The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-12-1999 Council PacketAGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JULY 12,1999,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of tlie Agenda items are available in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL 1.7:00 P.M. - Public Hearing - Fox Ridge Sewer Project A.Order Plans and Specifications for Fox Ridge Sanitary Sewer Project - Resolution CONSENT AGENDA 2.Approve/Amend APPROVAL OF MINUTES *3. Regular Council Meeting of June 28,1999 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Peter Welles, Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Jay Nygard, Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 4.#2488 Gregg and Theresa Klohn, 4455 North Shore Drive - Variance 5.#2492 Rick and Gail Luzaich, 2490 Old Beach Road - Variance and Conditional Use Permit 6.#2496 Patrick O'Flanagan, 3895 North Shore Drive - Variances - Resolution 7.#2499 Thomas and Marilyn Swanson, 1740 Shady wood Road - Variance - Resolution 8.#2500 Orono School District No. 278,685 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Conditional Use Permit Resolution MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT 9.Public Works Land Expansion 10.Hennepin County Mapping Agreement 11 .Authorize Development of Concept Plans for Navarre Playground Improvements and Navarre Municipal Parking Lot CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 12.Appointment of Temporary, Part-Time On-Site Septic Inspector 13.Proposed Schedule for Summer Hours CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT *14. LICENSES *15. BILLS AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JULY 12,1999,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 1999 07/07 - Highway 12 Design Review Committee Meeting, 5:30 p.m. 07/08 “ Council Work Session, 7:30 a.m. 07/12 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 07/19 - Planning Commission Meeting, 5:30 p.m. 07/26 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 08/02 - Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. 08/04 - Highway 12 Design Review Committee Meeting, 5:30 p.m. 08/09 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 08/16 - Planning Commission Meeting, 6:30 p.m. 08/23 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. Public Attendance Meeting Date / /.g "/ 7 ■ §Council Planning Commission Park Commission □ O ther NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 1.1 *?t Uy/J \ U • K 1 1 ^ >j 5 /-I A Av t- V * ^■'3 <? ‘/‘'Z? 2 ^------------ / 5 aJ, s/toA'’ <3/:7/ J -7 7 3. 4. /i :3-5S'____________________ K A -(/—------------------------------------------------------- 8._________________________________________________________________________ 9.. 10.. 11.. 12.. 13. 14. 15. t9U9S4 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MPirriNQ M 1 2 1999 DATE; ITEM NO.: j Department Approval: Name Gregor> A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer’s Report Item Description: Public Hearing for Fox Ridge Sewer Project The Fox Ridge neighborhood adjacent to Brown Road South was included in the recent MUSA expansions for sewer hot spots. We have had a neighborhood meeting with the project area residents to discuss this project. Two options were presented to the residents. A gravity sewer option with a municipal lift station at an estimated per unit cost of $33,800. The other option presented was a pressure system in which each property would own and opeiate their jwti residential grinder station. The estimated unit cost for this option is $21,100 which includes a $4,500 allowance for residents to purchase their own grinder station. We have discussed this project with the City of Long Lake staff and Met ro Council Eiivironmental Services staff. The most cost effective solution is to pump the waste water north along Brown Road to the Long Lake sewer system at the Brown Road/Watertown Road intersection. Both Long Lake and MCES staff are agreeable with this option. This project is planned for year 2000 construction and could be completed under one contract with the Weber Hills project. Project surv'eying and design can be completed this year for a winter 2000 bid opening and assessment hearing. The project area residents have submitted a petition requesting that the '’ity move forward with this project. There are several residents along Brown Road north of the pre 't that will be adjacent to the new force main that have expressed an interest in obtaining sewer. ^se properties are not in the MUSA. The current City policy is to allow use of the 50 additional sev r units if the following three criteria are met: 1. Existing residential development. 2. Non-conforming septic syi-tem. 3. No replacement septic sites available. Our recommendation is for Council approval of the attached resolution ordering the preparation of plans and specifications for the Fox Ridge Sewer project. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of resolution ordering preparation of plans and specifications for the installation of municipal sanitary sew'er to serve the Fox Ridge area. A RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECfflCATIONS FOR FOXRIDGE AREA SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared a feasibility study to determine the feasibility of serving the Foxridge neighborhood with sanitary sewer; and WHEREAS, on June 14, 1999 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 4307 receiving the feasibility report and calling for a public hearing for Webber Hills sanitary sewer improvements; and WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 12th day of July, 1999, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council does hereby direct the City Engineer to prepare plans and specifications for the installation of samtaiy sewer for the Foxridge neighborhood. Adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on July 12,1999 by a vote of ____ayes and_____nays. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST. Linda S. Vee, City Clerk JWPfV /*• •• I Report For t #Fox Ridge Sanitary Sewer Orono, Minnesota June, 1999 File No. 139-GEN I/1J Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik &. I Associates Engineers & Architects Bonestroo, Rosene. Andertik snd Associates, tnc. ts an Affirmative ActiOrV^qua! Opportunity Employfr Principals: Occo C. Bonestroo. PE. • Joseph C Anderiiii. PE. • Marvin L Sorvala. PE. • Glenn R. Cook. PE. • Robert G Schunichc. PE. • Jerry A. Bourdon. P£. • RoOerc W. Rosene. PE.. Richard E. Turner. PE. and Susan M. Eoerlin. CM.. Senior Consultants Associate Principals: Howard A. Sanford. PE. • Keith A. Gordon. PE. • Robert R. Pfefferfe. PE. • Richard W Foster. PE • David O. Loskota. PE. • Robert C. Russek. AJ.A. • Marti A. Hanson, px • Michael T. Rautmann. PE. • Ted KField. PE. • Kenneth P. Anderson. PX • Mark R. Rolfs. PX • Sidney P. Williamson, PE., LS. • Robert F. Kotsmith • Agnes M. Ring • Allan Rick Schmidt. PE. Offices: St. Paul. Rochester. Wiiimar and St. Ooud. MM • Milwaukee. Wl WeOsite: www bonestroo com Junes, 1999 Mr. Greg Gappa Director of Ptiblic Service*; City of Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay MN 55323-0066 Re: Fox Ridge Feasibility Report File No. 139-GEN Dear Greg: As directed by City staff, we have reviewed the existing conditions and the possible installation of sanitary sewer to serve the Fox Ridge neighborhood. The neighborhood is located on the east and west sides of South Brown Road just south of the Luce Line trail in Orono. There are nine total properties that would benefit from sanitary sewer. City records indicate that most septic systems in the neighborhood are non-conforming or failing. Designs for both a gravity system and a grinder (pressure) system were considered as shown on Figures 1 and 2. The gravity system would require the installation of a permanent lift station in the Fox Ridge neighborhood. Gravity sewer pipe would be installed in the street and carry flows to the lift station. Sanitary sewer services would be extended to the property lines. The grinder system option would require the installation of a common forcemain along the edge of the existing street. Services would be extended to the prq>erty lines. Each residence would be served by a residential grinder station that would pump flows into the common forcemain In both the gravity and pressure options, the sewer pipe crossings under C.R. 146 and the Luce Line trail would be jacked or directionally bored. Both systems assume flows would be pumped to an existing gravity manhole at the intersection of Brown Road and Watertown Road in Long Lake. The following is a summary of the estimated costs for each option: Area # of Units Est. Project Cost Est. Cost/Unit Fox Ridge-Grinder 9 $190,000 $21,100 Fox Ridge-Gravity 9 $304,000 $33,800 The gravity sewer option would require that the sewer be installed in the roadway and therefore complete street reconstruction will be required. Street reconstruction costs have been included in the gravity sewer estimate shown above. The grinder option assumes that the forcemain would be directionally bored along the edge of the roadways and therefore street repairs would be necessary only at manhole locations. The estimated costs are based on 1999 unit prices and can be related to the ENR Construction Cost Index for May, 1999 of 6,006. Soil investigation work has not been completed and the estimated costs are based on typical Orono soils. 7:i3c \y/ac» ui/nhxA/aw ;iA ■ ct Paul MM ■ A<;i-6.^6-4Ano ■ Fax: 651-636-1311 The City held an informal neighborhood meeting with the residents of the Fox Ridge neighborhood earlier this year. The purpose of the meeting was to answer questions about the sewer options. The neighborhood appears to be in favor of a grinder system option based on resident input at the meeting and subsequent feedback to the City. The project would require a license agreement between the City and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MN DNR) to cross the Luce Line trail. Permits will be required from Hennepin County and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The construction of the sanitary sewer to serve the Fox Ridge neighborhood is feasible from an engineering standpoint. The project is necessary because of the non-conforming septic systems and potential pollution problems. The capital cost as well as operation and maintenance costs have been considered in determining that the project is cost effective. The cost of these improvements we interrelated and should be assigned equitably between all property owners. The following recommendations are presented for consideration by the Orono City Council: 1. That this Report be adopted as the guide for installation of sanitary sewer to serve the Fox Ridge neighborhood. 2. 3. That the City conduct a legal and fiscal review of the proposed project prior to the public hearing. That a public hearing be held on the proposed improvements. The total estimated project cost of $ 190,000 should be incorporated in the public notice. The total estimated cost of $190,000 for the grinder system includes a 5 percent contingency, a 20 pc^nt allowance for design, inspection, legal, and administration costs, and a 5 percent allowance for capitah^ interest and bonding costs during construction. The cost estimate does not include easement costs W could be incurred on the project. The installation, operation and maintenwce of the grinder stauons and the connection of the sewer between the property line and the home will be the responsibility of the property owners. Detailed cost efstimates for both options are attached for your review. We would be pleased to discuss this report further with the City Council or City staff at any mutually convenient time. Respectfully submitted, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC, Tom Kellogg I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me c: under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of M^esota. ^ ^ / ^ ------------------------------------------- Glenn R. Cook, P.E. Date: June 8.1999 Reg. No._,94?l 1 \ 1 39GEN\ 1 39FOXRO1 .OWC 3/9/1999 I39G£n FOX RIDGE SANITARY SEWER - GRAVITY OPTION PRFIIMIMARY nnfiT ESTIMATE 8" PVC sanitary sewer Jack 8* PVC sewer, Inch Casing Directional bore 4" HOPE forcemain Standard 4’ dia. MH MH overdepth 8* X 4’ wye 4* PVC service pipe Improved pipe foundation Televise sewer Mechanical trench compaction Submersible pump lift station Connect to existing manhole Mobilization Silt fence Bituminous surface removal Common excavation Geotextile fabric Class 5 aggregate base, 100% crushed Type 31 bituminous base course Type 41 bituminous wear course Bituminous material for tack coat Repair driveways Sod with 4" topsoil Seeding wAodsoII. mulch, and fertilizer LF 28.00 625 $17,500 LF 200.00 75 15,000 LF 22.00 2,300 50,600 EA 1,500.00 5 7,5C0 LF 100.00 10 1,000 EA 75.00 9 675 LF 20.00 270 5,400 LF 1.00 1,075 1,075 LF 1.00 700 700 LF 1.00 895 895 EA 55,000.00 1 55,000 EA 2,000.00 1 2,000 LS 5,000.00 1 5,000 LF 2.50 1,600 4,000 SY 2.00 2,600 5,200 CY 6.00 1,000 6,000 SY 1.50 2,600 3,900 TN 10.00 1,600 16,000 TN 32.00 315 10,080 TN 35.00 235 8,225 GL 1.50 150 225 EA 750.00 9 6,750 SY 2.50 2,350 5,875 AC 3,000.00 0.3 900 Estimated Constnjction Cost •»-5% Contingencies +20% Legal, Engineering and Administration +5% Capitalized Interest and Bonding Total Estimated Cost $229,500 11,475 $240,975 48,195 $289,170 14,459 $303,629 FOX RIDGE SANITARY SEWER - RESIDENTIAL GRINDER OPTION PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE 1 1/2" HOPE service pipe 1 1/2" HDPE service pipe-directional bore 2* HDPE forcemain-direclional bore HDPE service tee Curb stop Cleanout manhole Repair driveways Bituminous street patching Connect to existing manhole Erosion control fence Mobilization Sod with 4" topsoil Seeding wAopsoll, mulch, and fertilizer Residential orinder station_____________ Estimated Construction Cost •f5% Contingencies +20% Legal, Engineering and Administration +5% Capitalized Interest and Bonding Total Estimated Cost LF 10.00 100 $1,000 • F 20.00 360 7,200 LF . 20.00 2,950 59,000 EA 50.00 9 450 EA 200.00 9 1,800 EA 2,500.00 6 15,000 EA 750.00 3 2,250 SY 10.00 200 2,000 EA 2,000.00 1 2,000 LF 2.50 300 750 LS 5,000.00 1 5,000 SY 2.50 2,200 5,500 AC 3,000.00 0.3 900 EA 4,500.00 9 40,500 $143,350 7,168 $150,518 30,104 $180,621 9,031 $189j6S2 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 COiiMrii MltETlNQ JUL 1 2 1999 cityofohono 3 ROI-L The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Council Members Charles Kelley, Barbara Peterson, Richard Flint and Bob Sansevere. Representing Staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney l orn Barrett, Assistant Zoning Administrator Paul Weiitberger, Director of Public Seivices Greg Gappa, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, Senior Planning Coordinator Michael GafTron, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. (#1) 6:30 p.m. - Presentation Regarding Potential Westonka Area Communitj' Center Tom Reese addressed the City Council regarding the potential Westonka Area Community Center and requested that the City Council consider becoming a partner in this community center. Brad reviewed a number of facilities where different communities and organizations have joined together in developing community centers, noting that they have met with great success. Brad stated they would like to construct a new community center to accommodate the growing needs of Mound and the surrounding communities. Brad stated they would like to include additional gymnasium space, walking/running track, racquetball courts, bathing rooms, and other facilities. Brad remarked that a subcommittee has been formed to review their financing options as well, noting that this structure is estimated to cost approximately $16.2 million. Brad stated that additional work will continue to be done to build support for this project as well as the financial feasibility being further defined. Mayor Jabbour noted that the Mound-Westonka School District held a ten million dollar referendum to renovate an old building in 1998, noting that the City of Orono is no longer obligated under that referendum. Jabbour stated that approximately 40 percent of the school-age residents of Orono attend Westonka. Kelley commented that the residents of the City of Orono may be somewhat reluctant to enter into another referendum at this time, noting that they have reeently passed a new school referendum which will increase the residents' taxes. Kelley suggested that Lifetime Fitness Center be contacted as a possible participant in this project. Reese stated the Lifetime is involved in the Plymouth facility and that ♦he demographics might not be in their favor to support the Westonka Area Community Center. Reese commented in his opinion there is more than 20,000 people in the surrounding communities which could help support this center. Reese inquired whether the City of Orono would be willing to draft a letter indicating th'»t they are Page 1 *. • * <ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 (^1 - Westonka Area Community Center, Continued) positive about this project. Sansevcru indicated he would be willing to join the Westonka Area Community Center. Mayor Jabbour thanked the committee for their fine efforts on their project, noting that financing for this center will need to be looked at in more depth. Flint commented that approximately 7,200 people reside in Orono. Reese stated that they will need to involve a large number of the surrounding communities, which should generate approximately 30,000 to 40,000 people, in order for this center to be viable. Mayor Jabbour thanked the committee for their presentation. (#2) 6:50 p.m. > Award Sale of General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1999 - Resolution No. 4310 Carolyn Drude, Bond Consultant with Ehlers Associates, reviewed the competitive bids received for the sale of bonds in connection with the sanitary sewer projects for Shoreline/Heritage Lane, Orono Orchards, and Edgewood Hills. Drude stated that four bids have been received, with the City being able to obtain a S.0668 interest rate. Drude noted that the City of Orono has aAal rating. Mayor Jabbour noted that the City's last bond rate was 4.19 percent. Drude stated that in general interest rates have risen. Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4310, a Resolution Awarding the Sale of General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1999, in the amount of Sl,190,000, for the funding of sanitary sewer projects for Shoreline/ Heritage Lane, Orono Orchards, and Edgewood Hills. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (it3) 7:00 p.m. - Public Hearing - Webber Hills Sewer Project A. Order Plans and Specifications for Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Project - Resolution No. 4311 Gappa stated that the procedure for tonight's hearing will consist of an overview by City Staff regarding the sewer project, followed by questions by City Council and City Staff. The public will then be given an opportunity to ask questions and comment on this project, followed by a vote by the City Council on whether the plans and specifications for this project should be ordered. Page 2 r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 (#3 - Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Project, Continued) Gappa reviewed a map depicting the Webber Hills area, noting that some lots are shown with only one new site, or no sites, because of the lot sizes and that the existing systems have already disturbed part of the lot. The fact that some lots may only have one available septic site is a concern in the event that the property owner encounters problems with their new mound system. To verify that conforming septic sites are available for all properties, soil borings and detailed site investigations would need to be completed for all of the properties in this project. Gappa stated on all new developments with a minimum of two acres, the City requires a primary and secondary septic site. Kelley inquired whether the well and existing septic site was taken into consideration when Gappa illustrated the available septic sites on the properties. Gappa stated that the wells and current septic sites were not taken into consideration at the time the boxes were drawn in illustrating a potential septic site. Kellogg gave an overview of the proposed system for this project, noting that the majority of the residents favor a grinder pump sewer system. The residents were opposed to a gravity sewer system with a municipal lift station due to the high costs that would be assessed to each property. Kellogg stated that each resident would be required to purchase, install and maintain their own grinder pump for this system, with the estimated cost for a grinder pump system approximately $16,500 per unit. Gappa commented that there are 37 properties in the project area, with 26 of the properties having non-conforming septic systems, six properties having newer conforming mound systems, and two properties have older conforming trench systems, which demonstrates a need for this project. Gappa stated currently there are no systems that are actually failing. Geoffrey Jillson, 2100 Webber Hills Road, inquired whether a verbatim record of these proceedings would be created and whether he would be able to obtain a copy of the audio tape being made in connection with these proceedings. Mayor Jabbour stated that the City is not making a verbatim record of these proceedings but that Mr. Jillson is free to have his own private service create a verbatim record. Jillson indicated that arrangement would be fine. Tom Barrett, City Attorney, indicated that if Mr. Jillson wished to have a verbatim record created, he is entitled to do that. The City recorder creates minutes, which are maintained by the City, and the tape itself is not a part of the record. Pet“r Lythe, 2065 Webber Hills Road, stated he is one of the four individuals who reviewed the gravity system and the low flow system or pressured system, and a variety of alternate septic systems, which included mound, inground, and a few others. L>lhe indicated in the past he has Page 3 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 (#3 - Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Project, Continued) owned a waste management treatment company and is presently involved in companies that are active in alternate waste management systems for commercial and residential, Lythe indicated during the last eight to nine months a large number of residents have been contacted regarding this proposed project and a significant amount of information has been obtained regarding different waste management treatment systems. Lythe commented he is appearing tonight on behalf of 12 other individuals who have signed proxies indicating their desire that Lythe represent them at tonight’s meeting. Lythe stated that out of the 22 failing systems in this particular area as defined by City Code, the majority of those individuals would prefer to have City sewer. Some alternate systems have been reviewed, but unfortunately, at this time, have not been approved by the State of Minnesota, but do provide a less expensive approach to this problem. Lythe commented that property value should also be taken into account when a new septic system is being proposed, noting that the majority of the residents who move into the Orono area are not familiar with traditional septic systems. Mayor Jabbour requested that Mr. Lythe gear his comments towards this particular project, noting that he is quite familiar with the various septic systems that are currently available. Lythe stated that based upon their review of the area, a mound system is probably not a viable option for the majority of the residents due to the high maintenance and the unsightly appearance of a mound system, as well as the lack of available sites. L>lhe commented that the pressure system was reviewed as well, which will help to preserve the environment and actually reduce the costs to the homeo\vner in the long run. Lythe stated that there are some individuals who have recently installed a mound system who have concerns that they will be pressured into converting to City sewer and bear an unreasonable financial burden. Mayor Jabbour stated that the City of Orono since 1990 has taken a non-adversarial role in providing City sewer to its residents and does not mandate that the property owner hooks up to City sewer unless their current system is failing and the property owner has no other options available. Jabbour noted that the City of Orono has a certain number of MUSA units available to its residents and that the MUSA units are in high demand. The City of Orono has taken a strong position that unless the property owner is requesting hookup to City sewer and a need is demonstrated, the City does not force the property owner to hookup to City sewer. Davt Williams, 2055 Webber Hills, commented that he installed a mound system in 1986, and sees this as a viable solution to some of the residents in this area. Williams stated he would like the mound system to remain as an option to those residents who desire to install one rather than hooking up to City sewer. Kelley stated that the City is not requesting that everyone in this area hook up to City sewer if their present system is conforming. Kelley indicated that the costs for those residents who choose not to hook up will be borne by the City until the property owner decides to hook up, at which time the resident will pay the initial cost as well as interest. Page 4 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 (#3 - Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Project, Continued) Lythe stated according to his knowledge the property owner is required to hook up to City sewer at the time of sale. Kelley stated the City of Orono does not require hook up at the time of sale. Mayor Jabbour stated the City of Orono has identified a number of trouble spots and are gradually working towards providing City sewer to those areas. John Cashmore, 2075 Webber Hills, commented that this project has caused some disputes among the neighbors, noting that he is against having a mound system due to the large number of trees on his property. John Menter, Menter & Associates, stated that they have not been afforded the opportunity to review the feasibility study generated as a part of this project, noting that the residents should be informed as to the proposed system and the proposed costs to see whether the benefit to hook up to City sewer will be realized. Menter stated there also is a concern whether this system is actually needed, noting that there are no failing systems in this area. Menter inquired whether hookup to City water was considered as part of this project as well. Mayor Jabbour commented that the costs for City sewer and water would be approximately $40,000, which is usually cost prohibitive for most property owners. Menter inquired whether the City Council would be willing to table action on this matter until the residents have been fully apprised of what the costs are and what this project will entail. Menter requested that a copy of the feasibility study be supplied. Mayor Jabbour remarked that this is merely a public hearing regarding whether plans and specifications should be ordered for this particular projecL noting that the final costs have not yet been determined. An assessment hearing will be held at the time the final figures are determined. Jabbour stated that the City Engineer is estimating that the costs for each individual property owner is approximately $16,000 for the grinder system, noting that the cost for a mound system is approximately $14,000 to $15,000. Gappa stated that City Staff conducted two informational meetings regarding this project where the proposed system and estimated costs were discussed at length. Gappa commented in his view the residents are fully informed as to the project. Kelley stated in his view he feels City sewer is a benefit to the property owners. Sansevere commented in his opinion the assessment will be recouped by the property owner at the time of sale. Mayor Jabbour reiterated that a property owner will not be forced to hook up to City sewer unless Pages • : ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 (Hi - Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Project, Continued) their system is failing and they have no other options available. Jillson stated in his opinion the majority of the residents do not fully understand what this system entails. Jillson requested that the cost estimates be put in writing. Mayor Jabbour remarked that the final costs for this project have not yet been determined and that the City will hold an assessment hearing, at which time the final costs will be available and will be assessed to the individual property owner. Jabbour indicated that the City will pay the costs for those property owners who elect not to hook up to City sewer. Jillson requested that the City obtain a generic bid for the grinder system and hook up. Moorse indicated that the City did obtain a generic bid for a previous project and the residents indicated that they felt like they were pushed into a specific type of grinder. Mayor Jabbour commented that in order for the City to obtain a generic bid regarding hookup, it would end up costing the property owners more money in the long run. Bill O'Meara, 2000 Webber Hills, stated he was informed by the City at the time he purchased the house that he would need to install a mound system and that the existing system was condemned by the City. O'Meara stated in 1 994, he approached the City regarding the possibility of City sewer being expanded to this area, noting he would not have spent $10,000 on a sewer system had he known that City sewer would be expended to this area five years later. O'Meara stated the City mandated that he install a mound system at that time and that he was also required to purchase three 1,000 gallon tanks. O'Meara remarked in his view he eventually will hook up to City sewer but that he should not be forced to pay interest on the assessment since he was mandated by the City to install a mound system and that he would like to do it without a grinder and have his tanks pumped annually. Mayor Jabbour stated that City Staff would need to be involved in the decision on whether a grinder pump is necessary. Jabbour indicated that the regulations regarding septic systems have gotten stricter over the years. Kelley commented that in his view environmental issues will become more and more of a concern in the next few years and the laws will tend to become stricter. Mayor Jabbour stated that the City Council normally determines whether an area will be provided with City sewer by the number of non-conforming and failing systems in that area and not by the number of people who would like to have City sewer. Jabbour indicated that no final decision has been made by the City Council regarding whether this project should be approved. Byron Johnson, 2275 Webber Hills, indicated he was in favor of the proposed system. Lythe commented that a number of people peripheral to this area are interested in hooking up to City sewer, and inquired whether they would have the ability to connect to City sewer. Page 6 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 (Hi - Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Project, Continued) Mayor Jabbour remarked that due to the limited number of MUSA units that are available to the City, those residents more than likely would not be able to hook up to City sewer unless their system was failing. Jillson stated that the national trend regarding septic systems is to have localized, onsite sewage treatment systems, noting that none of the systems in this area have actually failed based on MPC standards. Mayor Jabbour remarked that two systems were found to be failing according to MPC standards. Jillson commented that those systems are failing according to Orono Ordinance and not MPC standards. Mayor Jabbour commented that he has had lengthy discussions with MPC and that these systems are considered to be failing based upon MPC standards. Jillson stated that the MPC needs to comply with Minnesota Law, which requires that actual efnuent be present on the surface and that there is no requirement to replace these systems. Kelley inquired why Jillson does not elect to opt out of this project. Jillson stated that he has a right to be heard and that he is requesting that some alternative systems be explored. Jillson commented he does not have a problem with the low flow system, but would like to have the final costs on this project and the type cf system be fully explained. Jillson noted that the initial estimated costs for this project were significantly higher than what is now being proposed. Mayor Jabbour stated that City Staff is fully informed on these issues and that City Staff will be autliorized to get those answers and the final costs for this project. Jillson inquired whether an engineering firm could be obtained that has experience with low flow systems. Mayor Jabbour stated that he will not continue to debate with Mr. Jillson. Lester Beemink, 2110 Webber Hills, stated in his view it is extremely important for the property owners to be aware of whether they have an alternate septic site on their property. Beemink stated he is not in favor of a mound system. Mayor Jabbour commented that the City recently has had a property owner who owns 18 acres approach the City about the possibility of obtaining City sewer due to the fact that every'single one of his alternate sewer sites were contaminated as a result of heavy equipment being driven over them. Jabbour reiterated that it was not his intention that this become an adversarial meeting but rather an Page 7 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28.1999 (#3 - Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Project, Continued) opportunity for the residents to become informed as to what is being proposed. Sanscvere commented that Jillson appears to have a good background in this area and that it would benefit the City and residents if he would be willing to work together on this project rather than being confrontational. Sansevere stated this is the first opportunity he has had to hear the information regarding this project. Jillson stated he did attend the public hearings conducted by City Staff, noting he does have expertise and knowledge in this field which extends that of City Staff. Jillson remarked that in his opinion City Staff had already predetermined what type of system would be utilized and that his comments for the most part fell on deaf ears. Sansevere stated that the City would like to work together with the local residents. Julie Wiens, 2170 Shevlin Drive, inquired whether the grinder system is indeed a long-term solution to this problem. Mayor Jabbour stated that the grinder system is the system that is utilized from the residence to the City sewer and that the grinder is in reality a pump and is replaced at a nominal cost. Wiens inquired how long this proposed system is guaranteed to function. Jabbour stated the system should work indefinitely, but that the pump will need to be replaced periodically. Kellogg stated depending on the manufacturer, the pump will last anywhere from five to 12 years, and would need to be replaced at a cost of approximately $500. Mayor Jabbour stated that if the electricity goes out and the residence is not hooked up to a grinder system, there is no way for the sewage to get to the City sewer. Jabbour stated that most people prefer the gravity system. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4311, a Resolution Ordering the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Project with Project Construction and Bonding to be Completed in the Year 2000. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (Recess taken from 8:37 • 8:47 p.m.) CONSENT AGENDA (U4) Approve/Amend Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to amend tonight's agenda to include 14A, Orono Orchards Sanitary Sewer Change Order #1. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Pages ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 Items 6, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 14A, 15, and 16 were added to the Consent Agenda. Kelley moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *(#5) Regular Council Meeting of June 14,1999 Kelley moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the minutes of the Regular City Council meeting of June 14,1999, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Sherokee Use, Representative Use thanked the members of the City Council for attending the Park Tour on June 5,1999. CONSENT AGENDA Gail Briner requested that her application be removed from the consent agenda. Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to remove Application #2497, Gail Briner, 1760 Shad>'>vood Road, from the consent agenda. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT - Lili McMillan, Representative Lili McMillan reviewed the LMCD's Year 2000 budget and levy, noting that the City of Orono's share of the levy for the year 2000 is $32,998.54, which is a 24.7 percent increase over the 1999 levy. McMillan stated the main reason for the increase is that in 1999, the LMCD expended $15,000 of the Administrative Fund reserves and $30,000 of Exotics Management Fund reserves to reduce the levy. For the year 2000, the LMCD will not be expending any of its Administrative Fund reserve and only $10,000 of reserves will be expended from the Exotics Management Fund. McMillan remarked that this budget has been approved by the LMCD, noting that she did vote in favor of the proposed budget. McMillan commented that $15,000 has been budgeted for a boat density study and a user attitude survey, and that milfoil management is a major expense. McMillan remarked that presently there are not a lot of options available for milfoil management and that the LMCD is looking at the option of introducing weevils to the lake as one means of controlling the milfoil. Kelley inquired whether there was a downside to utilizing weevils. McMillan stated that to her knowledge there is not a downside to the weevils, and that the DNR is introducing weevils on a small scale. McMillan stated that this option has shown good Page 9 I■ ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 (Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, Continued) results. McMillan commented that one reason why the budget and levy cannot be reduced is that the LMCD is required to keep 12 months of reserves in its budget. Mayor Jabbour stated that the LMCD should be more supportive of environmental issues. McMillan noted that a public hearing has been scheduled for July 14 to discuss a proposed change to an ordinance for the LMCD relating to boat storage, density and multiple dock facilities on Lake Minnetonka. Mayor Jabbour stated that currently the ordinance allows for one boat for every' 50 feet of shoreline, with the proposed amendment changing that to one boat for every 100 feet of shoreline. Jabbour indicated he is supportive of efforts to reduce the density of boats on the lake, but that this ordinance is discriminatory and is site oriented. McMillan commented that more discussion should be held on this issue. McMillan stated in her opinion a significant number of people might be in favor of this amendment in order to reduce the number of boats stored on the lake. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Sandy Smith, Representative Smith stated she had no comment at this time but would be available to answer any questions the City Council may have. PUBLIC COMMENTS None ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *(U6) #2372 BARRY & JANIECE HAGLUND, 4590 NORTH ARM DRIVE WEST FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - RESOLUTION NO. 4312 Kelley moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4312, a Resolution Approving the Plat of North Arm Overlook. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#7) #2439 SERVICE 800,2190 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - REQUEST FOR ACCESS REVISION Gaffron stated that there is a question over what MnDOT will approve for an intersection, noting Page 10 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 (U2439 Service 800, Continued) that MnDot is strongly discouraging the eastbound left-turn into the site, with the permit being issued to Service 800 only, and any future use by Often or conversion to a Cit>' road would require a new MnDOT permit. Often has indicated he would like a more full-service intersection. Often applied to MnDOT for reconveyance of the Brimhall triangle property in April, and has applied for an access permit on behalf of Service 800. MnDOT has indicated that they will agree to issue a permit for an access that incorporates all possible turning movements e.xcept for a left-turn out (eastbound from the site). MnEKDT has expressed concerns regarding safety if an eastbound left-turn is allowed into the site. City Staff believes the best solution to the access issues in this area of Highway 12 is a frontage road, noting that the City Council has advocated limiting access to Highway 12 in Maple Plain through a frontage road system. City Staff is recommending that the eastbound left-turn lane be constructed and that left-tum-in movements be allowed by MnDOT. Tom O’Keefe, MnDOT, stated that a three-legged intersection would allow for two lanes of traffic in each direction, has five conflict points where vehicle paths cross and where an accident is likely. With a four-legged intersection, with left turns being allowed out of each leg of the intersection, there is a total of 16 conflict points. The accident rate for a four-legged intersection is higher than that of a three-legged intersection. If a left turn in is allowed and not out, which would not allow for through movement through the intersection, it would eliminate eight conflict points. O’Keefe indicated that MnDOT is paying more attention to preserving the safety and efficiency of intersections by limiting access. Kellev inquired whether Hennepin County would take over maintenance of this road once the Highway 12 project was completed. O’Keefe indicated that Hennepin County would maintain this road, noting that the County also has the same basic policy of limiting access onto Highway 12 and limiting intersections to no closer than one-half mile. Often commented that in his view MnDOT is discriminating, biased and prejudiced, noting that the City of Long Lake currently has three full intersections and that MnDOT is not supportive of one full intersection in the City of Orono on Highway 12. Often stated in his opinion this should be a full intersection and that MnDOT should bear the costs of construction of the intersection. Often stated he currently only has two right-ins. O’Keefe stated it is within MnDOTs authority to close an intersection. Sansevere inquired why there was such a long delay in responding to this application. O’Keefe remarked that he is unsure why this application was not handled sooner, noting that a different department would handle this request. Page 11 r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 (^2439 Service 800, Continued) Jean Mork-Bredeson, stated that one major issue is tlie expense of constructing this median that Service 800 is being requested to bear. One option is to allow a left-turn in rather than simply right-in and right-out. Mork-Bredeson stated that most of her staff travel east to west and live north of the site and that a right-in/right-out would be safer for her employees. Mayor Jabbour stated that had the City Council known this intersection would only be a right-in/ right-out, they would not have voted in favor of this access. Jabbour remarked that the City would like to provide an access for Otten and other City residents by having this become a full intersection. Mork-Bredeson stated that Service 800 is ready to occupy the building once the access issue is resolved. Kelley stated in his view this should be a full intersection, and if MnDOT refuses, this Council's view would be reflected in the minutes for future City Councils. Sansevere stated he supports full access. Flint commented that the City does not need a full intersection at this point but that perhaps this could be reviewed in three to four years. Otten stated that additional costs would be incurred to reconstruct the intersection, noting that the design is proposing to construct concrete curbs to prohibit the left-turns. Otten suggested that signs be posted prohibiting a left turn rather than the concrete curbs being constructed. O'Keefe stated MnOOT would not post a sign due to safety concerns. Mayor Jabbour stated he supports a full intersection and that MnDOT should be more supportive rather than designing an intersection that is difficult to change in the future. O'Keefe stated that the construction costs would not differ much between the two intersections, and tliat MnDOTs primary concern is safety. Peterson commented that the motorists are already being forced to make a number of U-tums along Highway 12 to access certain businesses. Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, reaffirming the City of Orono's position that a full intersection should be constructed at Brimhall Avenue and Highway 12. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Mork-Bredeson stated she understands the City Council's motion, but at present she is left without an access to her property. O'Keefe stated in his opinion MnDOT will not approve a full intersection at this location and Page 12 i ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28.1999 (^2439 Service 800, Continued) that a right-in/right-out intersection i.> being proposed. Kelley stated that MnDOT will need to notify Orono of their final decision regarding this intersection, but that the City is in favor of a full intersection at this location. Kelley remarked that should MnDOT refuse to construct a full intersection, then he would be supportive of a right-in/ right-out intersection to allow Service 800 access to their property. Mayor Jabbour encouraged MnDOT to consider a full intersection at this location. O'Keefe stated that MnDOT is proposing the safest intersection for this location. Mork-Bredeson stated she would like to have a left-in/right-in/right-out intersection and that full access could be negotiated in the future, which would allow her to construct her driveway. Sansevere inquired whether MnDOT would consider a full intersection. O'Keefe stated that MnDOT may consider that request if the City's position is adamant in that regard. Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, to request MnDOT provide a left turn lane and a right-in/rigbt-out intersection until the City of Orono negotiates a full intersection at Brimhall Avenue and Highway 12, with full access to the Often property. O'Keefe stated that if Otten should change the use of his property, that would require a new permit. Sansevere inquired how the full intersection into MPFC was approved by MnDOT. O'Keefe stated that that intersection was improved without a permit being issued by MnDOT and that MnDOT is pursuing possible closure of that intersection. Kelley inquired whether the Mayor's first motion still stands in light of the second motion. Mayor Jabbour replied yes. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0 *(#8) #2474 SUSAN WILSON, 325 BROWN ROAD SOUTH/2510 ABINGDON WAY, LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT - RESOLUTION NO. 4313 Kelley moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4313, a Resolution Approving a Subdivbion of a Lot Line Rearrangement for Properties Located at 325 Brown Road South and 2150 Abingdon Way. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 13 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28.1999 m #2477 GEORGE W. STICKNEY, 250/340 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD SOUTH PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL - RESOLUTION NO. 4314 George Stickney, Applicant, was present, along with Mark Gronberg, Sur\eyor. Gaffron stated that most of the issues have been resolved regarding this application, noting that less area credit is being given concerning the wetland area and that easements will need to be obtained. As a result of that, the proposed road is being shifted somewhat, noting that the road does not meet the 275' radius for a 30 mile an hour road, but City Staff feels a variance for the two radii of the private road at 200' and 225' is not a major issue. GafTron stated the developer shall grant drainage and utility easements five feet wide along all interior lot lines and ten feet wide along all right-of-ways and along perimeter lot lines. A final grading, drainage and erosion control plan must be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat approval.. The developer is proposing to construct a stormwater pond on Lot 5 to provide for stormwater detention and treatment. The City Engineer has recommended reducing the size of the outlet pipe located under the Luce Line Trail, which will reduce the rate of stormwater downstream but will increase the temporary high v/atcr level of the wetland during storm events. The Applicant is also proposing to raise the elevation of the horse trail portion of the Luce Line located Just north of the main trail, which may involve filling a small portion of designated wetland within the plat and within the Luce Line Trail. City Staff feels this issue can be worked out. City Staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat. Gaffron noted that a letter has been received from Suzann Willhite of the DNR regarding this development. Stickney indicated that they have worked very hard with City Staff to resolve most of these issues. Mark Gronberg indicated he has no comment. Willhite stated the DNR has several concerns regarding the preliminary grading and drainage plan. Willhite stated the culvert v. Ml need to be replaced by the developer, with the DNR continuing to own and maintain all culverts on state property. Gronberg stated there will be a homeowners association and that they will assume responsibility of the stormwater pond. Willhite stated the DNR would like the agreement for the maintenance of the drainage structures be betiveen the DNR and the City of Orono, even if the City of Orono requires the homeowners association to maintain the structure. The DNR also requires inspection authority on the drainage structures and horse trail treadway construction. Mayor Jabbour indicated that the City will not be responsible for maintaining the culvert and the trail. Gaffron stated the City's policy generally has been that the homeowners association assumes Page 14 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 (#2471 George Stickney, Continued) responsibility for maintenance of the culvert. Willhite stated the DNR would like the City to be the contact person but not the responsible party for maintaining this culvert. Willhite commented that the drainage affects a larger area than just this development. Mayor Jabbour stated the City will be the contact person but will not assume the responsibility for maintenance of the culvert. Kelley suggested that the motion requires that the homeowners association includes in their bylaws that they have sole responsibility for maintenance of this pond and culvert. Gronberg stated the Luce Line Trail is the responsibility of the DNR. Gaffron inquired who will be paying the expense of the culvert. Gronberg indicated that Stickney will assume that cost. Flint noted that the Park Commission has recommended that that Applicant dedicate additional land to move the existing bike trail further from Old Crystal Bay Road. Gaffron stated that fact is listed in the resolution and could be added as a condition of approval in the resolution. Peterson moved, Flint seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4314, a Resolution Granting Preliminary Approval of a Class III Subdivision Located at 250 and 340 Old Crystal Bay Road South, with the understanding that the homeowners association will modify their agreement to include maintenance of the culvert located under the Luce Line. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#10) #2497 GAIL S. BRINER, 1760 SHADYWOOD ROAD -VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 4315 Briner stated she was unaware that she is required to remove the plastic from all rock beds on the property, and to remove the plastic and rock from the area under the deck, and requested that the City Council reconsider that condition due to the water drainage problems she has experienced in the past in her basement. Mayor Jabbour stated that is a normal condition that the City requires, noting that it is against City Code to have plastic underla>'ment. Briner stated the plastic has been in place for over 15 years. Mayor Jabbour stated that the regulation regarding plastic underlayment has been in existence for Page 15 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 (^2497 Gail Briner, Continued) almost 23 years. GafTron stated the hardcover ordinance went into effect in 1975 and has evolved over the years, noting that in the 1980s, the City Council declared that fabric and plastic underlayment should be considered as hardcover and should be removed. Sansevere inquired whether this could be grandfathered in. GafTron stated that whenever an application is submitted and the Applieant is over the limit on hardcover, they are requested to remove the plastic underlayment as a condition of approval in an effort to reduce hardcover. Sandra Smith, Planning Commission Representative, stated this item was discussed at the Planning Commission meeting in an effort to reduce overall hardcover on the property. Briner stated the plastic was originally put down to prevent water from coming Into her basement, noting that some excavation and minor grading has been done around the foundation in an effort to control the water drainage problems. Briner inquired whether the rock also needs to be removed around the house. Mayor Jabbour stated it is the City's position every time an application is submitted to try to make the property as conforming as possible. Gaffron stated the Planning Commission recommended that all plastic and rock from under the deck be removed, noting that the rock around the house can remain, provided the plastic is removed. Gaffron stated the issue regarding water drainage problems was not discussed at the Planning Commission level. Mayor Jabbour inquired whether the City Council should vote on this application tonight. Briner indicated yes. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4315, a Resolution Granting Variances to Permit Construction of a Deck and to Allow Hardcover in the 0-75' Lakeshore Setback Area, for property located at 1760 Shadywood Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT This item follows the Engineer Report. ENGD«:ER REPORT Page 16 r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28.1999 (#11) MOONEY LAKE OUTLET Gappa stated the City was requested last year to petition the MCWD to complete a feasibility study for this project. The feasibility study has been completed by Boncstroo Engineers. Because the lake does not have an outlet, there is a concern about rising water levels in the lake. High water elevations have been causing damage to trees, yards and landscaping. Approximately 200 trees are in danger at this time. Gappa indicated the feasibility study has identified four options, with City Staff preferring Option I. Option 1 includes a pumping station on Dayton's property with piping south and east to the County Road 6/North Femdale Road intersection. A connection would then be made to the new storm sewer system in North Femdale Road. This system drains into Hadley Lake, then south through Wayzata. Gappa stated the recommendation is that the lake elevation be allowed to fluctuate between 987 and 988. It is estimated that beginning at elevation 988 pumping would be necessary every three to five years. To reduce downstream impacts, the pumping rate would only be one cubic foot per second and would be limited to off peak conditions. At one cubic foot per second, after 60 to 70 days of pump operation, the lake elevation would be lowered by one foot. Gappa stated the other options identified in the feasibility study are not feasible. The main consideration for this option is that this project has only local benefits or larger watershed district system benefits and does not have any water quality benefits for other water bodies within the district. Kellogg stated this issue has been incorporated into the construction of Femdale Road. Gappa stated an agreement will need to be worked out as to when pumping will commence and stop. Dayton indicated he has been regularly losing trees and that this hopefully will help save the tree line along the lakeshore. Da>1on indicated he is willing to accommodate this project. Gappa stated funding for this project also needs to be worked out, with one option being to assess the costs. City Staff feels if it is assessed, the assessment should be assessed to all of the properties in the drainage area. Peterson moved, Kelley seconded, directing City Staff to notify the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District that the City of Orono would like to proceed with Option 1 as outlined in the feasibility study completed by Bonestroo & Associates. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Kelley indicated he would like the MCWD to do the annual maintenance on this project. Page 17 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Mayor Jabbour suggested the City change its attitude regarding hiring, and possibly changing (Mayor/Council Report, Continued) the budget to retain City employees, noting that the City has lost a number of employees recently due to a lower pay scale. Mayor Jabbour inquired what the City is currently paying for the county assessor. Moorse stated that they are anticipating approximately $94,000 in assessor fees for ne.xt year. Flint commented that in his view the county assessor does not understand lakeshore property. Kelley stated the overall tax system should be changed in St. Paul. Mayor Jabbour stated the City needs to review the pay structure for its employees. Sansevere inquired whether a counter-offer could be made to the employee considering leaving employment. Moorse indicated that Staff is conducting a salary survey, and will have the information available as part of the budget process. Gappa stated in his opinion the residents in the Webber Hills area have been adequately informed about the sewer project. Mayor Jabbour requested that the City Administrator respond to the concerns expressed in the letter received from Edmund Rydell regarding the old sewer property on Orono Orchard Road located in Long Lake. Sansevere expressed his thanks to Megan Vee for setting up a City web site. Kelley recommended the City create a listing of the homeowners associations in the City, as well as a contact person and copies of ail covenants and agreements on file that pertain to that development. *(#12) SPRING HILL GOLF COURSE TRAIL AGREEMENT Kelley moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the Spring Hill Golf Course Trail Agreement subject to review and approval by the City Attorney. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 18 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28.1999 *(#13) NO PARKING COUNTY ROAD 19 NARROWS BRIDGE - RESOLUTION NO. 4316 Kelley moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4316, a Resolution Requesting that Hennepin County Install "No Parking" Signs on County Road 19, North of the Lake Minnetonka Narrows Bridge. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *(#14) PURCHASE OF WATER FROM SPRING PARK FOR NAVARRE WATER PLANT REHABILITATION Kelley moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve payment of invoice from the City of Spring Park in the amount of $74,523.07, for purchase of water during the Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rrhabilitation Project, with payment to be made from the Water Operating Fund, Line Item 601-49400-387, with a budget adjustment completed to reflect this expenditure. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *(#15) BELL SOUTH ANTENNA APPROVAL Kelley moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the installation of a whip antenna for paging services on the City's Navarre water tower by Bell South, subject to working out a lease agreement acceptable to the City and Bell South. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *(#16) RESIGNATION OF BRUCE VANG, BUILDING INSPECTOR Kelley moved, Sansevere seconded, to accept the resignation of Bruce Vang from his position as Building Inspector, effective June 14,1999. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT Tom Barrett had nothing to report. *(#17) LICENSES Kelley moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the following licenses: Spring Hill Golf Course - Cigarette License Timothy Ivory 725 Sixth Avenue North VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 19 I ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 28,1999 *(#I8) BILLS Kelley moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 11:03 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ATTEST: ► Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Page 20 Couwrii r/ipeTINQ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ ^ CITY Oh OMOiyg DATE: 6/28/99 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Planning Intern Administrator Revie>ved:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2488 Gregg Klohn 4455 North Shore Drive Variance-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:27,000 s.f. Application: The applicant has proposed to rebuild a garage that was damaged in the May 1998 storm. The new garage would be constructed in the same area of the existing garage. However, the new garage is proposed to be 4' wider and 5' longer than the existing garage (will be 14' X 24'). The applicant seeks approval of a variance for side yard setback and rear yard setback. This application requires the following variance approval: 1.Variance from Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B): To permit a side yard and rear yard setback variance to allow a 336 S.f. garage to be built in place of a damaged garage 2.Variance from Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L)(2): (Allowed hardcover in the 250'-500' lakeshore setback). Existing on the lot is 32.8% of hardcover. The garage construction would add 151 s.f. of hardcover totaling 2,172 s.f. (35.5%). PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Con.;;u‘jSion recommended by a 6 to 0 vote to: Deny the application as presented for reasons noted below: 1. In 1998 the applicant received a hardcover variance to allow 32.8% in the 250'-500' lakeshore setback area where 30% is allowed. 2. The proposed garage would encroach the side yard setback at 3' where 1 O' is required. Also, the rear yard adjacent street is 10.9' where 30' is required when the garage doors face the street. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To direct staff to draft resolution for the July 26, 1999 City Council meeting. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 PHONE: (612)249-4600 FAX: (612)249-4616 TO: Gregg Klohn 4455 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 TYPE OF APPUCATION: DATE OF MEETING: 6/21/99 ZONING FILE #2488 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 24, 1999 COPIES TO: Variance VOTE:0 FOR 6 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Denial for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Construction of 14'x24' garage at location shown on application was denied due to setbacks and amount of hardcover in 25C/-500' area. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council July 12, 1999, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval Ly the Planning Commission. X;\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS'.CAROLE\PCACnON\2488-2 L- MEMO TO: t:'' * FROM: DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Planning Intern June 14,1999 SUBJECT: #2488 Gregg Klohn 4455 North Shore Drive Variances Application: Last month the Planning Commission tabled the application for variances for Gregg Klohn. The direction by the Planning Commission was to allow more time for the applicant to allow him to review other possible locations on his property to rebuild his damaged garage. The applicant has waived the 60 day time limit. Upon review of different options and meeting with staff, the applicant would like to stay with his original plan. The location of his well and a power pole make it difficult to locate the garage on the northeast section of the lot. Also, if the garage were to be located on the northeast section of the lot, a turn around area would be needed adding to the areas hardcover amount. The applicant has also stated he would remove a shed when he replaces tht garage which changes the proposed hardcover amount in the 250-500' area. The existing hardcover is 2,021 s.f (32.8%) and the new proposed is 2,111 s.f. (34.2%). TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Wendy Bottenberg, Planning Intern DATE:May 11,1999 SUBJECT:#2488 Gregg Klohn 4455 North Shore Drive Variances — Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IB 27,000 s.f. One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) (.62 acres) Application: The applicant has proposed to rebuild a garage that was damaged in the May 1998 storm. The new garage would be constructed in the same area of the existing garage. However, the new garage is proposed to be 4' wider and 5' longer than the existing garage (will be 14' x 24'). The applicant seeks approval of a variance for side yard setback and rear yard setback. The existing and proposed garage is located within the 250'-500' lakeshore setback. A variance was granted in 1998 (File #2424) for hardcover to be 2,164 s.f. or 35.1% instead of the allowed 30%. The applicant then constructed an addition smaller than approved and removed a shed that are also located in this hardcover area. This reduced the hardcover to 2,021 s.f. or 32.8%. The proposed garage increases the hardcover amount in this setback area 151 s.f. to 2,172 s. f. or 35.3?'... This application requires the following variance: 1. Section 10.24, Subd. 5 (B): To permit a side yard and rear yard setback variance to allow a 336 s. f. garage to be built in place of a damaged garage. 2. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 L (2): (Allowed Hardcover in the 250'- 500’ lakeshore setback). Existing on the lot is 32.8% of hardcover. The garage construction would add 151 s.f. of hardcover totaling 2,172 s.f. (35.3%). #2488 Gregg Klohn 4455 North Shore Drive Variances 5/10/99 Page I ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards: LR-IB (1 Acre)Lot Area Lot Width Sideyard Adj Lot Rear Yard Required 43,560 s.f.140’10’30‘ Proposed 27,000 s.f.98’3’10.9 ’ The new garage would encroach into the side yard adjacent lot and rear yard setback requirements for the LR-IB zoning district. Hardcover : Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0’-75 ’5,968 s.f.0 s.f 0 s.f 0 s.f 75 ’-250’14,875 s.f.2,831 s.f (19%) 3,718.75 s.f (25%) 0 s.f same as existing 250’-500’6,157 s.f.2,021 s.f (32.8%) 1,847.1 s.f (30?/o) 2,172 s.f (35.3%) 500'-1000'0 0 0 (35%)0 The new garage would increase the hardcover amount on the property in the 250'-500’ area. The hardcover would increase from 32.8% to 35.3%, where 30% is the allowed amount. (In 1998 the hardcover allowance was approved to be 35.1% in this area). Structural Coverage : Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 27,000 s.f Allowed: 4,050 s.f 15% Existing: 2,855 s.f 10.6% Proposed: 2,863 s.f 10.6% #2488 Gregg Klohn 4455 North Shore Drive Variances 5/10/99 Page! Statement of Hardship The applicant has included his statement of hardship in Exhibit A. The applicant should also be asked for his testimony regarding this issue. Issues for consideration : 1. New garage could be built on northeast section of lot and not require variances for setbacks. 2. Other issues raised by planning commission. Staff Recommendation : Staff reconunends denial of the variance. A new garage could be built on another location (northeast) of the lot, be within all the setbacks, and be close to driveway. Attach ments A Application B Site Plan/Survey C New Garage Plan D Plat Map E Location Map F Site Topography G Hardcover Calculations H Property Owner's List 1 Permit Record U2488 Gregg Klohn 4455 North Shore Drive Variances 5/10/99 Page 3 P! • •• • < Application # 2- V ^ •. Date Received V- 2^<f^ .Amount Paid. Z ^ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE .^PLICATION .Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00-....... (no change fioni original application) . Variance for non-confom^g structures ‘ $250.00 . Afler-the-Fact Fees ODouble application fee) PROPERTY I^ORMATION Site Address /UorJ^ SAf>c. <■( Cct(f StLOOh (udUJl Property identification Number fPJ.D.’l - I i'l ~~ ^ /- O OO^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. D ite Prope^ Acquired______'3 /^Z____________________________(monOj/ye^) I (do) (dd'^^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present cSe of property; j/fesidential ___other (specify)_____________________ Zoning District:________________________________________________________ vj APPLICANT ; Name Phone (home")'i * •' y-«iV' Phone (work) ^ Address: City: ______Zip: ] !• si OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ^ Phone thome^l Phone (work! % • Address: w City : (j ti. ^a< j DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST pgrimatM Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: ~7o ^Prfi^OL. Tkf'tr .0 ^nr\AA-6( lO (attach additional sheets .if necessary) VARIANCES REQU^D Lot Area V/^etback:Front Lot Width l/Sid( Hardcover Lot ..Coverage I^Rear Ave^e Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY COOTITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions prevcn^g compliance with Zoning Code reqinrements: ttm . -rU^t, w aJj oik,^ (iU<^ -h /Oi/Lh fU, Li£— 4ki ^ MT^ (attach additional sheets if necessary) o ? •«.. »' 7^ (29) 122.3?fd (8) rci94, ( IO\q,X;'' ..»,:•' 15i \ NOTE' LOT A TONKAVIEW GARDENS tvax.jj*a oo O 1 OS II TRAILS Z mo ciR lAl CHIPPEWA U BATSOE QFORI CIR 0 0 iiAorti I S . ./ o RED OAX Ulo t R®4a CB c Oat V Gol^•V*» ' lAP 61 Lakevievr WEST B^CH wb ✓r.- .•• •J* r.'*. '••: ^ehnings\ Bay 'Woodtaitdi roimt ,‘Pt, •STU8IS lAY RO H•oo CD O 5 1 EILEEN ST S -------------- ORC « . HI6 S V SCHRST inc or i-/3/^ ' rk<Vr-.--- :• 'I EAST UJi-ST A'?-*? / • .•.;-ir > V *> N• •• *V.-~ l : r-.->r*/s:.- i •' > g I . •. • V • *1 *' > \ s - • P/yy , > > r------ \v ". —. • \* > • jv>f- • v'>w- ■■ '• ■ ■ ■ •'• 7 V ’• 4*. / Nor/ I • *, #•• *• \ I__1 xj* i •-* '>•* " ■RAilDVIEWUlAVE Lake:'] \ t • ^'■.• \ V '5 miirM MIU ^ irrison \ SkogsbergPdnt West * 9c«t «»ir^ ORONO Arm v_* * •.• * * ••; '*• •v::' • • •''y. O ' rv - >•'j. ood Point DEERIW « •Crystal \ • ..* ■ . I >tS :'-r - • I IP mm ulfl B ft::vi I 1 1 CALCL iXATION worksheet ^ # I SETBACK ZOiNE: (CIRCLE ON'^XO-75’ EXTSTTNG HARDCOVER TN 7.n?slikf-s. 75-250'250-500'500-1000’ • . • A.House • •••1 X •O'S.F. LengUi •X width 0 S.F. * • •X • • y, .'mmm /)S.F. • • • . * • ' *X . • 7) ‘•S.F. B.' » • •• Garage X • • •*• •rs 0 S.F.• • c. • • • • • Driveway ’ •• X • • ...k. •'0 • « S.F. .X . * .sss o S.F. D. • Sidewalk X • . * • . • • « 4 o S.F. ■ ^ j •X =S.F. E. " \• • Pado/Deck > X 4• m• •c?S.F. X r\S.F. F. • Landicaje ' ' .X ‘ « ■ •• * • o " •• S.F. X ts n S.F. By X 8 -o S.F. G.Other X •o S.F. •TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE • 4 • m ^. ^S.F. .TOTAL PROPER rV AREA IN ZONE •o S.F. A •B X ICO = . •r)% PROPOSE!^ HARDCOVER TN ZONE A. House X # • •0 S.F. Length• • • • *•X WdLh• • • • 4 0 S.F. • * • *•X • ' 4 •S.F. X 8 S.F. B.Garage X 53 <3 S.F. C.Driveway X m « • » 53 • . S.F. X 8 S.F. ■ • t • t.Sidewalk X ^ p • • •o S.F. X 8 S.F. E. • Patio/Deck X • cs S.F. • •X 8 o S.F. F. • • Laadicajre X • •4 • 8 Cb S.F. Uuderlam X S.F. By Plastic X <3 S.F. G.Other X • • S.F. • .• . . TOTAL hardcover ' IN ZONE • • •S.F. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA LN ZONE •Q -S.F. • •• A ••s*B X ICO “ ■o % ■6 A B A B KAPwDCO'V'ER CALCUXATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75* X75-250* J 250-500’500-1000’ •- / EXTSTTiNG HARDCOVER CN ZOiVE-:-^ • * A. House '• ’*k n )72^S.F. Length X Width « *= • S.F. • .X *• •*•S.F. .. • •. *X . • • •* • • • .• • ••S.F.- . • • • • • • B. Gaxage • ^ X • • • S.F. • % • - * • • C. Driveway $ ■ X • . ’ • * • ^, • • • S.F. .X . ss S.F. • . j D. Sidewalk f X • • • # •3^0 -S.F. ■ •• • •X '/ / ^S.F. • • E. Patio/Deck t X •• • • ito S.F. X t=26 y S.F. • F. Landscace %* •• • X ••• « t • • • S.F. Underlain X =S.F. By Plastic X . =S.F. G. Other X S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE • • •a S.F. .TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE •■ S.F. A 0^1)/B /<rvoo X 100 = • •% PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE • 9 $ • •/723A. House X s S.F. •X Wdth I • • • rs S.F. « * •’ X ...............................SS S.F. X *=S.F. B. Garase X S.F. C. Driveway X • • • •es • • . S.F. X s=S.F. * D. Sidewalk X • • • •32-0 S.F. . X //•)c.F. E. Patio/D'.K X • L./fO S.F.- X S.F. • F. Landscape • X • •• •• • • S.F. Underlain X S3 S.F. Bv Plastic ‘ X »S.F. G. Ciier X • • * S3 S.F. • TOTAT WARnrOVPP TM ZONE • • • ■n /S.F. TOTAl PROPPRTY AREA IN ZONE 1 S.F. ‘A 7X \-i- B X 100 »55 S.F. S.F. . •• •-■ • S.F.- • ns-S.F. • • • /^O « • S.F. S.F. ■^a ■S.F. ■ S.F. _________S.F.^ S.F. V ^ ' •• S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % • 5/S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. /^2-. S.F./4y-S.F. X/o S.F. S.F. . S.F. • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. '■ '55V.-% c X RUN DATE 04/21/99 V. BATCH 501 PROP AODR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 07-117-23 31 0001 04445 NORTH SHORE DR GAYLE ERNEST HXTTZ6 GAYLE E NITTXG 4445 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORHATXON SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 07-117-23 31 0002 04455 NORTH SHORE DR GREGG D KLOHN GREGG KLOHN 4455 NORTH SHORE OR HOUND HN 55364 REPORT NO. PX435401 PAGE 11 38 07-117-23 31 0003 04465 NORTH SHORE DR J L THEXSEN JR ET AL TRSTEES BARBARA A/JOHN L THEXSEN JR 4465 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND tm 55364 PROP AODR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 07-117-23 31 0004 04485 NORTH SHORE OR JOHN 0 A DEBRA H KNOOEL JOHN D 8 DEBRA H KNODEL 4485 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0005 04495 NORTH SHORE DR BARBARA J ANDERSON BARBARA J ANDERSON 4495 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0009 04480 NORTH SHORE DR JOHN J GROTANS JOHN J GROTANS 3200 29TH AGE N E HPLS HN 55418 C PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 07-117-23 31 0010 04470 NORTH SHORE DR JOHN J GROTANS ET AL JOHN« XLZE t PETERXS GROTANS 4470 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0041 00038 ADDRESS PENDING HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND COUNTY 0<^ HENNEPIN PUBLIC ROAD USE STATE DEED R91287 (5-19-51) 38 07-117-23 31 0013 04448 NORTH SHORE OR HURIEL G SENN HURIEL G SENN 4448 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364' 38 07-117-23 34 0093 04425 NORTH SHORE DR DANIEL J DICKEY ETAL NORHA J DICKEY 4425 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 TOTAL BATCH 501 00012 38 07-117-23 31 0039 04460 NORTH SHORE DR D D DREWS ILK DREWS D D DREWS A L K DREWS 4460 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 34 0004 04435 NORTH SHORE DR GJRPON W LUNOHAN (iORDON VI L.JNOHAN «435 NCRVH SHORE OR iOUND HN 55364 oo T Permit Mo, ■ 33g PERMIT RECORD Date /n^(o cr fo ///75 -5S Ji -/y~lf //r3»7^ yo<. ?? /'/'f 5 /i)'/j'- f/ //-/^ 7/ A-:?^ Type of Permit tudidJL ^ f ^c/ Application Date: April 21,1999 Completion Date: April 21,1999 Deadline Date: Waived by Applicant JUL 1 2 1999 C\TY OH OHQNO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 7/9/99 ,= ^ITEM NO. Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2492 Rick and Gail Luzaich 2490 Old Beach Road After the Fact Variances and Conditional Use Permit Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:55,215 square feet (1.27 acre) List of Exhibits A B C D E F G Planning Commission Recommendation Draft Minutes ~ Planning Commbsion Meeting — June 21,1999 Minutes -- Planning Commission Meeting — May 17,1999 Landscape Plan Consulting Forester Report and Recommendations ~ dated June 16,1999 Staff Report - Mike Gaffron - dated June 17,1999 Staff Report -- dated May 10,1999 Application Summary The applicants request variance and conditional use permit approvals for lakeshore land alteration including grading and construction of retaining walls within 75' of the lakeshore and within a bluff impact zone; and further request after-the-fact approval, including approval of a restoration plan, for intensive vegetation removal within 75' of the shoreline and within a bluff impact zone. In early spring the property owners removed 17 mature trees with a stump diameter of 12" or greater within both the 75' lakeshore setback and bluff impact i one. As a result the applicants landscape architect designed a restoration plan utilizing retaining walls across nearly the entire width of the property at the 940' contour. The plan also incorporates several trees and a series of perennial plantings, and regrading of the entire slope. The Comprehensive Plan addresses the issue of maintaining a natural appearance along lakeshore properties. The Plan states minimum green belts \vill be provided with prohibitations against clearcutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes. Retaining ^Is will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. The City retained Peter Bedker, Ph.D., a consulting forester, to complete a site analysis and make recommendations for restoring the site. Bedker's report and recommendations are attached to this memo. The applicant's are represented by Gary Mueller, landscape architect. It appears the approaches by Bedker and Mueller for restoring the site conflict with one another. Bedker has concluded retaining walls are not necessary for restoration on the site. Replanting of smaller trees can achieve restoration over a period of 20 to 25 years. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Co mmission recommended by a 4 to 2 vote to deny the application and to submit a plan implementing the recommendations by Peter Bedker, Ph.D. The Planning Commission voted to send this forward to the City Council absent a suitable restoration plan to expedite the review process as site erosion is a concern on *he bluff. Members of the Planning Commission were opposed to forwarding the application to the Council without an opportunity to review a revised plan. The applicants have not revised the plan reviewed by the Planning Commission. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED The City Council has the following alternatives to consider: A. Approve the site plan dated 5-28-99, completed by Landplan Associates. B. Deny the restoration plan, noting no application for a conditional use permit and variances "which has been denied wholly or in part shall be resubmittedfor a period ofsix months from the date of said denial, except on the grounds of new evidence or proof of changes of conditions found to be valid by the Planning Commission. C. Refer the application back to the Planning Commission for further review. D. Table allowing the applicants to revise the restoration plan to implement recommendations provided by Peter Bedker, PH.D., consulting forester. A CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2492 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 28, 1999 TO;Rick & Gail Luzaich 2490 Old Beach Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES;Gary M. Mueller Landplan Associates 9311 Rich Valley Blvd. Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 Phillip S. Resnick Rand Tower Suite 1925 527 Marquette Ave. S. Minneapolis, MN 55402 Peter J. Bedker, Ph.D. Treescapes 1214 Third Aveneu NE Buffalo, MN 55313 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Var/CUP DATE OF MEETING: 06/21/99 VOTE: 4 FOR 2 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: 1.Denial of the requested CUP for retaining walls and landscaping/grading within 75' of the shoreline and within bluff impact zone; and 2.Recommendation to Council that applicant be required to restore the site per the parameters recommended by Peter Bedker, the City's consultant forester, subject to applicant's submittal of a restoration plan that Council finds acceptable. 3.Planning Commission noted they were sending this forward to Council absent a suitable restoration plan in order to expedite the review process. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS; Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, July 12, 1999; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certilied i’opies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call Paul Weinberger at 612-249-4600. i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 \0 •• (#2496 PATRICK AND JEANNE O’FLANAGAN, CONTINUED) small lot size. StwW^ commented that that Is a bigger issue than v/hat Is before the Pj^wffing Commission tonight. Hawn stated that mb«R)^nlng Commission Is routinely askj and that this issue shomd’v^aps be addressed. approve variances for small lots Smith noted that the total structuraTo«x£'’39®J?'<^®f allowable limits and that the Applicant is not able to place the garage in a diffe?bnLKS^tlon. Stoddard moved, Lindquist sec^»ff^d, to recotrlTnaj^d approval of Appllcat'on #2496, to allow for the location of ap^istlng detached gara^e^d two decks on the property located at 3895 North Shof^rive, and to permit a crowdutg^^rinclpal structure vrriance residence and the ard variance to allow a six foot wi^d^eck to be ucnstructed between the exi proposed detach^d^arage where ten feet is required, to permit a si to allow the apcf^sory structure (detached garage) to be located six feef^rt^re ten feet is required^from the side lot line, to permit a rear yard variance to allow consm^tion of the prapt$sed 8 by 18 foot deck on the south side of the residence 24 feet from the rear loMide where 30 feet Is required, subject to inspection by the City Building Inspector of (e footings or slab on grade for the garage. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS . (#2) #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, 2490 OLD BEACH ROAD, AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Rick Luzalch, Applicant, was present, along with Phil Reznick, Attomey-at-Law, and Gary Mueller, Landscape Architect. Gaffron stated this application was reviewed at the May 17th Planning Commission wherein tha Planning Commission advised the Applicant that the proposed restoration plan was not appropriate and the Applicant was directed to submit a revised plan after consultation with Staff and the City's consulting forester. Gaffron stated that the Applicant submitted a revised plan prior to meeting with the City ’s consulting forester, which incorporates a single retaining wall at the base of the slope along with replacement of a small number of trees along the sides of the property. The Applicant ’s landscape architect and the City ’s consulting forester discussed the proposal, and concluded that their individual strategies for restoration of this property are quite dif^^rent. Gaffron noted that it is the City ’s goal to have the^ lakeshore restored to a wooded, natural appearance as quickly as possible, and while the Applicant ’s plan is a good landscape plan, it is not a restoration plan. Gaffron reviewed the City ’s consulting forester's comments and recommendations regarding the restoration of this property, noUng that a total of 17 trees with a stump diameter 12 inches or greater were removed from the lake side of the residence, with the value of the removed trees being estimated at $48,000. It would generally be unreasonal . to expect restoration costs to exceed this amount. Bedker is recommending that 29 trees of two Inch caliper on a 25 Inch average spacing would be needed to eventually replace the 14,450 square feet of lost canopy, with larger 4.0 to 4.5 Inch caliper trees being placed at the top of the slope to soften and obscure the roofline of the Page 3 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED) existing residence as viev/ed from the lake. Bedker is also recommending that the majority of the existing stumps and root systems remain in place to stabilize the slope, as v/ell as hand planting of the trees to avoid disturbing the soil. Bedker has indicated that the retaining wall at the base of the slope Is not necessary for stabilization of the slope. Gaffron stated the Applicant Is proposing four birch clumps at the base of the slope and a half-dozen maples along the two sides of the site, along with other proposed shrubbery along the edges of the lot or on the lake side of the retaining wail. Gaffron noted that the Applicant’s revised proposal makes no attempt to, over time, restore the site to Its original appearance in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code which states: Lake shorelines will be protected from alteration. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved Insofar as practical and reasonable in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clearcutting will be prohibited in areas of soil or wave action erosion, natural stone rip-rap shoreline protection will be encouraged. In addition, retention of natural vegetation will limit the impact of urbanization as visible from the lake. Building heights will be limited to less than the typical tree height. Minimum green belts will be provided with prohibitions against clearcutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes. Retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they wiii be screened with natural vegetation. Gaffron suggested the Planning Commission has the option of denying this application, and sending It on to Council, noting that the revised landscape plan does not meet the restoration goals of the City: or this matter could be tabled to allow the Applicant time to submit a revised plan In accordance with the City forester’s recommendations. Reznlck commented that the Applicant's revised plan was submitted In May but that the City's forester was not provided with the necessary information until this past Friday. The Applicant’s landscape architect was not able to meet with the City's fores*‘?r due to the short lime period before tonight’s meeting. Reznlck staled that the four inch diameter trees are too large to bring In to be planted, and that the Applicant should not be penalized by having to planflrees In excess of $48,100. Stoddard remarked that the Applicant Is not being requested to plant trees In excess of $4^100, noting that the forester states that it would be unreasonable to expect restoration costs to exceed that amount. Reznlck stated In his opinion the value of the trees removed should not have a bearing on what Is being proposed for restoration and Is Irrelevant. Nygard stated that the number of the trees cut down Is completely relevant, noting that It Is against City's regulations regarding clearcutting of property. Reznlck stated the Issue before the Planning Commission Is what to do with the property now and that the Applicant should not be requested to plant more trees than what was removed. Reznlck commented that a majority of the trees to be replanted are located within the site line from the house to the lake and that the property owner does have a right to trim the trees located within the sight line. Reznlck staled that the trees removed were removed to provide a view to the lake. Luzalch commented that their revised plan is a compromise by providing reforestation as well as Page 4 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED) providing a view of the lake. Luzaich stated that the amount of trees recommended oy the City ’s forester to be planted are excessive and that the trees will need to be trimmed to provide a view of the lake. Luzaich remarked that he would also like to plant vegetation along the slope rather than let v;eeds grow. Smith stated that the forester Is recommending natural vegetation on the slope and that some reconciliation of the two plans needs to be accomplished. Mueller stated that the revised plan was submitted shortly after the last Planning Commission meeting and attempts were made to follow the directions of the Planning Commission as far as replanting of the trees, noting that the trees and shrubs that were selected are Intended to blend In and look like they belong along the lakeshore, which was one of the objectives that the Planning Commission had stated at the last meeting. Mueller stated that the property owner should have the right to have a view of the lake, noting that the forester's plan does not allow that view and would create more of a wall of vegetation. Mueller remarked that he made numerous attempts to contact Paul Weinberger in an effort to obtain the name of the City's forester and was not able to reach him until June 7th. Mueller stated he was not able to contact the forester until June 11th and was Informed that he just received the Information regarding this application the other day. During the conversation with the forester It was apparent that the forester was not provided with the revised landscape plan by the Applicant. The forester’s plan was not received until the 14th, which did not allow lime for the Applicant to meet . with the forester and to develop a revised plan based upon his recommendations. Mueller remarked that there are discrepancies In the number of trees and the size of the trees that were purportedly removed, and that these issues will need to be worked out before another plan Is revised. Mueller commented that the Applicant ’s landscape plan was designed to meet the spirit of what the Planning Commission had recommended at the last meeting. Stoddard commented that the Planning Commission wanted the Applicant ’s landscape architect to meet with the City ’s forester in order to develop a plan that would be agreeable to all parties and Is in compliance with the City ’s Comprehensive Plan. Stoddard stated he would like Mueller to meet with the City ’s forester in order to address some of these Issues. Hawn stated that there ara some denclencies In the Applicant ’s landscape plan which need to be addressed, and suggested that Mueller meet with the City's forester to discuss these Issues. • Hawn noted that the Comprehensive Plan calls for restoration of the canopy that was removed. % Lindquist stated that it was clear at the last Planning Commission meeting that the City was looking for restoration of this area, which Is still the City ’s goal for this property. Luzaich remarked that in his opinion this landscape plan does meet that objective. Reznick stated that the revised landscape plan does include vegetation and trees that are indigenous to the area as was specified by the Planning Commission at the prior meeting. Reznick Inquired where the term reforestation Is used In the Code, and what is the City ’s authority to require restoration. Hawn stated that the City's goal Is to re-establish what was removed, which Is something that the Page 6 r ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED) City has required In the past in similar circumstances. Hawn stated that the Comprehensive Plan Is merely a suggested code of property conduct and not a criminal code. Stoddard stated that some of these issues should be handled by the City Attorney and City Council. Smith commented that the City has applied the same restoration concept to other similar situations In the past. Gaffron stated that this happens approximately once a year and that It has been the City’s practice to require reforestation of the area that has been cleared. Gaffron commented that it Is not realistic to expect the property owner to replace the larger trees with similar trees of the same size. There were no public comments. Reznlck distributed photographs of the neighboring properties to the members of the Planning .. Commission. Smith Inquired who was responsible for the costs of the forester. Gaffron stated that his fees would be charged to the Applicant. Berg commented that she has lived in that area for approximately 20 years with the area existing as depicted In the photographs for that entire time. Stoddard stated the Planning Commission can either vote on what Is before us tonight or table the matter to allow the Applicant time to meet with the City's forester. Luzalch stated he would like to negotiate a plan that would be acceptable to all parties. Hawn remarked that It Is difficult to negotiate a plan that would be acceptable without the City’s forester being present. Hawn stated in light of the disputed facts, It would be best If the Applicant's landscape architect met with the City’s forester. Hawn noted she was not In favor of the Applicant's proposed landscape plan. Stoddard commented that the forestci’s recommendations should be followed. Smith stated she cannot approve this landscape plan as presented. Hawn Inquired vyhether the Applicant would like the Planning Commission to act on this plan tonight or to table the matter, noting that if the application proceeds to the City Council and Is denied, the application would come back before the Planning Commission. Reznlck requested that this Item be tabled temporarily to allow the Applicant time to discuss his options. (This item was tabled at 7:46 p.m. and follows Item #4) NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS, CONTINUED Page 6 ' l! . ! l! • • • ORONO PLANNING COIvnvnSSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2497 GAIL BRINER, CONTINUED) Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2497,1760 sTi30yw«Gd,go^, to allow the Applicant to rebuild an existing rottlcuiiiihif^rhnd to grant a , ■ T to allow the propoaed^dccK to oe located within • 76* of the lakeshore and lu yialll a l>aQjcovfrCJVflil5i>ce lo allow 673 square feet of hardcover in the 0-76’ lakeshore setback areaJo^B?rlm»h«.CQnstructIon of the proposed deck, subject to the rock and pliiTTr pniii lliiyiiirnt being removi il iiiillM'llni^deckand plastic removed from under^JiifrHPOCirth^s not under the deck. VOTE: Ayes sTNaySr-O*^^ ^ OLD BUSINESS. CONTINUED (#2) #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICK, 2490 OLD BEACH ROAD - AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Reznlck stated that they would like the Planning Commission to vote on this application tonight. Stoddard moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend denial of Application #2492,2490 Old Beach Road, for an after-the-fact variance and conditional use permit for a retaining wall, and recommend to the City Council that the Applicant and the Applicant's Landscape Architect meet with the City's Forester in order to revise a new landscape plan for consideration by the City Council which Is more In accordance with the recommendations of the City Forester in order.to allow this item to be expedited. VOTE; Ayes 4, Nays 2, Smith and Berg Opposed. Smith staled she was opposed to this application due to the lack of direction being given by the Planning Commission to the City Council on the revised landscape plan that Is to be submitted. Berg slated that the Planning Commission should vole on the plan that Is to be presented to the City Council. tUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS, CONTINUED #5) #2499T?tOM^ AND MARILYN SWANSON, 1740 SHADYWOOD ROAD^AWl(iANCES, 8:C 3 p.m.-8:16 pmt' The Certificate of Mailing and ivit of Publication were noted:' Thomas and Marilyn Swanson, Applicants^wq^e pre; Gaffron stated the Applicants are proposhjg^b assentb^a temporary screen enclosure, 10 by 17 on an existing deck- The screen ericjasdre will be assetmJte<jJ'7 the early spring and down In the late fall. The screen enclosdre and existing deck are loc^aiq^within the 0-75* lakeshore setback. The structural coyprdge would Increase with the screen donJl however, the hardcover amount does not chani Gaffron stated tbdl a lakeshore setback variance is required to allow a 10’ by on an existing to be located within 75' of the lakeshore and a hardcover variance to>Jlow 1,9/3 squareteeCorZI.S percent, in the 0-75' lakeshore setback area where zero percent Is allowea. Page 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2485 ALEXTtoD CATHY JOHNSTON, CONTINUED Alex Johnston waMresent. Weinberger stated tn^pplicanl Is requesting a conditional use permit to allo^ "guest house". This property Is locateo\^ the RR-1B, One Family Rural Residential Distrij^'^hlch Is a two acre zoning district, and is cor^rised of 5.11 acies dry and 4.55 acres dry contiguous. A bam exists on the southeast portion ^he property that the Applicant Is remodello|E^o Install a guest apartment. The bam is cla^fled as an oversized accessory structu(eas it exceeds 1,000 square feet. Weinberger commented that asl^nditlon of approval the wpi^perty owner will be required to file a restrictive covenant on the propertyJhat states, In part, thd^o future subdivision will be approved that places the structure within a lot that has no princIpaL^i^cture, and If the property Is subdivided, the oversize accessory structure and principal structure^li be located together within a lot that meets that minimum lot area requlremen^r the gj^ size of accessory building. Weinberger stated that the property does noUialre a conforming septic system. The Applicants have submitted a septic design that has beemroproved by the City, but a condition of approval shall be that a final plumbing Inspection bejifla*^ntll the septic system has been Installed and approved by the City. City Staff is recommending approvaj^thls applicatltm based on the existing structure meets all the yard requirements established |^City Code for a gqest house conditional use permit subject to the conditions that a restrictlve^^venant Is filed on tfife^property for an oversized accessory structure and that a final plumbirfg Inspection be held until^a septic system has been installed and Vapproved by the City. ^ Alex Johnston had no coi^IFnent on his application. \ Hawn commented th^there does not appear to be any areas of c6l\][ention with this application. There were no p^lic comments. Lindquist nroved, Stoddard seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2485, 940 Bro^fRoad South, to allow a guest house conditional use permit sv^bjectto the structup meeting the yard requirements established by the Municipal Cotte for a guest hous^onditional use permit subject to the following conditions: The propei^ owner file^ restrictive covenant on the property for an oversized accessory structin^as outlined on P^e 1, Items A, B, and C, of the May 10,1999 Zoning Administrator's Report, M^hat inal plumbing inspection be held until a septic system has been installed and ^proved y the City. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0.rAy Item #7 follows Item #10. (#8) #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, 2490 OLD BEACH ROAD - VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 7:23 p.m. - 8:17 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Rick and Gail Luzalch were present. Page 7 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 . 1 #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED Phil Reznick, Attomey-al-Law. ./as present. •••• • • Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting variance and conditional use permit approvals for lakeshore land alteration, Including grading and c'.n?*. -i'c;<ion of retaining wails within 75 ’ of the lakeshore and within a bluff impact zone; and furthr'^ request an after-the-fact approval, Including approval of a restoration plan, for Intensive vegetative removal within 75 feet of the shoreline and within a bluff Impact zone. No restoration at this time has been completed. Weinberger noted that the members of the Planning Commission have had an opportunity to look at the property. Staff has concerns regarding the removal of the trees within 75 feet of the shoreline due to possible erosion into the lake. The Applicant is proposing to construct a four foot retaining wall to extend along the slope. Staff has Issues regarding the proposed landscaping plan as It does not contain any provisions for replacement of the trees that have been removed. Staff Is requesting that reforestation be required as part of this application. Wally Case, Landscape Architect, has had an opportunity to review the landscaping plan and Is recommending that this property be reviewed by a forester to determine what trees would be best for this type of soil. City Staff Is recommending denial of the proposed landscape plan.and requests that the Applicant submit revised plans. Currently the stumps have not been removed. Staff would also like to have the opportunity to review this application over time to Insure that proper restoration of this area Is achieved with similar trees. Reznick inquired whether the City was requiring a replanting of mature trees approximately the same size removed or If the Applicant could replace this type of trees with a smaller size tree. Weinberger stated that the City Is requesting that the Applicant replace the trees with fairly mature trees, noting that It is not possible to replace some of the larger trees. Reznick expressed a concern regarding the cost of replacing the trees and suggested that the City look at what Is right for the property rather than punishing the property owners. Reznick noted that the Applicant has been charged with a misdemeanor. The Applicants are willing to cooperate with the City to accomplish the restoration, but they would like to keep this property In line with the other surrounding properties. Reznick presented photographs to the Planning Commission and noted that the other properties do not have the lake hidden from their view. Reznick requested that the Planning Commission address the house plan, noting that the Applicants would like to start work on this property In the near future. Reznick indicated that they would like to remove the stumps and replace with some shrubbing, and expressed a concern that the equipment that would be needed to replace the .trees could cause the soil to be disturbed further. Hawn Indicated that she would like to see this property restored as quickly as possible to prevent erosion. Hawn noted that the City has allowed ritt-rafl In cases where erosion has occurred, but that the retaining walls are probably not going to be looked upon favorably by the Planning Commission. Hawn stated that the Applicants will need to get together with the City foresters to detemnine what Is most feasible for this pi operty. Luzaich slated that he Is fine wUh restoring the property, noting that he has spent money trimming * and pruning the other trees on his property and had merely removed what he thought was old Paged ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 (#2492 RICK AND GAIL LU21AICH, CONTINUED unhealthy trees. • • • * . . Stoddard reniarked that the Planning Commission has to act on v/hat is before it tonight, noting that the Planning Commission is merely a recommending body and that any plans would need to be approved by the City Council. Stoddard commented that the Applicant should work with City Staff on the reforestation, noting that he would like to see some mature trees planted to screen the neighbors' view as well as the proposed hardcover reduced. Luzaich stated they had proposed the retaining walls In an effort to save the hill. Weinberger commented that the stumps could possibly be removed but that the roots should remain to help hold the dirt In place with new plants and trees planted. Reznick inquired whether anything could be agreed to tonight. Eric Paulson, Old Beach Road, stated that he has lived In this area for the past 21 years and belongs to the Lafayette Bay Association which has been proactive in trying to preserve the natural beauty of Lafayette Bay. Paulson remarked that the property owners were perhaps ignorant of the laws regarding removal of trees by the lakeshore. Gaffron remarked that the City of Orono did not and would not Issue a permit to allow this type of tragedy to occur, noting that the City was not notified of this until a week after the work had already been completed. Gaffron stated that the City of Orono Is adamant In Its position that this type of land alteration not occur near the lakeshore and that it Is Impossible to get back what has been lost Weinberger stated that Wally Case Is recommending that this property be reviewed by a forester who will review the file and look at the types of soils and determine what types of trees could be planted. Weinberger stated that they would like to have this process started sometime this week. Hawn Inquired whether the Applicant's landscape planner could meet with the forester. Gary Mueller, Landscape Architect, stated he would be able to meet with the forester, noting that they are willing to discuss this property and the recommendations that they have. Mueller requested that the Planning Commission provide some guidance as to what they feel should be provided for this area. Hawn stated that retaining walls are not the answer. Stoddard stated that hardcover should be reduced and that he would like to see some larger trees planted, Lindquist remarked that the Comprehensive Plan Is clear and that everything possible should be done to restore what was lost. Lindquist stated that they should meet with the City's forester as soon as possible to resolve this issue. Lindquist commented that this application will need to be tabled since the proposal Is not acceptable as presented tonight. Berg commented that she Is In agreement with the other members of the Planning Comrnlsslon and would like to see some larger trees planted in this area to help restore what was lost. Luzaich inqu’-ed whether the stairway down to the lakeshore was okay. Paged Stoddard stated that he should work with City Staff to determine the appropriate width of the stairway, noting that the Planning Commission is not attempting to deny access to the lake by the • Applicant. Mueller stated that they would like to remove the stumps, grind them down to the point where they are no longer protruding, which will require some minor grading of the slope. Mueller stated that they would also like to eradicate the poison ivy and other nuisances that occur on the bank. Mueller Inquired whether they could commence work on the retaining wall as a means to p«went erosion, noting that they will have a civil engineer out to Inspect the site to Insure that the wall will stay in place. Mueller commented that they would like to have a better understanding of whal type of trees and size of trees the City would like to see for this area, noting that It Is Impossible to replace some of the larger trees. Hawn stated that they would like to see as large of trees planted as possible that have a good chance for survival, and that perhaps the forester would be In a belter position to address tb it. Mueller inquired whether this application could proceed to the City Council on the condition that agreement is reached with City Staff on a level of treatment that Is appropriate for this area. Stoddard stated the Planning Commission can vote on this application or table the application, noting that the Applicant will not be able to do any grading or retaining wal's. Mueller Inquired whether the stumps could be removed. Lindquist stated that In his opinion no work should be dene given the history of this application until It has been approved. Lindquist remarked that he would not be comfortable approving any work on this property until City Staff and the Clt/s forester has had an opportunity to look at this situation, i.nd that In his opinion this application should be tabled. Stoddard indicated they could spray the poison Ivy. Mueller inquired whether all the weeds could be sprayed. Stoddard staled that only the poison Ivy may be s ^yed. Hawn commented that the weeds may be cut. Haw idicaled that this application will probably be denied if voted on tonight. Weinberger indicated that this application requires variances and a conditional use perriiit that needs to be acted upon regardless of the landscape plan. City Staff is willing to work with the Applicant on this matter. Luzalch requested that his application be tabled. Hawn Inquired whether the 60 day time limit needs to be extended. Weinberger Inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to waive the 60 day limitation, Luzalch Indicated he would be vrilling to waive the 60 day time period. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application #2492,2490 Old Beach Road, Page 10 il ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED with the understanding that the Applicant will work with City Staff and the City’s forester on an appropriate plan of action for restoration of the lakeshore and bluff area, and that the 60 day time period is waived. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#9) #2493 KATHERINE TAYLOR HOMES, 692 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCES, 8:18 p.m. - 8:47 p.m. le Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Kath^ne Taylor was present. Barb HugK»j)roperty owner, was present. Weinberger s^^d the Applicant Is requesting several variances to construct a two car garage where a one car garage^xlsts and to attach a deck to the second garage on the property. The properly Is served with two ^rages, the first Is a one stall detached located on Tonkawa Road and the second Is a two car gWage attached to the house. This property Is located In the LR-1B, One Family Lakeshore ResldentiaID(strict, which has a minimum oi one acres, and this property consists of .36 acre. The Applicant is proposing to instruct a deck off the back portion of the two car garage with a spiral staircase located next to It, whlcrt'would allow access to that area. Currently there are building permits issued to this property for the remodeling of an office area above the existing garage. The deck becomes an Issue because It Is^ww hardcover located over existing hardcover, and any time that structural coverage Is placed overn^-structural hardcover, it requires a hardcover variance. The addition of the deck would not Increwq^the hardcover on this property, nor would it Increase the amount of structural coverage allowed on tnb^roperty. The deck would bring the structural coverage to 15 percent. The Applicant has proposed two options for the gahiae. Option A would move the garage back to the required 30 foot distance for a garage loading space right-of-way. However, the setback In this area is 35 feet, so It would stiii require a variance to the'q^eet yard setback. This option increases structural coverage to 16.4 percent, exceeding the 15 percent allowed. This option also allows the occupants of the property easier access In and out of the gahtge during the winter months when the steep driveway approach prevents safe access into the propei^L Hardcover would also Increase in the 250-500 ’ setback. Currently hardcover Is at 42.5 percent. OrKy a small portion of the residence is located within the 75-250 ’ setback. The Applicant is proposing h^cover In the amount of 70.2 percent in the 250-500 ’ setback. • • ^ Weinberger stated Option B would utilize the existing location of the one Itqll garage. The Applicant would construct a second stall to the existing one stall garage. This malntaln^he garage within the. required setbacks on the property, but still would require hardcover and slmctul^coverage variances. This option would not Increase the hardcover as substantially as Optior^. This option simply places an addition on the existing garage, which Is located approximately twtv^ three feet off the property line. The new garage proposed In Option A would meet the 10 foot setbaq^ City Staff has reviewed this plan and have determined that the Applicant could constmct a^o stall garage that would be located lO feet from the street property line - id 10 feet .from the side puberty line if the doors are faced away fror i the street. However, this option probably cantiot be done^mce City Code requires a distance of 3C feet from the garage doors to the street. Tonkawa Road Is a ^ Page 11 VLandplan Associates. Inc. Landscape Archltects/Slte Planners ....oxxca «««..9311 Rich Valley Blvd. Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota 65075 (612)45Ch)984 June 2,1999 CityofOrono Mr Paul E. Weinberger Assistant Zoning Administrator 2750 Kelly Parkway Orono. Minnesota 55356 RE: Conditional Use/Land Alteration Permit City of Orono Case No. 2492 • Rick and Gail Luzaich 2490 Old Beach Road Orono, Minnesota 55391 Dear Mr Weinberger; Pursuant to the decision made at the Orono Planning Commission meeting held on Monday, May 17,1999, to table action regarding the above referenced case pending receipt of a revision plan, please find the following enclosed: Re. ision Planting/Construction Plan 6 copies Revision Hardcover calculations ..................................................................... ^ As requested, the terraced retaining wall system previously proposed has been deleted. A single wall has been substituted therefor. Deciduous trees have been added and the planting plan revised to accomplish the objectives of ensuring slope stability and creating a natural appearance. If you have any questions, please call me. Gafy M holler Reoistered Landscape Architect R Luzaich AanivA hoim tica «aaNH>rw aiit / aiaaiuoay aavDMNvi S31VI00SSV NVldONVI •lop Z r-^ 996£i ^^9 mm JO -ipon loaiiMOJV •dooopuoi p«j«|a|69J A|np o luo 1 lOMi puo uo|«|Aj«dnt |o#J!P Aui jopun JO *UJ Aq pojodojd ooM uo|d «im lOMI AjiiJoo AqojoM 1 rro poAOjddy «UO|«lAO^ 66-91-9 •too oooi-ni •OH loJd 16CSS VXOSaNNIlN 'ONOMO avoy H3V39 010 06V5 goNaaisay Hoivzm *y o *NivdQ oji oaovdo 3Q nvHS svaMV nv ■aaooos a« mvHe 'oaHonnw xon svaMv BNJiN^d^nnvjiJva oaaaaaHS h.m/a oaHonnw aa nnvHS svaav ONllNv^d mv •NOllOndlSNOO 3116 dOd ®-^N3W3dinM •iwoOT MUM JL*1dH0Q mVHS N01630 mVM ‘W31616 HHVM AiiA^do ?aNol6xai^ V oNiNiviad aaeododd viosaNNm^a^vn^oNon^;anNa^^^^^^^^ •saaaNtoNa nwjoo S310N mvM do woixoa mvM dO dOX aNii dnoxNOO oasododd eaxoNao ann dnoxNoo ONixetxa eaxoNaa NoixvAaia xod6 GNixsixa saxoNaa [Ml - - • 1X0 - - - I S-C90 I aN3931 •- €4 4^ ^ 2 t 5 h V «o <0 I i 5^" i HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Rick and Gail Luzaich Property 2490 Old Beach Road Orono, Minnesota 55391 Revised June 2,1999 . EXISTING CONDITIONS 0’ - 75’seru A Concrete Masonry Unit Stairway 1.5 Ft X 40 Ft 60 SqFt A Total Hardcover in Zone Computer Measured 60 SqFt B Total Property in Zone Computer Measured 13,690 SqFt • * Percent 0.5 Percent Desired 0 ..........75’ - 250’ 061 X A Concrete Masonry Unit Stairway 1.5 Ft X 40 Ft 60 Sq Ft A House/ Garage Computer Measured 4,795 SqFt A Concrete Walk/Porch Computer Measured 400 SqFt A Concrete Patio Computer Measured 655 SqFt A Concrete Driveway/Curb Computer Measured 2,130 SqFt A Rock Mulch Planting Beds Computer Measured 2,415 SqFt A Total Hardcover in Zone Computer Measured 10,455 SqFt B Total Property in Zone Computer Measured 33,510 SqFt Percent 31 Percent Desired 25 Maximum • i \ . 1 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Rick and Gail Luzaich Property 2490 Old Beach Road Orono, Minnesota 55391 Revised June 2,1999 EXISTING CONDITIONS Page 2 of 2 Set I A lack Zone.................................... Sport Court/Retaining Walls 35 Ft X 65 Ft Court 2,415 Sq Ft A Concrete Diiveway/Curb Computer Measured 2,565 Sq Ft A Rock Mulch Planting Beds Computer Measured 1,000 SqFt A B • Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property in Zone Computer Measured Computer Measured 5,980 Sq Ft 39,385 Sq Ft •Percent Percent Desired 15 30 Maximum HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Rick and Gail Luzaich Property 2490 Old Beach Road Orono, Minnesota 55391 Revised June 2,1999 PROPOSED CONDITIONS A Concrete Stairway 5Ftx40Ft 200 SqFt • A CMU Retaining WaU 210 Lin Ft 210SqFt A Total Hardcover in Zone Computer Measured 410 SqFt B Total Property in Zone Computer Measured 13,690 SqFt Percent 3 • Percent Change 2.5 Increase • •• ...............75 ’ - 250 ’ A Concrete Stairway • 5 Ft X 40 Ft 200 Sq Ft A House/ Garage Computer Measured 4,795 SqFt A Concrete Walk/Porch Computer Measured 400 Sq Ft A Concrete Patio Computer Measured 655 SqFt A Concrete Driveway/Curb Computer Measured 2,130 SqFt A Rock Mulch Planting Beds Computer Measured 2,415 SqFt A Total Hardcover in Zone Computer Measured 10,595 Sq Ft B Total Property in Zone Computer Measured 33,510 SqFt Percent 32 •Percent Change 1 Increase 1 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Rick and Gail Luzmch Property 2490 Old Beach Road Orono, Minn'^'-rta 55391 Revised June 2,1999 PROPOSED CONDITIONS Page 2 of 2 Set Back Zone.................................................................................................250’ - 500' Sport Court/Retaining Walls 35 Ft X 65 Ft Court Concrete Driveway/Curb Rock Mulch Planting Beds Computer Measured Computer Measured 2,415 Sq Ft 2,565 Sq Ft 1,000 Sq Ft A B Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property in Zone Computer Measured Computer Measured 5,980 SqFt 39,385 SqFt Percent Percent Change 15 0 «! f Treescapes Comm'uiuty Forestry ConsuliAnts 1214 Third Avenue NE Buffalo, Minnesota 55313 e (612) 682-9562 Voice & Fax DATE: TO: FROM: RE: June 16,1999 Paul Weinberger Assistant Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 65323-0066 Peter J. Bedker, Ph.D. Consulting Community Forester Luzaich Restoration Plan Parameters 2490 Old Beach Road Application #2492 The following are parameters that should be used to design and evaluate restoration plans for the Luzaich residence at 2490 Old Beach Road. They were prepared to meet your stated desire objectives to restore the lakeshore to wooded, natural appearing landscape in as short of time as possible. These param.eters were developed at your request and are based on on-site observations and measurements made June 9, 1999 and June 14,1999. OBSERVAVONS AND BACKGROUHO The April 19,1999 survey (Coffin & Gronberg, Inc) of the property identified a total of 16 trees with stump diameters of 12 inches or greater that were removed from the rear (lake side) of the residence. On-site investigations identified an American linden stump (21 inch diameter) located 32.5 feet northeast of the northeast corner of the Luzaich residence that was not indicated on toe survey. Species composition of canopy trees was as follows: 47% sugar maple [Acer sdcchatum), 47% American linden (77///a emericana) and 6% northern red oak (Quercus lubra). Understory trees included sapling and seedlings of these species as well as ironwood [Ostiya virginiana) and American elm (Ulmus americana). The trees removed were a remnant of a mature sugar maple - basswood foresL The height of remaining trees on adjacent properties to the are 80 to 85 feet Tree diameters at 4.5 feet above the ground (DBH) were estimated based on measurements of stump height and diameters. An estimated 6,950 in’ of cross-sectional a'ea of trees were removed. The total value of the trees removed was estimated to be $48,100 using methods established by the Council of Landscape Appraisers (1992) and toe Minnesota Society of Arboriculture Plant Appraisal Committee Plaut Hcalih Care Management ■ Tree Management Plans ■ Tree ln%-entories ■ Hazard Tree Assessments Mr. Weinberger ~ June 16,1999 Page 2 (Simons 1996, Simons 1999). Since the trees were missing, average values (70%) were used for condition, contribution and placement v/ith the exception of Tree 14. This tree had extensive decay in the stump therefore the tree had no value. Table 1 presents species, stump height, stump diameter, estimated DBH and estimated value for each of the significant canopy trees. The total area of canopy removed is estimated to be 14,450 ft’. This estimate is based on the following average crown diameters: American linden Red oak Sugar maple 50 feet 50 feet 40 feet This area represents the union of crowns with the above diameters centered over their stump locations. The trees were located on a northeastern slope facing the lake. The steepest part of the slope represents an 18 foot vertical change of grade and ranges from 27 percent to 60 percent from west to east In a few locations, equipment ruts were left during tree removal and the ruts have begun to erode. This slope also creates issues of access and limits the type of equipment that may be used on site. In addition, the access from the front yard to the back is only 10 feet wide. Comments 1 . It is my opinion that the circumstances of the unauthorized removal of trees dictates that the restoration plan be consistent with the 'Reasonable and Practical Replacement Cost* method of plant appraisal (Council of Landscape Appraisers 1992). This method establishes the appraised damages are the 'cost to replace the number, size and species of trees destroyed to the extent that 1) replacement serves to substantially restore the character and quality of the property ... and 2) the cost of replacement is not greatly disproportionate to the resulting restoration...' 2. It is not reasonable or practical to transplant large trees as part of this restoration. The cdternative is to establish a approximate time frame for the restoration and to plant trees that with anticipated growth will largely restore the quality and character of the site within that established time frame. A reasonable time frame is 20 to 25 years. 3. With growth, 2.0 inch caliper trees planted on average with a 25 foot spacing would reach crown closure In this restoration time frame. Twenty-nine trees planted at this 25 foot spacing would be requires to completely replace the 14,450 of canopy removed. 4. The kinds of trees planted should be consistent with the those that were removed (i.e. largely sugar maple and American linden with a few red oaks mixed in). These trees are readily available in 2.0 inch caliper. i' Mr. Weinberger-June 16,1999 Pages 5. The above spacing should be staggered somewhat to provide for a more natural look. 6. At the top of the slope and towards both sides, larger 4.0 to 4.5 inch caliper trees should be planted. These trees by established standards should have an average height of 16 to 18 feet and 18 feet and greater, respectively (ANSI Z60.1-1990). These trees should provide sufficient to begin to soften and obscure the roof line of the Lusaich residence from the lake as soon as they are planted. The peak of the east gable is 18 feet above grade and the peak of the gable end in the center of the house is 26 feet above grade. 7. Existing stumps and root systems should be left in place. They will continue to stabilize the slope and prevent erosion. Any engineered solution would replace the natural character of the site. The exception to this are three stumps located in the center of the house at the top of the slope, these may be removed with a minimum of concern. • • 8. Planting within the slope should be done by hand with a minimum of soil disturbance. The above parameters should provide sufficient guidance for developing a landscape restoration plan for the Luzaich residence. Unfortunately, it will still take time for the landscape to recover. Please call me if you have any questions, or if I may be of further assistance. Sincejely, Peter J. Bebker, Ph.D. Consulting Community Forester Mr. Weinberger - June 16,1999 Page 4 Table 1. List of significant trees removed from the Luacich residence, 2490 Old Beach Road. Tree Species Stump Height (ft) Stump Diameter (in) Estimated DBH (in) Estimated Value 1 Sugar maple 4.5 15.7 15.7 $1,600 2 American linden 3.5 20.4 19.5 $2,200 3 Sugar maple 2.1 21.0 18.8 $2,200 4 American linden 0.8 16.2 23.3 $3,200 (five stems)0.8 13.2 0.8 13.2 • 0.8 12.6 0.8 14.4 5 Sugar maple 1.5 18.0 13.6 $1,300 6 Sugar maple 0.7 15.6 11.7 $1,100 7 Sugar maple 0.7 19.2 . 28.1-“$4,400 (two stems)0.7.31.2 8 Sugar maple 1.0 26.5 20.3 $2,500 9 American linden 0.7 33.0 25.5 $3,500 10 Northern red oak 4.5 30.6 30.6 • $5,100 11 Sugar maple 1.0 25.0 19.2 $2,200 12 American Bnden 1.6 20.4 41.2^$7,700 (five stems)1.6 22.8 2.8 22.2 2.0 12.0 •2.4 21.6 • 13 Sugar maple 1.5 19.2 14.5 $1,400 14 American linden 0.7 24.0 18.4 $0 15 American linden 1.5 24.6 18.8 $2,000 16 American linden 0.8 45.0 35.0 $6,100 17 American linden 0.5 21.0 16.0 $1,600 Total $48,100 area of the combined stems. f TO Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Michael P. Gaf&on, Senior Planning Coordinator^j^^ DATE:June 17,1999 SUBJECT: #2492 Rick & Gail Luzaich, 2490 Old Beach Road - Afler-the-Fact Variance and CUP - Continuation of Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential District List of Exhibits A - Revised Plan Submitted by Applicant B - Restoration Parameters Recommended by Forestry Consultant Peter Bedker C - 60-day Review Period Waiver D - Memo and Exhibits of May 10,1999 E - Draft May 17 Planning Commission Minutes On May 17 Planning Commission reviewed the proposed restoration plan offered by the applicant and generally concluded that the plan was not appropriate. Planning Commission tabled the proposal and suggested that applicant prepare a revised plan ^er consultation with staff and the Cit/s consulting forester. The City retained Peter Bedker, Ph.D., a consulting forester, to review the property and recommend parameters for restoration of the site. His report and recommendations are attached as Exhibit B. Prior to receipt of Bedker*s recommendations, applicant's landscape architect, Gary Mueller, submitted a revised landscape plan proposal incoiporating a single retaining wall at the base of the slope, and still requiring regrading of the entire slope. This plan proposes a small number of replacement trees ^ong the sides of the property. Staff is advised tbnt Bedker and Mueller have discussed Bedker’s recommendations, and apparently agree that their individual approaches or strategies for restoring this site are quite divergent It mi^t be fair to say that the applicant's plan is a good landscape plan, but it is not a restoration plan. The City's goal is to have the lakeshore restored to a wooded, natural appearance as quickly as possible. Brief Summary of Forester's Comments and Recommendations A total of 17 trees with stump diameter 12" or greater were removed from the lake side of the residence. These were primarily maples and lindens. The value of the trees removed is estimated at $48,100 using standardized appraisal methods. It would generally be unreasonable to expect restoration costs to exceed this amount. 1 #2492 Rick & Gail Liizaich June 17,1999 Page 2 It wouldn't be practical or reasonable to transplant the site with large trees. However, 29 trees of 2-inch caliper (mapl^^s and lindens with a few red oaks) on a 25' average spacing would replace the 14,450 s.f. lost canopy in a period of20-25 years. Spacing should be staggered to provide a natural look. Larger 4.0-4.5 inch caliper trees should be placed at the top of the slope to soften the and obscure the roofline of Ae existing residence as viewed from the lake. A majority of the existing stumps and root systems should remain in place to stabilize the slope. Planting within the slopes should be done by hand to avoid soil disturbance. Bedker indicated to staff that the retaining wall at the base of the slope is qqI necessary for stabilization of the slope; it is purely an aesthetic item. There are a few areas where ruts from the tree removal equipment have started to erode. These should be filled and sodded ASAP. He indicated there is no strict need to place larger trees at the base of the slope, as they will not assist in adding to the visual restoration. Brief Review of Revised Proposal Applicant's revised proposal was submitted without the benefit of Bedkefs recommendations. The revised proposal includes 4 birch clumps at the base of the slope and a half-dozen maples along the 2 sides of the site. Other proposed plantings are primarily shmbbery, either along the edges of the lot or on the lake side of the retaining wall. The apparent reason for the 5' retaining wall is to slightly decrease the slope above it. The proposal results in the following hardcover changes on the site per the calculations of the applicant's landscape architect: • •Existing Allowed ProDosed 0-75 ’ Zone 0.5%0%3.0% • (2.5% increase) 75-250' Zone 31%25%32%(1% increase) 250-500' Zone 15%30%15%(no increase) Lack of Conformity with Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code The applicant's revised proposal makes no attempt to, over time, restore the site to its original appearance. It appears to be a second generation attempt to provide a landscape plan that meets the • t I I# »1 #2492 Rick & Gail Luzaich June 17,1999 Page 3 applicant's goals for the property. The City's philosophical goals and policies for its lakeshore are stated in the Comprehensive Plan very clearly on pages 3-18 through 3-23. General Policy 9 on page 3-20 states: "9. LAKE SHORELINES WILL BE PROTECTED FROM ALTERATION. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reasonable in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clearcutting will be prohibited. In areas of soil or or wave action erosion, natural stone rip rap shoreline protection will be encouraged. Urban Area Policy 2 on Page 3-22 states: "2. RETENTION OF NATURAL VEGETATION WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OF URBANIZATION AS VISIBLE FROM THE LAKE. Building heights will be limited to less tlm the typical tree height. Minimum green belts will be provided with prohibitions against cle^cutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes Retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion,in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation." These policies have been in effect since 1980, and Orono's Shoreland ordinances and tree protection ordinances as noted in the May 10 staff memo have long been in place to implement these policies. Staff Recommendation The applicant's revised plan does not meet the goals set forth in the Comprehensive Plan, and does not come close to matching the recommendations of the City's forestry consultant for restoratiori o this site. The revised plan should be rejected. Planning Commission should consider the following options: 1. Vote to deny the request for a CUP for retaining walls, and recommend to Council that the applicant be required to submit a restoration plan that substantially meets the commendations of the City's forestry consultant. Staff would forward the application to Council's June 28 unless applicant wishes additional time to generate another plan. This action will send the application forward to Council more speedily, potentially getting restoration started sooner, Planning Commission may lose the chance to review and approve the next plan that is generated. OR 2. Table the request, and provide applicant with additional direction as to what pam of the plan are deficient, and direct that a further revised plan be submitted for Planning Commission review at the July 19 meeting. This action will result in an additional month delay before restoration can begin, but allows Planning Commission to review the next plan that is generated. • , .•• • GITYof ORONO Municipal Offices ^Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parlway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066 '4 WAIVER FORM May 27,1999 Rick and Gail Luzaich 2490 Old Beach Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Zoning Application #2490 2490 Old Beach Road I am requesting suspension of the review of my application for after-the-fact conditional use permit and variances. I release and waive any of the City’s obligations to proceed and conclude re view of my application in a timely manner which includes any statuatoiy obligation for timely review. Rj^Luzai^ ^ ^Date [4 Date Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE:May 10,1999 SUBJECT:#2492 Rick and Gail Luzaich 2490 Old Beach Road After the Fact Variances and Conditional Use Permit-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area: *55,215 square feet (1.27 acre) Application: The applicants request variance and conditional use permit approvals for lakeshore land alteration including grading and construction of retaining walls within 75' of the lakeshore and within a bluff impact zone; and further request after-the-fact approval, including approval of a restoration plan, for intensive vegetation removal within 75' of the shoreline and within a bluff impact zone. In early spring the property owners removed about twenty mature trees within both the 75 lakeshore setback, where no vegetation removal is allowed, and within the bluff impact zone. The applicants have provided a restoration plan that includes a series of retaining walls that will protect the bluff from erosion and provide planting areas. A number of perennial plantings and small trees are proposed in the plan which will be located on the hillside between the retaining walls. Most of the vegetation located on the interior of the lot will be shrubs. The property edges will be lined with a series of Tcchny Arborviteas. The landscaping plan has not addressed the restoration of the type of trees removed or the restoration of trees on the interior of the property. The t>q)e of restoration proposed is not consistent with the surrounding properties nor is it consistent with what had existed on the property prior to removal. Basswoods, maples and oaks make up the shoreline and bluff regions along this portion of the lake. The applicant's landscape plan does not propose any natural tree replacement. The Comprehensive Plan addresses the issue of maintianing a natural appearance along lakeshore properties. The Plan states minimum green belts will be provided with prohibitations against clearcutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes. Retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. §2492 Rick and Cail Luzaich 2490 Old Beach Road /{fier the Fact Variances and Conditional Use PermU 5/17/99 Pag* 1 This application requires the following variances: 1.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(2): Lakeshore Hardcover and Land Alteration Regulations; Within 75 feet of the shoreline (929.4') there shall be no excavating, filling, hardcover, temporary or permanent structures. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 25% hardcover. Within 250 to 500 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 30% hardcover. The proposed plan would increase the amount of hardcover in the 0-75' setback from 200 s.f. (1.5%) to 4,120 s.f. (30%) to allow a series of retain walls along the bluff. The amount of hardcover would also increase by 405 s.f. within the 75-250' setback. 2.Section 10.22, Subdivision 3 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (I) (1): Tree Removal Regulations: No live tree within 75 feet of the shoreline with a diameter of six inches or more shall be removed without first obtaining a permit from the City. Such permits shall be issued by the City staff provided that at least a like number of replacement trees of a size and nature found acceptable to the staff are planted, any question involving the number of trees to be replaced will require approval. 3.Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (I) (2); Intensive Vegetation Clearing: Intensive vegetation clearing within 75 feet of the shoreline and on steep slopes within the Shoreland Overlay District is prohibited. Limited clearing of shrubs and trees less than 6 inches in diameter and cutting, priming flnd trimming of trees of any size is allowed to provide a view to the water from the principal dwelling site and to accommodate the placement of permitted stairways and landing s^ picnic areas, access paths, beach and watercraft access areas, and permitted lock boxes, provided that the screening of structures, vehicles or other facilities as viewed from the water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, is not substantially reduced. Thb application requires the following Conditional Use Permit: 1.Section 10.03, Subdivision 19: A Conditional Use Permit is required to allow the grading and placement of retaining walls within the lakeshore setback. Vegetation must be made available to adequately screen structures, including buildings and retaining walls, from public waters. The proposal will also change the natural grade within the 75' lakeshore setback, requiring a Conditional Use Permit. §2492 Rick and Gall Luzalch 2490 Old Beach Road the Fact Variances and Conditional Use Permit 5/17/99 Page! n Pertinent Ordinances: • Section 10.22; Regulations for the Lakeshore Residential Zoning Districts • • Section 10.22, Subd. 2: Allowed Hardcover • • • • • Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)(1): Allowed Hardcover • Section 10.56: Shoreland Management ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IB (1 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeside Yard Side Yard Street Yard Required 43,560 s.f.140'75'10'35' Hardcover Distance Total Area in Existing Allowed Proposed Variance from Shoreline Setback Hardcover Hardcover Hardcover Requested 0-75'13,690 s.f.200 s.f.none 4,120 s.f.none (1.5%)(0%)(30%) All the new pro the slope. Structural Coverag e Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 55,215 s.f.5,920 s.f.10.7% The applicants are not proposing any structural alterations or additions on the property. §2492 RIek and Gall Lmalch 2490 Old Beach Road ^tr the Fact Vartanees and Conditional (fu Permit 5/17/99 Page 3 Issues for Discussion 1.The vegetation proposed is not consistent with the types that were removed without obtaining a permit and are not compatible with the vegetation on surrounding properties. Tne Code states no live tree within 75 feet of the shoreline with a diameter of six inches or more shall be removed without first obtaining a permit from the City. A requirement of the permit is at least a like number of replacement trees of a size and nature found acceptable to the Staff, Planning Commission and City Council be planted. 2.The landscape plan does not address tree replacement on the interior portion of die lot along the lakeshore and near the residence. 3. The majority of the plantings within the slope are smaller shrub style plantings. No mature trees have been proposed that w'ould help to screen the residence from public water view. 4. The applicants should provide revised hardcover calculations for the 75-250' lakeshore setback and the 250-500' lakeshore setback. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending denial of the landscaping plan. The plan does not address the types and sizes of trees removed. The plan should include plantings of mature basswood, oak and maple trees throughout the lot, especially along the lakeshore and on the hillside. I • • §2492 Rick and Gall Luzatch 2490 Old Beach Road After the Fact YarUmcee and Conditional Use Permit 5/17/99 Page A ■ Attachments V * A B C D E F Q H I J Application Location Map Plat Map Site Survey Landscape Plan Tree Removal Survey Grading Plan Hardcover Retaining Wall Plans Property Owners List 92492 Rick and Gait Ltcaieh 2490 Old Bttuh Road 4/1*1" du Fact Variances and Conditional Use Permit 3/17/99 Patti yOOCP'^ A Application #2H9Z Date Received ^ Amount Paid S ‘^0_____ l-W P<xcn" CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE i^PLICATION Site Address • . . Type of Application to be Filed _______ h^VS> Property Identification Number fP.ID.1 «:9s\~ \\^ ^S9 Phone fhomel^^(*^* Name (JO 6(W.C^i Phone fwork^ (bV2 - ^SS~“ nAc(n nLi^ city mr^Mo zx^^ss^lL^ 6fvu L- OWNER ^if different than applicant) Name . , AaL-P Address Phone (home)_ Phone (work). City Zip. Date Pro I (do) loj ugjqs-Acquired____________ also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) VEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMTTS - _____$ 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 VD $250.00 Land Alteration X y Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and fiUing - 501 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls wthin 75’ of lakeshore ^RD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change firom original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee '^4 ‘ 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 LA.»^C>SCa(=S£- ' $100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule fO>’ ir»j. .*.<• t4T^C AIaI ;?l3AV =*l i; isf @ c«t >«r '^c^.ell- Max^. 1= ra iF/?5S^.•J i'fe.. jti:;-; if»-- f. • • . * • •’ ».•• • • m m~ _ •“:c-*iV,/^/a» *r ..JBOHXS Oc.rAWMT--.vu 4- RE -»«• ••• bud^ uHi T •.^v A* • * ^ Qwntty C ub •. • iCKSON Tolo AV<££i£jgr ■' ’■'A'-' •< “ j*n *•/ ******^« cmTAjL nV*S|jJ^ AV1\^LrtIMTM imc pnng SMOWUM o •V_i<i|=i'i INN ETONKA ■Hiv: - ••3r •'» -» V > « f. •. ,• • •*. I».*<>*>V. . ■ '-'j•: ■•■•• -Iv V-v •!...•••. •• •■ r.-'l/-* f ■.. • •.•■■ •• / I.* ' ■■ ‘ ’/.I,: • \..\ y:\ • //. v'a*’jv|oilV ».•*.’* * •* ;. •* \< I*::.';.*. •* •• . ’ *.*• t • ’• vls^’*** -»v * • -** / • • !* •• I',*!* ^ • /■ •.••;•'• •■•. • ■••• ; TOPOGRAPHIC DETAIL FOR raCK LUZAICH - M , LOT 4. SHORE HILLS HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA . • < k*' ‘ ’ ’r’v vJ. • 1 •• • .* \ . 1 • .i • *1 • .J;'*. * ** 1r *: • •*1*; .• . •:. 4 • ’ . • 1 .• •*. •• iL • r .••■••1 m M V •• • .* ^ •\ \ LAKE \ \ \ f s MINNETONKA • • • <1* * * * * -*^ * 1 * * • • • : •• .: . •. -A:--.!-: /••• •'. '•■■''‘Is"' »•••••.■ /.V'.-l ■’;••.•••.' J . • r . k «w* I • • - • .* • I..* %, • jT .••V -.Jv i • , • • •••1. .• .» • •» •> • • ••■*• * I*. • *. Iv-** t ■ H* •'• • •. • |*.\ •V • *• .• *A* ** • • V •' •A .■ I * I tL * • V .1. wr <r SSKR <SHi "N \% N \ % f K •i* . % t . • 9 s \ N, N N •V • ' f*•. J# ^ \ \ \ %\ 's \•ASt<m \ X s 'V, IWWP S; B s ^ %imr ^.S2SSL ’■ASSVOOtoSf (MAA) \ N V V V • % s V N . %*S % » - —-958* • isrseb- -964^' \'-s S H •fc N S V \ \ • ^ • * .T \ •* %• • / •% : r •. (mm) : d«M>le. «Kl.ling ipol etevotlon. i"««» »« '•v- «>«»»«* .972 ___: <l«notM existinfl coologr 8n«. maop MO <lolum • I * «^ • • •• . • t* •. W' . ■ «0*f" '‘i^v . ,^i-. • • ' V . * * .* . : • • ^ > • • • o^» m- r-.'Vrm ■>''•S. - Jr V MEMO CITY OF ORONO TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor Jabbour and Councilmembers Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner July 9,1999 COUNCIL MEETING JUL 1 2 1999 CITY OF ORONO SUBJECT: Zoning Application #2492 Attached is a revised site plan that was received by mail on Friday, July 9,1999 following the Staff Ref)ort being complete for Rick and Gail Luzaich (Application #2492). The plan has removed the retaining wall and added a few more trees. Please review the revised plan prior to Monday's meeting. The plan will be forwarded to Peter Bedker Ph.D., consultant forester, for comments. ||saaM.L aov / nvM 66/10/^fiO\1 oNiNiviav aia*iao c II haiQAS 11VM se/9e/€r*o\1 aovHvai aianao 1 •40Q 1 •6uomd ON «UO{Q|A»^ Application Date: 5/18/99 Completion Date: 5/18/99 60 Day Deadline: 7/16/99 COUNCIL MEETIN® ! JUL t 2 m. CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 6/28/99 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Planning Intern Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2496 Patrick D. & Jeanne L. O'Flanagan 3895 North Shore Drive Variance-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1 C Lot Area: One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) 6,032 s.f. Application: The applicant has proposed to locate an existing detached garage onto their property. The proposed detached garage was relocated to the lot as is. Because it is an existing structure and not designed to be attached to the residence, it is difllcult to attach it to the residence on the property. The applicants are also proposing to construct two decks onto the existing residence. The proposed decks are to be located on the south and west sides of the house. The applicant seeks approval of a variance for side yard setback of an accessory building, rear yard setback, and crowding principal building. This application requires the following variance approval: 1. 2. 3. Variance from Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 : To permit a crowding structure variance to allow a 6' wide deck to be constructed between the existing residence and the proposed detached garage where 10' is required. Variance from Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (F): To permit a side yard variance to allow the accessory structure (detached garage) to be located 6' where 1 O' is required from the side lot line. Variance from Section 10.25, Subdivision 6(B): To permit a rear yard variance to allow construction of the proposed deck on the south side of the residence 24' from the rear lot line where 30' is required. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 6 to 0 vote to: Approve the "\pplication as presented. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. i CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 PHONE:(612)249-4600 FAX:(612)249-4616 TO: Patrick D. & Jeanne L. OTlanagan 3895 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance ZONING FILE #2496 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 24, 1999 COPIES TO: DATE OF MEETING: June 21, 1999 VOTE: Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted. 6 FOR 0 AGAINST NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council July 12,1999, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X:\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\CAROLEVPCACnON\2496 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISIONS 12 AND 15 (F) AND SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #2496 WHEREAS, Patrick D. O'Flanagan and Jeanne L. OTlanagan (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 3895 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: That part of Government Lot 2, Section 17, Township 117, Range 23, described as beginning at a point on the North line of said Government Lot 2 distant 1179.75 feet West from the meander comer on said North line; thence West along said North line 52 feet; thence South at a right angle 148.5 feet; thence East at a right angle 52 feet; thence North at a right angle 148.5 feet to the point of beginning, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); 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 Conunission held a public hearing on June 21, 1999, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 to permit construction of a 6' wide deck between the ejdsting residence and the detached garage where 10' is required between an accessory and main stmcture; Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (F) to permit the detached garage to be located 6' from the side lot line where 10' is required; and Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a deck 24' from the rear lot line where 30' is required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: Page 1 of 6 1. 2. 3. 5. 6. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2496. The property is located in the LR-IC Zoning District, where .5 acre or 21,780 s.f. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of .28 acre or 6,032 s.f The Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 21, 1999 and recommended approval on a vote of 6 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact; The lot is unusually small and narrow for the LR-IC zoning district. B The property is not currently served by a garage and there is not another location for it on the property. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely aifect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council 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. Page 2 of 6 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivisions 12 and IS (F) and Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit construction of a 6' deck between the detached garage and residence. Section 10.03, Subdivision IS (F) to permit the detached garage to be 6* from the side lot line. Section 10.2S, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a rear deck to be 24' from the rear lot line. Approval was subject to the following conditions; 1. 2. 3. 4. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan and/or hardcover may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 12, 2000). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 6 jk. r ■ V c. I • r A I. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 12th day of July, 1999. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of July, 1999, 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. Notary Public Page 4 of 6 -i I STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HEMNTPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me*a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instmment.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC ’e Page 5 of 6 M to • • • • om 00 o </) j 1 o 0- »j.,.-g\ ID 00n o cJto 14.31 S' VO £o Si EXISrJv'G '3 V” H0U3* ^ ^ X ✓ >■ ^ f go WSJprf oecK 5.3 6.4 o'? EAST ■■■■■■11% M 52.0C * ; oin 5 - - ^ V ■ •• •■ ••#I Fn£i nFsnpiPTinNi- A 1179.75 N. Line of Gov't. Sec. 17-117-23 V' ■V•. « *.J i** «W %*• /Jti? 0^ Thol part" Of Government Lot 2, Section 17, Township 1! /, Range 23, described os beginning at point on the North line of said Government Lot 2 distant 1179.75 feet West from the meander said North lino; thenco West along said North lino 52 feet; thence South at a .5 feet; thence East al. a right angle 52 feet; thence North at a right angle 148.5 f« corner on angle 148.5 feet; thence East al. a right angle to the point of beginning, Hennepin County, Minnesota. TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Commission Members FROM; Wendy Bottenberg, Planning Intern DATE: SUBJECT: June 7, 1999 #2496, Patrick D. and Jeanne L. O'Flanagan 3895 North Shore Drive Variance — Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1C One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) Lot Area:6,032 s.f.* Municipal sewer (♦7,722 s.f. -1,716 s.f. street easement) Application: The applicants have proposed to locate an existing detached garage, 14.2' x 22.2', onto their property. The proposed detached garage was relocated to the lot as is. Because it is an existing structure and not designed to be attached to the residence, it is difficult to attach it to the residence on the property. The applicants are also proposing to construct two decks onto the existing residence. The proposed decks are to be located on the south side of the house, 8' x 18', and the west side of the house, 6' x 23'. The applicant seeks approval of a variance for side yard setback of an accessory building, rear yard setback, and crowding principal building. The property is located within the 500'-1000' lakeshore setback of Lake Minnetonka. The proposed detached garage is to be located 6' from the side lot line where 10' is required. The proposed deck on the south side of the residence, 8' x 18', is 24' from the rear setback where 30' is required. The proposed deck on the west side is located between the proposed detached garage and existing residence. The proposed deck is 6' v^dde where 10' is required for accessory structures located by the principal building (crowding principal structure). This application requires the following variances: 1. 10.03, Subd. 12: To permit a crowding principal structure variance to allow a 6' wide deck to be constructed between the existing residence and the proposed detached garage where 10' is required. 2. 10.03, Subd. 15(F): To permit a side yard variance to allow the accessory structure (detached garage) to be located 6' where 10' is required from the side lot line. fi2496 Patrick & Jeanne O'Flanagan 3895 North Shore Drive Variances 6/7/99 Page I 3. 10.25, Subd. 6(B): To permit a rear yard variance to allow construction of the proposed deck, 8' X 18', on the south side of the residence 24' from the rear lot line where 30' is required. ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards: LR-IC (1/2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Side Yard Rear Yard Front Yard Required 21,780 s.f.100'10'30'30' Proposed 6,032 s.f.52'6' (Garage)24 ’ (Deck)38.6' The proposed detached garage would encroach the side yard setback requirements for an accessory structure. The proposed deck (south of the residence) would encroach the rear yard setback requirements for the LR-IC zoning district. Hardcover Coverage: Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 500'-1000 ’6,032 s.f.2,111 s.f. 35% 1,416 s.f. 23.7% 2,013 s.f. 33.37% Structural Coverage: Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage 6,032 s.f.Allowed: 1,500 s.f. Existing: 936 s.f Proposed: 1,251 s.f #2496 Patrick & Jeame O’Flanagan 3895 North Shore Drive Variances 6/7/99 Page 2 Statement of Hardship : The applicants have included their statement in Exhibit A. The applicants should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues for consideration : 1. The lot is small for the LR-IA zoning district. 2. The property is not currently served by a garage. 3. What height or grade the west deck between the detached garage and residence will be built. 4. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation ! Staff is recommending approval of the variances. Attachments A Application B Site Plan/Survey C New Garage Plan D Plat Map E Location Map F Site Topography G Hardcover Calculations H Property Owner's List I Permit Record U2496 Patrick & Jeanne O'Flanagan 3895 North Shore Drive Variances e/7/99 Pages Application # (p Date Rcceiv^ 5l\%IW^ Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from origin?.! application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 Afler-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) ofLfH ______ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 1^- II *7-^3 OOP3 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired I ^ 6 ________________________topertvA Wo~n^ t us S-oTp (month/year) property: readential Zoning District: LR' I Q________ other (specify) ry)iJir\i0.{flaJ APPLICANT 3 c A^//veU Name (>ATje.lCK.P. 0^ FUA«A6.AN Phone (home ) ^^7 (7^ ^ J ^ - ________ -________ Phone(woric ) f- 0Y7 Address: OA City: Ia /A^^A _______Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name i j ^ K C Phone (home). Phone (workX Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 300*00 Describe request in detail: A t!) 6 A a J/^ 6 g~C K.--------- . 5 L (attach additional sheets if necessary) n ! \;i VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback: ___Lot Width Front X" Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverag Ci Average Lakeshore Other (specify) EIARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: a J 1A^ A CC S Ai.A 11—A^U— /vf/VKJ^OvO lot ---------------------------------------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) tnn % • •• # • 6 I PRAi npcirRiPTinNit . . to the point of beginning, Hennepin County, Minnesota. o #S496 LlJ > C I—I I—I ^ fNI 7”in 3"^1 ^ • (28)(27)g 50 60 70 7 180 _ 5^(29)R 180 S (30) 180 ^ 9 505$)OJ0005C10 (32) ,80 ^ s 1 ^ Q (^^) 180 0 (^4) ,80 ^ 13 Q (35) 180 74 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 (94) 17 8 rvi 23 0— 0 1 rsj S >5 0 0 0 fNJ OJ 168ro 18 8 ro 0020________120 8 OJ 21 8 Osl 22 8 fVJ (49)(80)1 1 1 \ //4 50 50 50 50 50 \50 50 1 y50 o (54) 25S OsJ (55) (56) 26'^oo (7) 199.9 714. 15 WEST 00•«r CD1 57 I 52 ' in in • ' XvXCrt 06 GO i KT (6)"(39)m • ••••••« • • • •65 57 1525.72 FES 536. 25 N6 ( ) z. (I TRACT A (40) TRACT B 184.27 («) o .28 WEST CT C 279.71 (43) ■ 1097.85----- (13; 65. 5 (22) 16 (23') 263.4 15 (21) 262.3 & in N- ; 300. 59 WEST 777.8 220.77 1 (34) 195. 56 6 f \ XT oJ 8 MA nr> ro %nirrKff #1 m \ ORONO WfJUl CR oroBi cm 0 400 -.v:. -c '‘6^ '4. iv;.*?- t v*i>> ' Course t ? "'r«« • * •1 RAMCH BO . *.*«rr-* ■ eco 0 j** '*• HI6M IHEEN ST ■I.V ■•':•*•>•'■f . V *• • . • — : • BAYS I BATS «»0i :^WS»' SOMEASII g Line WHni «<5$y FOX « # iC* ‘ « ✓•• **.' • . T. ^i:-^:Nort, I ■•>; u Npefenberg • ■ • *. ••> •' •DAHL ROw ••’ J* aT.. ,s $ OluilOVlEw'-W’•imm: jsM,ys V :C'<v- :r.:'-7 •rJL > rfcerg /*anf «000 • • \ < / ^ ■' / *' > .-• • * \ West ♦V f * • •,' I ^ , X J«M ORONO-^-' Arm •BOHNS •Mil . -.'i'- \U *. .•.*•• • * 1 ^ • .* * \ . '7 ..•: V .: ' • • •*MINT S ^ ». /* *v- r M / * • • • Io — • * 1 r ^ • » V •. i.' wi Point *-'*r *'.•*•*" * *.'.*• '• ‘ft^jHoorf Point DiiERINO • f/;\f •*. ^ % % ••• r ••;7. Crystal '- ffCrystai. V ■ •* .’f » I . •• • '• T-*•• . ■ . • .. ..V ^ •• « V B •-•• .%• .'• 4» • A . •■ • .. *•• • • *. ••• . •. . T . • tV V • .r :•. V •;• ; *:• ..:!.. : •,.-. . • , • :. /T^y^ ■ ■V • .r.7 V .. •: •;.. • \ • ;^ . \ . .. .•••'»••. ; r' . • • -r-.^L . . •»r J MWMniiin S>BaOTlM/U«TOlO ^RJ^iQ CT=r------*«.•KSI WiAMiLu- V ' •; ^ • ■ •*■. • JUlA ^MINNETO M HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE! (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75* 75-250 ’ 250-500 ’ f 500-1000’ 1 .7 = ^36 sF.EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House *49. V X Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway 40 X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landsc^ Underlain By Plastic X X X G, Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A A ttM4 B B X 100 X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ^o.7o Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway 4o X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck il >1 X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERIY AREA IN ZONE Xoi^ * B X 100 Gr H-%0 i H-lL ni.i. ^34 21S. I'i a.Ol3 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJ. S.F. SE. S.F. S.F. SE. SE. SE. _ SE. _ S.F. 53747 y« S.F. SE. S.F. S.F. SE. SE. SE. SE. S.F. SE. S.F. S.F. SE. SE. SE. SE. S.F. A B A B I .. RUN DATE 04/22/99 RATCH 510 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI4S5401 PACE 27 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 30 06-117-23 33 0046 03696 NORTH SHORE DR R06ER 6RANNXNG 8 WIFE ROGER CRANNXNG 3696 NORTH SHORE OR HOUND MN 65364 36 06-117-23 33 0049 00036 ADDRESS UNASSX6NE0 D H EN6LUN0 ETAL COL 6 HRS D'H EN6LUN0 5101 SPRING ROCK CT FAIRFAX VA 22032 36 06-117-23 33 0050 00036 AOORESS UNASSXGNEO 0 N ENGLUND ETAL COL 8 HRS 0 H ENGLIMD 5101 SPRING ROCK COURT FAIRFAX Va 22032 PROP ADOR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 36 17-117-23 22 0002 03665 NORTH SHORE DR H A 8 H A DOSRATZ HARK A 8 HARY A DOBRATZ 3665 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 65364 36 17-117-23 22 0003 03695 NORTH SHORE OR HXCHAEL R DAHL PATRICK O'FLANAGAN 3695 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0606 00036 AOORESS UNASSXGNED LYNN 8 FAITH CHRISTINE LYNN 8 FAXTH CHRISTINE 3925 NORTH SHORE OR HOUND HN 55364 L PROP AI»R OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 36 17-117-23 22 0007 63925 NORTH SHORE DR L 8 F CHRISTINE LYNN R CHRISTINE 3925 NORTH SHORE OR HOUND HN 55364 36 17-117-23 22 0012 01635 SHAOYWOOO RO RALPH E HILLER ETAL RALPH E HILLER 1635 SHAOYNOOD RD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0013 01645 SHAOYWOOO RO RALPH HARVEY ETAL RALPH HARVEY 1645 SHAOYWOOD RO WAYZATA HN 55391 • * PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 36 17 117-23 22 0039 03905 . NORTH SHORE DR NONARO R ALTON III . HOWARD R ALTON XXI 1635 CONCORDIA ST ORONO HN 55391 36 17-117-23 22 0040 01635 CONCORDIA ST HOWARD R ALTON III HOWARD R ALTON III 1635 CONCORDIA ST OROHO HN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 510 00011 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACIS REPRESEMTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARincHT OF PROPERTY TAXATION^ TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDOE AND BELIEF DATE PERMIT RECORD Permit No.Date Type of Permit tkSAA^AAft ^AiJloujO- « . Application Date: Completioi; Date: 60 Day Deadline: 5/19/99 5/19/99 7/17/99 COUNCIL MEETING JUL 1 2 1999 CITY OF OflONO 1 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 6/28/99 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Planning Intern Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2499 Thomas B. & Marilyn L. Swanson 1740 Shadywood Road Variance--Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) Lot Area:20,250 s.f. Application: The applicant has proposed to assemble a temporary screen enclosure, 10' x 17', on an existing deck. The screen enclosure will be assembled in the early spring and taken down in late fall. The applicant seeks approval of variances for lakeshore setback and hardcover. The screen enclosure and existing deck are located within the 0'-75' lakeshore setback. The structural coverage increases with the assemblage of the screen porch, however, the hardcover amount does not change. This application requires the following variance approval: 1. Variance from Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (A) ; To permit a lakeshore setback variance to allow a screen porch on an existing deck to be located within 75' of the lakeshore. 2. Variance from Section 10.22. Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L)(l): To permit a hardcover variance to allow 1,973 s.f. (21.5%) in the 0 ’-75' lakeshore setback area where 0 s.f. (0%) is allowed. The screen porch will be assembled on an existing deck, therefore not increasing the hardcover amount. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recomm-nded by a 5 to 1 vote to: Approve the application as presented. r f The Planning Commission had the following concerns: 1. The screen porch increases the structural hardcover in the O' - 75 'setback. 2. Approval of this application is not consistent with previous votes by the Planning Commission on similar applications. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 PHONE:(612)249-4600 FAX:(612)249-4616 ZONING FILE #2499 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 24, 1999 TO:Thomas & Marily-n Swanson 1740 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION;Variance DATE OF MEETING; June 21, 1999 VOTE:5 FOR 1 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: The screen enclosure is reviewed as a permanent enclosure. Any change to the nature of the structure will not be allowed. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; City Council July 12, 1999, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X:\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\CAROLE\PCACnON\2499 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 (A) AND 2 AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (1) FILE #2-»99 WHEREAS, Thomas B. Swanson and Marilyn L. Swanson (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 1740 Shadywood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lots 14 and 15, Shady-wood, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); 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 June 21, 1999, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (A) to permit assemblage of a screen porch onto an existing deck that is located within the 0-75' lakeshore setback area and per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) to allow 1,973 s.f. (21.5%) hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback area where 1,973 s.f (21.5%) exists and 0 s.f (0%) is allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2499, Page 1 of 6 2. 3. 5. 6. The property is located in the LR-IC Zoning District, where .5 acre or 21,780 s.f. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of .46 acre or 20,250 s.f. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 21, 1999 and recommended approval on a vote of 5 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: The deck is currently located within the 0-75' lakeshore setback area. B Hardcover amount of 21.5% exceeds the allowed amount of 0% in the 0-75' lakeshore setback. C. Structure is permanent and the frame will stay all year. D. Any change to the nature of the structure will not be allowed. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 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. Page 2 of 6 J CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 (A) and 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) to permit assemblage of a screen porch onto an existing deck that is located within the 0-75' lakeshore setback area and to allow 1,973 s.f (21.5%) hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback area. Approval was subject to the following conditions; 1 2. 3. 4. 5. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan and/or hardcover may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. Screen porch is reviewed as a permanent enclosure. Any change to the nature of the structure will not be allowed. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building pemut vwthin one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 12, 2000). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 6 A Certlficateof Survey for for Arthur and Dorothy Flnkelsteln of Lots 14 and 15. Shady-Wood Hennepin County, Minnesota Zona 0-75 75-250 Total area 9150t Sq. Ft. moot Sq. Ft. Hardcover 2347± Sq. Ft. 4640± Sq. Ft. % hardcover • 25.6 % 41.6 % I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct representatIon of a survey of the bound aries of Lots 14.and 15. Shady-Wood, the location of all existing buildings, if any. there on and the existing location of all wood tlabers, concrete, plastic covered planted areas, and wood decks thereon. It does not purport to show any other laproveaents or encroachaents. COFFIN A 6R0NBER6. INC. Scale Date- 0 1 Inch » 20 feet July 19. 1985 uvi*ftcJi.t5-as . Iran Barker Hark S. Gronberg Reg. No. 12755 Gordon R. Coffin Reg. No. 6064 Engineers and Land Surveyors Long Lake. Minnesota TO; FROM; DATE; Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Wendy Bottenberg, Planning Intern June 7,1999 SUBJECT: #2499 Thomas B. and Marilyn L. Swanson 1740 Shadywood Road Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District; LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) Lot Area;20,250 s.f. (0.46 acres) Municipal sewer and water Application: The applicant has proposed to assemble a temporary screen enclosure, 10' x 17', on an existing deck. The screen enclosure will be assembled in the early spring and taken down in late fall. The applicant seeks approval of variances for lakeshore setback and hardcover. The screen enclosure and existing deck are located within the 0'-75' lakeshore setback. The structural coverage increases with the assemblage of the screen porch, however the hardcover amount does not change. This application requires the following variances: 1. 10.22, Subd. 1 (A): To permit a lakeshore setback variance to allow a 10' x 17' screen porch on an existing deck to be located within 75' of the lakeshore. 2. 10.22, Subd. 2 and 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(l): To permit a hardcover variance to allow 1,973 s.f (21.5%) in the 0'-75' lakeshore setback area where 0 s.f. (0%) is allowed. The screen porch will be assembled on an existing deck, therefore not increasing the hardcover amount. #2499 Thomas & Marilyn Swamon 1740 ShadyH'ood Road Variances 6/7/99 Page I ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards: LR-IC (1/2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Side Yard Lakeshore Set Back Required 21,780 s.f.100'10'75' Existing 20,250 s.f.166*10'55' Hardcover Calculations: Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0'-75'9,150 s.f.(0%)1,973 s.f. (21.5%) 1,973 s.f. (21.5%) 75'-250'11,100 s.f.2,775 s.f. (25%) 3,722 s.f. (33.5%) 3,722 s.f. (33.5%) Structural Coverag e: Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage 20,250 s.f.Allowed: 3,038 s.f. (15.0%) Existing: 2,503 s.f. (12.4%) Proposed: 2,673 s.f. (13.2%) Statement of Hardship : The applicants should be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. #2499 Thomas & Marilyn S\^anson / 740 Shacfy^wood Road 6/7/99 Variances Page 2 Issues for consideration: 1. The screen porch will be temporary, from spring to late fall. 2. The screen porch will be located on an existing deck. 3. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation: Staff is recommending approval of the variances. Attachments A Application B Site Plan/Survey C Plat Map D Location Map E Site Topography F Property Owner's List G Permit Record U2499 Thomas & Marilyn Swanson 1740 Shadvwood road 0 Variances 6n/99 Page 3 /Application # 2 M Date Received" Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMA nON ^ Site Address Property Identification Number (I^.I.D.) ________H "W'iProperty Identification Number Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired /0/Y3_______________________________ I [do not) also own the^djacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential (month/year) other (specify). Zoning District: APPLICANT B. 5ulAf/5fiV Name i\A^iLuAi /. Address: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name __________ Phone (home l 0^0^ Phone (work)____ City:.Zip:^££2_l/_ Phone (home). Phone (work). Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST________ Fstimated Construction Cost $ . ^_______ Describe request in detail: (attach additional sheets if necessary) * VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width ^ Setback: Front Other (specify)_____ Side ^ Hardcover ____Lot Coverage __Rear Average Lakeshore HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:_____________________:----------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) 3 Certificate of Survey for for Arthur and Dorothy Flnkelsteln of Lots 14 and 15, Shady-Wood Hennepin County, Minnesota Zone 0-75 75-250 Total area 9150± Sq. Ft. moot Sq. Ft. Hardcover 2347± Sq. Ft. 4640t Sq. Ft. X hardcover " 25.6 X 41.6 X I hereoy certify that this Is a true and correct representation of a rurvey of the bound aries of Lots 14.and 15, Shady-Wood, the location of all existing buildings. If any, there on and the existing location of all wool timbers, concrete, plastic covered planted areas, and wood decks thereon. It does not purport to show any other Imprrvements or encroachments. COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. Scale: Date : 0 1 Inch « 20 feet July 19, 1985 . Iron marker Hark S. Gronberg Reg. No. 12755 Gordon R. Coffin Reg. No. 6064 engineers and Land Surveyors Long Lake, Minnesota • • * V CL./ ^ 'I'.gTf WtCT'tMJCM iTo ■'*•■'*■••’•P.\ \:»,\.\ SCO c 57r.fi:'}: >.* • FOX \J‘ •.•%.“ *^ y • • •. •-••-•••• v:- .-' \^%i:maxweil APP •'•• - ii: > . ImiSS-LBov B • -- t. H^SkogsbergPant ' '^A -. |i W'ej/ • i m ORONb Arm Jorf /*«nf -'•.••••>;•*• t: \'Vi • • »• ;•• • • \* !*'••• • :•:. • •••..• : . %* ;•• •: •.**.: % •• rv. . • • • ••••^ • . . * V..,. *.r .; .• • • S^^Siood Point .*• ^SUND, Fagernas Point. 4 • fIST ■cA^RJdGJ: tHounjitn. ^0&0TM)Mf TOk* V jS cBSI AVI TOlo AO 1 . • i o»WBi!55 art cmTXjL, K ii MINI GQCSIQtXIDS ^4 7 S <\SH0R£LI«l o CO CL .240 7 Park LTOIAX f/ 3 ftc- ^V‘ V'#» /’«•« cvCOOSE ' ^'^C)*SLAND ‘/i?«^ • Carman <1 W‘«80CVv e»*M . VBay PRO NO • • •. • • • V • •r->*j • k *v Permit No. im VV/3 6^70-^_ PERMIT RECORD Date /?■ JV-^S' <i-') C, ! ^-ioi,r I-II-y/ TS 7- 3o -^5 - .7-^ .2^.^.2£ { Type of Permit rV>/lT HOOS>F HdbKK)'? ACOfr/OA/ HOOh'a/^ Ctr/iTiEf( mr^g-nc/L -t Hr /€J36 ReRoof^ RUN DATE 05/19/99 DATCH 507 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEN PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI435401 PACE 31 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR L 38 17-117-23 21 0002 00038 ADDRESS UNASSX6NED A 8 D FINKELSTEIN ARTHUR A DOROTHY FINKELSTEIN 9933 109TH AVE N HAPLE GROVE NN 55309 38 17-117-23 21 0003 00038 ADDRESS UNASSX6NE0 AID FINKELSTEIN ARTHUR 8 DOROTHY FINKELSTEIN 9933 lOOTH AVE N HAPLE GROVE HN 55369 38 17-117-23 21 0005 01719 FA6ERNESS POINT RO LAUREEN E DARLING LAUREEN E DARLING 1719 EAGERNESS POINT RD WAYZATA m 55391 L L. PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 38 17-117-23 21 0006 00030 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL DAY HN 55323 38 17-117-23 21 0007 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNEU HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY NN 55323 38 17-117-23 21 0018 01710 SHADYWOOO RO JOHN P FITZPATRICK JOHN P FITZPATRICK 1710 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA HN 55391 C PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR SB 17-117-23 21 0019 01720 SHADYWOOD RD H E PEHBERTON ET AL TRUSTEE WALTER H/HARILYN E PEHBERTON 1720 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 21 0020 01790 SHADYWOOD RD T B 8 H L SWANSON THONAS B 8 HARILYN L SWANSON 1740 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 21 0021 01750 SHADYWOOD RD GRETCHEN S SHAW GRETCHEN S SHAW 1750 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA HN 55391 c PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 38 17-117-23 21 0022 01760 SHADYWOOD RD GAIL S BRINER GAIL S BRINER 1760 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 21 0023 01770 SHADYWOOD RI) B J 8 T J PETERSON BRADLEY 8 TRACI PETERSON 1770 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA HN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 507 00011 I CERTIFY TtMT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY OEPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF NY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIE! DATE- 1 • Application Date: Completion Date: Application Deadline: 5/19/99 5/19/99 7/18/99 COUNCIL MEETING JUL 1 2 1999 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE:7/9/99 ITEM NO, Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator/Planner Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2500 Orono Independent School District #278 795 Old Crystal Bay Road (High School) Conditional Use Permit Amendment Zoning:RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres) Comprehensive Plan:Institutional/Urban Service Area Summary: Orono Independent School District #278 was granted conditional use permits for construction of a new middle school and improving parking facilities on the campus in April. They have now submitted an application requesting a conditional use permit to construct a media center addition to the high school. The Media Center would be located on the northeast side of the School and would be one story in height (16.6'). Please refer to the enclosed attachments for the proposed location of the addition. The Planning Commission and City Council did review a site plan showing the proposed location of the Media Center addition when the Conditional Use Permit and variances were granted to permit a new parking lot arrangement on the site. However this is the first application for this phase of the project. The applicant has indicated the addition will be constructed together with the other improvements on the Orono campus. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 21,1999 and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 0. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MEDIA CENTER ADDITION TO THE ORONO HIGH SCHOOL AT 795 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH FOR ORONO SCHOOL DISTRICT #278 PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 3 FILE #2500 WHEREAS, Orono Independent School District #278, (hereinafter "the applicant") on May 19, 1999, filed an application for a conditional use permit to allow a media center addition to the Orono High School for property located at 795 Old Crystal Bay Road North within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as: Part of the North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); 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 June 21, 1999, 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 of Orono for a conditional permit to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 to permit the construction of a 7,800 s.f. media center addition to the Orono High School. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #25(X). 2. The property is located in the RR-IB Zoning District, where 2 acres is the minimum lot area. The property consists of 130 acres. Page 1 of 4 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 21, 1999 and recommended approval on a vote of 6 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The media center addition meets all required setbacks for structures in the zoning district. B. The structure will be 16.6 feet in height, including parapet. C. The Council approved conditional use permits for the construction of a new middle school and improvements to the high school parking lots on April 12, 1999, including landscape and lighting plans for the school campus. D. The City Engineer has approved the grading plan submitted by the applicant. 5. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 7,800 s.f. media center addition to the Orono High School 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 properties, nor will its use depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the affect of the proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, 'ubdivision Page 2 of 4 3 to permit the construction of a 7,800 s.f. media center addition to the Orono High School, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. ATTEST: Development of the school campus is per the site plans previously submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Council, reviewed as Zoning File #2471. Authorities granted by this resolution are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building peunit within one year of the date of Council approval or this conditional use permit will expire on that date (July 12, 2000). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The undersigned 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. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 12th day of July, 1999. Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) . ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of July, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ) On this day of ^ 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared__________________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ) On this day of j 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared ___________________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 249-4600 ZONING FILE #2500 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; July 2, 1999 TO;Neal Lawson, Asst. Superintendent Independent School District #278 P.O. Box 46 Long Lake, MN 55356-0046 COPIES:R. Scott McQueen Wold Architects and Eng. 305 St. Peter Street St. Paul, MN 55102 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Media Center CUP DATE OF MEETING; 06/21/99 VOTE; 6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval per request. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS; Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; City Council - Monday, July 12, 1999; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. ’f ;, ou desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call Paul Weinberger at 249-4600. ! P TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: RE: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator #2500 Orono Independent School District #278 795 Old Crystal Bay Road (High School) Conditional Use Permit Amendment-Public Hearing Exhibits: A B C D E F G H 1 J K L Application Applicant Letter of Request Existing Survey Existing Site Plan Proposed Layout and Grading Plan High School-Geometric, Paving, Signage and Striping Plan Grading and Utility Plan Approved Landscaping Plan Elevation Views Proposed Floor Plan for Media Center City Engineer Comments Property Owner Notification List Zoning:RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres) Comprehensive Plan:Institutional/Urban Service Area Application: In April of this year the Orono Independent School District #278 was approved to make improvements to the student and faculty parking lots for the high school as well as construct a ne^ Middle School and gymnasium. The school district also is proposing an application for a Media Center addition to the existing High School. The Media Center would be located on the northeast side of the School and would be one story in height. Please refer to the enclosed attachments for the proposed location of the addition. The Planning Commission and City Council did review a site plan showing the proposed location of the Media Center addition when the Conditional Use Permit and variances were granted to permit a new parking lot arrangement on the site. However this is the first application for this phase of the project. f^247! Orono High School Conditional Use Permit Amendment June 21 1999 pagt-l The applicant has indicated the addition will be constructed together with the other improvements on the Orono campus. PARCEL INFORMATION Property Identiflcation Number: (High School) 33-118-23-21 0001 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota ZONING Minimum Zoning Requirements Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Rear Yard Side Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street 2 acres, dry buildable 200’50’50’30 ’50’ The Media Center will meet all required setbacks for the RR-IB zoning district. The addition will be located approximately 180 ’ from the Old Crystal Bay Road right-of-way Zoning Requirements for Schools The RR-IB district is intended to provide an area for low density residential development and limited agricultural uses. Schools are allowed in this district as a conditional use. The Zoning Code requires that no building or parking area be located within a required yard. The Zoning Code allows building in the district to be a maximum of 30' in height. The proposed addition is under that height allow by the Code. The building height is one story plus parapet totaling 16'-8" above grade on the west side of the building. All setbacks have been met by the proposal. W-/7/ Orono High School Conditional Uu Permit Amendment June 21. 1999 pagt-2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT STANDARDS The Planning Commission may recommend approval of a conditional use permit amendment if the application meets the following standards: 1. 2. 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 the Comprehensive Municipal Plan; 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 or improvements in the vicinity; and 3.That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the application for Conditional Use Permit Amendment to permit the Orono School District to construct a 7,800 s.f. Media Center addition to the High School. f^247! Orono High School Conditional Use Permit Amendment June 21. 1999 pagt~3 -y Application # Date Received~“ 5~-1 ^ Amount Paid $ CITY OF ORONO - CENTRAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATIO 'I Site Address 685 ni r r.RV<;TAi ray roah n .____________ Type of AppUcation tc be Filed CONbITIONAL USE PERMIT Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Phone (home)_APPLICANT Name ISP 0278 C/0 WOLD ARCH. & ENG. phone (work) 651-227-7773 Address ,?n5 5t. pf tfr 5T.___________.City 5T. paiii . Mh| Zip 55856-nnd6 OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home). Name INDEPENDCNT SCHOOL DISTRICT #278 Phone (work) Addressees OLD CRYST AL BAY ROAD N. City LONG LAKE, MN P.O. BOX 46 Date Property Acquired ____________________________________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____S 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____S175.00 Residential Accessory Use S2S0.00 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 fi'om ori^al application) _____After-the*Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPUCATIONS _____$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 App^s Other - see Fee Schedule Zip65356-0046 __(month/year) s.. f % ‘ ^ • 305 St. Peter Street St. Paul MN 55102 651.227.7773 EAX 651.223.5646 May 18, 1999 715-H T ollcate Road E lgin . IL 60123 847.608.2600 FAX 847.608.2654 Michael P. Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator 2750 Kelly Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55323 NET: HTTP//«WOLDAE.CO.M Re: Independent School District #278 Orono High School Media Center Addition Commission No. 99016 Dear Mr. Gaffron: Independent School District #278 is pleased to submit the attached Conditional Use Permit application for the Orono Hi^ School Addition. The High School Addition features new media center space for high school students, These spaces total approximately 7,800 gross square feet in accordance with the referendum.. The attached documentation supports the conditional use application, as well as items referenced in section 10.09, Subd.. 3 of the Orono zoning ordinance: 1. The High School Addition is 7,800 gross square feet and one story. 2. The building height: one story plus parapet totaling 16 ’-8 ” feet above grade on west side of building. These numbers are in accordance with sections 10.21 and section 10.75M of the zoning ordinance. 3. Schematic building elevations are included. It should be noted that the site work for this project was submitted and reviewed by the City of Orono, on February 17,1999, and was assigned application #2471. The work we are currently submitting for is only for the Media Center addition. Therefore, only sheets C1 .1 -C1.2, and C1 .7-C1 .10 are submitted for reference only. Respectfully submitted, WOLDARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS A R. Scott McQueen, AIA Associate El»tl EmfUjtr Letter to Michael P. Gaffron Page Two Enclosures: Schedule Of Drawings (City C.U.P. Submission Packet) Sheet Cl. 1 Partial Topographic Survey-Ice Arena/High School Site Site Removals Plan High School-Geometric, Paving, Signage and Striping Plan High School-Grading and Utilities Plan Middle School and High School-Landscaping Plan Construction Details Sheet CLIO Construction Details Architectural Plan Site Lighting Legal Description (See sheet Cl.O) Certified Property Owners List - Sheet C 1.2 Sheet C1.6 Sheet C 1.7 Sheet Cl.8 Sheet Cl.9 cc: Jay Pomeroy, AJA Pat Arlig, Arlig Environmental Kevin Sullivan Vaughn Dierks George Gorbatenko, Jr. Susanna Strand ean/99016/iray99 .^7 N -f vX t * •W' r^ir-hisiii' 1*1 1 1 J J 1 II 1 « 1V!1 MU I. IMiJ. I mM I'^' C(m Oa\\.\W /LA\yi*hfc=H?3 =**^' £li fl lliS'^■Mi-l3 . c isp .t I I i| 5 $!} * i!e H I*: :!lr i’ll l:fi!|b « sni ^ *“8 Hi! »• i 1'?i«i ti «:i act iiij-iir; illIIIM!!; *il 5j( l-sij hi 3i|ir.|| 111 !l:i!l fall1 t.srit t||ii!!ii If; y di!;; i|i; '*i ’i'illi *s?5 i i u o 1 ) I)I| i<^^' 1 l! iiinliililllliimih iiII fi Q § ( « I I I I I i MM ^...o* V V 1 t • % S f)—.-.I fi • **’'• X jaAd*^ lUOJpOHQ 1*1*7 •U||d«bi|d <u.2 u I' .*>A h h}>J .. ,-Awfyj / ■’, :1 I; *0 // '/f ■ 3 m 88 IUj I If «< •(< mm|i 111, m 11 111, If! lill ;!iii !i :lh i ll K tl-nw 01 "81* i^ll2 i O /■>. oi V. U P“ o W \ i n'^o^i -h ^ 9Tt NVS "* agg 50^ I I -J UJ iJ fV> OVDJSn zi CkSs« isg y zc/) “otf C/i fc_ •—• DrfO. d2« Utt < IT) ^ nu 2 oa o ^ d -4 svL( .eu Oi ®o SVlggSBaaBSBBggBBaKSSg ” H U «5»» LJ 0N > oM>>; i1 1 > as SoS — " fSg 1 1 1 1 1 3<SJ j 2 o 1 1 00 0^ o i 1 q: «j r>in CD♦ CM inC. a u <no cK #■4 c^ «i4 1- Ul 2g s o «■< X (/) <a FLR.ATu. 0^ d 1 u T1VA 9N1 3NQ3 J2X (' C8K0U1 C9>20li _J lUO S|§ \ .Jill H \ h. I •• d- (O.a;?::-'- I I ii \ n li i 1 i i-I ! I ! ! S I |(5 nn* I \th ! JI |lMH!mi I M •< •» if E !| )| ) ) ' i| Z UJo UJ •i %J1T L|,, 1®^® i 11 i> >) Lill! II liil s ® 0 lilill I in { I! V.•'t*yii:©1 gp .lUO(oGoozsiiilSEoqIww 5 o T i\ i ' V' 'V i' ,'I'll •ir^MIKCiS .1 i 'i!l>l''i I P piji . • 9I I T •« n 1/ i iViiiiii?':' ! |jl|linl 'ill ■ir." S 4=='*ty-->' 1.1 J H»111 7 t I "nf I'j'Jii 3 s X 0 iO tuo:e 1 (0 o:t s (0 Ui*' ill I •3!mj-»E !• k• k H « If ISk k t 1 5 fc* k 1 P k ! M• 1 |9 1 • • k k 0 0 k k 0 0 k k *i: \i 1 ii il il illil 1^ 1u ll3i • \>3 H ijii!% 1 !!!'i •i fi i ii i i1 i 1 » V < 1 6 1 • % • 1 8 1 iS i- iJ III. 1:1! I i i IP' P, i !i! .ill :lli! - |!i ^i: I I li«ill 11S| ilL i* I; >11 if:!!; II ii, iill! i 1 3. * 1 ‘i i< il I i si Ii i< r 1 lin I !! I 1 ! I I. I !' ii!lI s!‘;; I IjJ a aaaan i t c i s t)U 9 n 11 f I! I! U I I 11| I !! pi |*i! !l I I ■WHt|m I lito WMM m m “ “ 1 1 ■'■ ■■ •: I I 1 S 3 d 3 3 0 1 1 V 1 S A d 3 mi r/ >- »»« Milt I .) /arm ««4C4i m — 1 V. ,rJ J '• y/ !•* . N* C. J y ^ j i ii:" ’’•. l\ i Ql\ 2 v:.^_vv r^<m 9 ^ •«f» u lit_____ » A(.l4t • 0 :« X ^ J W--i£giii I rrnTnTTTTTrnTFHi l-S i:U:tt!!i!iit «s 8 mv y i.' J III !l! ii3}s:::ini:iiii —\N \ I I Pmsl nm tmi i L o» b IlllkVitlll kdf 1» J III i^J iJ!U__L£J' ”An»r 3; \ Pf:::::::::::::!:;{in:t:i:!:i!i.:i!::|| i •.kO^O wO ....... “'"Ifc k LLLlikll i 1 I I I I I I 111 1 H z 01 lU UJ zo § Oz § zsI lU -1 lU z M D § fr>s s 4 #IKJr •“*RF fl 1^ li iy *4 U-1. .L! OPo lU U) M § fl C* .1t iu -j lU $ I lU § vz»HD ¥i^ J ■7!!W|- lJ”;L_..ii:r.jl J wJS^' -*^mh , Ummi^mhv^ o;• •*»♦•%• *^**********^ .i.tr::n.”3 ,....L.: SWVWWYMW. t. I BONESTROO ROSENE ANDERLIK 6516361311 05/28/99 15:46 S'.OI/ ^ I Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects Bonesuoc. IfOtfffiC, Uh n mi Affinn.nt,i, Opportunity Pnnup.^h Ot(i>G floneicroo. FE • J05rph < Ar»ilrrl»t Ff • i SOiv/»l> Pf • lilchilfdf Tufr.Fr. PF tTHronK Coon. Fl* #RooerrCi icnurnini P£ • jcify a flouition, PC • RoOCft W Potent. TK SuKSn M. CDerlm. C FA itnn>r t,unutu.uu\ Ai%ociJt9 Prif\ctp»n Mow.'ifil A S.tnf»i/r? v»r • n*»iih ^ C«oMlun Ft • ffoocfl F. Ffofff^io. FF • ftlthurd Foster. FE • D«tvid O loiVn|.» f| • Rnoi-M (' puv\rk. AIA • M.W A HaoSOO. FF • MuH^et T OAutmaon. F£ t fco K F»eui FF • Krnnrrh F An..Vrvii#». PC • M^kR. ffulfi. Pt • Vrtnry P WiMljmion. PC . tS • POterf f KMlsmun • Agnri M Pini| • Mirh.trl P Fau. PC • Allan fticn Schmidr. PC Or/i^Pi St Paul. Hochesicf »uh I t MW • M.Uv iuUe U'l XVrbtile' wboneltrOO COOO May 28, 19<)9 Mr. Paul Weinberger Assistant Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 5S323 Re: Orono Middle School File No. 139-2471 Dear Paul: Wc hove reviewed the grading plans for the proposed Oroito Middle School. The site is located ««5t of Old Crystal Bay Road, south of County Road 6 and north of Orono City Hall in the .southeast quarter of Section 28. activity Wc will prepare a final review of the utility’ and storm sewer plans once storm sewer calculations, pond calculations, gcotechnicol recommendations and pavement design have been .siibmined. Please contact me at 651-604-4863 if you have any questions regarding thi.s matter. Yours very truly. BONHSTROO, ROSKNE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC, 7^ Tom Kellogg Cc: GregGappa, City of Orono Lyle Oman. City’ of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 - St. Paul. MN 55113 • 651-636-4600 • Fax; 651-636-1311 I • ; L L ■( L t • iUN DATE QS/2A/99 BATCH 5Q2 hennepxn county property information system PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PX4S5401 PACE S • • PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AODR 38 ES-llO'ES SI 0001 02940 SIXTH AVE N STONE6ATE FARM INC STONECATE FARM INC MSI FLYING CLOUD OR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55S44 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 38 2B-118-2S SI 0006 02905 SIXTH AVE N J F HAGEN ASM HAGEN JEFFREY F A SHELLEY N HAGEN 2905 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55SS6 ' PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR S8 28-118-25 52 0008 05045 SIXTH AVE H JAB RYDER JOHN D A BARBARA Y RYDER 5045 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55556 PROP' ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 2B-11B-25 55 0005 0005B ADDRESS UNASSI6NED ORONO XNOEP SCH DIST B27B ORONO INOEP SCH DIST R27B M5 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE MN 55556 PROP ADDR ONI«R NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 5B 2B-118-25 55 0010 050B5 JAMESTOWN RD BAB LARSON GARY A LARSON SOBS JAMESTOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55556 PROP ADDR V t OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AODR 58 28-118-25 54 0005 00795 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N SCHOOL DIST NO 270 ORONO SCH DIST NO 27B 685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 28-11B-25 51 0004 02995 JAMESTOWN RD J A K SWANSON JAMES T SWANSON 2995 JAMES TOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 28-118-25 51 0005 02945 JAMESTOWN RD M A J WANLIG MICHAEL J A JO ELLEN WAHLIG 2945 JAMESTOWN ROAD S LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 28-118-25 51 0007 02885 SIXTH AVE N C R A G L TIMM CHARLES A GERRY TIMM 2885 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 28-118-25 51 0008 00058 ADDRESS UNASS16NE0 LORRAINE N NIXCHEL LORRAINE N NIXCHEL NO 4 JAMESTOWN ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55356 o 38 28-118-25 32 0009 05025 SIXTH AVE N 8 A A F A MCKEE BRENT A ANGELA NCKEE 5025 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 28-118-23 55 0001 00058 ADDRESS UNASSXCNED ORONO XNO SCHOOL DIST NO 278 ORONO XND SCHOOL DIST NO 278 685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE MN 55556 1 38 28-118-25 33 0008 03065 JAMESTOWN RD J P A S K KOOB JOHN P A SUSANNE K KOOB 5065 JAMESTOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55556 38 28-118-23 33 0009 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED JAMES R GRABEK ET AL JAMES R GRABEK 5050 JAMESTOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55556 1 38 28-118-23 33 0015 03050 JAMESTOWN RD J R GRABEK A P J GRABEK JAMES R A PENELOPE J GRABEK 5050 JAMESTOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55556 38 28-118-23 34 0002 00058 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED JAMES R GRABEK ET AL JAMES R GRABEK 5050 JAMESTOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55556 v1 38 28-118-23 42 0002 02700 SIXTH AVE N JOHN LEIN JOHN H LEIN P 0 BOX 177 low: lake MN 55356 38 28-118-23 42 0004 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED ROGER A FAZENDXN ET AL LOU A JEANNXNE BEASLEY 1265 MAPLEWOOD DR LONG LAKE MN 55556-9550 RUN DATE 0S/24/9f * • MTCN 602 PROP ADDR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR PROP ADDR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER NAIC taxpayer NANE/ADDR t . HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORHATXON SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST SO 28-118-2S 42 0005 000S8 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED INDEPENDENT SCHL DIST 8278 ATTN SUPERINTENDENT INDEPENDENT SCHL DIST R278 485 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE HN S5S54 SO 20-I10-2S 4S 0008 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED INO SCHOOL DIST NO 278 IND SCHOOL DIST NO 278 ADHIN OFFICE- SUPERINTENDENT 485 OLD CAPITAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE HN 5SSS4 TOTAL BATCH 502 00024 38 28-110-23 43 0005 00770 OLD CRYSTAL DAY RD N IND SCHOOL DIST 8278 (ORONO) ATTN SUPERINTENDENT v IND SCHOOL DIST 0278 lORQNO) 485 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE HN 55354 38 33-118-23 12 0007 02700 KELLEY PKHY H R A CITY OF ORONO H R A CITY OF ORONO 1335 BROWN RD S WAYZATA HN 55391 REPORT NO. P1435401 PAGE 7 38 28-118-23 43 0004 00038 ADDRESS UNASSI6NED ALBIN F THIES ET AL ORONO INOEPENDT SCH DIST 278 485 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE HN 55354 38 33-118-23 21 0001 00745 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N SCHOOL DIST NO 11 ORONO SCHOOL DIST 1278 485 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE HN 55354 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE^BEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DAT (/ 10 CQ •t ■! i \ r JUI 1 2 1999 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO DATE: July 12, 1999 ITEM NO.;7 Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer's Report Item Description: Acquisition of Additional City Property As a result of the discussion at the July 8th Council work session, we have prepared a map showing the location of property for possible acquisition for future City purposes. The intent of this land purchase is to preserve this property for future City use. The property is currently undeveloped, and once this property is developed future acquisition would be extremely difficult and expensive. We are recommending that the first steps in this process should be to have a wetland delineation completed, to determine the dry area available, and to obtain an appraisal to determine the fair market value for this property. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to authorize ob taining a wetland delineation, at an estimated cost of $1,500, for additional land east of the existing City Office Complex for future City use, wetland delineation cost to be funded from General Fund, Special Projects and Contingencies Budget, Other Professional Services Line Item with a budget adjustment to reflect the $1,500 expenditure. Motion to authorize obtaining an appraisal, at an estimated cost of $2,000, for additional land east of the existing City Office Complex for future City use, appraisal cost to be funded from the General Fund, Special Projects and Contingencies Budget, Other Professional Services Line Item with a budget adjustment to reflect the $2,000 expenditure. \ { } . I . < s S i i , U I • » 1 i h iiiiiiiihiiiil'ilil.lnuiiiiiiiiniiii! WWWItI 1 Mtirl* 91 3M WT. - ___ rrJ '»• I Vf REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION '''"'•'‘ICIL MEETING juL \.zm CITy0F0«0^u DATE; July 9,1999 ITEM NO.: jl? Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineering Iteni «>escription: Resolution and Agreement Regarding the Use of Hennepin County's Geographical Data Base Over several years, Hennepin County has developed a computerized geographical data base that includes information related to all Cities in the County. This information is now available to Cities for use in developing a computerized mapping capability. This base mapping information will also be used by Bonestroo Engineers in the development of the City's water and sewer mapping. They are in the process of obtaining an agreement with the County pursuant to the City's agreement with the County. The County requires a resolution and a conditional use agreement before releasing the information to the City. In 1995, the City entered into a similar agreement with Hennepin County. The County has terminated the original agreement and developed a new "Conditional Use License Agreement." We are recommending approval of the attached resolution authorizing the City to enter into this agreement with Hennepin County. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt a resolution authorizing the City to enter into a conditional use agreement for the use of Hennepin County's proprietary geographical data base and to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the conditional use agreement. i A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF ORONO TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT FOR THE USE OF HENNEPIN COUNTY'S ELECTRONIC PROPRIETARY DATA BASE WHEREAS, the County has developed an electronic proprietaiy geographical digitized data base which was designed using an automated mapping facility software product which proprietaiy geographical digitized data base is hereinafter referred to as "Electronic Proprietary Data Base (EPDB)" and which is described in the Hennepin County Conditional Use License Agreement attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the City of Orono desires to use the County's EPDB in the course of conducting the City's business; and WHEREAS, the County intends that any additions and modifications to the EPDB relating to the County remain wholly compatible with the County’s EPDB for the period of the copyright and information added to the data base by either the County or the City shall be made available to either party; and WHEREAS, in acknowledgment of the Entity's above stated purpose, the County is agreeable to provide to the City the EPDB described in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the parties agree that the execution of this Agreement is necessary in order to adequately protect said EPDB. NOW, THEREFORE, .• ■^’• dcjiiion of the premises, as well as the obligations herein made and undertaken, the parties hercio, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree to the conditions set forth in the attached agreement. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono this 12th day of July, 1999. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Page 1 of 1 xmen a Agreement No. HENNEPIN COUNTY CONDITIONAL USE LICENSE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, Taxpayer Services Department, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the “County”, and the City of Orono, hereinafter referred to as the “Entity”. For purposes of this Agreement, the address of the County is A703 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487-0073 and the address of Entity is 2750 Kelley Parkway, Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the County has developed electronic forms of certain data bases and an electronic proprietary geographical digitized data base hereinafter referred to as EPDB j and WHEREAS, the Entity desires to use the County’s EPDB in the course of conducting the Entity’s business; and WHEREAS, in acknowledgment of the Entity’s above-stated purpose, the County is agreeable to provide to the Entity the EPDB, and WHEREAS, the parties agree that the execution of this Agreement is necessary in order to adequately protect said EPDB; and WHEREAS, the County exclusively owns the EDPB which is the subject of this Agreement and has the authority and legal right to grant Entity a license to have and use the EPDB as provided in this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the EPDB is trade secret or confidential information under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and is governed by Mirmesota Statutes sections 375.86 and 13.03 as well as other applicable state and federal law. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, as well as the obligations herein made and undertaken, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows. Forml (10/98) 1.1 Section 1 SCOPE OF AGREEMENT This License Agreement shall apply to the EPDB, which Hennepin County will provide to Entity, after a specific request has been made to County. Section 2 GRANT OF LIMITED LICENSE 2.1 The County hereby grants the Entity a non-exclusive, nontransferable and nonassignable limited use license to use the EPDB which includes self developed computer software under Minn. Stat. § 375.86. Said license shall commence on the date of approval of this Agreement by the County and shall extend throughout the term of the Agreement unless terminated sooner, in accordance with the provisions hereof. Section 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PROPRIETARY INFORMATION RESERVATION OF TITLE 3.1 The Entity acknowledges and agrees that the EPDB is the exclusive property of the • County, including, but not limited to, any and all indexes, and includes commercially valuable information which reflect the efforts of skilled development experts and required the investment of considerable amounts of time and money, and that the County has treated the EPDB as trade secret and confidential information, which County entrusts to the Entity in confidence to use in the conduct of the Entity’s business. The Entity further acknowledges and agrees the EPDB is a creative selection, coordination, arrangement and method of arrangement of data which is identified as being subject to cop)nright protection; is self-developed computer software under Minn. Stat. § 375.86 and is an entire or substantial and discrete portion of a pattern, compilation, method, technique, process, data base or system developed with sigmficant expenditure of funds by County under Minn. Stat. § 13.03. The Entity agrees that the County owns md reserves all rights, protection and benefits afforded under federal copyright law in all EPDB furnished to the Entity as unpublished works, as well as all rights, protection and beneftts afforded under any other law relating to confidential and/or trade secret information respecting said EPDB, and that the Entity will abide by all relevant laws, rules, regulations and decisions which afford protection to the County for its confidential and trade secret information and said copyright. This Agreement does not effect any transfer of title in or to any EPDB of the County. The Entity acknowledges that it is granted only a limited right of use of such EPDB, which right is not coupled with an interest, and the Entity shall not assert nor cause or cooperate with others to assert any right, title, or interest in any EPDB of the County. Section 4 PROTECTION OF PROPRIETARY INFORMATION 4.1 Obligations of Confidentiality, Limitations ofUse. The Entity shall neither disclose, flimish, sell, resell, transfer, duplicate, reproduce nor disseminate, in whole or in part, the EPDB of the County and its unique design, arrangement or method of arrangement in its electronic form fiunished to the Entity to (1) any other person, firm, entity, organization, or subsidiary, except as expressly authorized hereunder; or (2) any employee of the Entity who does not need to obtain access thereto in connection with the Entity s exercise of its rights under this Agreement. The Entity may have and use the EPDB on a corporate-wide basis and shall have the rights to use the EPDB on a limited number of sites, provided the equipment on which the EPDB is maintained supports only equipment operated by the Entity and the EPDB is used only for the conduct of the Entity’s own internal business by Entity employees. All employees having access to the EPDB shall be informed of the requirements contained in Section 4 herein. The Entity shall not otherwise copy or reproduce any EPDB of the County. Under no circumstances may the entity disclose or disseminate any EPDB to any other public or private entity. The obligations of the Entity to protect confidentiality which are established by this Agreement apply to the EPDB itself and not to any graphic representation or products produced by the Entity while using the EPDB. Any authorized consultants, contractors or agents of Entity must properly execute and file a separate EPDB Conditional Use License Agreement with Hennepin County. The Entity expressly agrees to use the County’s EPDB in the ordinary course of its business and all such use shall bear a notice of copyright by Hennepin County. 4.2 Secure Handling. The Entity shall require that all EPDB be kept in a secure location at 2750 Kelley Parkway, Crystal Bay, MN 55323 and maintained in a manner so as to reasonably preclude unauthorized persons from having access thereto. The Entity shall devote its reasonable efforts to ensure that all persons afforded access to EPDB protect same against unauthorized use, dissemination or disclosure. Entity agrees it will not knowingly or negligently allow its employees, agents or independent contractors to copy , sell, disclose or otherwise make the EPDB available to others. Entity agrees to immediately notify the County by telephone and in writing if Entity becomes aware of any unauthorized duplication, sale or other disclosure. Entity further agrees to prevent unauthorized disclosure by taking appropriate security measures including, but not limited to, providing physical security for copies of the EPDB and taking all steps Entity takes to protect information, data or other tangible and intangible property of its own that Entity regards as proprietary, confidential or nonpublic. Except for off-site backup, the Entity shall not remove or cause or allow to be removed from the Entity s place of business or the place of business of any EPDB or any copy thereof without the prior written consent of the County, which consent shall not be unreasonably vdthheld. 4.3 Assistance of the Entity. At the request of the County and expense of the Entity, the Entity shall use good faith and reasonable efforts to assist the County in identifying any 4.4 use, copying, or disclosure of any EPDB by any current or former Entity personnel ~ or anyone else who may have come in possession of said EPDB while the same was in the Entity’s possession - in any manner that is contrary to the provisions of this Agreement so long as the County shall have provided the Entity \vith information reasonably justifying the conclusion of the County that such contrary use may have occurred. • . * • « Survival of Confidentiality Obligations. The Entity’s obligations respecting confidentiality of the EPDB shall survive termination of this Agreement for any reason and shall remain in effect for as long as the Entity continues to possess or control any EPDB furnished by the County. In addition, the County shall remain entitled to enforce its copyright and propriety interests in all EPDB. Section 5 TERM, TERMINATION 5.1 The Entity and the COUNTY agree that this Agreement is in effect during the period commencing January 1,1999 and terminating December 31,1999. This Agreement shall commence firom the date hereof, unless sooner terminated by either party with cause upon three (3) calendar days’ written notice to the other. The expiration or tenmnation of this Agreement shall automatically and without further action by the County terminate and extinguish the license. In the event of any such expiration or termination, the County shall have the right to take immediate possession of said EPDB, and all copies thereof wherever located, and without demand or notice. Within five (5) days after expiration or termination of this Agreement, the Entity shall return the EPDB and all copies thereof to the County, or upon request by the County, the Entity shall destroy all of the same and all copies thereof and certify in writing to the County that the same has been destroyed. 5.1.1 It is agreed that any right or remedy provided for herein shall not be considered as the exclusive right or remedy but shall be considered to be in addition to any other right or remedy hereunder or allowed by law, equity or statute. 5.1.2 The County ’s failure to insist upon strict performance of any covenant, agreement or stipulation of the Agreement, or to exercise any right herein contained shall not be a waiver or relinquishment of such covenant, agreement, stipulation or right, unless the County stipulates thereto in writing. Any such written consent shall not constitute a waiver or relinquishment of such covenant, agreement, stipulation or right. 6.1 7.2 Section 6 INJUNCTIVE RELIEF The Entity acknowledges and agrees that unauthorized disclosure or use of the EPDB or any part thereof could cause irreparable harm and significant injury to the County, which may be difficult to measure with certainty or to compensate through damages. Accordingly, the Entity agrees that the County may seek and obtain against the Entity and/or any other person or entity injunctive relief against the breach or threatened breach of the foregoing undertakings, in addition to any other equitable or legal remedies which may be available. Section 7 OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS 7.1 No Agency. The parties hereto are independent contractors, and nothing herein shall be construed to create an agency, joint venture, partnership or other form of business association between the parties hereto. No Waiver. No delay or omission by either party hereto to exercise any right or power occurring upon any noncompliance or default by the other party with respect to any of the terms of this Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof unless the same is consented to in writing. A waiver by either of the parties hereto of any of the covenants, conditions, or agreements to be observed by the other shall not be construed to be a waiver of any succeeding breach thereof or of any covenant, condition, or agreement herein contained. All remedies provided for in this Agreement shall be cumulative and in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other remedies available to either p''ity at law, in equity, or otherwise. 7.3 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 7.4 Entire Agreement. This License Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties, and there are no understandings or agreements relative hereto other than those that are expressed herein. No change, waiver, or discharge hereof shall be valid unless in writing and executed by the party against whom such change, waiver, or discharge is sought to be enforced. 7.5. No Assignment. Neither party shall assipn, sublet or transfer this Agreement, either in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the other party, and any attempt to do so shall be void and of no force and effect. 7.6 THE ENTITY AGREES THAT THE COUNTY IS FURNISHING THE EPDB ON AN “AS IS” BASIS, WITHOUT ANY SUPPORT WHATSOEVER, AND WITHOUT REPRESENTATK i S OR ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED 1 7.7 7.8 WARRANTIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT IN ANY MANNER LIMITED TO, FITNESS FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, MERCHANTABILITY OR THE ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS OF THE EPDB. THE COUNTY'S SOLE LIABILITY AND THE ENTITY’S EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR ANY SUBSTANTIAL DEFECT WHICH IMPAIRS THE USE OF THE EPDB FOR THE PURPOSE STATED HEREIN SHALL BE THE RIGHT TO TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT. THE COUNTY DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE EPDB ARE ERROR FREE. THE EPDB WERE DEVELOPED FOR THE COUNTY'S OWN INTERNAL BUSINESS PURPOSES AND THE COUNTY DOES NOT REPRESENT THAT THE EPDB CAN BE USED FOR NAVIGATIONAL, TRACKING OR ANY OTHER PURPOSE REQUIRING EXACTING MEASUREMENT OF DISTANCE OR DIRECTION OR PRECISION IN THE DEPICTION OF GEOGRAPHIC FEATURES. THE COUNTY DISCLAIMS ANY OTHER WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, RESPECTING THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT OR THE EPDB. In no event shall the County be liable for actual, direct, indirect, special, incidental, consequential damages (even if the County has been advised of the possibility of such damage) or lost of profit, loss of business or any other financial loss or any other damage arising out of performance or failure of performance of this Agreement by the County. The County and the Entity agree each will be responsible for their own acts and omissions under this Agreement and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of the other party under the Agreement and the results thereof. The parties’ respective liabilities shall bo governed by the provisions of the Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466, and other applicable law. Iliis paragraph shall not be construed to bar legal remedies one party may have for the other party’s failure to fulfill its obligations under hiis Agreement. Notice. Any notice or demand shall be in writing and shall be sent registered or certified mail to the other party address as follows: To the Entity:City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Crystal Bay, MN 55323 To Hennepin County; Copy to: Copy to: Hennepin County Administrator A-2300 Government Center (233) Minneapolis, MN 55487-0233 Robert L. Hanson Hennepin County Chief Information Officer A-1900 Government Center (190) Minneapolis, MN 55487-0190 Patrick H. O’Connor Director, Taxpayer Services Department A-600 Government Center (060) Minneapolis, MN 55487-0060 7.9 Whereas Clauses. The matters set forth in the “Whereas ” clauses on page one of this Agreement are incorporated into and made a part hereof by this reference. 7.10 Survival of Provisions. It is expressly understood and agreed that the obligations and warranties of the Entity under Sections 3,4,5,6,7.6, and 7.7 hereof and the obligations and warran ties of the Entity and the County which by their sense and context are intended to survive the performance thereof by the Entity and the County, shall so survive the completion of performance and termination or cancellation of this Agreement. 7.11 Authority. The person or persons executing this License Agreement on behalf of Entity represent that they are duly authorized to execute this License Agreement on behalf of Entity and represent and warrant that this License Agreement is a legal, valid and binding obligation and is enforceable in accordance with its terms. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL ENTITY, having signed this agreement, and the County having duly approved this agreement on the___day of__________19 ___, and pursuant to such approval, the proper County officials having signed this contract, the parties hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. Approved as to form and execution Assistant County Attorney Date: Forml (10/98) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA 1 By: Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator CITY OF ORONO By:. Mayor And: City Clerk / Manager 8 C0>•—muq REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION . ^ ^ CiTY OF ORONO DATE: July 12, 1999 ITEM NO Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer’s Report Item Description: Concept Development PlaiTor Navarre Playground Improvements The Parks Commission has obtained a proposal from DSU Landscape Architects for a Concept Development Plan for improvements to the Navarre Playground and Municipal Parking Lot. Over the past six months, there have been several meetings with the Mayor, City Council members, Parl« Commission members, neighborhood residents, and City staff to discuss improvements in this area. The consensus is that improvements to this park and parking lot area are needed. The Parks Commission reviewed this proposal, at their July 8th meeting, and recommends City Council approval of this proposal for preparation of a Concept Development Plan for the Navarre Playground area. The proposed cost for these items is $3,500 for the park plan, and $4,500 for the parking lot plan. We are recommending Council approval of this proposal from DSU Landscape Archit<*vts. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to accept the proposal from DSU Landscape Architects for a Concept Development Plan for Navarre Playground improvements to be funded using Park Dedication Fees, and to approve a budget adjustment to reflect the $3,500 expenditure from the Park Fund. Motion to accept the proposal from DSU Landscape Architects for a Concept Development Plan for the Navarre Municipal Parking Lot to be funded from the engineering account of the General Fund, and to approve a budget adjustment to reflect the $4,500 expenditure. 07/00/99 11:26 FAX 612 337 5601 DSU. INC.@002 INTRODUCTION PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The City of Orono is seeking phased park planning and design services for tlie redevelopment of the Navarre playground and municipal parking area. Description: Navarre Park/Playground: by scattered deciduous trees of various species, sizes and conditions. The park mcludes and play equipment located on the high ground ten or more feet above Lyric Avenue. This is ^^ serving a concLtration of small lot single family homes in the area surrounding the Navarre business district. Navarre Municipal Parking Lot: The existing municipal parking lot provides parking and loading access for the ^ northwest quadrant of County Roads 19 and 15. It also provides parking for the park located to Ae Lyric Avenue. The parking area is in need of resurfacing and redesign to pro%ude a more P ® layout and safer and more efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation. Outdoor storage. landscaping, lighting and the potential for alternative uses should also be addressed during the redevelopment of this parking area. Objectives: The following are the objectives currently identified for this project. Navorre Park/Plcrv^ound: Redevelop the park to serve as a focal entrance feature for the Navarre District of Orono, as well as to meet the recreational needs of the surrounding small lot residential area. Create a town square utilizing a historic fountain, planting beds and an interpretive kiosk. Provide adequate parking and improve pedestrian access to and from the park. Provide ADA compliant trail connections to and from the park and park facilities. Provide adequate security, screening and buffering along the common boundaries witli the existing single family lots and the major roads.. Upgrade the park facilities and equipment to meet current ADA and safety standards. Develop a sustainable design that will reduce the long tenn maintenance of the piuk grounds and facilities. dahlgres . shardlow . and uban . n'C.Post / i .07/06/99 11:27 F.\X 612 337 5601 DSU. INC.@003 Navarre Town Square Park «S KUmicip^_ParjjJ^My 6,1999 f^nvnrrp Municipal PorJdrtf Lot: . Develop a safer and more efficient parking lot layout to reduce pedestrian and vehicle conflicts and to maximize the number of spaces. . Ma-ximize and concentrate the amount of open space for landscaping while minimizing snow removal and storage conflicts. • Explore the potential for creating mixed use space/s. (ie. festival space, flea market etc.) WORKPLAN/'.: /RoACH Ouf w^ices for this project will be as follows: Initial Meeting, Priyect Start-Up, Site yyialysis. Program^nfumation. Schematic Design Concepts, Preliminat7 Cost Estimates for the park and parking area. The following basic Scope of Services will be provided by tlie Consultant: PHASE ONE - SCHEMATIC DESIGN Task 101 - Initial Meeting 1. General project administration and start-up including schcduluig, internal administrative set-up and management will be provided. Work will begin within 14 days of City authorization. Task 102 - Project Start-Up/Data Gathering a. It is our understanding that the City of Orono will provide suiuble aerial topopaphic ■r-aPP‘"g ^ the park, adjacent lots, and parking area. We will review this topographic mapping and all availah,. studies, reports, maps, photos, surveys and plans, provided by the City. b. We will visit the park to photograph and become familiar with the physical characteristics, opportunities, and day to day operatiohs of the facilities. c. Existing utilities plans and information will be secured from the City and reviewed as needed, This proposal does not include site enginecrin,g or surveying. Task 103 - Site Analysts a. We will prepare a graphic analysis of the park and parking area characteristics. b. We will review, research and analyze the issues that are identified during the preliminary planning and design process. 07/0G/99 11:27 FAX 612 337 5601 DSLI, INC.@004 Navarre Town Spuare Park & Municipal Parking Are^July 6. 1999 Task 104 - Program Development/Confmnation 1. We will assist the City to explore opportunities, and priorities for the park and parking area.a. Task 105 - Schematic Design Concepts a. We will prepare two schematic design concepts for the Navane Town Square Park J ” •!;' municipal parking area. The concepts will explore vanous design soluttons based on the site analysis and approved program and objectives. b. We will prepare a general preliminary cost estimate for e.ich schematic design concept to illustrate the potential costs associated with their development. b. We will present the schematic design concepts to the Orono Park and Recreation Commission and Staff. c. We will revise (one revision) the preferred concept or combination of concepts, based on comments made during this review. d. The preferred schematic concept will be presented at a public hearing hosted and adm mistered by Orono Park and Recreation Commissicr•» PELASE TWO - EVBPLiElVIENTATION (FUTURE PHASE) Task 201 - Plans and Specifications a. We will refine and develop the design, and prepare a working line item cost estimate of the mitial phase of the improvements. This will serve as the basis of the construction documents. b. A meeting with the City Parks and Recreation Commission and Staff will be held to discuss the refmed design and cost estimate. c. Construction documents will be prepared. These will be suitable for public bidding of the approved improvements/elements. d. Final cost estimates for the identified improvements/elements will be piepared. e. Bid documents will be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to bidding. Task 202 - Bidding Assistance b. Wc will provide essistence to the City Staff during the .-ev.ew and preparation of the contract documents. DAHLGREN. SHARDLOn'. ASD UBAN. INC. • ^ f 07/06/99 11:27 FAX 612 337 5601 DSU, INC.@005 Havane Town Square Park & Municipal Parking Area July 6. 1999 c. We will attend a pre-constnictlon meeting. Task 203 - Construction Admmistration/Observation a. We will assist the City of Orono in securing neccssaiy permits and monitoring/administering permit requirements MPCA erosion control monitoring). b. We will serve as project coordinator between tlie General Contractor and tlie City. c. Construction observarion will be provided. Construction observation will include periodic site visits (once per week or as requested during critical stages) with City Staff attending. d. Contract administration will be provided. ThU will include review and approval of shop <Jrawings, review and certification of payment requests, preparation of change orders, issuance of field directives and minor changes, preparation of punch lists and final inspection. ESTIMATED COSTS BASIC SF.RVTCES The following is a summaiy of our estimated costs for the requested basic services. We have also included an estimated percentage fee range for the implementation phase and a list of optional additional services. PHASP. ONF. - SCHEMATIC DESIGN Ta.sk 101 Initial Meeting A. Administration B. Initial Meeting Task 102 Project Start-Up/Data Gathering A. Map and Document Review B. Site Visit/Reconnaissance ' Task 103 Site Analysis A. Graphic Site Analysis B. Issues Analysis Task 104 Program Development/Confirmation A. Analyze Proposed Program end Site Compatibility Task 103 Schematic Design Concepts A. Schematic Concepts (2) B. Preliminary Cost Estimates Eaik parking Area ?450tt DAHLGREtt. SHARDLOW. AND UBAN. INC.tag** 07/06/99 11:28 FAX 612 337 5601 DSU. INC.@006 ticNCLYfe Town Scjuare Park & Municipal Forking A July 6,1999 C. Schematic Concepts - Review Meeting D. Preferred Schematic Design Concept ■ E. Preferred Concept - Public hearing Parking Area yHASE TWO - IMPLI^MENTATION « tn 12Vo*TiolOSli* Task 201 Plans and Specifications A. Design Development & Preliminary Estimate B. Review Session C. Construction Documents D. Final Cost Estimate E. City Review and Approval Task 202 Bidding Assistance A. Bidding Communications & Assistance B. Cotitract Document Review C. Pre-construction Meeting Task 203 Const Admin70bsenation A. Permitting Assistance & Monitoring B. Project Coordination C. Construction Observation D. Contract Administration This .stimate is for the basic services identined in the proposal. The phase one fee isa maximun, b„ed on our estimate of the tune that will be required to complete the included basic services. The estimated fee does not include the costs of reimbursable expenses. Optional or Additional services, or phase nvo services. upon final determination of the authorized project budget/s. RF.T\mi JRSABLE EXPENSES Tbe above estimate does not include the costs of mileage, copies, printing con^ruction documents, postage^ shipping, ond long distance telephone charges, OPTIONAL ADDITION AT. SERVICES ’ The following services are not included in the basic sendees but arc available at an additional cost. AdditionalMcctinjs- Dahlgrcn, Shardlow. and Uban will identified in the basic proposal as an authorized additional service. We estim dahlgren . shardlow. and uban. iVC. 1 f 07/0G/99 ll:2S FAX 612 337 5601 DSU; INC.(^007 Navarre Town Square Park & Municipal Parking Area July 6,1999 cost of attending additional meetings at S350 each. Addition^ Revisionj - Dahlgren. Shardbw, and Uban avill prepare additional other than those identified in the proposal as authorized addmonal serviees. we estimate the cost of preparing each additional schematic concept to be $400 to $600. SCHEDULING The work that is deseribed in this proposal or negotiated upon seleetion will authorization. Our work will adhere to the schedule agreed upon during the project start-up m g. CITY PF.SPONSTBTL1T1ES The City will be responsible for providing an accurate boundary and topographic survey ^ facilUic% and utility plans in a timely manner. The City may also be re.iu.rcd to provide engineering or surveying services as needed. D.4HLCREK SHARDLOIV. AND UBAN. INC.Pap/S REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MEETING JUL 1 2 1999. CITY OF OHONO DATE: July 9,1999 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Appointment of Steve Weckman to Temporary Part-Time On-Site Septic Inspector Position The City's On-Site Septic Inspector position is currently vacant as the City completes the selection process for the position. During the interim period, prior to getting a new inspector on board, the City has continuing needs for septic inspection services. Steve Weckman, the City's former On-Site Septic Inspector, has agreed to provide septic inspection services on a temporary part-time basis, as needed by the City, during this interim period. The position will have a pay rate of $21.00 per hour and will not be eligible for benefits. k COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the appointment of Steve Weckman to a Temporary Part-Time Septic Inspector position at a pay rate of $21.00 per hour with no benefits, effective July 13,1999, wdth the condition that the position will terminate no later than November 1,1999. COUNCIL MEETING JUL 1 2 1999REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ClTYOFOfiONo DATE: July 9, 1999 ITEM NO:/3 Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name Ron Moorse City Administrator ’s Title City Administrator Report Item Description: Proposed Schedule for Summer Office Hours A number of cities in the area are experimenting with extended office hours to improve access to city services, particularly during the summer months. The City's current office hours are 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m., Monday - Friday. Staff is proposing the following office hours schedule for the remainder of die summer: 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., Monday - Thursday; and 7:30 a.m. -11:30 a.m., Friday. If the Council approves the proposed office hours schedule, a notice of the new schedule will be posted at the City facilities' entrance lobbies, and a news release will be placed in the local newspapers, indicating the new schedule will begin on Monday, July 19 and end on Friday, September 3. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion regarding the proposed extended office hours schedule. r COUWriL MEETING JUL 121!I###REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO DATE: July 9,1999 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk______ Administrator Reviewed:/m Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE 1. 2. William Lewis William Lewis Web Development 1125 Willow Drive North Long Lake, MN 55356 (Web Site Development) Mary E. Winkler Innovative Data Engineering Associates, Inc. 990 Loma Linda Avenue Orono, MN 55364 (Technology Consulting/Computer Services) COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the above listed licenses. Jl J 4 JUN 1 5 1599 ^.. .^APPLICATION FOR ANNUAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE G\TY Or OnOiVjO CITYOFORONO - / . '• . 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 • • • • . I * • ••• • •• • • • *: • •* . ••• • • • i NAME: • . A . • mm PHONE: ADDERS /Dmcj (/JfnKUir^______ ^ay/)A /I/Ia)—SS^CoC^ BUSINESS NAME: ^^^nr\r/int^ Asd£/^9rc<i:i /^C. . TYPE OE EU51ISJi55 iU CJti u>r.cjsAACi./. ---------/'Orryj^c/rC^—.—^^ Number of Employees Within Operation:_J__ (Provide names of employees on back of application) Check One: Initial Review Fee $50.00 Annual Review Fee $30.00 • • Lic«Be my be revolced if any violation occurs. City staff slufl have five (5) bustos ^ys to wBA to investigate Ld make a recommendation pursuant to Orono Mumcipal Code fwuon 5 ra & 5.0^ If a insDCCtion is required by City staff, the review time will be extendi to teii (10) busmess day . . . , j application with staff recommendation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regular y s meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month. ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOI® OC^ATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 4 (C) Prohibits Home Oc j^^n ^ ,o engage to operation without proper licenses. « ., , j n;«~ 2 All oersons engaged in the business must reside in the dwellmg. 3*. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permitted m the residential zo . 4 No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises. The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Mumcipal Code and any additional conditions the City may require. Datet^ti^Wff?• SignatureofApplicant: FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommen^ the followmg. P< Approval of applicat^n _________Denial of application Date: 7- Signature of Zoning Official: ^^ Signature of Building OfflcialT y Date: -?• Application Date:_Date License Approved:Date License Expired:. USUNG C' NAME:Uy s/)k.Cc/L NAME: ADDRESS: CrrY&23P: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY & ZEP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: i. NAME: ADDRESS: /^rjoe^ ADDRESS: CITY & 7TP: O^oyiQ /1/!aJ SS2>(s>^ DATE OF BIRTH: ^n _____ CTTY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CrrY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CTTY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: . CTTY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: • «• * 'i I. APPLICATION FOR ANNUAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE CITY OF ORONO CG V2 J 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 66 . CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 Oi 1 ^•**wi'**^ NAME: (xT I \\c\ rv\ L^S (cT ____________• PHONE: 07 ADDRESS: p7^ • H- LO)(-t^o<^ U> street city/state BUSINESS NAME: f7)»li:gcm L^.m)\S I^c/e.(cprv^eA.T TYPE OF BUSINESS TO BE OPERATED: Ixynh -5 Io f _________ Number of Employees Within Operation: (Provide names of employees on back of application) Check One: Initial Review Fee $50.00 Annual Review Fee $30.00____ License may be revoked if any violation occurs. City staff shall have five (5) business days in which to investigate and make a recommendation pursuant to Orono Mumcipal Code Section 5.02 & 5.03. If a site inspection is required by City staff, the review time will be extended to ten (10) business days. The license application with sta^ recoininendation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regularly schedul meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month. ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 4 (C) Prohibited Home Occupation Practices , 1. It is unlawful for any business operating as a home occupation to engage m operation witnoui proper licenses. 2. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dwelling. 3. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permitted in the residential zone. 4. No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises. 5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. 6. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from within the structure. The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional conditions the City may require. • T 9/-------------------------DaiK .^^g’/Signature of Applicant FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommen^ the following: _____^ Approval of application __________Denial of application Date: 7**?*^^Signature of Zoning Official: y Date:Signature of Building Official: ApplicaUon Date;________^DaWLiceate Approved:________Date License Expired:. J LISTING OF EMPLOYEES: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CTTY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CTTY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CTTY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRIH: NAME: ADDRESS: CTTY&ZEP: DATE OF BIRTH: I i 9 Jul 1999 Fri 12:43 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 5927S 59275 59275 59275 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUE 08-Jul-99 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUE 08-Jul-99 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUB 08-Jul-99 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/3ELLEVUE Total* Check Number 59275 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUS Check Number 59276 ALLEGRA PRINT k IMAGING 59276 08-Jul-99 ALLEGRA PRINT k IMAGING Totals Check Number 59276 ALLEGRA PRINT k IMAGING Check Number 59277 AT & T - TAMPA 59277 08-Jul-99 AT a T - TAMPA Totals Check Number 59277 AT a T - TAMPA Check Number 59278 AtIGIBS MOBILE CHEF 59278 08-Jul-99 AUGIES MOBILE QIEF Totals Check Number 59278 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF Check Number 59280 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC. 59280 08-JU1-99 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC. Totals Check Number 59210 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC Check NUndber 59281 BUDGET PRINTING Transaction Amount COUNCIL MEEftWD' UUL t 2 iW/5 CommentscnnroFOfl 388.43 16.42 16.43 CELL PHONES ON CALL CELL PHONE ON CALL CELL PHONE 421.28 44.73 44.73 BUSINESS CARDS 6.73 6.73 WIRELESS LONG DISTANCE 55.44 55.44 HOT DOGS, CKSBRGR Check Number S9279 BCA/ITIAINING k DEVELOPMENT 59279 OS-Jul-99 BCA/TRAININO a DEVELOPMENT 200.00 BSC INTOX OPER-FISCHBR 59279 08-J<j1-99 BCA/TRAINING a DEVELOPMENT 40.00 INTOX RECERT-CORNICX 59279 OS-Jul-99 BCA/TRAINING a DEVELOPMENT 40.00 INTOX RECERT-BORIS 59279 OS-Jul-99 BCA/TRAINING a DEVELOPMENT 40.00 INTOX RECERT-ANDERSON 59279 OS-Jul-99 BCA/TRAININO a DEVELOPMENT 40.00 INTOX RECERT-TOMCHECK 59279 OS-Jul-99 BCA/TRAININQ a DEVELOPMENT 40.00 INTOX RECERT-TOMCZYX 59279 OS-Jul-99 BCA/TRAINING a DEVELOPMENT 40.00 INTOX RECERT-SCHOENHOFF 59279 OS-Jul-99 BCA/TRAININO a DEVELOPMENT 40.00 INTOX RECERT-MCNICHOLS 59279 OS-Jul-99 BCA/TRAININQ a DEVELOPMENT 40.00 iinox RECERT-ERICXSON 59279 08-Jul-J-BCA/TRAININQ a DEVELOPMENT 40.00 INTOX RBCERT-DEMBOUSKI 59279 OS-Jul-99 BCA/TRAINING a DEVELOPMENT 40.00 INTOX RECBRT-JQHNSCai, B Totals Check Number 59379 BCA/TRAINING a DEVELOPMENT 600.00 4.578.63 4.578.63 3/4 MINUS CRSHED LIMBSTHB 9 Jul 1999 Fri 12:43 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 59281 59281 59281 59281 BUDGET PRINTING 08-JU1-99 P^T)GBT PRINTING 08-JU1-99 BUDGET PRINTING 08-Jul-99 BUDGET PRINTING Totals Check Number 59281 BUDGET PRINTING Check Number 59282 CHAMPION AUTO STORES 59282 59282 09-Jul-?9 09-JU1-99 CHAMPION A'JTO STORES CHAMPION AUTO STORES Totals Check Number 59282 CHAMPION AUTO STORES Check Number £9283 CITY OF MEDINA 59283 OS-Jul-99 CITY OF MEDINA Totals Check Number 59283 CITY OP MEDINA Check Number 59284 CITYVIEW PLUMBING k HEATING 59284 08-JU1-99 CITYVIEW PLUMBING k HEATING Totals Check Number 59284 CITYVIEW PLUMBING k HEATING Check Number 59285 CYS UNIFORMS 59285 59285 08-JU1-99 08-JU1-99 CYS UNIFORMS CYS UNIFORMS Totals Check Number 59285 CYS UNIFORMS Check Number 59286 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 59284 59286 Oe-Jul-99 Oa-JUl-99 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. Totals Check Number 59286 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. Check Number 59287 DCA - WIRE ONLY 59287 08>Jul-99 DCA - WIRE ONLY Totals Check Number 59287 DCA - WIRE ONLY Check Number 59288 DEAN TRYGGESTH 59288 09-JU1-99 DEAN TRYGGESTH Transaction Amount 21.82 10.85 71.86 104.53 15.96 4.25 20.21 100.00 100.00 114.71 114.71 67.30 47.95 115.25 66.60 82.20 148.80 745.76 745.76 179.91 Page 2 Comments CCTwi* COPIES Ure CHA^'iES DOG IMPOUND RELEASE FRMS BRAKE FLUID AIR FILTER PwADAR CERT TRAINING RPR TOILET-PD MEN'S SHIRT - KOeZUR PANT - KOeZUR BEER FOR RESALE CONCESSIONS FOR RESALE SPBIDniO ACCTS 6/29/99 REF - 3385 CRYSTAL BAY RD 9 Jul 1999 Frl 12:43 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Humber Date Hame Check Number 59288 DEAN TRYGQESTH Totals Check Number Fi288 DEA.M TRYGGESTH Check Number 59289 DELTA DENTAL Check Number 59290 DEPT OF ADM - INTERTECH GROUP 59290 09-JU1-99 DEPT OP ADM - INTERTECH GROUP Totals Check Number 5?'>90 DBPT OP ADM - INTBRTECH CROUP Check Number 59291 DEPT OP PUBLIC SAFETY Check Number 59292 DOYLE INC. 59292 09-Jul-99 DOYLE INC. Totals Check Number 59292 DOYLE INC. Check Number 59293 E-Z RECYCLING 59293 09-Jul-99 E-Z RECYCLIIRI Totals Check Number 59293 B-Z RECYCLING C3ieck Number 59294 BAST SIDE BEVERAGE 59294 08-Jul-99 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE Totals Check Number 59294 BAST SIDE BEVERAGE Check Number 59295 EKLUND TREE RECYCLING 59295 09-JUI-99 EKLUND TREE RECYCLING Transaction Amount 179.91 258.78 258.78 71.97 71.97 5,697.72 5,697.72 145.80 145.GO 304.00 Comments 59289 09-JU1-99 DELTA DENTAL 3.64 JULY DENTAL 59289 09-Jul-99 DELTA DENTAL -49.71 JT.LY DENTAL 59289 09-JU1-99 DELTA DENTAL 6.95 JULY DENTAL 59289 09-JU1-99 DELTA DENTAL 2.33 JULY DENTAL 59289 09-JU1-99 DELTA DENTAL 0.94 JULY DENTAL 59289 09-JU1-99 DELTA DENTAL 5.93 JULY DENTAL 59289 09-Jul-99 DELTA DENTAL 773.22 JULY DENTAL Totals Check Number 59289 DELTA DENTAL 743.30 PHONE SERVICE 59291 OS-Jul-99 DBPT OP PUBLIC SAFETY 100.00 Ricsrr TO KNON FEES 59291 08-Jul-99 DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 100.00 RIGHT TO KNON PEES 59291 08-Jul-99 DBPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 25.00 RIGHT TO KNON FEES Totals Check Number 59291 DBPT OP PUBLIC SAFETY 225.00 BOLT, HUT Page 3 RBCYCLim - JUNE 1999 BEER FOR RESALE BRUSH DISPOSAL 1 9 Jul 1999 Pri 12:43 PH Check Register City of Orono Ctieck Humber Date Name Check Number 59295 EKLUND TREE RECYCLING Totals Check Number 59295 EKLUND TREE RECYCLING Check Number 59296 FIRSTAR TRUST CO - WIRE ONLY 59296 09-Jul-99 FIRSTAR TRUST CO - WIRE ONLY Totals Check Number 59296 FIRSTAR TRUST CO - WIRE ONLY Check Number 59298 GAPFRON, MIKE 59298 08-JU1-99 QAFFRON* MIKE Totals Check Number 59298 QAFFRON* MIKE Check Number 59299 GAPPA, GREG 59299 59299 08-Jul-99 08-JU1-99 GAPPA« GREG GAPPA, GREG Totals Check Number 59299 GAPPA, GREG Check Number 59300 GLENCOE UNIFORMS 59300 59300 59300 08-JU1-99 08-Jul-99 08-Jul-99 GLENCOE UNIFORMS GLENCOE UNIFORMS GLENCOE UNIFORMS Totals Check Number 59300 GLENCOE UNIFORMS Check Higher 59301 GOLF CAk MIDWEST 59301 08-Jul-99 GOLF CAR MIDWEST Transaction Amount 304.00 73,479.10 73,479.10 106.60 106.60 45.82 45.00 9C.82 599.50 599.50 595.00 1,794.00 Page 4 Ccmm^nts HRA INT DUE 7/15 Check Number 59297 59297 G & 08-JU1-99 K SERVICES G a K SERVICES 14.02 UNIFORM RATHBUN 59297 08-JU1-99 G k K SERVICES 8.52 UNIFORM - STEFFBNHAGBN 59297 08-JU1-99 G k K SERVICES 76.39 UNIFORMS 59297 08-Jul-99 G k K SERVICES 27.47 SHOP TOWELS 59297 09-Jul-99 G k K SERVICES 42.01 MATS - CC 59297 09-JU1-99 G k K SERVICES 42.01 MATS - ADM 59297 09-Jul-99 G k K SERVICES 86.44 MATS - PW 59297 09-Jul-99 G k K SERVICES 8.52 UNIFORM - 8TEPFENKAGEN 59297 09-JU1-99 G k K SERVICES 14.02 UNIFORM - RATIffiUN 59297 09-Jul>99 G k K SERVICES 74.66 UNIFORMS Totals Check Number 59297 G k K SERVICES 394.06 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT MILEAGE REI MAPS, COPIES BALLISTIC VEST-CORNICK BALLISTIC VEST BALLISTIC VEST I '1 y ,1 3 4 1,400.00 LEASE PAYMENT 9 Jul 1999 Fri 12:43 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 59301 59301 GOLF CAR MICKSST 00-Jul-99 GOL.F CAR MIDWEST Totals Check Number 59301 GOLF CAR MIDWEST Check Number 59302 GOPHER STATE Or^E-CALL INC. 59302 59302 O0-JU1-99 OS-Jul-99 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. Totals Check Number 59302 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. Check Number 59303 HENN COUNTY TREAURER / 59303 09-JU1-99 HENN COUNTY TREAURER / Totals Check Nvmnber 59303 HENN COUNTY TREAURER / Check Number 59300 IIMC 59306 09-JU1-99 IIMC Totals Check Number 59306 IIMC Check Number 59307 INVER HILLS COfMUNITY COLLEGE 59307 Ot-Jul-99 INVER HILLS COft^UNITY COLLEGE Transaction Amount 26.25 1«426.25 29.31 87.94 117.25 1,161.25 1,161.25 70.00 70.00 36.07 Page 5 Cooments KEYS MAY LOCATES KAY LOCATES KM AND BOARD 5/99 Check Number 59305 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 771.56 LEGAL APPIIC APRIL 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 1,522.00 GORDON NELSON MATTER 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 1,660.56 SACA HILL LAND ACQ 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTS:^920.00 HEAD SENER PROJ 59305 09-Jul-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 1,116.50 LEGAL SERVICE APRIL 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 51.00 BROOK PARK REALTY 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 1,272.50 WOODHILL CC-ROAD MATTER 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 56.50 LEGAL - APRIL 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 2,961.50 LEGAL APPLIC MAY 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBBRTovN 154.36 ZONING CODE REVISIONS 59305 09-Jul-99 hXNSHAN k CULBERTSON 1,017.00 SAGA HILL LAND ACQ 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 16.00 NYPFELS EASEMENT 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 154.00 ZONING FILES REVISIONS 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 198.00 GENERAL LEGAL - MAY 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 220.00 HOYT RETAINING MALL 59305 09-JU1-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 428.32 SAGA HILL PARK 59305 09-Jul-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 1,100.00 LEGAL SERVICES MAY 59305 09-Jul-99 HINSHAN k CULBERTSON 2,376.00 tfOODHILL CC-ROAD MATTBl Totals Check Number 59305 HXNSHAN k CULBERTSON 15,995.80 KEMBERSHIP-KASEMAN f. MEALS-ADMY OP PUB MGMT 9 Jul 1999 Fri 12:43 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 59307 INVER HILLS COMMUNITY COLLEGE Totals Check Number 59307 INVER HILLS COMMUNITY COLLEGE Check Number 59308 KELLER, GREGORY LAN OFFICE 59308 09-Jul-99 KELLER, GREGORY LAN OFFICE Totals Check Number 59308 KELLER, GREGORY LAN C:FICE Check Number 59309 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST Check Number 59310 LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIPMENT 59310 59310 59310 59310 59310 59310 08- JU1-99 Oa-Jul-99 09- JU1-99 09-Jul-99 09-Jul-99 09-Jul-99 LONG LONG urn LONG LONG LONG LAKE LAKE LAKE LAKE LAKE LAKE TRACTOR TRACTOR TT-.JTOR TRACTOR TRACTOr TRACTOR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT .SQUIPMEKT Totals Check Number 59310 LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIP.-G2JT Check Number 59311 MAGIC CLEANERS 59311 59311 08-Jul-99 OS-Jul-99 MAGIC CLEANERS MAGIC CLEANERS Totals Check Number 59311 MAGIC CLEANERS Check Number 59312 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSY: i CO 59312 09-Jul-99 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI R CO Transaction Amount 36.00 500.00 500.00 4.41 9.32 8.65 90.31 -91.29 587.67 609.07 6.66 6.66 13 32 3,700.00 Page 6 Comments LEGL FEES-93 FORD FOPTEIT 59309 09-Jul-99 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST 50.00 WORKERS*COMP INS 59309 09-JU1-99 LEAGUC OF MN CITIES INS. TRUIJT 635.00 WORKERS'COMP INS 59309 09-JU1-99 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST 230.00 WORKERS'COMP INS 59309 09-JU1-99 LEAGUE OF CITIES INS. TRUST 16,505.00 WORKERS'COMP INS 59309 09-JU1-99 LEAGUE OP MN CITIES INS. TRUST 1,310.00 WORKERS'COMP INS 59309 09-Jul-99 LEAGUE OP MN CITIES INS. TRUST 340.00 WORKERS'COMP INS 59309 09-JU1-99 LEAGUE OP MN CITIES INS. TRUST 4,400.00 WORKERS'COMP INS 59309 09-Jul-99 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST 280.00 WORKERS'COMP INS 59309 03-JU1-99 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST -14,140.00 WORKERS'COMP INS 59309 09-Jul-9»LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST 1,200.00 WORKERS'COMP INS 59309 09-JU1-99 LEAGUE OP MN CITIES INS. TRUST 2,300.00 WORKERS'COMP INS 59309 09-Jul 99 LEAGUE OP MN CITIES INS. TRUST 1,030.00 WORKERS'COMP INS Totals Check Numb.r 593t9 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST 14,140.00 FLAIL PIN ROPE FUEL KIT HEAVY BLADE RETRUN HEAVY BLADE. CUSVIS BLAN1ST CLEANINQ BLANKET CLEANING AUDIT P7MNT «3 .1 9 Jul 1999 Pri 12:43 PM Check Register City of Orono Page 7 Check Humber Date Name Oieck Number 59312 59312 59312 59312 59312 MALLOY MCH7AGUB KARNOWSKI & CO 09-Jul-99 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOHSKI k CO 09-JU1-99 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOHSKI k CO 09-JU1-99 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI k CO 09-Jul-99 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI k CO Totals Check Number 59312 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI k CO Check Number 59313 MCPOA 59313 09‘Jul-99 MCFOA Totals Check Number * 59313 MCFOA Check Number 59314 MCLEOD USA PUBLISHING 59314 08-Jul-99 MCLEOD USA PUBLISHING Totals Check Number 59314 MCLEOD USA PUBLISHING Check Number 59315 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO 59315 59315 08-Jul-99 08-JU1-99 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO Totals Check Number 59315 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO Check Number 59316 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 59316 08-Jul-99 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN CQIffANY Totals Check Number 59316 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMTANY Check Number 59317 MINNEGASCO Check Number 59318 MN CHIEF OF POLICE ASSN 59310 08-Jvil-99 MN CH^EP OF POLICE ASSN Totals Check Number 59318 MN CHIEF OF POLICE ASSN Transaction Amount 1.520.00 2.400.00 2.900.00 1.950.00 12,470.00 30.00 30.00 60.02 60.02 404.40 159.50 563.90 13.50 13.50 15.00 15.00 Comments AUDIT PYMNT 83 AUDIT PYMNT 83 AUDIT PYMNT 83 AUDIT PYMNT 83 MEMBERSHIP - HASEMAN DIRECTORY ADV SODA FOR RESALE POWERAID - RESALE MQ^ICAL OXYGQ9 59317 09-JU1-99 MINNEOASCO 244.29 GAS SERVICE 59317 09-Jul-99 MINNEGASCX)11.01 GAS SERVICE 59317 09-JU1-99 MINNEOASCO 30.87 GAS SERVICE 59317 09-JU1-99 MINNEOASCO 37.73 GAS SERVICE 59317 09-Jul-99 MINNEGASCO 83.34 GAS SERVICE Totals Check Number S9317 MINNEOASCO 407.24 COmUNICATIQH NOTES-SUBSC n 9 Jul 1999 Pri 12:43 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Transaction Page 8 Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Number 59319 NAVARRE HARDWARE 59319 OS-Jul-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 9.10 ENAMEL 59319 08-Jul-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 21.29 DRAIN SPADE 59319 OS-Jul-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 12.65 METER SHELF - CH 59319 OS-Jul-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 4.24 CLR BOTTLE 59319 08-Jul-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 26.61 SCALE Totals Check Number 59319 NAVARRE HARDWARE 73.89 Check Number 59320 NEOPOST 59320 08-JU1-99 NEOPOST 150.00 RATE OiANGE PROTECTION Totals Check Number 59320 NEOPOST 150.00 Check Number 59321 NSP 59321 09-JU1-99 NSP 148.68 HWY 12 & WILLOW LIGHTS 59321 09-JU1-99 NSP 1,191.49 STREET LIGHTING 6/99 59321 09-Jul-99 NSP 1,351.16 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 59321 09-JU1-99 NSP 609.08 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 59321 09-JU1-99 NSP 9.42 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 59321 09-JU1-99 NSP 292.42 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 59321 09-Jul-99 NSP 33.00 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 59321 09-JU1-99 NSP 3,306.74 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 59321 09-JU1-99 NSP 1,618.56 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 59321 09-JU1-99 NSP 596.23 ELECTRICAL SERVICE Totals Check Number 59321 NSP 9,156.78 Check Number 59322 OLD DOTCH FOODS INC. 59322 08-JU1-99 OLD DUTCH POODS INC.16.80 CHIPS FOR RESALE Totals Check Number 59322 OLD DUTCH POODS INC.16.80 Check Number 59323 OMAN. LYLE 59323 OS-Jul-99 OMAN.LYLE:36.30 MILEAGE REIfGURSMENT 59323 OS-Jul-99 OMAN,LYLE 33.33 MILEAGE REIMBURSMENT 59323 OS-Jul-99 OMAN,LYLE 20.46 MILEAGE REIMBURSMENT 59323 OS-Jul-99 OMAN,LYLE 28.71 MILEAGE REIMBURSMENT Totals Check Runber 59323 OMAN,LYLE 118.80 Check Number 59324 arrsN brothers 59324 09-Jul-99 OTTEN BROnSRS 61.30 PLANTS 9 Jul 1999 Fri 12t43 PH Check Register City of Orono Check Humber Date Name Check Numoer 59324 59324 OTTEN BROTHERS 09-Jul-99 OTTEN BROTHERS Totals Check Number 59324 OTTEN BROTHERS Check Number 59325 PIONEER 59325 59325 59325 59325 59325 59325 08-Jul-99 Oa-Jul-99 08-Jul-99 08-JU1-99 08-JU1-99 08-JU1-99 PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER Totals Check Number 59325 PIONEER Check Number 59326 PONERCLEAN COMPANY INC. 59326 59326 59326 59326 08-JU1-99 08- JU1-99 09- Jul-99 09-Jul-99 POHERCLBAN COMPANY INC. POHERCLEAN COMPANY INC. PONERCLEAH COMPANY INC. POHERCLEAN COMPANY INC Totals Check Number 59326 POHERCLEAN COMPANY INC. Check Number 59327 PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC. 59327 Oa-Jul-99 PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC, Totals Check Number 59327 PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC. Check Number 59328 PROLAHNS 59328 59328 08-Jul-99 08-Jul-99 PROLAHNS PROLAHNS Totals Check Number 59328 PROLAHNS Check Number 59329 REED VENDING 59329 59329 08-Jul-99 08-JU1-99 REED VENDING REED VENDING Totals Check Number 59329 REED VENDING Check Number 59330 RICKS SUPBIVALUE 59330 09-JU1-99 RICKS SUPBRVALUE Totals Check Number 59330 RICKS SUPBRVALUE Transaction Amount 80.89 142.19 111.45 26.97 71.90 61.12 46.74 35.95 354.13 963.86 788.62 1,230.68 1,006.92 3,990.08 1,700.00 1,700.00 150.00 125.00 275.00 57.30 54.30 111.60 19.99 19.99 Page 9 Comments SOD, SEED ORDINANCE 8188 APPLICATION 82479 LAND USE APPLICATIONS ORDINANCE 8189 ORDINANCE 8190 ORDINANCE 8191 JANITORIAL - 6/99 JANITORIAL - 6/99 CARPBT/TILB CLEANING CARPBT/TILB CLEANING XNTBI-SEEDINO PR CRK PRK ROUND UP - SIDBHALKS ROUND UP - BALL FIELDS CANDY, ROLLS CQNCBSSICHIS FOR RESALE CAKE 9 Jul 1999 Fri 12:43 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 59331 59331 STEFFENHAGEN* RON 06-JU1-99 STEFFENHAGEN, RON Totals Check Number 59331 STEFFENHAGEN, RON Check Number 59332 STREICHERS Check Number 59333 SUPERAMBRICA 59333 09-JU1-99 SUPERAMERICA Totals Check Number 59333 SUPERAMERICA Check Number 59334 TEMPORARIES-TO-GO 59334 59334 OS-Jul-99 OS-Jul-99 TEMPORARIES-TO-QO TEMPORARIBS-TO-GO Totals Check Number 59334 TEMPORARIES-TO-GO Check Number 59335 THORPE DZST CO. 59335 O0-Jul-99 THORPF DIST CO. Totals Check Number 59335 THORPE DIST CO. Check Number 59336 TRI-K SERVICES 59336 08-Jul-99 TRI-K SERVICES Totals Check Number 59336 TRI-K SERVICES Check Number 59337 US WEST COmUNICATlONS 59337 09-JU1-99 US WEST COTtlUNICATIONS Transaction Amount 191.70 191.70 43.75 43.75 487.50 540.00 1.027.50 85.05 85.05 181.79 181.79 Page 10 Comments 21.75 DRILL HOLES FOR TEE SIGN 59332 Oa-Jul-99 STREICHERS -116.09 RETURN - 12 GAUGE 59332 08-JU1-99 STREICHERS 327.22 DUTY AhWO 59332 08-JU1-99 STREICHERS 58.58 DUTY 59332 08-JU1-99 STREICHERS -37.81 DOTY AMMO 59332 08-Jul-99 STREICHERS 42.87 BATON HOLDER. FILTERS 59332 Oa-Jul-99 STREICHERS 79.72 RECHARGEABLE BATTERY 59332 O0-JU1-99 STREICHERS -74.50 RETURN - BATONS 59332 08-JU1-99 STREICHERS 103.75 SPEAKER DRIVER 59332 08-JU1-99 STREICHERS 106.29 RECHARGEABLE BATTERY 59332 09-Jul-99 STREICHFRS 71.80 IRRITANT. HOLDER.BATON Totals Check Number 59332 STREICHERS 561.83 GAS - TRrCK 8427 TEMP HBLP-QALLUS 6/27/99 TEMP HELP-MBYBR 6/27/99 BEER FOR RESALE BLACK DIRT PHONE SERVICE 9 JUl 1999 Pri 12*43 PM Check Register City of Orono Page 11 Check Number Date Name Transaction Amount Cofimenta Check Number 59337 59337 59337 59337 59337 59337 59337 59337 59337 59337 59337 US WEST 09-JU1-99 09-Jul-99 09-JU1-99 09-JU1-99 09-Jul-99 09-JU1-99 09-JU1-99 09-Jul-99 09-Jul-99 09-JU1-99 COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST CO^tlUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COmUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COmUNICATICRfS US WEST CO^WUNICATIONS US WEST COmUNICATIONS US WEST COIMJNICATIONS US WEST CO^WDNICATIONS 43.22 2.75 942.33 31.41 73.29 2.75 61.26 202.30 75.17 45.94 PHONE SERVICE PHONE SERVICE PHONE SERVICE PHONE SERVICE PHONE SERVICE PHONE SERVICE PHONE SERVICE DIR ADV PHONE SERVICE PHONE SERVICE Totals Check Nunnber 59337 US WEST COWUNICATIONS 1,502.17 9 Jul 1999 Fri 10:41 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Dat^Name Check Number 58501 58501 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY 09-JuT-99 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Totals Check Number 58501 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Check Number 58706 RED APRON CATERING 58706 09-Jul-99 RED APRON CATERING Totals Check Number 58706 RED APRON CATERING Check Number 58707 PROTECTION ONE 58707 09-JU1-99 PROTECTION ONE Totals Check Number 58707 PROTECTION ONE Check Nun^er 58708 ESI COMMUNICATIONS 58708 09-JU1-99 ESI COMMUNICATIONS Totals Check Number 58708 ESI COMMUNICATIONS Check Number 58709 GREGORY, JAMES 58709 09-JU1-99 GREGORY, JAMES Totals Check Number 58709 GREGORY, JAMES Check Number 58710 BAKER'S SQUARE 58710 09-JU1-99 BAKER'S SQUARE Totals Check Number 58710 BAKER'S SQUARE Check Number 58711 DAHLGREN SHARDLOH k UBAN 58711 09-Jul-99 DAHLGREN SHAROLOW k UBAN Totals Check Number 58711 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW k UBAN Check Number 58713 MN DEPT OP REVENUE 58713 58713 58713 09-JU1-99 09-JU1-99 09-Jul-99 MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE Totals Check Number 58713 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Transaction Amount -240.00 -240.00 166.95 166.95 305.00 305.00 35,827.77 35,827.77 85.80 85.80 19.47 19.47 2,495.56 2,495.56 7.00 474.00 1,643.00 2,124.00 Page 1 Comments VOID CK 58501 BOX LUNCHES-PARK TOUR REPAIRS-ALARM SYSTEM FINAL PMT-PHONE SYSTEM SOD PIES-WECKMAN RECEPTION CONSULTING MAY SALES TAX MAY SALES TAX MAY SALES TAX •; r • 9 7ul 1993 Fri 10*41 AM Check Register City nf Orono Check Grand Total Transaction 4.749.87 Page 2 Mumn?r Date Name Amount Crmments Check f^umber 56714 COVT FINANCE QFFICERS A£SN 58714 09-JU1-99 GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSN 3?0.00 APPL FOE CERT Totils Check Number 58714 GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSN 350.00 Check Number 59083 MCLEOD USA PUBLISHING 59093 09-JU1-99 MCLCOD USA PUBLISHING -35.B27.77 VOID CK 59083 59083 09-JU1-99 MCLEOD USA PUBLISHING -6.66 VOID CK 59083 Totals Check Kumber 59083 MCLEOD USA PUBLISHING -35.834.43 Check ITunber 59185 EKLUND TREE RECYCLING 59185 09-JU1-99 tKLUND TREE RECYCLING -55.11 VOID CK 59185 5918S 09-JU1-99 EKLUND TREE RECYCLING -304.00 VOID CK 59185 Totals Check Numbe'.59185 EKLUND TREE RECYCLING -359.11 Check Number S9.;:<24 NAVARRE HARDWARE 59224 09-JU1-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE -12.65 VOID CK 59224 59224 09-JU1-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE -21.29 VOID CK 59224 59224 09-JU1-99 NAVARRE FARDWARE -9.10 VOID CK 59224 59224 09-JU1-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE -4.24 VOID CK 592^4 S9224 39-Cul-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE -29.31 VOID CK 59224 59224 09-Jul-99 NAVARRE HAROfiARE -87.94 VOID CK 59224 59224 09-JU1-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE -26.61 VOID CK 59224 Totals Check Number 59224 NAVARRE HARDWARE -19..14 ^ -Ml r 30 Jun 1999 Wed 11:49 AM Check Register Cit^ of Orono Check NOnber Employee Name Check Number 046171 046171 JOHNSON, MARY ANN Totals Check Number 046171 Check Number 046172 046172 HASEMAN, CAROLE A. Totals Check Nu.nber 046172 Check Number 046173 046173 MOORSB, RONALD J. Totals Check Number 046173 Check Number 046174 046174 VEE, LINDA S. Totals Check Number 046174 Check Number 046175 046175 KUEHN, THOMAS M. Totals Check Number 0461TS Check Number 046176 046176 OLSON, RONALD J. Totals Check Number 046176 Check Number 046177 046177 PETTIT, SANDRA K. Totals Qieck Nusdber 046177 Check Number 046178 046178 ANDERSON, BRUCX L. Totals Check Number 046178 Check Number 046179 046179 BOBZIBN, SUB A. Totals Check Number 946179 Check Date 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun* 99 30-Jun-99 30-Jua-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 Page 1 Check Amount 543.92 543.92 708.27 708.27 1,679.37 1,679.37 1,068.74 1,068.74 1,102.91 1,102.91 119.34 119.34 736.89 736.89 687.04 687.04 880.53 880.53 -i, 30 Jun 1999 Wed llt49 AN Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 046180 046180 BORIS, SCOTT M Totals Check Number 046180 Check Number 046181 046181 CARLSON* MICHAEL E. Totals Check Number 046161 Check Number 046182 0461P2 CHESWICK, GARY B. Totals Check Number 046182 Check Number 046183 046183 CORNIOC* JAKES L. Totals Check Number 046163 Check Number 046184 046184 DBMBOUSKI, JAY C. Totals Check Number 046184 Check Number 046185 046185 ERICKSON* KURT R Totals Check Number 046185 Check Number 046166 046186 FARNIOK, CORREY L. Totals Check Number 046186 Check Number 046187 046187 PZSCHENICH* DAN T. Totals Check Number 046187 Check Nuiia>er 046188 046188 FISCHER, CHRISTOPHER K Totals Check Number 046186 Check Number 046189 Check Date 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun>99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-JUII-99 30-Jun-99 Page 2 Check Amount 1*115.95 1*115.95 316.50 316.50 1,469.17 1,469.17 1*431.99 1,431.99 1,520.61 1,520.61 1,390.93 1*390.93 1,252.81 1,252.81 1*203.28 1*203.28 1,205.58 1,205.58 4 ll 30 Jun 1999 Wed 11:49 AM Check Register City of Orono Check HviAber Employee Name Check Number 046189 046189 JOHNSON, JEFFREY Totals Check Number 046189 Check Number 046190 046190 JOHNSON, BRADLEY P. Totals Check Number 046190 Check Number 046191 046191 MADSON, ADRIENNE M. Totals Check Number 046191 Check Number 046192 046192 MCNALLY, STEVEN A. Totals Check Number 046192 Check Number 046193 046193 MCNICKOLS, DAVID L. Totals Check Number 046193 Check Number 046194 046194 MOROWCZYNSKI, JAMES Totals Check Number 046194 Check Number 046195 046195 PERSELL, WILLIAM R. Totals Check Number 046195 Check Number 046196 046196 SCKOENHOFP, JOHN B. Totals Check Number 046196 Check Number 046197 046197 TOMCHECK, LAWRENCE P. Totals Check Number 046197 Check Number 04619S Check Date 30-Jun-99 30-Jun*99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-JUn-99 30-Jun-99 30-JUX1-99 Page 3 Check Amount 372.17 372.17 1.390.93 1.390.93 180.05 180.05 1,175.15 1,175.15 648.40 648.40 1,616.82 1,616.82 444.21 444.21 1,329.38 1,329.38 353.57 353.57 30 Jun 1999 Ned 11;49 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 046198 046198 TOMCZYK, MARK W Totals Check Number 046198 Check Number 046199 046199 H0ECHST« ROBYN A. Totals Check Number 046199 Check Number 046200 046200 KOCZUR, JASON R. Totals Check Number 046200 Check Number 046201 046201 BOTTBNBBRQ, NENDY C. Totals Check Number 046201 Check Number 046202 046202 GAPFRON« MICHAEL P. Totals Check Number 046202 Check Number 046203 046203 GAPPA, GREGORY a Totals Check Number 046203 Check Number 046204 046204 JENSON, KRISTINE K. Totals Check Number 046204 Check Number 046205 04620S 0MAN« LYLE B. Totals Check Number 046205 Check Number 046206 046206 PAIMATEBR,OD H. Totals Check Number 046206 Check Number 046207 Check Date 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-JU2I-99 30-Jun-99 Page 4 Check Amount 1,389.39 1,389.39 647.79 647.79 286.26 286.26 728.52 728.52 1,144.88 1,144.88 1,660.48 1,660.48 811.12 811.12 374.71 374.71 869.23 869.23 ..i1 30 JUn 1999 f?ed llt49 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 046207 046207 VANG« BRUCE L Totals Check Number 046207 Check Number 046208 046208 HECKMAN, STEPHEN J. Totals Check Number 046208 Check Number 046209 046209 HEINBERGER, PAUL E. Totals Check Number 046209 Check Number 046210 046210 BRINKHAUS, JOHN P. Totals Check Number 046210 Check Number 046211 046211 DEBAERB, DONALD L. Totals Check Number 046211 Check Number 046212 046212 GREGORY, JAMES D. Totals Check Number 046212 Check Number 046213 046213 HANSEN, STEVQI C. Totals Check Number 046213 Check Number 046214 046214 OBERAIGNER, SCOTT Q. Totals Check Number 046214 Check Number 046215 046215 OBRIEN, RAm>Y L. Totals Qieck Number 046215 Check Number 046216 Check Date 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 Page 5 Check Amount 131.96 131.96 4.52 4.52 1,011.81 1,011.81 1,090.47 1,090.47 833.39 833.39 733.14 733.14 927.43 927.43 729.05 729.05 361.32 361.32 30 Jun 1999 Wed 11:49 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 046216 046216 PALMER, GREC30RY A. Totals Oieck Number 046216 Check Number 046217 046217 RATHBUN, BARRY J. Totals Check Number 046217 Check Number 046218 046218 SKRBEN, DALE S. Totals Check Number 046218 Qieck Number 046219 046219 ABRAHAMSON, FRED N. Totals Check Number 046219 Check Number 046220 046220 DOCXBN, THOMAS N. Totals Check Number 046220 Check Number 046221 046221 JOHNSON, JOSHUA B. Totals Check Number 046221 Check Number 046222 046222 MCINTYRE, WILLIAM E. Totals Check Number 046222 Check Number 746223 046223 OAS, DANIEL 0. Totals Check Number 046223 Check Number 046224 046224 PETERSON, JACK N. Totals Check Number 046224 Check Number 046225 Check Date 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-JUXI-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-JUn-99 Page 6 Qieck Amount 729.87 729.87 810.40 810.40 709.21 709.21 140.31 140.31 471.82 471.82 64.53 64.53 316.85 316.85 230.13 230.13 432.89 432.89 4 1 30 Jun 1999 Wed 11:49 AM Check Number finployee Name Check Number 046225 046225 RAICHS. VICTORIA K. Totals Check Number 046225 Check Register City of Orono Page 7 Check Date 30-Jun-99 Check Amount 128.11 128.11 Check Number 046226 046226 ROSS. JOHN A. Totals Check Number 046226 30-Jun-99 126.75 126.75 Check Number 046227 046227 STBFFENHAGBN. RONALD E 30-Jun-99 1.176.74 Totals Check Number 046227 1.176.74 Grand Total 45.017.59 30 Jun 1999 Wed 1:06 PH Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 59261 59261 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION 30-Jun-99 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Totals Check Number 59261 CITY COUNTY CREIIT UNION Check Number 59262 FIRST NATIONAL BAliK OF LAKES 59262 59262 59262 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Totals Check Number 59262 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Check Number 59263 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. 59263 30-Jun-99 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. Totals Check Number 59263 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. Check Number 59264 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 59264 30-Jun-99 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Totals Check Number 59264 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Check Number 59265 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 59265 30-Jun-99 LAW ENFORQ1ENT LABOR SERVICE Totals Check Number 59265 LAN ENFORCHENT LABOR SERVICE Check Number 59266 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT 59266 30-Jun-99 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT Totals Check Number 59266 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT Check Number 59267 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 59267 30-Jun-99 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Totals Check Number 59267 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Check Number 59268 59268 HN MUTUAL LIFE 30-Jun-99 MN MUTUAL LIFE Totals Check Number 59268 MN MUTUAL LIFE Check Number 59269 MN STATE RETIRENENT-DEF COMP 59269 30-Jun-99 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Totals Check Number 59269 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Transaction Amount 6,909.00 6,909.00 3,654.87 3,654.87 8,166.28 15,476.02 800.68 800.68 275.00 275.00 0.00 0.00 179.51 179.51 3,458.74 3,458.74 703.00 703.00 227.00 227.00 Page 1 Comments SAVINGS W/H k TRANSFERRED FICA k MEDICARE W/H FICA,MEDCR CITY SHARE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING DEFERRED COMP W/H DEFERRED COMP W/H UNION DUES WH SKREEN 80010755723 STATE TAX W/H DEFERRED COMP W/H DEFERRED COMP W/H 4 1 30 Jun 1999 Wed it06 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 59269 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEP COMP Check Number 59270 PEBSCO/OBRA 59270 30-Jun-99 PEBSCO/OBRA Totals Check Number 59270 PEBSCO/OBRA Check Number 59271 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS 59271 30-Jun-99 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS Totals Check Number 59271 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS Check Number 59272 PERA 59272 59272 30-Jun-99 30-Jun-99 PERA PERA Totals Check Number 59272 PERA Check Number 59273 UNITED WAY 59273 30-Jun-99 UNITED WAY Totals Check Number 59273 'JNITED WAY Grand Total Transaction Amount 262.26 262.26 2,371.50 2,371.50 4,343.83 5,768.95 10,112.78 31.00 31.00 40,806.49 Page 2 Comments OBRA DEFERRED COMP W/H USCM DEFERRED COMP W/H PERA EMPLOYEE W/H PERA CITY SHARE CHARITY DONATIONS W/H I 9 Jul 1999 Pri 9:11 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Humber Bn^loyee Hame Check Number 046229 046229 PETERSON, BARBARA A. Totals Check Number 046229 Check Number 046230 046230 MOORSE, RONALD J. Totals Check Number 046230 Check Number 046231 046231 FLINT, RICHARD Totals Check Number 046231 Check Number 046232 046232 JABBOUR, GABRIEL E. Totals Check Number 046232 Check Number 046233 046233 KELLEY, CHARLES Totals Check Number 046233 Check Number 046234 046234 SANSEVBRE, ROBERT K. Totals Check Number 046234 Grand Total Check Date 12-JU1-99 12-JU1-99 12-Jul-99 12-JU1-99 12-JU1-99 12-JU1-99 Page 1 Check Amount 269.36 269.36 184.70 184.70 269.36 269.36 323.22 323.22 269.36 269.36 269.36 269.36 1,585.36 JUL 1 2 oirr woHONo • ! information ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING ColiMnrr mi^ETINQ JUL 1 2 »99 OF CITY OF 080NO SiDttH I^nnespta KsoaResources One West Water Street Suite 200 St Paul, MN 55107 (651)298-3767 Fax (651) 297-5615 Field Offices Northern Region: 394 S. Lake Avenue Room 403 Duluth, MN 55802 (218) 723-4752 Fax (218) 723-4794 3217 Bemidji Avenue N. BemidjI. MN 56601 (218)755-4235 Fax (218) 75M201 217 S. 7th SUeet Suite 202 Brainerd, MN 56401-3660 (218) 828-2383 Fax (218) 828-6036 Southern Region: 261 Highway 15 S. NewUlm, MN 56073-8915 (507) 359-6074 Fax (507) 359-6018 40-16th Street SE Suite A Rochester, MN 55904 (507) 285-7458 Fax (507) 280-2875 Box 267 1400 E. Lyon Street Marshall, MN 56258 (507) 537-6060 Fax (507) 537-6368 Metro Region: One West Water Street Suite 250 St Paul.MN 55107 (612) 282-9969 Fax (612) 297-5615 An equal opportunity employer Printed on recycled paper June 24,1999 ju:: 2 9 m crpf' Or OivJi.'O COUWCIL meeting JUL 1 2 1999 CITY 01= ORONO Board of Hennepin County Commissioners A-2400 Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487-0240 Dear Commissioners: The Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) has completed the enclosed report as a follow-up to our January 26,1998 report. The BWSR will continue to work with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District board of managers to affect the changes identified in the two reports. The District has initiated changes in the past year and half. Cities have been generally satisfied with the current direction of the District and have had greater opportunity for input than prior to the first report. The BWSR sees this increase in communication as a significant step forward in addressing the issues identified in the first report. It is our intent to assist the District whenever possible to foster better working relationships with its stakeholders. Ultimately, however, the success of the District will be determined by the shared commitment of the District, county, cities and townships to identify a common vision of the District’s role in water and land resource management, designate responsibility, and create a system accountability to ensure the vision is achieved. Please feel free to contact Doug Snyder of my staff at 651-215-1520 should you wish to discuss this matter further. Sincerely, Ronald D. Hamacl Executive Director Enclosure cc: attached cc: District Board of Managers BWSR Report to the Hennepin County Board of Conunissioners on the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District June 15, 1999 On September 23,1997 the H- nnepin County Board of Commissioners (Commissioners) requested the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) review the activities of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (District) to determine whether the activities were in compliance with State statutes, rules and regulations. The original report was prepared and delivered to the Comnussioners on January 26, 1998. While the report found the District was in compliance with State statutes, rules and regulations, it also contained several recommendations for the District. In summary, the BWSR recommended the District review its activities in the following areas. 1.D istrict Management . The District board of managers should: A. shift their management style from being involved in the details of District operations toward policy and oversight activities. B. empower District staff to carry out most of the operational functions and administrative functions of the District. C. rely more on staff in the areas of permits and planning. 2.DISTRICT C ommunication , Outreach and C oordination . The District board of managers should: A. improve communications with its constituents, especially cities. B. host an annual meeting with its constituent cities and counties to discuss capital improvement projects and to try to achieve broad agreement among the parties on sources of funding for the projects. 3.D istrict Financial A ccountability . The District board of managers should: A. consider using additional engineering firms or the Hennepin Conservation District for capital improvement project design. B. consider using city engineers as project managers on capital improvement projects. Although reports like the above tend to focus on areas of District activity which may require some improvement, the BWSR report also found the District’s managers, staff and consultants to be a highly dedicated and committed group working together to protect and manage water and related land resources of the District. As with the first report, District staff and managers have willing cooperated with the BWSR to complete this follow-up report. This report will review District activities relative to the three main areas of concern identified in the first report - District management, District communication, coordination and outreach, and District financial accountability. D istrict Management The District board has progressed in shifting their management style from a “hands-on” approach to that of being a policy and oversight body. Delegation of day-to-day management to its staff is reflected in the District’s new Rule B which allows the staff, rather than the District board, to issue erosion control permits in appropriate circumstances. This change and others like it should reduce the cost and time for negotiating the application process. It will also move the District board closer to its role as a policy making and oversight body. Additional evidence that District managers are progressing in this shift is revealed by tracking manager per diem and expenses. Per diems have deceased each of the last two reporting years fi-om $63,397.46 in 1996 to $$27,162.64 in 1998. There still is concern that the turnover rate of District staff is higher than other watershed districts in the metropolitan area. In the past year a new District supervisor was hired. Staff turnover slowed down the progress the District was making toward less direct daily management of District activties. With the new supervisor in place, the District has resumed its shift toward policy and oversight. District staff are now responsible for District activities which had previously been contracted for, primarily in the areas of communications and engineering. The result should allow District staff to efficiently and effectively carry out the administrative services and manage the programs for which the District is responsible. The District should track the cost effectiveness and efficiency of this decision. On the surface, it appears that it could eventually reduce the District costs if staff is retained for periods of at least three to four years. Service to constituents may benefit from the increased internal capabilities, though specialized expertice would still likely be necessary from outside providers. The BWSR commends the District board and staff for the work they have completed to implement positive changes in the District’s management. The BWSR recommends the District board continue to find ways to delegate to staff administrative and programmatic tasks while continuing to move toward its role as a policy making and oversight body. June 15.1999 BWSR Report to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners on the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Page 2 D istrict Communication , Outreach and Coordination The District has undertaken several activities to improve communication, outreach and coordination with its constituent cities and residents. Most notably, the District now has an active citizen advisory committee and the District hosted a city and watershed District staff round table. The citizen advisory committee has worked with the District board and staff as the District completed its revision to its erosion control and storm water management rules. The District committed to resolving outstanding issues related to these rules by April 1999. The District board and staff accomplished this by holding regular meetings with city representatives, consulting engineers and the advisory committee. This rulemaking process achieved two goals. First, the District developed consensus that the new rules will protect the District’s water resources and will not be locally burdensome to implement. Secondly, the process reinforced lines of communication between the District and its stakeholders. Recently, District and city staff met at a round table forum to begin the discussion of how to find ways they might work together to meet their respective short- and long-term resource management goals. The District’s goal is to find ways to build on the respective strengths of the cities and District staff to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of all parties. DISTRICT Financial accountability There have been adjustments made in how the District looks at engineering services and legal services. This is, in some respects, a District management issue, but is retained in the discussion of Financial Accountabilty for consistency with the original report. The District continues to work with one firm for general engineering services and permit revdew assistance. The District has pre-screened an engineering consultant pool to draw on for capital improvement projects. The list of firms in the pool include six environmental engineering or landscape design firms and one technical/laboratory firm. As new projects are conceived where there is no compelling need for the firm to have a “District memory”, the District requests proposals from the pool. The District board may then select the most appropriate firm for the task. To date, five of the seven firms have been assigned work. District legal fees have decreased each of the last two reporting years. However, they remain the highest for Metropolitan area watershed districts. The District should continue to review this expense to determine why the District incurs these expenses and ensure the cost effectiveness of the service. A quick benchmarking study of the other metropolitan watershed districts would be one possible way of providing context. June 15,1999 BWSR Report to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners on the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Page 3 The District is exploring ways to make the management of the District’s resources more cost efficient. On Friday, March 12,1999, the District hosted a round table discussion with city managers and public works staff. The information which resulted from this meeting should help the District better define its leadership role in policy development and fiscal accountability. the attendees suggested the District should develop cost sharing options, define system-wide versus local watershed functions and develop appropriate cost-benefit analyses to determine whom should pay and how much they should pay. In other words, the District should reexamine its policy of funding all projects on an ad valorem basis. O ther Recommendations The BWSR report also contained two recommendations directed to the Commissioners and the cities within the District. First, the Commissioners should establish, in coordination with cities and other District constituents, a set of “guiding principles and standards” for selecting and . reviewing the performance of District managers. Second, cities, which have not already done so, should designate a technical and policy representative to act as liaison with the District. The District and Cities have largely addressed the second of these recommendations. However, the first recommendation has remains undeveloped. The Commissioners, as the appointing and recalling authority for the District’s board of managers, have a clear leadership role in monitoring the effective management of water and related land resources in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and in the other watershed management organizations in Hennepin County. It was in this capacity that the Commissioners acted, when in September of 1997 they requested the BWSR revdew the District’s activities. The Commissioners would benefit from the establishment of a way to measure the success of the District board or an individual manager. The BWSR again recommends that the Commissioners develop a set of standards and a performance review procedure for the selection, appointment and reappointment of watershed district managers in Hennepin County. Performance measures might include interviews with District, City and County staff that work with the District board or manager on a regular basis, re^^ew of manager per diem and other individual expenses, review of the cost effectiveness of District programs by independent audit or any number of other indices the Commissioners feel would be useful in adding their decision-making. June 15,1999 BWSR Report to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners on the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Page 4 Summary The District has moved significantly and positively forward in response to the concerns expressed by its constituents and the Comrmssioners in the first report. During conversations with individuals to complete this report, new and old issues which still need to be resolved were identified; such as, developing a District policy on which projects the District should fund, determining project cost shares, identifying regionally significant water and land resources, improving enforcement and permit compliance, and realizing the District’s desire to review comprehensive plans as well as local water plans for consistency with District water resource goals. The District has begun work on some of these issues, but many have yet to be addressed. The BWSR believes the District has created the foundation from which it can efficiently manage, conununicate and coordinate District policy and goals with the County and Cities. June 15,1999 BWSR Report to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners on the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Pages • • Manager ExptadUurti Legal Expeadllurti SMBMO u9mo U09.0QO s:ooM steoM mmVv «! !» w* Wii mm1 — 1996 1997 1998 I ^ LkifitMO All Qfhtt EngfntcHng EipeadilarM j Summary of District Expenses Engineering Total Legal Total Litigation All other fees Manager Total 1996 $1,248,734.00 $421,829.00 $110,124.00 $311,705.00 1997 $1,461,864.00 $370,357.00 $72,112.00 $298,245.00^$54,839.05 '998 $860,181.00 $176,132.00 $36,384.00 $139,748.00 $27,162.64 Individual Manger Per Diem and Expense Total for the Last Three Reporting Years Bold Print indicates current manager. Blixt Calkins Fisher 1996 $10.924.01 $0.00 $9.556.00 $7.189.40 127.669.41 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2.057.40 $2,057.40 Grose $7,879.80 $11.393.26 $7.056.30 $26,329.36 Harttiel $1.202.01 $0.00 $0.00 $1,202.01 LaBounI $19.049.72 $12.385.33 $3,531.92 $34,966.^ Love $10.433.99 $9.116.37 $1.157.00 ;20.707.36 Mapie $2.961.29 $2.200.00 Reid $3.452.00 $2,458.00 Thomas $7.494.64 $7,730.09 $1,485.00 $6,646.29 $3,001.58 $8,911.58 $1,684.04 $16,908.7' Total $63,397.46 $54,839.05 $27,162.64 Individual Manager Per Diem Day Equivalent Assumes $55 per diem and rounded to the nearest full day. Bold Print indicates current manager. Total $29,370.00 $45,057.91 L JUL 1 2 1999 OF ORONOCITY<rf OBMO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Malting Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Mr. Peter Cangialosi P.E. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 2500 Shadywood Road Excelsior MN 55331-9578 Dear Peter; Subject: Mooney Lake Outlet The Orono City Council discussed this issue at their June 28th Council meeting. I have enclosed a copy of my memo to the Counci l for your information. The Council's position is that this project is feasible and necessary and should be funded by the Watershed District through their tax supported Capital Improvements Program. The option of assessing the property owners within the Mooney Lake drainage area was discussed, but the Council was concerned about the viability of this option. The most equitable method would be to assess all of the properties in the drainage area based on hardcover and flow contribution because of the wide range of development densities in the area. The viability of this option is questionable because proving a benefit for the non-lakeshore residents would be very difficult, and there would be many assessment appeals. Assessing only benefitting lakeshore owners is not equitable because they are not responsible for the entire problem. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Please contact me at 612-249-4621 should you have any questions. Sincerely; Gregory A. Gappa Director of Public Services Copy: Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mayor Gabrial Jabbour and Orono city Council Members Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 COUNCIL MEETING REPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 date op run 06/02/99 PERMIT TYPE Building SGL FAMILY-NEW DUPLEX-NEW SP-ADD/REMODEL SP-ACC STRUCTURE DEMO/PRINCIPAL COMMERCIAL-NEW COM-AOD/REMODEL COM-ACC STRUCTUR INST-ADD/REMODEL DEMO-ACCESSORY ACC/GARA6BS Sub-to*:al Mechanical HEATING SYSTEMS AIR CONDITIONING WOOD STOVE/FLUE FIREPLACE VENTILATION FUEL STORAGE GAS LINE INSPECT DUCT WORK ONLY REMOVE OIL TANK S\ib-total Plumbing FIXTURES SPRINKLER WATER METER VACUUM BREAKER Sub-total Sewer & Water SEWER CONNECTION NEW SEPTIC SYSTE DRNPLD &/OR TANK SAC ONLY SEPTIC CONNECTIN SEWER DISCONNECT SEWER REPAIR SEWER k WATER Stib-total Sign PERMANENT/POSTED PER./FREE STANDG TEMPORARY Sub-total Fire WTPF! PPPTMVTTm. QTY 13 1 107 12 9 1 4 0 1 2 1 151* 44 1 1 26 5 1 5 2 2 87* 62 1 4 0 67* 5 6 0 2 0 X 2 19* 1 1 1 3* ***** PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO -- CURRENT RANGE - 01/01/99 - 05/31/99 BASE FEE 31, 1, 3 1 604 _,637 30,377 1,735 570 099 234 0 74 60 199 592 5,371 35 37 1,274 232 312 215 128 2,410 10,018 .50 .25 .25 .25 .00 .75 .00 .00 .75 .00 .75 .50* .76 .00 .50 .39 .50 .50 .00 .75 .67 .07* 6,145.91 93.75 680.00 0.00 6,919.66* 175.00 470.00 0.00 2,100.00 0.00 35.00 105.00 140.00 3,025.00* 48.50 21.00 35.00 104.50* 1.fiop nq VALUATION 5,407,511.55 250.000. 00 2,818,510.69 108,910.00 0.00 550.000. 00 97.900.00 0.00 3,000.00 0.00 12.600.00 9,248,432.24* 414, 1, 3, 74, 12, 25, 8, 8, 191, 739, 819.00 500.00 000.00 596.00 700.00 000.00 000.00 700.00 483.79 798.79* 430,098.00 7,500.00 0.00 0.00 437,598.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 1,500.00 450.00 0.00 1,950.00* 135,550.00 PLAN REVIEW 20,542 1,064 13,020 1,022 0 2,014 753 0 0 0 129 38,548 .90 .21 .35 .46 .00 .84 .52 .00 .00 .00 .84 .12* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0. JO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0.00 EAR-TO--DATE JUL ) 2 1999. 1 *****PAGE: 1 CITY ut nnOT/TOTTO DlV1Jr*1? H9?ER: CAROLE 01/01/98 - 05/31/98 QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW 14 32,241.50 5,480,976.00 20,956.94 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 133 36,415.00 3,415,200.84 17,287.72 13 4,804.50 547,980.00 3,055.33 8 430.00 0.00 0.00 1 6,365.25 1,492,000.00 4,137.41 3 359.50 22,075.00 15.44 4 1,427.50 109,000.00 105.46 1 0.00 19,480.00 0.00 3 90.00 0.00 0.00 8 1,758.00 124,332.00 1,123.19 188*83,891.25*11,211,043.84*46,681.49* 36 5,988.38 473,015.00 0.00 7 486.82 38,145.52 0.00 1 35.00 2,000.00 0.00 37 1,577.06 91,265.00 0.00 3 105.00 5,150.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 140.00 4,659.00 0.00 10 363.75 15,833.00 0.00 3 105.00 1,750.00 0.00 101*8,801.01*631,817.52*0.00* 75 6,240.71 439,829.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 932.00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 150.00 0.00 80*7,207.71*439,979.00*0.00* 16 560.00 0.00 0.00 14 1,350.00 0.00 0.00 1 1 50.00 0.00 0.00 13 11,250.00 0.00 0.00 1 50.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 750.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 46*13,295.00*750.00*0.00* 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 0.00 0.00 1*35.00*0.00*0.00* 1 3.G50.00 292,000.00 0.00 REPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OP RUN 06/02/99 ***** PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO YEAR-TO-DATE *****PAGE: 2 REQUESTER: CAROLE -- CURRENT RANGE - 01/01/99 - 05/31/99 -- PREVIOUS RANGE - 01/01/98 - 05/31/98 PERMIT TYPE Sub-total QTY SY BASE FEB 1,698.88* VALUATION 135,550.00* PLAN REVIEW 0.00* QTY 1* BASE FEB 3,650.00* VALUATION 292,000.00* User Defined LAND ALTERATION nnPKQ LAWN SPRINKLER Sub-total 5 1 3 9* 230.00 30.00 105.00 365.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 7 0 3 10* 375.00 0.00 105.00 480.00* 500.00 0.00 0.00 500.00* Grand-total 339**92,723.61** 10,563,329.03** 38,548.12**427** PLAN REVIEW 0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 117,359.97** 12,576,090.36** 46,681.49** t ! . YEAR-TO-DATE REPORT NBR. BFEBRPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 06/02/99 ***** permit fee report ***** CITY OF ORONO FROM 01/01/99 TO 05/31/99 BASE FEE PLAN REVIEW SURCHARGE Lie. SEARCH FEB SAC INVESTIGATION DEPOSIT MAIL IN ESCROW PERMIT TOTAL REPORT TOTAL 92,723.61 38,548.12 5,278.18 0.00 4,200.00 4,227.25 0.00 120.62 0.00 145,097.78 PAGE: 1 REQUESTER: CAROLE ^ BUILDING MECHANICAL PLUMBING SEWER & WATER USER SIGN FIRE BASE FEE 70,592.50 10,018.07 6,919.66 3,025.00 365.00 104.50 1,698.88 PLAN REVIEW 38,548.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SURCHARGE 4,605.41 371.20 222.84 8.50 1.50 0.75 G Oa\•V O Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SAC 4,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 4,177.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MAIL IN 79.12 35.50 1.50 1.50 3.00 ESCROW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 122,123.28 10,468.39 7,178.00 3,033.50 418.00 106.75 1,769.86 REPORT NBR. BFEERPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 06/02/99 •***** permit fee CITY OF FROM 01/01/99 REPORT ORONO TO 05/31/99 PAGE: REQUESTER: CAROLE YEAR-TO-DATE REPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OF RUN 06/02/99 ***** permit issued report CITY OF ORONO -- CURRENT range - 01/01/99 - 05/31/99 PERMIT TYPE QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW User Defined SUBDIVISION VARIANCE CUP SKETCH PLAN VARIANCE/CUP REZONING RQST SIMILAR USE ZONING CODE AMEN Sub-total 8 18 6 6 1 1 0 2 42* 5.400.00 4.500.00 1.400.00 1.500.00 500.00 350.00 0.00 0.00 13,650.00* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Grand-total 42**13,650.00** 0.00* 0.00** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00* 0.00** * * * 1* ^ nDt?T7TnTTG PAGE: 1 REQUESTER: CAROLE n _ _ __ __ 01/01/98 -05/31/98 QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW 8 4,837.50 0.00 0.00 28 7,460.00 0.00 0.00 9 1,525.00 0.00 0.00 2 500.00 0.00 0.00 2 500.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 250.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 51*15,072.50*0.00*0.00* 51**15,072.50**0.00**0.00** %SPORT NBR. BFEERPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 06/02/99 ♦ PERMI.‘ 1 T?EPa<r ***** CITY OF ORUV^ FROM 01/01/99 TO 05/31/99 USER REPORT TOTAL BASE FEE 13,650.00 13,650.00 PLAN REVIEW 0.00 0.00 SURCHARGE 0.00 0.00 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 0.00 SAC 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 ESCROW 0.00 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 13,650.00 13,650.00 PAGE: 1 REQUESTER: CAROLE - • 1999 RECAP OF CONTRACT CITIES January February March April May June July August Septeinber October Novetnber December YTO Totals Spring Park 5,137.92Plan Review 40.46 274.14 0.00 2,760.22 2,063.10 Inspections 120.00 45.00 195.00 135.00 135.00 630.00 Retainer 2S.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 125.00 TOTAL 185.46 344.14 220.00 2,920.22 2,223.10 5,892.92 No. Plan Reviews 1 1 0 4 4 10 No. Inspections 8 3 13 9 9 42 Minnetonka Beach 1,756.14Plan Review 568.59 0.00 72.96 326.79 787.80 Inspections 60.00 45.00 150.00 135.00 60.00 450.00 Retainer 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 125.00 TOTAL 653.59 70.00 247.96 486.79 872.80 2,331.14 No. Plan Reviews 1 0 1 1 2 5 No. Inspections 4 3 10 9 4 30 839.05 414.14 467.96 3,407.01 3,095.90 8,224.06 - • 'A^ «w, - REPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OP RUN 06/02/99 PERMIT TYPE Building SGL FAMILY-NEW SF-ADD/REMODEL SF-ACC STRUCTURE DEMO/PRINCIPAL COMMERCIAL-NEW COM-ADD/REMODEL COM-ACC STRUCTUR DEMO-ACCESSORY ACC/GARAGES Sub-total Mechanical HEATING SYSTEMS AIR CONDITIONING FIREPLACE VENTILATION GAS LINE INSPECT DUCT WORK ONLY REMOVE OIL TANK Sub-total Plumbing FIXTURES VACUUM BREAKER Sub-total Sewer & Water SEWER CONNECTION NEW SEPTIC SYSTE SAC ONLY SEPTIC CONNECTIN SEWER REPAIR Sub-total Sign PER./FREE STANDG TEMPORARY Sub-total Fire FIRE SPRINKLER Sub-total User Defined LAND ALTERATION DOCKS LAWN SPRINKLER Sub-total QTY 3 48 5 3 0 1 0 1 0 61* 1 1 2 1 0 0 1 6* 13 0 13* 3 1 0 0 0 4* 1 1 2* 1 1* 4 1 1 6* ***** permit ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO -- CURRENT RANGE - 05/01/99 - 05/31/99 BASE FEB 8,799.25 12,569.75 553.25 210.00 0.00 99.75 0.00 30.00 0.00 22,262.00* 35.00 35.00 272.50 35.00 0.00 0.00 2,375.67 2,753.17* 1,126.25 0.00 1,126.25* 105.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 205.00* 21.00 35.00 56.00* 215.88 215.88* 180.00 30.00 35.00 245.00* VALUATION 1,580,000.00 1,057,946.69 30,210.00 0.00 0.00 5,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,673,156.69* 1,100.00 1,500.00 21,800.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 190,033.79 215,433.79* 78,345.00 0.00 78,345.00* 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00* 450.00 0.00 450.00* 17,270.00 17,270.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* PLAN REVIEW 5.719.51 5.596.52 359.61 0.00 0 64 0 0 0 00 84 00 00 00 11,740.48* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00* 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0.00 0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* MAY 1999 ^ncil meeting ***** QTY 4 39 9 2 1 0 2 1 4 62* 3 3 5 0 1 1 2 15* 16 1 17* 4 6 3 1 1 15* 0 0 0* 1 1* 3 0 2 5* Grand-total 93**26,863.30** 2,984,655.48**11,740.48**115** 1999 PAGE: -- PREVIOUS RANGE 05/01/98 - 05/31/98 M 12 C|TVO*=(S^g™''’ BASE FEE 10,894 9,120 1,510 130 6,365 0 557 30 925 29,532 .00 .25 .50 .00 .25 .00 .00 .00 .25 .25* 370.00 165.00 313.75 0.00 35.00 35.00 70.00 988.75* 993.57 35.00 1,028.57* 140 550 3,000 50 35 00 00 00 00 00 3,775.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00* 3,650.00 3,650.00* 150.00 0.00 70.00 220.00* VALUATION 1,988,202.00 738,961.00 99.680.00 0.00 1,492,000.00 0.00 40,000.00 0.00 67.832.00 4,426,675.00* 29.600.00 12.400.00 22.700.00 0.00 2.784.00 500.00 1.250.00 69,234.00* 59,085.00 150.00 59,235.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 750.00 750.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00* 292.000. 00 292.000. 00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 39,194.57** 4,847,894.00** PLAN REVIEW 7,081.09 4,694.48 914.23 0.00 4,137.41 0.00 105.46 0.00 581.91 17,514.58* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00- 0.00* 0.00' 0.00 0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00< 0.00, 0.00 0.00^ 0.00 0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17,514.58' REPORT NBR. BPEERPTl-1 DATE OF RUN 06/02/99 BUILDING BASE PEE 22,262.00 PLAN REVIEW 11,740.48 A S9ft Lo SURCHARGE 1,33>.40- Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 SAC 0.00 INVESTIGATION 87.25 DEPOSIT MAIL IN 0.00 ESCROW 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 3574>!3i10 REPORT NBR. BFBERPTl- DATE OP RUN 06/02/99 1 REPORT TOTAL BASE FEE 26,863.30 PLAN REVIEW 11,740.48 /, ypp. d"? SURCHARGE Lie. SEARCH PEE 0.00 SAC 0.00 INVESTIGATION 137.25 DEPOSIT 0.00 MAIL IN 14.50 ESCROW o.oc 4/CkUSi. faO PERMIT TOTAL PERMIT FEE REPORT CITY OF ORONO FROM 05/01/99 TO 05/31/99 MECHANICAL PLUMBING SEWER & WATER 2,753.17 0.00 . 107.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.50 0.00 2,865.40 1,126.25 0.00 39.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.00 0.00 1,172.85 205.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 207.00 *****PERMIT FEE REPORT ***** CITY OP ORONO FROM 05/01/99 TO 05/31/99 MAY 1999 USER 245.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 50.00 0.00 0.00 295.50 PAGE: : REQUESTER: CAROLE SIGN PIRE. 56.00 0.00 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.00 57.50 215.88 0.00 8.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.00 226.02 PAGE: REQUESTER: CAROLE * i IN 2, x999, 7:56 AM 1 ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF MAY 1999 WORK ADDR NBR STREET 01 2515 KELLY AVE 01 60 CRYSTAL CREEK RD 01 160 GOLDEN VIEW DR 02 2945 JAMESTOWN RD 02 580 NORTH ARM DR 02 1800 CONCORDIA ST 02 3145 JAMESTOWN RD 02 2205 ABINGDON WAY 02 2135 6TH AVE N 02 1085 BROWN RD S 03 539 KEENE AVE 05 2905 DEER RUN TR 05 540 ORONO ORCHARD RD S 05 2065 WEBBER HILLS RD 05 760 DICKEY LAKE DR 06 160 TRUFFULA TR 06 1120 cox FARM RD 06 2726 CAROLINE AVE 06 649 MINNETONKA HGLD LA 06 1743 EAGERNESS POINT RD 06 460 SUSSEX LA 06 2230 BAYVIEW PL 09 320 TURNHAM RD 09 1950 CONCORDIA ST 09 2705 PHEASANT RD 10 1998 SHADYWOOD RD 10 2445 SHADYWOOD RD 10 81 HACKBERRY HILL 11 217 NORTHGATE RD 11 2240 BAYVIEW PL 11 2649 CASCO POINT RD 11 4295 WATERTOWN RD 11 4720 TONKAVIEW LA 11 2315 DEVIN LA 11 425 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N 11 385 TURNHAM RD 11 460 LONG LAKE RD E 11 509 FERNDALE RD N 11 2509 KELLY AVE 11 175 LANDMARK DR 11 2945 JAMESTOWN RD 11 1461 NORTH ARM DR 11 1600 BOHNS PT RD 11 2700 CASCO POINT RD 11 2935 FARVIEW LA 11 1205 DICKENSON ST 16 680 BROWN RD S 16 372 WESTLAKE ST 16 2683 CASCO POINT RD 17 365 WESTLAKE ST 19 2160 WAYZATA BLVD 24 1700 SHORELINE DR 29 692 TONKAWA RD 29 4119 OAK ST PAGE 1 ISSUED ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATION 18948904 MAURER GEORGE C CONSTR INC HARDTEN 850,000.00 00000000 405,000.00 00000000 SCHMID 325,000.00 19369245 WARREN HOME RESTORATIONS WAHLIB 85,000.00 14730378 RIGHT ANGLE BUILDING CORP JOHNSON 145,000.00 14710532 DANBERRY COMPANY HANSON 65,000.00 00000000 NELSON 100,000.00 00000000 BRUCE 5,928.00 19297233 DIVERSIFIED BLDG SYSTEMS VALITON 32,000.00 00000000 BERRETT 80,000.00 00000000 PAINE 85,000.00 14766768 STICKNEY AND SCHWARZ POLLACK 18,000.00 00000000 LARSON 5,000.00 19269662 PARKLYNN BLDRS INC LYTLE 8,600.00 00000000 THOMAS 22,800.00 00000000 BORG 4,000.00 00000000 .HILLIER 8,877.00 00000000 KADLEC 2,500.00 14513192 THE DECK Sc DOOR CO., INC.SWANTEK 9,000.00 14513192 THE DECK & DOOR CO., INC.TAUBENBERGER 6,500.00 15911111 ARCHADECK TWIN CITIES MEYER 5,800.00 00000000 SCHNECK 3,000.00 15429000 DALPHIN POOL & SPA ZELINSKY 20,000.00 00000000 PETERS 3,500.00 14836600 ALL POOLSIDE SERVICES JOHNSTON 12,000.00 00000000 SOLTAU 13,000.00 00000000 .1,500.00 14254737 TWIN CITY EXTERIORS KALLENBACH 4,600.00 15410304 WESTURN CEDAR SUPPLY ACKMAN 17,743.00 14702001 CHRISTIANS INC HALLOCK 5,100.00 00000000 SCHERVEN 3,500.00 15410304 WESTURN CEDAR SUPPLY FILMORE 15,275.00 00000000 VALEK 2,500.00 17984970 BANNER ROOFING CORP POSTMAN 9,750.00 18238046 SELA ROOFING HUGH 5,936.00 18238046 SELA ROOFING PHELPS 4,900.00 00000000 BEAUCHAINE 4,500.00 14701364 HAGELE HOME CARE CO MCFARLANE 7,300.00 18818232 SUBURBAN EXTERIORS NADLER 5,570.00 15410304 WESTURN CEDAR SUPPLY HARREN 21,782.00 18688847 RIRHN GENERAL CONTRACTING WAHLIG 4,000.00 00000000 KOCH 3,000.00 15410304 WESTURN CEDAR SUPPLY SWEEN 11,279.00 15410304 WESTURN CEDAR SUPPLY BUESING >3,830.00 15500043 GATES BRUCE BILLIGMEIER 12,000.00 00000000 ANDERSON 7,000.00 14796777 BREN THOMAS HOMES INC ANDRUS . 00 00000000 ERICKSON .00 00000000 ERICKSON .00 00000000 ERICKSON .00 00000000 WEAR 5,000.00 15761810 M-CON INC JACOBS 2,900.00 14751160 TAYLOR KATHERINE PUGH 75,000.00 15411133 PEM MILLWORK HOLLAND 44,291.69 99/05/03 OR- 99/05/14 OR- 99/05/14 OR- 99/05/07 OR- 99/05/03 OR- 99/05/26 OR- 99/05/07 OR- 99/05/10 OR- 99/05/11 OR- 99/05/25 OR- 99/05/10 OR- 99/05/20 OR- 99/05/19 OR- S9/05/24 OR- 99/05/27 OR- 99/05/21 OR- 99/05/03 OR- 99/05/03 OR- 99/05/07 OR- 99/05/07 OR- 99/05/11 OR- 99/05/19 OR- 99/05/28 OR- 99/05/14 OR- 99/05/27 OR- 99/05/12 OR- 99/05/28 OR- 99/05/28 OR- 99/05/03 OR- 99/05/04 OR- 99/05/04 OR- 99/05/06 OR- 99/05/06 OR- 99/05/13 OR- 99/05/18 OR- 99/05/18 OR- 99/05/20 OR- 99/05/24 OR- 99/05/25 OR- 99/05/25 OR- 99/05/26 OR- 99/05/26 OR- 99/05/26 OR- 99/05/26 OR- 99/05/27 OR- 99/05/28 OR- 99/05/10 OR- 99/05/25 OR- 99/05/28 OR- 99/05/25 OR- 99/05/12 OR- 99/05/18 OR- 99/05/04 OR- 99/05/04 OR 011356 011409 011420 011371 011372 011373 011398 011403 011407 011449 011396 011361 011414 011447 011462 010529 011378 011380 011391 011392 •011411 -011442 -011421 -011429 -011465 -011424 -011471 -011472 -011376 -011382 -011384 -011390 -011393 -011427 -011436 -011438 -011445 -011446 -011450 -011451 -011452 -011455 -011457 -011459 -011463 -011474 -011413 -011444 -011468 -011443 -011425 -011432 -011381 -011383 WED, JUN 2, 1999, 7:56 AM PAGE 2 PERMITS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF MAY 1999 PERMIT WORK ADDR NBR STREET ISSUED PERMIT NBR ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATION BL 29 25 CYGNET PL 99/05/10 OR-011405 15721820 29 2605 MAPLERIDGE LA 99/05/13 OR-011426 17227129 29 1910 SHADYWOOD RD 99/05/26 OR-011437 15992525 29 1406 BOHNS PT RD 99/05/19 OR-011441 18882225 30 290 BIG ISLAND 99/05/04 OR-011292 00000000 30 25 CYGNET PL 99/05/11 OR-011410 00000000 30 2680 SILVER VIEW DR 99/05/28 OR-011473 00000000 61C 61C FI 19 2190 WAYZATA BLVD 99/05/03 OR-011375 83313111 1C 1C ME 01 3400 FOX ST 99/05/10 OR-011406 34618006 01 325 BROWN RD S 99/05/25 OR-011448 34282826 02 692 TONKAWA RD 99/05/05 OR-011386 34451900 05 1890 SHADYWOOD RD 99/05/26 OR-011454 36332561 19 2160 WAYZATA BLVD 99/05/07 OR-011388 37806332 24 820 NORTH SHORE DR W 99/05/18 OR-011439 34458585 6C 6C PL 01 40 TRUPFULA TR 99/05/06 OR-011394 24796436 01 350 NORTH ARM LA 99/05/17 OR-011435 29337200 02 1890 SHADYWOOD RD 99/05/03 OR-011377 24701208 02 80 CYGNET PL 99/05/13 OR-011428 00000000 02 3580 BAYSIDE RD 99/05/14 OR-011431 24282663 02 3145 JAMESTOWN RD 99/05/26 OR-011453 24701208 19 1050 TAMARACK DR 99/05/18 OR-011440 24646281 24 310 BIG ISLAND 99/05/03 OR-011379 24724959 24 1058 LOMA LINDA AVE 99/05/05 OR-011385 28274033 24 2660 LYDIARD AVE 99/05/07 OR-011404 24490147 24 2701 KELLY AVE 99/05/14 OR-011430 24490147 24 485 ORONO ORCHARD RD S 99/05/17 OR-011434 25458881 29 692 TONKAWA RD 99/05/05 OR-011387 28017974 13C 13C SI 13 1449 SHORELINE DR 99/05/10 OR-011408 00000000 19 3542 SHORELINE DR 99/05/12 OR-011399 16892050 2C 2C SW 01 3280 NORTH SHORE DR 99/05/07 OR-011400 24461495 01 3290 NORTH SHORE DR 99/05/07 OR-011401 24461495 01 3292 NORTH SHORE DR 99/05/07 OR-011402 24461495 01 3075 FARVIEW LA 99/05/11 OR-011415 54988702 4C 4C UD 01 2770 RAINEY RD 99/05/19 OR-011423 84461778 01 4455 NORTH SHORE DR 99/05/27 OR-011461 00000000 14 280 BIG ISLAND 99/05/04 OR-011374 one jr'OOO 14 2497 KELLY AVE 99/05/14 OR-011433 ooooocoo 20 1030 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N 99/05/26 OR-011460 00000000 22 1130 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S 99/05/06 OR-011389 14445353 6C 6C 93C VIKING HOME IMPR SHAUGHNESSY 3,100.00 GARLOCK FRECH ROOFING CO VONG 4,085.00 STRATFORD PROPERTIES INC MCMANUS 35,000.00 PLEKKENPOL BUILDERS INC CHAPMAN 17,500.00 FINK 1,210.00 SHAUGHNESSY 1,500.00 MORRISON 12,000.00 • OLSEN FIRE PROTECTION 17,270.00 THE BRICKSMITH INC OLSON 19,000.00 PRACTICAL SYSTEMS WILSON 2,800.00 ADVANTAGE AIR 1,000.00 FIRESIDE CORNER MASLOW 1,100.00 GRIFFIN SVC STA EQUIP WEAR 190,033.79 RON'S MECH INC REWERTS 1,500.00 PARK PLUMBING INC 1,200.00 CULLIGAN PENDLETON 1,000.00 STEINKRAUS PLBG INC MASLOW 3,300.00 SMITH 1,500.00 G R MECHANICAL OLSON 9,800.00 STEINKRAUS PLBG INC NELSON 7,800.00 LAMERE PLUMBING & HEATING 6,500.00 WESTONKA MECH CONTRACTORS YEAGER 1,995.00 NORBLOM PLUMBING CO SCHAIBLE 1,000.00 CUSTOM PLUMBING, :NC.BAUER 500.00 CUSTOM PLUMBING, INC.STORLIE 650.00 HOVDE PLBG & HTG INC HAMM 40,000.00 PLUMBING PLUS PUGH 3,100.00 .00 MINNESOTA SIGN CO 450.00 WIDMER INC WAADE .00 WIDMER INC WAADE .00 WIDMER INC WAADE .00 KOTHRADE SEWER & WATER LYNN •.00 TEMACA WYSOCKI .00 KLOHN .00 PARSONS .00 .00 .00 YERIGAN CONSTRUCTION CO COLWELL .00 2,984,655.48* WED, JUN 2, x999, 7:56 AM NUMERICAL LISTING MAY 1999 PERMIT NBR ISSUED CANCEL ADDR NBR STREET PAGE 1 WORK ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATION 06 00000000 BORG 4,000.00 30 00000000 PINK 1,210.00 01 18948904 MAURER GEORGE C CONSTR INC HARDTEN 850,000.00 05 14766768 STICKNEY AND SCHWARZ POLLACK 18,000.00 02 19369245 WARREN HOME RESTORATIONS WAHLIE 85,000.00 02 14730378 RIGHT ANGLE BUILDING CORP JOHNSON 145,000.00 02 14710532 DANBERRY COMPANY HANSON 65,000.00 14 00000000 PARSONS .00 19 83313111 OLSEN FIRE PROTECTION 17,270.00 11 15410304 WESTURN CEDAR SUPPLY ACKMAN 17,743.00 02 24701208 STEINKRAUS PLBG INC MASLOW 3,300.00 06 00000000 HILLIER 8,877.00 24 24724959 WESTONKA MECH CONTRACTORS YEAGER 1,995.00 06 00000000 KADLEC 2,500.00 29 14751160 TAYLOR KATHERINE PUGH 75,000.00 11 14702001 CHRISTIANS INC HALLOCK 5,100.00 29 15411133 PEM MILLWORK HOLLAND 44,291.69 11 00000000 SCHERVEN 3,500.00 24 28274033 NORBLOM PLUMBING CO SCHAIBLE 1,000.00 02 34451900 ADVANTAGE AIR 1,000.00 29 28017974 PLUMBING PLUS PUGH 3,100.00 19 37806332 GRIFFIN SVC STA EQUIP WEAR 190,033.79 22 14445353 YERIGAN CONSTRUCTION CO COLWELL .00 11 15410304 WESTURN CEDAR SUPPLY FILMORE 15,275.00 ' 06 14513192 THE DECK & DOOR CO., INC.SWANTEK 9,000.00 06 14513192 THE DECK & DOOR CO., INC.TAUBENBERGER 6,500.00 11 00000000 VALEK 2,500.00 01 24796436 PARK PLUMBING INC 1,200.00 03 00000000 PAINE 85,000.00 02 00000000 NELSON 100,000.00 19 16892050 MINNESOTA SIGN CO 450.00 01 24461495 WIDMER INC WAADE .00 01 24461495 WIDMER INC WAADE .00 01 24461495 WIDMER INC WAADE .00 02 00000000 BRUCE 5,928.00 24 24490147 CUSTOM PLUMBING, INC.BAUER 500.00 29 15721820 VIKING HOME IMPR SHAUGHNESSY 3,100.00 01 34618006 THE BRICKSMITH INC OLSON 19,000.00 02 19297233 DIVERSIFIED BLDG SYSTEMS VALITON 32,000.00 13 00000000 .00 01 00000000 405,000.00 30 00000000 SHAUGHNESSY 1,500.00 06 15911111 ARCHADECK TWIN CITIES MEYER 5,800.00 16 14796777 BREN THOMAS HOMES INC ANDRUS .00 05 00000000 LARSON 5,000.00 01 54988702 KOTHRADE SEWER & WATER LYNN .00 01 00000000 SCHMID 325,000.00 09 15429000 DALPHIN POOL & SPA ZELINSKY 20,000.00 01 84461778 TEMACA WYSOCKI .00 10 00000000 SOLTAU 13,000.00 19 00000000 WEAR 5,000.00 29 17227129 GARLOCK FRECH ROOFING CO VONG 4,085.00 11 17984970 BANNER ROOFING CORP POSTMAN 9,750.00 02 00000000 SMITH 1,500.00 OR-010529 OR-011292 OR-011356 OR-O?.1361 OR-011371 OR-011372 OR-011373 OR-011374 OR-011375 OR-011376 OR-011377 OR-011378 OR-011379 OR-011380 OR-011381 OR-011382 OR-011383 OR>011384 OR-011385 OR-011386 OR-011387 OR-011388 OR-011389 OR-011390 OR-011391 OR-011392 OR-011393 OR-011394 OR-011396 OR-011398 OR-011399 OR-011400 OR-011401 OR-011402 UR-011403 OR-011404 OR-011405 OR-011406 OR-011407 OR-011408 OR-011409 OR-011410 OR-011411 OR-011413 OR-011414 OR-011415 OR-011420 OR-011421 OR-011423 OR-011424 OR-01142S OR-011426 OR-011427 OR-011428 99/05/21 N 99/05/04 N 99/05/03 N 99/05/20 N 99/05/07 N 99/05/03 N 99/05/26 N 99/05/04 N 99/05/03 N 99/05/03 N 99/05/03 N 99/05/03 N 99/05/03 N 99/05/03 N 99/05/04 N 99/05/04 N 99/05/04 N 99/05/04 N 99/05/05 N 99/05/05 N 99/05/05 N 99/05/07 N 99/05/06 N 99/05/06 N 99/05/07 N 99/05/07 N 99/05/06 N 99/05/06 N 99/05/10 N 99/05/07 N 99/05/12 N 99/05/07 N 99/05/07 N 99/05/07 N 99/05/10 N 99/05/07 N 99/05/10 N 99/05/10 N 99/05/11 N 99/05/10 N 99/05/14 N 99/05/11 N 99/05/11 N 99/05/10 N 99/05/19 N 99/05/11 N 99/05/14 N 99/05/28 N 99/05/19 N 99/05/12 N 99/05/12 N 99/05/13 N 99/05/13 N 99/05/13 N 160 290 2515 2905 2945 580 1800 280 2190 217 1890 1120 310 2726 692 2240 4119 2649 1058 692 692 2160 1130 4295 649 1743 4720 40 539 3145 3542 3280 3290 3292 2205 2660 25 3400 2135 1449 60 25 460 680 540 3075 160 320 2770 1998 2160 2605 2315 80 TRUFFmA TR BIG ISLAND KELLY AVE DEER RUN TR JAMESTOWN RD NORTH ARM DR CONCORDIA ST BIG ISLAND WAYZATA BLVD NORTHGATE RD SHADYWOOD RD COX FARM RD BIG ISLAND CAROLINE AVE TONKAWA RD BAYVIEW PL OAK ST CASCO POINT RD LOMA LINDA AVE TONKAWA RD TONKAWA RD WAYZATA BLVD OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S WATERTOWN RD MINNETONKA HOLD LA PAGERNESS POINT RD TONKAVIEW LA TRUFFULA TR KEENE AVE JAMESTOWN RD SHORELINE DR NORTH SHORE DR NORTH SHORE DR NORTH SHORE DR ABINGDON WAY LYDIARD AVE CYGNET PL FOX ST 6TH AVE N SHORELINE DR CRYSTAL CREEK RD CYGNET PL SUSSEX LA BROWN RD S ORONO ORCHARD RD S FARVIEW LA GOLDEN VIEW DR TURNHAM RD RAINEY RD SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA BLVD MAPLERIDGE LA DEVIN LA CYGNET PL WED, JUN 2, 1999, 7:56 AM NUMERICAL LISTING MAY 1999 PERMIT NBR ISSUED CANCEL ADDR NBR STREET PAGE 2 COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATION PETERS 3,500.00 CUSTOM PLUMBING, INC.STORLIE 650.00 G R MECHANICAL OLSON 9,800.00 M-CON INC JACOBS 2,900.00 .00 HOVDE PLBG & HTG INC HAMM 40,000.00 CULLIGAN PENDLETON 1,000.00 SELA ROOFING HUGH 5,936.00 STRATFORD PROPERTIES INC MCMANUS 35,000.00 SELA ROOFING PHELPS 4,900.00 RON'S MECH INC REWERTS 1,500.00 LAMERE PLUMBING & HEATING 6,500.00 PLEKKENPOL BUILDERS INC CHAPMAN 17,500.00 SCHNECK 3,000.00 ERICKSON .00 ERICKSON .00 BEAUCHAINE 4,500.00 HAGELE HOME CARE CO MCFARLANE 7,300.00 PARKLYNN BLDRS INC LYTLE 8,600.00 PRACTICAL SYSTEMS WILSON 2,800.00 BERRETT 80,000.00 SUBURBAN EXTERIORS NADLER 5,570.00 WESTURN CEDAR SUPPLY HARREN 21,782.00 RIRHN GENERAL CONTRACTING WAHLIG 4,000.00 STEINKRAUS PLBG INC NELSON 7,800.00 FIRESIDE CORNER MASLOW 1,100.00 KOCH 3,000.00 WESTURN CEDAR SUPPLY SWEEN 11,279.00 WESTURN CEDAR SUPPLY BUESING 3,830.00 .00 KLOHN .00 THOMAS 22,800.00 GATES BRUCE BILLIGMEIER 12,000.00 ALL POOLSIDE SERVICES JOHNSTON 12,000.00 ERICKSON .00 1,500.00 TWIN CITY EXTERIORS KALLENBACH 4,600.00 MORRISON 12,000.00 ANDERSON 7,000.00 OR-011429 OR-011430 OR-011431 OR-011432 OR-011433 OR-011434 OR-011435 OR-011436 OR-011437 OR-011438 OR-011439 OR-011440 OR-011441 OR-011442 OR-011443 OR-011444 OR-011445 OR-011446 OR-011447 OR-011448 OR-011449 OR-011450 OR-011451 OR-011452 OR-011453 OR-011454 OR-011455 OR-011457 OR-0114S9 OR-011460 OR-011461 OR-011462 OR-011463 OR-011465 OR-011468 OR-011471 OR-011472 OR-011473 OR-011474 93C 99/05/14 N 99/05/14 N 99/05/14 N 99/05/18 N 99/05/14 N 99/05/17 N 99/05/17 N 99/05/18 N 99/05/26 N 99/05/18 N 99/05/18 N 99/05/18 N 99/05/19 N 99/05/19 N 99/05/25 N 99/05/25 N 99/05/20 N 99/05/24 N 99/05/24 N 99/05/25 N 99/05/25 N 99/05/25 N 99/05/25 N 99/05/26 N 99/05/26 N 99/05/26 N 99/05/26 N 99/05/26 N 99/05/26 N 99/05/26 N 99/05/27 N 99/05/27 N 99/05/27 N 99/05/27 N 99/05/28 N 99/05/28 N 99/05/28 N 99/05/28 N 99/05/28 N 1950 2701 3580 1700 2497 485 350 425 1910 385 820 1050 1406 2230 365 372 460 509 2065 325 1085 2509 175 2945 3145 1890 1461 1600 2700 1030 4455 760 2935 2705 2683 2445 81 2680 1205 CONCORDIA ST 09 KELLY AVE 24 BAYSIDE RD 02 SHORELINE DR 24 KELLY AVE 14 ORONO ORCHARD RD S 24 NORTH ARM LA 01 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N 11 SHADYWOOD RD 29 TURNHAM RD 11 NORTH SHORE DR W 24 TAMARACK DR 19 BOHNS PT RD 29 BAYVIEW PL 06 WESTLAKE ST 17 WESTLAKE ST 16 LONG LAKE RD E 11 FERNDALE RD N 11 WEBBER HILLS RD 05 BROWN RD S 01 BROWN RD S 02 KELLY AVE 11 LANDMARK DR 11 JAMESTOWN RD 11 JAMESTOWN RD 02 SHADYWOOD RD 05 NORTH ARM DR 11 BOHNS PT RD 11 CASCO POINT RD 11 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N 20 NORTH SHORE DR 01 DICKEY LAKE DR 05 FARVIEW LA 11 PHEASANT RD 09 CASCO POINT RD 16 SHADYWOOD RD 10 HACKBERRY HILL 10 SILVER VIEW DR 30 DICKENSON ST 11 00000000 24490147 24282663 15761810 00000000 25458881 29337200 18238046 15992525 18238046 34458585 24646281 18882225 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 14701364 19269662 34282826 00000000 18818232 15410304 18688847 24701208 36332561 00000000 15410304 15410304 00000000 00000000 00000000 15500043 14836600 00000000 00000000 14254737 00000000 00000000 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 99 9999 WORK TYPE CODE Residence Addition Garage/Attached Garage/Detached Porch Deck Pence Gazebo Pool Re-side Re-roof Tennis Court Sign Dock Shed Demo-Principal Structure Demo-Accessory Structure Move Commercial Institutional Storm Damage Repair 1-100 Cubic Yards 101 Cubic Yards or More Undefined 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Replacing Existing Lifting Principal Residence Well Abandonment Foundation Only Temporary Trailer Renovate/Remodel Accessory Structure Stairway to Lake Retaining Wall Entrance Monuments Tree Removal LOCAL USE CODES Undefined 4 '’I MAY 1999 REPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OF RUN 06/02/99 r*TTDDI?M'r PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO ***** _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _DDTWmTTC REQUESTER: paNHP ------------ PAGE: 1 CAROLE PERMIT TYPE QTY 05/01/99 - BASE FEE 05/31/99 VALUATION PLAN REVIEW QTY 05/01/98 - BASE PEE 05/31/98 VALUATION PLAN REVIEW User Defined SUBDIVISION 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 350.00 0.00 0.00 VARIANCE 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 800.00 0.00 0.00 CUP 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 250.00 0.00 0.00 RQST SIMILAR USB 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 250.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-total 0*0.00*0.00*0.00*9*1,650.00*0.00*0.00* Grand-total o**0.00**0,00**0.00**9**1,650.00**0.00**0.00** REPORT NBR. BFEBRPT2-1 DATE OP RUN 06/02/99 BASE FEE PLAN REVIEW SURCHARGE Lie. SEARCH FEB SAC INVESTIGATION DEPOSIT ESCROW PERMIT TOTAL USER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PERMIT FEE REPORT ♦♦ CITY OF ORONO FROM 05/01/99 TO 05/31/99 REPORT TOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 PAGE: 1 REQUESTER: CAROLE * • / ! • ^ 'July 2,1999 City of Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing In response to your letter dated June 17,1999, wherein you asked residents in the area of Townline Road to provide written comments regarding the proposed Townline Road options. We have lived at the intersection of Townline Road and County t\oad 6 (Watertown Road) for ten years. In those ten years we have noticed a dramatic increase in traffic on both County Road 6 and Townline Road. To our great disappointment. County Road 6 has now been turned into Highway 6. Despite the fact that the posted speed limit is 40 mph. This is also the case with Townline Road. People have continued to drive up and down Townline at Increasing rr 'es of speed. Since Townline is basically not maintained this makes traversing that road even more dangerous. Particularly to those of us who drive at reasonable speeds. Additionally, I have literally lost count of the number of times I have seen my life passing before me because of another driver’s Illegal reckless driving on Townline Road. Either coming head- on at me, or nearly rear-ending me. I have also been harassed by drivers who insist on speeding as they use Townline as a shortcut to their destination. We have observed that since our property is at the intersection of Orono, Independence and Maple Plain that no city is willing to police traffic speeds. Consequently, we view the closing of Townline Road as a way to artificially keep people from speeding up and down Townline Road. We hope Townline Road is closed permanently. Although we use Townline regularly to drive up to Maple Plain and to access Highway 12, we would happily go the long way around. Sincerely,____ Barbara Le s:\legal\usrtxf\mitcMovy1ine.doc 07/02/99 Thomas J Lunieski 1020 Townline Rd. Orono, Mn 55359 n f-. i-"o July 1,1999 City of Orono 2650 Kelley Parkway Orono, Mn 55356 Dear Sir or Madam; Regarding the matter of the closing of Townline Road at the intersection of highway 12. My self and my wife are in favor of option #1 - the closure of Townline on Highway 12. We feel the peace and quiet that would result is worth the minor inconvenience that would accompany the closing. 1 did not understand con #3 for option #1 - the cost of maintenance and “reconstruction” would be borne by the city and Townline residents. Why would the road have to be “reconstructed"? It is fine as it is. Yes there would be ongoing maintenance costs but the road would not be heavily u^. Are any maintenance costs available? I would be Interested in seeing what are the projected yearly maintenance costs and among how many famiiies would these costs be spread. Sincerely, Thomas J Lunieski Janice P Wahl ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, June 21,1999 COUNCIl. JUL 1 2 CITY OF ORONO ROLL: The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Elizabeth Hawn. Wiliiam Stoddard. Sandra Smith. Dale Lindquist. Janice Berg, and Jay Nygard. Commission Daniel Kluth was absent. The following represented City Staff: Senior Planning Coordinator Mike Gaffron and Recorder Jackie Young. Chair Hawn called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Item #1 follows Hern #8. Item #2 follows Item #3 NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS (#3) #2496 PATRICK AND JEANNE OTLANAGAN, 3895 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCES. 6:33 p.m. - 6:48 p.m. The Certificate of Maiiing and Affidavid of Publication were noted. Patrick O'Flanagan, Applicant, was present. Gaffron stated the Applicants are proposing to locate an existing detached garage onto their property. Because it Is an existing structure and not designed to be attached to the residence. It is difficult to attach it to the residence on the property. The proposed detached garage Is to be located six feet from the side lot line where ten feet is required. Gaffron stated the Applicants are also proposing to construct two decks onto the existing residence. The proposed decks are to be located on the south side of the house artd the west side of the house. Variances are needed to side yard setback of an accessory bulldirtg. rear yard setback, and crowding principal building. Gaffron remarked that the proposed hardcover Is 33.7 percent and Is under the allowable limit of 35 percent for this lot, which is comprised of 6,032 square feet, and is located within the LR-1C zoning district. Gaffron noted that the Applicants have included a statement of hardship. O’Flanagan stated the garage was given to him by some friends but he is not able to relocate the garage on his property without a variance. Smith stated she does not have a lot of concern regarding the rear yard setback, but expressed concerns regarding the variance needed to the side yard setback. Smith inquired whether a portion of the deck could be reduced to allow for the required ten foot setback. O'Flanagan commented that the main entrance to the house exists In that area. Stoddard Inquired whether the neighboring property owner has expressed any concerns regarding Page 1 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2496 PATRICK AND JEANNE OTLANAGAN, CONTINUED) this application. O'Flanagan stated the neighbor has indicated that he does not have any plans to develop that portion of his property to his knowledge. Smith commented that that property may be developed In the future and that the ten foot setback is required for emergency vehicle access. Hawn inquired whether there were any fire code issues that exist with location of the garage near the residence. Gaffron stated that if the structure was located within five feet of the residence, a fire wall would need to be constructed. Gaffron remarked the bigger issue for the Planning Commission to consider is the access to the rear of the property. O'Flanagan stated a fire hydrant is located in front of his residence and that there is ample room on the neighboring property for emergency vehicle access. Hawn commented that a small lot does not constitute a hardship under the City's ordinance*... O'Flanagan stated that the lot is very narrow and there is no other possible location for the garage. Lindquist stated he also lias concerns regarding the side yard setback. There were no public comments. Gaffron inquired how high above grade the lock io the rear of the property would be constructed. O'Fianagan replied the deck w ju'd be thr<;e to four feet above grade. Gaffron inquired whether a rt'lling would be constructed around the deck. O'Flanagan stated a railing would be constructed around the deck. Smith noted that the improvements would be within the total structural coverage allowed on this lot, but suggested that the Planninci Commission look at the side yard setback Issue more closely. Hawn commented she does not see a hardship other than the fact that the lot is small. Lindquist inquired whether the garage could be located closer to the street. Gaffron stated there would need to be a 30 foot setback from the street. Stoddard commented he does not have a problem with this application. Smith commented that this lot is not currently serviced by a garage. Smith inquired whether any members of the Planning Commission had concerns regarding the proposed decks. Lindquist stated he in his view he does not have a problem with the decks. Smith inquired whether the Planning Commission was approving this application based on the Page 2 1 1 a i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2496 PATRICK AND JEANNE O'FLANAGAN. CONTINUED) small lot size. Stoddard commented that that is a bigger issue than what is before the Planning Commission tonight. Hawn stated that the Planning Commission is routinely asked to approve variances for small lots and that this issue should perhaps be addressed. Smith noted that the total structural coverage is under the allowable limits and that the Applicant is not able to place the garage in a different location. Stoddard moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2496, to allow for the location of an existing detached garage and two decks on the property located at 3895 North Shore Drive, and to permit a crowding principal structure variance to allow a six foot wide deck to be constructed between the existing residence and the proposed detached garage where ten feet is required, to permit a side yard variance to allow the accessory structure (detached garage) to be located six feet where ten feet is required from the side lot line, to permit a rear yard variance to allow construction of the proposed 8 by 18 foot deck on the south side of the residence 24 feet from the rear lot line where 30 feet is required, subject to inspection by the City Building Inspector of the footings or slab on grade for the garage. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS (#2) #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, 2490 OLD BEACH ROAD, AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Rick Luzaich, Applicant, was present, along with Phil Reznick, Attomey-at-Law, and Gary Mueller, Landscape Architect. Gaffron stated this application was reviewed at the May 17th Planning Commission wherein the Planning Commission advised the Applicant that the proposed restoration plan was not appropriate and the Applicant was directed to submit a revised plan after consultation with Staff and the City's consulting forester. Gaffron stated that the Applicant submitted a revised plan prior to meeting with the City's consulting forester, which incorporates a single retaining wall at the base of the slope along with replacement of a small number of trees along the sides of the property. The Applicant's landscape architect and the City's consulting forester discussed the proposal, and concluded that their individual strategies for restoration of this property are quite different. Gaffron noted that it is the City's goal to have the iakeshore restored to a wooded, natural appearance as quickly as possible, and while the Applicant's plan is a good landscape plan, it is not a restoration plan. Gaffron reviewed the City's consulting forester's comments and recommendations regarding the restoration of this property, noting that a total of 17 trees with a stump diameter 12 inches or greater were removed from the lake side of the residence, with the value of the removed trees being estimated at $48,000. It would generally be unreasonable to expect restoration costs to exceed this amount. Bedker is recommending that 29 trees of two inch caliper on a 25 inch average spacing would be needed to eventually replace the 14,450 square feet of lost canopy, with larger 4.0 to 4.5 inch caliper trees being placed at the top of the slope to soften and obscure the roofline of the Page 3 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2492 RICK AND CAIL LUZAICH. CONTINUED) existing residence as viewed from the lake. Bedker is also recommending that the majority of the existing stumps and root systems remain in place to stabilize the slope, as well as hand planting of the trees to avoid disturbing the soil. Bedker has indicated that the retaining wall at the base of the slope is not necessary for stabilization of the slope. Gaffron stated the Applicant Is proposing four birch clumps at the base of the slope and a half-dozen maples along the two sides of the site, along with other proposed shrubbery along the edges of the lot or on the lake side of the retaining wall. Gaffron noted that the Applicant’s revised proposal makes no attempt to, over time, restore the site to its original appearance in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code which states: Lake shorelines will be protected from alteration. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reasonable in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clearcutting will be prohibited. In areas of soil or wave action erosion, natural stone rip-rap shoreline protection will be encouraged. In additioti, retention of natural vegetation will limit the impact of urbanization as visible from the lake. Building heights will be limited to less than the typical tree height. Minimum green belts will be provided with prohibitions against clearcutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preser/cd on slopes. Retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. Gaffron suggested the Planning Commission has the option of denying this application, and sending it on to Council, noting that the revised landscape plan does not meet the restoration goals of the City; or this matter could be tabled to allow the Applicant time to submit a revised plan in accordance with the City forester's recommendations. Reznick commented that the Applicant’s revised plan was submitted in May but that the City’s forester was not provided with the necessary information until this past Friday. The Applicant’s landscape architect was not able to meet with the City’s forester duo to the short time period before tonight’s meeting. Reznick stated that the four Inch diameter trees are too large to bring in to be planted, and that the Applicant should not be penalized by having to plan trees in excess of $48,100. Stoddard remarked that the Applicant is not being requested to plant trees in excess of $48,100, noting that the forester states that it would be unreasonable to expect restoration costs to exceed that amount. Reznick stated in his opinion the value of the trees removed should not have a bearing on what is being proposed for restoration and is irrelevant. Nygard stated that the number of the trees cut down is completely relevant, noting that it is against City’s regulations regarding clearcutting of property. Reznick stated the issue before the Planning Commission is what to do with the property now and that the Applicant should not be requested to plant more trees than what was removed. Reznick commented that a majority of the trees to be replanted are locater within »!ie site line from the house to the lake and that the property owner does have a right to trim the trees located within the sight line. Reznick stated that the trees removed were removed to provide a view to the lake. Luzaich commented that their revised plan is a compromise by providing reforestation as well as Page 4 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED) providing a view of the lake. Luzaich stated that the amount of trees recommended by the City’s forester to be planted are excessive and that the trees will need to be trimmed to provide a view of the lake. Luzaich remarked that he would also like to plant vegetation along the slope rather than let weeds grow. Smith stated that the forester is recommending natural vegetation on the slope and that some reconciliation of the two plans needs to be accomplished. Mueller stated that the revised plan was submitted shortly after the last Planning Commission meeting and attempts were made to follow the directions of the Planning Commission as far as replanting of the trees, noting that the trees and shmbs that were selected are intended to blend in and look like they belong along the lakeshore, which was one of the objectives that the Planning Commission had stated at the last meeting. Mueller stated that the property owner should have the right to have a view of the lake, noting that the forester's plan does not allow that view and would create more of a wall of vegetation. Mueller remarked that he made numerous attempts to contact Paul Weinberger In an effort to obtain the name of the City’s forester and was not able to reach him until June 7th. Mueller stated he was not able to contact the forester until June 11th and was informed that he just received the information regarding this application the other day. During the conversation with the forester it was apparent that the forester was not provided with the revised landscape plan by the Applicant. The forester's plan was not received until the 14th, which did not allow time for the Applicant to meet with the forester and to develop a revised plan based upon his recommendations. Mueller remarked that there are discrepancies in the number of trees and the size of the trees that were purportedly removed, and that these issues will need to be worked out before another plan is revised. Mueller commented that the Applicant’s landscape plan was designed to meet the spirit of vrhat the Planning Commission had recommended at the last meeting. Stoddard commented that the Planning Commission wanted the Applicant’s landscape architect to meet with the City's forester in order to develop a plan that would be agreeable to all parties and Is In compliance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Stoddard stated he would like Mueller to meet with the City’s forester in order to address some of these issues. Hawn stated that there are some deficiencies in the Applicant’s landscape plan which need to be addressed, and suggested that Mueller meet with the City’s forester to discuss these issues. Hav/n noted that the Comprehensive Plan calls for restoration of the canopy that was removed. Lindquist stated that it was clear at the last Planning Commission meeting that the City was looking for restoration of this area, which is still the City’s goal for this property. Luzaich remarked that in his opinion this landscape plan does meet that objective. Reznick stated that the revised landscape plan does include vegetation and trees that are indigenous to the a.^’ea as was specified by the Planning Commission at the prior meeting. Reznick inquired where the term reforestation is used In the Code, and what is the City's authority to require restoration. Hawn stated that the City’s goal is to re-establish what was removed, which Is something that the Page 5 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH. CONTINUED) City has required in the past in similar circumstances. Hawn stated that the Comprehensive Plan Is merely a suggested code of property conduct and not a criminal code. Stoddard stated that some of these issues should be handled by the City Attorney and City Council. Smith commented that the City has applied the same restoration concept to other similar situations in the past. Gaffron stated that this happens approximately once a year and that it has been the City's practice to require reforestation of the area that has been cleared. Gaffron commented that it is not realistic to expect the property owner to replace the larger trees with similar trees of the same size. There were no public comments. Reznick distributed photographs of the neighboring properties to the members of the Planning Commission. Smith inquired who was responsible for the costs of the forester. Gaffron stated that his fees would be charged to the Applicant. Berg commented that she has lived in that area for approximately 20 years with the area existing as depicted in the photographs for that entire time. Stoddard stated the Planning Commission can either vote on what is before us tonight or table the matter to allow the Applicant time to meet with *he City's forester. Luzaich stated he would like to negotiate a plan that would be acceptable to all parties. Hawn remarked that it is difficult to negotiate a plan that would be acceptable without the City's forester being present. Hawn stated in light of the disputed facts, it would be best if the Applicant's landscape architect met with the City's forester. Hawn noted she was not in favor of the Applicant's proposed landscape plan. Stoddard commented that the forester's recommendations should be followed. Smith stated she cannot approve this landscape plan as presented. Hawn inquired whether the Applicant would like the Planning Commission to act on this plan tonight or to table the matter, noting that if the application proceeds to the City Council and is denied, the application would come back before the Planning Commission. Reznick requested that this item be tabled temporarily to allow the Applicant time to discuss his options. (This item was tabled at 7:46 p.m. and follows Item #4) NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS, CONTINUED Pages li: f ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#4) #2497 GAIL S. BRINER, 1760 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE, 7:46 p.m. - 7:59 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Gail Briner. Applicant, was present. Gaffron stated the Applicant is proposing to rebuild an existing rotting deck, which has been removed. The new proposed deck will be In the same location and the same size. The deck area lies within the 0-75' iakeshore setback area. The hardcover amount for the lot will not increase with the new deck, which is at 11.94 percent. Gaffron stated that variances are required to the iakeshore setback to allow the proposed deck to be located within 75* feet of the Iakeshore and to permit ha'^dcover in the amount of 11.94 percent in tho 0-75* Iakeshore setback area to permit the construction of the proposed deck. The amount of hardcover allowed in this area is zero percent. The hardcover will not increase because the proposed deck is to be the same size as the one rernOved. Gaffron inquired whether there will be a railing on the deck. Briner stated there wilt not be a railing. City Staff recommends approval of the application since it is replacement of an existing deck. Hawn inquired whether the proposed new deck exceeds the old deck. Briner replied the deck is in the same location and the same size as the existing deck. Briner stated the deck was constructed approximately 25 years ago and has deteriorated over the years. Lindquist stated he does not have a problem with this application. Smith inquired whether the deck could be reduced somewhat to lower the amount of hardcover in the 0-75* setback. Hawn inquired whether the amount of rock could be removed to lower the hardcover in that area. Lindquist noted that the Applicant is merely replacing an existing deck. Smith stated the Planning Commission in the past has reviewed ttiese properties whenever a new application Is submitted in an effort to see what other steps could be taken to bring the property more Into compliance. Smith inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to reduce hardcover somewhat. Briner stated the rock and plastic have been there since she purchased the property In 1967. Smith stated by removing the plastic and rock, it would allow the runoff to go directly into the ground rather than into the lake. Lindquist stated he would like to see the plastic removed under the rock. Gaffron remarked that the rock comprises 570 square feel of hardcover. Boner's contractor commente''. that they could remove the rock and plastic under the deck. There were no public commei..s. Page 7 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2497 GAIL BRINER, CONTINUED) Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2497, 1760 Shadywood Road, to allow the Applicant to rebuild an existing rotting deck, and to grant a iakeshore setback variance to allow the proposed deck to be located within 75* of the Iakeshore and to grant a hardcover variance to allow 673 square feet of hardcover In the 0-75' Iakeshore setback area to permit the construction of the proposed deck, subject to the rock and plastic underlayment being removed under the deck and plastic removed from under the rock that is not under the deck. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS, CONTINUED (#2) #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, 2490 OLD BEACH ROAD - AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Reznick stated that they would like the Planning Commission to vote on this application tonight. Stoddard moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend denial of Application #2492,2490 Old Beach Road, for an after4he-fact variance and conditional use permit for a retaining wall, and recommend to the City Council that the Applicant and the Applicant's Landscape Architect meet with the City's Forester in order to revise a new landscape plan for consideration by the City Council which is more in accordance with the recommendations of the City Forester in order to allow this item to be expedited. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 2, Smith and Berg Opposed. Smith stated she was opposed tt IMs application due to the lack of direction being given by the Planning Commission to the City Council on the revised landscape plan that is to be submitted. Berg stated that the Planning Commission should vote on the plan that is to be presented to the City Council. NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS, CONTINUED #5) #2499 THOMAS AND MARILYN SWANSON, 1740 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCES, 8:03 p.m. -8:16 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Thomas and Marilyn Swanson, Applicants, were present. Gaffron stated the Applicants are proposing to assemble a temporary screen enclosure, 10' by 17' on an existing deck. The screen enclosure will be assembled in the early spring and taken down in the late fall. The screen enclosure and existing deck are located within the 0-75' Iakeshore setback. The structural coverage would increase with the screen porch, however, the hardcover amount does not change. Gaffron stated that a Iakeshore setback variance is required to allow a 10' by 17' screen porch on an existing deck to be located within 75' of the lakesnore and a hardcover variance to allow 1,973 square feet, or 21.5 percent, in the 0-75' Iakeshore setback area where zero percent is allowed. Page 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 4 (#2499 THOMAS AND MARILYN SWANSON, CONTINUED)consideration by the Planning Commission is determinina when something becomes permanent as opposed to temporary. oeiermining frck^rinrinnllff ^ould like to assemble this screen porch to allow them to sit on their Smith stated In her opinion this structure should be considered permanent. Gaffron noted that City Code does not permit structures within the 0-75 ’ lakeshore setback. Lindquist commented that this structure should be treated as permanent. rn"!lil«no o® ^re Slightly over on their hardcover amount but that structural '0 «f«"9 more structure In the Smith Inquired whether there was other hardcover that could be removed In that area. Mrs. Swanson slated that the dog house and concrete pad has been removed. Swanson noted that the contractor does charge a small lee for removing and Installing the screens. There were no public comments. Smith move^ Berg seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2499 1740 dlr?*« variance to allow a 10’ by 17' screen porch on an existing allow 1 973 souare felt of tf ? lakeshore and to grant a hardcover variance to sQurreVeet ^ af ^ in the 0.75* lakeshore setback area where zero ® ® Wf'tlei'standing that future applications for additional upon bv^he Pkannlnn r setback, on this property will not be looked favorablyupon by the Planning Commission. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 1, Lindquist Opposed. i?thet^ySrcl?nri?fS^^^^ fPP'i?^«0" Peca^^se It increases the structural hardcover Srnllar appIlM^ consistent with previous votes by the Planning Commission on commission Is allowing this stmcture lo remain on a Page 9 j: ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2499 THOMAS AND MARILYN SWANSON. CONTINUED) Gaffron remarked that one item for consideration by the Pianning Commission is determining when something becomes permanent as opposed to temporary. Swanson stated that they would like to assemble this screen porch to allow them to sit on their deck during the evening hours. Swanson remarked that the contractor is installing these screen porches throughout the metro area. Mrs. Swanson noted that the roof of the screen porch would not support the snow during the winter and would need to be removed. Swanson commented that the structure is designed to allow removal of the screens, noting that the structure itself is placed on top of the existing deck. Smith stated in her opinion this structure should be considered permanent. Gaffron noted that City Code does not permit structures within the 0-75* lakeshore setback. Lindquist commented that this structure should be treated as permanent. Smith noted that the Applicants are slightly over on their hardcover amount but that structural coverage is fine. Smith stated that the City would not be able to monitor that this structure is removed in the fall and that this structure should be considered as permanent. Lindquist stated he probably will not support this application due to adding more structure In the 0-75* setback. Smith inquired whether there was other hardcover that could be removed in that area. Mrs. Swanson stated that the dog house and concrete pad has been removed. Swanson noted that the contractor does charge a small fee for removing and installing the screens. There were no public comments. Smith moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2499,1740 Shadywood Road, to allow a 10' by 17 ’ screen enclosure on an existing deck, and to grant a lakeshore setback variance to allow a 10' by 17' screen porch on ari existing deck to be located within 75’ of the lakeshore and to grant a hardcover variance to allow 1,973 square feet of hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback area where zero square feet Is allowed, with the understanding that future applications for additional hardcover, especially in the 0-75 ’ setback, on this property will not be looked favorably upon by the Planning Commission. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 1, Lindquist Opposed. Lindquist stated he was opposed to this appiication because it increases the structural hardcover in the 0-75' setback and is not consistent with previous votes by the Pianning Commission on similar applications. Gaffron inquired whether the Pianning Commission is aliowing this structure to remain on a permanent or temporary basis. Page 9 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2499 THOMAS AND MARILYN SWANSON. CONTINUED) Smith stated this structure should be considered permanent since the City should not he expected to monitor whether the screens are removed in the fall. Gaffron asked for confirmation that the Applicants would be permitted to install the structure as proposed but are expected to remove the screens in the fall and are not permitted to alter the structure in any other way. Smith stated that the motion approved a screen porch only and does not allow the Applicant to modify the porch by adding glass or other materials to make it anything other than a screen porch (#6) #2500 ORONO SCHOOLS, 795 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH - VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT. 8:17 p.m. • 8:22 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Neil Lawson, School District, Scott McQueen, Architect, and Bruce Brahm, School District, were present. Gaffron stated Orono Independent School District #278 is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for a media center addition on the northeast side of the High School which would be one-story in height. The Planning Commission and City Council did review a site plan showing the proposed location of the Media Center when the Conditional Use Permit and variances were granted to permit a new parking lot arrangement on the site. Gaffron stated the proposed media center meets all required setbacks for the RR-1B zoning district and would be located approximately 180 feet from the Old Crystal Bay Road right-of-way and complies with the height requirements. City Staff Is recommending approval of the Conditional Use Permit. Lawson commented that the previously approved site plans did not show as much detail for the media center, which will house an area for computers and a resource area. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2500, 795 Old Crystal Bay Road North, for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the Orono School District to construct a 7,800 square foot mv^dia center addition to the high school. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#7) #2501 CITY OF ORONO, 3601 BAYSIDE ROAD - VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 8:23 p.m. - 8:46 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Gaffron stated the City of Orono has maintained a municipal dock and walking path for many years on the north end o' Stubbs Bay. A recent survey on an adjacent property has determined that the dock and path leading to the dock are not located on City ovmed property, but rather on the adjacent property to the east. The City of Orono has a 30' wide platted right-of-way leading from Bayside Road to Stubbs Bay shown as 'Oak Street' of the Bay View Park Addition. Page 10 'I ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 2% 1999 (#2501 CITY OF ORONO, CONTINUED) Gaffron stated the City would like to relocate the dock and walking path within the undeveloped Oak Street, which will require filling a small amount of wetland for the path. The City has maintained this dock for public use since it was originally constructed in the 1950s or earlier. The City was unaware until recently that the dock was not located on public property. Gaffron remarked that filling of more than ten cubic yards within the shoreland area of Lake Minnetonka requires a conditional use permit. The total fill for this project is 21.11 cubic yards of fill, which would create a base to accommodate a walking path to access the dock. A hardcover variance is also required to permit 180 square feet of hardcover within 75' feet of the lakeshore setback where no hardcover is normally allowed. The proposed project would also require a permit by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for filling of the wetland. Under the Wetland Conservation Act, the City is allowed to fill up to 400 square feet if the City demonstrates the project has no other alternatives to avoid filling of a wetland. Gaffron noted that there are no residences located immedi?<UUy adjacent to the dock and this project should have a minimum impact on the adjoining properties. The dock is for pedestrian use only, not for boat storage, with no parking allowed on Bayside Road. City Staff recommends approval of this application. Gaffron stated while the access was closed last year, the City received numerous calls expressing interest in the public access, and the City would like to maintain that public access. Hawn Inquired why a longer dock could not be installed rather than filling of the wetland. Gaffron remarked that the cost and liability may be the determining factors in the decision to fill the wetland, noting that the Public Works Director is not available tonight to answer those questions. Lindquist commented that those questions should be addressed to see if other alternatives exist to filling the wetland. Nygard stated that the snowmobilers in the area have harmed the shoreline In the past, noting that rocks have been placed along the shoreline to prevent further erosion. Hawn inquried whether there were any public comments. Renae Mueller, 222 Bederwood Drive, stated she has lived in that area for ten years and that people throughout the years have enjoyed that public access. Mueller stated that she has submitted a petition requesting that improvements be made to that access, and inquired whether an L-shaped deck could be installed as well as a bench and picnic table in that area. Mueller remarked that she would be willing to donate the picnic table and to patrol the area to insure that debris is picked up. Smith commented that it sounds like Mueller would like to have this area turned into a park, which is really not within the Planning Commission's jurisdiction. Gaffron stated that there is only a small area available for a picnic table, and that this is probably an issue for the Parks Commission. Hawn inquired whether the dock needs to be handicapped accessible. Page 11 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2501 CITY OF ORONO, CONTINUED) Gaffron remarked that the Planning Commission could approve this project and recommended that it be reviewed by the Parks Commission. Lisa Olson, Stubbs Bay Road, commented that she has approached the Hennepin Park Commission and the Orono City Council with concerns regarding a long history of trespassing in that area, and that she would like to see this area remain more private. Olson requested that Item #9 from the City’s Comprehensive Plan be read into the record. Hawn stated Item #9 states that the lake shorelines will be protected from alteration. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reasonable in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clearcutting will be prohibited. In areas of soil or wave action erosion, natural stone rip rap shoreline proetection will be encouraged. Olson stated that this area experiences a significant amount of water runoff down Stubbs Bay Road and that the wetland is needed to filter tnat water before it goes into the lake. Olson commented that the quality of the deck is poor and that no garbage can is located in the area, with little or no effort on the part of the City as far as cleanup of the area. Olson encouraged the Planning Commission to maintain the wetland as is. Berg commented that the dock needs to be relocated so it lies within City-owned property. Gaffron stated the City is attempting to establish a walkway to the City-owned dock, noting that the Public Works Director is not available tonight to answer these questions. Stoddard commented he would like to have these issues addressed and that perhaps this matter should be tabled. It was the concensus of the Planning Commission that the public access to Stubbs Bay be maintained. Lindquist stated without a survey, the Planning Commission is not able to determine whether the dock is located on City property. Stoddard moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application #2501, 3601 Bayside Road, to allow the Parks Commission and City Engineer to review this application to determine whether an alternative to filling the wetland exists, whether the dock needs to be handicapped accessible, and to determine the correct location of the dock and walkway. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW (#8) #2498 MOLLY AND DRAPER JAFFRAY, 2620 FOX STREET - SKETCH PLAN Molly and Draper Jaffray, Applicants, were present. Gaffron stated the Applicants are requesting a Sketch Plan Review for a two-lot subdivision for property located at 2620 Fox Street In Orono. The existing 4.1 acres is developed on one residential site with access being gained from Fox Run. The proposed lots would create a property boundary along an existing drainageway, which will minimize the amount of drainage easement area to be Page 12 i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, ju:,';: 21,1999 dedicated. (#2498 MOLLY AND DRAPER JAFFRAY, CONTINUED) Gaffron stated that the septic testing must be completed on both properties resulting in two sites on each lot. Jaffray stated that septic testing has not been completed on the property. Gaffron stated the proposed lot arrangement would result in Lot 1 being comprised of 2.085 acres and Lot 2 being 2.018 acres. Gaffron noted that no drainageways or wetlands have been subtracted from this gross area, and that this area lies within the RR-1B Zoning District, which has a minimum of two acre lots. Jaffray commented that the drainage issues need to be addressed more closely, noting that the Public Works Department recently completed some work on the existing culvert in the area. Gaffron remarked that traffic along Fox Street is expected to become heavier in the future, especially If a stoplight is installed at Orono Orchard Road and County Road 15 at some future date. Gaffron stated the primary Issue for the Applicant to consider is how much available acreage will be left once drainageways or wetlands have been subtracted from the total acreage, noting that not enough information has been obtained at this point to make that determination. Stoddard remarked that if the lots are s.maller than two acres, it would be unlikely that this subdivision would be approved. Gaffron stated that the City has not approved subdivisions with substandard area lots in the past. Stoddard recommended that the Applicant discuss this project with the Minnehaha Watershed District to determine whether it has been delineated as a wetland and what the Applicant's options are concerning the wetland. Jaffray stated that he has a person interested in purchasing a portion of this property, which is the reason for the subdivision. Gaffron commented that perhaps a smalt section could be acquired from the adjoining property owner should the lots be less than two acres. Gaffron recommended that the Applicant meet with City Staff to discuss these issues further, noting that there is a possibility that the Applicant may not be able to proceed with the subdivision if the lots are less than two acres. Lindquist noted that a two acre minimum is required for this zoning district. Hawn suggested that the Applicant have the septic sites tested as well. OLD BUSINESS, CONTINUED (#1) #2488 GREGG KLOHN. 4455 NORTH SHORE DRIVE • VARIANCES Gregg Klohn, Applicant, was present. Gaffron stated this application was tabled at the May Planning Commission meeting to allow the Applicant time to review other possible locations on his property to rebuild his damaged garage. Page 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2488 GREGG KLOHN, CONTINUED) The Applicant, upon review of different options and meeting with staff, has indicated that he would like to stay with his original plan. The location of his well and a power pole make it difficult to locate the garage on the northeast section of the lot. In addition, if the garage were to be located on the northeast section of the lot, a tum-around area would be needed, which would increase the amount of hardcover. Gaffron noted that Applicant has indicated he will remove an existing shed when he replaces the garage which changes the proposec hardcover amount in the 200-500' area. The existing hardcover is 32.8 percent and the new proposed hardcover is 34.2 percent. Variances to side yard and rear yard setbacks as well as hardcover are needed. Klohn stated that the non-conforming shed would be removed. Smith inquired whether City Staff had a recommendation concerning this application. Gaffron stated it is City Staffs recommendation that this application be denied. Klohn remarked that he did review other possible locations for the garage but that no other suitable sites exist for the garage. Hawn commented that she has a difficult time with this application in that other choices could be made concerning location of the garage. Klohn stated that he could construct the new garage In the same location as the orevious garage. Hawn stated that the new location Is not a significant improvement. Berg commented that in her view the garage should be located further back. Klohn stated that he does not want to lose additional trees, noting that he lost some during the windstorms last year. Lindquist stated the Applicant can request that the Planning Commission vote on this application as presented tonight and proceed on to the City Council, or he could request that this item be tabled to allow the Applicant time to submit a revised plan. Lindquist commented in his view this application will probably be denied by the City Council and then the Applicant would need to submit a new application. Gaffron stated the Applicant could elect to submit a new application to construct a new garage in the location of the previous garage. Klohn inquired whether thal option would be available at the City Council level. Gaffron remarked that that option would need to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Klohn commented that short of removing trees and doing excavation, no other suitable site exists for location of the new garage, and that he would like to replace what he previously had. Hawn stated that the Planning Commission needs to act on what is before them tonight. Klohn requested that the Planning Commission act on his application as presented. Page 14 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#2488 GREGG KLOHN, CONTINUED) Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to deny Application #2498, 2620 Fox Street, for a 14' by 24' garage due to the proposed location of the new garage being too close to side yard and rear yard setbacks as weli as exceeding the allowable hardcover in the 250-500' iakeshore setback. Klohn stated he had previously been approved for that amount of hardcover. Hawn commented that this is a new proposal and that the previous permit has elapsed. Lindquist stated that the allowable hardcover is 30 percent, with this application requesting 35.3 percent. Hawn stated that hardcover is approved per design or application and does not carry over from previous applications. Berg commented that the Applicant chose not to build that much hardcover in regards to his previous application. VOTE ON THE ABOVE MOTION: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#11) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 Berg moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve the muiutes of the May 17,1999 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0, Smith Abstained. (#9) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENT# WES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS ON MAY 24,1999 AND JUNE 14,1999 Stoddard stated he attended the June 14th City Council meeting,. »ting that the application regarding tho residence on Ferndale Road was discussed. Gaffron commented that the residence is partially located in the 100 year floodplain. Stoddard stated that the Applicants decided to remove the entire structure and do a rebuild. Stoddard commented that the Planning Commission needs to have clearer direction on what constitutes a rebuild. Gaffron stated if more than 50 percent of the residence is new. then it should be considered a rebuild, in his opinion, but the City has not established a policy on this. Stoddard requested that Gaffron review what other communities do regarding rebuilds. Berg stated she attended the May 24,1999 City Council meeting, noting that the application by RenckensA/Vinston was discussed, noting that the Applicants did not want the road going through their property. Gaffron stated that application was denied, noting that the Council felt the 50' outlot should be required. Page 15 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 (#12) SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON JUNE 28,1999 AND JULY 12,1999 June 28,1999 - Smith July 12,1999 - Nygard (#10) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Smith commented on the letter received from Edmund Rydell, t‘^5 Orono Orchard Road North, and inquired whether someone from City Staff could discuss this ssue with him. Smith stated that the brush site utilized by Long Lake has been an issue for some period of time now. Gaffron stated that the property is located in Long Lake and is not owned by the City of Orono. Smith stated that she would like City Staff to discuss this issue with Rydel! to let him know of the steps that have been taken by Orono to help correct this situation. Smith commented th.at perhaps some better landsrreening could be utilized. Hawn suggested that perhaps this issue be discussed with Long Lake. (#24) ADJOURNMENT Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 9:56 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Elizabeth Hawn, Chair Page 16