Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-08-1997 Council Packet) \ AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1997, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of tlie Agenda items are available in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL '>VC/4 /1. CONSENT AGENDA /) J S^p //Vq 8 ^PlOK,.'A'oAPPROVAL OF MINUTES ^ * 2. Regular Meeting of August 25, 1997 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Janice Berg Representative PUBLIC COMMf :\TS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT #2253 David Reinhold, 3551 Livingston Avenue - Variances - Resolution v4. #2267 John O'Sullivan, 2380 Shadywood Road - Commercial Site Plan - Resolution 5. #2270 Marcia & Kenneth Hickey, 4640 Tonkaview Lane - Variances/Conditional Use Permit - Resolution ^ 6. #2275 Ted & Myma Wolf, 900 Willow Drive North - Preliminary Plat - Resolution 7. #2276 Julie & Brent Walton, 2405 Dunwoody Avenue - Variances - Resolution MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT 8. Accept Feasibility Report and Schedule Public Hearing for Navarre Water Plant Rehabilitation - Resolution •^9. Pay Request #1 - Golf Course Irrigation System 3<r 10. Pay Request #1 - Bay Ridge/Bracketts Point Sewer Project .jil 11. Pay Request #3 - North Long Lake/Long Lake Country Club Addition Sewer Project CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 12. Budget/Tax Levy - Resolution -ii’13. Set Date for Truth in Taxation Hearing wAPolicy Regarding Inclusion of Properties in Sewer Projects - Resolution H.i^'Revised Assessment Resolution for North Long Lake Sewer Project - Resolution 15. Irrigation for Crystal Bay Park 16. Resolution Requesting County Assistance in the Oversight of *he Minnehaha Creek Watershed District AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1997, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COLTNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA • 17. LICENSES • 18. BILLS r\ UPCOMING ISSUES AND E\TNTS 09/08 09/12 09/15 09/22 09/23 Council meeting 7:00 p.m. Planning Commission Work Session 8:00 a.m. Planning Commission meeting 7:00 p.m. Council meeting 7:00 p.m. Public Hearing 6:30 p.m. - Orono High School Cafeteria - Navarre Water Plant Rehab *1 Jl ^>1 i.' ■ M • • » r I \ Public A ttendance Meeting D ate ^gfC>T'. 9 *7 ^ C ouncil d Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other Please fill out the information requested below for our city records . NAME (please print)address PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER i.8xe^r.^~:^uu:c iOkm-'A.' 1<t 2._ pc'-c.lC^y RtCtjiP ^/d/6 ^ ZZl(r 7<P 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.__ 0913914 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 25,1997 % ROLL '^yo <9 % The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present:^'' ■ Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Council Mentf>er5 J Diann Goetten, Charles Kelley, and Barbara Peterson. Richard Flint arrived at 8:1S p.m. during agenda item #9. Representing Staff ' were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Barrett, Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, Planner/Zoning Administrator Elizabeth Van Zomeren, Public Services Director Gr^ Gappa, City Engineers Gleim Cook and Tom Kdlogg, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. (#1) JIM DANIELS - LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION > 1998 BUDGET Jim Daniels, Administrator for the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission, was present to update the Council on the activities of the Commission as well as answering questions regarding the proposed budget. He indicated Chair Pattrin was unavailable to attend the meeting. Daniels said monthly updates are sent to the Mayor for his review. Daniels informed the Council that the Commission has gone through filings with the FCC relating to Triax submitting for small provider status. A disagreement on fees resuhed in an extensive filing. 1 he FCC decided in fiivor of the Comnussion, and the fee reimbursements will be retroactive and total about $150,000 in savings He noted there is a 60-day appeal allowance in the process. Daniels asked the Council to move forward regarding an ordinance r^ulating the use of p^lic rights-of-way in compliance with the recent legislative directive ruling in favor of cities. He said Moorse has received the draft information. Jabbour asked Moorse about this information. Moorse said he was reviewing it and has received additional information from the League of Cities for adoption of a City ordinance. Daniels indicated there is some difference in the language that should be paid attention to between the draft from the Comnussion and from the League of Cities and asked the City to make a comparison. Daniels said the opening of the north studio has been successful. The Long Lake Chamber of Commerce is using it, and the studio is receiving good recognition. Training sessions have also been popular. Daniels noted the 1998 Commission budget has been received by the Council. He s^d they are working on an early franchise renewal with Triax. It is scheduled to expire in mid 1999 but would like to r^uild it sooner than that. r MINITTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#1 - Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission - Continued) KellQr asked how many new subscribers there were for 1997 over 1996 and what is the growth rate for hook ups. Daniels said while not having the exact figures on hand, there has been a stearfy growdi. About 1000 new subscribers signed on 1*^ year hringiwg total to about 8000 current conne<^ons. Daniels informed KeUey that projections are conqileted by Triax. Thdr marketing plan is to add about 100 new connections each month. KeUcy asked if the Commission received fiinding through franchise fees and how it is calculated. Daniels said a fee is received from the gross revenues of Triax. Kelley asked if wifo increased subscribers the fee v reduced. Daniels said the extra subscriber fees received are used to open new facilities and fiind other growth options. Jabbour noted to the use of the fees is for budding equity and providing additional services. Daniels cited techmeal standards which need maintainiitg and increased customer service. Kdley was informed by Daniels that the viei^ir^ percentage of subscribers is difficult to measure. Danieb did cite an example of receiving calls on viewing of the Chamber meeting. KeUey informed Daniels that he has asked questions in order to understand how the Commission's services are funded. Jabbour asked about the contingency amount in the budget. Daniels indicated reserves are available to be used in cases of significam unforeseen expenses. Goetten iroved, Peterson seconded, to approve the 1998 Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission 1998 budget Vote: Ayes4, Ni^O. (*#2) CONSENT AGENDA Items US, 8, and 10 were added to the Consent Agenda. Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended Vote- Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (•#3) REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 11,1997 Goetten moved, KeUey seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of Augi-st 11, 1997. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. I t MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner McDermott informed the Council that work is proceeding on installation of new playground equipment at Antoine Park. The buildings on the property have been demolished and site work is currently taking place. McDermott said each Commissioner has been visiting assigned parks checking on maintenance and areas requiring attention. G^pa has been asked by the Commission to determine the cost of adding a sprinkler system at Old Ciystal Bay Park to assbt in the upkeep. McDermott asked the Council to consider approving a name change for the Commission to the Park and Open Space Commission. The Park Commissioners believe this name is more in keeping with the comprehensive nature of the board. Commissioner Welles said the Commission was unaware of the administrative process required to change the name. Jabbour informed him h would take some time and consideration. Jabbour said he has seen more work being done at the parks this year to the credit of Gappa and the Commission. He informed McDermott that he would hke to see Old Crystal Bay Park seeded soon. Goetten inquired when the work at Antoine work would be complete. McDermott said they had planned for a dedication some time this fall. Gappa said the work should be completed in about three weeks. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Smith had no new comments to make. She reminded the Council of the upcoming work session scheduled for the Planning Commission to discuss home occupation and tree preservation. PUBLIC COMMENTS Gary Hart, 3580 North Shore Drive, said he called the City ofiBces two months ago to inquire whether he would need a permit to add a temporary dock section. He said he was told it was not necessary. He proceeded to build a 12'xl2' dock on the lakeshore, and the building inspector stopped and informed him it was illegal to build a dock in this area. Jabbour informed Hart that a dock on the shore is considered a deck. He informed him of the Shoreland Ordinance amending the City code in 1975 where no structural coverage or hardcover is allowed in the 0-75’ setback finrn the lake, and exceptions are rarely made to that ordinance. He said docks are regulated by the LMCD. Hart said he has encounteret' many examples of rimilar structures on lakeshore properties that have been constructed ance 1975. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25» 1997 (Public Comments - Continued) Jabbour told Hart that a survey would be required and hardcover calculations made for his property for the changes as proposed. He said the Council would be happy to rc'/iew his application for variance. Goetten apologized to Hart for his having recdved incorrect information from City Staff. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT (#4) #223® CHIC DWIGHT AND FRED GUTTORMSON, 1220 TONKAWA ROAD • VARIANCES The applicants were present. Gafifron reported that the application is in two parts; one b^ng an after-the-fact lakeshore setback variance and 0-75' hardcover variance for an enclosed room below the existing deck. The second part includes a 75-250’ hardcover variance for a 32'x30' garage. Ga£fron explained the location of the property. The deck enclosure was approved two years ago subject to removal of the 8* gravel driveway to the lake and removal of the lakeshore deck. These removals would allow the applicant to enclose below the deck and repair the deck as well as grading for a w^out doorway. The resolution was not rigned and the work was done without the requured permits and removals. The work in progress was stopped by the building in^tector. This after-the-fact renewal application also now includes a new garage, which would the setbacks, and hardcover removal in both the 0-75' and 75-250' setback areas and removal of two sheds. The Planning Commission reviewed the q>plicarion and unanimously recommended approval of the deck enclosure with hardcover removals as noted. The approval is subject to brining the enclosure into conformance and removal of sheds. 8' driveway and the lakeshore deck. The Planning Commission detemuned that the removals suggested by the applicant were insufficient to off-set the increase of structural hardcover for the new garage. They requested the loop driveway located in the 0-75' setback be removed. The applicant did not agree to this removal, and the Planning Commission unanimously recommended denial of this portion of the application request. Guttormson said he installed pop-in, pop-out, type windows without any frost footings under the deck. He also did not do the dig^g as he had requested or enlarge the deck. He feh he then was not required to make the removals. Jabbour verified that Guttormson screened in what was existing below the deck. Guttormson said Bruce Vang inform^ him the work must be done to code. It was suggested to him at that lime that he split his ^[iplication requests into separate parts. ! ! MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#4 - #2238 Chic Dwight and Fred Guttonnson - Continued) Jabbour told Guttomison that he bdieves it is ^>propriate to have a garage in this State but the applicant must work with the City. Gaf&on noted that the applicant docs have an existing garage as wdL Goetten noted that the lot was beautiful. Guttonnson said he was at a standstill regarding the improvemems. He said his lakeside deck is unique to the property. He indicated he has removed grating, shed, and dumpsters full of debris and would not have done so if he had known these kerns could have been used as bargtuning tools. KellQr asked Guttormson if he had added new gravel to the driveway to the lake. Guttonnson said he has had k graded and added gravel, which was dragged down to the lake. Guttormson said he would be able to move the proposed garage forward if it would help. Goetten noted that the Planning Commisaon wanted to sec the turnaround eliminated, and the applicam wants to keep it. Chic Dwight said it is difiBcuh to move a car to the .correct angle to leave the driveway. Guttomison said it is difficult to make a left turn from the property and noted the road is posted for no parking. Guttormson said he needs the additional storage space. Dwight reiterated the clean up measures that they have taken on the property. Peterson received confirmation from Gaffiron that the gravel driveway to the lake was to be removed as part of the screeiung in of the ar ea below the deck. Guttonnson responded that he only screened in the deck that is existing and did not make it a 3* season porch. Peterson asked Guttormson why he did not remove the gravel as he had agreed to do. Guttormson said he didn't because he did not complete the improvements as proposed. Jabbour said the applicant had been unhappy with the Council's decision at that time and bad ori^ally plaiuied on adding frost footings. Jabbour noted the appticant and City were back to where they started if no agreement is reached. Gaflfron confirmed that was true. Jabbour asked Guttormson if he would cut down the circular driveway to address the Planning Commission's concerns. Guttormson said he ba« allowed a portion of it to grow in wkh vegetation to narrow k. Goetten was informed that 50 s.f was proposed to be removed and vegetated. Jabbour suggested uting the portion of the driveway out of the 0-75’ setback. Dwight said there are trees located in that area; Guttormson confirmed there are 12 trees located there. Jabbour asked what would be done with the gravd. Guttonnson sdd he would add black dirt and restore the vegetation. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#4 - #2238 Chic Dwight and Fred Guttormson - Continued) Jabbour asked if there was any way to reduce the hardcover to oflf-sct the new hardcover. Gafiron suggested the garage be moved forward. Gaffron also said he thought the loop could be cHminated with the ability for maneuvering whhin the large pad out of the 75' setback. He said the options had been explored, but the applicant's recreational vehicle would be difficult to maneuver. In comparison to other similar properties, Gaffion indicated that the loop is overbuilt. Dwight questioned whether other properties are able to park on their streets. Jabbour informed her that it was possible for the Council to allow parking again on the street. Jabbour informed the applicants that the Council rardy allows nardcover in the 0-75* setback and views the application timilar to the Planning Commission. He noted that if the application was denied, the ^plicants could not submit a further application for sx months. Peterson said she would support the screening of the deck but saw a problem with the extensive hardcover and the turnaround. She said she agrees with the Planning Commission recommendations on the trade-offs, e^>ecially in light of the fact that there is already a 2-car garage on the property. Guttormson asked, if he eliminated the screened porch and requested the garage, whether he would be allowed to keep the road to the lake and lakeside deck. Keller informed him that the road to the lake must be eliimnated. He told Guttormson that he was upset that the applicant was back before the Council after having previously approved improvements and felt taken advantage of He indicated the applicant did not uphold the terms of the resolution and proceeded to perform the work. Kelley said the ^plicant was aware of the riilcs that had been established through the process. Guttormson said he got the permits for the work that was done. Goetten informed the applicants that she would like to see the Council and applicant come to a mutual agreement but did feel the loop driveway must be eliminated. She said the applicant should comply with the options presented by Staff and supports the garage with removals as noted. Jabbour asked the applicant if he wanted to have a motion on the ^plication or if he preferred the application be tabled. Guttormson adeed that the application be tabled. Jabbour said changes to the application would require review by the Planning Commission. Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to table Application #2238 until the applicant is ready to take further action. City Attorney Barrett will draft a dated letter to that effect and send to the applicant. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. t MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (•#5) #2255 RICK RICE, 2700 KELLY AVENUE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3945 Goetten moved, Kell^^ seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3945. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays (#6) #2264 JANET KIERNAN, 1491 SHORELINE DRIVE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 3946 The applicant was present, along with Alan Christy. Gafifron reported that an application for additions to the existing residence was reviewed and approv^ one year ago, bm plans have since been revised. The Planning Commission recently reviewed the application as well. The property located by Bracketts Point was planned for remodeliog with additions to the garage. Existing structure and hardcover were reviewed. At the time of appl3nng for the building permit, applicant proposed to remove the entire structure and b^n anew with new construction. The plan included encroachment of the side and 75' setback. The Planning Commission had recommended that this new construction should include moving the house back from the 75' setback. The currem revised plan will make use of some portion of the existing structure. The applicant will make use of 40% of the existing structure. After the additions, the new ^ructure will be 80% new and 20% existiiig. The plan was reviewed with the building inspectors. Ga^on noted that the code does not specify a percentage of existing building that must remain to be con^dered as a remodeling. TTw plans include a side setback encroachment. The 75' encroachment will remain as exists. The average lakeshore setback enrrodchment will change as the nature of the bulk and mass of the structure will increase in that setback. Gafiron indicated that the Planning Commissioners felt this change would not impact the neighboring properties due to its relation to and topography of the land. Staff recommended approv^ of the application subject to the conditions previously r^mmended by the Planning Commission. These conditions include no change to the side setback, a change in the drweway, addition of a garage stall, meeting the 15' street setback, and 27.6% hardcover in the 75-250' setback ftM” a 0.1% increase. The applicant printed a computer scanned photograph of the area depicting what the improvements will look like. Tree coverage was removed to allow the residence to be viewed. However, the actual tree coverage will remain. Alan Christy said no additional encroachment will occur into the setback of the footprint and only in volume for the second story. Jabbour was informed that height was not an issue. 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#6 - #2264 Janet Kieman - Continued) Kiernan ^owed pictures of the property. Christy said the resolution as proposed is acceptable to Kieman. He noted if the mumcipal sewer easement is included in the resolution, the easement should be restricted to a 20 ’ width. City Engineer, Tom Kellogg, said the sewer easement referred to is one bdng n^otiated for the extreme northeast comer of the property to allow a directionally bored 8" pipe to be installed to provide service to the property east of Kieman. A back hoe would be used for the sewer installation otherwise, resulting in a 20-25' deep hole with a steep bank. The easement would decrease that digging to 10 ’. Christy said he has not seen the legal description for the easement and would approve it in die extreme northeast comer but would like it clarified. Jabbour srud the sewer easement should be indq)endent firom the application. Barrett agreed with Jabbour. Kelley said he was concerned with the 80%/20%, new/old, stmcture percentage. Gaflfron clarified that the 40% of the current structure would remaiiL Kelley said he opines that the constmction would result in a new structure. He would support the firont and ride yard setback variances. He would not support encroachment of the 75’ setback. Goetten noted that the code does not ^lecify a policy regarding how much of an old structure is required to remain in order to be considered as a remodel instead of new construction. Peterson remarked, that without this policy, she supported the application. Jabbour acknowledged that the City should make a policy determination on this issue. Goetten indicated that if foundation was removed, the structure should be bdiind the 0- 75’ setback; but without a pdicy regarding the foundation in place, she would support the Planning Commission recommendation. Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3946 per the Planning Commission recommendation, but excluding the condition regarding a sewer easement. Gaflfron indicated that a 10' comer of the house would remain in the 0-75 ’ seti>ack. JaUmur verified that no additional structure would occur in the 0-75 ’ setback. Gaflfrmi said the construction v^’ould be remodeling only and no expanrion of the footprint in the 0-75 ’ zone and in the south side setback area. Most of the foundation is being used in that area. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 1, Kelley. 8 minutes of the regular orono city council MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 "** HOAD. COMMERCIAL- •» 0^‘He r ^lSSSn “a Im7 ““ - Graten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3947. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays (») KJ7M277 WYATT MOE. 1230 SPRUCE PLACE - SUBDIVISION OF A m vacation - varl S™uton Nancy Moe was present, along with JoEUen Hurr. Ga^n indiorted that Stoffhas prepared a final resolution for approval for Council review, instead of conceptual approval only. ** >>*“ «pplicant agrees with the discussion,conditions, and the Planning Commission recommendation. ^ ^on ^d the ap^cation is a metes and bounds subdivisioa It includes vaearion of a “<* '«<'> another portion to be rededicated It ^ i^dw a sub^sion of a lot line rearrangement to balance out the size of the two ^.Required are lot area, lot width, and hardcover variances tor the southern im ^ The cabin on the southern property >^repl^with a^home The vacation will accommodate Spruce PItoT^provision will be made for a sewer line easement. * •"* 'o*down• *K ^ setbacks for the south lot will be met, hardcover will be at 37 7% Distrirt^ Th^ ** aUowed. This is not unusual in this LR-IB Zoning wSL Commjsaon was in agreement with the tradeoflfe. The resohS provides the findings and conditions and includes the vacation and rededication r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#9 - #2272/2277 Wyatt Moe - Continued) Kelley asked if the existing house on the north win provide for an easement for access to the southern lot. Gaffion informed him diat the access easement could be abandoned and a drivews^ biult instead. Kelley asked if this would be allowed. Gafifron said yes, but it would be dependent on the hardcover. Kelley questioned whether this Council would make that approval. Gafhron indi :ated the driveway relocation could be accomi^ished without a variance but not if the northern house is expanded. Kdlqr questioned whether the property owner would use the driveway as a hardslup. He said he was attempting to visualize ^lat might occur in the property in the future. Hurr rdterated that the lots are two separate parcels. She also indicated that the applicant is granting a drainage easement, for facilities which were built at their expense. Ihe application will result in a 15' easemen, and tie together some loose ends. (Flint arrived at thb time, 8:IS p.m.) Goetten said the subdivition is an improvement for the property. Jabbour asked that the record note to future ownership that this approval might self- impose a future hardship if it does not have utilization of the driveway. Gafhon clarified for tl>e record that if a long driveway is created, it may create a self-imposed hardslup. Peterson moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3948 per subdivision of a lot line rearrangement. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Peterson moved, Goetten seconded, to a{^nx>ve lot area, lot width, and hardcover variances for Wyatt and Nancy Moe at 1220 Loma Linda Avenue and 1230 Spruce Place. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Peterson moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3950, a vacation of dedicated public roads and park witii rededication as noted. Vote: : Ayes 4, Nays 0. (•#10) #2274 BRYCE AND MARY PAT PETERSON, 2829 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 3949 Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3949. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#11) #2282 TOM TERRY FOR VALERIE PETERSON, 1125 NORTH ARM DRIVE - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 8:21-8:27 P.M. - RESOLUTION NO. 3951 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of M^ing were noted. The applicant was represented by Tom Terry. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#11- #2282 Tom Terry for Valerie Peterson - Continued) Gafi&*on reported that the public hearii^ was to review an application requiring lot area and lot wi^h variances for construction of a new residence to replace one that was destroyed by fire. The 26,292 s.f property is in the LR-IB Zoning District, where 43,560 s.f is required. Lot width of 85' is substandard to the 140' required. The survey shows the garage and driveway and proposed house. The residence will meet the 10' side setback on the north and be at 12' to the south. Setbacks are met. Hardcover in the 75- 250' setback needs to be confirmed at 30%. Gaffion believes the 0.04% overage is resolvable. Staff recommended approval. Tom Terry S2ud he thought the hardcover requirement was met as area was removed fifom the driveway. Jabbour a.sked that this occur. Terry indicated that the old house not meet the requirement. There were no public comments, and Jabbour closed the public hearing. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3951. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Terry asked the Council to waive the variance fee. Jabbour said this would require review and verification of the occurrences. He asked Moorse whether the facts would justify the waiver. Moorse said there was a delay in determining the need for a variance, but, ^e feet remains that variances are required. Jabbour opined that the applicant should pay the fee for the variance. Terry said the delay cost about two weeks of additional time and cost noting the variance fee of $225. Jabbour indicated that aiqr waiver of the fee would require a thorough investigation and did not support the waiver. Peterson, Goetten, Flint, and Kelley supported the variance fee. No motion was made for a variance wtuver. (#12) VARIANCE FOR DAVID AND JODI RAHN, 1385 REST POINT ROAD David Rahn was present. Gappa reported that the variance was previously approved for remodeling and addition of the subject residence. The building inspector brought concerns forward regarding the work in progress. The existing cabin is located in the 0-75' setback, and the variance was for an addition to square off the residence and add a second story. It called for the residence to be slab-on-grade. Floor plans were shown as well as pictures as the property was viewed at the time of inspection. It was felt that the amount of removals was more extensive than projected, the building was jacked up, and more courses of block were being added to the foundation. r MINUTESOFTHEREGVlARORONOCrrYCOUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#12 - Variance for David and Jodi Rahn - Continued) Gaooa indicated that the two additional courses of block were added after the st^ work ^^wTSued. He said the stop work order was issued b,^ the ^nstrucuon was not occurring according to what was permitted under the building permit. Jabbour inquired about a problem that arose with the ftreplace E^d said a tree feU on the fireplace during the July 14 storm and showed the resuhtng pictures. Rahn said he attended the meeting to hear the discuMion regarding the i*®"?. the stop work order. He indicated that the concrete S^otk order posted. Jabbour informed to that this issue was wth the Bto^ Department and to the CouncU. The CouncU can only discuss the house, its location, and its Rahn esplained that the two courses of block was only added wbc^ H w^to the porch as the floor joists were only inches away fi-om the ground. He » recommendation to elevate it two courses to obtain a separation frto the grade. He aai this recommendation came fiom his engineer. ^ poim thM, in order for the existing foundation to be in conformance, core fifl would have to be added. Jabbour said he saw the issues as being the existing residence is *ocat^ m the 0-75 setback and the other land on the property being in the flood . considerations were the location and what exists. Jabbour indicated ttot bi^on the major rehabilitation taking place, it would be difficult to save a^ portion of the residence. He considered the residence as being new construction. Bruce Vang said Staff did not feel Rahn was intending to deceive the City but there was nothing worth saving on the residence. Jdibour said Rahn should not attempt to save a few pieces rfwood for ^ to preserve what the City sees as use of existing structure. Jabbour informed Rahn that the Building Inspector feels there is no house left. Rahn said he disagreed but would work with the Bmlding Dep^ent. He thought what remained of the residence wm what was to remarn but would do all that was necessary to allow the project to continue. (Joetten noted that she did not vote for the project iratially and thMght occur. Goetten said the occurrences result in a inajor change to the appbeahon and should be reviewed again by the Planning Commission. ^ i ‘ I MINITTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#12 - Variance for David and Jodi Rahn - Continued) Jabbour asked Counsel if the resolution allows the applicant to continue as he is doing and remain in compliance. Bairett said the Council needs to determine whether the premise of the resolution, which is allowing additional structure to the existing reridence, is occurring. He noted that if it is determined to be new construction, a lot area variance would also be required in addition to the variances ^proved. Kdley noted the difiScuh issues at hand and differing viewpoints. Jabbour said the discussion is not to review the application but to determine whether the approved application is being diverted from. Kdley said he bdieves it has changed. Peterson said she does not bdieve that was Rahn's intentimi. Rahn noted that to a certain extent, the City required the ei^eering that occurred. He sees the only issue as being the two courses of block added. KeUey stated that this brings up the issue that en^neering should occur prior to approval of an ai^lication. If the facts had been known prior to the approval, he questioned whether the decision would have been differem. Kelley said these facts should have been known. Vaiig said he would like to correct the ord^ of events. According to the resolution, the Council directed an inspection of the foundation. Staff required the engineer to review the foundation and found h to be structurally sound but not meeting the 42** dq>th. A plan was developed to provide additional underpinning. Ketl^ said that issue should have been discussed before the Planning Commission and Council review and may have changed the judgments made. Jabbour said he feels the process should be done in the building permit process as it creates an added burden on the property owner. He noted surveying is e?q>ensive and with the engineering, the applicant could pay a large sum and then receive a denial. He ii^s conditions should be placed on the approval in terms of what checkpoints need to be met. Kelley said the issue is what occurs when these problems are found during the project that Staff says is different from that approved by Council resulting in the Coun^ becoming caught inbetweetL MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#12 - Variance for David and Jodi Rahn - Continued) Jabbour suggested no building permit be granted until the conditions to be met are known efiminating creating the problem. He said the question remaining b not whether the (nroject should be approved but whether what was sq>proved is what is there. Kelley responded that in that scenario, what was approved is being met. He indicated that Rahn is attempting to gain the residence within the footprint and on blocks. He feels the applicant is trying to meet what the Council wanted. Jabbour re^nded that removing three quarters of a house is not the same. Jabbour said he is not saying the owner should not get what the building code asks for, but the Council has to make a determination of its original intent and whether the applicant diverted from that intention. Jabbour asked Rahn when the storm occurred that resulted in damage to the fireplace. Rahn said it occurred about the time he had received application rqrproval. Rahn said when the floor joists were opened, he determined the floor had to be elevated to be in compliance with code. Without doing this step, he would not have been in compliance. Rahn said any further delays would create a hardship for him, and he b willing to do whatever is necessary to be allowed to continue. He indicated that be disagrees that only a small piece of floor remains. Jabbour indicated that Staff will continue to monitor the construction. Jabbour smd the Council will not get involved even if it would like to. He indicated that it is Staffs duty to morutor the atuation to protect the Council viewpoint. He noted that the CouncU would most likely not change the iq)proval due to the need to preserve the flood plain. Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the continuation of the construction wtb further removals if required to assure proper completion of the residence at that locatioiL Jabbour said he wants Rahn to be able to remove all of the building if necessary. Flint clarified that this would meet option #2 given to the Council. Jabbour concurred. Option #2 states: "Allow work to proceed under Resolution #3926 with further removab as deemed necessary by the biulding official to assure the best possible end product." Kelley asked to review the motion noting that the property is sewered, the biulding location b the best spot on the lot for a residence, and questioned whether this would have recoved a variance. He questioned whether the applicant would have recoved a variance if ah of the buildii^ was required to be tom down. With the house being found unsatisfactory, he questioned whether the work would be allowed to continue even if the entire residence was removed. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#12 * Variance for David and Jodi Rahn - Continued) Flint said he would support the nwtion as the facts laid out show the applicant acted in good &(th. He indicated there was a mutual misunderstanding of the facts and an act of God occurred. If this had not h^penecL he would recommend the Planning Commisrion again review it. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Goetten. Goetten said she felt the decision was outrageous. If the residence has to be demolished, Goetten said the Council has always required the residence to be moved back behind the 75* setback fine. She feels this decision erases that stance and allows people not to be held to that requirement. Jabbour asked that the record show that the majority of the renuuning portion of the property is in the flood plaiiL (The meeting was recessed for five minutes.) (Mayor/Council Report precedes the City Attorney Rqpoit) (Engineer’s Report, Hems #13-15, follow the City Administrator's Report.) CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT (#16) CASCO COVE ROAD MAINTENANCE UPDATE Moorse reported that tins item was being discussed as a result of public comments made at the July 28 Council Meeting regarding the poor condition of Casco Cove Road. Mike Barrett had requested at that meeting that the City take responsibility for ownership and maintenance of the road. Staff reviewed the matter and identified the issues as related in the memo by Gappa. According to the Comprehensive Plan pertaining to Urban Transportation, urban streets are to be maintained by the City. Moorse spoke with City Attorney Barrett regarding legal responsibility He indicated that he would generally believe in cases as this that be^n as a private road and become acquired by the City, the City would not be requ^ to take over maintenance as the road has always been maintained privat^. Shore HiUs Drive and Dakota Avenue are two other urban roads that are not maintained by the CHy. Reridents along Dakota Avenue have requested the CHy to take over maintenance. All other urban streets are maintained by the CHy. r (#16 - Casco Cove Road Maintenance - Continued) «kri for ,h. .0 ^meon. eUe. It decided the, foe City should foke ownership to preserve access to properties. property. H-S-SrpSfpSCity did not take that property as the subdivision needed It for their road. A A Cliy uiu iiui ------J • uu ...«a thm the Citv had uken the stand that roads will not he ^en over unless it •____ dliuaiiv/ily ------------ < Goetten asked when t»c forfeit parcels arise, ^ citi« » property in order to work with the homeowners associauon. Otherwise, have been made available for purchase.nave oeen hwu^ aYa..»s,.wr -------- Lntenance. After a total of 40 years, reconstruction would most likely be necessary fnati—------— Kelley cited an example of the private road his residence is on having had to be overlaid twice' m the last 15 years and only used by 11 homes. _ • Moorse said the Couned may want foe engineer to do a more m-depfo constnicrion review of private roads to ensure at least a 20 year life span. Kdley received confirmation from Moorse that roads are supposed to be built to Cky QtufidArds. I, was noted that there are differem t^dards for roirfs wito built in diffierent time periods when different stands were m ' „ that there are examples of different bases used and sods result m differences KeU^ said he would support foe City taking over foe mmntenance of foe force roads mentioned. r mI <•, I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25.1997 (#16 - Casco Cove Road Maintenance - Continued) Moorse asked Council to discuss the roads noting Dakota Avenue is new and Shore Hills Drive residents may not wish the City to take over maintenance as it is in good condition. Casco Cove, in its poor condition, may require not only maintenance but significant upgrade and correction to some portions and overlay elsewhere. Moorse said the cost would be ngnificant. He noted there is no program in place for major reconstniction of existing streets. The road would be added to the list of roads requiring work. I v. indicated there are other roads in similar condition on the list. Flint said he is of the opinion that the City shou^ not take over roads that are not built to City standards. He noted Dakota Avenue will be to standards but paid for by assessments. Jabbour said the road work was City subsidized. Flint suggested Casco Cove be brought to City standard and then taken over by way of assessment. Jabbour indicated the Comprehen^ve Plan is binding in its action or an amendment wiB be required noting the distinctions made regarding rural and urban roads. He cited the incident of Old Beach Road. Jabbour agreed the City should not take on a liability, but should have brought the road to City standard in 1987 when it was taken over. He noted it could not be brought to airrent standard in the wooded area. Cook concurred. Flint stud he was in agreement with the explanation made by Moorse on why the road was taken over in order to protect access for residences. He indicated the road is still that of those readents and should not be taken over by the City for maintenance without bdng brought to standard. He noted the ownership was done to protect the interest of the residents. Jabbour sdd he agreed with Flint but is of the opinion that the 10 years of subsequent use should be considered and value depreciated. Peterson siud she believes 50% of the life span for the road has been used. Goetten a.sked if the next .step should follow that train of thought. Peterson inquired what the prior standard was for that road. Moorse indicated that not all roads are built to the standard width but should have a good base and 3 ” of bituminous. Kelley noted that the road would then not be to City standards. Flint concurred that the standard was different than what currently exists. Gafifron indicated that the standards adopted with the subdivision code only go back to 1980 Jabbour asked, if the road was taken over in 1987 and built to City standards, what would have been the cost and what depreciation would have occurred. Peterson, while agreeing with this thought, noted the standards would have been different. Moorse indicated the road would have been about 8" of Class 5 and 3" of asphalt but not to the current width requirements. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#16 - Casco Cove Road Maintenance - Continued) Kelley asked what the condition is of the road. He was informed that the low area would require drainage improvements and excavation. The remaining portion would need an overlay. The sewer was installed in 1966 and road rebuilt at that time. The road is now (XMning close to the end of its life expectancy. Kelley clarified that the road was assessed in 1966 as part of the sewer project. KeUey opined that the City should do what marginally can be done and add the road to the list of roads for repairs. He suggested Staff dassily the needs and fix any major potholes. Goetten asked where the decision is made to fix a road. Jabbour questioned whether the City should take the road only if brought up to standard, or as is. He believes it should be taken somewhere inbetween due to its use since tinre of City acquisition. Gappa reported that a contractor quoted an estimated $20,000 to repair the road. Jabbour questioned whether the residents would be interested in an assessment of one- half that amount or whether they would prefer a temporary patch and the road be added to the road repair list. The $20,000 would not be a total recop'. ’ iiiction. It would include r^ladng the base in the low area and overlaying the entire street. The overlay would last about 10 years. Gappa told Jabbour that the road could be blade patched at a cost of about $500. The road would then be plowed by the City and added to the major repair list. Gappa said the road could be fixed now as suggested by Jabbour earlier wiA a portion paid by the City and assessed back to the residents. Jabbour reiterated there would be a 50% depreciation by this time fiom when it was acquired. He noted there were only 8 homes on the road. Kelley suggested the Council make a detemunation whether the road should be a City • road and allow time for the homeowners to talk about what they would like to see occur, whether to patch or totally repair as noted above Jabbour noted an assessment hearing would be required if the road repair was done and assessed. He reiterated the distinction in the Comprehensive Plan regarding urban roads and maintenance by the City. Goetten said the distinction should then be made on all three roads. Jabbour indicated that the other two roads are not in need of repair. Goetten questioned whether the determination taking over the road m 1987 was of a different criteria. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#16 - Casco Cove Road Maintenance - Continued) K*n^ n»v^, seconded, to take over Casco Cove Road as a City road for snow pto^ and mainlei^. Minimum maimenance would occur unless residents are Willing to be assessed for major repair. ^ saM he is not in favor of taking action and then deciding what should occur He said the road sMd not ^ taken over unless it is brought to City standard. He indicated he undets^ the amlMguity of the situation and would not object to some agreemem but a t>e made to bring to the budget table. Flint noted that the ^ does not tax for new roads u a policy, only patch. He feels residents wUl be misled into thinking the road will be improved. Jabtx^ agr^ but noted the Comprehensive Plan must be considered as well as the fact V suggested that the cost should be estabhsM to repair the road and prorated in order to allow the residents to know the cost and accelerate the repair if they so desire through assessment. Jabbour said he feeb rt wa^mistake t^g the road over in 1987. Flint said he did not believe that is what occurred. He beheves ownership was taken of the land but not the roadway. Goetten noted tf rwidents have a private road and want to see improvements made, and turn It over to the City, they must bring the road up to City standard. h^rse said ^erd items have been discussed regarding maintenance of a private road ^ brought to City Standard before being taking over. Howevi^. o'’"* Glas^ 2914 Ca^ Cove Road, indicated that the State took over the road in 1981. City reemv^ the deed in 1987 when it requested the road for City street and seww. Glasanian said he moved imo the neighborhood six years ago. He indicated the r^ was in good cation 10 years ago and has since deteriorated. He was told the •" “ “ “ “ Classman said he feels the road looks more like an alley. He would like to see it comparable to other roads on Casco Point, such as Ivy Place, which is 16' wide.” Classman said he cannot speak for the neighbors and would have to talk with them Xrell”o‘X::li,"*S'Ll' «ty « . --ner minutes of the regular orono city council MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#16 - Casco Cove Road Maintenance - Continued) s^d he would speak with others in the neighborh~^ Jabbour indicated that the comments made by Flint arc accurate. Qassman referred to the comments regarding the road made by Gafl^n. He noted ^ there are pubUc utilities in the road. Jabbour said that can continue throu^ the use of utility easements. He informed Classman he did not want to create false hopes. dayman said he would like to see the road snowplowed. Jabbour noted that rural roads are all plowed by the residents. The vote for the motion to take over responsibility for the maintenance of the Aves 4 Navs 1 Flint. Jabbour reiterated that only blade patching would occur at this p4it keUcy suggested there be a one month period in which the resideirts mwt Sor i^^r is^esired. By the end of that time period, if Staff has not heard from the neighborr^ road will be blade patched and snow plowing will occur dunng appropriate times. (#17) CITY POUCY REGARDING BURNING PERMITS Moorse reported that a discussion ensued at the last Council meeting regarding on brush burning and burning permits and how it relates to State regiments and othff cities’ regulations. Moorse said he found that historically the MPCA had authonty over burning permits and was very strict in Hs regulations. The City followed the guidelines set by the MPCA regarding the burning of brush, remaining strict m its r^ations regarding burning. The DNR then took over authority. Their viewpoint is more liberal. Other cities have foUowed in loosening their regulations but Orono has not done so. Jabbour inquired whether the fire department is aware of the c^cs ttot were He said he has discussed the topic with the Long Lake Fire Chief, who has mdicated tha the City does not need to be as strict in their regulations Jabbour noted that this contradicts the recommendations made by Staff. He feels there is a m^or di^c^ between what should occur m urban vs. rural areas. Jabbour said brush burning shouia only occur in rural areas if the regulations once again allow this to occur. Goetten said she would like to see burning approved noting the need for the acUvity m emergency situations. Goetten would Uke to see residents have the opportunity to bum. She noted there were 97 requests for burning permits this year. s MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#17 - City Policy Regarding Burning Permits - Continued) Kelley said he feds allowing burning would be very dangerous and should be at least 50* from any building. Jabbour indicated there are difierences in the sizes of properties. Goetten indicated that an inspector used to come to the properties and in^>ect the areas. Kelley questioned whether inspections diould still occur with a burning permit. Goetten said inspections should occur. Kdl^ asked if the building inspector has standards Moorse said they are laid out in the application form. Kelley said he feels the conditions on the application form are not strict enough. He noted that Orono has become refmested and is concerned with trees being burned down and brush fires occurring. It was noted that an 8*x4' area is presently permitted for bumii^. He noted it is not stipulated how big a circumference around the pile should be free of debris. He questioned how the building jiqiector is to make that determination. Peterson also questioned who would police the fires. Kelley indicated there will be many more fires if permits are more easily obtained He does not want to sec Staff involved in making the many determinations and would like to see more definite standards and conditions, such as wind velocity. Kelley said he is concerned with the fast spreading of fires. Goetten asked Kelley what conditions he would like to see in effect. Kelley said he is not an expert. He also indicated he is not totally against allowing burning but wants to be sure that there are adequate standards and conditions. Kelley said he would like to see the policy format redone. Jabbour saw the problem with not allowing burning and people doing it an)rways. He would like to encourage residents to ask for permission and enable the City to provide expertise on the issue to the residents. It noted that a fire could bum for several days if confined to an 8' circle. A time limit was suggested. The fire code should determine the fire Mparation without requii^ a fire wall with a SC setback for so numy feet. He feds the dze of the fire should be in direct proportion to the distance from the building. Jd)bour asked the Council if they were willing to amend the burning ordinance and allow Staff to study the issue further. Bob Gehrman suggested there were two issues to consider; the potential for loosening the rules regarding open burning; and for those who are unable to bum due to lot the need to provide for some type of disposal site or burning site. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#17 - City Policy Regarding Burning Permits - Continued) Jabbour acknowledged the need for an emergency program to deal widi as an exception to the rule. He said the City should probably consider a site that would coincide with the de&n-up days. Peterson said ^ is in favor of a change but is not sure what the change should be She questioned whether it would be appropriate to have a distinction between rural and urban. Jabbour said he would like to see the distinction related to the distance between the property line and adjacent buildings. Kdley said, while he is in favor of reviewing the policy, he is not necessarily in &vor of chan^. He does not want the re^xmsibility left to tte building staff to deal with. Kdley said he would like to see a fire marshal hired as previously discussed, who would be b^er able to handle such situations. He would like to see the work contracted out and paid by an hourly rate for buildings, marinas, and burmng. Jabbour noted that Staffs recommendation is to maintain the current policy. He indicated it would be necessary to let Staff know why Council feels otherwise to allow them to come back with another recommendation. Moorse indicated to Goetten that people are not charged for burning. Peterson voiced concern with residents going ahead and burning while others make the request and are denied. Goetten said that is why she asked if there would be a charge for burning. She said she would not be against a possible charge. Moorse indicated that this could become a workload issue. Jabbour indicated that he does not see this issue becoming large as he feels there will be limited desire for such burning. Goetten agreed that there probably won't be alot of requests for burning but acknowledged there are emergency situations where burning is needed. Bob Gehrman suggested the inspector could in^iect the wood to ensure it is dry for a quicker bum and cleaner bum. Goetten suggested monitoring how many more permits are requested. Flint said he would like to further investigate the matter noting its complexity. He indicated the time of year is very critical. He would like to see if there arc rules that would make sense. Goetten agreed vnth Flint. Bob Gehrman asked the Council to review the potential of providing a refuse site for those than are unable to bum or prefer not to bum. Jabbour suggested this occur during clean up days and adding additional clean up days to the calendar. r minutes of the regular orono city council MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#17 - City Policy Regarding Burning Permits - Continued) Go«tten indicated that residerts will tend to stock pile their brush if th^ ha ^ * Goetten said she feels the drop off site has been reaOTnAlecJs;. KeUey s^d he feh the City should make that provision. Bob Gehrman indicated t-ii ne is refmng to waste wood and not construction material. (#18) APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION FOR A DRAINFIELD LOCATION Steve Weckman, Septic Inspector, reported that the review is an appeal ofm administrative decision regarding a drainfield location for the r^lacement of a sephc system. Theresa and Michael Eastman have applied for a buildmg permit m order to build a garage and small addition to thw residence. During the review of the septic, the septic system was found to be TOn^orfonnmg due to the lack of a 3 foot separation from the seasonal ground water level. WeekmM ^ Staffs decision was the best solution for the septic, and the septic system woih should be done in cor^unction with die improvements. Weckman said the Eastman's are asking for the septic system to be placeo m irora oi w residence instead of the rear. The front site is classified as experimental due to the soils. The wetlands were found to have been filled with 3-1/2 ’ of clay fill Underneath ttot ctey is peat which, along with fill, cannot be used for septic site material as it is unpredictable how h win work. Due to its compacting, it is difficult to determine the long range acceptance of vmte. Weckman also noted that the son is mottled within 6" of the surface indicating saturation. He indicated that it takes one foot of unsaturated sou to treat sewage. Weckman said the preliminary work performed with a designer shows the area in back of the residence having good soU. It is close to the residence and the weU but the soils should be able to accept the sewage. Weckman expects the remaining standards wffl be met. Mrs. Eastman indicated there are substantial differences in cost bctvi^ the septic sit« for the back and front of the property. She presented the Council with a handout with this information. She iiuficated that the location as requested by Staff would be financially difficult. Flint remarked that the Eastman's should not be forced to put in a new sqptic system if thdr system is only non-conforming but not failing. Weckman responded that the CouncU reviewed where sewering might better serve residents and this resulted in the 10 hot spots. He indicated that the area where the Eastman's reside is not included on this list. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1W7 Kelley asked why the system is non-conforming. Weckman informed him that it is due to the lack of a 3' separation. The residence is within lOOO’ of the lake, and so it has a two- year time penod to replace the system. Properties outside of the 1000' shoreland district have a 10-year penod in which to replace non-conforming systems. Mrs. Eastman noted their property is near the Saga Hill area being considered for sewer Weckman responded that the property is at least onc-half mile away depending on where sewer would come la Goetten acknowledged that the Eastman property was not within the hot spot areas. Weckman noted that the parcels are also larger in this area. The Eastmanproperty is 1.22 acres. ^bbour asked Weckman if the building permit triggered the need for a new system. Weekmm noted that if the system was discharging to the surface, the system would be ri^ired to be replaced immediately. The Shoreland Ordinance b a separate entity that tnggw the upgrade automatically if not maintained. Jabbour noted that the budding permit is what triggered the resulting action. Mrs. Eastman asked where the septic system would be located if the prior owner had comph^ with the need for a new ^stem. Weckman said they would probably have had to use the experimental area and the system would likely have failed. Weckman said he would not recommend that area for the septic when he cannot say it will work. He i^icated the result may be the Eastmans might have to have their system pumped out ab^ twice monthly, which is not prudent. Weckman said he looks for the best site first and an ciyenm^al ate is the last option. Weckman said he believes the septic system as sugg^ed would work. Mrs. Eastman responded that their contractor feh their experimental site would work with additional sand added. J^ur clarified wth Weckman that the need for the new system was due to the lack of a 3 separation and not because of a failing system. ^bbour noted that the Stale has considered changing the 3' separation requirement to 2' He noted that properties outside of the 1000' shoreland area has received a 10 year mormonurn on septic j^^stem replacement in these cases. Jabbour said he has changed hi< opinion r^dmg this issue and beUeves those within the shoreland area should be irflowed the moratorium as well. Weckman responded that the 2' suggestion was a legislative decision and not a scientific one Kelley said the issue is one of treating the residences in the 0-1000' shoreland area the sarne as the lOOCH-' area and give them the same latitude of a 10-year period for informing. Mrs. Eastman informed KeUey that half of her lot is outside of the 1000' shoreland area. Weckman mdicated that the house and septic are within the 1000' shoreland area. 5 f r r f MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (^^18 - Appeal of Administrative Decision for Drainfieid Location - Continued) Kelley asked what the fects were and why Staff believes those withLn the shoreland area should conform. Gaflfron responded that the DNR informed the City to make sure that the systems be upgraded and allow one year to comply. Kelley asked where the DNR now stands on the issue. Gaffi’on said he did not know. Jabbour indicated there are more fmling ^ems in the out-state area. He said all of the residences should be allowed the 10 year grace period. Weckman responded that there is not much debate regarding the 3' separation and is only a financial matter. He indicated it is Council's prerogative to change the code but noted that the 1000' shoreland regulations were to protect the lake. He mdicated the code has always stipulated the 3' separation but allowed those not meeting it to be grandfathered in. Goetten asked how often the septic systems would be checked for sewage emering the lake if the code was changed in the shoreland area as suggested. Weckman said he has reviewed all .systems installed prior to 197.3 and is continuing on the remaining systems in checking for the 3' separation. Goetten asked what would trigger Weckman to take the next step in checking for discharge. Weckman stud he inspects all systems eveiy 2-3 for ^ling ^sterns. Jabbour noted that the Eastmans have a non-conforming ^em, not a failing system. Weckman indicated that it may be a matter of semantics as the State considers a system not meeting the 3' separation as failing while the City calls that non-conforming. A system that is discharging is called a imminent health hazard according to the State and called failing by the City. Jabbour polled the Council and questioned whether the policy requiring a two-year I^od for septic system replacement in the shoreland district could be changed at this time. Gafifron informed him that revising the Shoreland Regulations arc part of the Zoning Ordinance requires Planning Commission review and a public hearing. K^ey said the City should go ahead with the zoning ordinance amendment process. He indicated the City is sewering more and more, and people are being caught up within the policy as the 1000' line gne.s through their properties Goetten acknowledged that the cost of a new sj'stem tvould be tremendous for the Eastmans, though acknowledged that economics should not be a consideration. Gafiiron asked to clarify to the Council that there is no connection between the property in question and sewering Saga Hill area due to the distance and topography. Jabbour suggested the Eastmans wait on installmg a new system. Kelley noted that the same concern will occur elsevriiere. 25 minutes of the regular orono city council MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#1S - Appeal of Administrative Decision for Drainfield Location - Continued) Goettcn noted that a building permit wodd not be issued unta the dedsion r^arding amending the shoreland ordinance was finalized. Mrs. Eastman noted rt will be expensive to rq)lace the ^em no matter where it is located. Kelley noted that the Eastmans will eventiiaUy have to comply with the requirement for a new system and diould be sure to inform a future buyer of the system’s non-conformity. Staff was directed to begin the process of changing the ordinance. Mike Schulte, said he fives within a couple of miles of the Eastmans. He said tte Co«^ has finlcd to sec that the Eastmans had been notified that their property was subrtandart when they purchased it and it resuhed in their purchasing additional property If they had not purchased the additional property, Schulte said the new system wodd have been placed in the experimental area where they requested it to be located. They also would not have been required to have a variance. Jabbour clarified that the additional land was bought to bring their lot into conform^ to standards, and they would otherwise not have had to go through this Schulte said he feels they should not have been required to do so. Jabbour informed him toe Council must look at the land that is owned. He indicated that the Eastmans acted m the spirit of Orono. Schulte said the trigger to bring this issue to the forefiront should have occu^ carfi^ Jabbour indicated that the title opinion should have presented the issue, but it b not the City's responsibility to report h. Schulte said the shed should have triggered it. Mrs. Eastman confirmed that a shed permit was taken out m 1995, and the survey done at that time indicated an addition was planned. Jablx^ indicated that the prior owners were informed that they were to have conformed with a new system by December, 1995. He suggested the issue could be deferred at this time. Kell^ noted that the Council was attempting to .save the Eastmans the money that would be ^lent on a new system at tWs time if they are willing to go through the process to change the ordinance. Mrs. Eastman reported there were foundation problems that need to be resolved^ soon as possible and were planned for repair during the addition. Council suggested the Eastmans work with Staff regarding these issues (»lg - Apptal of AdministratKe Decision for Drainfield'Locaiinn. ^ Weekly came to her readence the day after the stonn on July 16 Attha^ Weekman took a ^ sample aSdS^ ^ she had lOy^ m which to comply She questioned what this decision was ^ 00 due to the testing done immetfiately after a aorm Hager said ate icplaw the system if it is not necessaiy. Kelley noted that she has 10 years in which to comply and reported that he Ufa a similar sitStion * “*'0 y«n>n which to wish to i««» fitir that the Eastmans had to go through this proce^rt should have been taken care of when the shed pennit was issu^ Jah^.r ENGBySER REPORT (Items #13 and 14 foUow item #15.) (#15) AMENDMENT TO PLANS FOR STUBBS BAY SEWER PROJECT ^ onte T* “ <'"««•)' “ a concern as a telrtopped dnveway prior to the project. The driXay was on DNR rilt^Sf-^ The *’*■** '^NR. »*'o rt>ey were willing to give a ta« t^ lease to the Ten, s for a drweway. but have to have mitigation as federal fandswere used. said tte question Uwhethe^faeCily*^dteuSfatin^.‘^ that Uie parcel had been obtained from park fimds mid U glad to see it r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#15 Amendment to Stubbs Bay Sewer Project Plans - Continued) Gappa reported that there is 150' of right-of-wtQr at this location. He asked Council if the City should move ahead to fix the driveway. He indicated he has spoken with a iwighbor along Bederwood who has concern r^ardii^ the project and has a^ed to gjve public comments. He infi^rmed the neighbor that a public hearing was required for the berm. Goetten questioned that the public hearing was necessary because of both the change in the plans and the berm being over 100 c.y. Jabbour indicated, and all members agreed, that the Council is obligated to pay for the rq>air of the driveway as part of the sewer project. He directed Staff to hold the public hearing at the Septeiri)er 8 Council meeting. Mrs. Terp said her husband is a landscape derigner and will make the berm aesdietically fit in with the area. Jabbour asked that the plan be ^ven to Staff fi>r use at the public hearing. (#13) CHANGE ORDER #1 BAY RIDGE/BRACKETTS PROJECT NT SEWER I Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Change Order No. 1. Kelley asked who pays for the increases. Cook said the amount could be assessed as the reridents waived their rights to appeal the assessment amount. Kell^ withdrew his motion. Jabbour moved. Kelley seconded, to approve Change Order No. 1, Bracketts P<wit/Bay Ridge Sanitary Sewer Project, in the amount of $55,538. Staff was instructed to add this amount to the original special assessment subject to review by City Attorney Barrett. (#14) CHANGE ORDER #5 NORTH LONG LAKE SEWER PROJECT Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Change Order No. 5, North Long Lake/Long Lake Country Chib Sanitary Sewer project, in the amount of $10,208. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Jabbour said he received a notice fi'om Shorewood Mayor Howard Bennis that be will be hosting the meeting regarding the MCWD. FUnt reported attending the Femdale Road public hearing. He indicated there was a lot of support for the trail. It was noted that the trail will be fimded by MSA fimds and the cost will be shared with the Chy of Plymouth. I V MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (Mayor/CouncU Rqx>rt - Continued) % I-" § Flint indicated there was an issue from Plymouth residents regarding the road being three lanes wide. Flint said Orono residents would probably prefer three lanes as the road carries alot of traflBc. He feels it would be a mistake to upgrade the road inadequately. Kelley clarified that the desire is for a middle turn lane. He questioned whether the cost sharing should be negotiated with Plymouth due to the amenities being included. Flint noted to the Orono residents also want the trail to be constructed. He had noted to the residences on the Plymouth side are closer to the road and appreciate the trail beiiig located there. G^a indicated that the cost share requires Council approval. He suggested a possible joint public hearing for comments and for approval by both Councils. Jabbour noted there are many smaller lots in Plymouth than in Orono. Kdley srid the intersection at CoRd 6 is of most importance to him. He noted there is a steep slope at the intersection and asked how much of it will be regraded. Gappa indicated that the entire approach to Ferndale will be regraded He said CoRd 6 is not part of this particular project. Kelley asked if fill would be required to be brou^ in. Gappa said h would for the landing zone. Kdley was informed that the landing zone wouJd be about S0-7S'. Cook said it would depend on the impact on the area. Gappa noted that the road improvement would aflto 100 homes in Orono and 300 homes in Plymouth. Kdley fdt additional traffic would be traveling to the golf course. Flint said the western portion of Wayzata would also use this road. Gappa indicated the next stq> in the process is the fearibility report. Jabbour a.sked Moorse to speak with members of the Plymouth Coundl to ddermine the appropriate time for a joint meeting to be held as soon as possible. Jabbour noted the engineers and Mn/DOT will be in attendance at the Thursday meeting regarding stormwater management. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT City Attorney Barrett had no report. (*#19) LICENSES There were no license applications. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL meeting HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (*#20) BILLS (joetten moved, Kdley seconded, to approve pigment of the AH FuikIs Account. Vote: Ayes 4, N^s 0. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Jabbour adjourned the roeetiiig at 11:03 p.m. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST:i1 Dorothy M. Ilallin, City Clerk w III mi btO % i *4 UZJi r •sk * U— ii&r <?^ct sr 1} «• t i ^ - !oi 00 ON o ??• Q 8- Ui to 2 • • • 50 w w > 2 R c b K- Ot« BQ W « tt^ S 2 ^ 3* K 2i/> *-i 3 s S!T5§ Mg" 5* i » S S i- 2 s* - s. 5S?- o' o 2 g D ts O >-l p ^ ^ ^ P IN) fD ^ ^ ^n55 o V - 50 50 2. « !fl a g 4D ^Q g- C C C O *Tl C^(/)(/) Co S’ On ^ =«tru ro M to ON Lh ^ ^ ^ UJ >—» Ui 4^ y. to to to .O -O On Oi > g- O --i UJ 0 o Spi 2 < y O9p n CO?T ^n pi CL 2. ^ > ^ S & *5 OQ 5 R i ^iS 3n2 oo1^»t5 U) s§ hH O (T> *3^ «-» M (IQ Z n o cj o •^l f"m I 1r-» to Uicn«• NO NO < OI & n» i 5 s < % |r 1 ►;! < 0. -• 1 §■11 « 2. « 1 ^ *"P P.R B ^ - iaS.« a ' ^S 2 i-latReo w £« D ?• r^)B'w 3 gibei0^0 OQ p ^ O P ^ o D* D- O C ^ i Ml*< o li*-n *0 CL O ► ^ =3 ? cr >^ ___n OO os §S §S2j&^ i REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION _ e ^ DATE; SeptemfeUr3. 'y '^'OITEM NO.: > 'Q Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2253 David Reinhold, 3551 Livingston Avenue - Variances - ________________Resolution _________________ Zoning District: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential, Vi Acre Minimum, Sewered Application: Lbt of Exhibits Request for lot area/lot width variances to construct a new residence to replace the existing residence. A - Resolution B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 8/20/97 C - Memo and Exhibits of July 14, 1997 Summary of Application Please review the memo and exhibits of July 14. Briefly, applicant requests lot area and lot width variances for construction of a new residence to replace the existing residence on this 50' X 134.5' (0.15 acre) lot in Navarre. The LR-IC standards are 100' width and 0.5 acre. The property currently contains an existing 720 s.f. house and 40 s. f. shed, both of which would be removed. Applicant has indicated he may sell the lot rather than build on it himself. No plans for a proposed house for the site have been submitted. However, the July 14 staff memo descril*5J how a house could be developed on the site meeting the 35% hardcover limit, the 1,500 s.f. lot coverage allow^ance and the required front, rear and side yard setbacks. As noted, such a house could include a two car attached garage which would be at the 30’ setback. Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval subject to the following: 1. Granting only the requested lot area and lot width variances. 2. Development of the property shall not exceed the 35% hardcover limit. 3. Development of the property shall not exceed the 1,500 s.f. lot coverage by structures allowance. Am M i ; Request for Council Action continued Page 2 September 3, 1997 #2253 David Reinhold, 3551 Livingston Avenue - Variances 4. At the time the existing house is removed, the existing shed shall also be removed. 5.Existing house and shed to be removed uithin 90 days of variance approval (to avoid City proceeding with hazardous building action). 6. Applicant is advised as part of this approval that it is City’s intent to grant no other variances for this proj>erty. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation. COUNCIL AC 1 ION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached resolution of appioval. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by , seconded by to adopt Resolution No. _______granting lot area and width variances for construe''on of a new residence to replace the existing residence at 3551 Livingston Avenue. Vote: ____ayes,_____nays. f i*. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE NO. 2253 WHEREAS, David Reinhold (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3551 Livingston within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 6, Block 4, Navarre Heights, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a new single family residence to replace the existing residence on a lot of 0.15 acre area and 50' width where a 0.5 acre area and 100' width are normally required. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, 3. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2253. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 18, 1997 and on a vote of 7 to 0 recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A. The existing lot of 0.15 acre in area and 50' width contains an existing house connected to municipal sewer. Page 1 of 5 4. 5. B. The adjacent properties on either side of applicants property are developed with existing single family residences, hence no additional land is available to make the lot larger. C. Development of this lot would be in character with the neighborhood, as evidenced by the fact that of 73 homes in the neighborhood bounded by Shadywood Road on the east and Blaine Avenue on the west, including Livingston Avenue, Lyric Avenue and Crystal Place, 41 are on single 50' lots, 23 are on double 100’ lots, and 9 are on triple 150' or larger lots. D. Even though this lot is significantly smaller than the zoning district standards, a residence can be built on the property which meets the lot coverage, setback and hardcover standards of the LR-IC district. E. Allowing the rep'.a. .• nent of ihe existing deteriorated structure with a modest residence :t b-,fp the City meet its goal of maintaining affordable housing in the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 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 inerely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantia^ property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spint and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 5 ! ^ CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to allow the construction of a new residence to replace the existing residence on a lot of 0.15 acre area and 50' width where a 0.5 acre area and 100' width are normally required, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. This approval grants only the requested lot area and lot width variances. Development of the property shall not exceed the 35% hardcover limit of the 500-1,000' hardcover zone in which the lot is located. Total lot area is 6,725 s.f., and the maximum hardcover allowed on the property is 35% or 2,353 s.f. Development of the property shall not exceed the 1,500 s.f. "lot coverage by structures" allowance. 4. At the time the existing house is removed, the existing shed shall also be removed. 5. 6. 7. 8. Existing house and shed shall be removed within 90 days of variance approval, and if this is not completed, the applicant is advised the City may proceed with hazardous building action. Applicant is advised as part of this proposal that it is the City's intent to grant no other variances for this property. Authorities granted by this variance run widi the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 8, 1998). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 3 of 5 9. undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of ths resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs. suLssors and ^sST Chain of Title ofTe meeting held on'r slhl^o'f « <> -^uiar ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ant Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss« COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) September 199?L r'2Tr before me on this 8th day ofptember, 1997 by Gabnel Jabbour jid Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the Citv f O OTO. a Minnesota municipal coiporation and said instrument was exited on behalf of Notary Public Page 4 of 5 t CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 TO: David Reinhold 5333 Forest Road Minnetonka, MN 55345 ZONING FILE #2253 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: August 20, 1997 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variances DATE OF MEETING: 08/18/97 VOTE: 7 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commbsion recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Granting only the requested lot area and lot width variances. Development of the property shall not exceed the 35% hardcover limit. Development of the property shall not exceed the 1,500 s.f. "lot coverage by structures" allowance. i .4 . ,3 6. At the time the existing house is removed, the existing shed shall also be removed. Existing house and shed to be removed within 90 days of variance approval (to avoid City proceeding with hazardous building action). Applicant is advised as part of this approval that it is City's intent to grant no other variances for this property. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council, Monday, September 8, 1997; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. 4\ •• >- ■ » “a ~ TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: July 14,1997 SUBJECT: #2253 David Reinhold, 3551 Livingston Avenue - Variances - Public Hearing Note: This item was tabled at your July meeting at applicant's request. Zoning District: LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2 acre sewered. Application: Request for lot area/lot width variances to construct a new residence to replace the existing residence. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owner's List D - Survey E - Hardcover Zone Review Summary of Request This property currently contains an existing 720 s.f. house and 40 s.f. shed. The lot is 50'xl34.5' or 0.15 acre. The LR-1C standards are 100'width and 0.5 acre. Applicant reo-oests area and width variances to allow replacement of the existing house with a new residence, end he indicates he may sell the lot rather than build on it himself. Pertinent Code Sections 1.Section 10.25, Subd. 6 (B); - Lot area required = 21,780 s.f.; existing = 6,725 s.f. Required lot width =100'; existing = 50' - Required setbacks; 30' front and rear, 10 side. Sections 10.22/10.56: Hardcover in 500-1,000' zone is allowed at 35%. Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C); Allowance for lot coverage by structures is 15% of total lot area or 1,500 s.f., whichever is greater. Zoning File #2253 July 14, 1997 Page 2 ; i Discussion The existing house on the property is small and in poor condition, and has not been lived in for a few years. Applicant proposes to remove the existing house and either rebuild himself or sell the lot as a building site. A third option he is considering is sale to neighboring property owners for additional yard area. Applicant has not provided plans for a proposed house for the site. It may be reasonable to grant the variances requested to replace the existing house without knowing the parameters of a new house, only if all setback, hardcover and lot coverage requirements are intended to be adhered to. Given the 35% hardcover limit, the 1,500 s.f. lot coverage allowance, and the required front, rear, side yard setback requirements, a modest residence with two car attached garage could be developed on tWs property without variances other than the requested lot area/width variances. A conforming residence might include the following: A. 28 ’x36' house + 24'x20' attached garage = 1,488 s.f. B. 16'x30' driveway = 480 s.f. C. 3'x32' sidewalk = 96 s.f. D. 10'x28 ’deck =180 s.f. E. lO'xlO’shed = 100 s.f. Total hardcover = 2,344 s.f. or 34.9% Total lot coverage = 1,488 s.f. This home could be two stories in height to gain square footage, but would have to be set at the 30' street setback line in order to meet hardcover requirements. Further, the attached garage would have to face the street. This combination of limitations leaves little flexibility in design, but may also yield an opportunity for creativity. Hardship Both adjacent properties contain existing homes, hence no additional land is available to make the lot larger. Further, of 73 homes in the neighborhoc-^. ounded by Shady wood Road on the east and Blaine Avenue on the west, including Livingston . u;r-. Lyric Avenue and Crystal Place, 41 are on single 50 ’ lots, 23 are on double 100 ’ lots, and 9 are 'j iple 150 ’ or larger lots. Construction of a new residence on this property would not be out of character with the neighborhood, even though it would be significantly smaller than the zoning district standards. Also, it can be argued that a property containing a residence which meets the lot coverage, setback and hardcover standards should not be considered as "over built". Additionally, allowing the replacement of the existing deteriorated structure with a modest residence will help the Cit)' meet its goal of maintaining affordable housing in the City. \ Zoning File #2253 July 14,1997 Page 3 Staff Recommendation If Planning Commission detennines that this lot should be considered buildable, staff would recommend the following conditions of approval: 1. 0 3. 4. 5. 6. Granting only the requested lot area and lot width variances. Development of the property shall not exceed the 35% hardcover limit. Development of the property shall not exceed the 1.500 s.f. "lot coverage by structures" / allowance. At the time the existing house is removed, the existing shed shall also be removed. Existing housito'ta removed within 90 days of variance approval (to avoid City proceeding / with hazardous building action). Applicant is advised as part of this approval that it is City’s intent to grant no other variances for this property. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval per staffs recommendation. 2. 3. 4. 5. Recommend approval with other conditions. Table for further information (specify). Recommend denial (state reasons). J Other.7 o i j 1 w CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2253 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: July 29,1997 TO: David Reinhold 5333 Forest Road Minnetonka, MN 55345 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variances DATE OF MEETING: 7/21/97 VOTE:6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Tabled at applicant's request. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Planning Commission Monday, August 18,1997; meeting starts at 7.00 p.m, If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. iI CITY OF ORONO 2750 KeUey Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phooc (612)473-7357 Fax 473-0510 NOTICE Prior notice was given that the Orono Planning Commission will review application #2253, David Reinhold, 3551 Livingston Avenue, request for lot area and width variances to construct a new residence on said property, on Monday July 21,1997 at 7:00 p.m. This is to advise you that at the request of the applicant due to a schedule conflict, this item will nol be considered at the July 21 meeting. It has been rescheduled for the August 18,1997 Planning Commission Meeting to be held at the Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, beginning at 7:00 p.m. All persons wishing to be heard are encouraged to attend this meeting. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available in the City Offices for review, by appointment. For an appointment call 473-7357. City of Orono By: Planning Commission Michael P. Gaffron Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator , 1 Application # 3 Date Received 7 Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220. After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) \ • L O ^ ■t ? ^.V 8 IS PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address ic? » A.t* vok-<^0 ^7. «*»• sr-*2'i 1 6; i Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)_ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date ProBertyAcquire d uf\^n-i________________________________^(month/year) I (do) (qo_^J>also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X._presidential Zoning District: _____r')i\c' ^~T■ other (specify). I- j Ln ^. Hi; h O C rc) APPLICANT Name riBvi.rf Address: si'i Phone (home ) qoo-qz.i'?_______ _____ Phone (work) i-goo . OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address;City:,Zip:, DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Constmction Cost $ Describe request in'detail: 't \ f rr>r ' jr^t i I ^TT.^ *r »________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED V Lot Area y' Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or imusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: -Ic ______ V^,Viu.Ui* lo . I <>»«i c/eL.!i .^ n _______—. tl f (■.« tJi PA. i-< f~ f lit".» -y (attach additional sheets if necessary) A i © REQUIRED SUBMITTALS .h. f^iinwin. informati.'n m..g he submiited bv tht unnlitMion ^M4lir«-!ial«-in nrrigr fftr vour application to be considgrcd PPHIPktti Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Gov't Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/2" x 11 for reproduction. , • „ Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing "" grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy m' x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8/2 x K ). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in ---- the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). __ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. __ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that yflar application is nnt complete if the above information haS PPf APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE ^ u .Uo y^nina The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested Admiidstrator. tgrees to pay additional fees (staff time not coveted by onginal fee Paym««) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. 4. 0. (3 8. Applicant’s Signature Date ^r^wTOr\ereby alJf^edges and agrees to Ms application and further authorizes rei^onable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. DateOwner’s Signature ------------------------------------------------- Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days CoLission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on ^ month Annlicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a “h'du'sd make anangements to have an authorized agent anend in your place and to advise the Build g & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 70 / /// /177 2458 113.9 /57. 1 1/ 1 13. 40 f s»/7- ,'5 X •oOicv 12 r7 11- (32)C33) f£) CO• • (.0 rv.' 5)X O I nL D; 10 fji 5C i 5C' 9 (_0 cJ H 13 rii( 145) 50 50 1 .50 L. 7 (26) 60 5<0 60 ** 50 GQ 5 in’. ) OJ,X ml f'l, LO ) ■•■..•'I • ^RK CD O N- 43) r\i 20 v34) M- 15 ^'(35 •5C' (27) 5" 18 r.j 50 ! 50 OJ X' »o o ^ Si‘ iV.V •V J ' . - -1 f-n 10 (.‘J i-*l OJ •-^ ''J• • OO " O'* 50 2019' (148) (40) I > 7;> -K ; X 24- 7Dm x> : X lo X 60 0113 LIVING 5G 9 ui 8 cn 49) 50 To xH|8|j X__' X_ 5C^ ^ V] Vi^|('*6T (45) (44) 50 V • • • « ■ ■ V ...so*.A* X 50 <^17 ! (55) 19 (56) Kioji 21 (57) X I X OM cn X X 50 (59) 50 LLRIC L 2)12 X :ii 11 X/' 50- ^ 10^9 • 5 ^.1(105), 52 X X CU LO 13 X X \<^AU 104) 15 X IS, 5) I 5!50 521 X - 50 X 4 CXI X _ X _ X _ 3-^ X 2cn ( 102)C 101)1( 100) X LO '^1 ^1 X -J xG; 50 C ! \ 13) X X 22 23 lT> ^• ( 1 14) LO • ro to *‘0 "“x X- Nj -----/ 1 7 ^ ' - U) 50 "’ 50 1 C.»J 1 i : 139) X 50 MV X 50 ^--- 3314 • cn 13 (70) 50 i X OJ C.V. -U X- • • 1 _ i 04 Xu« cni5Ui (71)(72)1 X ^0 1 AVE X oii 4<> • • (_n o ^'in •r-'' ^• 3; 13 — ;(90) 50 X uO • 1215 1 ^ '3? lo ; ^ X 35 (9I)'02) ! X ! 50 M'OC NO 5^24684 N69°I8'52"E to OOC NO U i \ I \ M87" 0\RUN DATE 12/20/96 BATCH 006 C ^ PROP ADDR OHNtR NAHE TAXPAYER NAiiE/ADOR PfiOP ADOR atlER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR ZB 17-117-23 43 0040 03556 LIVINGSTON AVE C D A N LONG CHRISTIAN 0 A NATCY LONG 3556 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA m 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0045 03533 LIVINGSTON AVE S D SANDLER AKA SANDLER STEVEN B A KATHRYN A SANDLER 3553 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0048 03559 LIVINGSTON AVE D LEFEBVRE A L S CARNES DOHINIC LEFEBVRE 3559 LIVir^GSTON AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0055 03554 LYRIC AVE R D BARTELL A K K BARTELL ROLAND D/KIMBERLY K BARTELL 3554 LYRIC AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0058 03508 LYRIC AVE RONALD THOHAS HILL RONALD THOHAS HILL 3508 LfRIC AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0153 03596 LYRIC AVE HICHAEL E A UURA J SHANSON HICHAEL E A LAURA J SHANSON 3596 LYRIC AVE I'lAYZATA HN 55391 HEI>INEPIN COUrTTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST 38 17-117-23 43 0041 03520 LIVINGSTON AVE ROBERT EUGENE EBERT ROBERT EBERT 3520 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0046 03541 LIVINGSTON AVE JOANN H HOLSBECK J04M4 M HOLSBECK 3541 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0049 03577 LIVINGSTON AVE ELIZABETH J BALTER ELIZABETH J BALTER 3577 LIVINGSTON NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0056 03536 LYRIC AVE RICHARD R GILMORE CHARLES LEHIS HENKE 3536 LYRIC AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0148 03554 LIVINGSTON AVE R E & J M THOMPSON RICHARD E/JEANNE M THOMPSON 3554 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 16 38 17-117-23 43 0044 03525 LIVINGSTON AVE S PUGH A T SOBERG SUSAN PUGH A TERRENCE SOBERG 3525 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0047 03551 LIVINGSTON AVE DAVID N REINHOLD DAVID N REINHOLO 3551 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0050 03585 LIVINGSTON AVE MICHAEL G HOSIMAN HICHAEL G 'lOSIMAN 3585 LIVINGSTONE AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 33 17-117-23 43 0057 03520 LYRIC AVE J A V NEGLEY JAMES A VICKY NEGLEY 3520 LYRIC AVE N NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0150 C3572 LIVINGSTON AVE MARK N A KAREN L CUFF HARK N A KAREN L CUFF 3572 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA m 55391 TOTAL BATCH 006 00016 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA in K)LIVINGSTON AVENUE in lO •T / S 89®59' E 50.00- o lO ro ooO -e-9.2'> yrm 7.4 yrrm 7A EXISTING ♦ » HOUSE 102 : 4dddddA lOf 19.9---> o EXISTING SHED” *m 0)o E ro ro •A O)oe O ’i 49.92 meas 50.0* S 89®51'44" W 1 NAL N RR TC ^RETANNC WAa /> /' ' LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : LOT 6. BLOCK 4. NAVARRE HEIGHTS denotes iron marker denotes distance os shown on the plot of NAVARRE HEIGHTS Bearings shown ore based upon an assumed datum. o * This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, and the location of an existing house and shed thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. jxr»n> KQ \ 06) lliJSTQN™’ 170 Mm V.C5 (36) Ir/ 36r— Uir) 04) OOC HO 47724* f 136)i'( 137), 3 '® E(M) miDAWTA t28)(27)s, 170 5 » mm ¥ (33)' (143) X.-••••• “y &w ■5: V. jtX^i iM-grr: »«*/ ,« o \ ^ •« i;» B.I|!»,iJb.JJ!Sl ' i' ^ 8u 't3 5= y Ave » 1)1 y?«M« Hwiyg» ni|0_W-5M_B i«*ont- ■5T.;ibKuwa; (n)/I • X 5 ? («) ?T5 I'm<$ WLlU (44€SA>A%"^^'‘^ jr-------------- •* > k«?«ivqv«r Ml «T ‘iV OOC d vi?047- S (ffl) s^. *"*-10 '' a(60)s iLy5-8» 00c NO I»46I6S-^-t ................liiV ................... ^ .......^. IfiJJi} •••;■ '^€,"- ' rK^ ,MV»‘ . - L<c 00c w nosioo^ • /J3^5 (f s J..02) (101) _ jl ) ^ ^ rt IftC Ifl p ^ • J J >^HgrM5* wj _ i*i’ P- - - l<c OOC l« 200)109 • 8 rt h § 8 rr ^lT9.4i N5r*)S'l3‘C Cq, REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 5>> 6 % Administrator Reviewed: DATE: September S,' ^9,97 ‘^4'q ITEM NO.: Agenda Section: ZoningDepartment Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Senior Planning Coordinator__________________________________. --— --------t— Item Description^----#2267 John O'Sullivan, 3340 Shoreline/2380 Shadywood Road - Commercial Site Plan Review - Proposed Driveway from Culver's Site to Shadywood Road - Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Notice of Tabling 8/28/97 C - Notice of Council Action 8/21/97 D - Easement Agreement At your August 11 meeting. Council voted 5 to 0 to approve the proposed access to Shadywood Road, conditioned on; ., , • u u 1. Temporary approval only, subject to review with comprehensive church site plan. 2. Property owner to add a 6' section of railing along the sidewalk adjacent to the northwest restaurant doorway exit. 3 . No parking lot cross-hatching is required at the northwest restaurant exit, and no stop sign will be required where the new access enters the parking lot. Although not specifically included in Council’s approval motion, staff has included m the attached resolution two addition^ couaitions which were in the staff recommendation: 4. Applicant shall make changes to the existing parking configuration, wWch shall include elimination of the last parking stall adjacent to the westerly Shoreline Dnve exit, and reconfiguration of the parking lot curbing near the new access to create additional green space. 5. Approval subject to driveway construction plan approval by staff; Hennepin County access permit as well as a City land alteration permit will be required. Shared Parking Although not discussed by Planning Commission or Council, it is noted that the easement agreement between O’Sullivan and Adam Smith Company includes an easement for Culver ’s overflow p^kmg to use the conceptually proposed parking spaces in the west half of Navarre Lane as overflow for e Culver ’s operation. These spaces will only be created if the vacation of Navarre Lane is complete Request for Council Action continued Page 2 Septembers, 1997 #2267 John O'Sullivan, 3340 Shoreline/2380 Shadywood Road - Commercial Site Plan Review - Proposed Driveway from Culver's Site to Shadywood Road__________________ and the church site is developed under the conceptual plans briefly reviewed earlier this year. Because the Culver's site as it currently exists meets the minimum parking requirements, this shared parking poses no conflict' with City code, and staff has no problem with this agreement. Applicants are advised that any future development of the church site must be provided with adequate parking per code requirements witl:in that site. Parking spaces on the Culver's site are not eligible for inclusion as required parking for the church site. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached resolution. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by__ granting commercial site plan approval and approval for creation of an access easement to serve the property at 3340 Shoreline Drive. , seconded by____, to adopt Resolution No. A RESOLUTION GRANTING COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND CREATION OF AN EASEMENT FOR A DRIVEWAY FROM 3340 SHORELINE DRIVE TO SHADYWOOD ROAD - FILE NO. 2267 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Miimesota; and WHEREAS, John O'Sullivan, owner of the commercial property located at 3340 Shoreline Drive, and Ted Christianson on behalf of Adam Smith Company, owner of the commercial property located at 2380 Shadywood Road, have jointly applied for commercial site plan approval for the construction of an access across 2380 Shadywood Road to serve 3340 Shoreline Drive; and WHEREAS, the subject properties are legally described as follows: 3340 Shoreline Drive:Exhibit A, attached 2380 Shadywood Road: Exhibit B, attached; and WHEREAS, the co-applicants request approval for the creation of an access easement across 2380 Shadywood Road, such easement legally described as follows: Exhibit C, attached; and WHEREAS, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed this request at their regular meeting of July 21, 1997 anvd by a vote of 4 to 2 recommended denial of the request based on safety issues and lack of coordination with the comprehensive development of the 2380 Shadywood Road site; and WHEREAS, on August 11,1997, the Orono City Council reviewed the request of Page 1 of 6 the applicant, and the recommendations of the Planning Commission, City staff, and the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, the on August 11,1997, the City Council on a vote of 5 to 0 approved the proposed easement creation and access construction and directed staff to draft an approval resolution with appropriate conditions; and WHEREAS, in approving this request, the City Council makes the following findings of fact: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The commercial site at 3340 Shoreline Drive lacks access to Shadywood Road, and such lack of access presents difficulty for customers ingressing and egressing the property. Although no comprehensive site development plan has been approved for the 2380 Shadywood Road property, the preliminary site development proposal includes an access at the location now proposed by applicants for access to 3340 Shoreline Drive. The proposed access location entering Shadywood Road is approximately 130' from the north rightrof-way line of Shoreline Drive where it intersects Shadywood Road. Because the City Engineer has indicated that this distance is potentially less than the optimum separation for an access from the major intersection at this location, and because there is a potential for a free right turn lane to be developed by Hennepin County at some time in the future from westbound Shoreline Drive to northbound Shadywood Road, it »s appropriate to allow the proposed access on a temporary basis only, with the City retaining the right to require the access to be moved if conditions so dictate in the future. Hennepin County Department of Public Works has permit jurisdiction over the proposed access location and has indicated that the County will approve the access as proposed. Because the proposed new access will impact circulation in the parking lot at 3340 Shoreline Drive, Council has reviewed the safety concerns raised by the Planning Commission and has concluded that it is appropriate that anplicant provide a 6' section of railing along the sidewalk outside the northwest restaurant entrance doorway as shown on Exiiibit D attached. Council further finds that the revisions Page 2 of 6 r ff -e „«d for .e nor... iSe »r Exhibit D"i^Hl‘^rtor^eIJTd ‘°.dJM« ^ '“' “ mcronse in hardcover caused by the addS^cess’““ '" conceptu^|/vaS^.'^?I,e'^i^‘™“ 3 <>f Nav^ Lane which has been until such time that its vacation is completed Navarre Lane SSrg^rir-- r-“° Which would be attached 2380 portion of Navarre Lane conditionally approved subject to the conSion easement is portion of Navarre Lane. completion of the vacation of that westerly hereby approves thf^orm^ci^^^sitl City of Orono easement for access purposes over 2380 Shadyv'o^^R'^d^ ^nveway and creation of an on the findings of fact noted above, subt^r.:t.^::^“ Drive based prior to driveway comt^criom''^^ oonstnicUon plan to be approved by City staff pennit prior to conTictfoTof^e^drivm^^ ° bounty access shairS:tht -P°-y basis only. The City determines that the access^presents a <f f location be moved if the Council approval for the 2380 Shadywood ^zard, or if comprehensive site plan requires this initial access t^be relocnit^H ^ location that the City Council. If the Council chfo'^' discretion of applicants Shall have the n-ghUoTo^^^^^^^^^^ « the O’Suliivan shall construct a 6 ’ segment of miling extended along the sidewalk Page 3 of 6 r 5. 6. 7. 8. adjacent to the northwest restaurant doorway exit, subject to approval of the Inspections Department, and such railing to be in place prior to opening of the new access. Changes to the submitted parking plan shall be required as noted in Exhibit D, including: A. Elimination of the last parking stall adjacent to the westerly Shoreline Drive exit to the site; and B. Reconfiguration of the parking lot curbing near the new access to create additional green space. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the owners, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a land alteration permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (September 8, 1998). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terrns of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Muinesota at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of September, 1997. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor f Page 4 of 6 «4 1 Property Owner(s) Property Owner(s) Page 5 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 25th day of vVugust, 1997 by Gabriel Jabbour and Dorothy M, Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of___, 199_before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. 1 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of___ ! .I , 199_before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 6 of 6 ■ iirti ^<9 kN^/ hMtrMUTT* ^'dmKSQ^ « f /; r / i / / ir*% / / / « / / I I • ■:Jis^ 7 • • ■/ v'J / / \. I AHAi r.nvM • iS;.*.w.* .'• • i<S2a i;i {•., 's. r /\ " / ' S/ : • f W/ ’ i •• •^•.•« »h<k..« w r / / p p ./ / / k r.r./954.p % \ / W / % ‘\ .•i‘‘ •-• w « I I N; V / I*-' mi ItlMUl V \# k \ *m: cM •M. . • V JJ* •*s ^ » • i« • lilt «>OCU*>g* -HJI*- w>i«no’i • * i^- 1 t CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 APPLICATION NO. #2267 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: August 28, 1997 TO:John O'Sullivan 8047 Ranchview Lane Maple Grove, MN 55311 COPIES: Adam Smith Company Ted Christianson, President 700 Cedar Street, #121 P.O. Box 965 Alexandria, MN 55308 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Commercial Site Plan DATE OF MEETING: 08/25/97 VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: Tabled because applicant was not present. This item will be presented for Council action at their September 8 meeting which begins at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from tlie City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 TO; John O'Sullivan 8047 Ranchview Lane Maple Grove, MN 55311 APPLICATION NO. #2267 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: August 21, 1997 COPIES: Adam Smith Company Ted Christianson, President 700 Cedar Street, #121 P.O. Box 965 Alexandria, MN 55308 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Commercial Site Plan DATE OF MEETING; 08/11/97 VOTE; 5 FOR 0 AGAINST COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: Conceptual approval of proposed access. The attached resolution will be presented to Council for adoption at their August 25 meeting which begins at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. 1 j# O o // FASRMFNT AGRHKMENT I “ / / i.v' THIS AGREEMENT, dated this 5th day of June, 1997, by and between ADAM SMITH COMPANY, a Minnesota corporation (hereinafter referred to as “Grantor”) and VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTERS, INC., a Minnesota corporation (hereinafter referred to as “Grantee”). RECITALS: 1. Grantor is the Contract for Deed purchaser and North Central Conservative Baptist Association is the fee owner of the following described property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota. See Exhibit A attached hereto (“Property”); and 2. Grantee is the fee owner of the following described property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota. See Exhibit B attached hereto (“Grantee Parcel”); and 3. The parties desire to create appurtenant, perpetual and nonexclusive easements in favor of Grantee for ingress and egress over and across the property described as Parcel 1 and for customer overflow parking over and across the property described as Parcel 2, as both parcels are described on Exhibit C attached hereto (“Easement Parcels”). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged. Grantor and Grantee do hereby mutually covenant and agree as follows: 1. GRANT OF EASEMENT. Grantor hereby grants, quit claims and conveys to Grantee a perpetual, appurtenant and nonexclusive easements for ingress and egress over and across Parcel 1 and for customer overflow parking over and across Parcel 2 for use by Grantee (“Easements ”). 2. USE OF EASEMENT PARCEL. Grantor hereby grants to Grantee the right to use Parcel 1 for ingress, egress and Parcel 2 for customer overflow parking. No party to these Easements, their successors or assigns, customers, guests, invitees or licensees, shall in any manner block, obstruct or otherwise prevent the use of these Easements by Grantee or Grantor. 3. DURATION AND APPURTENANCE. The Easements granted herein shall be perpetual and appurtenant to Grantee’s Parcel and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of Grantor and Grantee. r 4- MAINTENANCE AND CONSTRUCTfON ANO rOMPr.TAMrF At the time the Property is developed, the owner of the Property will, at their sole cost and expense, construct the driveway and parking areas on the Easement Parcels and maintain and repair such improvements (“Improvements”): Upon completion of said Improvements, Grantor shall keep the parking and ingress and egress portions of the Easements in good repair, with stripes designating parking spaces and in compliance with all applicable rules, regulations, laws and ordinances. 1 i i j 4. 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMT.RSS. Each of the parties hereto hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the other harmless from any loss or damage resulting from their use of the Easement Parcels by themselves, their customers, guests, invitees, licensees or other users of said Easements. Grantee shall carry commercial general liability insurance (“Insurance”) in an amount of not less than One Million and No/100 Dollars ($1,000,000) for use of the Easements as set forth herein. 6- ENFORCEMENT• If any party to this Agreement seeks to enforce any term or provision of this Agreement against the other, the non-prevailing party, in addition to any judgment o; award against them, shall also pay the prevailing party’s reasonable attorneys’ fees, paralegal fees, costs and disbursements. 7' OWNERSHIP* The Grantor warrants that they are the Contract for Deed purchaser of the Property and has the right to make this conveyance. Grantor covenants that the Grantee, its successors and assigns, may quietly enjoy the Easement Parcels for the uses set forth herein. APPURTENANT EASEMENT. This Easement shall be appurtenant to and run with the Grantee Parcel. ‘‘-j I SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS. This Agreement shall be binding upon the successors or assigns of the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands as of the day and year above first written. CONSENT TO F.ASF.MFNT North Central Conservative Baptist Association, the Fee Owner of the Property, hereby consents and agrees to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. II2590/2«V$03!.DOC EECiiS'NER tatANTOP oArilST ASSOC! ATTON] a Minnesota corporation By-t Ilta. GRANTEE; VOYAOEUR SERVICE CENTERS, INC, a Minnesota corporation By: The feregnii^y ||lent wa.< ecknnu/l^vtped ngforg me »tiic.aciv «uiiiOir f STATE OF MINI^OTA ) )S3. ------------------------- ) COUNTY OF The forgoing w« jcknowledg«i bef«e me dis____d»y of Jupe. 1997. by WAMSf COMPAwT^SSSSTon uaTihe l.'y, of the Si«. said coiDoration. Of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of Notary Public I l2J90/2#VtR£D DOC trCi’A <;7n*0N CI:l7T jf>.c,C) Nnr :nr nnftt7 exhibit A (Property) Minnetonlc; «nd fta, p« „f l « j ImefsM tM 5 Kk!?Ihf*'”• *® Noitherl;Icnown as Mumfitonlra r av. _^ highway ninniiia acrasa »aiA r a* c ly hoc of said Lot 5 to the point of beginning Hetmqrin Gninty Abstract and Tonens Plroperty Torrens Certiltcate No. 776469 ORieiNULL DOCUMBNT■B OP POOR OUB1.1TVexhibit c (EaseiDBnt Parcal) PARCEL 1 INgRggS/FGRESS gASgajp^ CfrCT t PARCEL 2 S’^rtud'n ioi“c!:'’“^**‘ ''“*“<•»“«« “SSitf; girLSS2g^‘£?>:y^»<y-»-» *« ?tar5S “S=?Kr=;2^ Lbb HSSi^pSHS~ S-SKS'sSSv«««. (L*« Mm,,uW«. to »» yfyV oiRifl ttm •ouhiRttry MinfMioniai* to the Ihe n»»t Eto*«v comer of toWtol^"^ **•“*•* •*"****«^ »w" • •• won oi the N*vtm lbb %*cBldr nr>Af» I 80‘H ^i^n'ON t7i:pi r»F.,<;n hjnr :nr nnp.f7 ConREQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE; s l9Sf Augu«^^997 ITEM NO. Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Elizabeth A. Van Zomeren Zoning Title Flanner/Zoning Administrator Item Description:#2270 Marcia and Kenneth Hickey 4640 Tonkaview I ane Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Detached Garage-Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District Lot Area:46,938 sq. ft. (1.08 acres) Application: The applicants are proposing the construction of a 26' by 38' (988 sq. ft.) garage and additional concrete driveway in front of the existing residence. The proposed height of the gar^ige is 22.5' as measured to the peak of the roof as recommended by Planning Commission. The following approvals are required: 1. A variance for locating an accessory structure nearer the front lot line than the principal structure. 2. A height variance allowing the height of an accessory structure to exceed that of the principal structure. 3. A conditional use permit is needed for locating an accessory structure on a through lot. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: To approve (5-2): 1. A variance to allow an accessory structure to be located 50' nearer to the front lot line than the principal structure. A height variance to allow the height of the accessory structure to be 22.5' to the peak of the roof, exceeding the height of 13' for the principal structure. 3. A conditional use permit is required to allow an a-^cessory structure located on a through lot.0COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:To amend or approve the enclosed resolution. I A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISIONS 9 (B & D) AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 10 FILE NO. 2270 WHEREAS, Marcia Hickey and Kenneth Hickey (hereinafter "the applicants ) ate owners of the property located at 4640 Tonkaview Lane within the City of Otono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 47, Block 1, Tonkaview Gardens, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and "VSTIEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivisions 9 (B & D) to permit the construction of a 26 ’ x 38’ detached garage located in front of the principal structure with a height of 22.5 ’ to the peak of the roof. Variances for height of an accessory structure to be greater than the principal structure and locating an accessory structure forward of the principal structure on the lot are required. A conditional use permit for locating an accessory structure on a through lot is required. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2270. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District where the minimum lot area requirement is one acre. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 18, 1997 and recommended approval on a vote of 5 to 2 of the proposed variances based upon the following findings and hardships: Page 1 of 5 r 4. 5. 6. A.There is currently no enclosed storage for vehicles on the lot for protection from the elements. B.The zoning lot does not conform to lot vvidth requirements for the LR-IB Zoning District. C. The topography of the lot limits the location of the structure. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use ^rmit to allow an accessory structure on a through lot will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will its use depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planmng Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances for height and location of an accessory structure in front of a principal structure to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivisions 9 (B& D); and a conditional use permit for locating an accessory structure on a through lot per Section 10.03, Subdivision 10 to permit construction of a 26' x 38' detached garage, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 5 J J -i 1. The non-conforming storage shed located uithin the front setback will be removed prior to any new construction. 2. The height of the structure must not exceed 22.5' as measured from grade level to peak. 3. The footprint of the garage is not to exceed 988 sq. ft. and placement of the driveway shall be located according to Exhibit A dated August 22, 1997. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 8, 1998). 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of tliis resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, sha)' automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of September, 1997. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner (s) Page 3 of 5 i r V r I t f Iff. 5% P tk.ir STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of September, 1997 by Gabriel Jabbour and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of Notary Public .* 199_before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared______________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. i*-. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of NOTARY PUBLIC ■------------------ 199_before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared___________________ known to me to be the person(s) descnbed in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 5 O' ?TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor Jabbour and Orono City Council Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator August 27, 1997 SUBJECT: #2270 Marcia and Kenneth Hickey 4640 Tonkaview Lane Conditional Use Permit, Variances—Public Hearing ZoDing District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:46,938 square feet (1.08 acres) Application: The applicants are proposing the construction of a 26' by 38' (988 sq. ft.) detached garage and additional concrete driveway in front of the existing residence. The proposed height of the garage is 22.5' as measured fi-om to the peak of the roof, where the height of the existing residence is 13 feet in accordance with Planning Commission recommendation. Variances are needed for locating the garage in front of a principal structure and for the height of an accessory structure exceeding that of the principal structure. The need for a side variance has been eliminated as the applicants have agreed to locate the garage within the required side setback. A conditional use permit is required for its location on a through lot._________________________ Pertinent Ordinances: • Section 10.03-General Provisions • Section 10.03-Subd. 9 B: Height Restrictions Subd. 9 D: Location Subd. 9 E: Setbacks Subd. 10: CUP Through Lot • Section 10.03-Subd. 15 A: Non-Encroachments U2270 Marcia and Kenneth Hickey r -----------^view Lane 9/15/97 ^ge I r L ANALYSIS T ot Area and Yards LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 1 acre 140 feet 35 feet 10 feet (15 feet for structures > 750 s.f.) 35 feet (abutting street) Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard 1.08 acres 120 feet 110 feet to house 15 feet for proposed garage The subject property meets lot size requirements. The lot does not meet the minimum lot width requirement, however. The applicants were directed by Planning Commission to meet the side setback requirement. Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 46,938 s.f.1,702 s.f.-existing 2,690 s.f.-proposed 4%-existing 6%-proposed Structural coverage is not an issue with this application. t U2270 Sfarcia and Kenneth Hickey 4640 Tonkaview Lane 9/15/97 Page! Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 250'-500 ’22,000 s.f.38 s.f. (.17%) 6,600 s.f (30%) 38 s.f (.17%) none 500 ’-1,000'24,938 s.f.4,845 s.f (19.4%) 8,728.3 s.f (35%) 6,139 s.f (25%) none Hardcover is not an i^sue. The subject property wth the proposed garage does not exceed hardcover limitations. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. It would be possible for the owners to obtain reasonable use of the property in its current state, however, currently there is no enclosed storage for vehicles on the lot. Building the proposed structure would allow them greater enjoyment of their property. The garage would allow them to park their boat and camper out of view and protect them from the elements. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. There are topographical limitations on the property. The rear yard has significant slope, as well as the south side yard. The north side yard does not allow sufficient space for the construction of a garage. Due to these limitations, the area in front of the principal structure is the only feasible location for a garage. 3. The variances, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Planning Commission recommends that locating a garage 22.5' in height as measured to the peak of the roof, which exceeds the height of the principal structure and that is nearer to the front lot line than the principal structure will not have a detrimental effect on the character of the locality. §2270 Marcia and Kenneth Hickey 4640 Tonkavie\e Lane 9/13/97 Page 3 4. 5. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors are not a consideration wth this application. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not a consideration. 6. - ■■ /• 7. 8. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the propert>' in the zone where the affected person's land is located. A detached garage on a through lot is a conditional use in this zoning district. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Not applicable. The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such property or inunediately adjoining property. 9. Due to significant topography and lot configuration, location of the desired garage elsewhere on the property would be difficult. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. Many lots in the surrounding area have significant topography limiting where development may occur on the lots. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicants should be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Also refer to the attached statement of hardship. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. U2270 Marcia and Kenneth Hickey 4640 Tonkaview Lane 9/15/97 Page 4 I' 1 I The variance will not impair health, safety, comfort or morals. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The variance for locating the garage in front of the principal structure is necessary to alleviate hardship. The significant topography inhibits construction of the garage elsewhere on the lot. The variance for height is a compromise made by Planning Commission as the height of the garage the applicant previously proposed was 28' in height as measured to the peak of the roof 1SSUS2 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The applicants have submitted two separate proposals for the design of their proposed garage. Their preferred option includes an overhang extending approximately 7 off of the front of the building. Overhangs exceeding 1.5' are considered encroachments. If this is allowed, a front setback variance will be required as the southwest comer of the garage is already near the front setback line. The alternate design option lacks the overhang and would require no additional variances. The proposals before you are revisions of the applicant's previous plans based on Planning Commission's recommendations. The initial proposal required a side yard setback reduction from 15' to 11'. Due to the lot width being 20 feet less than the zoning district minimum standard and the location of the house, it is not possible to build the garage on the relatively level north side yard. The rear and south side yards have significant downhill slopes away from the street. Some large trees have already been removed. It appears that Cottonwoods, which are not considered to be a desired species were removed. A non-conforming 12.30' by 12.47' shed exists near the street within the required front yard setback. Planning Commission recommends the removal the shed of prior to any new construction. “^0 Starcia and Kenneth Hickey 4640 Tonkaview Lane 9/15/97 Pages STAFF RECOMMENDATION The applicants have met the concerns of the Planning Commission Attachments A B C D E F G H I Location Map Application Statement of Hardship Plat Map Topographic Map Hardcover Calculations Applicant's Preferred Proposed Structure-Front and Side Views Alternate Proposed Structure-Front and Side Views Rear View for Both Alternatives I U2270 Marcia and Kenneth Hickey 4640 Tonkaview Lane 9/15/97 Page 6 I 7 . i !' ■■ Application # cPc^ "70 Date Received (o '-0~7 Amount Paid fs CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $22 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) / PROPERTY INFO Site Address FOR^TION'iCfo 2- t/f Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 07' U?'2?) 32 OC>^3 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired _____________________________^(month/year) I (do) (do no!) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential ___other (specifrr) Zoning District: UZ- I f? APPLICAI^ Name v-/^-7 ______ Address: City: Phone (home ) V 7 ^ ~ ^ ^ 3 Phone (work ) Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address: Phone (home). Phone (work)_ City:.Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Estimated Constniction Cost $ i Ju: 1/ iz gf * x^^'y 20' (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED ___ Lot Area Lot Width Setback:V* Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore X Other (specify) 1-1^ HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing com^ance with Zoning Code requirements: ^ €y-iri Cje f£^C, / 3/<g( Y- (attach ’additional sheets if necessary) 7 r 1 J ly. 5 I N't? PT OF 69 / (43)f# / /; /yA)h (24)/ / ^'1 '^27) ;# >, A i" TOlUvflfl ^ /4 \4- p (29) (26) i.A t “/ <sS^ ’*' w<v«f J66J5 i<3.(27) i1 \ h OF ^ j LOT 79L j C I ;rj(50) /lot ao/^(26) '<& 14, B *-\\%I ''A VV(63)<V % / \ V '^63 ......... (24) '\ I _ • * k \l .(30)-^ >? ’3 \ / i7 «&. '08. y 7 -<7 «“/ S89*I6'£. <^ , to / ^ „ (!5).- _i_® wo \ 8*7 ^ * ^orTfT—t-~JL^ / *; r' /, 2k# ' jV\ (16) ¥S \V^ \vR \v 'v' i /si 1 '??• 3? "-------- IU.6 ~iy ’NQRfttS, R-488.92 i. 15* I / (^0T -7 TAfKxtrr 2\\^(7)§ fe r M . .. v. J^TOk AW< . «»• CITY OF ORONO ® 6124730510 08/01/97 13:02 0 :03/04 NO:998 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) B-IS'7S-2»*2S0-S0«*S00.1000' EX1STINC HARPCOVtR IN ZONE A. Houia _____________ UntOi WMih X X X B. Garage C. Drtvewiy X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Pitlo/Deck X X F. Liodicape Underliin By Plastic X X X WOwW Q- Otter I ?>a TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPER IT AREA IN ZONE TkaL ^ B 'TJZ.OOCi X 100 T-7 Qnn o • PRnpnSBD PAPnrnvBR IN ZONE A. Hooie _______* Ljagei WIM X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidevmlk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Luubeepe UoderUin By PUsdc X X X G. Otter TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B X 100 - SJ>. S.F. S.P. S.P. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ;.F.@) S.F. S.F. % A B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.P. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. * A B f : / i » fr illf CITY OF ORONO ^ 6124730510 08/01/97 13:02 0 :03/04 NO:998 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 6-7S*75-25r 2SO<SOV BVfSTlNn habpcover in zone A. Houm ____34.C. R oc K Wo*\\ B. Oarage C. Driveway •P. Cl^awallf Vla\K E. F. LeodKqie Underlain By Pliitic O. Other Unilh lfct.£2 '?»3 a X WUOi T.3Q 1 1 2.3 \^.A7 fcz 11 rL\o \0 40 4^R X Xa X X X X X X X 14 4 \.n 4 4C*5 ic.» -5 total HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + D X 100 - A. Hottie •HARDCQVPR IN ZONE UBfdi width Rcirnovc 0V\e<^ B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Pado/Deck F. Landseape Underlain By Plaadc C. Other \7..'h \?.47 2G X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZOI^ c, \ ? gT + B ^ X100 c 500-1000 154°) lee S J. © 1 4?^ S.F.© s.p.a§ S.P. @ 4 ‘?> 6 12a A2 i 4-3^ _ S.P. © S.F. S.F. S-F. S.F.O 234 S.P. S.F. S.F. S.P. S.p. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. . S.F. S.F. ?, A Oi*^R S.F. iA .lt4 A B I? SV^€<^ ve-r^o vC-ci 13 34432> / heet nunber project title ||general contractor A_ 1 Ken k Uarcia Hickey • ••• • • • • •: _ ... . • • . m U} om heet number Iproject title A_______________________________________________A______*_»__►A____ ^general contractor I Ifon_if l/aiviia I _ Custom Desiffn V•'« .* •• jCSaolIl T\^ Si/'' *'t M- heet number A O Va project title n__i^JLfajRMa HrnkiMcr general contractor „ X Custom Design REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: ITEM NO. 8/26/^'" ^?7.V'G a Department Approval: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2275 Ted and Myrna Wolf ';00 Willow Drive North Class II Preliminary Subdivision-Public Hearing Zoning District: RRl-B One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres) Lot Area:11.76 total acres (6.73 dry buildable) Application:Applicant proposes to divide existing parcel into two lots, front and back, with access provided to the back lot via an outlot. Planning Commission Action: To approve the prelimary plat, subject to: 1. The applicant providing a inventory of vegetation and trees 50 feet on either side of the property line to determine if the screening requirements of the ordinance are met; and 2. To provide access via Outlot A instead of the road extension (Outlot B) through Shadowood. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To review the letter submitted by the applicant regarding trees and vegetation on the property and accept the existing situation as being adequate screening in compliance with the Zoning Code and to amend or approve the enclosed resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A PLAT AT 900 WILLOW DRIVE NORTH - FILE NO. 2275 WHEREAS, Theodore F. Wolf and MymaT. Wolf, (hereinafter the "subdividers") on July 24, 1997, filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a two lot residential plat of property legally described as: That part of the North 316.80 feet of the South 825.00 feet of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter lying West of the East 990 feet thereof. Section 27, Township 118, Range 23 (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono's Zoning, Platting and On-Site Septic Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 18, 1997, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on September 8, 1997, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of Theodore F. and Mymi T. Wolf noting the following findings of fact: 1. 2. 3. The property is located within the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum ofacres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. The property contains a total of approximately 11.76 acres, 6.73 acres are considered dry buildable. The proposed plat contains two residential lots that each meet the 2 acre minimum. Lot 1, the front lot, contains 4.01 acres. Lot 2, the back lot, contains 7.6± acres, 3.8 acres to the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL), 2.7 acres to the wetland delineation. Page 1 of 5 r 4.The property is located in the Shoreland Overlay District. Lot 2 is a lakeshore lot contiguous to Dickey Lake, a natural environment lake. Lot 2 meets the required 200’ width at the OHWL, 985.5’ elevation, of Dickey Lake. 5.Access to Lot 2 shall be provided by Outlot A, a private driveway outlot instead of the road extension of Outlot B through Shadowood. 6. Lot 1 shall continue to have access provided by the existing loop driveway, 7. The existing trees and vegetation 50’ on either side of the proposed lot line meet the screening requirements of the subdivision ordinances. 8. A primary and secondary septic area have been located for Lot 2. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVF !> 'hat based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of Uie .uy ot Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application for Theodore F. Wolf and Myma T. Wolf for the property located at 900 Willow Drive North per the survey dated December 23, 1996, by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc. attached as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions: 1.Prior to new construction, future owners shall be responsible for staking and protecting the primary and alternate septic sites. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Planner/Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of each month. 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200’. Drawing to include: A. Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark S. Gronberg dated December 23, 1996. B.Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10’ wide along all perimeter property lines, except the shoreline of Dickey Lake, and 5 each side of internal property lines. Page 2 of 5 J c. D. Portions of lot located below 985.5' to be designated as Dickey Lake. The wetland designated on Lot 2 shall be showTi as a drainage easement on the plat. E. Dedication of 7 of right-of-way of Willow Drive North. F. Naming of plat. 2. Legal documents required: A. Title opinion addres^d to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. B. The applicant shall provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. 3. Fees to be paid: Total due: S 200.00* A. Legal review and filing fees = $ 200.00 B. Park dedication fee of $7,600.00 (8% of $95,000.00) to be paid upon the filing of the final plat and associated documents. meeting held this 8th day of September, 1997. ^ ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 3 of 5 r STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of September, 1997 by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City o Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public 1 i Page 4 of 5 3 I IN THE SW 1/4 OF SEC’. 27-118-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA t. WMf #r SW s«t. ♦ — MO LAKE ''SW SeJ ‘?7-118-23 ----L_. LEGAL OeSCfW>TION’ OF PREMBES : . • .1 port of the f^th 318.80 Feet of the South 825.00 feet of the South Holf of the Southwest Ouorter lying West of the Eost 990 feet thereof. Section 27. Township 118. Ronge 23. O I ^00-^0^ *T“S#|—; t04 ^0000 ^00 #/^00$ r»r4t 44 f 4 » //. r / ^f4tf I < * ^4/€M t rWS ^40 00*0§ M. 044000^4**/ 9ftSi mSIOJtDIY DRAWN lY MVtSMlN DAD iifSiMiriiiiN 0' •m Coffin & gronberg . inc. i.onsiiltm^ iit\^tihrr<. htihl Snnrififr>, Site Plminers I h«‘[rbv M ftifv fh.il IhiN Mif\« \ u.iN pri'p.irrsl In iiu*i*i untU*r niv ilinvl Mi|>rr vihhHi. .iiil I Ih.i! I »im .1 «luU C i\ il I n^mm .irul I .iml Siirunm unslri Ihr laws i»| ihi* Stair i*l K!(iim*s«*la /__y_________✓ lip'CITVOFonoNOtBEEiirMl i 900 North Willow Drive Long Lake MN 55356 August 25, 1997 AUG 2 5 199T City of Orono Zoning File ff 1215 P O Box 66 Ci^stal Bay, MN 55323 To whom it may concern: In an attempt to inventory the existing "trees and vegetation" which are on either side of the line dividing lots I and 2, I herewith submit these figures. There are: 32,000 square feet of brush and grasses, 2-4 feet high some brush on north line, 10-15 feet high approximately 200-300 tree seedlings, 2-5 feet high, too numerous to count 2 evergreens - 5-10 feet high 25 deciduous trees, 20-60 feet high. cc: file TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:August 8,1997 SUBJECT: #2275 Ted and M>Tna Wolf 900 Willow Drive North Class II Preliminary Subdivision-Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 Acres) Lot Area:11.76 total acres (6.73 dry buildable) Application:Applicants propose to divide an existing lot into two lots, (front and back) with an access lot. The applicants previously presented a sketch plan for a three lot subdivision (#2203 in January 1997). Applicants were directed to determine the extent of the glencoe wetland. Applicants were also instructed that if three lots were proposed, the private road outlot must be platted to connect to the extension of Outlot B in the Shadowood plat. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.02, Definitions ofBacklot Section 10.03, Subd. 27, Special Standards for Backlots Section 10.56, Shoreland Management Section 11.03, Subd. 2, Definitions Definitions Backlot. A lot typically separated from a public or private road by another lot ana which gains access to the public or private road via a narrow corridor. Such a separated lot is considered to be a "backlot" when the corridor is platted as an outlot. A separated lot is considerc--; .o be a "flag lot" when the corridor is platted as part of the lot. When the corriodor is merely c? :ement over another lot, the separated lot is considered to be an "easement back lot". » 2275 Ted and Kfyrna Wolf 900 Willow Avenue North 8/18/97 page—I It 1 . The proposed subdivision creates one front lot and one backlot. The proposed outlot "A" is platted as a separate corridor. ANALYSIS RRl-B Zoning Standards for Front Lots Dimensional standards for front lots. A front lot created as part of a front/back lot division shall meet all zoning district area, width and setback standards, except that the required side yard of the front lot adjacent to the access outlot shall be equivalent to the side street yard requirement for the zoning district. Lot Area 2 acres Lot 1 Lot Area Lot Width 200 feet Front Yard 50 feet Side Yard 30 feet Side Yard adjacent to street 50 feet Rear Yard 50 feet 4.01 acres Lot Width 287 feet Front Yard 70+feet Side Yard 40 ’ from north property line Side Yard adjacent to street 150' adjacent to outlot A Rear Yard 490 ’ Lot 1 meets the requirements for a front lot. Special Standards for Back Lots Created After January 1,1994 A. Dimensional standards for back lots shall be as follows: 1. Lot Area shall be 150% of the zoning district requirement. 2. Lot width measured parallel to the front or street lot line at the street yard setback line of a lakeshore backlot, or at the front yard setback line of a nonlakeshore back lot, shall meet the zoning district width requirement. The street yard or front yard for any back lot will be a # 2275 Ted and Myrna Wolf 900 Willow Avenue North 8/18/97 page~2 r 3. yard starting where the narrow access outlet corridor ends and the lot begins. Lakeshore backlots shall meet the lot width standard at the shoreline, at the lakeshore setback line, ?jid at the street yard setback line. The depth of the required street yard or front yard shall be 150% of the zoning district from yard requirement. 4. The required side yard and rear yard depths for back lots shall be 150% of the zoning district requirements. The required lakeshore yard of a lakeshore back lot shall meet the zoning district lakeshore yard requirements. RRl-B Zoning Standards for Back Lnt.< (150% requirement) Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Side Yard Adjacent to street Rear Yard 3 acres 200 feet 75 ft.45 ft.75 ft.75 ft. Lot 2 Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Side Yard Adjacent to street Rear Yard Lot 2 3.4 acres 287 ft.90+ proposed 50’ from south property line Not applicable 230 ’+ to wetland The proposed Lot 2 meets the minimum 150% requirement for backlots. Access Requirements 1. ^ Access outlots shall be 30' minimum width, and shall be wide enough to accommodate drainage, snow removal and screening without encroachment on neighboring properties. The proposed outlot is 30* in width and will not cause encroachment onto adjacent properties. # 2275 Ted and Myrna Wolf 900 Willow Avenue North 8/18/97 page~3 r I ' •; ’1 V,‘‘‘Tv.. 2.The City is to consider requiring both the front and back lot to share a driveway access within the access lot if the Council determines that creating an additional access to the existing street will be a potential safety hazard. Lot 1 currently has an existing house with a circular driveway. The curb cut for outlot A is proposed to be located at least 120' from the southern entrance to the circular driveway. 3.Driveways within a back lot shall be located at least 10’ from the side or rear lot lines of adjacent lots. The proposed driveway for Lot 2 will be able to be located at least 1 O' from the side and rear yard of Lot 1 and the adjacent property to the south. 4. No more than two residences may be served by a driveway located within an access outlot. . Only one residence will be served by outlot A. 5. No access lot may be platted abutting an adjacent access outlot except when the intent is to combine the two access outlets for creation of a public or private road meeting City standards. The proposed outlot A is not located next to an access outlot. Screening Requirements 1.Driveways constructed in access outlets si.**!! be adequately screened by fencing or vegetation at the discretion of the City, at all points to the rear of the required street yard of the front lot, so as to eliminate intrusion of vehicle headlights into the side or rear yard of adjacent lots. The applicants have not submitted a landscaping plan for the outlot. The Planning Commission shall direct the applicant to screen the driveway in the outlot. 2.The street yard of the back lot shall be adequately screened by fencing or vegetation at the discretion of the City, so as to eliminate intrusion of vehicle headlights into the side or rear yards of adjacent lots. The applicants have not submitted a plan indicating how the street yard of the back lot shall be screened. The Planning Commissiq^shall direct the applicant to screen the street yard of the back lot. #2275 TedandXfyrna Wolf 900 Willow Avenue North 8/18/97 page—4 r t.r Septic Septic tests confirm that soils are suitable to support a five bedroom mound system on Lot 2. The septic system location will meet all necessary setbacks from property lines, structures and wells. DrainageAV etlands The land generally slope downward towards Dickeys Lake. Approximately .4 acres of wetland has been delineated to the west of the lake. The dry buildable area of Lot 2 is sufficient to build a residence at least 26' from the wetland. Park Dedication The City Assessor is reviewing the proposal to determine the value. The Park Commission will require the 8% dedication fee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval following the Planning Commission's directions to the applicant regarding: 1.Screening along the outlot and along the rear property line of Lot 1 which is the front yard for Lot 2. 2. Retention of the loop driveway on Lot 1. Attachments A B C D E F G H Application Plat Map Preliminary Plat Topo Map Septic Report Assessor's Findings (to be inserted when received) Minutes from Sketch Plan Resolution #2880 re: Outlot through Shadowood # 2275 Ted and Myrna Wolf 900 Willow Avenue North 8/18/97 page—5 L-JCA I oylVJ AAy\t’ *’ L‘~ ID I * *■ V w\ / ^ .^OO \/Ji’|low Drii/< NJo^K/> y- ■ ‘ $ I Application # ,J*t CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION Date Received v 7 Amount Paid -^^00 . PROPERTY LOCATION tecJdress_ ^OO UJlLLdVO D(e.\i^. Property Identification Number (PID) T>_________ • ORcJV\0 Please check one - Property Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT ______ Name iE.D ne>^ 000<^ abstract or Jk~ torrens? Address <?bo IU. t0„.' (> _ City Cj£^ ■■Phone (home) O Zip3*'5'3rtPhone (work) ER (if different than applicant) Covvrv\^-p ^Wiv<e 1^1'iQpjPv.isLic O^-dVvo . Phone (home) 1 (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Zip5S‘35V>Phone(work) V7fa ~ 5~5 3 6 / Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land . Acres Total, all parcels —X" ■ Residential; no. of units ^_______ Other (specify) X65 . g g 1 R i _ Division for Tax Purposes _ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (nd new buildling sites) _ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites Exisimg Units ____f New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use(check) Units per //. ^cres Sq. Ft. Dry BuilUable Land )C Residential ________ Oil Si r (specify)_________ ‘-.-A- t30 l538 Application # _____ Date Received" Amount Paid ^ VOO • CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site address ______t OO (JOiLUVO Q Rtm O Property Identification Number (PIP) \\<t> ^ Please check one - Property____abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT Name City. LE-C? ^ Phone (home) 4^3-*tfa3 D Zipj^aytiPhone (work) ER (if different than applicant) Cov\-tv^^-p Name _____|^Wi\<e 1^1 llio jP».isi.(c Address 0S~ CjclcCflyw. V/tCc/J City, Ofi.cfwo yV\.Ai_______ (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) _______Phone (home) ( Pfe 7 ZipS£|5S?Phone (work) - 5'5 3 8 / y/.7to Present Zoning District j^gs . g ^ ^ Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)______ PROPOSAL _________ Division for Tax Purposes -------------- Lot Line Rearrangement Only (nd new buildling sites) _ Subdivision for New Building Sites ^ Existing Units ____/ New Units Total Units Number of Building Sites Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per //. “^^Acres Sq. Ft. Diy Buildable Land )C Residential ________Other (specify)_________ r r»tt.a»rry m (g) i I Zi r^. i5) *riTi) i:\ tmt’flr' ; f»‘" s ■rqii .4,‘E-~»r isnrr'Sf'V ■ ' u-^ re*-' »*.»*vTTii#/TC”iT || ,, (|SrP,^‘(g \* ee> • > m.i‘ cL r "IA4T 15. / V.'^ft : / /.♦* /sy C2) jol i rr \031 K Hi. i - / • ••••«•••••%•• ■ •••••«••••««» • ««•■•••••• •■• !••••••#•««•««« • •••■•••••••VV • »•«•••• •••••• »••«••••••#••«■• •■••••««••••»»•••• #••««••%••• •••••«••*•«•« • •«••••■«•••«• ■ •«•••««•••••• ^0 ^ ^ w*-^ -- , y y • »*«•«••'»•••* • i S T• ••••■•••■a****** «*««»aaaB*a*ta*»«aa«aa«aaa*a«a«B« • aaaaaatfaaaaaaaaaa• Baaaaaaaaaa^Baaa• aaBavaaaasBraaaa ■ ■••B««aaaa*a#aaa TT?*.yy . ^ f*S \ (O i OO) :v:-:• a a a a a a aaavaaaaaaaaaaa laaaaaatfaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaamaaaaaB laaaaavaaaaaaraa aaaaaaaaaaaasa# (•••aaBaaga*#* • • aaaaataaa«a«*aa iritaaaaaaaaaaata vpaavaaaasavaaa' r a a a#aaaaaa«aaaa. a^aaaaaa«a#a^a#a I «aaa *a«a < aav# *• • a4#aa«««aaa M's a a 8 a aaaa^aaaaaataaaa aaaaaa^aaaaaca ■ • aaaaaaa«aaaaa a^ aAaaaaaaaaaaapvv* avaaaaa8.«vaaaaaa aaaaaaa «aa •avaaa aaaa* aaa#aaaaa a aaaaaaaa«aaaaaaa aaaaaa«aaa8a«aa a«^aaa«aaaaaaaaa aaaaa^aaaaaaaat aaaaaaaa «aaa«aaa aaa«*aa*aaaa«aa aaaaaaaa *9 a«aaaa M.J. J, "a* *a* *a a a a a a a a . a a a a :• iipa- ■Jill _?■». aa “T5T5»'---------------nrs------ »■'• •./ '••V / T / / fWQQ§ M ,-:r / 7*^ / hI7 » u».at \ «naf* =t i!r7r rajf T*i>* < t-f c^’ «cn —— 'S .*^ 'M '* V aani-ffr L ( ^7) |Cl.t» ToTw y®® X i / %* ' /I »a* F, V V \ti9} i: % / ^ * r & c<) C *• ^ « ! TED WOLF IN THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 27-118--23. HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA EYhibi+ G. C. UMf SW S«i. LAKE SOUTH LWE OF THE • SW 1/4 Of SEC. 27-118-23 LEGAL OESCWPTION Of PREMSES : Thot port of the North 316.80 feel of the South 825.00 feet of the South Half of the Southwest Uuorter tying West of the East 990 feet thereof, Section 27, Township 118, Range 23. r»r4i 44 00 • ^ f 4e0f/ TV# 4^4*4 f40 44*4f M. 49400*0, f///r • I Rivisiorw PAri <2>/V# ♦; I»*S< KJl'IhtN #*4rre#w>#» «y mw§ »0 » t**J I hi’rrbv lh.il lhi\ mhu*\ w.i\ pri'iMri'tl b\ nif m uiuU*r niv dmtl u|H ’f and thal I am ? dulv fiTjistrntl C i\ lU and I ami Suivmiw omiri r j r TO: FROM: DATE: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager August 12,1997 SUBJECT: Septic Review for Application #2275, Ted & Mytna Wolf - SuMivision The proposed two lot subdivision includes soil testing and design for each lot. A new septic system was installed in 1997 for the existing 3 bedroom residence. The existing system can be expanded to a 5 bedroom system and a future site for a 5 bedroom residence is also available. The new lot has suitable area for both primary and alternate sites for a five bedroom residence. All designs meet City and State Standards. Based on the above information, staff recommends approval of the application. r CITY OF ORONO SEPTIC SYSTEM APPROVAL CITY of ORONO Municipal OOke PDstOfT1ctBo.t66 Co ital Bay, Minnosoto 55323^ LOCATION: J°° »iH°« Dr. N. -S> AtiftSS- /jcSjOyuJ OWNER: Ted Wolf GENERAL CONTRACTOR:._SEPnC CONTRACTOR: SITE EVALUATOR: s-P Test-inn The City of Orono has .REPORT DATE: 23, 1997 Approved (approved-disapproved) wiili the following comments: your on-site system design as of *^^^7 ^ (date) enclosed. (473^S).‘'SfforP'‘" W™'*! ®f *' ta pUc^tuS Sal" ‘uh "* ““ f'"':!"* "lust lemain haa v«mad that primary and*altar„"raL „?.d.qu«afy p^rlctl ““ of ^l^ar T“* «'•)« «Uowed within 20' unuaabl. prohibiting the timaiy compiation X7SXro„g ‘'3m“ A site copy wiii be available at the City Officea for the septic contractor. CITY OF ORONO -------------^ Stephen Wewian, On-site Syslems Manager telephone -473-7357 • FAX-473-0510 ■■Twiieiix • I I tj 3 I S-P TESTING, INC.Steven B. Schirmers • MPCA Cert.No. 627 951 Katydid Lane NE • St. Michael, MN 55376 • (612) 497-3566 FAX(612)-497-5011 State License #394 May 19, 1997 Ted Wolff 900 Willow Drive North Lot 2 Orono, Henn. Co., MN JUL 2 5 W’ OF ORONO This on-site s^age treatment system is designed for a Type 1, five bedroom home, in accordance with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Chapter 7080 and local ordinances. The soils on this site are SCS soils mapped - LTB - LeSueur loam. The seasonally saturated soils were located at 12" to 26" (mottled soil). Due to the seasonally saturated soils, a Pressurized Mound System will need to be installed to treat septic effluent. The bottom of the treatment area must be located at least 3' above the saturated soils. The soils at a depth of 12" have a percolation rate averaging 12.7 mpi. A pumping chamber will need to be installed to lift the effluent to the treatment area. The power supply and switches must be located outside the manhole and pumping chamber in a weather proof enclosure. A warning device must be installed with a light and sound device, this is In case of a pump failure. The nianifold and supply line pipe must have back drainage to the pumping chamber. The distribution pipes shall have their ends capped. Be sure the rock and sand fill material are clean. The sod layer below the entire mounded area must be turned over, just breaK up the sod, be sure not to over work. All neighboring wells are located greater than 100* away from the proposed treatment sr03. 1 I 'i *1 ! ^ » construction. The tiLtn»nt a^a Design is not valid & the systeli^i^need to to construction. This proposed for On-Site Sewage TreaS^toto^ ®^®s i2W%"ss'4Ksr“-» w-r.ave no problem in should to disposed of fnto the toptfctenfrn?,;,!!^’^^'''“leHissue due to adding more solids & fine ^lids oassina thfrSmh ♦ ® recommended, treat septic effluent Additives are not recommended "r ^ bacteria needed to your tanks through the manhole by a earned num^r ^ pump & clean pumper to set up a schedule. ^ Pumper every 2 years. Check with your Steven B. Schirmers w# 'fctf»iii^ , >■•<0'^^ 9XM By-h I hii f City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55323 Phone: (612) 473-7357 Fax: (612) 473-0510 MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: August 14, 1997 Planning Commission Members Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Park Dedication Fee for Ted & Myma Wolf, 900 Willow Avenue North I minutes of the orono planning commission meeting held on JANUAP,.Y 21, 1997 (#7 - #2202 County Road 15 Improvement - Continued) Smith asked what impact the filling of wetlands would have on the wUd life in the area. Settles said the reports indicate there will be no impact noting the land is only a long, narrow stnp. nuth inquu-ed if there would be any detours or rerouting of traffic. She was informed tMt the construction would be staged such as half the road would be built at a time allowing for on-going two-lane traffic by use of one lane and the shoulder. McMillan questioned the surcharging. Guy Knowlan said the surcharging will make use ot a select granular sand, which over an appro.ximate 6 month period of time wUl compress the air and water out of the material to allow Class 6 and bituminous to be laid over It. The north <5»de would be affected 1.2 meters and driveways will be left lower to accommodate the surcharging. There were no public comments. Gaffron informed Lindquist that the Council is considering a ponding agreement but does not wash to delay the project. Polaczyk noted the construction cooperative agreement between Hennepin County and Orono states such language listing the responsibilities regarding maintenance and funding participation between the County and City. He explamed the costs regarding right-of-way and construction as well as the City contribution of the Femdale Cutoff for mitigation. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seronded, to recommend approval of the CUP and variances for alteration of existing wetlands in conjunction with the reconstruction of County Road 15 from Orono Orchard Road to the eastern border of the City with the recommendation that the Council pursue alternate mitigation sites. Vote: Ayes 4 NaysO SKETCH PLAN/COXCEPTUAL REVIEWS (#8) #2203 TED WOLF, 900 WILLOW DRIVE - SKETCH PLAN REVIEW FOR PROPOSED CLASS HI SUBDIVISION The applicant was represented by Mark Gronberg and Mike Hilbelink. 6- I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 21, 1997 (#8 - #2203 Ted Wolf - Continued) Mabusth reported that the applicant proposes a three lot subdivision of the 8o acre property located in the RR-IB Zoning District. The propeny is subject to the Shoreland Regulations as it is located within 1000 feet of Dickey Lake, an natural environmental lake Structures and septic drainJfields are not allowed within 150 of OHWL at 985.5. The existing residence within the property currently has access oflf of Willow Drive. Outlot B of the Shadowoods plat to the immediate north was created to provide a future loop road to Willow Drive. The applicant proposes a single driveway is proposed to be installed within the Shadowoods outlot to eliminate impact on vegetation. The subdivision, Shadowood Farms, is serv’ed by a cul-de-sac road 1300 ft in length. This driveway would increase that access from the 1300 ft. to 1600 ft. The code would aUow a 1000' length. It was the City ’s plan to plat and install a future loop road. Mabusth reported that the dry buildable has not yet been determined and will be a factor in whether there is a two or three lot division. Mark Gronberg indicated a wetlano delineation occurred about six weeks ago using aerial and field checks. Mabusth noted that the wetland consists of 2 types, PA and glencoe, adding that the soils of the glencoe need to be determined. Gronberg will get the results of the testing to Mabusth. McMillan noted for the Planning Commission that winter testing is not guaranteed and will require further confirmation. If a 3-lot subdivision were to occur, Staff must ask for a future corridor connecting Cox Farm Road with private road in subdivision. If a 2-lot subdivision is proposed, the City may not ask for a platted extension at this time. Mabusth noted that a let:er signed by the Sanford's, 945 Cox Farm Road, along with 10 other property owners of Shadowood, asked for elimination of Outlot B extension road. Lindquist read the letter "into the record voicing concern over access from Outlot B. The residents feel two lots are not an extensive development and the City's right to outlot B does not exist citing safety and environmental impact with the number of maple trees existing in 0 -tlot B. The residents voiced concern over impact to the wetlands and Dickey Lake and prefer an access from the subject property. Gronberg noted the possibility of a loop road. He did not feel they would have to use the driveway _nd do not wish to connect all the way through for the two lots. He asked for consideration of the 30' outlot for two lots from Willow Drive with Lot 1 using the existing access. Lindquist asked if two curb cuts were possible. Gronberg said there were no sight line problems. Mabusth said this would require input from Greg Gappa, the Director of Public Services. It was noted that t^e Ringerswood plat does not have a connecting corridor to north lot line or subject property. r »*<■ I MhHTlNCi HELD ON JANUARY 21, 1997 (rrS - #2203 Ted Wolf - Continued) Schroeder asked if the reason for a loop road was for safety purposes. Mabusth said the concern was for safety and this pattern for development is recorded in the Comprehensive developed with a temporary cul-de-sac. HiJbelmk said the applicant prefers the way the property access is currently laid out and Goes not propose to eirtend the cul-de-sac. Schroeder asked if an outlet could serve as a driveway. Mabusth said a 3-lot plat would require a private road. Mabusth questioned the loop drive that serves proposed Lot I and the requirement to maintain its use. Lindquist said ideally he would see all access off of the future road out ot. McMillan noted the difficulty of installing the connecting road outlots once development takes place. The roads should be installed prior to development or placed closer to the boundary of the developed site. Mabusth informed Schroeder that there were no standards for driveways. She informed him the access serv^g three units would have to be a private road. Lindquist noted the 50 ’ outlot would still be platted. Schroeder questioned whether there was enough land. Gronberg said there was 3.05 acres to the wetland area. He noted there would be a need for an S" shape to hook up to the outlot. It was felt there would be adequate land. During public comments, Matthew Sanford, 945 Co.x Farm Road, informed the Comim^sion that the propeny owners of Shadowood were unanimously opposed to the use of Outlot B. He noted that one reason for the purchase of his property was because of the Running maples located there. Schroeder informed him that it was not the intent of the Commission to have to cut down those trees. The Commssion discussed the options for access. M:> Jillan noted the need to have the Mdition^ irformation regarding the wetland on Lot 3 in solving access from Willow Drive. Mabusth advised that the final resolution of the access issue is dependent on the number of residential units. Lindquist noted the need for assurance that there is enough dry buudable land for three lots. Applicant’s representatives were informed that if there was a 3-lot subdivision, the 50 ’ outlot must be a private road designed to connect with Outlot B of Shadowoods. The private road could be constructed with a temporary cul-de- sac. Mabusth inquired about septic testing. Gronberg informed her that the testing has been completed and all three lots have acceptable sites for septic systems. Schroeder said he would be inclined to plat a road outlot with a 30’ corridor with a dnveway. Concern was voiced that it would be difficult in the future to divide if the outlot was not platted at 50 ’. A suggestion was made for a driveway installed within Outlot B that was specifically created as a connection corridor. Sanford asked that Outlot B be stipulated that no driveway would be constructed off of it. His concerns were noted. r Wf^m »/. a •&s#-^ ll^i mmmn CSty- of OH.ON'O RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 238° _^Mmm ■ 'yv; .r mi -C.-T ,L . B f< • - ■'Mh * •_ 'T .1* A R2S0LDT20a A??ROVIRG TE2 PLAT OF SSADCXfOOD FARM yiS.2 BO. 1532 «»•«*«<of Orono ia a aunieipal ccrporat.lon ^|anized and existing under the laws of the State of .*lfnM5cta; .. ^ ^ Council of the City of Orono has subdivision regulations for the orderly, econoaiic end safe development of land within the City? and -^aoniAc cnc Council has considered the plSoa?M« T * subdivision of a plat of 13 lots by Pullerton Properties Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, the subdivider; end s“bdivislon has been found to neet all that^Uch residential zoning district finding UM aJ ^ sinffii%-5< 1 size and configuration that will allow its th? “4 “ "• a«»«iop.d,«ithout o€ ♦•h* -1 subdivider has completed all requirementsof the platting regulations of the City, including* ,> i'• I ^ .H * . * a’ref^uJ?ii®fw®f requirenents of Resolution #2826, ’ subdivision” granted preliminary approval of the 13 lot ' • * ®" ^**® rights-of-way for public roadsshown as E.C.S.A.H. No.6 and Willow Drive. 3. Dedication oj easements.the plat of drainage and utility 4.Dedication on the plat of drainage easements. -os<5s shown on the plat as Outlots B and Cox Pa^*Road^” known henceforth as Shadowood Drive Page 1 of 4 Ifc.a v V V v;*».7 City of OS^OE^O RE£0L'JT!0?J O? THE CITY COUNCIL sibdlT^VeV hVs“de«MteerU**h^ private reed, the the «ty jl^e'* ec«st “4roV^? created nen-exclueive rne^o//*ec-es»'’*d.*V' >>»» ‘ naintenance covenants wh«-*ifn * declaration of certain benefiting lot owners and/or maintain and pay the cost oi Easement Pro^^ding for %^ta-iens^ Coan^'rvationcrainagewayse f^ood ed wetlands, c=e ehown on the' pie? „ dJJfnfprSseMnLl^'"-'^'^ InstaXlltlon" of* certain^ iit-o've*’V'“'"* Providing forsubdivision apoVoval^^ imp-ovements as a condition;.o£ usesf"^**^^®" OQtlots for the following approved V-* ; • . • 1^- • .? • ■ hJmeVtea* property llScicombined with the Jamia'icol' «a property which is surrounded by Outlot A. 't ^ south*! * Ti?is^?ectlo?*^o?^'^^*extension’ to*" the constructed at Jhis time V.road use. time but is set aside for future ilMl'pfat *’• oonatruoted npon interim use^^f "7»®ef ®-ddit°eil»idealing with along west border of^oetTLi-^ right-of-way of Willow Drive unused portion of rl«sht' ^ possible vacation of upgrade of Wil'ow*nr1tf/ “P»n deteminetion of final standard, or a,\<ut“ rS'i’S.tfllaV'illr Sxecuti^on P--=p.rty on the north .n"d'V.Vt^iV.V^orrh,'s’cVi.^rjfoV. “• Pace 2 of 4 B®£iS.S -V • ^v'--fu*..... ■■•• ,. fe.':€fvv.! •*.* • v;- Si 'j.v-.ty-.- m ii '*^**^*ar> ••^"**.*^*^ •- > •*? V - -Y * * •.•••* *" r REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: Sep „ ^^0/Vo August 29,1997 Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2276, Brent and Julie Walton 2405 Dunwoody Avenue Variances —Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 acre) Lot Area:12,754.5 sq. ft. (.29 acres) Application: The applicants have a purchase agreement to buy the subject property which is currently a vacant lot. They intend to construct a new residence. Variances are needed for lot area, lot width and hardcover in the 75 - 250 setback. Other issues with this application include relocation of a water line that serves 2425 Dunwoody Avenue and dedication of a sanitary sewer easement across the property. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommended on a 4-3 vote: 1. 2. 3. To direct the applicant to reduce structural coverage to under 15%. To request an easement of 10' on either side of the sanitary sewer line. To relocate the water line upon building permit approval and before the footing inspection. 4.To redesign the driveway to access Dunwoody Avenue via the existing curb cut I'^ed by 2425 Dunwoody Avenue to include a 20' by 20’ turnaround area. 5.To approve a hardcover variance in the 75'-250' setback area based on a redesigned driveway and structural coverage under 15%.i I 6. To approve a lot area and lot width variance COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; To amend or approve: 1. 2. 3. To accept proposed easement for the sanitary sewer. To require the water line to be relocated prior to the footing inspection. To approve variances for lot area, lot width and hardcover in the '75-'250 setback to allow 3,810 sq. ft. (43.15%) of hardcover where none is existing and 25% is allowed No hardcover shall be allowed in the 0'-75' setback area. 4. To require that the driveway include a turnaround for vehicles and access to be shared with 2425 Dunwoody Avenue, as shown in the Exhibits.. I ' A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (A & B) SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1, 2 AND 3 FILE NO. 2276 WHEREAS, Brent Walton and Julie Walton (hereinafter "the applicants") have an interest in the property located at 2405 Dunwoody Avenue owned by Louis B. Oberhauser (hereinafter "the owner") within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: see Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 18, 1997, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivisions 6 (A & B) and Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1, 2 and 3 to permit a new residence on a vacant lot of record. Variances are requested to allow a reduction of lot area of 12,745.5 sq. ft. where 21,730 sq. ft. is required, and a lot width variance to allow a lot width of 50' where 100' is required. A hardcover variance to allow 43.15% or 3,810 sq. ft. where 25% or 2,207.5 sq. ft. is allowed is required. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2276. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one-half acre or 21,730 sq. ft. is the minimum lot area. The property consists .29 acres or 12,754.5 sq. ft. Page 1 of 7 ] ■i. r u 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 18, 1997 and recommended approval on a vote of 4 to 3. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The lot is an existing lot of record. B. The lot is 12,754.5 sq. ft. or .29 acres. It does not meet the minimum lot area requirements of the LR-IC district. C.This is an unusual shaped parcel as it is situated in relation to Shoreline Drive and Dunwoody Avenue and Lake Minnetonka. D.The amount of hardcover for the long driveway and turnaround are due to the access being provided from Dunwoody Avenue and the need for safe ingress/egress. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 7 lilfcMT.aa r CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivisions 6 (A & B) and Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1, 2 and 3 to permit construction of a new residence on a vacant lot where the minimum lot area and lot width are not met and to allow 43.15% (3,810 sq. ft.) of hardcover where none is existing and 2,207.5 sq. ft. (25%) is allowed. Approval was subject to the following conditions: 1. The structural lot coverage shall not exceed 1,913.17 sq. ft. (15%). 2.Applicants to provide easement to the City of Orono for the sanitary sewer as described in Exhibit B. Said easement to be executed upon closing of the purchase of 2405 Dunwoody Avenue. 3.Applicants to relocate the water line following approval of the building plans and prior to approval of the building permit and installation of footings. 4.A 20’ X 20' paved area for vehicles to turnaround to discourage backing out onto Dunwoody Avenue shall be installed. 5. No hardcover shall be allowed in the 0-75* setback. 6.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 8, 1998). 7.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 3 of 7 a 8. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of September, 1997. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Louis B. Oberhauser, Property Owner Brent Walton, Applicant Julie Walton, Applicant STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of September, 1997 by Gabriel Jabbour and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 7 r STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of___, 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of___, 199 before me a Notary Public within -1 and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.t: NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 7 r r I t t • * • • *4 •• « A Sanitary Sewer Easenient Description for Brent Walton in Lot 2, Block 8, Townsite of Langdon Park • Hennepin County, Minnesota August 25,1997 •4# ^ a « • • f • A 20 foot easement for sanitary sewer purposed over, under and across that part of. the following described property: That part of Lot 2, Block 8, Townsite of Langdon Pai k described as follows: Beginning at a point of Northeasterly line of said Lot 2 distant 5.CG feet southeasterly from the Northeast comer of said Lot 2; thence southwesterly parallel with the Southeasterly line of said Lot 2 to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence southeasterly along said shore to the Southeasterly line of said Lot 2; thence northeasterly along said Southeasterly line to the most Easterly comer of said Lot 2; thence northwesterly along the Northeasterly line of said Lot 2 to the point of beginning. which lies within 10 feet on each side of the following described centerline: Commencing at the most Easterly corner of said Lot 2; thence southwesterly along the southeasterly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 220.00 feet to the point of beginning of ^e line being described; thence northwesterly deflecting rfghtSI degrees 30 minutes'td its iritersection with the northwesterly line of the above described property, and said centerline there ending. • I 11. • 4 t .• » »4 •• • ** • *» 4 *t t • • I I • • ' t '« 0 • • I » I TO:Mayor Jabbour and City Council Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE: SUBJECT: August 29, 1997 #2276 Brent and Julie Walton, having an interest in the property located at 2405 Dunwoody Avenue Variance(s)—Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) Lot Area:12,754.5 square feet (.29 acres) Application: The £^plicants have a purchase agreement to buy the property which is a vacant lot to construct a new residence. Variances are needed for lot area, lot width, and hardcover. The need for a structural coverage variance has been eliminated because the applicants have redesigned the house and garage. Other issues with this application include relocation of a water line that serves 2425 Dunwoody Avenue, the proposed driveway and access to Dunwoody Avenue, dedication of an easement for sanitary sewer line across the property, and relocation of a water line that serves the adjacent property. Pertinent Ordinances: • Section 10.25, One Family Lakeshore Residential District, Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requirements, Subd. 6 A. and B. • Section 10.22, Subd. 1. and Subd. 2, Lakeshore Hardcover and Land Alteration Regulations and Subd. 3, Tree Removal Regulations • Section 10.03, General Provisions, Subd. 14, Yards and Open Space, C. Lot coverage r- k ^2276 Brent and Julie Walton 2405 Dunwoody Avenue August 18, 1997 page~I ■ s Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0’-75'3,750 sq. ft.♦railroad ties viewed on site by shoreline None None None 75 ’-250'8,830 sq. ft.None 2,207.5 sq. ft. (25%) 3,810 sq. ft. (43.15%) 1,602 sq. ft. (18.14%) 25O'-500 ’1,050 sq. ft.None 315 sq. ft. (30%) 215 sq. ft. (20.48%) None needed A variance is needed for hardcover in the 75-'250 setback. The applicant needs to provide a turnaround area for safe access to Dunwoody Avenue. The length of the driveway also effects the amount of hardcover because of the lot's relationship to the two streets and the lake. The house is situated as close to the lake and as far away from the two roads as possible. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicants have stated that a narrow and very long lot requires a long driveway which in turn increases the hardcover percentage. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The property is currently vacant. Any new residential construction on this site requires a variance for lot area and lot width. It would be difficult to design a structure with a driveway that is less than 25% hardcover because the turnaround and driveway represent 15.28 % of the lot area. A house, garage, and deck would then be limited to less than 10% of the lot area in the '75-'250 setback which would be 857.5 sq. ft. #2275 Brent andJutie Walton 2405 Dunwoody Avenue August 18. 1997 page-3 fur :y- ’ *■ 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The plight of the landowner is due to the existing lot size. The Plaiming Commission previously reviewed a sketch plan to combine three lots on this comer to allow two units. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Residential development on this property would be an improvement over the condition of the vacant lot. 4. 5. 6. 7. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors are not a consideration with this application. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not a consideration. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Residential uses are allowed in this zoning district. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Not applicable. The special conditions applying to the stmcture of land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The conditions that apply to this lot are due to the lot size and the relationship of the lot ♦o Shoreline Dr. and Dunwoody Avenue. #2276 Brent and Julie Walton 2405 Dunwoody Avenue August 18, 1997 page-4 „ ► <a» T.... 11. 12. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. Lots in this neighborhood district tend to be narrower and do not meet the lot area requirements. Many lots in this area do not meet lot area and lot width requirements and often do not meet hardcover requirements. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The variances for lot width, lot area, and hardcover are needed to build a house on this lot as proposed. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. Variances for lot area and lot width will allow the lot to be built upon. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The granting of the variances will allow the applicant to purchase the property to construct a new residence. i I : i r Issues There are numerous issues with this application. 1. The need for a structural coverage variances has been eliminated. 2. The driveway has been redesigned to tie into the existing curb cut and to provide a turnaround ai:e»’native to backing out. 3 . The hardcover worksheets as submitted are for the first plan that was submitted. They need to be redone to show the revised plans. Any proposed hardcover along the shoreline shall be shown so that the complete amount of hardcover on the site can be considered. 4.The applicants have agreed to provide an easement for the sanitary sewer upon finalizing purchase of the property. if2276 Brent andJutie Walton 2405 Dunv/oody Avenue August 18. 1997 page-5 M? / 7 / .0 - 5 • « • • .j • *4 AAv » • Sanitary Sewer Easement Description for Brent Walton in Lot 2, Block 8, Townsite of Langdon Park Hennepin County, Minnesota August 25,1997 \ • •• • • » A 20 foot easement for sanitary sewer purposes over, under and across that part of/the following described property: That part of Lot 2, Block 8, Townsite of Langdon Park, described as follows: Beginning at a point of Northeasteily line of said Lot 2 distant 5.00 feet southeasterly from the Northeast comer of said Lot 2; thence southwesterly parallel with the Southeasterly line of said Lot 2 to the shore of Lake Minnetonka: thence southeasterly along said shore to the Southeasterly line of said Lot 2; thence northeasterly along said Southeasterly line to the most Easterly comer of said Lot 2; thence northwesterly along the Northeasterly line of said Lot 2 to the point of beginning. which lies within 10 feet on each side of the following described centerline: Commencing at the most Easterly comer of said Lot 2; thence southwesterly along the southeasterly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 220.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence northwesterly deflecting nghtSI degrees 30 minutes to its intersection with the northwesterly line of the above described property, and said centerline there ending. I • • I • t •• 0 .0 • • * I / • • • 't , > • I CfNTmCATI tUMVfV FOH BRENT & JULIE WALTON IN U)T 3. BLOCK B, TOWMSITE OF LANOOON FARK HENNEPIN COUNTV. MINNESOTA .r/ * i0*I • • • • y> 77,>s ^^:>/.y^siScc.- r ^•‘‘C LEGAL pesci ^t- ThMpartofLo«2,Block8,Towi»ltoofCsng<tonPMfc.dMCfttMdsslblows: B*oinnins •I ■ point In th« NorthMAlMly Hm of aaU Lot 2 dMMS 5.00 fM MUtMMtMly from lh« Noithout conwr of Mjd Lot 2; thoncs soiShwostMty pmlM wlh «M SovttMastMly Inp 'of Mid Lot 2 to ttM otioro of Lnko MlnnOlonka; Ihonco souttioasl^ olong oald shora to ttw Soultwostofty Hno of osM Lot 2; ttionoo noilhoastorty Along sold SouttioastMty In# to ttio most Eostorly comor of mM Lot 2; Ihonco northwostoity Along Iho Morthoostofty >no of Mid Lot 2 to ttw point of boglnntng. This suivoy stKMis ttto loctiton of proposod tiouM, garago ond drtvo on ttio obovo dotcilboil^oporty. It doos not purport to show snyottMTlmprovomonli or ‘ oftsroschmonts. : donotos Iron maiinrs IHMUdllitt ■|VIMll^IIAII lifM mriHiK T_0 __lOT>r\Vlf>Tin/^_IVT,i hfft'h\ tt'ililv Ihji ihiN Hti\ft |»n ‘|mfil l»t tm- ih mt>Ui wti ttmtl "*^*P** M All Maxwell Day ^MT|£ t fSlal Beh»s foiM Bay irman f'^RONO ^ \ \ VliTin cto^^' FIEWOOD I laffilfwl U ■ iatrvusM- f' Application # Jl^~7L______ Date Received ^7-j V-*? “7 Amount Paid -> ^r> CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION ^ git«» Address nrh'< Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)rropcny lacnimcciuuu inuiuuwi -------------------------------^— -------------------------- Attach legal description to application if not included on required su* vey. Date Property Acquired ------------------------_(montb/year) I (do) (jp nq^>l: Present use of property: X residential ZoningDistrict: Address: ^ Sfh:^;etfrst different than applicant) Name LAf^f other (specify). Phone fhom e'i ^ ___ Phone (work! ^Y6-/7/7 5^rfYtr, AfriL juJ0 Zip: Address: Xld/L _ City: Phone fhome'i Phone (\vork> -'Z'l/ 6_ Zip: _ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ___ Estimated Construction Cost $. (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED . Lot Area ___Lot Width Setback;Front Side ji Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusud property conditions ^eventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: (attach additional sheets if necessary) ! * h ; REQUIRED SUBMITTA] " All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete: 1. ___ Completed Application Form 2. __ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). 3. ___ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 854" x 11" for reproduction. 4. __ Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 854" x 11" for reproduction. 5. ___ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views provide one (1) copy SYi" x 11"). 6. ___ List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current ov.Tier(s). 7. __ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. __ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred iu review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. DateApplicant's Signature Owner's Signature Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents^jCommission members, and Cou^il members for purposes of inygstigatroirpnd verifipatitSnof this request. Applicant must have all subiimtals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 \ ■ ;i ■ 4 4 B.Garage C.Driveway D.Sidewalk E.Patio/Deck 1 • F.Landscape Underlain ‘ By Plastic 0.Other {liiiiriiiiiiiiininu.PRO'V 1 am PH 1 CSHT 1 apR SH CSMT LR N/A 01N/A V5HI-7060 TOAI-20^6 N/A 7026 nfflflUKtttl N/A VSHI 70)0 Tai-2050 PR N/A N/A r N/A 1 N/A N/A N/A ■afcwii VOL 1-3030 VSHI 3030 T0A2 1830rnenigt raif^ rnr;!ii:i VOV3*70^0 VSH7-3650 T0A3-2646Minmm CZEIBCEII rnr;!ini va 1-4040 V5HI 3050 TCA7-7646liacoN/A V5HI 2636 TOAI-2636 imilUIIIIINiORISIO HUilHii mni PRO'V ROOM apR 5H C5MT apR 5H CSMT LOFT 6040 3624 2 1/6VV705C V5H2 3650 ia3*2646 1 h--* n'(f j;;;;;;:;:;:;12'o' 9uu»tir»tfRn /7\ TYP COLUMM FT6 PETAIL •nuMucnRn i^TYP BEAM PQOCET PETAIL RK ■ % 'V^ - «• »; w7 typi <:al SIQQP PETAIL RK TYP FTP DETAIL RK i lUMlftf NVIMftMUfftMlUMir«l««MKMi nr«ArWM (flMM «MUM CMIMMM M MUtlMMMfm M9II• 1WfCMMtirr» WMMMUCIflilt»UU atMttHMmtummBtwmmimtmtMim. IM^ #£t|rUKfRli I* M < _ _ JfAiMMiM futi.«iMi tflLiitcawMMi r MMatvcMPca. 1 SuNNMItrM^K aMMUjfiiMMiMIMHlttfMitaM \iftn I 9 tmi MCtMlMiUMMMWimilfifMWifttWfaM f—fllWi 4 V AMMIU t«tM0 lltMMt liAMHintamiUWim K«a qo9'6 Holiday Homes FOUNDATION DETAIL HOUMY Hones- fUi BASOCM - YH|> 2* . \ c%rj ♦ A ^ ’ J b \ -A f ^ V • ^dinjaent Property Owners’ Acknowledgement Form I (we) A /^) .<0 ^Arjfo /r_________ [print name(s)][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at ? ^ also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the Citv Coimcil that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. / U>JL dperty Owner Date Property Owner Date ♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ A******* *4t**AA ********** *4141414141 I (we) [print name(s)] of 3F71 Wl/^ [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at 2 WO S also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (we) imderstand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property' or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property''Owner Date 7 l-ZZ-T? Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning OfBcc at least 10 days prior to the schedu ed meeting date. j ■''C/4 %■ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Ctry 6 C; DATE: September 8, 1997 TT^h^O.: ^ Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer's Report Item Description: Resolution to Accept Feasibility Study and Schedule a Public Hearing for the Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation Bonestroo Engineer's has completed a feasibility study for this project. The proposed project financing is described below. 1) Assessment on all properties in the Navarre water system service area. $350 X 752 properties = $263,200. Assessment to be payable over a 5 year time period. 2) $200,000 from cash reserves in the water fund 3) $276,800 internal loan to the water fund from other City funds. Total estimated project cost: $740,000. We are projecting a 2.95% per year increase in water rates for the next 15 years based on current trends. This annual rate increase should provide adequate funding for effective maintenance and operation of the water system. The proposed schedule is to bid the project in January 1998 and begin construction in September 1998. This will allow time for the contractor to order and receive the new electrical control equipment before starting construction after the summer peak water usage season. Completion of construction is anticipated for November 1998 A public hearing is scheduled for 6:30 P.M. on Tuesday, September 23rd at the Oronc High School Cafeteria to solicit comments on the proposed project and funding sources. The attached resolution accepting the feasibility study and scheduling the public hearing needs to approved by the Council. COUNCn. ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve resolution to accept the feasibility study and schedule a public hearing on the Navarre water treatment plant rehabilitation for 6:30 P.M. on Tuesday September 23rd at the Orono High School Cafeteria A RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE NAVARRE WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND CALLING HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT WHEREAS, a feasibility report has been prepared by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates with reference to the improvement of the Navarre Water Treatment Plant, and this report was received by the Council on September 8, 1997. Minnesota: 1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, The Council will consider the improvement of the water treatment plant in accordance with the feasibility report and the assessment of property within the Navarre Water System Service Area for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of $740,000. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 23rd day of September, 1997 in the Orono High School Cafeteria located at 795 Old Crystal Bay Road North at 6:30 p.m. and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. Adopted by the Orono City Council this 8th day of September, 1997. 2. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 1 of 1 .* r r 1/1 Bonestroo Rosene iK~|n Andcrlik & ^1 Associates Engineers & Architects September 2,1997 Bonestroo. Rosene. Ander/ik AssociMes. Inc is Affirmative Action Equst Opportunity Bmptoyer Pninip.its Otlo G oo. PE • Jo*>t'ph C Andcrlik. PE • Mtuvtn L Sofvald. PE • Rich.ird E Tufnt*f PE • Glenn R Cuok PE • Robert G Schunicht. PE • Jerry A Bourdon. PE • Robert W Rosene. PE and Susan M Eberlin, C PA Senior Consultants Asiocrafe Prinap.its Howard A Sanford. PE • Keith A Gordon. PE • Robert R Pfcfferle. PE • Richard W Foster, PE • D.rvitl O I oskot.r PE • Robert C Russek. A I A • Mark A Hanson. PE ■ Michael T Rautrnann. PE • led K Field. PE • Kenneth P Anderson, PE • Mark R. Rolfs. PE. • Sidney P Williamson. PE L S • Robert F Kot smith Offices St P.iul. Rochester Willmar and St Cloud. MN • Milwaukee. Wl Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 Re: Feasibility Report Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation Our File No. 13975 Dear Mayor and Council: Enclosed for your review is our preliminary rq)ort on the Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation. This report describes the improvements necessary to extend the useful life of the water treatment plant an additional 20 to 25 years. Cost estimates for the proposed improvements are presented in the preliminary report We would be pleased to discuss this report further with the City Council or City staff at any mutually convenient time. Respectfully submitted, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERUK AND ASSOCIATES, INC. I I Thomas A. Roushar I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Thomas A. Roushar, P.E. Date: September 2. 1997 Reg. No. 12084 I 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul. MN 55113 • 612-636-4600 • Fax: 612-636-1311 Letter of Transmittal Table of Contents Introduction n. Summary and Recommendations Table 1 - Cost Summary Figure 1 - Assessment Area Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation IV. Cost Analysis Table 1 - Cost Summary Project Schedule Navarre WTP Rehabilitation ti. ':-v •MlMkH.filltiff""'" ' I. Introduction The City Council has requested this report to determine the feasibility of rehabilitating the Navarre Water Treatment Plant (WTP). The Navarre WTP provides water to the Navarre area of the City of Orono. The Navarre water system serves 752 properties and approximately 1,685 persons. The Navarre WTP was constructed in 1971. The water treatment plant includes a pre-fabricated steel filter to remove iron and manganese from the water pumped from Wells No. 1 and 2. Three ion exchange softeners follow the filter to remove hardness causing elements, primarily calcium and magnesium. P ! H L) 1995, the City of Orono commissioned a study titled Water Treatment Facility Needs and Improvement Study. That study concluded that the structure of the water treatment plant was sound. Further, that study concluded that it was cost-effective to rehabilitate the existing filter and softeners and the related mechanical and electrical equipment in the plant. ^ . f Navarre WTP Rehabilitation ■‘■1 II. Summary and Recommendations i The rehabilitation of the Navarre WTP is feasible from an engineering standpoint. The project is necessary to extend the useful life of the water treatment plant an additional 20 to 25 years. The capital cost as well as operation and maintenance costs have been considered in determining that the project is cost effective. The cost of these improvements are interrelated and should be assigned equitably between all properties. The following recommendations are presented for consideration by the Orono City Council: 1.That this Report be adopted as the guide for rehabilitation of the water treatment plant. 2. That a public hearing be held on the proposed improvements. The following cost estimates should be used for hearing purposes: Table 1. Cost Siunmary » 1 r *Navarre WTP Rehabilitation Assessment:$263,200 Cash Reserves:200,000 Internal Loan from Sewer Fund:276.800 Total:$740,000 ■■ 4 hr- , -h ■ •W c > * U ¥*u I i ka limi3iAm MWW m mmMgm iiniiiii SDiil aiani^i^p li I SBXMilSHIHBBs /// // /i /y / / / // ^//'//// m /// / / / /V/ / / V/ ''''^"////////., / / / y' ////// ''pm'//. / / / / / / / // // / / / /P^ / /✓I / / /I // // / / y L.-- V/ A/ / // / /K / A / / X /\7 ''y'/^'''/y' /////////// y//,'////////, ''////////////^ / y ^ / / / / / / / / / ............. ^^//y/7✓ > ✓✓ > y /k' ✓ / //////////7 ^ '‘yry/y-ry-^z 5/V / // /;/// / / / / / /V / / / // / / / / / /// / // V/ ■7 /^////^ ^^^/yy'// ^/^///y^^////y ' ^ ^ /y / / /^ / ''// / ^ y' y / / / y/ / ^y//y //yy/ < ^y'’y ' y y > /^ y' y y / / y y y / /V y y y / / / y y y / y yy / / y y y y y / //' y y/y/y y yA^^ y y/ yyy///yyy/// y'^/ yy/yyyyyx////wp/A/' ////'// z////// / /. / / / / |The Narro f//ji:;ai!ll ^7 yT-/ A ASSESSMENT AREA 132P 2640 ASSESSMENT AREA Scale in feet I i ORONO, MINNESOTA FIGURE 1 NAVARRE WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ‘ \139MAP\139NAVWA.0WG 9/2/97 COMM. 139... ' Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects WWiri][•riTrti L*lY^tiiiirMnT8iiiT*i ItJRTtTwn rtr^i WM^iTniTTrr rtTslfiTil '•atWiiFi lUOlVTil riTiTTiT^ LUUfW ///fIMf C«fllll aiilllli IlIfflinWiTil WlDr*TiTtl [•TilRI [•HniTi] Ltj»rnT# 6. Discharge from the softening units to the sanitary sewer cannot be measured. This means that operation of the process cannot be monitored and no accountability for the amount of water discharged exists. To remedy this problem, discharge flow meters on each softening unit will be installed. M 7. The electrical system consists of nearly all original equipment. The original motor starters and incandescent lighting systems will be replaced for enhanced reliability. 8. The existing automatic control valves on the softening units arc original equipment and no longer function reliably. These valves will be replaced. 9. The interior ferrous metals in the water plant building show signs of corrosion due to condensation. Increases in the amount of ventilation and dehumidification inside the facility to control the problems ass^iated with condensation will be made. 10. The plant’s control systems are at the end of their useful life. This equipment will be replaced with a new supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system. 11. The piping within the water treatment plant is all original. As renovations take place, all related piping will be inspected and replaced as necessary. The improvement! <\uilined above will extend the usefu? ’ of the water treatment plant an additional 20 t - 25 years. Iron and manganese levels in u.c acated water will be below the Secondary Standards of the Safe Drinking Water Act. Because of the proposed changes in the operation of the softening units, a more uniform, more stable treated water will be produced. This, in turn, will help to alleviate problems with high copper and lead levels in the distribution system. Navarre WTP Rehabilitation »» rv. Cost Analysis A detailed cost estimate appeared in the section titled II. Summary and RecommftnHaHnng and appears again, below. Line item 12. Engineering and Contingency includes a 5% contingency and a 15% allowance for design, inspection, legal and administrative costs. The cost estimate is based on anticipated 1998 construction pricing. ;er Table 1. Cost Summary Item Estimated Cost 1.Filter Refurbishment $220,900 2.Softening Unit Control Replacement 17,000 3.Chlorine Solution Water Line Relocation 8,500 4.Brine Storage Tank Cleaning 8,000 5.Softening Unit Renovation 79,900 6.Softening Unit Discharge Meters 23,400 7.Electrical Systems Replacement 43,100 8.Automatic Control Valve Replacement 9,600 9.Ventilation/Dehumidification Improvements 102,500 10 Controls Replacement (SCADA)73,100 11 Piping Replacement 30,000 12 Engineering and Contingency 123,200 TOTAL $739,200 r" r Navarre WTP Rehabilitation 8 Assessment:$263,200 Cash Reserves:200,000 Internal Lx)an from Sewer Fund:276.800 Total:$740,000 V, Project Schedule Date Event September 8, 1997 Schedule Public Hearing Week of September 8,1997 Advertise and Mail Notice of Public Hearing September 23, 1997 Public Hearing October 13,1997 Authorize Plans and Specifications • October 13,1997-December 1, 1997 Complete Plans and Specifications December 8,1997 Authorize Advertising Week of December 8, 1997 Advertise for Bids January 8,1998 Open Bids January 12, 1998 Schedule Assessment Hearing Week of January 12, 1998 Advertise and Mail Notice of Assessment Hearing Week of Januar}' 26,1998 Assessment Hearing February 10, 1998 Award Construction Contract February 25, 1998 Issue Notice-to-Proceed Feb 25, 1998-Aug 31,1998 Equipment Delivery September 1, 1998 Begin Construction November 30, 1998 Complete Construction I « Navarre WTP Rehabilitation DATE: Septemb^l^l997 ITEM NO. % Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer’s Report Item Description: Request for Payment Golf Course Irrigation System Project The contractor has completed installation of one half of the irrigation system and we are recommending payment of this invoice. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to tqtprove Request for Payment #1, Golf Course Irrigation System Project to Evergreen Sprinkler Company in the amount of $43,348.03 ff Owner:City of Orono, P.O. Box 66, Crystal Bay Date:Septembers, 1997 For Period:Start to September 3,1997 Request No: 1 Contractor:Evergreen Sprinkler, 4100 Vera Cruz Avenue North, Robbinsdale, MN 55422 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT 1997 GOLF COURSE IRRIGATION SYSTEM SUMMARY Original Contract Amount Change Order - Addition Change Order - Deduction Revised Contract Amount Value Completed to Date Material on Hand Amount Earned Less Retainage 5% Subtotal Less Amount Paid Previously AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. 1 0.00 0.00 $91.259.00 91.259.0a 45.629.50 QX)0 45.629.50 2.281.48 43.348.01 0.00 43.348.03 i ; Recommended for Approval by: GREGORY A. GAPPA, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES C Approved by Contractor: EVERGREEN SPRINKLER Approved by Owner: CITY OF ORONO Date: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION /-Vq 8 Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: DATE: September 8, ITEM NO.: / 0 Agenda Section: Engineer's Report Item Description: Request for Payment #1, Bracketts Point/Bay Ridge Sanitary Sewer Project We have reviewed the information submitted by the City ’s engineering firm and recommend approval of this Request for Payment COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Request for Payment #1, Bracketts Point/Bay Ridge Sanitary Sewer Project to Barbarossa & Sons in the amount of $117,259.45 Owner:City of Orono, P.O. Box 66, CryjtUil Bay. MN 55323 Date: Septembers. 1997 For PcriikJ Start to September 3. IW7 Request No. 1 Contractor:Barbarossa fit Sons. P O. Box 367. OssL*n» MN 55356 ^10:190 bonestroo and associates ©612 6361311 09/03/97 13:23 0:10/13 NO:190 5. 1997 740.00 278.f)0 4 31.00 0.00 ,431.00 ,171.55 .2 59.45 OOP .259.45 »' Item 8 PVC, SDR 35. O'* 8' deep in place 8 “ PVC. SDR 35. 8'-10'deep in place «-PVC. .SDR .15. 10 -12-deep in place 8 PVC. SDR .1.5, 12 ’- 14' deep in place 8 PVC. .SDR 3.5. I4 ‘- 16 ’ deep in place 8 1 V(., .SDR 35. 16'* 18' deep in plate 8 PVC, SDR 26. 12'* 14' deep in place 8 PVC, .SDR 26, I4 ‘- 16' deep In place 8-PVC. SDR 26. 16'. 18-deep in place 8 ’ DIP, 8'. 10' deep in place 8 1-^JP, 14'- 16' deep in place Sid MH «*dp .4'dia„ W/RJ642B c.stg MH depth greater than 8* deep Force main acce.t^s manhole Outside drop Directional horc 8" IIDPH SDR 17 3- IIDPE. SDR 11 Directional bore 3 “ HDPC SDR 11 Connect 3" HOPE to exist. MCES FM .stub Connect .1" IIDPE inluoxitiing manhole Lightweight aggregate .3" X 3" HOPE lee with cap 2"x l-I/2"HDPE reducer 3" X 45 degree HOPE hend 8" X 4 * PVC service wye branch 8** X 2*’ wye 4 ’* PVC service pipe in place. SDR 26 4 PVC service riser pipe in place, SDR 26 4 ' HDPE service pipe directional hore 1 -1/2- IIDPE service pipe direciioual bore Improved pipe fdn. in 6- Increment depth Mechanical trench compaction Insulation Sanitary sewer television imspeciion Submersible Pump Lift .Station 1 •Submersible Pump Un Stniion 2 Total Pan I • Sanitaiy Sewer Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Quantlt to Dal LF 975 .11.00 322 LF 547 32.00 461 LF 831 33.00 85 LF .182 34.00 142 LF 95 3.5 00 15 LF 50 36.00 LF 41 36.00 10 LF 82 37.00 ISO LF 210 38.00 170 LF 20 .50.00 20 LF 12 .54.00 4 EA 17 1,700.00 9 LF .19.4 85.00 28.6 EA 1 2.000.00 IJ5 8.2 300.00 IJ*630 29.00 624 LF 1.815 20.00 496 IJ 184 24.00 EA I 3,000.00 EA 1 1.00000 !J5 I.OlO 30.00 EA 1 50.00 EA I 25.00 EA 5 30.00 EA 22 3000 7 EA 1 .10.00 LF 850 20.00 170 LF 35 20.00 LF .100 24.00 LF 120 24.00 LF 1.950 3.00 500 LF 1.950 1.00 1.375 SY 20 20.00 LF 4.075 0.60 LS 1 40.000.00 0,.t LS > 40.000 00 0.3 Amount to Dote 9.982.00 14.752.00 2.805.00 4.828.00 525.00 360.00 5.550.00 6.460.IX} 1.000 00 216.00 1.5.300.00 2.431.00 18,096(8) 9.92000 210.00 3.400.00 1.500.00 1.375.00 12.000.00 12.000.00 5122.7 10.00 l:\139M 3890mEQUtS T.WB2 SY 4.000 1.50 CY 2,100 3.50 TN 2.500 900 TN 600 28.50 TN 600 29.00 SY 4,700 1,23 CL .100 1.20 SY 700 6.75 LS 1 5.000.00 LF 100 6.00 SY 600 6.75 SF 100 U).0<J KA 1 1.000.00 IJ?ISO 5.00 LF 150 20.00 RA 4 150.00 SF 80 14.00 SY 13,000 2.00 AC 0.4 3.2KO.OO U*1,000 2.00 SF 800 0.30 RA 20 220.00 EA 20 6or».f)o LF .300 1600 BA 40 30.00 EA 13 .300.00 OA 15 300.00 -F 783 24.00 ,F 90.00 uF 115 34.00 [JF 3 35.00 LF 40 3000 40 LF -25:^31.00 -253 L.F -783 20 00 LF -4JS 3.3.00 -435 LF -26 36.00 -26 :190 BONESTROO AND ASSOCIATES ^612 6361511 09/03/97 13:23 0 :13/13 N?):190 i I PROJFXT PAYMENT STATUS Owner Frojtcl No. File No. Contractor City of Oronu l.'!990 1.1990 Barbarossa & Sons CHANGE ORDERS 1 08/19/97 Chani;cs due in unsluhle soils encountered .15.51800 3 ToUl Chanc* Ordan $55,538.00 PAYMENT SUMMARY 1 .•start 00/f.).3/97 117.259.45 ! 6.171.55 123.431.00 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lU Material on Hand m I'otal Ptiytncnl lu Dale $117.2.59.45 OriginAl Conlrftct $523.74(U«) Kttaina^c, Paymcnl No. 1 6.171.55 Change Orders 55.538.00 Total Amount tamed $123,431.00 Rcvi.sed Contract $579,278.00 I \139M aOdO\REQUEST.WB2 I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION % & % DATE: SeptembeKJ^^-^7 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services nistrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engiaeer's Report Item Description: Request for Payment #3, North Long Lake Sanitary Sewer Project We have reviewed the information submitted by the City's engineering firm and recommend approval of this Request for Payment COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Request for Payment #3, North Long Lake Sanitary Sewer Project to Barbarossa & Sons »n the amount of $49,031.45 r BONESTROO AND ASSOCIATES ©612 6361311 09/03/97 13:23 0 :02/13 ri6:190 jMlBonesiuin Owner;City of Uronn. p.O. Box 66. Crvstal Bay. NfN 55.32.3-0066 Date:Augu.st6. 19*)7 R Andetflca ^Anodvei h'nr Feriixl:August 6. 1W7 to Sepiemlw .3. 1097 Request No:3I'll A ArcMiRCU arai'iMaif 1 C fintractor:Baibarossti A Sons, P.O. Bo.x 367, Ossco, MN 55369 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NORTH LONG LAKE AND LONG LAKE COUNTRY CLUB SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS File No. 13988 SUMMARY 1 Orijtinul Cunlnwi Amount 2 Chani;c Order - Addition 3 Clian^c Order * Deduction 4 R<vh«H Contraet Amount .5 Value Completed l»> Date ’•'utcrial on Hand Amount liorned 8 Les.^ Retninage 3% 9 Sublulul Less Amount Paid Previously AMOUNT DUli THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMEhTP NO. $ S 55.768.00 737.00 6 7 10 II S s $ $ $ $ $ s Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO. KOSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Approved by Contractor: Barharo.^«a & Sons Approved by Owner: City of Oronu Specified Contract Completion Date:Date: t \lM\136ltg\nEQUEST3 WB2 874.930.01 929.961.01 .591..373.60 0.00 591.373.60 29.568.68 56IJ04.92 312,773.47 49,0.31.45 rn I \ • I. BONESTROO AND ASSOCIATES ^612 6361311 09/03/97 13:23 S :03/13 N0:190 Cnnlracl Unit Quantity Amount So.item Unit Quantity Price to Date to Date 1 R" FVC. SDR 35. O'- K ^leep in place LF 232 28.00 139 .3,892.00 2 K" pvc, SDR ft*- ](y deep in place LF 752 29.00 1.071 .31.059.00 3 8” PVC. SDR 35. 10'- 12' deep in place LF 1,303 30 00 974 29.220.00 4 R" pVC. SDR .35.12 -14' deep in place I.F 981 .31 00 1.309 40.579.00 3 8" PVC. SDR 35. 14'- 16' deep in plate LF 1.024 32.00 968 30.97600 6 8" PVC. SDR 33. 16'- 18' deep in place LF 63 33.60 IH3 6,10.7.00 7 8" PVC. SDR 26. 14'- 16' deep In place LF 220 .35.I.X)1.38 4.830.00 i(8“ PVC, SDR 26, 16'- IR' deep in place LF 188 36.00 9 8" Dll’. 10’-12' deep in place LF 40 38.00 40 1.520.00 10 K“ DIP. 16'- 18' deep in plate LP 20 41.00 20 820.00 II Sid. MH 8' dp.. 4' dia . w/RI642B c.sli»EA 24w 1.440.00 24 34.560.00 12 MH depth grculcr than 8’ deep LF 97 100.00 102.7 10.270.00 13 Directional bore 4" IIDPii SDR 17 LF 140 20.00 140 2.800.00 14 4 " MDPH, SDH 17 LP 3.812 8.40 3.716 48.01440 15 Air Tclca.se manhole EA 2 1.900 00 2 3.800 00 16 1-1/2" curb .Stop and box EA 3 350.00 1 350.00 17 C'onneci 4" HDPI; into existing nuuihule EA 1 1.000.00 1 1 .(XX1.00 IH 4 “ 43 degree HDPC bend EA 16 30.00 8 4tM).Un 19 4" tee with cap EA 1 55,00 20 4" X 2 " HOPE lee EA 3 50.00 1 50.00 21 4 “ X 4" HDPE lee EA 1 50.00 *• •>2“ X 1-1/2" IlDPli reducer EA 3 35.00 1 35.00 % 23 2" X 45 degree IIDPH bend EA 3 3000 24 4*' X 2" wye EA 2 30.00 1 30.00 25 8" X 4 “ PVC service wye branch EA 48 50.00 55 2.750.00 26 8" X 2" wye EA 3 30.00 27 2" X 1-1/2" reducer EA 7 .30.00 7 210.00 28 4" PVC seivice pipe in plate, SDR 26 IJ*1,463 18.00 1.262 22.716.00 29 4 * PVC .service rl.ser pipe in place. .SDR 26 1.F 33 18.00 44 792.1X1 30 4" IIDPH .service pipe direction.'il Nsre LF 225 20.00 31 1.1/2" HDPE service pipe directional bore IP 225 10.00 561 3.610.00 32 Inipruvcd pipe fdn. in 6" increment depth IP 6.500 001 6.SOO 65.00 33 Mechanical trench compaLiion LF 6.500 LOO 4,844 4,844.00 34 ln.su laiion SY SO 10.00 22 220.00 35 Siuulary sewer television inspection IP 4,808 042 36 Submersible Pump Lift Suiiiim 1 LS 1 44,200.00 060 26.520.00 37 Submersible Pump Lift Station 2 LS 1 44.700,00 0.60 26.82000 Total Part 1 • Long Lake Sanitary S340.857.40 L\13ftM3Qaa\PEQUFST3 WB2 i- niniiMfini~[rf Tt -*"• -------------- BONESTROO AND ASSOCIATES © 612 6361311 09/03/97 13:23 0 :0A/13 n6:190' 38 39 40 4t 42 43 44 45 4ft 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 38 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 Pari 2 - Waltr Main 8- DIP. Claw 52 12- DIP. Class 52 6" DIP. Class 32 Cut into exislinji: 8" CIP Cut into existing 6* DIP Hydrant 6" gate valve ami boi gate valve and box 12’ huttertly valve ami boa Fittings Mechanical trench compaction Improved pipe foundation in 6’ Increments Total Pan 2 • Walcrmain Part 9 • Restoration Clear and grvh 2' X 3' sump catch basin 4 ‘ diameter sump catch basin manhole Catch basin tnanholc ovcrdcptli Bituminous surfacing lemoval ('ommon excavation Class 5 aggregate base (100% crushed) Type 31 bituminous base course Type 41A bituminous wearing course Geotextile fabric Bituminous material for tack coal Bituminous street patching Sawcut concrete driveway Sawcul bituminous Bituminous driveway restoration Concrete driveway restoration 12" RCPiit plate I5 “ RCP in plate IS’ RCP. over H' deep 15 ’ RCP flared end in place with trash guard Mcthanical ircnth coinpotiion Improved pipe fnd. in 6’ increment depth Remove existing CMP culvert IM 39\139B8'.n EOUE ST3 WB? LF 95 20 00 46 920 00 LF 490 26.00 583 15.158.00 LF 3 I9.W)10 ISO (Ml EA 1 1.000.00 1 I.000.00 EA 1 800.00 1 800.00 EA 1 2,000.00 1 2,000.00 EA 1 600.00 1 600.00 EA 2 750.00 'y 1,500.00 EA 1 1.000.00 1 1,000.00 LB 1.370 1.00 850 830.00 LF 590 1 00 639 639.00 LF 593 0.01 100 l.OO S24.6S8.00 EA 20 300.00 51 15,300.00 EA 2 1.000.00 2 2,000.00 EA 5 1,200.00 3 6,000.00 LF 17 125.00 $625.00 .SY 11.600 1.00 11.500 11.500.00 CY 3.700 .3.25 3,700 12,025.00 TN R.(MX)9.20 8,000 73.600.00 TN 1.200 23.50 TN 900 27.50 SY 11.000 1.00 10.819 10.819.00 GL .550 1.00 SY 300 6.30 LF 100 5.00 • LF 650 1.50 SY 1.550 6.50 SF 3,200 3 50 LF 233 22.00 86 1,892.00 LF 141 24 00 121 2,904.00 LF 20 26.00 HA 2 900.00 1 900.00 LF 595 ) 00 207 207.00 LF 393 001 LF 430 2.00 KK)200.00 • 1 L m I BONESTROO AND ASSOCIATES 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 82 83 84 85 86 H7 88 89 90 92 93 93 96 97 Humish and install I5 ” CMP culven 15" CMP Hared end Riprap. Class m hand placed Sod with 4“ (upxoil Seed with topsoil, mulch and fenili/er Erusiun control Icncc Wood fiber blanket Furnish and plant Fvergtecii Tree (nine Spruce) 6* high Furnish and plant shade tree (Sugar Maple) 4 ’ diameter Remove and replace wo*hJ or chain link fence Remove and transplant bushes Remove and transplant tree * Oesiduous Remove and transplant tree - Coniferous Salvage «id reinstall wood gu?*-d post Total Pari 3 • Restoration Part 4 • Ice Arena Duplex Grinder Station Duplex submersible grinder station 2" HOPE. SDR 11 Connect to existing manhole 2" HOPE 45 degree bends Total Pan 4 * ice Arena Duplex Onndcr Station 6361311 09/03/97 13:23 (5 :05/13 Ni LF 450 1200 201 2.412,00 BA 30 10000 12 1,200 00 CY 12 30.00 8 240 00 SY 28,000 2.25 AC 2 1.55000 LF 1.000 2.50 1.000 2.500.00 SY 750 1.50 EA 6 225.00 EA 6 500.00 LP 600 13.00 EA 12 75.00 EA 12 1.50.00 EA 15 150.00 EA 11 50.00 0.50 25.00 $144,349 00 LS 1 I8.60U.00 0.60 11.160.00 LF 1,160 6.00 1.095 6.570.00 EA 1 1,000.00 1 1.00000 EA 2 50.00 5 • Lift bUitloii 6 Renovaliun Temporary controls, pumps and piping fur interim conveyance Lift station demolition New pumps, piping, valves, top hatch and slab New control panel, base slab, dialer, and miscellaneous electrical Sod 8" Class 5 aggregate base 3" lliick bituminous driveway Total Part 5 • i.ift Station 6 Renovaliun LS LS LS SY TN TN Part«• Lin Station 12 ModifleaUtma Remove existing impellers ai>d wear rings 2,(XX).00 5.000.00 I 35,000.00 I 50 75 30 24.000 00 2.25 12.00 4500 118,73000 $0.00 I \13»\1390fl\RFOUEST3 WB2 »:»ii:4 BONESTROO AND ASSOCIATESi ^612 6361311 55 09/03/97 13:23 g :07/13 NO:190Deletel2“RCPinpJacc lf15 RCP fiareU eiKJ In place wiih trash guord EA Total Change Order No. 3 Chingc Order No. 4 4 diam. sump catch ha-sin munhule ex C’atch basin manholo overdepth lf Biluminuus surfacing reninvul jy Common excavation .Sawcui bituminous jj, 15" RCP in place j_p 15" RCP flared end in place w/ TO ea Clear and grub Total Change Order No. 4 Change Order No. 5 Common Excavation ^y aas-s 5 Aggregate Base (100% Cm.shcd) t N Total Change Order No. 5 Total Pan l - Long Lake .Sanitary Total Part 2 • Watermain Total Pan 3 • Restoration Total Pan 4 • lee Arena Duplex Grinder Station Total Part 5 - Lift Station 6 Renovation Total Pan f> - Lift .Station 12 Modifications Total Pan 7 - Portemain Alignment Total Part It - Rcsidcntal Submersible Grinder .Siatioiu AUcmale No. 1 - MM 22 to MM 22A Total Change Order No. 1 Total Change Order No. 2 Total Change Order No. 3 Total Change Order No. 4 Total Change Order No. 5 Total W«>rk Completed to Date 22.00900.00 (l.54.00> (I) (3.388.00) (900.00) (S870.00) 4.800 00 375.00 400 00 13.000.00 309.00 5.016.00 900.00 2.100 00 $26,900.00 1.560.00 8.648.00 $10,208.00 340.857.40 24.658.00 144.349.00 18.7.30.00 0.00 0,00 8,201.20 0.00 13.420.00 4.920.00 0.00 (870.00) 26.900 00 10.208 00 SS9U73.60 IM.39M3988\nEQUEST3 WB2 VI3 NO: 190 BOr ^STROO AND ASSOCIATES ^612 6361311 09/03/97 13:23 0 :08/13 NO:190 ‘3,388.00) (900.00) [$870.00) 4,80000 375.00 40000 >.000.00 309.00 C.0 16.00 900.00 !, 100.00 1.900.00 .360.00 .64800 .208.00 I PROJECT Payment stat us 4)wn*r City of Orono ProJtciNft. 13988 File No. 13988 Cuiilriiclur Barbarossa & .Son.-s CHANOK ORDERS No. PAYMENT .NUMMARY 1 06/06/97 — _____i^esenpiion Ad^iiional trees and manholes a.s a resuh of easement nct*()tiations Amount 1 2 420 no mm 06/10/97 Extend bypass piping in valve l,6«>0 00 06/18/97 Siibslituie cormKatud polyclhylcne pine for RCP sinrm sewer (737.00) 4 CrtiiMfUclion of pomliiiK urea ami liiNiHllHlion of storm ijpwor 31.450 (X) 5 08/19/97 Aildilional Class .5 10.208.00 Total Change Orders $55,031.00 1 Stan 07/01 I95.908.K6 Neumage 10.310.99 Completed 206 219 8S T 07/01 08/06 316,864 61 26,98808 539 761 SS }08/06 0*)/03 49.031.45 29.568 68 mm -m ^ ■ 591,.373 60 4 5 6 7 K 9 10 Miilerial on Hand 173.60 $874,930.01 33.031,00 l;\ 1 3<)\1 3986\nEQUe S T3 WB2 1'^b:i90‘ t ) .^1 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <? DATE: September 4^9^ ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: ^ ' Proposed 1998 Budget and Tax Levy - Resolutions Proposed 1998 Budget The proposed 1998 Budget accommodates a number of necessary expenditure increases while holding the tax levy to the planned increase of less than 3%. A number of expenditure requirements have occurred simultaneously to cause the need to increase expenditures beyond the normal level. Although the General Fund expenditures are proposed to increase by 5.53%, these expenditures can be accommodated within a tax levy increase of less than 3% because several of the increases are offset by related revenue increases. Expenditures and Tax Lew The city’s 1998 General Fund budget expenditures are proposed at $3,638,095. This is an increase of $190,490 or 5.53% over the 1997 budget. The tax levy required to fund the general fund budget is $1,750,000. This is an increase of $69,020 or 4.11% over the 1997 General Fund tax levy. The total tax levy required to fund the overall 1998 city budget is $2,225,130. This is an increase of $63,500 or 2.94% over the 1997 levy. Property Class Rate Reductions and Tax Tanacitv Rate The 1 997 Legislature enacted property class rate reductions for both residential and commercial property. The most significant changes in property class rates were the reduction of the residential rate for value over $75,000 from 2% to 1.85%, and the reduction of the conunercial class rate for value over $100,000 from 4.6% to 4.0%. Due to the property class rate reductions, the city's tax capacity growth for 1998 taxes is minimal. The tax capacity for 1997 taxes was $14,874,819. Without the reduction in property class rates, the tax capacity for 1998 taxes would have been $16,178,830, an increase of 8% over 1997. With the reduction in property class rates, the tax capacity for 1998 taxes is projected to be approximately $14,921,498 or an increase of .3% over 1997. Based on the proposed 1998 tax levy, and the minimal increase in tax capacity, the city’s tax rate will increase from 14.251% to approximately 14.690%. This is an increase of 3%. Dollar % 1996 1997 1998 Increase Increase Actual Budget Budget rOecrease')(Decreased Personal Services $ 1,924,879 $ 2,009,530 $2,153,825 $ 144,295 7.18% Suppi'?.': S< Maintenance 355,334 380,380 388,730 8,350 2.20 % Professional Services 524,602 548,705 579,545 30,840 5.62 % Insurances 63,547 66,900 66,900 0 0.00 % Other Expenses 237,481 276,560 283,415 6,855 2.48 % Capital Outlay 46,598 69,400 69,820 420 0.61 % Transfers to Other Funds 458-013 96.130 95.860 (270)- 0.28 % Total $ 3.610.455 S 3.447.605 $ 3.638.095 $ 190.490 5.53 % General Fund Expenditure Increases II Request for Council Action Continued September 4,1997Proposed 1998 Budget and Tax Levy - Resolutions 3.) The costs of fire service provided to Orono by the four fire departments have been increasing well beyond the general inflation rate. The proposed budget includes a 7.45% increase in fire service costs. B. Other General Fund Expenditure Increases 1. ) Planning intern: $14,000. The need for the planning intern is caused by a very high level of planning and zoning activity. This activity is producing additional revenue which will be used to fund the position. 2. ) Two position reclassifications have resulted in increased pay to reflect increased responsibilities (Deputy Clerk/MIS Assistant and Senior Planning Coordinator). 3. ) 3% general pay adjustment. Although this increase is higher than the current consumer price index, it is part of the second year of a two year agreement with the police officers. 4. ) Police longevity pay step increases. Five police officers will all receive step increases in the longevity pay schedule in 1998. Each step increase is a 2% increase in pay. The total cost of these increases is $5,000. 5. ) Police sergeant position. This position, which will be added in 1997, will add $6,000 to the police budget in 1998. 6. ) Increase of $10,000 in part time police officer pay. The need for additional part time officer hours to fill in on miscellaneous shifts has increased for two reasons. One, as officers increase in age and longevity, they accrue and use more vacation time. Because the department needs to maintain minimum staffing levels, these shifts have to be filled. It is most cost effective to fill them with part time officers. Two, as the area grows, the level of general activity increases. This keeps the shift officers busier and less able to provide requested services such as speed enforcement The part time officers are also used for these types of activity. 7. ) Elections related expenditures will increase $8,600 due to 1998 being an election year. New Program Options The Council has determined that the budget will include $20,000 for new programs, such as those listed below. The Council has not determined which specific programs will be funded. f I Request for Council Action Continued September 4,1997Proposed 1998 Budget and Tax Levy - Resolutions 1. Fire/hazardous material inspection. This could most cost effectively be accomplished by contracting with another city for this service. The estimated cost is $5-7,000 per year. 2. Merit pav program. The Council supports the development of a merit pay system to enable o; ‘"Standing performance to be rewarded. The general plan for this program is to proviuv -m amount of merit pay dollars that could be paid out as a performance bonus to rc -ognize, reward and encourage outstanding performance. 3. Comprehensive Plan update. The city is mandated to update its Comprehensive Plan by the end of 1998. The cost of this effort is uncertain at this point. Staff has applied for a grant through the Metropolitan Council which could cover a significant portion of the city's costs. 4. Funding for park land acquisition and park development. There has been some discussion that the city's park dedication fee revenue will not be sufficient to meet the needs of the city regarding parkland acquisition and park development. The Council may want to supplement the park dedication fee revenue by initiating a tax levy for park land acquisition and park development. It is very unclear at this point what the city's future expenditures for park land acquisition and park development might be. Lew Limits The 1997 Legislature imposed levy limits on cities for 1998 and 1999. The levy limit is tied to the implicit price deflator and household growth. The city's levy limit for the 1998 budget is $2,265,600. This is an increase of $103,970 or 4.81%. The proposed tax levy is well under this levy limit amount. Funding for Major Infrastructure Rehabilitation/Construction The 1998 budget follows the direction set by recent budgets toward putting the city into a better position to address both current and long term needs for infrastructure rehabilitation/construction. The three main areas of infrastructure rehabilitation/construction are as follows: 1. Sewer and water infrastructure 2. Street infrastructure 3. Storm drainage infrastructure Request for Council Action Continued September 4,1997 Proposed 1998 Budget and Tax Levj’ - Resolutions Sewer and Water Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Utility Rate Increases A. Water Fund. The Council has determined that water rates should be sufficiem to fully fund 100% of depreciation on all water infrastructure. This will provide funding to enable the city . to address long term water infrastructure rehabilitation needs. The Council has also authorized staff to move forward with the project review and approval process related to the rehabilitation of the Navarre water plant. This project has a cost of $740,000. Staff has projected that in order to fund the water plant rehabilitation and 100% of depreciation on water infrastructure, the water rates will need to increase 2.9% per year over thw next 20 years. B.Sewer Fund. The Council has directed that the sewer rates be set so that the depreciation on sewer infrastructure would be 100% funded. To accomplish this, the minimum sewer rate increase, on an annual basis over the next 20 years, needs to be 3.2%. Street Infrastructure Repair and Maintenance The city provides for general street maintenance activities, such as pot hole patching and snow and ice control, with in-house staff and equipment. Other activities designed to e.\tend the life of the city's streets, such as sealcoating and overlays, are provided through the use of private contractors. The 1998 budget includes $97,000 for contractual street maintenance in the General Fund. As in 1997, an additional amount ($40,000) is included in the PIR Fund to enable the city to do more overlay work. The overlays can extend the life of a roadway by up to 10 years and also reduce or eliminate the need for other maintenance activities during this pe»^od. Funding for Storm Drainage Infrastmr.tiire There are currently a substantial number o^^ stormwater drainage problem areas in the city. Although some of these can be solved with projects costing in the range of $20-30,000, several of these could require projects with costs approaching $100,000. In addition, there are a number of areas in the city in which a large volume of "untreated" stormwater flows directly into Lake Minnetonka. The Surface Water Management Plan being completed by Bonestroo and Associates will identify a set of stormwater improvement projects that will address many of these problem areas in addition to addressing other stormwater drainage needs. The storm drainage infrastructure will require a large amount of funding from a number of different sources over the next 10 to 20 years. As a significant step in providing funding for storm drainage infrastructure, the city initiated, in the 1996 budget a levy amount of $40,000 per year for storm r F:‘ Request for Council Action Continued September 4,1997 Proposed 1998 Budget and Tax Levy - Resolutions drainage infrastructure. This levy amount is maintained in the 1998 budget. Budget and Tax Lew Adoption The city is required to adopt a budget and tax levy so that the levy can be certified to the County by September 15, and so that a summary of the budget can be published along with the notice of the Truth in Taxation Hearing in November. After adoption^ the proposed tax levy cannot be increased, but can be reduced prior to final budget adoption after the Truth-in-Taxation hearing in December. The proposed budget can also be changed prior to final adoption in December. Resolutions adopting the preliminary 1998 budget and proposed tax levy are attached for Council adoption. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: I. Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Tax Levy to fund the 1998 Budget. 2. Motion to adopt a resolution approving the 1998 Budget. -----------iiiiliiiKti \ J r r ■i.' »*• A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED 1998 BUDGET BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the proposed 1998 governmental funds budgets are determined to be as follows: Fund ESTIMATED REVENUES Taxes - General General Special Revenue Debt Service Capital Projects $1,750,000 $315,000 $54,480 Special Assessments ——315,665 Licenses and Permits 202,000 Intergovernmental 497,800 $50,000 17,000 1,388,970 Charges for Services 996,660 12,400 Fines and Forfeits 66,000 — — Interest Inc ne 65,400 176,000 74,650 30,000 Miscellaneous 60,235 25,000 Transfers From Other Funds —95,000 130,000 — Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources $3,638,095 $358,400 $852,315 $1,473,450 PROPOSED EXPENDITURES General Government $795,5.35 — —mmm — Public Safety 1,914,355 — —— —— Street Maintenance 508,105 Parks and Recreation 57,665 . — Recycling Program 72,250 ——— Engineering — Unallocated 14,850 .. —— . Reimbursable Expenditures 46,475 — — Special Projects and Contingency 67,120 — —— — Debt Service - Principal —— —$415,000 Interest and Fiscal Charges ——384,727 _ Capital Outlay 66,740 $202,750 — ^$1,421,500 Transfers To Other Funds 95,000 605,000 —— Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses $3,638,095 $807,750 $799,727 $1,421,500 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held September 8,1997. ATTEST: Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk r! * i: A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PROPOSED 1997 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 1998 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the following sums; as reduced by HACA, be levied for the current year, collectible in 1998 upon the taxable property in the City of Orono, for the following purposes: General Fund - Operating PIR Fund - Infrastructure Replacement (Storm Sewer) ?IR Fund - Infrastructure Replacement (Road) G.O. Sewer Improvement Bond 1992 G.O. Improvement Bond 1997 G.O. Refunding Bond 1995 - (Debt Fund) G.O. Refunding Bond 1995 - (Operating Funds) Public Facilities Revenue Bond 1991 - HRA $1,750,000 40.000 14,480 35.000 10.000 35,000 105,650 235,000 TOTAL ALL LEVIES $2.225.130 The City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held Septembers, 1997. ATTEST:Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor 4 1 Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk n 10 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION O^yO * w 6 DATE: Septembers, 1997 ITEM NO: \ 5 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: ' Establishment of Dates for the Truth In Taxation Hearings Attachment. Calendar of Dates Available for Truth In Taxation Hearings The City is required to select dates for an initial Truth in Taxation (T in T) hearing, and for a continuation hearing. On the basis of the available dates, it is staffs recommendation to set the initial (T in T) public hearing for 7:00 P.M. on Wednesday, December 3, 1997, at the City Council Chambers, and to set the continuation hearing for 7:00 P.M. on Wednesday, December 10,1997, at the City Council Chambers. If a continuatio n hcuring u n ot requ ired, the final tax levy and budget may be adopted at a subsequent hearing which can be held at 7:00 P.M. on Monday, December 8, 1997, prior to the regular council meeting on that date. (In this case the council would announce the time and place for the subsequent hearing to officially adopt the final tax levy and budget, at the initial T in T hearing.) 11 a cont inuatio n hearing is required, the council will then decide on a subsequent hearing date and time to officially adopt the final tax levy and budget and must announce it at the continuation hearing. (The hearing to officially adopt the tax levy and budget may be held immediately following the continuation hearing.) COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to set the initial Truth In Taxation public hearing for 7:00 P.M., Wednesday, December 3, 1997, at the Orono council chambers, and to set the continuation hearing, if required, for 7:00 P.M., Wednesday, December 10, 1997, at the Orono council chambers. DECEMBER 1997 ,1 ' » ■ Pv.' : < r i REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator DATE: September 4, 1997 ^ ITEM NO 'V Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Sectidv^ City Administrator’s Report % Item Description: Policy Regarding Inclusion of Properties in Sanitary Sewer Project - Resolution The city’s policy regarding the inclusion of properties in a sewer project area has been that if a property is within a project area and the sewer line passes the property, the property is in the project, regardless of the size of the lot or the condition of the septic system. A property on the fringe of the project area can be excluded from the project if the property has a minimum of 2 acres, a septic system meeting all code requirements, and an alternate septic site. As the city has undertaken projects using the current policy, the city has found that the timing of a sewer project is not always in sync with the timing of the need for septic system replacements. At the point a project is undertaken, the various properties in the project area are at various stages in relation to their septic systems. Some have systems that are failing and require immediate replacement, while others have installed new systems a very short time prior to the project being identified or reviewed. Because of the timing problem, when the city undertakes a project there will be those who cannot obtain the sewer soon enough, and those who just installed a new septic system and don't want to pay again for sewer. The situation where a property in a proposed sewer area has a newer, code compliant septic system will appear more often as the city deals with more, but smaller, neighborhoods who decide they want sewer versus septic. There will probably always be one or two properties who have recently replaced their septic systems. Proposed New Policy To address the timing problem of new septic systems versus new sewer projects. Council directed that the policy regarding inclusion in a sewer project be changed to enable a property with a newly upgraded septic system that meets all current code requirements to opt out of the sewer project. The resolution provides that the age of the septic system can be amaximum of seven years. The Council may want to increase or decrease this number; or may determine that the age of the system is not relevant, as long as the system is in compliance with all current code requirements. The Council also directed that the policy provide that the owner of the property can decide at any time in the future to connect to the sewer system. The property will then pay a connection charge equal to the full per unit cost of the initial sewer project increased by a cost of living factor on an annual basis. A resolution setting out this policy change is attached for Council adoption. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt a resolution amending the city's policy regarding inclusion of properties in sanitary sewer projects. 1' A RESOLUTION AMENDING CITY POLICY REGARDING INCLUSION OF PROPERTIES IN A SANITARY SEWER PROJECT sewerWHEREAS, the city has had a policy requiring inclusion of properties in sanitary _ projects with the exception of a property on the fringe of the project area if the property has a minimum of 2 acres, a septic system meeting all code requirements, and an alternate septic site, and WHEREAS, the city has found that the timing of a sewer project is not always in sync with the timing of the need for septic system replacements, so that project areas tend to include a small number of properties with recently upgraded septic systems, and WHEREAS, those properties with recently upgraded septic systems may determine it is in their interest to opt out of the project to avoid paying a sewer assessment in addition to the recent cost of upgrading their septic system, and WHEREAS, it is reasonable to allow properties with recently upgraded septic systems that meet all current code requirements to opt out of a sewer project, and WHEREAS, it is not in the best interests of the city that a small number of properties with recently upgraded septic systems prevent a sewer project, that would benefit a large number of properties, from moving ahead, and WHEREAS, if a property that opted out of a sewer project desires to connect to the sewer project in the future, the property should pay the full per umt project cost as a connection charge. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orono City Council does hereby amend the city policy regarding the inclusion of properties in sanitary sewer projects to enable a property within a sewer project area to opt out of the project if the property has a septic system that meets all current code requirements and is less than 7 years old. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if the owner of the opt out property decides at any time in the future to connect to the sewer system, the property will pay a connection charge equal to the full per umt cost of the initial sewer project increased by a cost of living factor on an annual basis. ' V ^0.C'v'#*REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ■-0 ^ Js,'S> DATE: Septembers, 199^^^© ITEM NO = B Department Approval: ^ Name Tom Kuehn• Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Resolution to amend the interest rate and date applied to the North Long Lake/Long Lake Country Club sanitary sewer assessment roll, as established by Resolution No. 3895. I ;'Vi '3* Attachments: Resolution to amend the interest rate and date applied to the North Long Lake/Long Lake Country Club sanitary sewer project special assessments. The interest rate on special assessments is generally set at 1.25% above the interest rate on the bonds used to finance the improvement project. When Council adopted the initial assessment resolution on the above project the interest rate was established at 8.00%. Council indicated that the final assessment interest rate could be lower due to favorable conditions. The bonds were sold at a true interest cost of 4.9793%. Therefore, the interest rate applied to the special assessments can be reduced from 8.00% to 6.25%. The interest on the assessments is to begin accruing effective October 1, 1997, with interest added through December 31, 1998, for the first year of collection. The assessment roll currently includes the property at 1490 Long Lake Road, ovmed by Troy Anderson. Mr Anderson has appealed the assessment and the Council directed that his property be excluded from the project. The City Attorney will advise the city as to the proper method of officially excluding the property from the project. Once this is accomplished, the property will be removed from the assessment roll. Two properties, each with an adjacent undeveloped lot under common ownership, were included in the project with the condition that the adjacent lot be combined with the lot receiving sewer. These properties are located at 2085 County Road 6 and 879 Brown Road North and are owned by John Maresh and George Johnson respectively. These two properties will need to meet the condition prior to being allowed to connect to the sewer. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt Resolution #____, amending the interest rate applied to the North Long Lake/Long Lake Country Club sanitary sewer assessment roll from 8.00% to 6.25%, and amending the starting date of interest from May 6,1997 to October 1, 1997. A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE INTEREST RATE AND DATE APPLIED TO THE NORTH LONG LAKE/LONG LAKE COUNTRY CLUB SANITARY SEWER ASSESSMENT ROLL, AS ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION NO. 3895 WHEREAS, the City Council of Orono, Minnesota established the interest rate at 8.00%, and the effective interest date as May 6, 1997, on the assessments for the improvement of sanitary sewer in the North Long Lake/Long Lake Country Club area by passage of Resolution No. 3895; and WHEREAS, the City Council did intend to amend said interest rate based on the total interest cost interest rate of the bonds sold for the sanitary sewer improvement in the North Long Lake/ Long Lake Country Club area; and has determined that the first year of collection should reflect a maximum 15 months of interest; and WHEREAS, the City Council has awarded the sale of said bonds, bearing a total interest cost interest rate of4.9793%. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: 1. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 15 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 1998 and shall bear interest at the rate of 6.25% per annum fi-om October 1, 1997. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from October 1, 1997 until December 31, 1998. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 2. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole assessment on such property, with interest charged to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid vdthin thirty (30) days of October 1, 1997; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 30 in 1997, or before November 15 in a subsequent year or interest will be charged through December rtfiiRMOMiHl •mni MW575I gfiFTnn X rV..*n \ m V. I (Cq •V. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 'A. <9 DATE: September % ITEM NO. Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Administrator's Report Item Description: Crystal Bay Park Irrigation System A recent project was completed to add additional topsoil in Crystal Bay Park. Excess material from construction projects was used for the completion of this project. This area is the site of the old City Hall and Public Works Buildings. There have been problems with the establishment of landscaping trees and shrubs in this area because of lack of a convenient water source. In conjunction with this project to add additional topsoil. City staff was instructed to obtain cost estimates for additional faucets, or an irrigation system to provide for adequate watering of the new turf and landscaping. We have obtained cost estimates for this work. The estimated cost for the installation of an irrigation system to cover the entire area is approximately $8,000 dependant on the available capacity of the existing well. A more reasonable option would be to install three faucets along the edge of the field to allow for easier sprinkling of this area. These would be inground faucets installed in an enclosure flush with the ground surface. The estimated cost for this work from Evergreen Sprinkler Company is $1,500. Evergreen Sprinkler is the contractor installing the golf course irrigation system. The first year of turf establishment is important and may require more sprinkling. After initial turf establishment the amount of sprinkling required should be less, and these additional faucets should be adequate for maintenance of the turf and landscaping. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to authorize the installation of piping and three additional faucets in Crystal Bay Park by Evergreen Sprinkler Company at a cost of $1,500. i m' REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^O' (? DATE: Sept^nl^r 5, ITEM NO: jO Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Resolution Requesting County Assistance in the Oversight of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) is a regulatory board with authority in the areas of wetland protection, surface water drainage, and water quality. The board is appointed by the County Board of Commissioners and operates independently with assistance by professional staff and legal and engineering consultants. The MCWD includes all cities around Lake Minnetonka and all cities along Minnehaha Creek. The cities under the jurisdiction of the MCWD have recently joined together to address concerns regarding the manner in which the MCWD carries out its responsibilities. Because the MCWD board is appointed by the County Commissioners, the cities are requesting County assistance in the oversight of the MCWD. It is essential that the cities and the MCWD are able to work cooperatn ely in dealing with issues related to wetlands, surface water drainage, and water quality. One ultimate goal of the joint effort of the cities is to get to a point where the working relationship between the cities and the MCWD is such that issues can be cooperatively addressed and resolved. A committee representing the cities in the district has identified specific concerns regarding the manner in which the MCWD carries out its responsibilities, and the effects this has had on the cities in the district. The committee is recommending that the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners take a more active role in monitoring and overseeing the activities of the district, to improve the communication between the district and the affected cities and to address the concerns identified by the committee. The committee is requesting that all cities in the district adopt a resolution setting out the concerns identified, and requesting County assistance in the oversight of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The resolution is attached for Council adoption. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt a resolution requesting County assistance in the oversight of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. A RESOLUTION REQUESTING COUNTY ASSISTANCE IN THE OVERSIGHT OF THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT WHEREAS, the City of Orono lies within the boundaries of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MWCD); and WHEREAS, the City of Orono believes it is essential that the cities and the MCWD are able to work cooperatively to address and resolve issues related to wetland protection, surface water drainage, and water quality; and WHEREAS, the City of Orono supports the joint effort currently underway to improve the working relationship between the cities and the MCWD; and WHEREAS, the cities under the jurisdiction of the MCWD have significant concerns that the MCWD has not demonstrated good governance in the conduct of its statutory responsibilities, and WHEREAS, a committee representing these cities has identified specific concerns regarding the manner in which the MCWD carries out its responsibilities; and WHEREAS, such concerns relate to such matters as: a lack of intergovernmental comity and cooperation; a failure to give timely, responsive, and reasonable consideration to public and private project applications; an apparent unwillingness to give fair consideration to alternatives for funding MCWD projects; the absence of sound, accurate and thorough budgeting; a lack of consistency in dealing with municipalities with the district; a failure to recognize limitations on legal authority of the District and to appreciate and accommodate local concerns; unreasonable restrictions on minor developments, redevelopments and public improvements; a failure to utilize professional staff effectively; excessive expenditure of public funds for administration, per diem, consultants and travel expenses; inflexible application and unreasonable interpretation of District rules; and the failure to evaluate fully the cost effectiveness of storm water management and water quality improvements and structural and nonstructural alternatives to such improvements; and WHEREAS, the committee has found that the actions of the District have resulted in: an unnecessary duplication of effort among political subdivisions; unnecessary delays and increased costs of development and redevelopment projects and public improvements; an extraordinary • ^ r w t t commitment of public money and staff resources in dealing w ith the District; an excessive tax burden on the citizens of the cities; delayed provision of needed public facilities; and a declining confidence in the governance of the affairs of the District; and WHEREAS, a number of the cities within the MCWD also lie within other watershed districts or participate in joint powers watershed management organizations where they have not experienced similar problems; and WHEREAS, the cities have no means of exercising control over the affairs of the MCWD for the benefit of the cities and their citizens, and lack the resources to monitor, oversee, and negotiate with the District independently. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono that: 1. The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners is hereby requested to undertake a thorough investigation of the activities of the MCWD, to monitor and oversee the ongoing activities of the District, to facilitate dialog between the District and affected municipalities, to consider diligently the cost effectiveness of capital projects proposed by the District and structural and nonstructural alternatives to such projects prior to approval thereof, and to take such other actions as the County deems appropriate to ensure the accountability of the District and address concerns described above. 2. City staff is directed to explore with other cities in the watershed district joint and cooperative efforts to monitor and oversee the activities of the MCWD, in cooperation with Hennepin County. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono the 8th day of September, 1997. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 0^- ■i 1 1 i * r m.. t kJ- •k' % i. iI> REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: September 4, 1997 ITEM NO: / 7 Department ApproTal: Name Dorothy Hallin Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: / List of Licenses for Council Approval Garbage and Refuse Collector's License: BFI of North America, Inc. 9813 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55347 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny above listed license. Agenda Section: Licenses Cb. ■<?( 0 CICT OP*ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 All-1251 License Year / ^ 1 Date Received 5^' b" - 7 Fee Initials jCi^ GARBAGE & REPOSE COLLECTOR'S LICENSE APPLICATION The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City of Orono and herewith makes application for a license to do so. /• (Street) / (City)(State) Business Phone Numlser ___________ nerewitn maxes appxica.ta.uu xuo. « ..w Business/Firm ^ Address /^/y7 (Zip Code) Applicant's Name ^ Address _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (Street) _ ^ Phone Number _ _ r.^.x—^ (City)(State) (Zipip CodeO • Check One: _ _ _ _ Individual _ _ _ _ Partnership Number of Vehicles to be used in Orono Corporation Description of Vehicles (attached list if more): Loaded Loaded Size/Yards License NumberYear Ifi0> Mtgr.uro s s w I. • /V.ova <’/ (Ton 0 ' // r?-o//£/S • General area of City served /7p6 C- Schedule of Collection charges/ dates Approximate number of customers in Orono _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ Location of dumping area IN ORDER POR THIS APPLICATION TO BE COMPLETE, YOU MOST ENCLOSE THE FOLLOWING: Surety bond in the amount of $1,000. Proof of insurance in the amount of $100,000-$300,000-$50,000, and 10-day cancellation clause, .^nual fee xs $30.00 flat rate fee, plus $15/truck, and a $30.00 transfer fee (if applicaox^^. I am the owner and operator of the above business and I have paid all license fees and taxes required by law. The above information is- correct. '7--" PORyCITY OSE ONLY / Approval After review of application, staff recommends:^ Denial _ _ Other (specify) iiAlii ( ( jJ\ .anature df/ City ottxcialsign Date r <5* X i.« 4 Sep 1997 Thu 12:16 PM Check Register City of Orono Page 2 Check Number Date Name Check Number 54633 54633 BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP 08-Sep-97 BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP Totals Check Number 54633 BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP Check Number 54634 BRESSLER, BRAD 54634 08-Sep-97 BRESSLER, BRAD Totals Check Number 54634 BRESSLER. BRAD Check Number 54635 CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS 54635 08-Sep-97 CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS Totals Check Number 54635 CDP IMAGING systems Check Number 54636 CHASPRO Check Number 54638 CRABTREE COMPANIES 54638 08-Sep-97 CRABTREE COMPANIES Totals Check Number 54638 CRABTREE COMPANIES Check Number 54639 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 54639 08-Sep-97 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. Totals Check Number 54639 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO, deck Number 54640 doyle inc. 54640 08-Sep-97 DOYLE INC. Totals Check Number 54640 DOYLE INC. Check Number 54641 E-2 RECYCLING 54641 08-Sep-97 E-2 RECYCLING Transaction Amount Comments 1,252.86 1,252.86 SEPT BJ.^6 82.26 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 8,148.99 8,148.99 COPIER PURCHASE 54636 08-Sep-97 CHASPRO 360.00 SHARPEN CHOPPER BLADES Totals Check Number 54636 CHASPRO 360.00 Check Number 54637 OIUNKS LAXESHORE AUTO 54637 08-Sep-97 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 22.85 8177 MOUNT a BALANCE 54637 Oe-Sep-97 CHUNKS LAXESHORE AUTO 222.81 #175 ELEC DIAO 54637 08-Sep-97 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 264.82 #172 TRANSMISSION 54637 08-Sep-97 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 31.89 #177 OIL CHANGE 54637 08-Sep-97 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 45* 85 #178 SHOTGUN SBT01>, SHOCK 54637 08-Sep-97 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 700.89 #174 CONTROL ARM, ALIGN Totals Check Number 54637 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 1,701.11 186.OT 186.05 TONER CARTRIDGE 51.20 51.20 DEER FOR RESALE 112.83 112.83 SHEAVE 5,422.92 AUGUST SERVICE I I 4 Sep 1997 Thu 12:16 PM Check Register City of OronoCheck Number Date Name Check Number 54641 E-Z RECYCLINQ Totals Check Number 54641 E-Z RECYCLING Check Number 54642 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 54642 O0-Sep-97 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE Totals Check Number 54642 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE Check Number 54643 ESS BROTHERS k SONS 54643 08-Sep-97 ESS BROTHERS k SONS Totals Check Number 54643 ESS BROTHERS k SONS Check Number 54644 EVERGREEN LANN CO. 54644 54644 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 EVERGREEN LAHN CO. EVERGREEN LAWN CO. l . Check Number 54644 EVERGREEN LAVfN CO. The^k Number 54645 FROST, SHERRY R. 04-Sep-96 FROST. SHERRY R, TotU % Check Number 54645 FROST. SHERRY R Check Number 54646 G a K services 54646 54646 54646 54646 54646 54646 54646 54646 54646 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 Oa-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 Q a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a R SERVICES G a X SERVICES G a X SERVICES G a X SERVICES Totals Check Number 54646 G a K S^VICES Check Number 54647 GALL'S INC. 54647 O0-Sep-97 GALL'S INC. Totals Check Number 54647 GALL'S INC. Check Numbei 54648 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. 54648 08-Sep-97 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. Transaction Amount 5.422.92 96.80 96.80 527.18 527.18 43.348.03 6.000.00 49.348.03 360.00 360.00 60.36 12.15 5.93 86.56 12.15 5.93 60.36 12.15 5.93 261.52 10.98 10.98 41.00 Page 3 Comments BEER FOR RESALE ADJUSTMENT RINGS PAY #1 INSTALL DRAIN TILE MINUTES AT MEETINGS STREET EMPLOYEES RATHBUN STEFFENHAOEN STREET EMPLOYEES RATHBUN STEFFENHAOEN STREET EMPLOYEES RATHBUN STEFFENHAOEN SNITCH BOX JXn.Y SERVICE 1 ! Ki. 4 Sep 1997 Thu 12:16 PM Check Number Check Number 54648 Check Register City of Orono Date Name 54648 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. 08-Sep-97 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. Totals Check Number 54648 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. Check Number 54649 54649 HASE>1AN, CAROLE 08-Sep-97 Totals Check Number HAS01AN, CAROLE 54649 KASEMAN, CAROLE Check Number 54650 54650 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 12-Sep-96 Totals Check Number HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 54650 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF Check Number 54651 54651 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS. 08-Sep-97 Totals Check Number HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS 54651 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS Check Number 54652 54652 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN 08-Sep-97 Totals Check Number HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN 54652 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN Check Number 54653 54653 HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE 08-Sep-97 Totals Check Number HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE 54653 HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE Check Number 54654 54654 J H LARSON ELECTRICAL CO. 08-Sep-97 Totals Check Number J H LARSCW ELECTRICAL CO 54654 J H LARSON ELECTRICAL CO, Check Number 54655 54655 54655 LAND CARE EQUIPMENT 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 Totals Check Nunu/er LAND CARE EQUIPTiENT LAND CARE EQUIPMENT 54655 LAND CARE EQUIPMENT Dieck Number 54656 54656 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES 08-Sep-97 Totals Check Number league of MN CITIES 54656 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES Tramsaction Amount 41.00 82.00 10.54 10.54 261.06 261.06 25.00 25.00 1,195.74 1,195.74 20.97 20.97 155.02 155.02 19.49 10.12 29.61 15.00 15.00 Page 4 Comments JULY SERVICE MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT BOOKING FEES-JULY PROPERTY OWNER LIST JULY ROOM & BOARD FLOOR MATS LIGHT BULBS FOR ENTRY MISC PARTS MISC PARTS TOMCHECK-WORKSHOP i t m4 Sep 1997 Thu 12:16 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Humber Date Maine Check Humber S4657 54657 LOB'S OIL COMPANY 08-Sep-97 LOE'S OIL COMPANY Totals Check Number 54657 LOE'S OIL COMPANY Check Number 54658 LONG LAKE BIG A AUTO PARTS 54658 54658 54658 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 LONG LAKE BIG A AUTO PARTS LONG LAKE BIG A AUTO PARTS LONG LAKE BIG A AUTO PARTS Totals Check Humber 54658 LONG LAKE BIG A AUTO PARTS Check Humber 54659 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT 54659 54659 54659 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT Totals Check Number 54659 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT Check Number 54660 54660 LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIPMENT 08-Sep-97 LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIPMENT Totals Check Number 54660 LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIPMENT Check Number 54661 MEDICA CHOICE 54661 54661 54661 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 MEDICA CHOICE MEDICA CHOICE MEDICA CHOICE Totals Check Number 54661 MEDICA CHOICE Check Number 54662 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS 54662 08-Sep-97 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS Totals Check Humber 54662 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS Check Number 54663 MICRO AGE 54663 08-Sep-97 MICRO AGE Totals Check Number 54663 MICRO AGE Check Number 54664 MIDDLETON, PATRICK 54664 08-Sep-97 MIDDLETON, PATRICK Totals Check Number 54664 MIDDLETON, PATRICK Check Number 54665 MIDWEST ASPHALT Transaction Amount 48.75 48.75 7.89 95.98 8.41 112.28 91.57 5.91 170.36 267.84 20.85 20.85 262.03 112.29 10,286.68 10,661.00 2.350.00 2.359.00 1,956.69 1,956.69 160.00 160.00 Page 5 Comments OIL FILTERS CHIPPER BED MATS PLUG FOR CHIPPER HELMETS FILTER FOR SAW HELMETS HOSE, RACK SEPT INSURANCE SEPT INSURANCE SEPT INSURANCE ADD'L SAC CHARGES COMPUTER-FIKAHCB REFUND-720 TONXANA r i ? 4 Sep 1997 Thu 12:16 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 54665 54665 54665 NICHEST ASPHALT 08-Sep-97 MIDNEST ASPHALT 08-Sep-97 MIDWEST ASPHALT Totals Check Number 54665 MIDWEST ASPHALT Check Number 54666 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO Check Nuniber 54669 HN DEPT OP HEALTH 54669 04-Sep-96 MN DEPT OP HEALTH Totals Check Number 54669 MN DEPT OF HEALTH Qieck Number 54670 MN DEPT OP REVENUE 54670 54670 54670 04-Sep-96 08-Sep-97 04-Sep-96 MN DEPT OP REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OP REVENUE Totals Check Number 54670 MN DEPT OP REVENUE Check Number 54671 NSP Check Number 54672 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. 54672 08-Sep-97 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. Totals Check Number 54672 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. Transaction Amount 76.68 3,115.25 3,191.93 1,126.00 1,126.00 2,697.00 115.00 40.00 2,852.00 15.40 15.40 Page 6 Comments ASPHALT PATCH ASPHALT PATCH 54666 08-Sep-97 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO 132.00 POP FOR RESALE Totals Check Number 54666 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO 132.00 Check Number 54667 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 54667 08-Sep-97 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 90.10 MEDICAL OXYGEN Totals Check Number 54667 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 90.10 Check Number 54668 MINNEGASCO 54668 08-Sep-97 MINNEGASCO 12.13 GAS CHARGES 54668 08-Sep-97 MINNEGASCO 131.61 GAS CHARGES 54668 08-Sep-97 MINNEGASCO 94.21 GAS CHARGES Totals Check Number 54668 MINNEGASCO 237.95 3RD QTR TESTING FEE AUGUST SALES TAX AUGUST SALES TAX AUGUST SALES TAX 54671 04-Sep-96 NSP 209.89 NSP CHARGES 54671 04-Sep-96 NSP 874.36 NSP CHARGES 54671 04-Sep-96 NSP 331.74 NSP CHARGES 54671 04-Sep-96 NSP 2,112.53 NSP CHARGES 54671 08-Sep-97 NSP 154.99 HWY 12 a WILLOW Totals Check Number 54671 NSP 3,683.51 CHIPS POR RESALE r r t % 4 Sep 1997 Thu 12:16 PM Checfe Muflober Check Number 54673 Check Register City of Orono Date Name 54673 OMAN. LYLE 08-Sep-97 OMAN. LYLE Totals Check Number 54673 OMAN. LYLE Check Number 54674 54674 54674 54674 54674 54674 54674 54674 PIONEER 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER Totals Check Number 54674 PI Check Number 54675 54675 POffERCLEAN COMPANY INC. 08-Sep-97 Totals Check Number POMERCLEAN COMPANY INC. 54675 POMERCLEAN COMPANY INC O'.eck Number 54676 54676 REED VENDING 08-Sep-97 Totals Check Number REED VENDING 54676 REED VENDING Check Number 54677 54677 RICKS SUPERVALUE 08-Sep-97 RICKS SUPERVALUE Totals Check Number 54677 RICKS SUPERVALUE Check Number 54678 SNYDER DRUG STORES 54678 08-Sep-97 SNYDER DRUG STORES Totals Qieck Number 54678 SNYDER DRUG STORES Check Number 54679 54679 SOPTMARE SPECTRUM 08-Sep-97 Totals Check Number SOPTMARE SPECTRUM 54679 SOPTMARE SPECTRUM Check Number 54680 54680 SOUTHERN MN CONSTRUCTION CO 08-Sep-97 SOUTHERN MN CONSTRUCTION CO Totals Check Number 54680 SOUTHERN MN CONSTRUCTION CO Check Number 54681 ST. JOSEPHUS EQUIPMENT INC. Transaction Amount 27.90 27.90 31.50 24.50 38.50 42.00 24.50 80.50 19.25 260.75 1.693.35 1.693.35 68.40 68.40 12.60 12.60 37.36 37.36 270.88 270.88 1.650.00 1.650.00 Page 7 Comments EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT APP #2298 REV. ZONING CODE APP #2294 APP #2294 APP #2286 LAND USE APPLICATIONS STUBBS BAY AM1ENDMENT AUGUST SERVICE CANDY POR RESALE MISC SUPPLIES FILM OMNIPORM. OMNIPAGE TRANSPORT GRINDER r L 4 Sep 1997 Thu 12:16 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number SU»i 54681 ST. JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC. 08-Sep-97 ST. JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC Totals Check Number 54681 ST. JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC Check Number 54682 STANDARD SPRING 54682 25-Aug-97 STANDARD SPRING Totals Check Number 54682 STANDARD SPRING Check Number 54683 STATE OF MINNESOTA 54683 08-Sep-97 STATE OF MINNESOTA Totals Check Number 54683 STATE OF MINNESOTA Check Number 54684 54684 STATE OP MINNESOTA 08-Sep-97 STATE OF MINNESOTA Totals Check Number 54684 STATE OF MINNESOTA Check Number 54685 STREICHERS 54685 54685 54685 54685 54685 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 STREICHERS STREICHERS STREICHERS STREICHERS STREICHERS Totals Check Number 54685 STREICHERS Check Number 54686 SUBURBAN TIRE INC. 54686 08-Sep-97 SUBURBAN TIRE INC, Totals Check Number 54686 SUBURBAN TIRE INC. Check Number 54687 TAP ENTERPRISES INC. 54687 08-Sep-97 TAP ENTERPRISES INC Totals Check Number 54687 TAP ENTERPRISES INC, Check Number 54688 TEMPORARIES-TO-GO 54688 08-Sep-97 TEMPORARIES-TO-GO Totals Check Number 54688 TEMPORARIES-TO-GO Check Number 54689 THORPE DIST CO. 54689 08-Sep-97 THORPE DIST CO. Transaction Amount 284.73 284.73 350.49 350.49 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 228.12 11.18 66.06 59.14 19.12 383.62 613.44 613.44 23.39 23.39 44.00 44.00 147.55 Page 8 Comments REPAIR A/C 1425 PINS AIR TANK EXEMPTION INSPBCTION-AIR TANK SHOTGUN LOCK, ASSEMBLY KEY FOR GUN LOCK ROTATOR REFLECTOR SHOTGUN LOCK SPEAKER PART SQUAD CAR TIRES JACK STAND, PLIER EMPLOYEE PICNIC COVERAGE BEER FOR RESALE r 4 Sep 1997 Thu 12:16 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name ^eck Number 54689 THORPE DIST CO. Totals Check Number 54689^ THORPE OIST CO. Check Number 54690 TOHCHEOC,LARRY 54690 OB-Sep-97 TOMCHECK, LARRY Totals Check Number 54690 TOMCHECK, LARRY Check Number 54691 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE 54691 08-Sep-97 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE 54691 08-Sep-97 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE 54691 08-Sep-97 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE 54691 08-Sep-97 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE 54691 08-Sep-97 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE 54691 08-Sep-97 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE 54691 08-Sep-97 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE 54691 08-Sep-97 TRUE VALUE HAROHARB 54691 08-Sep-97 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE 54691 08-Sep-97 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE 54691 08-Sep-97 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE Totals Check Number 54691 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE Check Number 54692 TWIN CITIES SERVICE CDJTER INC 54692 08-Sep-97 TWIN CITIES SERVICE CENTER Totals Oieck Number 54692 twin cities SERVICE CENTER Check Number 54693 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE - LIFE 54693 08-Sep-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 54693 08-Sep-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 54693 08-Sep-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 54693 08-Sep-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE Totals Check Number 54693 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE Check Number 54694 UNUM1 LIFE INSURANCE - AD 5 D 54694 08-Sep-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -AD k 54694 08-Sep-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -AD k 54694 08-Sep-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -AD k 54694 08-Sep-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -AD Totals Check Number 54694 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -AD k Check Number 54695 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 54695 04-Sep-96 us west cowtonications Transaction Amount 147.55 190.00 190.00 i.as 6.09 11.16 34.44 2.65 16.23 5.62 23.76 84.07 8.51 9.55 203.93 145.98 145.98 0.15 0.64 0.27 67.94 69.00 294.51 Page 9 ConvnentS ^PENSB REIMBURSEMENT MISC SUPPLIES MISC SUPPLIES NUTS. BOLTS PAINT. KEY COFEB FILTERS PICNIC SUPPLIES BUG KILLER MISC SUPPLIES MISC SUPPLIES MISC SUPPLIES BRUSH. PAINT 1422 MICROPHONE 0.70 SEPTEMBER INSURANCE 2.97 SEPTEMBER INSURANCE 1.27 SEPTEMBER INSURANCE 341.42 SEPTEMBER INSURANCE 346.36 SEPT INSURANCE SEPT INSURANCE SEPT INSURANCE SEPT INSURANCE US NEST CHARGES r [' ; 1 4 Sep 1997 Thu 12:16 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 54695 54695 54695 54695 US NEST COMMUNICATIONS 04-Sep-96 US WEST COftlUNICATIOTIS 04-Sep-96 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 04-Sep-96 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Totals Check Number 54695 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Check Number 54696 WEST PHOTO 54696 08-Sep-97 WEST PHOTO Totals Check Number 54696 WEST PHOTO Check Number 54697 WRICaiT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC 54697 54697 08-Sep-97 08-Sep-97 WIIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Totals Check Number 54697 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Grand Total Page 10 Transaction Amount 68.37 68.57 682.28 1,113.73 159.10 159.10 9.00 8.31 17.31 274,859.78 Comments US WEST CHARGES US WEST CHARGES US WEST CHARGES FILM SECURITY LIGHT SECURITY LIGHT INFORMATION ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL MEET1NQ SEP 8 1997 OF CITYOFORONO MitttiP<;nta Department of Agriculture August 27,1997 Michael P. Gaffiron Asst. Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323*0066 Dear Mr. Gaffron: I writing in response to your letter dated July 21,1997, concerning prior notification of lake chemical treatments. The Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MD A) is the lead state agency regarding the reoulation of oesticides in Minnesota. Conunercial pesticide applicators (those applying ce^sticides on a “for hire” basis) are required to obtain licensing from the Miimesota Department rf A « TO legally apply pesticides to surface wares for nui-mce control the applicator must be licensed as an aquatic pest control . obtained from the DNR for application of pesticides to public waters. accord with *e Aquatic Plant Management and Aquatic Nuisance Conhol Rules, 6280). A ^it under this Rule requites the permit holder^' TOs ^ Eive notice of the proposed date of treatment to all persons specified on the penmt Tlus Ltificction must te Reived prior to beginning any work under *' „„ reouirement in the AquaUc Plant Management and Aquatic Nuisance ConMl Rule mere « no State rr .uirement regarding prior notification of pesticide treatment. Noufication of ^ticide ttSmer maTl« Suited as part of me label instructions. If notification requirernents ^ p^ec on L p^uct label it carries me weight of law. Generally, label instrucuons do not include p rior notification. k there any Stale regulation which would prohibit the City from adopting ordinances requiring such notij'cation? • 90 West Plato Boulevird . Sdm Paul. Minn«ou 55107-2094 • (612)297-2200 • TOD(612)297-5353/l-«00-627-3.'29. An equal roportun'ty t«H)*oyef r Minnesota Statutes 18B.02 specifically preempts local ordinances that prohibit or regulate any matter relating to the registration, labeling, distribution, sale, handling, use, application, or disposal of pesticides. It is likely that an ordinance requiring prior notification would fall within the scope of this preemption Is there any State regulation that would prohibit the City from concurrent licensing of chemical application contractors? A City licensing program specific to pesticide applicators would likely fall within the scope of the preemption identiHed in M.S. 18B.02. Does the Department of Agriculture issue individual permits for chemical applications? The MDA issues individual permits for chemigation; the application of fertilizers or pesticides through an irrigation system. The DNR issues Aquatic Plant Management Permits in accord with the Aquatic Plant Management and Aquatic Nuisance Control Rule. An Aquatic Plant Management Permit is required for pesticide treatments to public waters. Can the City undertake to issue such permits if it chooses to regulate to this extent? The issuance of permits for pesticide applications would likely fall within the scope of the preemption identified in M.S. 18B.02. The DNR reserves the authority tor the issuance of Aquatic Plant Management Permits. We understand the concerns as expressed in your letter and would like to work cooperatively with you in addressing those concerns. GH:APPD:MZ:mz cc: Rod Sando,DNR Kent Lokkesmoe, DNR Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor of Orono Greg Buzicky, MDA r v> Vi^V^VSWV.'^V.<y.'‘V;^VSVAV^ ^Av*jrtLvj;v>W IV^xVwiWW It: h: . .^vhv^AcSvSvhvSs V pj' jt >j >j 4 i m. w; >i w wwv4wwwi-*w;>; w ii f >I u' :^.V^V••V^V^V•'V•lV^Vi a * M ^ ^ 5VI I I ■| j? & V ;?. ;S » t 15? W 'C* i -i V? •A4 :l % t II I \C " &ifSS5CJ0^!;f5J5JS ‘Iv> ..•A.SNiWi IIIIIIIIIIINi::<iHllllllllllllllllllj JILLS x i 1 1 WESTONKA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 12 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM $20 PER PERSON IHIIIilllillilllllilllllllimillilliHHHHIHHHH BURL OAKS GOLF CLUB MiNNETRISTA. MN IIHHIsMlllllllilllllillllll IIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIIIIIIIIIIII Jill S|)i('”(‘l will b(‘ lli( kevnott* s|h*;ikor at tho Husincss I^m’soii oI' i I he 'H’car A\wml M Diiitu'i'oti k'riday H SoptomlK'i* I‘V I al im) l>M. Jill is M a (iMiamib* s|K*ak(‘r^ yon will riov(n* forf^ot. ^ * I ** I • i._ : i-"-. ' ' 1 I . • I » >J IMca‘<<* invite' all Htv (‘inployccs and coniu il innnlM‘i*s to this (•(nmminitv cvnit t(> lioiun* our Ihisiiirss INnsnli (d‘ tin* ^Car...Pattv (iiittomison ICtiN is an ai*t‘iit w itii • •» Wisor Insjirann* Ai»cnrN in Mound.• » • Sli(‘ is a coininilti'd and valnahic voliinlorr lor till* \\Cslonka ( hainhcr and lh(‘ WCstonka Ai(‘a. IMcasi* sn|)()oil this cve'iit. PHONE: 471-0768 I ii ■ To;Mayor Jabbour & City Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Mike Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator September 2, 1997 Subject: Orono Ice Arena Landscape Plan - Revisions Approved by Staff Gary Schroeder, Operations Managci for the Ice Arena, submitted a revised tree planting plan that substitutes coniferou> trees for most of tlie hardwoods originally planned for those areas generally within 50' nt the building. They are getting these niatuic pine and spnice trees from the school annex east of Old Crystal Bay Road, where the existing lows of trees need thinning. This will save the Ice Arena approximately $19,000. The coniferous trees will provide some immediate screening adjacent to the building which would likely have taken 5-10 years to develop with the smaller deciduous stock initially proposed. The original plan proposes approximately 12 future additional trees (honeylocust, red maple, red oak) within and around the parking lot area, which will help to soften the view of the parking lot, and will be in keeping with the existing school property trees along the west side of Old Crystal Bay Road. Jack Nuveau of the Ice Arena agreed they would plant these additional trees within the next year. Staff approved this minor change to the landscape/planting plan subject to the additional trees being planted next year and subject to City retaining the right to review the coniferous plantings when completed and require any additional plantings needed. ! I f i ' H , {