ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST Totals Check Number 61014 ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST Check Number 61015 PEBSCO/OBRA 61015 22-Mar-OO PEBSCO/OBRA Totals Check Number 61015 PEBSCO/OBRA Transaction Amount 6,924.00 6,924.00 3,963.16 3,963.16 9,236.23 17.162.55 300.00 300.00 462.00 462.00 179.51 179.51 3.549.41 3.549.41 2,136.68 2,136.68 0.00 0.00 Page 1 Cofunents SAVINGS N/H a TRANSFBIRED FICA a MEDICARE W/H FICA.MEDCR CITY SHARE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING DEFERRED COMP W/H UNION DUES HH SKREEN 80010755723 STATE TAX W/H DEF COMP OBRA DEFERRED COMP W/H I 21 Nat 2000 TUA 2:54 PM Chack RAgister City of Orono ChAck MumbAr Data Name Chack NUnO^ar 61014 61016 PEBSCO/US CONF OP MAYORS 22-Har-OO PEBSCO/US CONF OP MAYORS Totala Check NUmbar 61016 PEBSCO/US CONF OP MAYORS Ctimck NUnbar 61017 PSRA 61017 61017 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO PERA PERA Totala Chack Numbar 61017 PERA Chack Nuaibar 61016 UNITED HAY 61018 22-Mar-OO UNITED HAY Totala Chack Numbar 61018 UNITED HAY Check Number 61019 HISCONSIN SCTF 61019 22-Mar-OO HISCONSIN SCTP Tbtala Check NUs^r 61019 HISCONSIN SCTP Grand Total Transaction Amount 2,658.00 2,658.00 4,466.69 5,802.68 10,269.37 28.00 28.00 184.62 184.62 43,854.14 Page 2 Comnanta USCM DEFERRED COMP H/H PERA EMPLOYEE H/H PERA CITY SHARE CHARITY DONATIONS H/H IDI0002 7568 98 J.Johnaon 21 Mar 2000 rue 12:29 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 047324 047324 JOHNSON. MARY ANN Totals Check Number 047324 Check Number 047325 747325 BERRY. HEIDI N. Totals Check Number 047325 Check Number 047326 :47326 HASEMAN. CAROLE k. Totals Check Number 047326 Check Number 047327 )47327 MOORSB. RONALD J Totals Check Number 047327 Check Number 047328 047328 VEE. LINDA S. Totals Check Number 047328 Check Number 047329 747329 KUEHN. THOMAS M. Totals Check Number 047329 Check Number 047330 047330 OLSON. RONALD J. Totals Check Number 047330 Check Number 047331 047331 PETTIT. SANDRA K. Totals Check Number 047331 Check Number 047332 Check Date 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO Page 1 Check Amount 606.15 606.15 705.96 705.96 843.82 843.82 1.654.78 1.654.18 1.158.59 1.158.59 1.376.14 1.376.14 4.70 4.70 359.80 359.80 AM. ■ III 'T la nii - -r i- - - -- k? Mar 2000 Tua 12:29 PH Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 047332 047332 ANDERSON, BRUCE L. Totals Check Number 047332 Check Number 047333 047333 BOBZIEN, SUE A. Totals Qieck Number 047333 Check Number 047334 047334 BORIS, SCOTT N. Totals Check Number 047334 Check Number 047335 047335 BUDIO, STACIE M. Totals Check Number 047335 Check Number 047336 047336 CARLSON, MICHAEL B. Totals Check Number 047336 Check Number 047337 047337 CHESNICK, GARY B. Totals Check Number 047337 Check Number 047338 047338 CORNICK, JAMES L. Totals Check Number 047338 Check Number 047339 047339 DEMBOUSKI, JAY C. Totals Check Number 047339 Check Number 047340 047340 ERICKSON, KURT R Check Date 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22>Har-00 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22>Mar-00 Page 2 Check Amount 361.22 361.22 669.05 669.05 1,019.18 1,019.18 671.30 €71.30 652.56 652.56 1,548.37 1,548.37 1,238.22 1,238.22 1,416.32 1,416.32 1,277.03 21 Har 2000 Tue 12:29 PH Check Register City of Orono Check :«umber Employee Name Check Number 047340 Totals Check Number 047340 Check Number 047341 047341 FARNIOK, CORREY L. Totals Check Number 047341 Check Number 047342 047342 FISCKENZCK, DAN T. Totals Check Number 047342 Check Number 047343 047343 FISCHER, CHRISTOPHER K. Totals Check Number 047343 Check Number 047344 047344 JOHIISCN, JEFFREY Totals Check Number 047344 Check Number 047345 347345 JOHNSON, BRADLEY P. Totals Check Number 047345 nieck Number 047346 347346 MADSON, ADRIENNE M. Totals Check Number 047346 Check Number 047347 :47347 MCNALLY, STEVEN A. Totals Check Number 047347 Check Number 047348 047348 MCNICHOLS, DAVID L. Check Date 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Har-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO Page 3 Check Amount 1,277.03 1,446.51 1,446.51 1,301.95 1,301.95 1,309.21 1,309.21 794.50 794.50 1,522.04 1,522.04 623.50 623.50 1,232.82 1,232.82 648.35 ; ■ ... 21 Har 2000 Tue 12:29 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Oieck Number 047346 Totals Check Number 047348 Check Number 0473*9 047349 MOROWCZYNSKI, JAMES Totals Check Number 047349 Check Number 047350 047350 PERSBLL, NILLIAH R. Totals Check Number 047350 Check Number 047351 047351 SCKOENHOFF, JOHN B. Totals Check Number 047351 Check Number 047352 047352 TOMCHECK. LAHRENCE F. Totals Check Number 047352 Check Number 047353 04735J TOMCZYK, MARK W. Totals Check Number 047353 Check Number 047354 047354 NITTKE, ANTHONY A. Totals Check Nunber 047354 Check Number C47355 047355 HENDRICKS, RONALD J. Totals Check Number 047355 Check Number 047356 047356 JENSEN, CHRISTOPHER E. Totals Check Number 047356 Check Date 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22>Mar 00 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO Page 4 Qieck Amount 648.35 1.525.43 1.525.43 739.89 733.89 1,303.80 1,303.80 425.72 425.72 1,284.23 1,284.23 869.12 869.12 589.22 589.22 262.35 262.35 A ■S 21 Mar 2000 Tie 12:29 PM Check Register City of Orono Check I^uffiber Employee Natne Check Humber 047357 047357 BOTTENBERG, WEHDY C. Totals Check Number 047357 Check Number 047358 047358 DAVIS. MARK L. Totals Check Number 047358 2heck Number 047359 347359 GAPFRON, MICKASL P. Totals Check Number C47359 Check Number 047360 047360 GAPPA. GREGORY A. Totals Check Number 047360 Check Number 047361 047361 MEYER. WILLIAM C. Totals Check Number 047361 Check Number 047362 047362 OMAN. LYLE E. Totals Check Number 047362 Check Number 047363 047363 PENCE. CHRISTCFI-^IR M. Totals Check Number 047363 Check Number 047364 047364 WEINBERGER. PAUL E. Totals Check Number 047364 Check Number 047365 047365 BRINKKMJS. JOHN P. Check Date 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22>Mar-00 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO Page 5 Check Amount 1.047.85 1.047.85 1.062.47 1.062.47 1.181.11 1.181.11 1.638.94 1.638.94 472.10 472.10 476.82 476.82 873.37 873.37 1.185.36 1.185.36 1.065.67 ■ It. t rffei uwl'.VTn 1 11 f ■'.m rl**! • AMVT-I n a 21 Kar 2000 Tua 12:29 PN Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 047365 Totals Check Number 047365 Check Number 047366 047366 DBBAER£« DONALD L. Totals Check Number 047366 Check Number 047367 047367 GREGORY, JAMES D. Totals Check Number 047367 Check Number 047368 047368 HANSEN, STEVEN Totals Check Number 047368 Check Number 047369 047369 OBERAIGNER, SCOTT G. Totals Check Number 047369 Check Number 047370 047370 OBRIEN, RANDY L. Totals Check Number 047370 Check Number 047371 047371 PALMER. GREGORY A. Totals Check Number 047371 Check Number 047372 047372 RATHBUN, BARRY J. Totals Check Number 047372 Check Number 047373 047373 SKREEN, DALE S Check Date 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO 22-Mar-OO Page 6 Check Amount 1.065.67 861.48 861.48 748.09 748.09 918.89 918.89 706.37 706.37 273.15 273.15 706.55 706.55 943.97 943.97 749.98 C.ni iM^ii mpETING MAR 2 7 2000 Qn t ur UiiUiMU INT0]RMATI0N ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCn, MEEf mar 27 2000 C\TY vt OrtONO ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23. 2000 draft prtiiwr.il m 2 7 C\TY OF OHUNO ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Elizabeth Hawn, Commissioners Jay Nygard, Sandra Smith, and Daniel Kluth. Commissioners Janice Berg, Dale Lindquist, and William Stoddard were absent. The following represented City Staff: Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, Senior Planning Coordinator Mike Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, City Council Representative Barb Peterson, and Recorder Jackie Young. Chair Hawn called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS OLD BUSINESS (#1) #2513 CONNIE PIEPHO, 540 NORTH ARM LANE - VARIANCES, 6:33 p.m. - 6:58 p.m. Connie Piepho, Applicant, was present, along with Mike Movani, Custom Pools. Weinberger stated the Planning Commission had reviewed this application at their August 16.1999 meeting, where it was recommended the application be approved on a vote of 5 to 0 to grant an average lakeshore setback variance on the property subject to the property owner identifying a secondary septic site on the property. The original proposal had the swimming pool located within an area designated as the secondary septic site on the property. The Applicant has submitted a new site plan that relocates the pool to the north property line, which requires the application to return before the Planning Commission for review. The present application is for an average lakeshore setback to permit construction of an inground pool. For swimming pools, the setback is measured from the water basin to the property line. The size of the setback is set by the size of the basin, which in this case is less than 750 square feet, requiring a ten foot setback to the property line. The pool itself is proposed to be located 15 feet from the side property line, where ten feet is required. Weinberger stated the Applicant, following the first public hearing, was to identify a secondary septic site. The previous proposal discovered that the secondary septic site is located between the home and the secondary septic site. City Code requires all structures to be located at least 20 feet from the absorportion area of the mound. To date no secondary septic site has been identified which meets all requirements of the Septic Code. One problem in relocating the septic site further to the north is the well for the adjacent property owner is located 16 feet off the Applicant's property line where the Septic Code requires a minimum 75 foot setback between a septic system and an active well. The City's septic inspector will not approve a variance to the septic code to permit a site to be located closer than 75 feet to the neighboring well. Staff has concerns regarding the placement of a potential health risk to an adjacent property owner's water supply to accommodate a property owner to relocate a septic site. Weinberger stated Staff has some concerns regarding the impact the new location of the pool would have on the views to the lake. The intent of the average lakeshore setback is to protect views for adjacent property owners and to promote consistent development along the lakeshore. Page 1 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23, 2000 (#2513 Connie Piepho, Continued) City Staff is recommending denial of the application based on the negative impacts to the adjacent property and locating the pool within the average lakeshore setback. Weinberger indicated he has spoken with Mike Movani of Custom Pools who has indicated the property owner would prefer the swimming pool to be located in its original proposed location. Weinberger stated an agreement between the two property owners could perhaps be considered to allow a secondary septic site in the proposed location with relocation of the adjoining neighbor's well. This option would be acc:eptable to City Staff if all the parties are in agreement. Weinberger reiterated that City Staff is recommending denial of the application as presented tonight. Movani commented the property owner would like the pool located in the original proposed location. Movani stated a variance was needed for the septic site in its present location, with no secondary site being found compatible with the City’s septic requirements. Movani stated they have attempted to comply with the City's requirements by reducing the size of the pool and trying variouj locations. Hawn inquired whether the Applicant would like the Planning Commission to consider the application that has been presented tonight. Movani stated they would prefer to have the original application considered. Hawn inquired whether any discussions have been held with the adjoining neighbor. Piepho indicated she has spoken with the neighbor regarding their options. Kluth inquired whether the present septic site operates fine currently. Piepho stated the present system is six years old and operates fine. Smith inquired whether there were any other possible locations for the pool. Piepho indicated they have considered other possible sites for the pool and were not able to find a suitable location. Kluth indicated he was unsure what option the Planning Commission is supposed to be reviewing tonight. Movani stated the Applicant would like to pursue the option of reaching an agreement with the adjoining property owner in which he would agree to relocate his well in the event the Applicant’s primary septic site needs to be replaced. Kluth inquired whether this property was located within the MUSA district. Weinberger stated there is a potential this will be included in MUSA in the future. Hawn stated she has a concern with the proposed option in the event the adjoining property owner decides to sell the property, which would encumber future buyers. Hawn stated one other option would be to relocate the well now, which would be an added expense to the Applicant. Tim Pellizzer, 520 North Arm Drive, stated his well was installed in 1984. Hawn inquired whether Pellizzer would have any objections to working out an agreement with the Applicant. Page 2 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23. 2000 (#2513 Connie Piepho, Continued) Pellizzer stated at this time he is not opposed to reaching some type of agreement with the Applicant. Weinberger stated some type of bond could possibly be posted with the City in favor of the adjoining property owner, which could be used to help pay for relocating of the well. Weinberger stated the bond would have to be attached to the property in the event a sale of the property should occur. Smith commented she would rather not see the City involved in an agreement of this type if at ail possible. Movani stated in his view he does not see why the City would need to be involved. There were no further public comments. Hawn commented she would be willing to table this application to allow the Applicant time to try to reach an agreement with the adjoining property owner. Movani inquired whether they would need to appear before the Planning Commission again if an agreement is reached. Movani noted the prior application was approved. Hawn stated that approval may have expired. Movani stated he is unsure whether that approval has expired. Weinberger stated he would prefer a new recommendation by the Planning Commission, noting that the previous approval required that a secondary septic site be identified, which has not been done. Movani commented they will need to find a secondary septic site. Hawn inquired whether the adjoining property owner had other available sites for a well. Pellizer indicated he does. Movani stated there are not available locations for the pool vrithout a variance of some type. Weinberger stated the approval in August was based on the Applicant finding an alternate septic site. Hawn stated the Applicant will need to locate a secondary septic site before August 16 in order for the previous approval to still be in effect. Hawn inquired whether the Applicant would like the Planning Commission to table this application. Movani inquired whether they would need to come back before the Planning Commission if they meet all the necessary criteria. Hawn stated it vrill be necessary for them to appear before the Planning Commission again. Movani requested the application be tabled. Weinberger n ted the Applicant submitted a letter requesting the 60 day statutory review period be waived Page 3 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23, 2000 Hawn moved, Smith seconded, to table Application #2513, Connie Piepho, 540 North Arm Lane, with the understanding the Applicant will seek to reach an acceptable bond and agreement with the adjoining property owner to insure relocation of his well in the event the Applicant's primary septic site fails, and identification of a secondary septic site on the Applicant's property, and further subject to submittal of an accurate sketch depicting the location of the proposed pool and secondary septic site. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#2) #2551 THOMAS MICHAEL RANDGAARD, 2765 SHADYWOOD ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT This application was not heard due to the absence of the Applicant. (#3) #2556 BARBARA AND COLLINS CAVENDER, HAVING AN INTEREST IN 1405/1395 REST POINT ROAD - VARIANCES. 7:00 p.m. - 7:13 p.m. Barbara and Collins Cavender, Applicants, were present. Weinberger stated the Planning Commission reviewed this application at its January 19.2000 meeting where the application was tabled to allow the Applicants time to revise their plans in order to comply with the IS percent structural coverage limit and address concerns regarding the takeshore setback. The Applicants have submitted revised plans which reflect a reduction in total structural coverage to 15 percent. The proposed setback to the lake is now 34 feet as opposed to the 30 feet originally proposed. The house would be located further from the lake if the shoreline were consistent across the full width of the property. Weinberger commented many other primary residences along this road are located at a distance comparable to the 34 foot setback. Weinberger noted the City of Orono currently owns and maintains a lift station on the property. The proposed location of the house creates the greatest distance possible on the lot from the lift station. Weinberger stated this application requires variances to permit structure within 75 feet of the lakeshore as well as variances to permit structure and hardcover within 75 feet of the lakeshore. In addition, variances to hardcover in the 0-75' setback is required and a variance to the street setback. The proposed residence will encroach 13.67 into the setback. City Staff is recommending approval of this application subject to the following conditions: A. The property has been developed and used as a residential property for many years. To complete the application it is a requirement the lots be combined to permit the construction B. Most of the property is located within 75 feet of the lakeshore. It Is nearly impossible to locate a house outside of the 75 foot setback requirement without building on the street right-of-way line. Other houses in the locality are located at comparable setbacks from the lakeshore. C. The City of Orono owns and maintains a lift station located on the properly. The City has a regular weekly inspection schedule for lift stations. It is reasonable to expect a "buffer” between the house and the station based on regular inspections. The City of Orono is requesting an easement for the lift station. D. The lot has a very limited building pad. Any new construction on the property would require setback variances. Because Rest Point Road is narrow, it is not possible to park cars on the Page 4 ririW • hr#cTtR [•r>Ii[^liiiti^>]irtiilmtWa1 •lirtnrri^ WWimniTii [•mm*] [•II •iv^riitT^ •imw wl^i] •iir^trii [•11114^ Rm niltl •iiT»r^ •r^ft •M*P«*lr: •1*1 rii •jii* ur«i [•HWiTi iNII iN [•■=r:7I^ WatHiliTilW [*i • B4T« [•jiTOg^riniTtTiF [•■cfTt•r*ti •[•niTti •11 r«P:i nn ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23, 2000 (#2558 Anthony Patterson, Continued) existing residence to be expanded from a one and a half story to a full two story house. Bottenberg stated the Applicant was issued a permit for construction on the second story as long as the construction did not occur within the 10 foot side yard setback. The Applicants were advised by the Building Inspector that the variances could be denied. Bottenberg stated the Applicants have redesigned the deck to eliminate it from protruding into the setback area, lowering the hardcover calculations in this setback area to 0 percent, which eliminates the need for any variance. The existing deck located in the 75'-2S0 ‘ setback area has been reduced from 291 square feet to 235 square feet, in the combined setback areas, total deck square footage is reduced from 285 square feet existing to 220 square feet proposed. Bottenberg indicated the Applicants had originally proposed to construct a side entry consisting of 165 square feet. They have reduced the side entry to 80 square feet. Bottenberg stated the Applicants are still proposing to remove 95 square feet of driveway and 128 square feet of sidewalk. Bottenberg noted a variance is still required for hardcover within the 75-250' setback area, with the proposed hardcover being calculated at 41.4 percent. Bottenberg stated the Applicant has been informed of the difference between hardcover and structural coverage, but is still requesting a variance to structural coverage to allow for 15.9 percent. The existing structural coverage for the lot is 1,977 square feet or 15.7 percent. The Applicant has indicated he would like to keep the side entry at 8' by 10 ‘. City Staff is recommending approval of the variances for lot coverage and side yard setback, approval of the variance for hardcover in the 75-250' setback area, including the sidewalk and full driveway. A new survey showing revisions should be submitted to City Staff for approval before a building permit will be issued. Patterson stated he has become aware of the differences between hardcover and structural coverage, noting he was left with the impression after the last Planning Commission meeting that structural coverage could be reduced from the proposed 18.7 percent down to 18.2 percent by removing a portion of the deck and reducing the side entry. Patterson stated they were informed of the need to comply with the 15 percent limit later on, noting they have attempted to comply with the limits as much as possible. Hawn commented the Applicant has made progress on this application, but stated she still has a problem with the proposed structural coverage. Hawn stated she wilt allow the Applicant to replace what was existing, but she is not in favor of increasing structural coverage any further than what currently exists. Hawn expressed a concern that the Applicant may have a problem navigating a vehicle in the driveway if it should be reduced. Hawn noted the properly should have a sidewalk to access the garage. Patterson stated they have conducted some tests on the reduced driveway and feet that it will be acceptable. Kluth commented the mi^utes from the previous Planning Commission meeting reflect that the Applicant was advised t.ie deck would be considered structural coverage, with a clear direction being given by the Planning Commission that they would not be In favor of any increases in hardcover or structural coverage. Hawn stated she is opposed to allowing the structural coverage to be increased beyond the existing Page 6 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23.2000 (#2558 Anthony Patterson, Continued) 15.7 percent. Patterson stated he will reduce the side entry if necessary. Hawn stated the consensus of the Planning Commission is to leave the structural coverage at the existing 15.7 percent. Nygard indicated the Applicant will need to remove 43 square feet in order to reduce the proposed structural coverage to 15.7 percent. Nygard inquired whether the driveway should be removed. Kluth commented he would like to see the numbers for hardcover and structural coverage kept at the existing numbers. Hawn inquired why structural coverage increases if the deck is being reduced. .'‘gman stated the driveway was part of the original proposal and apparently has not been removed t. cm the calculations. Kluth stated they need to get the correct hardcover and structural coverage numbers on this application. Hawn commented it appears the hardcover is less than 43.7 percent. Kluth stated he would like some assurance from the Applicant that the 3xisting hardcover and structural coverage limits will not be increased. Kluth stated the Applicant will need to calculate the correct numbers prior to appearing before the City Council. Kluth moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2558, Anthony Patterson, 1780 Shadywood Road, granting of variances to lot coverage, and side yard setback, with the understanding that all existing hardcover and structural coverage limits will not be exceeded, and subject to the submittal of a new survey showing the revisions to City Staff for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS (#5) #2486 ELAINE ERICKSON. 1270 SPRUCE PLACE • VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 7:38 p.m. • 8:26 p.m. Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted Nancy Anderson. Daughter. Jeff Olson. Son. and Al Hirsch. Contractor, were present. The Applicant was not present. Bottenberg stated the Applicant is requesting variances to remove an existing residence and build a new residence further back on the «;ame lot. The Applicant is also applying for a conditional use permit to permit grading within 7 j feet of the lakeshore. The Applicant is proposing to remove a "bulge" in the topography to bring the lakeside of the lot more in natural f ow with the adjacent properly. The proposal includes relocating the new residence back out of the 0-75 ’ setback area, which will allow it to be more m alignment with the adjacent properties. Bottenberg stated the Applicant initiated this process in April of 1999, when the Applicant brought Page 7 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23. 2000 (#2486 Elaine Erickson, Continued) in the first set of house plans. The Applicant has submitted several sets of revised plans, with the latest set of plans calling for the elimination of the side yard setback. The Applicant is requesting variances to lot coverage and hardcover coverage in the 0-75' and 75-250* setback areas, with a conditional use permit still being necessary. The bulge that the Applicant is seeking to remove occurred in 1975, when the owner of the adjacent property did some grading work on his property and a walkout war created. Bottenberg stated since that time, the City has denied a number of requests for similar grading to create walkout situations when they involved excavating in the 0-75* zone. The Applicants have been advised by Orono's building inspector that one option to correct the incorrect grading on the adjoining property would be to remove the trees and level it out to flow more with the other properties. Bottenberg stated this option, however, would be inconsistent with the zoning code and with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Bottenberg indicated the Applicant will need to relocate the existing well should this plan be approved since it will be located underneath the new residence. Bottenberg stated the Applicant is proposing total structural coverage in the amount of 1.584 square feet, or 16 percent, where 15 percent is permitted, and hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback of 5.84 percent where 0 percent hardcover is allowed. The Applicant is aiso proposing hardcover in the 75-250* setback of 48.6 percent, where 25 percent is allowed. Bottenberg stated the hardcover variance in the 0-75* setback area will be reduced to 0 percent if grading is permitted and the proposed residence and deck are relocated further back on the lot out of the 0-75 ’ setback area. Bottenberg noted if grading is permitted, the sidewalk and steps will no longer be needed. City Staff is recommending denial of the conditional use permit to permit grading or excavating within 75* of the lakeshore due to conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Nancy Anderson stated the biggest issue they are faced with is attempting to construct a single-story handicapped accessible residence to meet her mother's needs. Anderson commented they have attempted to reduce the size of the residence as much as they feel is economically feasible in order to retain its resale value. Anderson stated it is difficult to find a suitable building pad which will meet all of the City’s requirements, noting they would like to do some grading on the lot in order to correct the drainage on the lot and to make the lot flatter. Jeff Olson stated he personally is not in favor of altering the lakeshore, but in his opinion some action needs to be taken in order to correct the drainage and remove the bulge that was created from some previous grading work that was completed on the adjoining property. Olson stated his mother would like to construct this new residence so her daughter, who lives next door, will be able to take care of her. Hawn stated the Planning Commission will need to address in further detail what the Applicants are proposing for the lakeshore side of the property. Hirsch stated they would like to remove some dirt to create a walkout to the north. Hawn stated typically the Planning Commission does not allow grading within 75* of the lakeshore and the Planning Commission cannot grant a conditional use permit to allow grading in that area simply because some incorrect grading has occurred on the adjoining property. Hawn acknowledged some incorrect drainage does currently exist on this property, which should be addressed. Hawn stated ideally it would be better to correct the grade on the adjoining property, but due to the lack of an engineer's report, the Planning Commission is not able to determine what ideally should be done Page 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23, 2000 (#2486 Elaine Erickson, Continued) to correct the drainage. Hawn noted the Planning Commission typically does not approve walkouts near the lakeshore. Hawn acknowledged the tree in the location of the bulge has been damaged, which should also be addressed. Hawn noted the Planning Commission typically does not permit structural coverage to exceed the allowable 15 percent. Hawn stated the deck would be considered hardcover versus structural coverage if the proposed residence was a two-story structure. Kluth stated he would like to separate what appear to be aesthetic concerns versus hardships that exist due to the topography of the land. Kluth commented he is in agreement with Hawn and that some action should be taken to correct the incorrect drainage that has occurred as a result of the grading on the adjoining property. Kluth stated he would like City Staff to continue working with the Applicants to see if some resolution could be reached to these issues. Anderson stated a walkout could still be created without the bulge being removed. Andeison stated they are in agreement that something needs to be done with the damaged tree. Hawn inquired whether additional till could be put near the tree. Anderson stated if additional fill were placed in that area, it would block the neighbor's view of the lake, which was one reason why the grading was completed. Anderson stated the house could perhaps be moved further back out of the 0-75' setback, and suggested that the grade between her mother's house and her house be altered to help correct the drainage in that area. Hawn inquired whether that would eliminate the need for a retaining wall. Anderson stated it would. Havm stated the Planning Commission needs some direction from an engineer as it relates to the excavation and the impact to drainage that any grading work would do to this property as welt as the adjoining properties. Kluth commented he has concern.*; regarding the grading and drainage. Kluth suggested the parties speak to City Staff regarding the removal of *he damaged tree. Hawn stated the City's forester should perhaps take a look at the situation before the tree is removed. Hawn stated she would not be opposed to a small amount of grading on this property, but noted the overall grading and drainage issues need to be further addressed before any approval can be given. Anderson stated they are merely requesting the right to level the land in this area. Hawn reiterated that an engineer wilt need to review the situation and submit his recommendations to City Staff. Weinberger stated the City Engineer can review this situation and how it will affect the lakeshore. Weinberger commented the City wants to protect the natural environment as much as possible. Nygard acknowledged there appears to be a major drainage issue which needs to be addressed. Havm stated the Applicant will need to show how much grading will occur, where the grading will occur, and how much dirt will be moved Page 9 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23. 2000 (#2406 Elaine Erickson, Continued) Hawn stated the Applicant needs to address the drainage concerns and reduce structural coverage. Hawn Indicated she does not have a problem with an attached garage. Kluth commented the driveway is not a major issue in his opinion. Hawn remarked the Applicant may have some issues with snow removal as well. Anderson commented the road was not constructed as it was originally platted and should be located further uphill. Weinberger stated the City Engineer can review the drainage and grading plans prepared by the Applicant's engineer and make whatever recommendations are necessary. Weinberger noted the City Engineer normally does not go out and review the site. Gaffron pointed out it would be hard to tell the viability of the tree at this time of year, and suggested the Applicant hire a tree service to look at the tree and make some recommendations on what should be done. Hawn suggested the application be tabled. Anderson requested the matter be tabled. Hawn moved, Kluth seconded, to table Application #2466, Elaine Erickson, 1270 Spruce Place, to allow the Applicant time to revise their plans, submit a grading and drainage plan, and to address the issues with the damaged tree. Gaffron inquired whether the Applicant will be allowed to keep the structural coverage at the proposed 16 percent. Hawn stated the Planning Commission typically does not allow structural coverage to exceed the allowable 15 percent. Hawn stated it is hard to determine the exact amount of hardcover being proposed at this time, which will need to be recalculated. Gaffron suggested the Applicant lower the de'rf’.i* K'r. *tt' so it will not be counted as structural coverage. There were no public comments regarding this application. VOTE ON THE ABOVE MOTION: Ayes 4. Nays 0. (#6) #2559 GILBERT GEHLE. 1392 BALDUR PARK ROAD - VARIANCES, 8:28 p.m. - 9:15 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Gilbert Gehle, Applicant, was present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting hardcover variances to permit hardcover in excess of 25 percent within the 75-250 ’ lakeshore setback and to permit hardcover within 75 ’ of the south lakeshore. A variance is aiso required to permit a small amount of regrading within the south 0-75 ’ lakeshore setback for a driveway. Page 10 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23, 2000 (#2559 Gilbert Gehle, Continued) Weinberger noted this property has appeared before the Planning Commission on a number of times for various variances over the years. In August of 1998, the City Council approved hardcover in the amount of 5,725 square feet in the south 0-75' setback and the 75-250' setback due to the fact the property is located on a peninsula and has two 0-75' setbacks. In April of 1999, the City Council approved 5,606 square feet of hardcover in the south 0-75' setback and the 75-250' setback, which is 119 square feet less than the first approval the previous year. Weinberger stated the property presently contains an existing residence and detached garage. The garage and driveway will be removed but will continue to utilize essentially the same access point that currently exists. Weinberger noted any change in access to the property would require variances due to the access to the property being located within the southerly 0-75' zone. Staff would agree that this limited access does place an undue hardship on the property. The proposed development meets all setback requirements. Weinberger stated the hardcover variances are related to the size of the proposed house, with the need for a variance being minimized in the 75-250' setback by a reduction in the size of the house. The southerly 0-75* hardcover variance as proposed is the minimum necessary to permit a driveway, and this is a factor unique to the property. Staff is recommending that no mature trees be removed within 75' feet of the lakeshore. Weinberger noted the proposed driveway location may require some loss of natural vegetation. City Staff is willing to work with the Applicant on the alignment of the driveway to help prevent any loss of mature trees. Gehle indicated he would like to have a walkout in the front, noting that the vast majority of the houses on the lake have a walkout. Weinberger stated Exhibit D shows a two story building with the lowest story being part of a walkout. The Applicant is not proposing to do any grading within 75' of the north lakeshore. The City's Comprehensive Plan discourages any changes to the natural grade along the lakeshore, which would occur if any grading should take place within 75' of the north lakeshore. Weinberger stated the proposed hardcover on the property is 5,738 square feet, which is 4.3 square feet short of the allowable 25 percent. Gehle stated he is willing to raise the elevation of the house if necessary, but would like to avoid that due to aesthetic appearances and creating a pedestal type look. Gehle pointed out a large amount of grading has occurred in the past in the middle of the lot, with a knoll existing by the trees. Gehle stated he would ike to retain the trees and reduce the knoll if possible. Gehle stated it will be necessary to remove one to two trees in order for the proposed driveway to be constructed. Gehle stated he would like to construct a front loading garage. Hawn inquired whether the Applicant was proposing to construct a path to the back side of the garage. Gehle stated the existing garage and drivev/ay will be removed and replaced with vegetation. Weinberger stated he has a concern with the areas that are proposed to be redone, noting Staff was not informed they would be driving across the lawn. Hawn inquired whether there was any public comment regarding this application. A re jent on Baidur Road expressed some concerns regarding potential drainage issues that may be created as a result of this project. Page 11 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23, 2000 (#2559 Gilbert Gehle, Continued) Hawn inquired whether any drainage problems currently exist. The resident stated no. Weinberger stated any proposed retaining wall will need to stay within the allowable hardcover. Kluth inquired whether any grading is proposed in the north 0>75'. Gehle stated they do not plan on doing any grading in the north 0-75' setback. Gehle commented they may place some paving stones down to the lake, but will limit the hardcover to a minimum. Kluth commented the issues are the proposed hardcover in the south 0-75' and the 75-250 ’ setback. Kluth recommended the Applicant keep the concerns of the neighbor in mind when doing any grading. Hawn inquired whether a large amount of grading will be necessary once the existing house is removed. Gehle stated some fill will be needed by the garage. Gehle stated the elevation of the house will dictate how much fill is required. Smith noted the City did not allow any grading within the 0-75' setback on the two previous applications. Hawn stated she would like to know the specific amount of fill proposed to be used as well as the amount of grading to be completed on this property. Gehle requested the Planning Commission consider allowing him to change the contour of the land within the 0-75' setback area and to allow him to keep the house at a reasonable level. Gehle stated the ideal situation would be to lower the house and do the grading that was previously approved. Hawn stated the Planning Commission would be more comfortable knowing the exact amount of fill to be moved as well as the grading that is being proposed. Hawn stated the Planning Commission needs to know the impact to the grading and drainage before they can approve the elevation of the house. Kluth stated he is not fully aware of what was previously approved. Gaffron stated his recollection of this application is that the two large trees on top of the knoll were approved to be cut dov'n, as well as the knoll. Gaffron commented there were no proposed changes to the grade in front of the house, with the City requiring a land alteration permit in the 0-75' setback to allow for the placement of fill after the structure is removed, with the contours on either side being matched. Gaffron commented the Planning Coiamission needs to be cautious about changing the contour of the property in order to create a walkout. Gehle stated he was unaware he would need the figures for the amount of fill to be moved tonight. Weinberger stated in the previous application the owners were proposing to return the land back to its original natural contour, with the elevation of the house remaining the same as the previous house. Hawn indicated a conditional use permit is required if the Applicant plans to move more than 500 cubic yards of fill. Page 12 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23. 2000 (#2559 Gilbert Gehle, Continued) Gaffron noted City Staff has not received any formal grading and drainage plans on this property. Gaffron stated the Applicant needs to submit a plan showing the proposed drainage and grading. Kluth suggested a restriction be placed on this application limiting the amount of grading or table the application to allow the Applicant time to submit a grading and drainage plan. Weinberger stated City Staff has just received this plan recently, with the present plan showing some grading on the property. Staff had understood the Applicant would be working within the existing grades on the property nor did Staff anticipate any grading beyond what would be necessary to create a natural walkout in the area. Hawn inquired whether the Planning Commission was in agreement that grading should occur on this 'roperty. Nyc.^rd stated grading was not approved in the previous application. Kluth commented it is difficult to determine what people mean by a little fill without the exact figures being spelled out. Hawn commented it is unclear what Is meant by restoring the natural contour without it being further defined. Gaffron stated the existing house is proposed to be removed, with the existing foundation being filled in to match the surrounding contour of the land, vrtiich returns the land back to its original state prior tc construction. Gaffron commented some grading may have occurred on the site prior to construction of the original residence. Gaffron stated the Applicant is not allowed to do any grading within the 0-75' setback. Weinberger stated grading within the 0-75 ’ setback requires a conditional use permit, which has not been applied for, as well as additional variances. Weinberger inquired whether the Applicant stiil wished to continue to work within the existing grades on the property. Gchie stated he would like to work within the existing grades. Gehle stated he is not proposing to do any grading within the 0-75' setback. Hawn inquired whether the Applicant is agreeable to maintaining the contour of the land as it presently exists. Gehle indicated he is agreeable to that. Hawn inquired whether that would be agreeable to the Commissioners. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the Applicant should stay within the existing contours of the land. Weinberger stated in the two previous applications, the applicants were given credit for the hardcover in the south 0-75' setback. Weinberger stated it would be acceptable to Staff to keep within the existing contours of the land. Hawn stated she would be reluctant to approve any additional hardcover over what has been previously approved in the O'Keefe application. Weinberger stated O'Keefe was approved at 5,725 square feet in the south 0-75' setback and the Page 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23. 2000 (#2559 Gilbert Gehle, Continued) 75-250* setback. Weinberger stated this proposal exceeds what was approved in the O'Keefe by 13 square feet. Gehle stated he would be willing to reduce the patio. Hawn indicated she would like to see the patio reduced to meet the same percentage that was approved in the O'Keefe application. Hawn stated she is willing to allow the contours of the land be restored, with no additional grading to accommodate a walkout, the existing garage and driveway to be removed, hardcover reduced to 5,725 square feet, no tree removal in the 0-75' setback, with the understanding the adjoining properties will not be negatively impacted by any drainage and grading, and submittal by the Applicant of the appropriate drainage and grading plans to City Staff for their review and comment. Hawn stated the Applicant will also need to work with City Staff on the issue of the placement of the driveway. Gaffron stated in his view that encompasses the issues. Hawn moved, Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2559, Gilbert Gehle, 1392 Baldur Park Road, with the understanding the Applicant will submit a grading and drainage plan to City Staff for their review and comment subject to the grading being limited to restoration of the existing contours of the land, with no additional grading being allowed for a walkout; hardcover being reduced to 5,725 square feet in the south 0-75* and the 75-250* setbacks; the existing garage and driveway being removed, with the Applicant working with City Staff on placement of the new driveway to avoid the removal of mature trees; and further subject to no removal of trees within the 0-75* setback. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#7) #2561 FRANK AND BARBARA PETERSON. 1261 ARBOR STREET • VARIANCES, 9:18 p.m. -10:00 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Barbara Peterson, Applicant, was present. Bottenberg stated the Applicants are requesting variances to permit the construction of a 28* by 32' detached garage on the northwest corner of their lot, which will be accessed from Minnetonka Avenue. The property currently does not have a garage. The proposed garage will be constructed where parking space is currently located. The shape of the lot is such that it does not allow for the garage doors to face away from the street. Bottenberg stated the property lies within 1.000 feet of French Lake, with the amount of proposed hardcover not exceeding the allowed 35 percent. Bottenberg stated the detached garage will increase the structural coverage from 10.9 percent to 17.3 percent, where 15 percent is allowed. A variance is required to allow the accessory structure to be located five feet from the rear property line where 15 feet is required. A variance is also needed to allow the doors to be 20 feet from the traveled paved roadway where 30 feet or more is required and a variance to side street yard setback to permit the proposed garage to be located 10 feet from the side street lot line where 50 feet is required. Peterson presented the Planning Commission with pictures of other sheds and garages that exist in her neighborhood. Peterson inquired whether the 15 percent structural coverage limit is geared towards lakeshore properties or to the City at large. Page 14 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23, 2000 (#2561 Frank and Barbara Peterson, Continued) Nygard commented the City's policies are designed to help lessen the impact to the iake and iakeshore as much as possibie. Peterson noted a garage iocated in her neighborhood did obtain a variance to structurai coverage. Peterson commented she wouid be wiiiing to remove the existing shed in order to construct a nice garage. Bottenberg stated most of the sheds located in this area have been constructed without the necessary approvais and permits. Peterson stated they have a one-story house and wouid like to construct a garage to store their vehicies as weii as other personai property. Smith stated it can be a hardship to be without a garage in Minnesota. Smith inquired what the structurai coverage would be if the garage was reduced to 24' by 28'. Bottenberg stated it wouid be 15.6 percent. Hawn commented that the Planning Commission generally does not deviate from the 15 percent. Hawn stated she would like to see the Applicant comply with the 15 percent, noting she does not have a problem with the rest of the application. Kluth inquired whether the Comprehensive Plan addresses garages at all. Gaffron stated the City's Comprehensive Plan contains a statement which says the City will not adopt an ordinance requiring a minimum house size nor will it specify that the house should have a garage. The present City Council looks at the applications as if the Applicant will eventually build a garage if it is not specified in the plan and requires that the Applicant allot some of their structural coverage to a future garage to insure that they will comply with the 15 percent structural coverage. ;imit. Hawn inquired what the structural coverage would be with a 24' by 24' garage. Bottenberg stated with a 24' by 24' garage, the Applicant would be under the allowable limit. Bottenberg noted the garage cannot exceed the height of the principal structure. Smith inquired whether the Planning Commission would be willing to allow structural coverage at 15.6 percent. Kluth commented the Planning Commission needs to have a consistent standard to adhere to. Hawn Indicated she does not have a problem with approving the other variances, but would like to see the Applicant comply with the 15 percent structural coverage limit. Peterson commented a 24' by 24' garage is smaller than most of the sheds that exist in the area. Hawn stated a 22' by 22' garage is the standard size garage, which can accommodate two cars. Nygard commented the Planning Commission may be setting a precedent if they approve anything in excess of the 15 percent. Peterson stated she would also like to construct the garage to help improve the appearance of the Page 15 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23. 2000 (#2561 Frank and Barbara Peterson, Continued) property, which would allow her to eliminate the need for a small storage shed. Peterson stated the City should look at whether they are creating another problem by limiting structural coverage to the 15 percent. Peterson commented in her view property owners are forced to store cars and other personal property outside or in small, unsightly storage sheds, which is very detracting to the appearance of the neighborhood and appears to be a growing problem. Smith inquired whether the Planning Commission has ever approved structural coverage in excess of 15 percent on any other applications. Hawn stated the City does allow Applicants to replace what is existing. Hawn noted this garage would be considered new construction. Kluth stated he would not be opposed to considering Minnesota winters a hardship. Gaffron stated the City prior to 1983 granted variances to hardcover with minimal discussion if the property exceeded the allowable limit. The City Council, starting in 1984, realized that excessive hardcover was getting out of hand and started to enforce the limits. Over the years the City has gotten stricter on hardcover and structural coverage. Hawn Inquired whether the Planning Commission would be in favor of building an accessory building which exceeds the height of the principal structure. Peterson stated this garage would be used to store vehicles, snow blower and lawn mower. Hawn inquired whether there were any public comments regarding this application. There were no public comments. Kluth inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to compromise on the size of the garage. Peterson stated she would like to build the garage as proposed. Kluth moved to recommend denial of Application #2561, Frank and Barbara Peterson, 1261 Arbor Street, unless the proposed garage is reduced in size to comply with the 15 percent structural coverage limit. NO SECOND. Hawn inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to construct a garage which will comply with the 15 percent structural coverage limit. Peterson stated her husband probably will not be agreeable to limiting it to the 15 percent and will erect a shed to accommodate their other personal items. Peterson stated rather than deny the application, she would be agreeable to limiting the structural coverage to 15 percent. Kluth moved. Nygard seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2561, Frank and Barbara Peterson, to permit the construction of a garage not to exceed the allowed 15 percent total structural coverage on the lot, and to grant variances to side yard setback, lot coverage and location of the garage doors. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Page 16 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 23. 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#8) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS ON JANUARY 24. 2000 AND FEBRUARY 24. 2000 Hawn indicated the Hoyt application was discussed at the City Council meeting and appears to be heading back to the Planning Commission for review. Hawn stated the Applicant failed to apply for certain variances and a public hearing will need to be held on the request for the variances at the Planning Commission level. Gaffron noted the City Council tabled the application. Peterson stated she has the understanding he will be filing an application for the variances. Hawn stated the Department of Transportation is presently seeking other sites for the sand/salt storage facility. Weinberger stated they are looking at the new maintenance facility in Medina. (#9) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Gaffron indicated Rick Luzaich has recently signed his response to interrogatories, with the Judge requesting the matter be resolved by June. (#10) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 22.1999 AND JANUARY 19. 2000 Nygard moved. Smith seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of January 19. 2000. as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Smith moved, no second, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of November 22.1999. as submitted. NO VOTE The recording secretary noted a change was made in the November 22.1999 minutes as it relates to the Edin application. Kluth requested the minutes from the November 22.1999 Planning Commission meeting be included in their packets for their review prior to approval. (#11) SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON FEBRUARY 28. 2000 AND MARCH 13. 2000 February 28.2000 - Smith March 13,2000 - Nygard ADJOURNMENT Motion by Kluth. second by Smith, to adjourn the meeting at 10:29 p.m. Elizabeth Hawn. Chair Page 17 f » i WOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB MW 2 7 MO® ^,„tur OMUi>tU 200 WOODHILL ROAD WAYZATA. MINNESOTA 55391 473-7333 March 21,2000 The Honorable Gabriel Jabbour City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 ? 2 2Kn vjr OrtOiviO Dear Mayor Jabbour. I am writing on behalf of the Board of Trustees and members of the Woodhill Country Club to express our strong support of the City of Oiono ’s effort to convert the rail line used by Dakota Rail to a hiking/biking- trail. We believe that such a trial would be more consistent uith the City’s land use policy and would be a real benefit to its citizens. The rail line parallels the south property line of the Club for approximately 1 mile and our members, staff, guests and service vehicles must cross the tracks to access the Gub. This is the only 24 hours access point and the only exit from the property. Several years ago a train detailed at our main entrance resulting in very limited use of the entrance while the debris was cleared. We are alway’S concer.ied that a derailment might take place again, particularly in li^ of Dakota Rail’s derailment history. Se\ eral members have suggested that they would use the trail to get to the Club to avoid the trafiic on County Rood 15. If there is anything we can do to fiuiher support your effort, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, e Jackson III President I A ^ MR. & MRS. D. ELDREDGE JACKSON HI loss Edgewood HiU Road Wayzata, MN SS391 March 21,2000 The Honorable Gabriel Jabbour CityofOrono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN SS323-0066 rnuMoii mpETINQ MAR 2 7 2000 Cu t Uiiui^U MA.9 ? 5 2000 CITY Or OoOiVO Dear Mayor Jabbour, We are writing to express our strong support of the City of Orono’s effort to convert the rail line used by Dakota Rail to a hiking/biking tiaJ. We believe that su^ a trial would be more consistent with the City’s land use policy and would be a real benefit to its citizens. Our home is only accessible via Woodhill Road, which crosses the rail line to County Road IS. If there was a derailment such as the one that took place several years ago it might be impossible for us to leave our home and could cause issues for emergency vehicles if they were needed. If thore is anything we can do to further support your effort, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerelv, rniiMrii n/icfrnNQ MAR 2 7 2000 MRS. FREDA C. KEITH 1045 Edgewood Hill Road Wav^ata, MN 55391 March 21.2000 Oil f UF Oi-iui^Qt: * * ^ J Wfi 2 3 2m CiTYOroS0,V0 The Honorable Gabriel Jabbour City of Orono P.O. Bo.\ 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Dear Mayor Jabbour. I am writing to express my strong support of the Cit>' of Orono ’s effort to conNcrt the rail line used by Dakota Rail to a hiking/bUdng trail. I believe that such a trial would be more consistent with the City's land use policy and would be a real benefit to its citizens. My home is only accessible via Woodhill Road, which crosses the rail line to County Road 15. If there was a derailment such as the one that tO(dc pbee several years ago it might be impossible for me to leave my home and could cause issues for emergenc>’ vehicles if thc> w ere needed. I am particularly concerned about emergency access since having a stroke 3 years ago. If there is anything I can do to further support your effort, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, '