Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-10-2015 Council PacketAgenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, August 10, 2015, 7:00 P.M. Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us The public is invited to address the City Council regarding any item on the regular agenda. If your topic is not on the agenda, you may speak during the Public Comments section. Roll Call Pledge of Allegiance Approval of Agenda 1.Consent Agenda – Consent agenda items, including (*) asterisk items, are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under this section of the agenda. Items on the Consent Agenda are reviewed in total by the City Council and may be approved through one motion with no further discussion by the Council. Any item may be removed by any Council Member, staff member or person from the public for separate consideration. If you wish to remove any item from the Consent Agenda, please state the item number and description of the item. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet located in the lobby near the sign in sheet. Approval of Minutes 2.Regular Council Meeting of July 27, 2015 * 3.Council Work Session Meeting of July 27, 2015* Planning Commission Comments – John Thiesse, Representative Public Comments – (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) This is an opportunity for the public to address matters not on the agenda. The Council will not engage in discussion or take action on items presented at this time. However, the Council may refer issues to staff for follow up or consideration at a future meeting. Speakers should state their name and home address at the podium before speaking. Planning Department Report 4. Request for administrative appeal; Nygard fence viewing 5. 15-3758, City of Orono & Clifford Otten, 2251 Pine Ridge Lane and City Owned Parcel PINS 34- 118-23-22-0019 (Well #3) – Lot Line Rearrangement and Rezoning 6.15-3761, Nancy Radermecher, 4775 North Shore Dr, Variances 7. 15-3763, Christopher W. Bollis, 200-350 Stubbs Bay Road N – Preliminary Plat 8. 15-3753, City of Orono Park Commission, Variance 9. 15-3754, City of Orono, City of Orono, Text Amendment related to approval extensions 10. 15-3755, City of Orono, Amend Zoning Ordinance Text: Section 78-71 (c)(3) Expanding of Nonconforming Structures 11. 15-3760, City of Orono, Amend City Code to Allow Clinics in B-1, B-3 zoning 12. 15-3766, City of Orono, Amend City Code relating to Average Lakeshore Setback 13. Amend resolution identifying administrative citation offenses Public Works Director/City Engineer’s Report Agenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, July 27, 2015, 7:00 P.M. Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us – follow links for Stay Connected & Email Notification 14. Water Treat System Improvement - Pay Request No. 5 15. Water Meter Reader Replacement 16. Watertown Road and Stubbs Bay Road Rehabilitation - Pay Request No. 2 Mayor/Council Report City Administrator's Report 17. LMCIT Power of Attorney* 18. Permits/Licenses* a. Orono Football Booster Gambling Permit 19. Agreement for Use of Election Equipment to Orono School District* 20. Claims/ Bills* City Attorney's Report Adjournment Upcoming Events 08/13 – Park Commission Work Session, 2:00 p.m. 08/17 – Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. (Council Liaison –Lizz Levang) 08/24 – Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m. 08/24 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 09/07 – City Hall Closed in Observance of Labor Day Holiday 09/08 – Park Commission Meeting, Tuesday 7:00 p.m. 09/14 – City Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 09/21 – Planning Commission Meeting, 7:00 p.m. (Council Liaison – Aaron Printup) 09/28 – City Council Work Session, 5:00 p.m. 09/28 – City Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 10/12 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 10/19 – Planning Commission Meeting, 7:00 p.m. (Council Liaison – Dennis Walsh) 10/26 – City Council Work Session, 5:00 p.m. 10/26 – City Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 29 ROLL CALL The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Lili Tod McMillan, Council Members Jim Cornick, Jr., Lizz Levang, Aaron Printup, and Dennis Walsh. Representing Staff were Finance Director Ron Olson, Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, Senior Planner Michael Gaffron, City Planner Melanie Curtis, Public Works Director/City Engineer Adam Edwards, City Attorney Soren Mattick, Consulting City Engineer David Martini, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor McMillan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Item Nos. 3, 8, 11, 14, 16 and 17 were added to the Consent Agenda. Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 13, 2015 Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council meeting of July 13, 2015, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS – KEVIN LANDGRAVER, REPRESENTATIVE Landgraver stated he had nothing to report but would be available for questions. PUBLIC COMMENTS Jim Mandel, 3155 North Shore Drive, requested the City of Orono to review their ordinances regarding fences and lighting. Mandel stated over the past several years their neighborhood has been negatively impacted by certain activities that are violating the intent of the ordinances that currently exist, and for that reason he and his neighbors would like to have those ordinances revisited. Mandel noted these type of activities have a negative impact on their property values. Mandel indicated he can provide before and after pictures of what is occurring. Mandel stated in his view it is pretty clear some of these activities are occurring out of spite and that there are spite laws that exist in Minnesota that these activities would fall under. Mandel stated in his view he does not feel it is his obligation to adjudicate these issues and that he will make himself available to provide any input the City may require. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 29 PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT *3. #14-3678 ARCHITECTURAL LANDSCAPE DESIGN ON BEHALF OF BRET AND JENNIFER RIEMENSCHNEIDER, 835 FOREST ARMS LANE, VARIANCES –RESOLUTION NO. 6525 Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6525 , a Resolution Granting Variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279(6), for the property located at 835 Forest Arms Lane. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 4. #15-3712 CITY OF ORONO, AMEND CITY CODE SECTION 86-70 BUILDING PERMIT EXPIRATION – ORDINANCE NO. 151 Community Development Director Barnhart stated earlier this year the City Council and Planning Commission reviewed some potential changes to the building code and directed Staff to look at the time period for when building permits expire. At times the length of time between the start and finish of a building project can cause negative impacts to the neighborhood, such as erosion, vandalism, and other issues. The existing code, entitled Permit Expiration, regulates the time period for which building permits are valid. Its requirement that building, both interior and exterior, be completed within a specified period of time may be difficult to enforce as the building code does not give cities that authority. As a result, Staff is proposing this draft ordinance which requires that the exterior of the building be completed within 180 days. This is intended to protect neighborhoods from the disruptive nature of ongoing exterior construction. Interior modifications could continue to occur as long as the work continues as required by the building code. An abandoned permit, which includes a building permit in which no work has been completed within 180 days, would require a new building permit to be issued and fees paid. Staff recommends approval of the ordinance as drafted. Council Member Levang noted under Section 1, Item b (1) includes the language “according to the approved landscape plan.” Levang asked whether that means there has to be a landscape plan anytime someone is building. Barnhart stated currently there are rules regulating the minimal stabilization of soils during construction, which is basically grass to prevent erosion. At times there is also a larger requirement for an overall landscape plan. Barnhart stated his interpretation of b(1) relates to minimal stabilization of the soils. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 29 4. #15-3712 CITY OF ORONO, AMEND CITY CODE SECTION 86-70 BUILDING PERMIT EXPIRATION – ORDINANCE NO. 151 (continued) Mayor McMillan stated 180 days is definitive and asked what would happen if a project is not completed during that time. Barnhart stated the City has a two-year time limit for the building and that this ordinance is just limited to the exterior. Council Member Walsh stated he has a concern with the 180 days given the fact that some people install sprinkler systems or other similar items once the project is completed or near completion. Walsh stated he does not want to penalize someone who is making good progress on their project by requiring them to get another permit. Barnhart stated the City Council has the ability to change the 180 days in the ordinance. Barnhart noted next month he will be bringing before the City Council another ordinance that addresses extensions of building permits. Walsh asked what the City of Elk River did to address this issue. Walsh indicated he would be more comfortable with 9 to 12 months. Walsh stated if a window order is delayed, that could delay the project by two months. Barnhart stated Elk River required at least one inspection every six months, which is intended to see if progress is being made on the project. Barnhart stated technically someone could pound in one nail a year and say that they are making progress. Barnhart stated the main issue with projects being dragged out relates to people running out of money but that results in neighbors having a partially constructed building. Walsh stated this ordinance will not solve that problem and that he would be more comfortable with a longer time period. Walsh noted the construction season can be pretty short in Minnesota and that unanticipated delays can occur which may result in the project taking longer than 180 days. Walsh stated he would rather start with a year limit and that the Council can always shorten that up if necessary. Council Member Printup stated he likes that idea. Council Member Cornick stated that is reasonable. Walsh moved, Cornick seconded, to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 151, Third Series, an Ordinance Amending the Orono Municipal Code by Amending Section 86-70 Regarding Expiration of Building Permits, with the time period being extend ed to one year. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 29 5. #15-15-3739 GEORGE STICKNEY FOR BPS PROPERTIES, LLC, 300 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL – RESOLUTION NO. 6526 George Stickney, Applicant, was present. Senior Planner Gaffron noted at the July 13 meeting, the City Council voted 4-1 to direct Staff to draft a resolution for preliminary plat approval based on site layout Plan B, which calls for three lots along Hunter Drive, and Road Option B, which places the cul-de-sac at the base of the hill with a road width of 20 feet. A resolution has been prepared incorporating appropriate findings and conditions of preliminary plat approval for Council consideration and adoption. Mayor McMillan asked whether anyone from the public would like to comment on this application. Marylyn Miller, 2005 Xanthus Lane, Medina, stated she has some concerns about this development and that she only heard about this development recently. Miller indicated she is a resident in Imperial Hills and that she has lived there for 49 years. Miller stated her concern is that Orono is only part of the Mooney Lake shoreline and that Medina and Plymouth also have shoreline on Mooney Lake, with Plymouth having a larger shoreline than the other two cities put together. Miller stated it was her understanding when something like this takes place that the residents are notified by mail that it is taking place. Miller expressed concern that a number of the residents on Mooney Lake do not know about this proposed development. Miller stated her first concern is that the old forest will go and that her other concern relates to the five large homes proposed to be located on the lake. Miller indicated Mooney Lake only consists of 111 acres and is very shallow with no input or outlet. As a result of the new homes, Miller stated in her view the impact to the lake will be considerable. Miller stated she is irritated the residents on Mooney Lake were not notified about this application. Miller noted she owns a small cabin in Wisconsin and that she is notified whenever something takes place on the lake. Miller stated while the proposed development might be legal since the property is in Orono, in her view it is highly unethical since not everyone was notified. Miller suggested the City Council table the application until all the residents on the lake are notified about what is going to take place on the lake. Gaffron stated the standard notification was sent out to adjoining property owners within 350 feet of this parcel and that it was also published in the City’s legal newspaper. Gaffron noted the Planning Commission has held two public hearings on the application and that the City Council has also reviewed it twice. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 29 5. #15-15-3739 GEORGE STICKNEY FOR BPS PROPERTIES, LLC, 300 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL – RESOLUTION NO. 6526 (continued) McMillan stated the City has a standard notification for throughout the City and that they do not tend to deviate from that. City Attorney Mattick stated according to MN Statutes, the City has to notify someone within 350 feet of the site. Ann Haley, Mooney Lake, stated she is grateful she gets to live on the lake but that she was not told about this proposal. Haley stated one of the Council Members seems to be very friendly with this builder, which she is scared about, and that all the residents on the lake have a right to know what is going on unless they want a bunch of lawsuits from angry homeowners. Haley stated every time there has been a development on Mooney Lake, the lake has taken a hard hit because it is not spring fed and does not have an inlet. Haley stated the lake is shallow, currently smells, is really gross and has a lot of blue algae. Haley stated Mooney Lake is not the greatest quality of lake and that there are already quite a number of homes on it. Haley stated there are also lots of videos with Mr. Dayton saying that this land will not get developed and that this is proposal is not the greatest solution. Haley requested the City Council table the application so the residents can speak with Wendy Dayton about other solutions. Haley stated the only people that will benefit from this are George Stickney and Wendy Dayton and that the only reason she learned about it was that the Star Tribune called her for a quote about the proposal. Haley stated the City Council needs to hear from the residents on the lake. Haley stated it feels like this proposal is under the table and that the City does not want to notify people because they do not want them to complain about it. Haley indicated the residents have been paying for the cleanup of the lake for the last five years and that this development will set them back again. Haley stated in her view the majority of the residents on the lake will fight this development. McMillan noted she did speak with Ms. Haley about this proposal when it first came up. Haley stated at that one meeting it was just a plan but now it is all approved. Haley noted Peter Rechelbacher offered to purchase the property and preserve it as is it now but was turned down because he was not able to pay for it in two years. Haley stated in her view all options have not been considered and that developers have too much control over where people live. Haley stated approving the preliminary plat would be a disservice to everybody on the lake and that in her view it is not too late to change things. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 29 5. #15-15-3739 GEORGE STICKNEY FOR BPS PROPERTIES, LLC, 300 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL – RESOLUTION NO. 6526 (continued) Marilyn Miller stated it was brought up that the notice was printed in the newspaper. Miller stated people nowadays do not read newspapers and that she get her news on the TV. Miller stated the notice should be sent to people’s doorstep so they know what is going on and that she is not sure why Orono does not notify every resident on the lake. Miller noted she also has property out in Montana and that she is notified of anything going on within a very large area but that Orono cannot send a letter. George Stickney, Applicant, stated there were approximately 20 people in attendance at the first meeting and that he was told by Mr. Rechelbacher that he was going to invite all the neighbors to the meeting. Stickney stated based on 60 people, everyone is paying approximately $160 a year towards the lake and that he had indicated he would be willing to make a donation to the association before the development was finished and then increase it for the next couple of years to help improve the quality of the lake. Stickney noted he is adding six more units to the lakeshore area and that he could legally have added more. Stickney indicated it was his understanding that Peter Rechelbacher would notify all the residents on Mooney Lake and invite them to every meeting. Ann Haley questioned how Mr. Stickney could do this to the residents. McMillan stated in her view this is a good preliminary plat and that over the past several months there has been a lot of discussion about how to develop this property. McMillan noted the proposal leaves a large portion of the property in its natural state and that in her view it is one of the best developments for this area. Printup moved, Cornick seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6526, a Resolution Granting Preliminary Plat Approval for a Class III Subdivision of Property Located at 300 Sixth Avenue North. Walsh stated given the efforts by Mr. Stickney to preserve the natural areas and to limit the number of lots, he will be voting to approve the preliminary plat. Levang suggested the next steps in this application process be enumerated for everyone in attendance tonight and for anyone who may be watching the meeting at home. Gaffron stated the developer has a significant number of conditions that he has to meet in order to gain final plat approval, which will likely take from a month to six weeks. Gaffron noted final plat approval will only occur at a City Council meeting and will not be going before the Planning Commission. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 7 of 29 Printup moved, Cornick seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6526, a Resolution Granting Preliminary Plat Approval for a Class III Subdivision of Property Located at 300 Sixth Avenue North. (continued) In addition, the City Engineer will be reviewing the plans and making recommendations. Gaffron stated it will likely be late August or early September before it will be back before the City Council. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 6. #15-3744 JOHN BRUNELLO, 190 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD SOUTH, VARIANCES – RESOLUTION NO. 6527 City Planner Curtis stated the applicant is requesting lot area, lot width, and side street variances to allow construction of a new residence on the property to be situated 30.5 feet from the Woodhill Avenue side street lot line where a 50-foot setback is required. All other setbacks will be met. On June 15, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and reviewed the application. Comments were made during the public hearing and additional written comments were received. The Planning Commission voted 6 to 0 in favor of approval of the variances. In addition, the Planning Commission recommended submittal of the following: 1. Elevation plans for all four sides of the proposed home. 2. A revised survey showing the revised driveway location and associated grading; spot elevations in front of the proposed garage and at the curb cut location; the driveway location of the neighbor across the street at 1315 Woodhill Avenue, including spot elevations at the 1315 Woodhill Avenue curb cut and at the top of the driveway. 3. A proposed landscape plan. Curtis noted the applicant has submitted all the recommended items. Staff recommends approval of the variances and a draft resolution has been provided for Council consideration. McMillan noted she received a letter from one of the neighbors and that there may be some people in the audience who would like to comment on this application. Jane Delaney, 1315 Woodhill Avenue, stated she has some concerns and questions she would like answered. Delaney stated she would like to see some landscaping on the plan. Curtis stated the landscape plan is separate. Curtis pointed out the driveway entrance to this property and Ms. Delaney’s driveway on the overhead. Delaney asked what the rock construction entrance is. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 8 of 29 6. #15-3744 JOHN BRUNELLO, 190 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD SOUTH, VARIANCES – RESOLUTION NO. 6527 (continued) Curtis indicated that is a driveway that will be used during construction and will be removed following construction. Delaney stated the one thing about the Planning Commission meeting was that every application before and after this was all about trees. Delaney stated to her knowledge only one Planning Commissioner has reviewed the property and that there needs to be some further discussion about what is being proposed. Delaney noted the neighbor on the other side of the subject property is also here tonight. Delaney stated following this project, there will hardly be any trees left on the property and that the tree on the landscape plan to the east is a boxelder tree. Delaney stated none of the trees are tagged on the property so it is difficult to know which ones the applicants are referring to. Delaney noted some of the proposed landscape is also within the City easement. Delaney stated the applicants are applying for a variance and that she is wondering if it needs to be that much since everything that is being planted is within the easement. Delany questioned whether granting a variance based on a large city easement is fair and that she is not going to get the same kind of consideration since her easement is only three to four feet. Delaney noted the Council’s packet says that given the large city easement is one of the reasons Staff would recommend granting the variance. Joseph Rokke, 180 Orono Orchard Road, stated he has lived in this neighborhood since 1973 and that he is happy someone is thinking about putting a house on this piece of property since it has been sorely neglected for a number of years and currently is a haven for squirrels, raccoons and mice. Rokke indicated he studied art in college and became a fan of Frank Lloyd Wright, who always said you should build the house that is right for the land. Rokke stated if the garage were moved to the other side of the house towards Woodhill, it would change the configuration and that it is now all hardcover. Rokke stated he has eight steps from his garage up to his kitchen level, which he understands is not the current trend, and that they have to have the garage at the same level as the living area. Rokke stated in his view it would not take a lot of work to change the plans and save the trees. Rokke stated he also did a walk-through of the lot. Rokke pointed out a 48-inch oak tree on the overhead and stated that in his view it is 150 years old and that there is another one that is 44 inches. Rokke noted there are trees shown on the survey plan, but there is not one tree shown on the survey plan in the front of the house. Curtis stated the trees are shown on the plan that was submitted but do not show up on the overhead. Curtis indicated the survey does represent the trees on that portion of the property. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 9 of 29 6. #15-3744 JOHN BRUNELLO, 190 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD SOUTH, VARIANCES – RESOLUTION NO. 6527 (continued) Rokke stated there are dozens more trees in the right-of-way that also do not show up on the survey. Rokke indicated his point is that it is his belief there will be at least 20 significant trees damaged or destroyed by the building plan as shown. In addition, the turnaround for the driveway will be within feet of the 150-year-old oak tree and the driveway will eliminate two 75- year-old trees. Rokke stated research says that an oak tree has a root system that is sometimes four times as large as the crown of the tree, which means that the whole front part of the property is all crown oaks. Rokke stated as a result, every tree on this piece of property will be affected and there will be at least 20 or more trees that will be lost or likely lost due to root damage. Sally Kerr Ekstrom stated when she and her husband purchased that house, it was due to the magnificent trees and the view of the golf course. Ekstrom stated when they got ready to sell their house in 1976, they wanted to put an addition on the back of our house but that Orono said no because it was marsh land. Ekstrom stated the house as proposed will be right over that piece of property and that she would encourage the City Council to reconsider. Ekstrom stated it is a beautiful piece of property and deserves something a little bit nicer than what is being proposed. Delaney stated she hopes the applicants have to replace some of the trees with larger specimens since it would be a good buffer to her house. John Brunello, Applicant, stated there are a lot of trees on the property and that it is not customary to include every tree on the survey. Brunello stated as far as the driveway is concerned, before they came up with the footprint for the house, they had to consider the location of the driveway. By putting the garage on the other side, it would force a house with a tuck- under garage due to the elevation, which is something he would not do on an expensive house. Brunello stated they also looked at locating the driveway off of Orono Orchard Road but that it is rather steep and would not be a workable plan. Brunello stated they designed it so the driveway comes around the house and enters the way it is depicted. Brunello noted initially they came in for a variance for a setback but that the City has since asked them to provide four elevations. Brunello stated in essence, when you have four elevations, you are designing a house, and that he does not want to design a house for a variance he does not have yet. Brunello stated he was forced to quickly design a house so everyone can see what is being proposed and that it normally takes weeks or months to design a proper house. Brunello indicated what is being shown is a simplified design of what they want. Brunello indicated they will save what trees they can. Brunello stated he has built in Wayzata a lot and that he has saved plenty of trees there. Brunello stated the City Council can drive by those houses and they will see 100-year-old trees within feet of the homes. Brunello stated removing trees is expensive and that they will not just start cutting trees down but some trees will need to be removed because of the driveway. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 10 of 29 6. #15-3744 JOHN BRUNELLO, 190 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD SOUTH, VARIANCES – RESOLUTION NO. 6527 (continued) Jeff Jagwell stated he is a part-owner of the property and that they have spent a lot of time carefully planning and designing a house that would fit on the property. Jagwell stated the property will require a variance for something to fit there and that they did the best they could to minimize the footprint of the house on the lot. Jagwell stated he can attest to what John Brunello said about the trees and that he has watched him for years on tree preservation. Jagwell stated he once saw him drill 300 holes around a tree in Wayzata to preserve it, which was successful. Jagwell stated they are very cognizant of the impact on the neighborhood with the proposed project and that they will pay attention to the neighbors’ concerns as well as the City’s recommendations. McMillan asked if it would be a 30-foot setback. Curtis indicated that is correct. Sally Ekstrom asked whether that has changed through the years. Curtis indicated it has. Levang asked Staff to point out the property lines for this site. Curtis indicated it is the heavy black line. Levang asked where the easement is. Curtis stated there is not an easement but there is a right-of-way platted. Curtis pointed out the area of the right-of-way on the overhead. Levang asked if that area of right-of-way has been included in the calculations. Curtis indicated it has not been. Curtis stated the 30.5 feet is measured from the property line and that the discussion about the additional length of right-of-way related to the additional space that is between the road and the house, which Staff is not giving them credit for it. Curtis stated the applicants are asking for a variance from it but that they are not receiving a credit. McMillan stated in order for the house to conform, it would need to be pushed more toward the Rokkes and that the variance helps to center the house on the property. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 11 of 29 6. #15-3744 JOHN BRUNELLO, 190 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD SOUTH, VARIANCES – RESOLUTION NO. 6527 (continued) McMillan noted there are some large trees that are around the present structure, which is a tear down, and in order to construct a new house, there will be some tree loss. McMillan stated she does not see a way around the tree loss. Delaney asked Mr. Brunello if he planning on taking all the trees down. Brunello indicated taking trees out is expensive and that he will not be removing all of them. Brunello indicated he has not gone through them but that he is aware some of them will have to be removed. Delaney stated it would be nice to have them tagged so they know which ones will be staying and which ones will be going. Delaney noted these are fairly big trees. McMillan stated she understands the neighbors’ concerns, but the City does not have anything in their code that requires people to preserve the trees outside of the 75-foot area and that it is their decision. Walsh stated as the application moves forward, it sounds like the applicants might be designing a different house or modifying the house. Walsh stated it also sounds like the applicants want to preserve as many trees as possible, and that in order to be neighborly, he would encourage the applicants to meet with the neighbors. Delaney stated she does not understand why there is so much discussion revolving around trees on other applications but on this application there was not much at all. Walsh stated those discussions probably relate to conservation issues. Walsh noted if it was not for the setback variance, the applicants would not need to appear before the City Council and that they could simply build the house. Delaney stated she is not opposed to a house being there either. Levang stated it sounds like the plan is kind of fluid, which is confusing since Mr. Brunello said it was put together quickly and then Mr. Jagwell said it took a lot of time. Levang asked the applicants if they are planning on changing the plan and whether they will have a deck facing Woodhill Avenue. Brunello stated what they spent the most time on was the actual footprint of the house and that it is not a very big house. Brunello stated this initially was a variance request and not a full design. When the City asked for elevations, that was when they had to come up with a plan very quickly. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 12 of 29 6. #15-3744 JOHN BRUNELLO, 190 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD SOUTH, VARIANCES – RESOLUTION NO. 6527 (continued) Brunello stated in his opinion the elevations are a simplified version of what will fit on the property. Levang asked if the footprint is going to change. Brunello stated the footprint should not change at all. Levang asked if he is planning on having a deck that would face Woodhill. Brunello stated there is a screened-in porch and a deck that faces east or towards the wetlands, which should not change, but nothing that faces south. Brunello stated that should not change and there should not be any more items protruding to the south of the house. Walsh stated the applicants are working with a basic footprint, which should not really change. Brunello stated he did not know the tree preservation would be such an issue since he is just trying to get the footprint approved. McMillan stated in her view people would probably prefer some of the trees in the front for privacy from the road but that it is the property owner’s choice. Brunello stated due to the proximity of the golf course, they will open up a view corridor for that, but that they will keep as many trees as they can. Levang asked if the driveway will fit two cars. Brunello indicated it would be a one lane driveway. Levang encouraged the applicant to save as many trees as possible. Walsh moved, Printup seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6527 , a Resolution Granting Setback Variances from Orono Municipal Code Sections 78-420, for the property located at 190 Orono Orchard Road South. Cornick asked if the width of the driveway would change. Brunello stated the width of the driveway will likely change and that the driveway on the plan appears to be wider than what will be constructed. Delaney stated it is 20 feet wide. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 13 of 29 6. #15-3744 JOHN BRUNELLO, 190 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD SOUTH, VARIANCES – RESOLUTION NO. 6527 (continued) Walsh moved, Printup seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6527 , a Resolution Granting Setback Variances from Orono Municipal Code Sections 78-420, for the property located at 190 Orono Orchard Road South. Curtis stated the legal buildable area is within the 30-foot setback from the property to the north, the 50-foot setback from Orono Orchard Road, the 35-foot setback from the wetland, and the 50-foot setback from Woodhill. Curtis stated if the applicants were to change the footprint slightly to extend up to the wetland area or in a conforming way in the legal building envelope, they can, and that the granting of the variance will solidify the portion within the 30-foot area. Curtis stated she does not expect the applicants to change anything between the two setbacks as it relates to the footprint of the house. McMillan stated they could move the footprint slightly. Curtis indicated that is correct. Jagwell stated the only thing that might change on the footprint is that it might actually get smaller. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 7. #15-3749 HOMESTEAD PARTNERS, 185 AND 225 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL – RESOLUTION NO. 6528 Gaffron noted the City Council reviewed this application at their last meeting and directed Staff to prepare an approval resolution. That resolution has been prepared and Staff is recommending approval. Levang asked if there is going to be a monument proposed. Gaffron stated to his understanding the applicants are planning on doing something on either side but that no formal plans have been prepared yet depicting that. Gaffron indicated the Council would certainly see that at final plat approval. McMillan noted there is no requirement for one. Matt Hanish, Homestead partners, stated their intent is to put a monument in and that it most likely will be in the northwest corner since there is a power pole on the southern corner. Mayor McMillan asked if anyone from the public would like to comment on this application. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 14 of 29 7. #15-3749 HOMESTEAD PARTNERS, 185 AND 225 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL – RESOLUTION NO. 6528 (continued) Scott Goldsmith, 265 North Old Crystal Bay Road, stated there is a boundary line dispute that is to the east at Old Crystal Bay Road. In some places it may be like a foot, but as it goes to the west, it ranges on our property between six and ten feet. At the northwest corner it is approximately eight feet. McMillan noted the Council is aware of that from the last meeting. Goldsmith stated he does not understand why they are where they are with this application. Goldsmith stated the City Council really has three broad possibilities: One, they can approve the plat as proposed. The effect of that would be platting his property as part of this development to the tune of six to ten feet along the south end of his property. The second option would be to say, well, when you come in and ask the City to plat property, it has a responsibility of demonstrating to their satisfaction that it is the applicant’s property that they are platting. The third possibility is to say, well, there’s a dispute here, is there a way to plat the property so that the dispute does not get in the way. Goldsmith stated clearly, depending on where the boundary line is, there are setback problems and plat problems since the property would have to be re-platted using the existing lines marking out the lots, which would result in two of the lots being less than two acres. In addition, the utility easement would create problems with some of the septic sites. Goldsmith stated in his view it seems that the first option is unwise and creates a problem because, as a practical matter, he would be forced to file a notice of a claim to that portion of the property being platted as part of this development. Goldsmith stated in his experience, that would mean that those lots are not going to sell until the property line dispute is resolved, which could take anywhere from 18 to 24 months. Goldsmith stated that is creating problems that do not need to be created. Goldsmith noted the City Council stated they could not decide the property line issue at the last meeting but that is exactly what they are doing in deciding that the applicant’s property line takes precedence over the fence line. Goldsmith indicated the fence line has been there for at least 50 years. Goldsmith stated he cannot ask the Council to decide if this would be an adverse possession, but that if the City Council decides to go ahead with the project, they are, in essence, deciding that point in favor of the developer. McMillan stated the City Council is looking at a certified survey from the applicant and that they do not have anything from Mr. Goldsmith showing that there is a dispute. McMillan stated to her understanding the fence is not a certified piece of the survey. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 15 of 29 7. #15-3749 HOMESTEAD PARTNERS, 185 AND 225 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL – RESOLUTION NO. 6528 (continued) Mattick stated City Code requires a certified survey. Mattick stated asserting an adverse possession claim based on Mr. Goldsmith’s assertion that he has acquired some of this land would take an affirmative act by him to assert his rights. Mattick stated he and the City Council are not going to weigh in on whether Mr. Goldsmith has a valid claim and that the City is not saying the developer wins and Mr. Goldsmith loses since the City Council cannot decide that. Mattick stated City Code requires the submittal of a certified survey, which the applicant has done, and if a decision comes in between preliminary plat and final plat, the City will need to look at that. Mattick stated at this point the applicant has met the requirements of the code that they own the property with the survey. Goldsmith stated he is not disagreeing except for the last point, which is clearly that the existence of a maintained fence line gives some indication of a potential dispute that could be resolved one way or another. Goldsmith stated the City is not absolved of the responsibility of platting the property and that in his view the only point here is if, in fact, City wants to find out in 24 months that the lots are too small, the setbacks are insufficient, and the building pads will no longer work. Goldsmith stated it seems to him that when there is a clear indication of a maintained fence, the City should not step blindly into it based strictly on a survey when there are clear indications of adverse possessed property and a practical boundary line that has existed for 50 years, the City. Mattick stated Mr. Goldsmith has to prove that claim and he hasn’t at this point. Goldsmith stated that is something he will do if he is unable to resolve it, but that the City should not start with the presumption that those two type of claims will not trump the survey. Goldsmith stated right now all they know is that they have a fence line that is clearly six to ten feet south of where the survey line is. Mattick stated if Mr. Goldsmith establishes it legally, that would trump the survey, but at the present time there is nothing to validate that. Goldsmith stated if that is the case, the applicant is going to end up with substandard lots, substandard setbacks, and utility easements and other things that are wrong. Goldsmith questioned why the City Council would do that. Goldsmith noted it will likely take him 18 to 24 months before this matter is resolved and that it seems to him there is some obligation on the part of the applicants to say that they are going to plat this property and that they will be claiming six to ten feet on the north side of this fence. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 16 of 29 7. #15-3749 HOMESTEAD PARTNERS, 185 AND 225 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL – RESOLUTION NO. 6528 (continued) Goldsmith stated that should be taken into consideration. Goldsmith noted the applicants have not previously mentioned that there is this dispute and that he was not aware of it until after the Planning Commission meeting when they placed a stake on his side of the fence. Hanish stated they have rechecked the boundary lines and they match the legal description and the deed that was given to the Underdahls when they purchased the property. Hanish stated in their view they have the correct boundary line. Hanish indicated he did have a conversation with Mr. Goldsmith prior to tonight’s meeting and that he is committed to having a meeting on the site to see if there is any common ground that can be reached. Cornick asked if the survey that verified the first survey was done by the same person. Hanish stated the property to the north was actually recently re-platted and that they used the legal description from that plat as well. Hanish stated using that boundary line, they came back to the exact same points on the common boundary line. Walsh moved, Cornick seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6528, a Resolution Granting Preliminary Plat Approval for Subdivision of the property located at 185-225 Old Crystal Bay Road North. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *8. #15-3750 JEFF VONFELDT AND ELAINE WYATT, 1990 SHADYWOOD ROAD, VARIANCES – RESOLUTION NO. 6529 Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6529 , a Resolution Granting Setback Variances from Orono Municipal Code Sections 78-350 and 78-1279, for the property located at 1990 Shadywood Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 9. #15-3756 CITY OF ORONO, AMEND CITY CODE SECTION 86-68 SURVEY REQUIREMENTS – ORDINANCE NO. 152 Community Development Director Barnhart stated a couple of weeks ago he presented a preliminary draft of the ordinance that talks about the survey requirements. At that meeting the Council expressed two concerns: One being the accuracy and age of the as-built survey and hardcover. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 17 of 29 9. #15-3756 CITY OF ORONO, AMEND CITY CODE SECTION 86-68 SURVEY REQUIREMENTS – ORDINANCE NO. 152 (continued) Based on that direction, Staff made some changes to the draft ordinance. Barnhart stated the ordinance requires a survey that accurately describes the property conditions. An as-built survey is not required. One of the concerns was that surveys only reflect the conditions at the time the survey was done and may not necessary reflect current conditions. Barnhart stated an accurate survey will provide an understanding of the property and what exists at the time of the project. Barnhart stated the other issue related to the hardcover, which has been clarified in the draft ordinance. Hardcover calculations are required as part of the building permit application. Barnhart stated the goal of the ordinance is to ease the burden on property owners who would like to do a small project. McMillan noted Staff’s report says that this change will require more time and discretion on the part of Staff and asked whether there should be a small fee related to that. McMillan added the fee does not need to be decided tonight. Barnhart stated he is uncomfortable proposing a fee out of the air and that he would suggest exploring the amount of Staff time required over the next couple of months. Walsh stated in his view that is a good approach. Walsh asked whether Staff would need something that exceeds the required setbacks by 150 percent for a 200 square foot deck if they have an accurate survey. Barnhart stated there is quite a bit of fluctuation between properties and that he did not want the ordinance to get into the nitty gritty associated with that. Barnhart stated in the future, if Staff finds that it is not giving anyone flexibility, the City Council can review that. Levang moved, Printup seconded, to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 152, Third Series, an Ordinance Amending the Orono Municipal Code by Amending Section 86-68 Regarding Survey Requirements. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 10. REQUEST BY NAVARRE COMMUNITY INITIATIVE TO WAIVE PERMIT FEES Barnhart stated as part of the Navarre Community Initiative “Bike Navarre Event,” scheduled for September 20, the group is requesting the fees be waived. Barnhart noted the fees consist of a special event permit, a temporary sign permit, a conditional use permit, and a conditional use permit escrow, which amount to $1,485. Barnhart noted there will be some Staff time involved with this event. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 18 of 29 10. REQUEST BY NAVARRE COMMUNITY INITIATIVE TO WAIVE PERMIT FEES (continued) Printup asked if the City has waived fees in the past. Barnhart stated the City does not charge itself fees for City events and that he would consider this to be a community event. Barnhart stated the Navarre Community Initiative group does not have a huge budget and that they will still have rental and insurance costs associated with the event. Barnhart stated he would consider this perhaps as a partnership between the City and the Navarre Community Initiative. McMillan asked what property will be on public property. Barnhart stated he plans to bring a draft ordinance to the Planning Commission next month allowing temporary signs for certain events. The way the ordinance reads currently, anyone can apply for a conditional use permit to place a sign in the right-of-way along city-owned roads. Printup indicated he is okay with the waiver since it is a community event. Levang stated she sees this as a collaboration with the City and the Navarre Community Initiative Group. Walsh stated he does not have a problem giving the group the benefit of the doubt. Walsh moved, Cornick seconded, to waive the permit fees for the Navarre Community Initiative’s “Bike Navarre Event.” VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *11. NAVARRE COMMUNITY INITIATIVE, REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY PUBLIC ART IN PARKS Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to approve the request by the Navarre Community Initiative Group to place decorated bikes and bike parts (wheels) in the parks in and near Navarre, both as public art and to promote the Bike Navarre Event planned for September 20, 2015. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (Recess taken from 8:43 p.m. – 8:47 p.m.) PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT 12. BALDUR PARK ROAD CONTRACT AWARD Public Works Director/City Engineer Edwards stated the City received three bids for the Baldur Park Road project, with the low bid being for $143,523 from GMH. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 19 of 29 12. BALDUR PARK ROAD CONTRACT AWARD (continued) In addition, Bolton & Menk provided an estimate for construction oversight not to exceed $14,750. Edwards stated Item No. 4 in Staff’s report shows the cost breakdown of the project, with the City receiving approximately $60,000 from FEMA towards this project. Walsh asked how the City advertised this project. Edwards indicated it was advertised in Blue Book and ads. Walsh stated the goal is to get as many bids as possible. Walsh stated he would like to know when the bid packages are ready but that he was not notified about this one. Walsh indicated he knew a couple of people who would have liked to bid on this project and that he was little chagrined to see that the bids were over and done with. Edwards stated Bolton & Menk advertises the projects for the City and that they use Blue Book, newspaper, and Commerce & Finance. Walsh stated someone would need to know it is there and that he does not check it every day or call to find out if the plans are completed. McMillan asked how long the projects are advertised and available on the Bolton & Menk website. Martini indicated it varies and that the Watertown Road project was three weeks from the time it was advertised until the bids were received. Martini indicated they typically advertise in Blue Book, Finance, & Commerce, the City’s local newspaper, and on the City’s website. Walsh requested he be notified when the plans are ready to go out for bids. Cornick requested the whole Council be notified. Edwards stated he will add it to his weekly update. Cornick moved, Printup seconded, to award the contract for Baldur Park Road to GMH in the amount of $143,523, and to approve the construction phase services to Bolton & Menk in the not-to-exceed amount of $14,750. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 13. NORTHERN UTILITIES BUILD OUT – RESOLUTION NO. 6530 Edwards stated the purpose of this action item is to adopt a resolution laying out the funding mechanism and cost distribution plan for the build-out of water and sewer utilities along CSAH 112. Edwards noted the City Council discussed this item at a previous work session MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 20 of 29 . 13. NORTHERN UTILITIES BUILD OUT – RESOLUTION NO. 6530 (continued) Edwards stated developers have begun to show interest in developing properties along the western portion of CSAH 112. The area is divided into three parcels with developers actively interested in the two end parcels. There are currently no known plans to develop the center parcel, which is Dumas Orchards. The Community Management Plan calls for these areas to be serviced with municipal water and sanitary sewer. Currently water and sewer service only extends westward to the corner of Old Crystal Bay Road and CSAH 112. In order to distribute the cost of the projects to the benefitting properties in an equitable manner, the City will divide up the projects and allocate specific portions of the project to the benefitting property. The cost will be further allocated based on the potential demand of the benefitting properties by using the maximum number of units of each development area could accommodate based on the current CMP land use guide plan. Edwards stated the City will be funding the projects initially and then charge the developers for their portion as each development occurs. Edwards stated the estimated costs of the projects are broken out in Staff’s report and that it amounts to approximately $1.4 million worth of work in today’s dollars. Edwards stated there are developers actively looking at developing two of the properties currently and that this would give Staff a mechanism for providing the developers with the anticipated costs for the build-out of water and sewer utilities. Mattick noted this is an estimate and would be bid dependent. Mattick stated in his view this is a preliminary look at the City’s formula for how the expenses are allocated. Mattick stated it is important for the developers to understand that these costs would be borne by the development or property owner. Walsh stated this will help the developers know the estimated costs up front. Walsh asked what the City’s fund capabilities are to fund this all the way down to the Eisenger property. Olson stated the City has already funded the new well portion and that the City should have the funding capabilities available for the rest. Printup asked how the City arrives at the maximum number of units. Gaffron stated the Comprehensive Plan guides the James property and Dumas property for seven to ten units per acre based on the dry buildable acreage and 10 to 15 units for the Eisenger property. Printup asked what would happen if it takes a long time for those properties to be built and if the density is much higher. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 21 of 29 13. NORTHERN UTILITIES BUILD OUT – RESOLUTION NO. 6530 (continued) Gaffron stated if the City bases its units on the full capacity of the parcel but the units are not all built, the City would not recoup all of the money that it anticipates. Gaffron stated the proposed formula allows a developer to know what the fees are no matter how many units he builds. Walsh stated the developer will want to know what their costs are up front. Mattick stated the City Council will need to discuss special assessments versus a connection fee a little further. Printup asked if this is a mechanism to hold those costs down by limiting it to a certain number of units. Printup asked if this formula will pull the numbers down if there is pressure to push the density numbers back down with a future Comprehensive Plan. Gaffron stated if the City is building for a certain capacity, it will cost X amount of dollars, and that the City will need to recoup those costs. Walsh stated if the City sizes the pipes for 400 units and then the Metropolitan Council requests 800 units, the City’s argument could be that they sized it according to what it was guided for. Edwards stated the capacity has been based on what it is guided for today. If the densities go way up and the City is under capacity, they will need to look at whether they should replace the lines or place parallel pipes in. Martini stated the project is currently planned with an 8-inch sewer main, which will still allow some flexibility for some increased units. A 12-inch water main is also planned due to the long stretch out to the far west property, but that 12-inch pipe would also have some flexibility. McMillan asked if the property owners are aware of this formula. Edwards indicated he has only spoken with some developers. McMillan asked if the City Council should approve this tonight. Edwards stated if there are some adjustments in the methodology that the Council would like Staff to look at, he would be happy to look into that, but that there are some developers asking about this. McMillan stated to her understanding it is the parcel on the far west that potentially could be developed in the near future. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 22 of 29 13. NORTHERN UTILITIES BUILD OUT – RESOLUTION NO. 6530 (continued) Mattick stated one of the things the Council should consider is the fact that the City is proposed to front the costs. Mattick stated there are times when communities do not agree to be the bank and then there is a reimbursement agreement of some type entered into. Walsh noted the City could be the bank for a long time on the middle property. Cornick asked if the property to the north of the Eisenger property would be a candidate for utilities. Gaffron indicated that property is not in the MUSA. The Eisenger property requested to be included in the MUSA just prior to the last Comprehensive Plan update being finalized. Gaffron stated across the road there is the potential for some two-acre lots but at the time of the last Comprehensive Plan update, the City had no desire to include that in the MUSA. Levang noted the City would likely be required to have higher density in that area if it was included in the MUSA system. Gaffron indicated it would likely be three units per acre. Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6530, a Resolution Outlining the Funding Mechanism and Cost Distribution Plan for the Provision of Sanitary Sewer and Municipal Water Utilities along CSAH 112 from Old Crystal Bay Road to CSAH 6. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT, CONTINUED Edwards reported the paving has been completed on Watertown and Stubbs Bay Roads and that the pavement marking should be completed later this week. Edwards stated overall it has been a successful project but that there are a few punch list items remaining. The Public Works Department has also performed some more patching of potholes. The debris site was reopened on McCulley Road following the storm. Edwards indicated he has had some people request longer hours following a storm. Edwards stated the water plant project upgrades are proceeding well. The only major item remaining on that project is painting, which will be finished by September. The Public Works Department is also continuing with sewer clean-out in the areas marked with the gray on the overhead. The green represents what has been completed to date. Edwards reported concrete pads have been installed at Lurton Park and Crystal Bay Park for the new picnic tables. Prairie Restorations has performed a control burn at Lurton Park. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 23 of 29 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT (continued) Edwards stated the process is then to see what invasive species come up, followed by any necessary spraying. Edwards stated the spraying has delayed the planting of the prairie grasses for 90 days. Trail trimming has also been completed at French Creek Preserve. Edwards stated the preferred holiday decoration is the Presidential snowflake. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Walsh reported there is a Fire Department meeting on Wednesday and that the biggest item to discuss is storage of the dock and poles for the boat. Walsh stated he attended the Planning Commission meeting last week and that it is nice to hear the dialogue as the Planning Commission vets the applications. Cornick stated he received a few phone numbers about emergency brush pickup following storms. Cornick asked whether the City has ever considered offering that service. Edwards stated to his understanding the City has tried that in the past but found it to be cost prohibitive. The main concern would be manpower. Edwards stated even after a small storm event, the entire Public Works Department is usually busy cleaning up as well as performing their normal duties. Levang noted the Navarre demonstration project is still going forward and that the group will be meeting tomorrow morning. There was also a meeting two weeks ago. Printup stated he would echo Council Member Cornick’s comments regarding brush pickup. Printup stated he would like the City to have a brush drop-off site available to the residents for the long-term. Printup stated the Public Safety Day was a really fun time. McMillan stated this morning the LMCD had a task force meeting regarding littering on the lake related to the Big Island Fourth of July Celebration and littering in general. McMillan stated lots of ideas were thrown out, such as enforcement, education, legislative action, and possibly having a pontoon boat or barge go around Cruiser’s Cove conducting trash pickup. McMillan stated there is no real quick easy solution but that it comes down to people respecting the lake and other natural resources. McMillan stated the task force will be meeting again at some point. McMillan reported that she and Council Member Cornick attended the 112 Turnback Committee meeting last Wednesday and that a large number of Long Lake business owners were there. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 24 of 29 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT (continued) A matrix will be put together with seven options relating to possibilities for road closures by the lake. Hennepin County will be researching the costs and duration of the closure in relation to each option. Some of the options include no build, a single lane going east, a single lane going east in the morning and a single lane going west in the afternoon, a single lane with a stoplight, two lanes, and a total closure. McMillan stated Hennepin County is working toward addressing the concerns and that in her view the matrix will help understand the project and costs. McMillan noted the trail will definitely be located on the north side so it will be right next to the lake. The City of Long Lake will be paying for the additional engineering costs. Levang asked how far the trail will extend McMillan indicated it is her understanding the trail will go to Old Long Lake Road. Cornick noted the Mayor spoke to Hennepin County at the meeting about possible improvements on eastbound Wayzata Boulevard. McMillan stated the County said they would take it under advisement. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT *14. 2ND QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT The City Council took no formal action on this item. 15. POLICY FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS Olson stated this item is to help clarify how items come up on the agenda and communications between Council Members and Staff. Olson stated the Council should discuss whether they should adopt a formal policy. McMillan noted Wayzata adopted a formal policy in June and Lake Elmo is also working on a similar policy. McMillan stated at the League of MN Cities orientation sessions spoke quite a bit about the idea of having policies in place. McMillan stated there are a number of stresses to the job of being Council Member and part of City Staff and that they often have to deal with tense, negative or stressful situations. McMillan stated the City Council must be skillful in how they respond and be careful not to condemn and be respectful, which can be difficult at times to do in this type of an environment. McMillan stated having a formal policy provides the Council a way to check themselves and realize their position with Staff and other Council Members. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 25 of 29 15. POLICY FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS (continued) McMillan stated the desired outcome is not to create an unhealthy environment which can undermine the City’s productivity. McMillan noted one of her goals at Mayor was to be efficient and productive and not be sidetracked with drama. McMillan stated the Park and Planning Commissions could also adopt it. Printup stated he is not so much in favor of the policy portion and that in his view it is more of a personality conflict rather than citizen oriented issues, which in his view can be worked out informally. Printup noted the City Council has Robert’s Rules of Order available, which could be utilized more. Printup stated he would prefer to call it spirited debate and that talking about the issue gets it out in the open and brings attention to potential drama. Printup stated he would rather focus on the agenda piece. Levang stated in her view there needs to be formal rules of decorum and that the Council meetings in the last six months have not gone well and that the Council gets off track and is not as productive as they could be. Levang stated she does not see this as strictly personalities and that it is about rules not being followed and disrespect and incivility. Levang stated in her view the City needs a decorum policy. Levang stated what Wayzata and Lake Elmo have done are in the spirit of having a good process that everyone can adhere to and provides good accountability around those processes. Levang stated she has not been happy with the way the meetings have been going for the past six months and that it negatively impacts staff and residents as well as how the Council functions. Cornick stated he would not be opposed to having a policy as long as there is also a means to enforce it. Without a way to enforce it, it is worthless. Cornick stated the other issue is if the City Council does develop a policy and a means to enforce it, it should be in effect at the end of an election year so it begins with the election of the new Council and not immediately. Cornick stated in the meantime there could perhaps be some guidelines in effect. Walsh stated if the policy gets in the way of freedom of speech and being able to talk about what is going on, that would be an issue. Walsh stated as it relates to how to get stuff on the agenda, the City Administrator was against being too formal. Walsh stated he would be open to a formal policy if the City Administrator was open to it as well in terms of how that would function. Walsh stated formal policies could be a slippery slope and that he is not sure how the policies would be enforced. Walsh stated it is difficult to define incivility, which could be incivility to Council members or incivility to people at the microphone. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 26 of 29 15. POLICY FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS (continued) Walsh stated in his view there are a lot of slippery slopes and that he is not sure how that is defined. Walsh stated if it is not enforceable, then it is not worth putting on paper and that is where elections matter. McMillan noted the City has some things in their Code regarding communication with City Staff but that she would prefer to have the items highlighted on one page. McMillan stated she is aware that Wayzata has Item G in their policy, which is to work through the City Administrator. McMillan stated in her view it is also important to include language regarding respecting staff and how they work for the Council as a whole and not one Council Member. McMillan stated oftentimes citizens will call individual Council Members and that it is their job to talk with Staff about the issue. McMillan stated it is important that the Council does not carry the interests of one or two people and that the Council should debate things if the City Administrator feels it is an issue the Council as a group should discuss. McMillan noted there have been a couple of issues where some on the Council attempted to bring votes back up on the minority side. McMillan stated regardless of how individual Council Members stand on issues, they need to accept the decision of the majority and support the Council. McMillan stated some of the policy items contained in Wayzata’s or Lake Elmo’s policy do not need to be formalized but that she is glad everyone had a chance to read it. McMillan stated the idea of having a policy is that everyone agrees to it, which helps hold everyone accountable. McMillan stated it would also give people the chance to say that is against the policy we have all agreed on. Printup stated it is important this discussion is being held rather than simply adopting a policy. Printup stated there needs to be an acknowledgement that there are some personality conflicts and a discussion on how those differences can be addressed. Printup stated tonight’s discussion is a starting point. McMillan stated people can disagree on things but that it has to be done in a civil manner or it builds resentment and gets worse over time. Printup stated that is why he thinks this is a good starting point. Printup stated the City Council has had many discussions on how rules or regulations should be enforced, and as it relates to the City Council, ultimately the voters decide every two years. Levang stated in her view a policy on decorum says this is how the Council agrees to conduct him or herself. Ultimately the voters may have something to say about that, but Council Members should also have something to say about how they want to treat each other. Levang stated they are all adults and that they need to take responsibility for their own behavior as well as monitoring each other. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 27 of 29 15. POLICY FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS (continued) Levang stated the Mayor has the most power and has a responsibility to conduct the meetings, but that each Council Member has an individual responsibility to conduct him or herself with the highest level of ethics. Levang stated that level of respect has not been happening here, and that she disagrees that it is a personality conflict Levang noted one Council Member does not acknowledge her except when that Council Member decides to attack her. Levang stated she takes issue with Council Member Printup’s statement that this is a personality conflict and that they are like water and vinegar. Levang stated this Council Member also said something very inappropriate to her during a closed work session and that Council Member Printup’s response was to say that I tried to get you not to talk. Levang stated she is not the perpetrator here and that she was responding to an insult. Levang stated in her view incivility is rudeness, disrespect, and a whole host of behaviors that are not appropriate in Council Chambers and the traditions that they hold as a community. Levang stated Council Member Printup should call it what it is, which is disrespectful. Printup stated he tries not to take sides as it relates to individual Council Members and that having this conversation up here is demonstrating that there needs to be a lot more talked about. Levang stated that is why a policy on decorum is important, so there are some well-defined rules on how Council Members should conduct him or herself. McMillan stated she would suggest sending comments to Finance Director Olson about having a policy and that the Council can discuss it further at a City Council meeting or work session. McMillan stated in her view the Council should try to explore a one-page policy even if they end up not being in favor of formally adopting it because it would be worth it to go through the exercise. McMillan stated she is not really willing to go down the path of citizen behavior. Cornick stated there are two separate issues here and that they are talking about the Council and a decorum policy as well as the issue with how the Council deals with Staff. Walsh stated beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and one person’s disrespect is another person’s, I don’t think you are right, and when people take that personally, it takes it to another level. Walsh asked if pointing a finger at him is incivility and how that would be defined. McMillan stated this is a public forum and that the Council needs to be very mindful about what they say at the meetings. McMillan noted the meetings are a public record and are being videotaped. McMillan stated if any Council Member has an issue with what goes on at the Council level or with Staff, they should call the City Administrator or call the City Attorney to discuss it, but that the Council needs to be very careful about how they conduct our business. McMillan stated the Council should be very professional, very cautious, and very concerned with how they come across with each other. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 28 of 29 15. POLICY FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS (continued) Walsh stated he is in agreement with that and that it should apply to both inside this building and outside. McMillan stated the Council is also judged as being leaders of the community and that people expect the Council to hold to a higher standard. McMillan stated she would like the citizens to be able to come here and feel like they can approach the Council without being attacked. McMillan stated the last thing the Council needs to be doing is attacking each other and adding more stress to the process. Mattick stated what would be helpful for Staff at this point is to provide direction on whether this item should be put on the work session agenda or City Council agenda. Levang indicated it does not matter to her but that she would like this item to come back for further discussion. Levang stated she likes Council Member Cornick’s suggestion to separate communication with staff from the other issue. Cornick stated he would also like to remind the Council of Former Mayor Gabriel Jabbour’s comments regarding the Orono brand. McMillan suggested this item be placed on the August work session agenda. McMillan stated she would like to talk a little more about putting items on the agenda but that she does not want to get into that tonight. McMillan stated in her view the City Administrator does a good job of putting the agenda together. McMillan requested the Council Members forward their comments and input to Finance Director Olson. Printup stated he is less concerned with the agenda piece. *16. RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING AGREEMENT AMENDMENT – RESOLUTION NO. 6531 Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6531, a Resolution Authorizing Amendment to Residential Recycling Grant Agreement with Hennepin County. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *17. ORONO POLICE GARAGE – PAY REQUEST NO. 11 Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to approve Pay Request No. 11 for the contractors working on the Orono Police Garage Project as listed in Staff’s memorandum dated July 27, 2015, in an amount totaling $51,958.21. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. __________________________________________________________________________________ Page 29 of 29 *18. CLAIMS/BILLS Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT Mattick stated he had nothing to report. ADJOURNMENT Printup moved, Cornick seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 9:54 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ATTEST: __________________________________ ____________________________________ Diane Tiegs, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor City Council Work Session, July 27, 2015 Page 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION July 27, 2015 5:00 o’clock p.m. _________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: Mayor Lili Tod McMillan, Council Members Jim Cornick, Jr, Aaron Printup, Lizz Levang, and Denny Walsh. Representing Staff were Finance Director Ron Olson, Public Works Director/Engineer Adam Edwards, Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, and City Clerk Diane Tiegs. 1. Compensation Study Draft Report Victoria Holthaus, AEM Financial Solutions LLC presented a second version of the Orono Draft Compensation Study. The City’s last compensation study was done in 2007. Since that time job responsibilities and positions have changed. The Council requested at the June 22nd Council Work Session to amend the study using communities with smaller populations of 5,000-10,000 residents. The revised study used fifteen communities with the new parameters which indicate the average minimum salary for Orono employees is $5,800 below the market, $4,442 below the median, and $3,014 below the maximum. A new step and grade plan was developed from the results of the market analysis. The new step and grade plan has 8 step grade increases and the overall growth of the scale between steps was trimmed to 3% and between grades to 6%. Council Member Walsh would like to see private sector comparable. Ms. Holthaus recommended Walsh review the Robert Half Accounting website, the LMNC, and Association of Professional Engineers. Council discussed the outcome of the study. Council Member Cornick questioned how this information will be relayed to the employees. All employees are aware of the study and were required to complete job description surveys. AEM City Council Work Session, July 27, 2015 Page 2 Financial will discuss this with the City Administrator to determine next steps and wait to hear from the Council. 2. Budget Ron Olson, Finance Director reviewed the 2016 Preliminary Budget, Operating Fund needs and answered Council questions. Tax Levy/Street Maintenance Funding:  If the tax levy is not increased the $45,000 to reinvigorate the pavement would have to be added to the budget because it is not a line item in the 2016 Budget.  Council previously discussed a special levy which would be specified for road maintenance. Health Benefits:  The proposed health benefit increase is $90.00 which is similar to union employees’ benefits.  Effective in 2016 the City will no longer be a large employer under the Affordable Care Act. Olson will attend a meeting at LOGIS for discussion on how to move forward when the changes take effect. Revenues:  Golf course revenues are up.  Permit revenues are increasing due to the increased building activity.  Public Safety service charges are increasing as a result of an increase in contracted services. Wages:  Council Member Levang asked for clarification on page 2, third paragraph regarding the 1 percent lump sum temporary raise in 2015. Olson explained the Council approved a 1.5% pay increase and a one -time temporary lump sum increase of1% which totaled to a 2.5% raise in 2015. If City Council Work Session, July 27, 2015 Page 3 the 1% lump sum is removed the employees’ salaries will decrease by 1%. This is not well received by employees especially since the same was done year-end in 2014.  The Hennepin County Assessing Contract expires at year-end of 2016. Hennepin County’s formula is based on the cost of homes. Council does not like the formula and would like to see an adjustment. Police Chief Health Insurance:  The Police Chief Farniok request 100% paid benefits for his contract. Council reviewed and denied the request. Other Discussion: Council Member Cornick inquired about the increase in legal expenses. Finance Director Olson responded part of the increase is due to our meetings going longer and a legal fee wage increase. Olson introduced discussion regarding an email tracking software program which stores and can recognize key words or phrases to search for information. Olson will bring information to Council at a future work session. Enterprise fund budgets will be discussed at the August work session. The amount budgeted for transfers was identified as $240,000 to the Improvement Equipment Outlay Fund for the purchase of major equipment with the remaining $125,00 going to the debt service fund for the Police garage bonds. 3. US Internet Request Resident James Diebel has request an alternative for high speed internet service in the City of Orono. Finance Director Olson will draft a response to the resident and Mayor McMillian will review the letter before it is sent. 4. Goals Documentation City Council Work Session, July 27, 2015 Page 4 City Administrator Jessica Loftus provided a summary of the goals discussion for 2016 for Council review. Council reviewed and agree with the summary. 5. Verbal Update from Park Commission Chair Rick Meyers Park Commission Chair Meyers, updated the Council on the Parks Commission activities. The Commission was reinstituted on February 24, 2014. Meyers stated after ten years of neglect that the parks are in need of maintenance. Public Works trimmed many trees over this past winter which saved dollars in the tree trimming allowance. The 2015 Park Commission goals were to choose an active park, passive park, and beach. The park improvements for this year were Livingston Tower Park (active), French Creek Park (passive), and Summit and Lydiard Beaches. The goals have been accomplished. The Park Commission is considering for 2016 to make improvements at Saga Hill Park (passive), Crystal Bay Park (active), and Sandy Beach. Tree trimming will continue in 2016. The Park Commission would like environmental assessments of the passive parks, to determine if they are they healthy, if there is the right mix of trees, wildlife, etc. A possibility would be to hire a graduate student to review the areas. Orono Parks need to have higher standards fitting the residents of Orono. Navarre Park is a good example because of the good atmosphere that has been created. The Park Commission has discussed the concept of a dog park for a future project. City Council Work Session, July 27, 2015 Page 5 There is a maintenance issue regarding signs such as, maps, park amenities, and historical information. The Park Commission is reviewing the signs and will contact a company to review the signage needs. Livingston Park is in the most densely populated area and the park was picked for maintenance but could be made to be more inviting. Meyers presented a cad demonstration on the possible improvements for Livingston which would be CIP funded. Park Commission will review the plans at their meeting in August. The trail on Brown road needs repair. The City has easements for trails but it is not clear to the Park Commission what is Three Rivers Park District and which is the City’s responsibility. Meyers would like more information regarding the easements. Council thanked Meyers for the Park Commission update. Meeting adjourned at 6:53 p.m. ATTEST: _________________________________ ____________________________________ Diane Tiegs, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor 182883 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 10 August 2015 ITEM NO: 4 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Jeremy Barnhart RJO Planning Department Report Title Community Development Director _____________________________________________________________________________________ Item Description: Request for administrative appeal; Nygard fence viewing _____________________________________________________________________________________ List of Exhibits Request for appeal Statute Fence viewer decision Purpose. Jay Nygard requests an appeal of the fence viewer’s decision that the fence adjacent to his property is not a partition fence. Background. On July 6, Orono Fence Viewers inspected the fence between Jay Nygard and Peter Lanpher’s houses. Mr. Nygard had requested fence viewers to determine if the fence is a partition fence, a statutory designation affording the adjoining property owners certain rights. The fence viewers determined that the fence was not a partition fence and therefore the criteria set forth in Minn. Stat. 344 were not applicable. The fence viewers made their determination based on a viewing of the fence and discussions with Jay Nygard and Peter Lanpher. The fence viewers determined that there was no indication that the fence viewers originally ordered the fence to be constructed pursuant to 344 and that the fence in question wasn’t one of the types of fences described in 344.02 1(a) – (d). Mr. Nygard did not originally share in any of the cost associated with the construction of the fence. It was never contemplated by the parties that the fence, when constructed, was to serve as a partition fence. The fence is completely located on Lanphers’ property, is owned by the Lanphers, and the Lanphers do not consider the fence to be a partition fence. The Lanphers’ have not sought to burden the Nygards with any of the costs associated with the upkeep of the fence. The fence is constructed of wood and is slightly discolored with small gaps in certain parts of the fence. The fence is not in danger of falling over and does not present a safety hazard. No repair of the fence is required. Based on these facts, the fence viewers determined that the fence is not a partition fence and that no repairs would have been required. To date, no additional information has been received by Mr. Nygard. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Council is asked to consider the appeal of Mr. Nygard. Page 1 Sec. 2-41. - Right to administrative appeal. Except as otherwise provided, if any person shall be aggrieved by any administrative decision of the city administrator or any other city official, or any board or commission not having within its structure an established review schedule or an appellate procedure, such aggrieved person is entitled to a full hearing before the council upon serving a written request upon the mayor and city clerk at least seven days prior to any regular council meeting. Such request shall contain a general statement setting forth the administrative decision to be challenged by the appellant. At such hearing, the appellant may present any evidence he deems pertinent to the appeal; but the city shall not be required to keep a verbatim record of the proceedings. The mayor, or other officer presiding at the hearing, may, in the interest of justice or to comply with time requirements and on the mayor's own motion or the motion of the appellant, the city clerk, or a member of the council, adjourn the hearing to a more convenient time or place; but such time or place shall be fixed and determined before adjournment so as to avoid the necessity for formal notice of reconvening. An employee of the city who is aggrieved by an action or decision of another city employee that relates to their employment shall exhaust the grievance procedures set forth in the administrative and personnel policy before requesting a hearing before the city council. (Code 1984, § 2.07) Date Application Received: 6/17/15 Date Application Considered as Complete: 7/7/15 60-Day Review Period Expires: 9/5/15 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: August 4, 2015 Item No.: 5 Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section: Name: Mike Gaffron RJO Planning Title: Senior Planner Item Description: #15-3758, City of Orono & Clifford Otten, 2251 Pine Ridge Lane and City-owned Parcel PINS 34-118-23 22 0019 (Well #3) - Lot Line Rearrangement and Rezoning List of Exhibits: Exhibit A. Planning Commission Memo & Exhibits dated 7/16/15 Exhibit B. Updated Purchase Agreement Exhibit C. Draft PC Minutes 7/20/15 Application Summary: The City requires additional land adjacent to City Well #3 in order to install an additional well (City Well #4). An agreement has been reached with the adjacent residential property owner, Clifford Otten, in which the City will acquire the necessary acreage, resulting in 2251 Pine Ridge becoming smaller than the 2-acre minimum of the RR- 1B District. Therefore, the remainder of 2251 Pine Ridge Lane after City lot line rearrangement and acquisition is proposed to be rezoned to R-1A, 1-acre Single Family District. Planning Commission Recommendation: On 7/20/2015 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed lot line rearrangement and rezoning. Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval as presented. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the proposed rezoning and lot line rearrangement. Please review the Planning Commission Memo and Exhibits and the draft July 20 PC minutes. Briefly, the lot line rearrangement provides the City with the necessary property in which to construct Municipal Well #4 meeting all mandated location requirements, as well as providing the City with direct vehicular access to the wells and wellhouse without traversing the Otten nursery property. The lot line rearrangement leaves the Otten property less than 2.0 acres in area (reduced from 2.43 acres to 1.62 acres). To allow the Otten parcel to remain conforming, and meet the terms of the purchase agreement, the property is proposed to be rezoned from RR-1B (2-acre minimum) to R-1A (1-acre minimum) matching the adjacent Sugar Woods PUD underlying zoning. One member of the public commented, the neighbor to the immediate north, indicating a desire to not have his access to the rear of his property affected or blocked by snow storage, as that is a location he stores a trailer. Public Works Director Adam Edwards indicated the City will try to not plow him in or cause access issues. The neighbor also questioned whether the proposed R-1A zoning would allow multi-family uses. Staff noted that the R-1A zoning would allow a two-family #15-3758 August 4, 2015 Page 2 dwelling to be developed via conditional use permit, but does not provide for any other type of multi-family uses. Staff is proposing that the City property and the Otten property both be rezoned to R-1A to maintain the contiguity of zoning boundaries. R-1A allows the City facilities as a permitted use (same as RR-1B) so the rezoning does not have any impacts on the City’s intended use Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the rezoning and lot line rearrangement as proposed. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A. Motion to direct staff to draft for Council consideration and adoption: 1) A resolution for approval of the proposed lot line rearrangement; and 2) An ordinance to rezone the properties from RR-1B to R-1A. B. Motion to direct staff to publish for a public hearing to vacate the road easement over Outlot C, East Willow Woods. Date Application Received: 06/17/15 Date Application Considered as Complete: 07/15/15 60-Day Review Period Expires: 09/13/15 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: August 6, 2015 Item No. 6 Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section: Name: Melanie Curtis mcc RJO Planning Title: Planner Item Description: #15-3761 –Nancy Radermecher – 4775 North Shore Dr – Variances –Resolution Application Summary: The applicant is proposing to construct a 204 square foot two-level, lakeside addition to the home. An existing 6-foot wide upper deck walkway will be removed. The following variances are requested: 1. An average lakeshore setback variance to locate the addition 87.4 feet from the OHWL where the neighboring home has a 90.1 foot setback; 2. A bluff setback variance to permit the addition to be 12 feet from the top of the bluff where a 30-foot setback is required; and 3. A variance to allow an 8 foot encroachment into the 20 foot bluff impact zone. In September the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing regarding the applicant’s request to vacate Lake Street; the vacation request should be before the Council on September 28th. Planning Commission Recommendation On July 20, 2015, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and reviewed the application including the evidence submitted. Following the public hearing the Commission voted 5 to 0 on a motion to approve the variances with the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall comply with the permitting requirements of the MCWD. 2. Applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the City Engineer and Building Official during the permit review and construction process, including but not limited to the following: a. Applicant shall submit engineering information due to the possibility of fill soils used to create a stable building pad for the existing home. b. The proposed structure shall be required to be installed on suitable original soils or engineered corrected soils which would need to be tested and approved by the designing engineer. c. The applicant shall submit a bluff slope stability analysis for review by the City’s engineer prior to issuance of the building permit. Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variances as requested. A draft approval resolution has been provided for Council’s consideration. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Council should consider adopting or amending the approval resolution. List of Exhibits: Exhibit A. Draft Resolution Exhibit B. Proposed Survey Exhibit C. Proposed Plans & Elevations Exhibit D. PC Staff Report & Exhibits 07/15/15 Exhibit E. Draft PC Minutes 07/20/15 Date Application Received: 6/17/15 Date Application Considered as Complete: 6/26/15 120-Day Review Period Expires: 10/24/15 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: August 6, 2015 Item No.: 7 ______________________________________________________________________________ Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Planning Dept. Title: Senior Planner RJO ______________________________________________________________________________ Item Description: #15-3763, Christopher W. Bollis, 200-350 Stubbs Bay Road North - Preliminary Plat Review ______________________________________________________________________________ Zoning District: RR-1B, One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres/200’ width) Property Area: 31.01 ac. (Wetland: 6.48 ac. Dry: 24.53 ac.) Application Summary: This is a proposed subdivision involving two tax parcels to create a new private road and 7 new 2-acre building lots. All lots will be served by individual on-site sewage treatment systems and private wells. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission reviewed this application and held a public hearing at its July 20 meeting. Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the application subject to conditions regarding the road design and that the two developments enter into a road agreement. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends tabling of the preliminary plat review pending the applicants and adjoining developer/HOA reaching an agreement regarding use of Kintyre Lane. Alternatively, if an agreement is reached, direct staff to draft a resolution for preliminary plat approval subject to appropriate conditions, for Council review. List of Exhibits A - Revised Preliminary Plat Drawings – Received 7/20/15 B - Septic System & Buffer Comments from City Engineer and MCWD C – Pertinent Code Sections re Wetland-Septic Setbacks D - Planning Commission Memo and Exhibits dated 7/16/15 E - Draft PC Minutes of July 20 Meeting F – Public Comments Received PLEASE REVIEW THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO & EXHIBITS OF 7/16/15 Background The property consists of two adjacent tax parcels, each with existing residence structures. The southerly parcel, 200 Stubbs Bay Road North, contains an existing single family dwelling and a number of outbuildings (located just north of the Kintyre Lane cul-de-sac) which will be removed. The northerly parcel, 350 Stubbs Bay Road North, contains an existing residence and detached garage which may remain within proposed Lot 5 or may be removed. 15-3763 200-350 Stubbs Bay Rd N August 6, 2015 Page 2 The applicants propose to develop the property with 7 single family lots which will be served by a private road extension of Kintyre Lane, which is also private. Planning Commission Review Please review the draft minutes of the July 20 Planning Commission meeting (attached). Planning Commission reviewed the proposal, held the public hearing, and considered a number of topics related to the viability of the proposed building sites including lot widths, septic sites and relationship to surrounding wetlands and the apparent MCWD requirement for 75’ buffers vs. the 50’ buffers shown on the plat proposal; the road location, design and potential access alternatives; and how proposed Outlot A might be developed in the future. Public comments from residents of Kintyre Lane indicated they had no prior knowledge that Kintyre Lane could be extended to serve more homes to the north; they have concerns how the extension of it will impact the character and safety of the neighborhood, and what will happen with the existing cul-de-sac; and questioned how two separate homeowner associations will interact and agree on future road administration and maintenance. One resident indicated a concern about consistency in lot sizes and setbacks with other developed properties in the Stubbs Bay Road area. Planning Commission ultimately concluded that the proposed plat should be moved forward to the Council, recommending approval on a 5-0 vote, subject to an engineer review of the road as a complete coordinated system, acceptance of a 24’ road width to be consistent with existing Kintyre Lane, and subject to both HOAs reaching an agreement as to the road. Issues Unresolved or for Council Consideration Road Design. Planning Commission recommended that the extension of Kintyre Lane be allowed at a 24’ width, the same as the existing road. The City’s standard for minimum paved width for a road serving more than 7 units would be 28’, and this would be a rural section (shoulders and ditches) except where curbing is necessary to manage stormwater. Discussions with the applicant after the PC meeting resulted in the suggestion by staff that they consider a rural section for those sections of the road where shoulders and ditches would be feasible, with 24’ paved width. Existing Kintyre Lane has a 24-foot paved width, with surmountable concrete curbs. As of this writing, a revised road plan was being developed by applicant’s engineer. The City’s standard maximum length of a cul-de-sac road is 1000 feet and limited to 10 dwelling units. The proposed road extension of approximately 700 feet past the current terminus of Kintyre Lane results in a final combined road length of approximately 1550 feet contained within a 50 - foot outlot and ending in a new cul-de-sac, serving a total of 13 dwellings. While there are a number of private roads in the City extending well beyond 1000 feet, it has been City policy to establish corridors for possible future development of “through roads” where that ability exists. Discussion at the sketch plan review as to whether a corridor should be dedicated from the proposed road, extending west to Stubbs Bay Road, resulted in no support for such a connecting corridor. While Planning Commission in July expressed some concern about future development of Outlot A and whether there would be even more homes accessing via Kintyre, no recommendation for a connecting corridor was forthcoming. 15-3763 200-350 Stubbs Bay Rd N August 6, 2015 Page 3 Staff has reviewed this subdivision and road proposal with Fire Chief James Van Eyll. He noted that the road length and width proposed were less of a concern because it is likely most or all of the homes would meet Fire Code thresholds for requiring individual fire suppression sprinkler systems. As to the existing cul-de-sac, when asked his opinion regarding the Kintyre neighborhood’s possible desire for placing an island in the existing cul-de-sac to help slow traffic, he indicated this would potentially require expansion of that cul-de-sac to maintain necessary width and turning radius for fire vehicles. An additional question unanswered is whether the Kintyre residents might want their cul-de-sac eliminated, what that would entail, and who would pay for the revisions. Additionally, the applicant’s engineer has been provided a copy of the road design and as-built for existing Kintyre Lane in order to ensure an appropriate match-up at the point of extension. Septic Sites: Wetland Setbacks. Staff met with the applicants after the Planning Commission review to discuss various aspects of the development. An issue unresolved is concern that based on the “Preserve” management classification, the MCWD is likely to require 75 -foot wetland buffers for the two large wetlands that extend into the property. Revised plat drawings (See Exhibit A) were submitted the day of the Planning Commission meeting showing the originally proposed 50-foot buffers as well as the 75-foot anticipated buffers. With the 75’ buffers, drainfield sites as shown are partially or wholly within the 75’ buffer for Lots 4-5-6-7. The regulatory provisions here are somewhat complex: - Orono’s individual sewage treatment systems ordinance [Section 58-50(2)a] establishes a minimum setback between the wetland boundary and the defined absorption area of the septic system of 50 feet, and a lot line setback of 20 feet. - Orono’s wetland ordinance [Section 78-1605(c)] requires a minimum setback to MCWD- imposed wetland buffers equal to the buffer width plus 10 feet, i.e. 85 feet total. This came about when the City released its authority for wetland buffer establishment to the MCWD in 2013; the list of items the City thenceforth required to meet a buffer-plus-10’ setback includes buildings (principal or accessory) or other structures, hardcover, septic systems and wells. (Should septic systems be excluded?) - To confuse the issue further, the State code does not have a specific setback requirement for septic system to wetlands, but relies on the soil evaluation to ensure that the absorption area is located in satisfactory soil conditions. - MCWD does not specifically prohibit the placement of septic systems within wetland buffers, but recommends against it due to the potential for a never -ending loop of buffer re-establishment and 5-year monitoring periods for any disturbance of buffers. Mound sites in buffers approved today but not installed until some future year when a home is built, would result in buffer re-establishment and a 5-year monitoring program beginning when the home is constructed. The original septic testing and the City Engineer’s comments in Exhibit B were based on the 50- foot setback requirement, prior to either party’s knowledge that a 75’ buffer was likely to be required. When staff met with the applicants on July 28, the MCWD position was not yet known. 15-3763 200-350 Stubbs Bay Rd N August 6, 2015 Page 4 The City Engineer and MCWD in subsequent discussion have both recommended against placing mound sites within the MCWD-required buffers if at all possible. If the City imposes the 85-foot setback requirement, new drainfield sites will have to be found on Lots 4-5-6-7. An option that should be explored by the applicant is whether the MCWD is willing to allow for buffer averaging or some other method to allow the existing tested sites to not be subject to the buffer requirement. An option for the City to consider is removing septic system drainfields from the list of items not allowed within buffers. This is the first incidence in which we have encountered a Preserve class wetland adjacent to a septic drainfield site. The 85’ requirement seems to be excessive, in the opinion of staff. Grading of Building Pads. The applicant has discussed with staff how the City determinations of building height and number of stories (limited to 30 feet and 2-1/2 stories) rely on the use of existing grades. It is possible that certain lots will in fact be graded to create building pads and establish new existing grades as part of the development improvements. A revised grading plan may be forthcoming. Landscaping Plan. The applicant has provided a landscaping plan for the private road boulevard as well as for providing some screening to the two adjacent Kintyre properties to the south (see Exhibit A - Landscape Plan sheet). While the plan appears to meet the overall numerical requirement of one tree per 40’ of new road frontage, it locates many of those trees along the side lot lines. Subdivision Code Section 82-226(b) would give Council discretion to allow this, rather than specifying a uniform ‘urban boulevard’ character: (b) Shade trees planted by subdivider. (1) As a requirement of subdivision approval, the city may require that the subdivider plant shade trees on the property of the subdivision. Such trees are to be planted within five feet of the right-of-way of the roads within and abutting the subdivision, or, at the discretion of the city, within the right-of-way of such roads. One tree shall be planted for every 40 feet of frontage along each road unless the council, upon recommendation of city staff, shall grant a waiver. Council should discuss and conclude whether any revisions to the landscaping plan are desired. Note that the majority of existing trees to the immediate north of the existing Kintyre cul-de-sac will be removed to accommodate the road extension. Lot Width Variances. There was some discussion at the Planning Commission meeting as to whether the lot width variances required for Lots 4-5-6 at the new cul-de-sac were supportable. It was generally concluded that those lots have building sites further back on the lots where the width is 200’+, and ultimate house design and configuration could easily meet the required minimum front/rear/side/wetland setbacks, although some lots would more limited in flexibility than others as to house placement. Existing Driveway Corridor to 350 Stubbs Bay Road. Planning Commission questioned why the existing driveway corridor outlot from proposed Lot 5 to Stubbs Bay Road was not part of the proposed subdivision or what was planned for it, as only a small portion of its length at the west end appears necessary to serve the neighboring residence at 300 Stubbs Bay Road. Applicant indicated they have no plans for this separate tax parcel at this time. It should be noted that applicant does intend to access Lot 5 from the new cul-de-sac, and staff would note that once cul- 15-3763 200-350 Stubbs Bay Rd N August 6, 2015 Page 5 de-sac access is established, the access to Stubbs Bay Road should be removed; this potentially leaves an opportunity for restoration of the linear wetland that was filled for driveway purposes when the house on Lot 5 was originally constructed in the 1970s. Road Agreement. Mr. MacKinnon is in the process of granting the City the required easement for Outlot D. The City Attorney is waiting to receive the original document so that it can be recorded. It is staffs’ understanding that the Applicant and Mr. MacKinnon are close to finalizing a maintenance agreement. General Topics Addressed Discussion of Conservation Design, park dedication and stormwater fees, and stormwater management are addressed in the Planning Commission memo and exhibits dated 7/16/15. Summary of Issues for Council Discussion 1 Does Council have any concerns regarding the proposed road width, length and design? 2. Does Council have any concerns about the lot width variances for Lots 4-5-6? 3. Should the City consider allowing septic system drainfields within MCWD-required buffers as long as a 50-foot setback is met? What are the downsides of such a code change? Or should the applicant be required to locate drainfields to meet the 85-foot wetland setback where required? 4. Is the landscape plan acceptable as presented? 5. Council should review the Conservation Design materials in the PC packet and determine whether there are any potential concerns. 6. What is the status of negotiations between MacKinnon and Bollis regarding the necessary road agreements? Will Council grant preliminary plat approval without a road agreement in place? 7. Are there any other issues or topics that need to be addressed? Staff Recommendation If Council determines that the proposed subdivision is generally acceptable as presented and per the results of the above discussion, staff will prepare a resolution for preliminary plat approval incorporating appropriate general and specific conditions of approval for Council consideration at a future meeting. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Review the attached materials and consider whether all issues of concern have been addressed. Provide staff with direction for moving forward, which may include requesting additional information, or directing staff to prepare a Preliminary Plat Approval resolution for consideration. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 10 August 2015 ITEM NO: 8 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Jeremy Barnhart RJO Planning Department Report Title Community Development Director _____________________________________________________________________________________ Item Description: 15-3753, City of Orono Park Commission, Variance _____________________________________________________________________________________ List of Exhibits Resolution Planning Commission packet Purpose. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance as proposed. Background. The Orono Parks Commission is requesting a variance to permit the replacement of 10 wood bollards with a new split rail cedar fence. The fence will delineate the parking area at Lydiard Beach from the beach and the adjacent channel. The construction of the fence will add 58 square feet of hardcover and two fences within the 75’ lake yard setback. Both fences are identical, posts spaces 8-10 feet apart. The posts will be 42 inches high. One fence will run along the exposed portion of the channel and the other will run the width of the lot at the south end of the street, between the parking lot and beach. Due to vegetation in the area and the design of the fence, the fence is not anticipated to block or alter visibility from adjacent properties. The public hearing notices to the adjacent property owners were not mailed in time to meet the July 20th meeting, and though a public hearing was held at the Planning Commission meeting, the Council is asked to hold a public hearing on the item, to guarantee adequate public comment. To date, one area resident questioned the design of the fence, but voiced no concerns once receiving the plans. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance as proposed. Page 1 of 3 Council Exhibit A A RESOLUTION GRANTING SETBACK AND HARDCOVER VARIANCES FROM ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 78-1680 & 78-1405 (8) a 4) FILE NO. 15-3753 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (hereinafter the “Applicants”) are the owners of Lydiard Beach within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") (hereinafter "the Property"); and WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City for a variance from Orono City Code Section 78-1680 to permit the addition of hardcover in the form of a split rail fence where a no additional hardcover is permitted; and WHEREAS, the proposed hardcover is 58 square feet over the existing hard cover; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City for a variance from Orono City Code Section 78-1405 to permit construction of a fence as close as 30 feet from the ordinary high water level (OHWL) of the lake where a 75 foot setback is required; and WHEREAS, after due published notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the Orono, Minnesota, City Code, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 20, 2015, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. WHEREAS, after due mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the Orono, Minnesota, City Code, the Orono City Council held a public hearing on August 10, 2015, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #15-3753. 2. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on July 20, 2015, the Planning Commission voted 6 in favor and 0 opposed on a motion to approve the hard cover and fence encroachment variances; based on the following findings: Page 2 of 3 a). The Property is not a building site, it is platted right of way being used for public purpose. b). The improvements are intended to protect the public from unintended encroachments of the beach area or the channel from parking lot traffic. c). The variance to allow construction fencing on the Property which is substandard with respect to area and width will alleviate a practical difficulty inherent to the Property and was not created by the Applicants. d). The Applicants’ proposal results in a minor increase of hardcover of 58 square feet. e). The proposed improvements are consistent with Park Commission plans for system wide consistency are not out of character with the neighborhood. f). The proposed improvements are consistent with Section 78-1684 standard hardcover exclusions, hardcover encroachments intended for the public’s benefit. g). The variance to construct the fence is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance, which is to preserve health and safety. h). The variance to permit improvements to a public the park in a residential district is consistent with the comprehensive plan. i). The Applicants propose to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; j). The circumstances unique to the Property were not created by the landowners. k). The granting of the proposed variances will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. l). The granting of the requested variances will not merely serve as a convenience to the Applicants, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. 3. The City Council considered this application at meetings held on August 10, 2015 Page 3 of 3 including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the Applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community as well as the impact on properties in the vicinity. 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this Property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the Owners, but is necessary to alleviate a practical difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the Applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based on the above findings, City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby grants a variance from Orono City Code Section 78-1680 to permit additional hardc over in the 75’ lake yard where none is permitted; a variance from Orono City Code Section 78-1405-8-a-4 to permit construction of split rail fence as close as 30 feet from the OHWL of the lake where a 75 foot setback is required,subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the plans submitted by the Applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to these plans may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. 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. 3. The undersigned Applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the Property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 10th day of August, 2015. ATTEST: ______________________________ ______________________________ Diane Tiegs, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 10 August 2015 ITEM NO: 9 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Jeremy Barnhart RJO Planning Department Report Title Community Development Director _____________________________________________________________________________________ Item Description: 15-3754, City of Orono, Text Amendment related to approval extensions _____________________________________________________________________________________ List of Exhibits Ordinance Planning Commission packet Purpose. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the text amendment as proposed. Background. City Code prescribes the effective duration of approval for several types of land use applications, including variances, site plans, conditional use permits, and preliminary and final plats. In nearly every situation, an extension may granted, either by staff or the City Council. The proposed ordinance limits the number of extensions eligible to be granted to 4 one-year extensions. If all extensions were granted, a project would expire 5 years after the approval and typically, the public hearing. The proposed ordinance is in response to Council comments regarding the number of extensions granted to a preliminary plat, originally approved in 2008. The proposed ordinance limits the number of extensions for conditional use permits, plats, site plans, and variances. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the ordinance as proposed. Page 1 of 2 ORDINANCE NO. ___, THIRD SERIES CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SECTIONS 82-117, 78-128, 78-149, and 78-918 REGARDING THE NUMBER OF EXTENSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH APPROVED PROJECTS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 82-117 of the City of Orono Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding and deleting text as follows: Sec. 82-117. - Effective period of preliminary subdivision review. Planning commission recommendations concerning any class I subdivision and the council resolution concerning any class II and class III preliminary plat shall remain effective for one year. Failure to file a complete final subdivision application within this time period shall be construed as formal withdrawal of the proposed subdivision. For one year following preliminary approval, unless the subdivider and the city agree otherwise, no amendment to a comprehensive plan or official control shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout, or dedication or platting required or permitted by the approved application. Thereafter, pursuant to its regulations, the city may extend the approval period by agreement with the subdivider and subject to all applicable performance conditions and requirements, or it may require submission of a new application. unless substantial physical activity and investment has occurred in reasonable reliance on the approved application and the subdivider will suffer substantial financial damage as a consequence of a requirement to submit a new application. In no case shall the approval period be extended greater than four years. SECTION 2. Section 78-128 of the City of Orono Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding and deleting text as follows: Variances shall expire one year after the date of council approval if not used and an extension has not been granted. Any change in use of the property shall require a new variance. In no case shall more than four, one year extensions be granted. SECTION 3. Section 78-149 of the City of Orono Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding and deleting text as follows: Sec. 78-149. - Lapse of approval. Unless otherwise specified by the city council or the planning and zoning coordinator, a site plan review approval shall become null and void one year after the date of approval, unless the property owner Page 2 of 2 or applicant has substantially started the construction of any building, structure, addition or alteration, or use requested as part of the approved plan. In no case shall more than four, one year extensions be granted. SECTION 4. Section 78-918 of the City of Orono Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding and deleting text as follows: Sec. 78-918. - Lapse of permit. A conditional use permit shall lapse one year following the date on which it became effective unless prior to that time a building permit is issued by the building inspector and construction is commenced and pursued toward completion on the site which was the subject of the conditional use permit application. A conditional use permit may be renewed for an additional period of one year provided the request is filed prior to the expiration of one year from the date when the use permit is filed with the zoning administrator. The council may grant or deny an application for renewal of a conditional use permit. In no case shall more than four, one year extensions be granted. SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this __th day of _____________, 2015 on a vote of __ ayes and __ nays by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota. ATTEST: ______________________________ _____________________________ Diane Tiegs, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of ________, 2015. To: Chair Leskinen and Planning Commission Members Jessica Loftus, City Administrator From: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director Date: July 20, 2015 Subject: #15-3754, City of Orono Ordinance Amendment Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance Background City Code presently requires completion of certain projects, based on their method of approval, within a specified period of time: Variances, one year Site Plan approval, one year Conditional Use Permit, one year Preliminary Plat, one year Where a time limit is imposed, a building permit to effect the changes must be pulled within that time frame. In the preliminary plat, the final plat application must be filed within the year. In all cases, an extension may be granted, either by staff or the city council. This ordinance is intended to benefit several parties. For the applicant, they have an understanding of the time limitations to initiate the project. For neighbors and interested parties, the extension more adequate limits the time separating the public hearing process and construction starting. The city retains the flexibility to address situations outside of their control. The 4 one year extensions proposed (5 years total) recognizes that in 5 years, balances the desire to complete the project in a timely manner with appropriate flexibility. Issues for Consideration Application Summary: The ordinance as drafted imposes limits to the number of extensions eligible to be granted for preliminary plat approvals. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the ordinance as presented. FILE # 15-3754 20 July 2015 Page 2 of 2 1. Does the Planning Commission feel that a codified limitation is appropriate? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that 4 extensions is appropriate? Date Application Received: NA Date Application Considered as Complete: NA 60-Day Review Period Expires: NA REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: August 4, 2015 Item No. 10 Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section: Name: Mike Gaffron RJO Planning Title: Senior Planner Item Description: #15-3755 Amend Zoning Ordinance Text: Section 78-71(c)(3) Expansion of Nonconforming Structures List of Exhibits: Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance and Summary Ordinance for Adoption Exhibit B. Planning Commission Memo & Exhibits 7/14/15 Exhibit C. Draft PC Minutes 7/20/15 Summary of Request: The proposed amendment is intended to codify the City’s long- standing policy and practice regarding the expansion of nonconforming structures by clarifying the site conditions under which such expansions may or may not occur. Planning Commission Recommendation: On 7/20/2015 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendment with no public comments forthcoming. Planning Commission made two minor revisions to the text and voted 5-0 to recommend approval. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends adoption of the attached ordinance as revised by the Planning Commission. Due to the length of the ordinance, a Summary Ordinance is also included for publication. Please review the Planning Commission Memo and Exhibits and the draft July 20 PC minutes. The proposed text revisions define what the City means by ‘expansion’ of a nonconforming structure, defining its multi-dimensional character that the City has historicall y deemed to be a critical element. The new language also adds clarity to what is meant by “increase the nonconformity”. The proposed language (recommended by the City Attorney and drafted by Soren at staff’s request) reflects how the City has consistentl y interpreted and enforced its nonconforming structure regulations in the past. During its review, Planning Commission noted one typo in section b.1, and added the wording “but not limited to” in the list of site features subject to the definition in the first paragraph of (3). Staff Recommendation A draft ordinance reflecting the above-noted recommendations of staff and Planning Commission is attached. Staff recommends adoption. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED 1) Motion to adopt or amend the attached Ordinance entitled An Ordinance Amending Chapter 78, Section 71 of the Orono City Code Regulating Nonconforming Structures and Uses. 2) Motion to adopt or amend the attached Summary Ordinance. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 10 August 2015 ITEM NO: 11 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Jeremy Barnhart RJO Planning Department Report Title Community Development Director _____________________________________________________________________________________ Item Description: 15-3760, City of Orono, Amend City Code to Allow Clinics in B-1 & B-3 zoning districts. _____________________________________________________________________________________ List of Exhibits Draft Ordinance Planning Commission staff report Purpose. In response to a desire to allow clinics in more service and retail based zoning districts, the draft ordinance defines “clinics for human care on an outpatient basis only” and allows them by conditional use in the B-1 zoning district, and by permitted use in the B-3 zoning district. Background. On June 8th, the Council amended the definition of Beauty and Barber Shops to add more personal services, including spa and exfoliation services. Noting a number of hair removal businesses, the Council questioned the appropriate locations for hair restorative businesses or clinics. Staff would categorize a hair restoration business as a clinic. Clinics are frequently found in retail and service areas; the business model is often similar to a professional offices, providing service to clients within the similar hours, generating a similar ratio of traffic, in buildings common to retail and service areas. The draft ordinance allows clinics in the B-1 and B-3 zoning districts as shown in bold italics: Business District Professional Office Clinic Beauty Shops Retail Sales (B-1) Conditional Conditional Permitted Shopping Center (B-3) Conditional Permitted Permitted Office and Professional (B-4) Permitted Permitted The Planning Commission held their public hearing on July 20th and supported clinics in the districts proposed. In addition, they recommended the definition included in the draft ordinance. No comments from the public were received. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the ordinance as presented. Page 1 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. ___, THIRD SERIES CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SECTION 78-643 AND 78-704 REGARDING ADDING CLINICS IN THE B-1 AND B-3 ZONING DISTRICTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 78-1 Definitions of the City of Orono Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding text within Sections 78-1 as follows: Clinic for human care on an outpatient basis only: A place where a group of licensed medical practitioners provide medical treatment or advice on an outpatient only basis. SECTION 2. Section 78-644 of the City of Orono Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding and deleting text within Sections 78-644 as follows: Sec. 78-644. - Conditional uses. Within the B-1 retail sales business district, no structure or land shall be used for one of the following uses without a conditional use permit: (1) Garages for the servicing and repair of automobiles, provided repair functions are totally enclosed in a building. (2) Motor fuel stations subject to the provisions set forth in section 78-1373. (3) Restaurant (class I), in which food is served to customers while seated at counter or table, or cafeteria, in which food is selected by a customer while going through a li ne and taken to a table for consumption. Neither live entertainment nor intoxicating liquor sales are permitted in class I restaurants. (4) Restaurant (class II), i.e., a fast food, convenience, drive-in, or liquor store restaurant, which is a restaurant where a majority of customers order and are served their food to be consumed at a counter in packages prepared to leave the premises; or a drive-in where most customers consume their food in an automobile regardless of how it is served, or restaurants which serve intoxicating liquor or have live entertainment. (5) Off-street parking when the principal site of the off-street parking abuts on a lot which is another B or I district and is in the same ownership as the land in the B or I district and subject to those conditions as set forth in article X, division 5, of this chapter and such other conditions as found necessary by the council. (6) Public service structures, including but not limited to electric transmission lines and buildings, such as telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electric power substations. Personal wireless service and Page 2 of 3 commercial broadcasting antennas and towers shall not be considered public service structures. (7) Day nurseries, provided not less than 50 square feet of outside play area per pupil is available and fenced. (8) Professional office and offices of a general nature. (9) Commercial recreation subject to the provisions set forth in section 78-949. (10) Clinics for human care on an out-patient basis only SECTION 3. Section 78-704 Permitted Uses of the City of Orono Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding and deleting text as follows: Sec. 78-704. - Permitted uses. Within the B-3 shopping center business district, no structure or land shall be used except for one of the following uses or uses deemed similar by the council: (1) Retail and service businesses. The following neighborhood retail sales and service businesses supplying commodities or performing a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood: a. Arts and school supplies store. b. Banks and insurance companies. c. Barbershops and beauty shops. d. Bicycle sales and repair. e. Books, magazines, record shop. f. Drugs, candy, ice cream, soft drinks, cosmetics and other usual drugstore merchandise. g. Dry cleaning and laundry pickup stations, including incidental pressing and repair. h. Garden supplies, florist shop. i. Gift or antique shops. j. Hardware store, paint store. k. Hobby shops, camera and photographic supply stores. l. Jewelry shops and repair. m. Laundromats. n. Locksmith. o. Music, radio, TV, appliance sales and repair stores. p. Newsstands. q. Office supply store, office machine store. r. Pet shop. Page 3 of 3 s. Pipe and tobacco shops. t. Plumbing, electrical, heating, housewares, furniture, carpet store. u. Postal substation. v. Real estate sales. w. Retail food of all varieties and home supplies. x. Sewing center and yard goods. y. Sporting goods store. z. Tailor shops. aa. Temporary sales, such as Christmas tree lots. bb. Travel bureau. cc. Variety store. dd. Wearing apparel store, shoestore. ee. Off-sale liquor store. ff. Home and garden equipment rental. gg. Massage therapy centers. hh. Clinics for human care on an out-patient basis only. SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this __th day of ________________, 2015 on a vote of __ ayes and __ nays by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota. ATTEST: ______________________________ _____________________________ Diane Tiegs, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of ________, 2015. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 10 August 2015 ITEM NO: 12 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Jeremy Barnhart RJO Planning Department Report Title Community Development Director _____________________________________________________________________________________ Item Description: 15-3766, City of Orono, Amend City Code relating to Average Lakeshore setback _____________________________________________________________________________________ List of Exhibits Draft Ordinance Planning Commission staff report Planning Commission attachments Purpose. The draft ordinance codifies the application of average setback where a subject lot is adjacent to a vacant lot or right of way. The draft also removes the provision that staff can approve a project where the average lakeshore setback cannot be met. Background. Average Lakeshore setback was deemed a high priority during the November 2014 joint work session. The Average Lakeshore setback, in summary, is intended to address visual massing impacts to adjacent properties by requiring improvements on lakeshore lots to be ‘behind’ adjacent residential structures. Where there is not two adjacent residential structures, staff applies the setback of the adjacent structure, or 75 feet, whichever is greater. The proposed ordinance codifies this practice in paragraph b. Further, staff recommends deletion of the clause (paragraph a) that grants the planning director discretion to approve a project if the setback cannot be met, the lake views of adjacent lots are not obstructed, and with adjacent neighbor’s approval. It is bad practice to regulate approval on neighbors consent, and a variance from regulations should only be approved through the formal variance process. In staff’s estimation, this clause was applied 5 or less times over the last 10 years. The Planning Commission held their public hearing on July 20th, after receiving no public comment, the Commission recommended approval. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the ordinance as presented. Page 1 of 2 ORDINANCE NO. ___, THIRD SERIES CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SECTION 78-1279 REGARDING AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 78-1279 of the City of Orono Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding and deleting text within Sections 78-1279 as follows: (6) Average lakeshore setback. No principal or accessory structure shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots; except that this does not apply to patios and other accessory structures less than 42 inches above existing grade, stairways, lifts, landings, lockboxes, flagpoles and pump houses. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. a. In instances where the average lakeshore cannot be met, administrative approval may be granted at the discretion of the city administrator or designee planning director provided no lake views of an adjacent lakeshore lot are obstructed and adjacent neighbors provide written approval. ab. In situations where improvement is proposed on a lot adjacent to a vacant lot or right-of-way, the average lake shore setback shall be equivalent to the setback of the most lakeward protrusion of the residence building on the immediately adjacent improved lakeshore lot. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this 10th day of August, 2015 on a vote of __ ayes and __ nays by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota. ATTEST: Council Exhibit A Page 2 of 2 ______________________________ _____________________________ Diane Tiegs, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of ________, 2015. To: Chair Leskinen and Planning Commission Members Jessica Loftus, City Administrator From: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director Date: July 20, 2015 Subject: #15-3766, City of Orono, Ordinance Amendment: Accessory Structure Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance Exhibit B. Lot Schematic Exhibit C. Minutes from Joint PC/ CC Meeting November 5, 2014 Exhibit D. Summary Memo dated September 21, 2011 Background The review of Average Setback and its application was deemed a high priority of the Planning Commission and the City Council at their joint workshop on November 5, 2014; these minutes are attached. The Planning Commission further discussed the topic at their meeting on January 7, 2015. Unfortunately, there are no minutes from that meeting. The history of average setback is lengthy, and summarized in the attached memo (Exhibit D) from Mike Gaffron to Staff, Planning Commission, and the City Council dated September 21, 2011. The code currently reads: 78-1279 (6) Average lakeshore setback. No principal or accessory structure shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots; except that this does not apply to stairways, lifts, landings, lockboxes, flagpoles and pump houses. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. a. In instances where the average lakeshore setback cannot be met, administrative Application Summary: The proposed ordinance would codify the practice of applying average setback to lots adjacent to unimproved lots or ROW. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the draft ordinance as presented. Alternatively, staff would appreciate direction as to alternative language. FILE #15-3766 20 July 2015 Page 2 of 2 approval may be granted at the discretion of the planning director provided no lake views of an adjacent lakeshore lot are obstructed and adjacent neighbors provide written approval. It is staff’s understanding that the Planning Commission in January felt the language adequately serves the majority of situations encountered and did not recommend any changes to the zoning code. While no changes were suggested, staff wanted to confirm practice in certain unique situations, and codify this practice. Current practice. Please refer to the attached schematic (Exhibit B). In situations where construction is proposed on a lot (Lot B) where a house is standing on one side (Lot A), and the lot on the other side is either vacant or right of way (Lot C), the average lake shore setback, in practice, is the distance the standing house is from the OHWL. There is no straight-line drawn because there is no neighboring residential structure. In effect, the neighbor on Lot A alone creates a new setback that is greater than the 75’ lake yard. Issues for Consideration 1.Does the Planning Commission agree with the method of determining average lakeshore for lots adjacent to vacant/ ROW property? 2.If not, what concerns of the Commission should be addressed? REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 10 August 2015 ITEM NO: 13 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Jeremy Barnhart RJO Planning Department Report Title Community Development Director _____________________________________________________________________________________ Item Description: Amend resolution identifying administrative citation offenses _____________________________________________________________________________________ List of Exhibits Draft resolution Pertinent city code sections. Purpose. Approve a resolution identifying administrative offences, as prescribed in Section 66-250. Background. In December 2013, the Council approved an ordinance amendment that provided for administrative offenses, certain offenses that may be subject to an administrative fine, in addition to the normal citation process. That ordinance requires the Council to determine offenses eligible for administrative citations by resolution. It is thought that identifying certain offenses as an administrative citation strengthens the code enforcement toolbox, improving the resolution rate. The proposed offenses to be added are for long grass and weeds (Section 18-238), Vacant buildings (86-4), Damaged buildings (86-5) and expired building permit (86-70). In application, administrative citations will be used when other methods (education, formal written notice, etc.) to resolve the issue are ineffective. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Staff recommends approval as presented. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: August 10, 2015 ITEM NO: 14 ______________________________________________________________________________ Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Adam Edwards ATE RJO Public Works Director/ Title Public Works Director/City Engineer City Engineer’s Report ______________________________________________________________________________ Item Description: Water Treatment System Improvements – Pay Request No. 5 ______________________________________________________________________________ List of Exhibits A- Recommendation Letter from Bolton & Menk B- Contractor’s Pay Request No. 5 1.Purpose. Gain Council authorization for Pay Request #5 of the Water Treatment System Improvements 2.Background. On January 12, 2015, the Council awarded the contract to improve the city’s water treatment facilities to Municipal Builders, Inc and further authorized Bolton and Menk to perform construction oversight. Work includes updating the chemical feed system to meet MN Department of Health requirements as well as replacing roofing, replacing doors, painting, new electrical and HVAC improvements. 3.Cost. Total Cost for the project is $707, 960 broken down as listed below: Who Work Cost Bolton &Menk, Inc Design and Bid Engineering $42,160 Municipal Builders, Inc Water Treatment Improvements $625,000 Bolton &Menk, Inc Construction Oversight $40,800 TOTAL $707,960 4.Funding. This project is funded from a bond issue in 2014. 5.Status. Municipal Builders has completed approximately 94% of the work and has requested payment of $22,059.95. (Exhibit B). Bolton and Menk has reviewed the payment request and confirmed that the work has been completed to standard (Exhibit A) COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Pay Request No. 5 to Municipal Builders, INC. in the amount of $22,059.95 for the Water Treatment Systems Improvement project. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: August 10, 2015 ITEM NO: 15 ______________________________________________________________________________ Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Adam Edwards ATE Public Works Director/ Title Public Works Director/City Engineer City Engineer’s Report ______________________________________________________________________________ Item Description: Water Meter Reader Replacement ______________________________________________________________________________ List of Exhibits A- Quote from Ferguson Water Works 1. Purpose. Gain Council authorization to purchase a new water meter reader 2. Background. The City’s meter reader is inoperable. After 7 years of service it is no longer supported for physical or software maintenance. In addition, the existing reader was not capable of leveraging the capabilities of the newer meters the City uses. The proposed new meter reader will fully synchronize with the City’s latest generation of water meters taking advantage of not only their readings for billing but also their historical data and diagnostic capabilities. 3. Cost. Total Cost for the meter reader is $5,588.24. 4. Funding. This purchase will be funded by the Municipal Water Fund. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve purchase of a new water meter reader Deliver To: From: Comments: FERGUSON WATERWORKS #2518 1694 91ST AVE NE ryan.raupp@ferguson.com BLAINE, MN 55449-4311 Ryan Raupp Bid No.......: Bid Date....:Cust Quoted By.:Terms........: Customer:Ship To: Cust PO#...:Job Name: Page # 07/01/15 952-249-4600 RDR NET 10TH PROX CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO 2750 KELLEY PKWY 2750 KELLEY PKWY ORONO, MN 55356 ORONO, MN 55356 MRX/BELT CLIP 11:53:18 AUG 03 2015 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #2516 Price Quotation 1 Phone : 763-560-5200 Fax : 763-560-1799 B053156 Item Description Quantity Net Price UM Total N13193001 TRIMBLE NOMAD 900B HH 1 2573.530 EA 2573.53 N13302000 R900 BELT CLIP TRANSCEIVER 1 2573.530 EA 2573.53 N13245001 TRIMBLE NOMAD CHARGING CRADLE 1 441.180 EA 441.18 Net Total: Tax: $5588.24 $0.00 Freight:$0.00 Total: $5588.24 Govt Buyers: All items are open market unless noted otherwise. Quoted prices are based upon receipt of the total quantity for immediate shipment (48 hours). SHIPMENTS BEYOND 48 HOURS SHALL BE AT THE PRICE IN EFFECT AT TIME OF SHIPMENT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. Seller not responsible for delays, lack of product or increase of incorporated by reference and found either following this document, or on the web at pricing due to causes beyond our control, and/or based upon Local, State and Federal laws governing type of products that can be sold or put into commerce. This quote is offered contingent upon the buyer's acceptance of Seller's terms and conditions, which are http://wolseleyna.com/terms_conditionsSale.html. LEAD LAW WARNING: It is illegal to install products that are not "lead free" in accordance with US Federal or other applicable law in potablewater systems anticipated for human consumption. Products with *NP in the description are NOT lead free and can only be installed innon-potable applications. Buyer is solely responsible for product selection. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: August 10, 2015 ITEM NO: 16 ______________________________________________________________________________ Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Adam Edwards ATE RJO Public Works Director/ Title Public Works Director/City Engineer City Engineer’s Report ______________________________________________________________________________ Item Description: Watertown Road and Stubbs Bay Road Rehabilitation – Pay Request No. 2 ______________________________________________________________________________ List of Exhibits A- Recommendation Letter from Bolton & Menk B- Contractor’s Pay Request No. 2 1. Purpose. Gain Council authorization for Pay Request #2 for the Watertown Road and Stubbs Bay Road Rehabilitation 2. Background. On May 11th, 2015 the City awarded the contract for the road rehabilitation project to Bituminous Roadways. Construction began on June 5th and is substantially complete. Remaining work includes a few punch list items as well as additional erosion control and seeding. 3. Cost. Total Cost for the project is $880,211 broken down as listed below: Who Work Cost Bolton &Menk, Inc Design and Bid Engineering $124,630 Bituminous Roadways Construction $686,481 Bolton &Menk, Inc Construction Oversight $69,100 TOTAL $880,211 4. Funding. This project is funded from MSA, the General fund and the Storm Water fund. 5. Status. Bituminous Roadways has completed approximately 90% of the work and has requested payment of $351,408.37. (Exhibit B). Bolton and Menk has reviewed the payment request and confirmed that the work has been completed to standard (Exhibit A). To date, the cost split by funding source for construction are: State Aid General Fund Storm Water Fund Total This Pay Request $ 306,145.45 $ 44,112.47 $ 1,150.45 $ 351,408.37 To Date 367,549.47 $ 144,756.09 $9214.90 $ 521,520.46 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Pay Request No. 2 to Bituminous Roadways in the amount of $351,408.37 for the Watertown Road and Stubbs Bay Road Rehabilitation project. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: August 10, 2015 ITEM NO: 17 Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Ron Olson RJO City Administrator's Title Finance Director Report Item Description: LMCIT Power of Attorney The received a claim in the amount of $592.42 regarding an alleged sewer backup relating to maintenance that was being performed in the Rest Point neighborhood. Our insurance carrier, the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) made a settlement offer to the resident. However the resident has refused to sign a liability release in exchange for the payment. The signing of a release is a standard practice whenever an insurance company pays a claim. Without the release, the LMCIT will not make the payment. The resident has now filed a claim in Conciliation Court for the damages plus a $70.00 filing fee for a total of $662.42. The court date is set for September 1st at 10:00am. The insurance adjuster for this claim is Matt Pawlowski. In order for him to speak on our behalf in court, he needs to be granted Power of Attorney. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to grant Matt Pawlowski Power of Attorney in order to represent the City in this Conciliation Court case. STATE OF MINNESOTA FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN DISTRICT COURT POWER OF ATTORNEY IN FACT City of Orono, Minnesota I, ___Lili Tod McMillan___________________, __Mayor______________________________, of Name Title of Authorized Position Held ___City of Orono, Minnesota_______________________________________________________________, Name of Entity Corporation, Partnership, Sole Proprietorship, Association (circle one) duly authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota hereby appoint and authorize: __Mathew Pawlowski___________________________________________________________ Name or Names of Employees as attorney in fact for the business, to commence, prosecute, defend, satisfy or settle any claim or cause of action brought by or against said business in the ____Conciliation Court of Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, and to execute on behalf of the business any and all documents and pleadings necessary to accomplish said purpose. Date: __August 10, 2015__________ ____________________________________ Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor _ ____________________________ Diane Tiegs, City Clerk Sworn and subscribed to before me this _______ day of ________________, 20___. ____________________________________ Notary REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: August 10, 2015 ITEM NO: 18 Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Diane Tiegs RJO Licenses/Permits Title City Clerk Item Description: Orono Football Boosters Gambling Permit The Orono Football Boosters have submitted the required application and documents to hold a fundraiser during the home football games. Staff recommends approval of the gambling permit. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Request Council approval of the Orono Booster gambling permit application. 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66, Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phone: 952-249-4600 / Fax: 952-249-4616 / www.ci.orono.mn.us CITY OF ORONO PERMIT FOR GAMBLING ACTIVITY Date Issued: July 30, 2015 Date of Event: August 22, September 4, September 18 (Varsity Football Games) Time: 6:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m.. Type of Gambling: Lawful Gambling Exempt Permit for a Raffle Description of Event: Orono Football Boosters Fundraiser Name of Person(s) And/or Organization Sponsoring this Event: Seth N. Kahn (Applicant) Orono Football Boosters 2830 Cabaline Trail Medina, MN 55340 Steve Skillin (Gambling Manager) 612-202-4144 Phone: 612-619-9046 Location of Event: 795 Old Crystal Bay Road The following documents are required and on file at the City Administrative Offices:  Approval from Orono Police Department  Copy of Application for Exempt Permit Submitted to Minnesota Gambling Control Board  Documentation from Orono School District indicating approval of the event and raffle (City Seal) __________________________________________ Mayor Lili McMillan REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: August 10, 2015 ITEM NO: 19 Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name: Diane Tiegs RJO City Administrator's Report Title: City Clerk Item Description: Agreement for Use of Election Equipment by Orono School District The Orono School District has requested permission to use the City’s election equipment for their school district election this fall, which will be held on November 3, 2015. The election equipment is owned by Hennepin County and leased to the City of Orono, with a provision that allows Orono to lease the equipment to the school for such elections. A two-way agreement between the City of Orono and Orono Public School District #278 is required before the School District is approved to use the equipment. The City attorney has reviewed and approved the language in the attached agreement. Per the agreement, the School District will pay to the City of Orono $50 for use of (2) Model DS200 Digital Scan Precinct Count Units and $28 for use of (1) AutoMARK machine. Staff is recommending Council approval of the attached “City of Orono / Orono Public School District Lease Agreement” that allows the Orono School District to use the City of Orono’s election equipment. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Request Council approval of the “City of Orono / Orono Public School Lease Agreement” that allows the Orono School District to use the City of Orono’s election equipment. 171938v3 Page 1 of 8 CITY OF ORONO / ORONO PUBLIC SCHOOLS LEASE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made by and between the CITY OF ORONO and ORONO PUBLIC SCHOOLS, INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 278, both political subdivisions of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the “City” and the “School District,” respectively. For purposes of this Agreement, the address of the City is 2750 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356, and the address of the School District is 685 Old Crystal Bay Road North, Orono, Minnesota 55356. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners in Resolution Number 13-0134 and Resolution Number 05-564 authorized the purchase of Election Equipment and Assisted Voting Technology equipment for a countywide digital scan voting system, election hardware and services; and WHEREAS, the Hennepin County, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota (“Hennepin County”), and the City of Orono are parties to an agreement numbered A-131257 relating to the lease of Election Equipment and AVT equipment (as defined herein); and WHEREAS, the City desires to sublease Election Equipment and AVT Equipment to the School District for use in all School District elections. WHEREAS, the City also desires to lease voting booths to the School District for use in all School District elections. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements hereinafter set forth, the City and the School District agree as follows: Section 1 SCOPE OF AGREEMENT 1.1 The City hereby subleases to the School District at the cost identified below and subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and the School District hereby agrees to sublease from the City election equipment identified as: two (2) DS200 Digital Scan Precinct Count Units (including four (4) 4 GB Jump Drives), and two (2) DS200 Plastic Ballot Boxes (the “Election Equipment”) for polling places contained within the School District. 1.2 The City hereby subleases to the School District subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and the School District hereby agrees to sublease from the City Assisted Voting Technology Equipment identified as: one (1) AutoMARK Voter Assist Terminals, two (2) flashcards and one (1) ES&S 171938v3 Page 2 of 8 AutoMARK Table with adjustable legs for polling places (“AVT Equ ipment”) contained within the School District. 1.3 The City hereby leases to the School District subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement, and the School District hereby agrees to lease from the City ten (10) voting booths (“Voting Booths”). 1.3 Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the parties may agree by written addendum executed by all the parties to increase or decrease the Election Equipment, AVT Equipment, and Voting Booths included within the scope of this agreement. The City hereby delegates authority to execute such an addendum to the authorized City officer, or the City Council, as appropriate. The School District hereby delegates authority to execute such an addendum to the authorized School District officer, or the School Board, as appropriate. Section 2 OWNERSHIP 2.1 The School District acknowledges that Hennepin County owns the Election Equipment and AVT Equipment. The School District acknowledges that it is authorized to use said Election Equipment and AVT Equipment for official election related purposes only. Use of the Election Equipment and AVT Equipment for any other purpose is strictly prohibited absent express written consent of Hennepin County and the City. 2.2 The School District acknowledges and agrees that the Election Equipment and AVT Equipment may contain proprietary and trade secret information that is owned by a third party and is protected under state and federal copyright law or other laws, rules, regulations and decisions. The School District shall protect and maintain the proprietary and trade secret status of the Election Equipment and AVT Equipment. 2.3 The School District acknowledges and agrees that the City owns the Voting Booths and that the School District is authorized to use sa id Voting Booths for official election related purposes only. Use of the Voting Booths for any other purpose is strictly prohibited absent express written consent of the City. Section 3 HANDLING OF EQUIPMENT AND INDEMNIFICATION 3.1 The School District shall be responsible for the Election Equipment, AVT Equipment, and Voting Booths while it is in the School District’s custody, possession or control. The School District, either through insurance or a self- insurance program, shall be responsible for all costs, fees, damages and 171938v3 Page 3 of 8 expenses including but not limited to personal injury, storage, damage, repair and/or replacement of the Election Equipment, AVT Equipment, and Voting Booths while it is in the School District’s custody and this Agreement is in effect, consistent with the School District’s defense and indemnity obligations contained within this Agreement. 3.2 The School District shall be responsible for the transporting of the Election Equipment, AVT Equipment, and Voting Booths from and to the City. The School District shall be responsible for all costs, including but not limited to shipping, related to the repair or replacement of lost, stolen, destroyed or damaged Election Equipment, AVT Equipment, and Voting Booths as well as the maintenance and repair costs described in Sections 5.1 and 5.2. Section 4 TERM, TERMINATION 4.1 The City and the School District agree that this Agreement is in effect during the period commencing upon signature by both parties and terminating when the School District returns the Election Equipment, ATV Equipment and Voting Booths to the City or December 31, 2015, whichever is sooner. Thereafter, this Agreement shall automatically renew and be in effect commencing September 1 of each odd-numbered year and terminating when the School District returns the Election Equipment, ATV Equipment and Voting Booths to the City or December 31 of that year, whichever is sooner. This Agreement shall not automatically renew if either party notifies the other party, on or before June 1st of that year, of its intention not to renew. Termination of this Agreement by the School District shall not relieve the School District of any duties or obligations hereunder including but not limited to the obligation to pay amounts due and payable. Up on expiration or any termination of this Agreement, the School District shall return the Election Equipment, AVT Equipment and/or Voting Booths within a reasonable time and in good operating condition except for routine wear and tear. Section 5 MAINTENANCE 5.1 Maintenance Agreement (DS200) Hennepin County has entered into an agreement with a third-party (“Maintenance Vendor”) for maintenance and repair of the Election Equipment as more fully described in Addendum A (“Maintenance Services). The School District will obtain Maintenance Services for the Election Equipment directly from the Maintenance Vendor including but not limited to scheduling and supervising the Maintenance Vendor. The School District shall pay the City the per-unit amount that Hennepin County pays to the Maintenance Vendor plus any additional costs incurred by County as the same are directly 171938v3 Page 4 of 8 related to maintenance and repair of the Election Equipment subleased by the School District which may include the cost of replacement parts. 5.2 Maintenance Agreement (AVT Equipment). Hennepin County has entered into an agreement with a third-party (“AVT Maintenance Vendor”) for maintenance and repair of the AVT Election Equipment (“AVT Maintenance Services). The School District will obtain AVT Maintenance Services for the AVT Election Equipment directly from the AVT Maintenance Vendor including but not limited to scheduling and supervising the AVT Maintenance Vendor. The School District shall pay the City the per unit amount that Hennepin County pays to the AVT Maintenance Vendor plus any additional costs incurred by Hennepin County as the same are directly related to maintenance and repair of the AVT Election Equipment subleased by the School District which may include the cost of replacement parts. 5.3 The School District agrees not to make any repairs, changes, modifications or alterations to the Election Equipment or AVT Equipment that are not authorized by Hennepin County and said vendors. 5.4 After reasonable notice, the City or Hennepin County shall have the right to enter into and upon the premises where the Election Equipment and AVT Equipment is located for the purposes of inspecting the same or observing its use. On an annual basis, during the term of this Agreement, the School District shall comply with the City’s or Hennepin County’s request for verification of Election Equipment and AVT Equipment inventory. 5.5 The School District agrees to provide notice to Maintenance Vendor and/or AVT Maintenance Vendor of any defects or malfunctions with the Election Equipment and/or AVT Equipment within twenty-four (24) hours. The School District also agrees to provide the City with notice of such malfunctions or defects and the Maintenance Vendor and/or AVT Maintenance Vendor response within a reasonable time. Section 6 LEASING, PROGRAMMING, AND ACCUMULATION COSTS 6.1 Lease Fee. The School District shall pay the City the amount of fifty dollars ($50) for the Election Equipment and twenty-eight dollars ($28) for the AVT Equipment. The School District shall pay the City upon receipt of billing for use of the equipment in each year this contract is in effect. 6.2 Election Equipment Programming. Hennepin County, through its agreement A-131257 with the City, will be responsible for programming the DS200 Digital Scan Election Equipment at no charge to jurisdictions for all races in all elections. 6.3 AVT Equipment Programming Costs. The School District is responsible for paying to the City the programming costs, not to exceed twenty-five dollars ($25), of the AVT Equipment described in paragraph 1.2. 171938v3 Page 5 of 8 6.4 Results Transmission and Accumulation. For a primary and/or a general election, as described in Minn. Stat. §§ 205.065 and 205.07, in the odd - numbered years, the City, in its sole discretion, may elect to have Hennepin County perform the electronic transmission and accumulation of results of City and School District races in the primary and general election, at a cost of $100 per polling place for the primary, and $100 per polling place for the general election. The School District is responsible for paying to the City any accumulation costs prorated upon the number of columns devoted to the School District’s races on the ballot. Section 7 OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS 7.1 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 party at law, in equity, or otherwise. 7.2 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 7.3 Entire Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. All items referred to in this Agreement are incorporated or attached and are deemed to be part of this Agreement. Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties hereto. 7.4 No Assignment. Neither party shall assign, 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. 7.5 Limited Warranty. The City warrants that it has obtained express written permission of the Hennepin County’s Election Manager, or his/her designee to sublease the Election Equipment and AVT Equipment to the School District. 171938v3 Page 6 of 8 7.6 No Warranty. THE CITY IS PROVIDING THE ELECTION EQUIPMENT AND AVT EQUIPMENT ON AN AS-IS BASIS WITH NO SUPPORT WHATSOEVER. THERE IS NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, NO WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR PARTICULAR USE, NO WARRANTY OF NON- INFRINGEMENT, NO WARRANTY REGARDING THE USE OF THE INFORMATION OR THE RESULTS THEREOF AND NO OTHER WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. Pursuant to the foregoing, the School District agrees that the City is furnishing the Election and AVT Equipment on an “as is” basis, without representation or any express or implied warranties, other than those provided by the Maintenance Vendor and/or AVT Maintenance Vendor, including but not limited to, fitness for particular purpose, merchantability or the accuracy and completeness of the Election Equipment or AVT Equipment. The City does not warrant that the Election Equipment and/or AVT Equipment will be error free. The City disclaims any other warranties, express or implied, respecting this agreement or the Election or AVT Equipment. The School District’s exclusive remedy and the City’s sole liability for any substantial defect which impairs the use of the Election Equipment and/or AVT Equipment for the purposes stated herein shall be the right to terminate this Agreement. 7.7 IN NO EVENT SHALL THE CITY BE LIABLE FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (EVEN IF THE CITY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE) OR LOSS 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 CITY. The City and the School District agree each will be responsible for their own acts and omissions under this Agreement and the results thereof including but not limited to the acts or omissions of the party’s subcontractors, employees and other personnel and shall to the extent authorized by law defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other party from any liability, claims, causes of action, costs or expenses resulting directly or indirectly from such acts and/or omissions. Each party shall not be responsible for the acts, errors or omissions of the other party under the Agreement and the results thereof. The parties’ respective liabilities shall be governed by the provisions of the Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466, and other applicable law. The statutory limits of liability for some or all of the parties may not be added together or stacked to increase the maximum amount of liability for any party. This paragraph shall not be construed to bar legal remedies one party may have for the other party’s failure to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement constitutes a waiver by the City or School District of any statutory or common law defenses, immunities, or limits on liability. 171938v3 Page 7 of 8 7.8 Notice. Any notice or demand shall be in writing and shall be sent registered or certified mail to the other party addressed as follows: To the City: City of Orono 2750 Kelley Pkwy, Orono, MN 55356 To the School District: Orono Public Schools 685 Old Crystal Bay Road North Orono, Minnesota 55356. 7.9 Audit Provision. Both parties agree that either party, the State Auditor, or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours, and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent to the accounting practices and procedures of the other party and involve transactions relating to this Agreement. Such materials shall be maintained and such access and rights s hall be in force and effect during the period of the contract and for six (6) years after its termination or cancellation. 7.10 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. 7.11 Survival of Provisions. It is expressly understood and agreed that the obligations and warranties of the City and School District hereof shall survive the completion of performance and termination or cancellation of t his Agreement. 7.12 Authority. The person or persons executing this Lease Agreement on behalf of the City and School District represent that they are duly authorized to execute this Lease Agreement on behalf of the City and the School District and represent and warrant that this Lease Agreement is a legal, valid and binding obligation and is enforceable in accordance with its terms. 7.13 The parties shall comply with applicable law including but not limited to the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 (MGDPA). THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS BLANK. 171938v3 Page 8 of 8 AUTHORIZATION CITY OF ORONO By: Its: ___________________________ Date: ORONO PUBLIC SCHOOLS, INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 278 By: Its: ___________________________ Date: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: Aug 10, 2015 Item No. 20 Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section: Name: Ron Olson RJO City Administrator’s Title: Finance Director Report Item Description: Claims/Bills The attached claims for payment have been received by the City. Staff has reviewed the claims and is recommending approval of the listing for payment. The claims will be paid by checks 111225 to 103502, totaling $706,282.53. Noteworthy payments include: Bond Trust Services US Bank $ 39,971.88 $ 56,462.51 $ 1,125.00 $ 60,776.25 Semi-annual interest payments on our outstanding bonds. Payments are due 8/1 and 2/1. The February payments also include principal. AEM Financial Services $ 12,000.00 This is the payment for the Compensation Study that was presented to the Council last month. Bituminous Roadways $351,408.37 Payment for work that has been completed on the Watertown Road/Stubbs Bay project. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve payment of the claims list as presented. City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 1 Check Issue Dates: 7/28/2015 - 8/10/2015 Aug 05, 2015 02:25PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount A 1 RENTAL 08/10/2015 103424 111225 101-43000-224 LP for patch truck Public Works Department 102.85 Total 103424:102.85 Advanced Imaging Solutions 08/10/2015 103425 78206 101-41900-413 toner shipping Central Services 10.39 Total 103425:10.39 ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIO 08/10/2015 103426 283827327 101-41900-413 copier lease 7/20 to 8/20 Central Services 1,284.00 Total 103426:1,284.00 ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIO 08/10/2015 103427 283839082 101-42110-413 pd copier lease 7/20 to 8/20 Police Department 331.00 Total 103427:331.00 AEM FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS LL 08/10/2015 103428 351181 101-43290-800 compensation study Special Projects-Contingencies 12,000.00 Total 103428:12,000.00 ALLIED BLACKTOP COMPANY 08/10/2015 103429 20875 703-49960-379 Crestview Ave culvert 2,890.00 Total 103429:2,890.00 BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC 08/10/2015 103430 2 402-20600 Watertown/Stubbs Bay rehab 18,495.18- BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC 08/10/2015 103430 2 402-48056-590 Watertown/Stubbs Bay rehab Watertown Road 369,903.55 Total 103430:351,408.37 BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF 08/10/2015 103431 72015 101-21706 Health insurance 3,272.44 BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF 08/10/2015 103431 72015 101-15998 Cobra 7,626.42 Total 103431:10,898.86 BNR IRRIGATION SERVICES 08/10/2015 103432 83960 101-45210-404 irrigation repair Golf Course 198.44 Total 103432:198.44 BOLTON & MENK INC.08/10/2015 103433 179755 602-49450-304 Sewer matters Sewer 960.00 BOLTON & MENK INC.08/10/2015 103433 179755 101-43170-304 MSA counts Engineering 345.00 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 2 Check Issue Dates: 7/28/2015 - 8/10/2015 Aug 05, 2015 02:25PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount BOLTON & MENK INC.08/10/2015 103433 179755 101-43170-304 Seal coating specs Engineering 30.00 BOLTON & MENK INC.08/10/2015 103433 179755 601-49400-304 data dictionary Water 275.00 BOLTON & MENK INC.08/10/2015 103433 179755 602-49450-304 data dictionary Sewer 275.00 BOLTON & MENK INC.08/10/2015 103433 179755 651-49910-304 data dictionary Storm Water 275.00 BOLTON & MENK INC.08/10/2015 103433 179755 101-43170-304 sign map book Engineering 1,980.00 BOLTON & MENK INC.08/10/2015 103433 179755 651-49910-304 Orono Orchard drainage Storm Water 960.00 BOLTON & MENK INC.08/10/2015 103433 179755 101-43170-304 fence setback drawing Engineering 128.00 Total 103433:5,228.00 BOND TRUST SERVICES CORP 07/31/2015 201300 25817 321-47000-611 GO 2010A bond 39,971.88 Total 20130065:39,971.88 BOND TRUST SERVICES CORP 07/31/2015 201300 25818 322-47000-611 GO 2014A 56,462.51 Total 20130067:56,462.51 BUDGET PRINTING 08/10/2015 103434 8380 101-42110-221 UPS shipping Police Department 14.94 Total 103434:14.94 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-000G1 101-42400-307 B&Z assistance Building & Zoning 1,008.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-000G1 101-41600-307 Gen Legal/staff/review Law/Legal Services 2,542.55 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-000G1 101-42400-307 staff meetings 6/15 Building & Zoning 1,689.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-000G1 101-41600-307 Council meetings 6/15 Law/Legal Services 1,286.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-000G1 101-41600-307 Council communications Law/Legal Services 248.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-004G1 101-42110-307 Police matters Police Department 279.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-115G6 101-41600-308 Code enforcement/ordinance violations Law/Legal Services 160.34 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-130G5 101-43280-307 Kintyre Two Special Services 17.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-150G5 101-43290-800 litigation Special Projects-Contingencies 776.10 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-201G3 101-41600-307 misc recordings Law/Legal Services 227.67 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-277G1 101-43280-307 3208-1 Orono Mini storage Special Services 40.66 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-281G1 101-41600-307 encroachment agreements Law/Legal Services 92.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-334G7 101-41600-307 Pyle land registration Law/Legal Services 31.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-340G3 101-43280-307 15-3716 3850 Watertown Rd Special Services 90.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-348G4 101-43280-307 15-3723 405 North Arm Dr Special Services 202.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-352G3 101-43280-307 15-3737 1150 Homestead Trl/3020 Sixth Ave N Special Services 67.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-353G2 101-41600-307 Spates Ave Lake Access Law/Legal Services 310.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-357G2 101-43280-307 15-3739 300 Sixth Ave Special Services 225.00 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 3 Check Issue Dates: 7/28/2015 - 8/10/2015 Aug 05, 2015 02:25PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-358G2 101-43280-307 15-3734 200/350 Stubbs Bay Rd Special Services 120.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-360G2 601-16500 Land acquisition-New Well 930.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/10/2015 103435 2717-362G1 101-43280-307 15-3738 1025 Spring Hill Rd Special Services 202.50 Total 103435:10,545.82 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 08/10/2015 103436 JL72715 101-41110-439 food for work session Jimmy John's Mayor & Council 72.68 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 08/10/2015 103436 RO71315 101-41900-319 CAFR certificate program Central Services 435.00 Total 103436:507.68 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN 08/10/2015 103437 72215 601-49400-381 6/23 to 7/22 Water 198.62 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN 08/10/2015 103437 72215 602-49450-381 6/23 to 7/22 Sewer 172.01 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN 08/10/2015 103437 72215 101-41900-381 6/23 to 7/22 Central Services 88.68 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN 08/10/2015 103437 72215 101-42110-381 6/23 to 7/22 Police Department 34.42 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN 08/10/2015 103437 72215 101-45210-381 6/23 to 7/22 Golf Course 22.42 Total 103437:516.15 CENTURY LINK 08/10/2015 103438 71915 101-45210-321 GC phone/dsl Golf Course 193.10 Total 103438:193.10 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 08/10/2015 103439 12971 101-42110-402 #844 oil change, power supply repair Police Department 214.86 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 08/10/2015 103439 12982 101-43000-402 #210 brakes Public Works Department 178.62 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 08/10/2015 103439 12985 101-42110-402 #228 fuel pump Police Department 578.38 Total 103439:971.86 CITYVIEW PLUMBING & HEATIN 08/10/2015 103440 43278 601-49400-405 supplies Water 8.19 Total 103440:8.19 CIVIC SYSTEMS LLC 08/10/2015 103441 13180 101-41900-401 software support 7-15 to 12-15 Central Services 1,021.10 CIVIC SYSTEMS LLC 08/10/2015 103441 13180 602-49450-401 software support 7-15 to 12-15 Sewer 1,021.10 CIVIC SYSTEMS LLC 08/10/2015 103441 13180 601-49400-401 software support 7-15 to 12-15 Water 765.82 CIVIC SYSTEMS LLC 08/10/2015 103441 13180 603-49500-401 software support 7-15 to 12-15 765.82 CIVIC SYSTEMS LLC 08/10/2015 103441 13180 651-49910-401 software support 7-15 to 12-15 Storm Water 685.16 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 4 Check Issue Dates: 7/28/2015 - 8/10/2015 Aug 05, 2015 02:25PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Total 103441:4,259.00 CLIFTON LARSON ALLEN LLP 08/10/2015 103442 1093011 601-49400-301 2014 Audit services Water 4,000.00 CLIFTON LARSON ALLEN LLP 08/10/2015 103442 1093011 602-49450-301 2014 Audit services Sewer 6,000.00 CLIFTON LARSON ALLEN LLP 08/10/2015 103442 1093011 614-49840-301 2014 Audit services Cable Franchise 1,625.00 Total 103442:11,625.00 CNA LTC 08/10/2015 103443 1569455 101-21715 Long term care 8/15 68.70 Total 103443:68.70 CONNELLY INDUSTRIAL ELEC 08/10/2015 103444 14221 601-49400-405 water plant repairs Water 3,259.22 Total 103444:3,259.22 CREATIVE PRODUCT SOURCIN 08/10/2015 103445 84623 101-42110-201 DARE supplies Police Department 11.50 Total 103445:11.50 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 08/10/2015 103446 813158 101-45210-091 beer Golf Course 217.60 Total 103446:217.60 DELTA DENTAL 08/10/2015 103447 6097087 101-15998 003722072 Aug Cobra 522.30 DELTA DENTAL 08/10/2015 103447 6097087 101-21709 003722072 Aug Dental 1,675.80 Total 103447:2,198.10 DPC INDUSTRIES 08/10/2015 103448 827001066-1 601-49400-216 chemicals Water 805.00 DPC INDUSTRIES 08/10/2015 103448 827001116-1 601-49400-216 chemicals Water 439.00 Total 103448:1,244.00 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 08/10/2015 103449 183796 101-41900-352 legal ads Central Services 53.64 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 08/10/2015 103449 183798 101-41900-352 legal ads Central Services 65.56 Total 103449:119.20 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 5 Check Issue Dates: 7/28/2015 - 8/10/2015 Aug 05, 2015 02:25PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount ERLANDSON, JIM 08/10/2015 103450 80415 101-45210-404 fountain and misc GC repairs Golf Course 1,219.04 Total 103450:1,219.04 FLOORS BY BECKER INC 08/10/2015 103451 158263 437-48970-520 carpet strip new office 576.00 Total 103451:576.00 G & K SERVICES 08/10/2015 103452 1006193914 101-43000-226 uniform Public Works Department 23.39 G & K SERVICES 08/10/2015 103452 1006193914 601-49400-226 uniform Water 11.70 G & K SERVICES 08/10/2015 103452 1006193914 602-49450-226 uniform Sewer 11.70 G & K SERVICES 08/10/2015 103452 1006193914 101-43000-221 towels Public Works Department 6.37 Total 103452:53.16 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 08/10/2015 103453 282020 602-49450-403 generator #851 Sewer 179.00 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 08/10/2015 103453 282275 101-43000-224 shop supplies Public Works Department 4.99 Total 103453:183.99 GEPHART ELECTRIC CO INC 08/10/2015 103454 80215 602-49450-404 garage door repair Sewer 860.73 Total 103454:860.73 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 08/10/2015 103455 139145 601-49400-489 locates Water 351.00 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 08/10/2015 103455 139145 602-49450-489 locates Sewer 351.00 Total 103455:702.00 HACH CHEMICAL CO 08/10/2015 103456 9469226 601-49400-216 chemicals Water 44.48 Total 103456:44.48 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 08/10/2015 103457 1000063101 101-41600-309 jail charges Law/Legal Services 225.00 Total 103457:225.00 HIRSCH, AL 08/10/2015 103458 80415 101-34410 refund advance plan review 230.10 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 6 Check Issue Dates: 7/28/2015 - 8/10/2015 Aug 05, 2015 02:25PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Total 103458:230.10 INTEGRA TELECOM 08/10/2015 103459 13164967 101-42110-321 Phone service Police Department 245.99 INTEGRA TELECOM 08/10/2015 103459 13164967 101-41900-321 Phone Service Central Services 344.38 INTEGRA TELECOM 08/10/2015 103459 13164967 601-49400-321 Phone Service Water 57.40 INTEGRA TELECOM 08/10/2015 103459 13164967 602-49450-321 Phone Service Sewer 172.19 Total 103459:819.96 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE 08/10/2015 103460 61215 101-41900-319 HRA PCORI fees Central Services 31.20 Total 103460:31.20 JOHNSON, RAYMOND 08/10/2015 103461 72015 999-10015 refund overpay UB 152.40 Total 103461:152.40 KENNETH N POTTS PA 08/10/2015 103462 80115 101-41600-306 prosecution services Jul Law/Legal Services 3,000.00 Total 103462:3,000.00 KRIER, RICHARD 08/10/2015 103463 80415 101-22205 Escrow refund 2015-00259 2,000.00 Total 103463:2,000.00 LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE 08/10/2015 103464 A26041 101-43000-224 supplies Public Works Department 1.88 LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE 08/10/2015 103464 B272506 101-41900-223 and killer Central Services 19.98 LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE 08/10/2015 103464 B274949 101-45200-221 folding chair Parks 19.99 LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE 08/10/2015 103464 B275337 602-49450-403 water for generator batteries Sewer 1.79 LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE 08/10/2015 103464 B275568 101-43000-221 supplies Public Works Department 2.59 LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE 08/10/2015 103464 B276607 101-45200-223 paint supplies for parks Parks 21.05 LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE 08/10/2015 103464 B276617 101-43000-224 supplies Public Works Department 5.99 Total 103464:73.27 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT 08/10/2015 103465 2153963 602-49450-222 #713 bearing plate assembly Sewer 80.52 Total 103465:80.52 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 7 Check Issue Dates: 7/28/2015 - 8/10/2015 Aug 05, 2015 02:25PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 08/10/2015 103466 666305 101-45210-212 GC fuel Golf Course 1,049.63 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 08/10/2015 103466 666311 101-45210-212 GC diesel Golf Course 632.76 Total 103466:1,682.39 Mediacom 08/10/2015 103467 72115 614-49840-329 internet Cable Franchise 487.00 Total 103467:487.00 MEDIACOM 08/10/2015 103468 72615 101-45210-415 GC cable Golf Course 7.34 Total 103468:7.34 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTA 08/10/2015 103469 1047537 602-49450-383 Sept wastewater service Sewer 40,608.92 Total 103469:40,608.92 MEYERS OUTDOOR SERVICES 08/10/2015 103470 4177 101-45200-404 July service Parks 2,175.00 Total 103470:2,175.00 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLI 08/10/2015 103471 168123107 101-45210-092 beverages Golf Course 313.20 Total 103471:313.20 MORRIES PARTS AND SERVIC 08/10/2015 103472 4260 101-42110-402 headlight repair Police Department 140.00 Total 103472:140.00 MOUND TRUE VALUE 08/10/2015 103473 71515 101-42110-240 supplies for Night to Unite Police Department 140.00 Total 103473:140.00 MUNICIPAL BUILDERS INC 08/10/2015 103474 5 601-16500 Water Plant pay app 5 22,059.95 Total 103474:22,059.95 NAVARRE HARDWARE 08/10/2015 103475 257057 101-43000-224 caution tape Public Works Department 7.99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 08/10/2015 103475 286654 602-49450-406 LS 14 repair Sewer 20.64 NAVARRE HARDWARE 08/10/2015 103475 286797 602-49450-240 supplies Sewer 13.99 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 8 Check Issue Dates: 7/28/2015 - 8/10/2015 Aug 05, 2015 02:25PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount NAVARRE HARDWARE 08/10/2015 103475 286856 101-45210-223 supplies Golf Course 8.49 NAVARRE HARDWARE 08/10/2015 103475 287017 602-49450-221 rope Sewer 7.99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 08/10/2015 103475 287062 651-49910-227 erosion repair supplies Storm Water 9.98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 08/10/2015 103475 287069 101-45200-223 paint supplies for parks Parks 11.14 NAVARRE HARDWARE 08/10/2015 103475 287073 101-42110-550 squad supplies Police Department 27.34 NAVARRE HARDWARE 08/10/2015 103475 287092 101-45200-223 paint supplies for parks Parks 11.46 NAVARRE HARDWARE 08/10/2015 103475 287106 101-45210-223 supplies Golf Course 82.97 NAVARRE HARDWARE 08/10/2015 103475 287132 601-49400-223 supplies Water 25.26 Total 103475:227.25 NEOPOST 08/10/2015 103476 5389839 101-41900-401 postage meter lease Central Services 376.50 Total 103476:376.50 NOVA COMMUNICATIONS 08/10/2015 103477 92270 101-41900-401 update phone greetings Central Services 60.00 Total 103477:60.00 OFFICE DEPOT 08/10/2015 103478 7808598110 101-42110-201 office supplies Police Department 263.20 OFFICE DEPOT 08/10/2015 103478 7808599110 101-42110-201 office supplies Police Department 15.29 Total 103478:278.49 OFFICE DEPOT 08/10/2015 103479 7804023390 101-41900-201 office supplies Central Services 81.83 Total 103479:81.83 PETERSON, LINDA 08/10/2015 103480 80415 101-22205 Escrow refund 2014-01293 2,500.00 Total 103480:2,500.00 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC 08/10/2015 103481 30724 602-49450-406 LS service checks Sewer 3,540.00 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC 08/10/2015 103481 30728 602-49450-406 LS 21 and LS 7 repair Sewer 568.00 Total 103481:4,108.00 REED VENDING 08/10/2015 103482 9086 101-45210-094 concession supplies Golf Course 114.70 REED VENDING 08/10/2015 103482 9089 101-45210-094 concession supplies Golf Course 154.10 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 9 Check Issue Dates: 7/28/2015 - 8/10/2015 Aug 05, 2015 02:25PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Total 103482:268.80 SCHMID, DAVID 08/10/2015 103483 80415 101-22205 Escrow refund 2014-00858 10,000.00 Total 103483:10,000.00 SEH 08/10/2015 103484 300940 601-49400-304 Sprint upgrades Water 680.68 Total 103484:680.68 SELECT ACCOUNT 08/10/2015 103485 38027820 101-21719 7/28/15 FLEX 876.87 Total 103485:876.87 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 08/10/2015 103486 14773 101-45200-223 paint for parks signs Parks 127.15 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 08/10/2015 103486 650210586 101-45200-223 credit Parks 7.28- Total 103486:119.87 TASC 08/10/2015 103487 574819 101-41900-319 COBRA admin fee Central Services 55.00 Total 103487:55.00 TESSMAN COMPANY 08/10/2015 103488 219227 101-45210-223 fungicide Golf Course 174.00 Total 103488:174.00 THELEN HEATING & ROOFING I 08/10/2015 103489 70281 101-42110-404 weight room AC repair Police Department 421.00 Total 103489:421.00 THORPE DIST CO 08/10/2015 103490 909307 101-45210-091 beer Golf Course 215.30 Total 103490:215.30 TREECARE 08/10/2015 103491 877 101-45200-404 Part tree maintenance Parks 4,725.00 TREECARE 08/10/2015 103491 882 101-45200-404 Part tree maintenance Parks 750.00 TREECARE 08/10/2015 103491 882 101-43000-408 ROW tree maint Public Works Department 475.00 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 10 Check Issue Dates: 7/28/2015 - 8/10/2015 Aug 05, 2015 02:25PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Total 103491:5,950.00 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERV 08/10/2015 103492 80415 101-41900-322 postage for meter Central Services 2,000.00 Total 103492:2,000.00 US BANK WIRE 07/31/2015 201300 73115 320-47000-611 GO Imp Refund Bond 2009A 1,125.00 Total 20130066:1,125.00 US BANK WIRE 07/31/2015 201300 80115 319-47000-611 GO Street Recon Series 2008A 60,776.25 Total 20130068:60,776.25 VANGUARD CLEANING SYSTE 08/10/2015 103493 39698 101-41900-407 Janitorial service Central Services 1,435.50 VANGUARD CLEANING SYSTE 08/10/2015 103493 39698 101-42110-407 Janitorial service Police Department 1,039.50 Total 103493:2,475.00 VERIZON WIRELESS 08/10/2015 103494 9748512331 101-42110-321 7/07 to 8/06 Police Department 1,498.87 VERIZON WIRELESS 08/10/2015 103494 9748512331 101-41900-321 7/07 to 8/06 Central Services 111.54 VERIZON WIRELESS 08/10/2015 103494 9748512331 101-45210-321 7/07 to 8/06 Golf Course 40.20 VERIZON WIRELESS 08/10/2015 103494 9748512331 601-49400-321 7/07 to 8/06 Water 45.30 VERIZON WIRELESS 08/10/2015 103494 9748512331 602-49450-321 7/07 to 8/06 Sewer 45.30 Total 103494:1,741.21 VINTAGE WASTE SYSTEMS IN 08/10/2015 103495 72015 101-45210-404 July service Golf Course 45.00 VINTAGE WASTE SYSTEMS IN 08/10/2015 103495 72015 101-41900-404 July service Central Services 155.00 VINTAGE WASTE SYSTEMS IN 08/10/2015 103495 72015 101-45200-404 July service Parks 240.50 Total 103495:440.50 WAYZATA BAY CAR WASH 08/10/2015 103496 71715 101-42110-402 car washes Police Department 9.49 Total 103496:9.49 WEILANDS ALL SEASONS CLINI 08/10/2015 103497 23257 101-41900-404 AC repair city hall Central Services 728.55 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 11 Check Issue Dates: 7/28/2015 - 8/10/2015 Aug 05, 2015 02:25PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Total 103497:728.55 WEST METRO MECHANICAL 08/10/2015 103498 72715 101-32530 permit refund 2015-00180 138.31 Total 103498:138.31 WILDTHREADS 08/10/2015 103499 23312 101-42110-226 OPD shirt- J. Werder Police Department 20.00 Total 103499:20.00 WINDSTREAM 08/10/2015 103500 58621784 601-49400-321 water plant phone Water 54.84 Total 103500:54.84 XCEL ENERGY 08/10/2015 103501 466103032 101-41900-381 6/23 to 7/23 Central Services 1,940.15 XCEL ENERGY 08/10/2015 103501 466103032 101-42110-381 6/23 to 7/23 Police Department 1,088.30 XCEL ENERGY 08/10/2015 103501 466103032 101-42110-381 6/23 to 7/23 Police Department 38.09 XCEL ENERGY 08/10/2015 103501 466103032 101-43000-381 6/23 to 7/23 Public Works Department 161.83 XCEL ENERGY 08/10/2015 103501 466103032 101-43000-386 6/23 to 7/23 Public Works Department 1,911.50 XCEL ENERGY 08/10/2015 103501 466103032 101-45200-381 6/23 to 7/23 Parks 34.25 XCEL ENERGY 08/10/2015 103501 466103032 601-49400-381 6/23 to 7/23 Water 6,126.65 XCEL ENERGY 08/10/2015 103501 466103032 602-49450-381 6/23 to 7/23 Sewer 2,581.85 XCEL ENERGY 08/10/2015 103501 466103032 101-45210-381 6/23 to 7/23 Golf Course 957.16 Total 103501:14,839.78 YAMAHA MOTOR CORP.08/10/2015 103502 556042 101-45210-415 golf cart lease Golf Course 1,128.00 Total 103502:1,128.00 Grand Totals: 706,282.53