The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-14-1994 Council Packet•t1>%% ^ 'Mr, *>. «u,C V't..■. . t *. ' t'-•**.*'»»»' ^Ji'jfe. >:VV' ^.' ^Jv>-« I ^■i’lii*.4»c . i ■'* ».v . %•"»> ' '. . ^ V ' •• >? Jr’’’ /4' • <,^. “..r- jl r ^ ^ ,* ■' ■';• % jf «• -^,>V H 64 (1524E) File Pocket Red Rope m XOlHDJk FOR CaUHCIh MEETING SET FOR NOMDAT« FEBROART 14, 1994, 7t30 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLRT PARXKAY, OROMO, MINNESOTA {*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL 7j30 P.M. Public Hearing - Proposed AmendmentFunds *1. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. Regular Meeting of January 24, 1994 park COMMISSION COI PLANNING COMMISSION COM>®ITS - Sandy Smith Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ••APPLICANTS ** 3 4 5 6 7 8 Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolutions at the Recorder's desk. Applicants need not execute resolutions for subdivisions, vacations and denials #1818 Russell Lund and Barbara Lund Estates, 905 Tonkawa Road Final Subdivision - Resolution . #1862 Three Star Trucking, 2590 Watertown Road -Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution , . #1893 Christine A. Freeman, 2240 Shadywood Road -Variance - SlS^e'^Allan and Judith Klotsche, 2760 Shadywood Road - Variances - #1899 Carolyn and Donald Udell, 1210 Loma Linda Avenue - Variances - Resolution . ^m French Lake North Basin-Potential Elimination of Shoreline Designation MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT CITY 9 10 11 *12 *13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT j „ • Crystal Bay Site Underground Tank Removal and Soil Testing School Liaison Officer Program . ^ ^ Year XVIII Statement of Objectives and Projected Use of Funds Resolution . Award 1994 Materials & Equipment Bi^ “olfcy Award Ra==™.end.Cio„ Request for Designation of Funding for the DARE Program Reconsideration - Tax Forfeit Property Water Tower Antenna Request j • Eacablish Public Hearing Dace for Year XIV CDBG Funding Request for Funding for Performance Evaluation Training I 1 AGSICA for COUMCZL MESTZMQ srr for HONOAT, FEBRUJ^Y 1S94, 7t3Q P.M. OROHD COtmCZL CBJUCBRRS, 2710 KSLLXT PARKNAY, ORONO, MZMHKSOTA CITY ADMZmSTRATOR'S REPORT continued 20.Authorization of Additional Funding for Engineering Consulting Related to Highway 12 » 21.Park Commission Reappointments ^ 22.Planning Commission Reappointments '* 23.Agreement with Burlington Northern Rail Road - Old Crystal Bay Road Bridge 24.Consideration of a Joint Council/Planning Commission Work Session 25.Request for Funding for Planning Commissioner Training C*26) LICENSES (•27) BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AIOD EVENTS 02/14 02/15 02/21 02/22 02/22 02/23 02/28 03/01 03/07 03/14 03/15 03/21 03/28 03/29 Council meeting 7:30 p.ra. Council work session 8:00 a.m. HOLIDAY - President's Day (Monday) Highway 12 Joint Mediation meeting 3:00 p Planning Commission 7:00 p.ra. (Tuesday) Planning Commission work session 5-7:00 p Council meeting 7:30 p.m. Precinct Caucus 7:00 p.m. No Public Meetings Scheduled After 6:00 Park Commission meeting 7:15 p.m. Council meeting 7:30 p.m. Highway 12 Joint Mediation meeting 3:00 p Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. Council meeting 7:30 p.m. Highway 12 Joint Mediation meeting 3:00 p •m • • in* p.m •m. •m« minutes of the regular orono city council meeting HELD JANUARY 24, 1^ ROLL CiThe Council met cm the ibow due with die foUowii^ members present, Callahan, Coiuicilmeiitfiers J. Dtann Goeoen. Gabriel Jabbour and JoElkn ^ Councilmcmbcr Charles Kelley was excused. The fbltowinf represented staff: «|( Attofticy Kevin Sttunion, City Administrator Ron Moorse, Assistant Planning A Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron. Public Works Director John Gerhardson. City Engineer Glenn Cook, Police Chief Ste^n Sullivan, and Recorder Barbara Anderson. Mayor Callahan called the meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. (•it) CONSENT AGENDA Hurr moved. Mayor Callahan seconded, for approval of the Consent Agenda as proposed Ayes 4. Nays 0. (•#2) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY !•, I»4 REGULAR CITY COUNCn. MEETING Hurr moved. Mayor Callahan seconded, for approve of the Minutes of the January 10, 1994 Regular City Council meeting as submitted. Ayes 4, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS There were no Park Commission comments PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS There were no Planning Commbsion comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT There was no Zoning Administrator’s report. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Jabbour discussed the minutes from the January 10, 1994 meeting of the LMCD and stated he was concerned about the number of car/trailer parking spaces identified in the Lake Access Committee Report. He noted that while Orono had agreed to provide its share of public access parking spaces, what was being proposed did not fit with what was originally determined. He report^ on the action taken by the LMCD Lake Access Committee and noted diat he was not in agreement with their figures for parking spaces. He discussed the 1 minutes of the regular meeting MAYCHUCOUNCIL REPORT (CONTINUED) list of memben on the Task Force and indicaied only a small numbef actually participaied. ENGINEER REPOKT (#3) SCHEDULE WORK SESSIWi TO WSCIISS MSA mOIECTS ■me Council decidedm meet 00 Febnaiy 15. 1994 at 8:00 ».m. for i wort jesskm » dtsoiss the MSA projects. PATHWAY ON OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD BRIDGE(M) The Council felt this was an issue which should be li^aKli^ree Session. Cook stated t»'at this project would be bid by MnDOT and it would be about ce months before construction commenced. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#5) LONG LAKE WATER QUALITY PUBLIC INFORMATION COMMITTEE and was appointed. (#0 AUTHORIZATION TO INITIATE fi POLICE OFFICERS 11 :t i HG PROCESS FOR PART TIME Moorse reviewed the request to add two part lime police officers to cover the h<^ neetM by the Department. Hurr asked about the occupations of the current officers ^ Chief Sullivan responded that they all have regular jobs in related fields, but have an interest in law enforcement. Hurr moved, Jabbour seconded, to authorize staff to initiate the hiring process for part time police officers. Ayes 4, Nays 0. (PD POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR USE OF DRUG FORFEITURE MONEY resoonded that he would submit a request to the City Council for approval for any major exp^iturc of these funds. This could include, but not be limited to, diug abuse prevention efforts, minor capital items that are beyond the funding provided through the regular budget, and other law enforcement related purposes. I L MINUnS OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCO. MECT^G MELD JANUARY 24, 1994 (#7) POUCY AND PR( (CONTINUED) •: ii D*»URE FOR USE OF DRUG FORFEITURE MONEY labbour moved, Hurr seconded, to appmve the proposed |x>licy and prtKedure regarding the expenditure of drug forfeit rocmey. Ayes 4, hUys 0. (•#» ANNUAL INVESTMENTS REPORT > INFORMATION ITEM No aaion required by Council (#9) AMEND ANNUAL APPOINTMENT TO BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS RESOLUTION NO. 3380 Mowse stated that Steve Anderson, Minnetonka Fire Inspector, will be unable to ser^ on the City’s Building Board of Appeals. Staff recommended the appointment of Loren Kohnen, a Contract Building (Official for sixteen cities within Hennepin and Wright counties. Hurr moved, Goettcn seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3380 appointing Loren Kohnen to the Building Code Board of Appeals. Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#10) DESIGNATION OF RESPONSIBLE LOCAL GOVERNI^ffiNT UNTT (LGU) FOR WETLANDS CONSERVATION ACT Goetten stated she was concerned about the expense involved if the City of Orono were to regulate the Wetlands Conservation Act, and inquired what it would cost if the Watershed District were to administer it versus the City beaming the LGU. Gaffron responded that it was his impression from talking to MCWD’s Mike Panzer that the Watershed District’s application fee covers about an hour of their engineer’s time. If more time is required, it is billed back to the applicant. He felt that nwre time would be used in getting City staff up to speed to administer the program, and thus would increase the City’s costs. Goetten inquired if staff felt comfortable having the Watershed District handle this for the present, and Gaffron responded affirmatively, noting if any differences arose, they could be worked out at that time. Hurr stated that she had reservations about handing anything over to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as she did n<K believe they would be as thorough as Orono would be. She felt that staff should administer the Wetlands Conservation Act because they were familiar with the City and this way mitigation measures could be kept under the City’s control. Gaffron stated he felt that it was a question of whether the City Council wanted to be in charge of all the Type I Wetlands which do not show on the City of Orono’s maps. Hurr stated she felt it would be better to keep it within the City’s jurisdiction than allow the Watershed District the opportunity to establish wetland mitigation for other cities within Orono. She also indicant it was her understanding that the watershed district had not been charging application fees, but they should. r minutes of the regular orono city council meeting HELD JANUARY 24,19H <#1®) designation OF RESPONSIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT (LGU) FOR WETLANDS CONSERVATION ACT (CONTINUED) Mayor ftawd he felt dot it was unnecessary to become involved in something thit was already regulated by five odter agencies. Hurr stated she wm not willing to have wetland mitig^kxi for the City of Orono being done in another city. Mayor Callahan st^ that wetland mitigatioo for other cities could not be done within Orono. Discimion ensued regarding the possibility of a more r«trictive ordinance restricting wetland mitigatiot i ^Id be enacted, thus enabling Orono to have more control than the LGU. Gaffton noted t a Conditional Use Permit would still be required for any wetland filling or dredging and the Council would have tlw authority to deny that if they did not support that action. He discussed the possible costs of administering the application process, and slated there are many regulations to be enforced. Mayor Callahan stated he felt that if conflrct arose between the City and the Watershed District the City could become the LGU instead of the Watershed at that time. He stated he felt that the Watershed should be designated as the LGU until the Council decided to take further action. Goetten and Jabbour agreed with Mayor Callahan. Mayor Callahan nrnved, Goetten seconded, to have the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District be designated as the Responsible Local Government Unit (LGU) for the Wetlands Conservation Act until such time as the Council takes further action. Ayes 3, Nays 1. (#11) ESTABLISH BOARD OF REVIEW DATE The Council decided to hold the Board of Review on April 28, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. Chief Sullivan made a monthly review for the Council. (•#12) SALARY ADJUSTMENT - OmCER JAMES CORNICK Moved by Hurr, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to increase Officer James Cornick’s salary from $19,390 per hour to $19,767 per hour as of January 2, 1994, as per the 1994 LELS contract currently in effect. Ayes 4, Nays 0. (•#12) SALARY ADJUSTMENT - OFFICER MARK THOMTON Moved by Hurr, seconded by Mayor (Tallahan, to increase Officer Mark Thornton’s salary from $19,390 per hour to $19,767 per hour as of January 27, 1994, as per the 1994 LELS contract currently in effect. Ayes 4, Nays 0. (•#14) LICENSES Moved by Hurr, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to approve the following licenses: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNi:iL MEETING HELD JANUARY 24, 1994 (•#14) LICEKSES (CONTINUED) Site Evtluiior/Desi£i» - Dicks Excavating/Mapte Rid^ Soil Testing Stancfafield 5S I}. :l On-Sale Non-Intoxicatinf Malt Liquor - Grant R. Wciytsicrn Lakeview Golf of Orono. Inc. 405 North Arm Drive Cigarette Licefse • Bill Wear Orono Self Service 2160 Wayzata Boulev^ John O’SulIivtui O’Sullivans 2420 Shadywood Rt^ Richard Bloomquist Rick’s Super Valu 333 Shoreline Drive John Downey Wayzata Country Club 200 Wayzata Boulevard! Jimmie Holtz Jimmie’s Lounge 3380 ShOTeline Drive Richard Keaveny Keaveny ’s Navarre Drug 3425 Shoreline Drive LcRoy Koehnen Navarre Amoco 3360 Shoreline Drive Don Scherven Navarre Bowling Lanes 3435 Shoreline Drive Steve CJorl Navarre Liquors Inc. 3421 Shoreline Drive OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEEUNC HELD JANUARY 24, 19M (•#14) ua D*CfC1 X'(CONTINUED) Michael Mehner Crystal Bay Services 3398 N<^ Shore Drive (•#15) BILLS Hurt moved. Mayor C^lahaii seconded, lo approve payment of the All Fuab Account Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Jabbour moved, Goeften Seconded, that the meeting ht adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Ayes 4, Nays 0. Edward J. Callahan. Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 1a • • -� E _, IH :J 1200 J�\tm..tL ,. :1 .... .. . L];!u !•.(;· • �--rJ ll I 'I fl 7 � ,µ., 3 .. , . . t i , --- u,e1.CeOJUt ✓•✓•� 100 H IGO I J K wJ bH� h:· I la --- L r- .. L Co11,tQ -···---� t' s r '1&..C� l '1 '''it AmnfflA POR com,cn. MU'rDIIG SBT !'OR � QFEB�� :L4,oaoHo cowcrL CHAMBERS, 2, so nLLEY I tnY, 0Ro.N1 (•) Asterisk items are considered tor� roucine one mot:ion by t.he City council under ci Consent: regarding each of the Agenda items are 4vailable may be obtained upon reques.,: from the Reccrder. ROLL CALL ms t:o 7: 3 0 P .l!. Publ.ic !'iearing - Proposed .Mtendmenc to Yea •1. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES •" Regular Meec:1ng of January 2�, 1994 PA.ll COMMISSION COMMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS -Sandy Smith Reoresent PtJBLIC COMMl!NTS -{Limit 5 Minute• Per Person) ZONXNG ADMXN:ISTRATOR'S REPORT ••APPLICANTS • • Immediacely after the Coancil application please .sign the t. resolutions a1: t.he Recorder's des: not:. ex�cuce re.solutions for suhdi and denials 3.#1818 Russell Lunci and Bar:,ara Lund Est aces, SSubdivision -Resolution 1862 Three Scar T=\.:cking, 2590 Watertown R• Subdivision -Resolution S.#1893 Chriscine A. �reeman, 2240 Shadywood FResolucion #1896 All,an and Judith Kl.ocsche, 2760 Shaciywood . #1899 Carolyn a.nd :ionald Odell, 1210 Lomaariances -Resolution . French Lake Nor�h 3asin-?otencial Zliminat.. esignation MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINED REPORT C:tTY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 9.Crystal Bay S:.ce Underground Taruc Removal and SSchool Liaison Officer Prog:-am ••. Year XVIII Statement of Object.ives and Project:e •12.·•l3.14.lS. lw,i, .18.19. Resolution Award 1994 Materials & Equipment. Bids Establish Road Weight: Limi�s -Resolution 1994 Insurance Policy Prem.ium Tabulation and Aw Request for Designation of :-unding for the DARI Reconsideration -Tax Forfeit Property Water Tower Ant:enna Request Establish Public: Hearing Date for Year XIV CDBC Request for Funding for Performance Eva1uation p Affidavit of Publication stale of Minimota. County of HtrvMpin. B« Holm. Mno duly sworn on oath, says «iat hi is an audnrtad agsm and entpioyeo of the puhHsher of newspaper known as T)^ LAKER, Mound. Minnesota, and has full knowledge of the facts mm tMtow*WWW ^^0^ • WWW V • SSSSMSSS&S A.) The newspaper has compiled with ail Ihe requirements constituting qualifications as a m $3^ quaWied newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable a • M MM w rwriMT* ta<M. as amended. ISM • raS^ML Ohm CW Ht* m • law UM •! Catmv wv vw Cw A.. W s.4nm r r\ t PPtvA TIM CHy W isvwuMiMTiMiMMrMMnMMMjw SO wftich « attsched wss cut Ifom ihs oolumns ol saM newspaper, and was printed and published once each week lor __L_ successive weeks: It was first published Monday. day of.ts)UJX><rL nfiiishe 9asL. and was thereafter printed and published every Monday, to and including Monday. day of horized Agent Subscrased and sworn to me on this *^\ ~ day of ^ B»; \\a NetaqH^^ HSMMEnN COUNTY■_i«etgw«»r**r_ (1)Low«tl dMs!M m* ^ by comnMfCi«l u»in for oompsrabl* sp«c«: $l0.se p«r inch. (2)Maximum rat* aM owad by law lor above mattar: $I0.M. (3)Rat* actually chargad for above mattar: S6.16 par inch. Each additional tuocassivc weak: $4.24. lEQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: ITEM NO Departmoit Approval: N mic Ifannc A. Mabusth Title ftulding & Z(»iiig AdministriKg AHminUtratnr RevicWCd:AcndaSjBl^; Zoning Item Descriptioa: #1818 Russell Lund Estate/ Barbara Lund Estate. 905 Tonkawa Road - Final Subdivision - Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution #3277 - Granting Preliminary Approval of Subdivision B Final Plat C - Report by Dennis Marhula of Westwood Engineering Plus Exhibits D - Shawn Gustafson Report 11/8/93 E • Plan for Access Stair by Muonio Construction F - Gustafson Report of 6/8/93 G > Council Minutes 5/10/93 The applicant has paid the required fees as set forth in resolution including the park dedication fee of $25,200,00. The applicants have not been able to complete the removal of debris on Lot 1 nor has cement base of independent antenna been removed. The antenna base located within ihe kennel has been altered to meet City’s directive. The early snowfall and constant extreme cold weather this winter has prevented any further work in the exterior yard. The directives of the Council at preliminary approval was to have the asphalt ramp removed within the lakeshore yard. Since preliminary approval, applicants have submitted at least two plans prepared by their contractor, review Exhibit E. The final plan submitted by applicants’ contractor was not accepted by the City Engineer because it would have created potential erosion problems and did not address the special needs of the sensitive drainage area. The asphalt ramp serves to carry all drainage from the local watershed to lake. Applicants have hired an engineer to review the area and consider alternatives of providing access and impact of the removal of the ramp. Please review Exhibits C and D. Both engineers concur that we are dealing with a highly sensitive area and that any disturbance may, if not addressed properly, will create major erosion problems. The City E^ineer has provided Council with at least four alternatives in dealing with the asphalt ramp. Glenn Cook will be present to answer any questions members of the Council may have. Options of Acl 1.Allow asphalt ramp to remain in place and restrict vehicle access I Request for Couocil Action c< page 2 of 2 February 9, 1994 Zoning FUe #1818 timied 2.Leave existing nunp in pl»:e and construct stairway over a ptwtion of it. 3.Remove half of the asphalt ramp and construct a stairway in its place. The reroaLning pavement could be used as the drainage way. 4.Remove asphalt and construct a suirway and drainage way per previous letter dated 6/8/93 (review Exhibit F). Please note his report specifically asks that if there are any alterations or improvements to be made to this existing walkway that plans address construcubility, drainage and erosion control problems that will be encountered. None of the plans that the City has received so far by applicants’ construction company has dealt with these important issiKS. It is suffs recommendation that Westwood Professional Services provide plans for any improvements required by the City. The enclosed approval resolution includes a condition that applicants execute Devel^r’s Agreement and provide a Letter of Credit assuring that concrete antenna base and additional debris on Lot 1 are removed. The Developer’s Agreemeik and Letter of Credit should also cover any improvements required by the City for the alteration of the existing asphalt ramp. The enclosed approval resolution can be amended to include all final action of the Couocil COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Please review the enclosed approval resolution drafted for Council’s formal action on the final plat of Sunset Overlook. Council may adopt or amend resolution. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF SUNSET OVERLOOK FILE NO. 1818 WHEREi\S, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has SKlopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, tlK City Council has considered the j^lication for a subdivision of a Class in plat by Trcs Lund and Dario Anselmo authorized representatives of the Russell Lund Estate and Barbara Lund Estate, hereinafter the subdividers; and WHEREAS, the subdivision has been founu to meet all standards of the LR-IB, Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow either its continued or future use as a single family residence to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, on August 23, 1993 Council approved Resolution No. 3317 that vacated a sanitary sewer easemeiu that intersected the property finding no further public purpose or use; and WHEREAS, the subdividers have completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including; 1.Completion of all the requirements of Resolution No. 3277, the resolution granting preliminary approval of the Class HI subdivision. 2.Dedication on the plat of drainage and utility easements. 3.Execution of a Developers/Subdividers Agreement providing for either the installation, completion of the following improvements as a condition of subdivision approval: Page 1 of 3 a. b Removal of debris stored in open yart of Lot I, Block 1. Removal of cement base for former inctependent antenna. c. Subdivider to provide a Letter of Credit written to an amount equal to 150% of the cost of these improvements A ftilly executed agreement and Letter of Credit must be submitted to the City before the final plat can be transmitted to the County for filii^. 4. 5. Payment to the City of a park dedication fee in the amount of $25,200.00. Payment to the City for the legal review a*id filii^ of tte plat in the amount of $200.00. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Sunset Overlook, Hennepin County, Minnesota, subject to the following conditions: 1.Excess hardcover exists on Lot 2, Sunset Overlook, within the 250-500’ setback area recorded at 27,351 s.f. or 41.8%. Owners or future owners of this property are hereby advised that any proposals for additional hardcover on this property may not be approved without the removal of either equal or greater amounts of existing hardcover improvements. 2.Based on 1994 fee schedule, the sewer connection fee for undeveloped Lot 1, is $7,529.00. 3.All required improvements as noted above in item 3 of this resolution must be completed no later than June 1, 1994. 4.The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder’s Office or Registrar of Title on or before August 14, 1994 together with a certified original copy of this resolution.. Page 2 of 3 The approval granted by this resohitiofi shall expire if the plat has nol been filed by the date specified above. In that event it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orooo for subdiviskm review. Dated this 14th day of Febniary. 1W4. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instiument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of February 1993 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr., 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 3 cf 3 CITY of ORONO RESOLimON W THE cmr COUNCIL NO..Z-zJl_i_____ A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY approval of a class in subdivision FOR THE RUSSELL LUND ESTATE -FILE NO. 1818 WHEREAS Tres Lund and Dario Ansclmo authorized rcprcscnuUves of ^ p„.^,i umd 26.1993. fiM • fonn»l subdivm^appUcaUon with the City for approval of a two lot residential plat of property legally desenbed as. Lote 1. 2 and 3. Block 1, Vasa Park. Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS after due published and mailed i^tice in accordance with Mini^oo WHEREAS at their regular meeting held on May 10, 1993, the Ototo City CouncU of th. RusseU T. U»d Estate. ncKui, the following findings of fact: 1 The Drooetty is located within the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore ^.ing ^rict requiring a minimum of one acre of buUdable land withm eac newly created lot. 2.The property contains a total of 6.3 acres all of which is considered dry buildable. -me proposed plat contains two lots each eaceei^ ^ 1 requLments. Lot A proposed at 3.03 acres. Lit B proposed at 3.27 acres. Lot A is 305’ measured in a strai^ line at the shoreline and 290’ at the 75 ’ setback area where 140’ lot width is required. Lot B is 280’+ measured in a straight line at the shoreline and 275 at the 75 3. 4. 5. Page 1 of 4 cmr of ORONO »LUnON OF THE CITY COUNCIL J *k setback area where 140’ width is required. Each lot shaU «<iin a scpaiaie access at County Road 135 or Tonk^^. New accMS to serve Lot A must be approved by Hennepm County, Department of Transportation. 7. A.To require a lot line readjustment to include over a o^l^f acre of area within the 250-500’ setback area, would result m Lot A s ftiture residence being developed closer to the lake. B. C.The Lot B at 3.27 acre has a total of 16.6% hardcover. Hardcover within the 75-250 ’ setback area is at 4.68% where 25% is allowed. D. conforms to current shoreland standards. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more the following conditions: 1.Prior to final approval appUc^is sM file a vacation applicaUon for the 20’ sewer easement that encroaches within Lot A. Page 2 of 4 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CTTY COUNCIL S 2 7 <--------- 2.The following ftnictures shaOl be removed prior to final plat approval: A.Shed on proposed shared lot liiK. B. 3. 4. Antenna towers and base to be removed. kennel be allowed to remain as long as anchor bolts are level of existing paved kennel floor. SMdlite dishes and odier items stored on undeveloped lot to be removed prior to final plat approval. Prior to final plat approval applicants shaU provide a plan for *®S^re. Said sriScLesluUl replace eahtin* asphalt ramp w.thiriO-75 ar«175 250’ setback area. the month: Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to T - 200’. Drawing to include: A.Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark S. Gronberg dated June 12, 1992, revised March 25, 1993. B rwro...i..n of -drainage and uUlity easements' 10- wide ^ong all ^^pr^ lirJ and 5- each side of internal property Imes. 1. C.Naming of plat. 2.Legal documents required: Title opinion addressed to the City. All ^ others with property Uneresr indicated thetem shaU sign the plat and all other documents affected by such mterest. A. Page 3 of 4 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION QF THE CTTY COUNCIL NO. QFTHECT S 2 7 ? B 3. A. B. Tbc applicanB must provide certified copies of lU recorded casements Qunently affcctmg the property.CITY Of ORONO Fees to be paid: Total due: $375.(W U50200000 Oi CEN i75,0 1350200000 01 CEN 200.0k CHECK TL 375. C RECEIPT-TTm YOU nhe two tot subdivUton staU be lefctted to of the fair mirket vdue so that » parkdaennined. Appltoants wiU be advised as soon as the fee hai been determined. Pinal plat fee » $175.00 Legal review and filing fee * $200.00 Adopted by the Cit) held this 10th day of May, 1993. ATTEST: A• V cm OF DRONQ FINANCE OFFICE 123S4000000 12 m 25200.^ j R 25200.0 fjPT~THY^ YOU Edward J. CaUa^^h, Jr., Mayo#v*^^^^OV^ ) ss. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on 1993 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk ° ^ 0^o;,'a Mi^om municipai corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 I I '----- B \ \ /I \ • • .' I • � 0 -· --? � I � � / /.../ I ,,,,_ , ,-- ,.. I r Septate 10.1$93 6 |4ia0 TrvifMi H»y S Eden %•«« MN 55344 612 9J7 5150 fA* 612 937 5422 Mr. Dario AMdRio 905 Tookawa Road Loi«Lake,MN 55356 Dear Mr. Aiuclaw Ref. No.; 93369 &ued on our and of >our property at 905 Tookavva Road, Orooo, MN on Scptoiber 2. 1993, we have performed additional research and proem the fbllowing findif^: •Topo surveys were not amiable through your surveyor, the City of Orono, or Horuons Aerial who ate in the process of mappii^ die city. •Hennepin County Survey (1974) inSc^ the followity soil and topographic conditions. •Lower slopes (adjacent to lake) ate Erin Loam with 1 8-24 percem slopes. "........slopes are commonly up to 1(X) feet long and are broka by shallow downslope drainageways ......Steepness ofslopes severely limits the use ofthis sod for common crops. It erodes raoidlv if not protected. •UpfMT slopa ate Enn Loam with 6 to 12 percent slopes. This soil is fiur cropland...... The main management needs are comrol of erosion...... •Drainage • Based on visual inspection, it appears that the bituminous walkway serves as the drainageway for a large portion of the property. Based on our observations on site, research of Hennepin County Soil Survey, and experience with similar slopes, it is evkknt there is a strong potatial for erosion along any disturbed portion of the slope. Due to the proximity of the slope to the lake and the sensitivity of pollution of the lake through erosion we would gtronalv iwvwinvwl to the walkway or adiacat slopes be minimized. 1 would also recommend diat, at a minimum, portions of the pathway remain in place for its entire length to act as a paved drainageway, thus eliminating the natural erosion which would take place if the runoff occurred through landscaped natural slopes. Serocea, Inc n an auMi 6 iMr. Dario All ^tpirnrfirr 10.1993 ^2 I Imivc abo i«vie««d the stairwmy coaocpt iHovided by Muonk) CooAruction aiid would reserve tmtil fufther are available; bowcvre. I would c oiwnfid diai with removal of the bituminous pathway. tfie polcatial fcr craaioa is very durk« die coAStiucsioa period and in tte future if erosion control IS not carefiiUy maintained. If we can be of fiiithre assistance; plose do not lesitate to QQOtad me Sinoerely. OOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. INC. OM:jiw < HENNEPIN COUNTX^MINNESOTA -<J Lr9 I MaxwtU Bay »‘;'«r H-. B^-r -* ^ -^^ •"V ^'1 g3^^T'-;'r+>Al=^ - VA: r->^JiaS ___:• y ^-i. »S wm:^wm fe—-.•• ■'■"••-. 5. s fi L z>>) -SC/^^i'— . -90 ri //- -“'^■'.«;i 20''.--3C -5C^ of pods and in root channels, aildly alkaline; strongly calcareous; clear, saiooth hcundary- C2--40 to 60 inches, light olive-bro-n (2.ST S/4) loaa; coomon, aediuv and fine, yell<n#ish-brown (lOYR S/8) aottles; weak. cOarse. angular blocky structure; friable;, few, very dart brown (’OYR 2/2) root channels; aildly alka line; weakly calcareous. Erin soils have strong horitonation. The solus ranges from 28 to S4 inches in thickness but is coMonly 32 to 42 inches chick. The A1 horizon is 2 CO 4 inches chick. The A2 horizon is 3 to 6 inches chick and is dart-gray or dart grayish-brw*n loan or silt loan. The Ap horizon is 7 to 9 inches thick and is very dark grayish brown or dark grayish brown. The 12 horizon is typically o'ive brown and li^t brown but is brown in sons places. It ranges fron clay loss to light clay Clay content ranges from 35 CO 42 percenc. and sand content ranges from 20 to 35 percent. The C horizon is loaa or light clay loaa. Sand content ranges froa 25 to 4S percenc. The 8 and C horizons coaaonly contain 3 to 8 percent coarse fragments. In soae places reddish, tubular iron segregations and aoctles occur in the lower part of the 8 horizon and in the C horizon. Reac tion of the A horizon ranges froa slightly acid to neutral, and reaction of the 8 horizon ranges froa strongly acid to neutral. Erin soils are higher in sand uid coarse trag> aents and lower in clay than th* siailar Oalbo soils. Erin soils have a lighter colored A horizon than the associated Kilkenny soils and are higher in clay con tent than the siailar Hayden soils. Erin loaa. 2 to 6 percent slopes (Eni).--Thls gently -jndulating soil occupies li-acre to 40-acre areas on irregular hillsides and knolls. Slopes are coMonly 7S to 125 feet long. In aany places the slope is in several directions. This soil has Che profile described as representative for the series. In cultivated areas the surface layer is very dart gray or very dart grayish brown. A few scattered patches of the brown subsoil are exposed. Included in mapping were a few patches of Oalbo soils that are higher in clay content and lower in send content. Areas of Oundas and Cordova soils were included in shallow drainageways and depres sions. If well managed, this soil is good cropland anc is suitable for all aajor crops in the county. The aain aanagcaent needs are control of erosion and maintenance of tilth. (Capability unit IIe-2; woodland group 1; building site group 7) Erin loan. 6 to 12 percent slopes (EnC). —This /rolling soil occurs in 2-acre to 2S-afre areas on hillsides and knolls. Slopes are comaonly between 75 and ISO feet long. In cultivated areas the sur face layer is dark grayish brown to very dart gray ish brown and a few scattered patches of the biwn clay loaa subsoil are exposeo. Included in mapping in convex areas were sasil patches or Oalbc soils. Areas of Oundas and Cordova soils were also included in shallow drainagewavs and depressions. This soil IS fair cropland and is suited to all major crops in the county. The main management needs are control of erosion and nainte.nancc of tilth. Hast areas are in permanent pasture or wood land. (Capability unit IIIe-2; woodland group 1. building site group 7) Erin lom, 12 to IS pcrctnt slopes (Enfi) .--This tmUrittiy st««p soil occupies 2-sere to IS-scre srees on hillsides snd knolls. Slopes ere typically 60 to 12S feet long. The surface layer and subsoil are coMonly thinner than those in the profile de scribed as representative for the series In culti vated areas the surface layer is dark grayish-broen or very dark grayish-brown, triabla loaa. A ftw scactored patches of the brown clay loaai subs "'ll \to exposed. Included in napping were saall patches of Taibo soils. Areas of Oundas and Jordova soils were also Included in shallow drainageways and depressions. Because of the rapid runoff, erosion is difficult to control on this soil. If coaaon aanageaent prac tices are used. Intertilled crops should he grown only occasionally. This soil is better suited to hay and pasture crops or to woodland than to aost other crops. >t)st areas are in woodland or per- ■uent pasture. (Capability \mit IVe-2; woodland group 1; building sits group T) Erin loan, 18 to 24 percent slopes (En£).--This /steep soil occupies 2-acre to l6-acre areas on hillsides. Slopes are coflBonly i»p to 100 feet long «id ire broken by shallow downalope drainageways. In SOM places there are snail, 2-acre to 3-acre, gently sloping areas on crests and sidesiope benches Ihis soil has a uhinner surface layez subsoil than those in the profile described as representa tive for th# series. A few areas have been cultiva ted, and the brownish subsoil is exposed in those Included in napping were snail areas of a soil that has a thick, dark surface layer. This soil is near the base of the slopes. Steepness of slopes severely limits the use of this soil for connon crops. It erodes rapidly if rot protected, and nachinery is hard to operate on the steep slopes. This soil keep it covered with plants, woodland group 1; building « is suited to uses that (Capability unit Vle-l; t.group 7) Erin clay loan, 2 to 6 ^rcent slopes, eroded (ErS2).--This gently undulating soil occupies 2-acre to 40-acre areas on irregular hillsides and knolls. Slopes are connonly 75 to 125 feet long. Because this soil is eroded, the surface layer in cultivated areas is clay loam that is a mixture of the 'ery dark grayish-brown surface layer anc< the brown subsoil. Included in napping were small patches of Oalbo soils. Areas of Dund«kS and Cordova soils, too small to be separated in mapping, were also included in shallow drainageways and depressions. II VVESTWOOO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. INC. Pr«tid«it and Oiractor of Enginocir; Mr. Mjrhula ia tha D^tor of Waatwood'a Engineering Division wtvch irKludas consaiiction and Mwpacfon aarvicae. and serves as Protect Manager on special protects. EDUCATK3N Bachelor of Engineving • BE (Qvy), Ursversity of North OakoU. Grand Forks, 1967 Mr. Mwhula’s enperience spans more than 25 years as a professional engineer. Serving as a aer^ design enQinear and project manager, he establishes and monitors municipal planning and enninearinn design aeiviiiea, eonskuction budgets and consktjction programs of land development, highway and civil engineering projects. He provides project conkol and liaison between cHenti. dty staff, conractors artd others for the successkjl completion of project^ Projects uTKlartaiten irtciude ijeeipn artd supar>^ion of major residential, conwnerciai and mduskial land development, as wel as highway and other civil engineerir>g projects. Mb. Mvhula joined Westwood m 1978 as a partner and rejoin^, j ,he «rm in early 1992 alter Ive yevs with an iniamationat consultant in New Zealand. His pi evious experience includes posilioM with tfte Oty of Minneapolis, a major conkacting company and a national engineering consultant He Meo served on the Eden Prairie Planning Commission kom 196M966. EdenvMe - Oesigneo and coordinated construction of a major portion of the site and public improvements tor a 600>acre planned community, including commercial/induskiai, high- density and single-tamily residential; Eden Prairie. MN FVdgewood West • 3(XHot residential development Eden Prairie. MN Hidden Glen - 285-lot residential development Eden Prairie, MN Siverthorne- 104-lot residential development Plymouth. MN RioLomo -89-lot residential development Burnsville. MN Woodbridge Ofice Park - Mirwietonka, MN Minnetonka HiNs Apartment Complex • Minnetonka. MN Olympic Ridge Estates (Olympic Hills <3oH Course) - Eden Prairie. MN Coordinated design and corwtruction of numerous housing subdivisions in Auckland, New Zealand, area. Typical projects include: Redhil Grove (151 lots - Howick) Mleadowiawns (64 lots • Howick) Esther Place (22 lots - Red Beach) •Served as civil engineering manager on many commercial and irtduskial building sites. Duties include coordinating site works ani liaison with client, architects, council sUff, general conkactors and civil conkactors. ^ ypical projects include these locatiorw In New Zealand: Parkland Retirement Village FERNZ Separation Plant Fowler Ceramic Factory Tokoroa Airport runway reconstruction Presbyterian Support Elderly Housing and paving PEoemAnoN Registered Professional Engineer - Minnesota Wisconsin. New Zealand PROFES SIONS ASSOCIATIONS American Society of Cfvii Engineers MinnesoU Society of Professional Engineers irwtitution of Professional Engineers New Zealand Bonestroo Itosene AndertikS Associates Engineers A Architects November 8, 1993 OmG tosmuA ^ W Aneof ^€* C Anar-A Pf Marvn L Sotmm Af Unee Af Gimn I Cook. Af Thom« f Noyei ^ AaAgh G ktHjncht rf SuMh M Efierth C ^A *Sthor CohMftjni HOHMaia A SenkMA ■reh A Ooeaor* AW t WbWiAi n rnersmt w Poem Af D«Md O LOAnu Af inAtit C iuuetL A f A jcay A §oumm\ Af Mjrti A Herman Af McnaoT AMnw Af %« k am Af Thomet t AAMciOh A «A Oanem C lk0gmH. Af Thomes f Angus. Af vnwi Af Michjet A tiu Af Agrw M Am AiC A AhAA J Ayne Af Thohfs W ^mnen Af Mchjf* C Lynch Af jamn t Mumd Af Jerry O ^WtlCh Af kOA J AigM. Af kennM A Andenan. Af Vlart t Mi Af Mam A M Af Gary w Mwvn. Af Dw i f dgetfon Af A Aclt khrnidt Af Ahrig» i CmM Af Mark O Wtmk Af Mies I jenvn Af L Ando Oiam Af kj«n L Wmmen. Af Gary O cnsnNlz Af 8 MSMer Af Mh t kaop Af OoufMs J fenok. Af ShaMwr» 0 GuMion Af Cecdo Af Aaut G Heuet Af John A GoM Af ChartR A fnetson Lao M Aa^^¥e^ll^y Hahan M GMon Jamas 8 I ngaMS D Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Ciystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Russell Lund Estate FUe No. 139-1818 NOV 9 1393 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the letter prepared by Westwood Professional Services regarding the proposed landing reconstruction on the Russell Lund Estate at 905 Tonkawa Road. We do not dispute any of the information presented in the letter. We a^ee that the existing bituminous walkway serves as a drainageway for the property and is presently in good condition. It is clear that if the pavement is removed, the potential for erosion is significant However, the pavement may be undesirable because it represents a large amount of hardcover, an unappealing view from the lake and a private boat landing. As we see it the City has several options to discuss: -Leave the existing pavement inplace and restrict vehicle access. •Leave the existing pavement inplace and construct a stairway over a portion of it. -Remove half of the pavement and construct a stairway in its place. The remaining pavement could be utilized as a drainageway. -Remove the pavement to construct a stairway and drainageway as per our previous letter dated June 8, 1993. The drainageway may function better if Cable Concrete is used instead of riprap. Plans should be prepared for any improvements to the existing walkway. These plans should address the constructability, drainage and erosion control problems that will be encountered. Please contact me at this office if you ha%e any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERUK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612-636-4600 I I I I I l l ' I i ' . I l i I I I I r I I I ! I !I I I I I I r I I 1 I 'I I ! j 1 I I I I I ' l f I ! I ;I I l l I r I ' ·1 I -. • r � I : • I I I I I/ Ii! , I I I i ' ----· � -' I ; ' I -----·--------- -· -• ---•------.i-----------i l I : b-o ___ 1 � 16 -o' r--e ��.. I w t>"I -, :.o"I Zo;O ,,I1,:,,0 /6 '-o•' ·---·-.op,---·------------ _ .. _ .. _ -·----- �-- I I -i ,_. I • -r��-�ffl'� e�;;�/),J_G:Jk� ---- --==-----------Qci ---I ---�---11�" ,,. • - - ••.IN. � • �-/r,.L_ � ,_ e �J�""J ___ Lk-!.OW • �-------�-etf.)J!Jrf)_-::._.B dwt�-e?tf-t:k_.A!_S.10_.� __ Q�Le;> I � � � .. � I_ A, J f0SC�£.,, -·_ ... __,.., .. ,� €:.¥-J�T.l_��---... _L�rd:_��£ I � I • ., -- --·-J_ ----· --------. ,,,__- � a , ..... "-· _\:I _-z:.� �f:1ro�'}:)�f§ _r;:: •• -• I cc---•� u --r -----•-------Cl0 x�"-��01---4-t----t--:-1---4 I I I�- -� \� -J •�: � t. ·-- • r --�---r-r· ·,I -------�• ·-�L .. j __ ;:-. 1 f I -•:::::t:=i·--.. --__ ➔-•-• --•--,--- ---ll . ...,...,,.-----·-·----· -··---·-� --·1·· "'--·---. - .... -·•-•------. ·-----'""' ·-·-· ----7------•--·-------�!1::a;) -• ..·-·----·--·-------·· _____ -··· _____ _ .... _ ··-----8��-PJ/C _£)�1 ;tJ -·,.. -----· . . . ....... --_ .. t---�-��ii7i/��Q.j2_-�:----=�--�--�p$J��-(-�_ty2t,__i£,.,:r�$_ •• ______ _ -·- --__ ,, -. ----. ---·------·-_ ... -----�·" ---· _,,_ ·-. --· --.. . ... -� el..��- --· .. .. . ... -. ----·· - . --- --.. -·-· --·-·---------· -· ------.... .. .. --·------0 -----L ___ : --��-�-�-:--��--.:�--:�-�----� -�:-�:�: __ �--.-:·-•--��--=: __ -__ ·-___ ·-·-----------·:··_-·::�·-! -� v\ --- --•--•P---0'" ---r· --------• M ... --···------·---- --------•a---•----• U•--•-------- ----·----·-.. -------- _ ____..,_, ::_ (:_-·� L.... - , _, .,_,,-_,.;;ii --------•-• •••-�c-...-• -•••-• ••• .. -..,.. .. •• ---4----· -- ?Y'-�· ---• ---·----� •• A t41 - p- --·-··----·--------· I I . e5 4 :=:;UlJ� • , . I . .. -··-··-·- ' I • II I I • I ------------· . - Ml"iNIO CONST. CO. 26055 Smithtown Lane SHOREWOOD, MN 55331 (112)474-2160 .JOB :::J»..B.tz, wsQ_L�(\Q .. SHEET NO. I pµt;; LA/!'"' e,. ) OF. CALCULAT£D av_________ OA0 CHE:E0/4-0A1 SCAL l °' •• -I f]itt MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 10» 1993 ZONING FILE «1818 - CONT. The Plenning Conwnistion reconwended approval as presented, conditioned upon removal of the asphalt portion of the ramp partially located in the 0-75’ and the 75-250’ setback areas At the meeting, the applicant voiced concern with potential erosion if the ramp is removed. Mabusth cautioned that erosion be addressed If the ramp is to be removed. It is recommended that the antenna towers be removed, including the bolts for the one located in the kennel. It is recommended that the 20’ wide sewer easement be vacated, and that applicant proceed with the application prior to final approval. The shed on the lot line will be removed or relocated on the developed lot. Jabbour commented that under the shoreline management regulations. It was recommended that the entire shoreline area be considered as one zone. He felt It was best to consider hardcover in each zone, however here Is a situation that is not following the norm. Goetten put the applicants on notice that any future proposals for additional hardcover may not be approved without additional removals or tradeoff. It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt Resolution •3277 for Application #1818 Russell Lund Estate, 905 Tonkawa Road, granting preliminary approval of a Class III subdivision. Ayes 5, nays 0. (••11) #1819 GREG PETERSON. 1920 SHORELINE DRIVE - RENEWAL VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3278 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution •3278 for Application ^1819 Greg Peterson, 1920 Shoreline Drive, granting a renewal variance to construct a new residence on the property. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*•12) FOREST ARMS SILTATION - INFORMATION ONLY It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to accept the Information regarding the Forest Arms siltation matter. Ayes 5, nays 0. e MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 10, 1993 (*#7) 91812 THOMAS PATRICK GOODYEAR, 712 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3275 It was movsd by Jabbour, sacondad by Goattan, to adopt RasolutIon §3275 for Application §1812 Thomas Patrick Goodyear, 712 Tonkawa Soad appro??ng a varlanc. to allo« a aacond story addition. Aya, 5, nays 0. (»§8) §1814 THOMAS 8ERTHIAUME AND CHERRYL KACHENMEISTER. 3035 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTIW §3276 It was movad by Jabbour. sacondad by Goatt* °'^*„d**ChaJrv?§3276 for Application §1814 Thomas ' suma and Charryl K^hanmaistar,3035 Casco Point Road,?rsrdanJ2construct a sacond story addition to tha -.aside of tha rasidanca and a grada lavai dack axtansion at tha side. Ayes 5, nays 0. (§9) §1816 KENT § SUSAN SWANSON, 32298 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION §3282 Goattan raportad her vehicle sustained $176.00 while backing out of the driveway. It was movad by Jabbour. seconded ‘ ^ apprSv nrvsrlanc.s to allow a to' addi t Ion to th. .iMonid garage and a two story family room addition at th. lakeside. Ayes 5. nays 0. (§10) §1818 RUSSELL LUND ESTATE, 905 TONKAWA ROAD - CLASS III PRELIMINARY SU8DIVISION - RESOLUTION §3277 Dario Anselmo was present to represent the estate. Mabusth explained th. applicant proposes a ^^J^ririoSsala property located within the LR-.8 toning district. The proposal satisfies all lot standards. There Is 11.8» excessiva hardcover in the 250-500’ setback area. The Planning Commission considered euher adSlng 25.000 square feet to the «0-600, setback ^or possible removal of hardcover. It was afso added, • line Is readjusted, it would encourage new construction o”^ to movi closer to the lake and would be forcing the applicant Into an average lakeshore setback situation. REQUEST rOR COUNCIL ACTION FEB 1 4 1$94 DATE: 2/10/9XnVlFl ITEM NO. Department Approval: Nasc Jeaone A. Mabusth Tilk Buildinf A Zoninf Admiustmor Administrator Reviewed:Afenda Sectkm: Zoning Item Description: #1862 Three Star Truckii^, 2590 Watenown Road • Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution List of Exhibits A-Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - R. Suess, Jr. Letter and Exhibits 8/20/93 E - J. W. Ploetz Letter (J. Hallson ’s Attorney) and Exhibits F - Petition of Adjacent Neighbors G • Current Road Layout H - City ’s WeUand Map I - Existing Drainage Pattern J - Watershed Map K - MCWD - Conditional Approval of Permit L - 1-2 Weckman Reports 9/20/93, 12/14/93 M - Comp Plan Sections N - Subdivision Code Sections Dealing with Road Development P - Staff Sketches of Development Plans with Future Road Extension to West Q - Preliminary Plan Approved for 3-lot Subdivision of Property in 11/91 R - 1-2 Gustafson Reports 9/12/93, 1/94 S - GME Consultant Reports 11/5/93 T - Planning Commission Minutes of 9/20/93 U - Gustafson Report 2/9/94 V - Preliminary Plans Brief Summary of Application The subdivision application involves a Cla-s III plat of 8 lots. A preliminary subdivision of 3 lots was approved for this property in November of 1991, review Exhibit Q. As required by code, the subdivision was first presented to the Planning Commission as a sketch plan review at their July 1993 meeting. Major issues raised during the sketch plan review were resolved by the Planning Commission during the formal subdivision review completed September of 1993. Issues raised dealt with adequate control of storm water runoff and to ensure there is no negative impact on adjacent developed neighborhoods. The next major issue involved the need for future ‘ Request for Council Action coittinued to. 1994 Zoning FUe #1862 extension of a through road linking property to west via Goldcnview Drive. The majority of the Planning Commission found there was no need for a future road extension to the west connecting property with Goldenview Drive. Retention ponds are required to allow adequate storage of runoff. Extensive grading of ditches and berms are required to achieve storm water control. The preliminary plat was approved by the Planning Commission as proposed in a 5 to 2 vote. The minority opinion voted nay based on the issue of a future connection road link to GoldenView Drive. The following ordinances and Comp Plan sections are pertinent to this review; Chapter 11, specifically the sections dealing with Class III subdivisions Section 11.10. Subd. 21 (C) - Private Roads Section 11.32. Subd. 2 - "Roads" Section 11.32. Subd. 2 (B-6) - Issue of Cul-de-sac Roads Section 11.33, Subd. 4 - Road Specs/Standards Section 11.40, Subd. 3 - Road Deduction and Reservations Section 11.62, Parks and Playgrounds of Class II and III Subdivisions, Exhibit N Section 10.28, RR-IB Zoning District Standards Total area = 194- acres (.89 acres wet) Lots 1 -7 consist of 2 acres dry contiguous Lot 8 consists of 3.5 acres dry Comp Plan Sections dealing with rural private roads. Exhibit M Lot Standards/Configuration The subdivision plan proposes 7 new lots and Lot 8 retains all existing homestead improvements. The surveyor has provided a plan offering two options of development. Review Exhibit V. one alternative provides an extension road to the west. Note hatched line corridor at north lot line of proposed Lot 7 and realigned lot line shown through Lot 8. Based on the location of the septic test sites and adjacent potxl area. Planning Commission members doubted whether there was adequate room for a house site within Ijoil with the development plan providing road connection. All lots meet the required 200’ lot width measured at the 50 ’ setback line. This includes Lots 4, 5 and 6 adjacent to cul-de-sac. Grading/Drainage There were no designated wetlands witbm the property based on the City’s designated wetland maps, review Exhibit H. A natural ponding area has been created in Lot 8 as a significant drainage way runs from the southwest to the northeast through this property, review Exhibit I. The majority of surface runoff from property drains into the Daniels Long Lake Heights Subdivision along the east creating problems during wet seasons. There is a severe drainage Request for Council Action contimicd page 3 of 6 Fcbniary 10. 1994 Zoning File #1862 problem at the southeast comer where drainage runs into Lot 13 and ponds. TlKre are no drainage ditches along the north side of Watertown Road. As with the earlier 3 lot subdivision review, the normal drainage and utility easement widths would be expanded from 10' to 35' along the east to allow for the installation of berms that would control and carry runoff to the northeast detention pond. Note drainage exits at the northeast via an existing drainage ditch. Drainage would no longer haphazardly drain through rear yards of esublished neighborhood to east. Review Exhibits R-1 and V, note that the drainage swale along the east property line has been lowered by extending the 1022 contour 50’ to the south and providing a 1021 elevation at the southeast property comer to allow for a 5.5% grade within the ditch. This will keep the ditch lower than Lots 12 and 13 in the Daniels Long Lake Heights Addition. Gusufson also notes the need to lower ditches adjacent to the private road and Watertown Road at least 2 1/2' below the elevation of the centerline street grade. Gustafson advises that the septic site on Lot 7 shown at an elevation of 1027 must be protected by requiring that the existing pond on Lot 8 be maintained at a high water level of 1024 with an outlet ditch at 1023.5 to set normal water level. Applicant has commenced the permitting process with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, that continues to function as the LGU or local govemmenul unit responsible for implementing directives of the Boaru of Water & Soil Resources and the 1991 Wetland Conversation Act. review Exhibit K. The Watershed District will issue a permit as soon as applicant has provided design of emergency overflow at the northeast pond and an analysis of downstream capacity. The Watershed District's permit will also condition approval on the first floor level elevation of the future home on Lot 4 being placed at either 1014.5 or 2' above the emergency overflow elevation of the northeast pond whichever is highest. Both staff and the Watershed District are concerned with the issue of downstream drainage, specifically the impact of increased runoff on drainage ditch within Lots 2 and 3 of Daniels Long Lake Heights. Staff and developer met with the property owner who has agreed to allow the regrading and lowering of the ditch. With the lowering of the ditch the surveyor has been able to deepen detention pond for greater storage and relocate completely out of treed area. Please review Exhibit U, Gustafson s final review comments on revised grading plan. Staff asked Peter Fossen. the owner of the property, if he would consider granting an easement to the City but he refused. Any unregulated alteration of this ditch would have a major impact on the storm water controls within the subdivision. Staff recommends that the developer obtain a drainage easement from Fossen. The easement would forewarn any future owner of its importance. Any attempt to block drainage in future can be remedied by either homeowners association or City having authority to enter property to correct blockage. Request for Council Action continued page 4 of 6 February 10, 1994 Zoning File #1862 Road/Access/Extensions The Planning Commission considered the need for a future connection outlet to west and reviewed the pertinent sections of the Comp Plan and subdivision code. The Commission listened to the various sutements of the adjacent residents and affected property owners in attendance. Review Exhibits D. E, F. G and U, both applicant and owner objected strongly to the City’s requirement for the future extension corridor claiming a negative impact on the future development of lots and existing improvements on the homestead parcel. Lot 8 to be sold to owner’s son. Review Exhibit D. Mr Sucss, Jr.’s letter and exhibits, Mr. Suess ’ objections reflect the same concerns raised by neighboring property owners when City sought future extension corridors at Goldenview, Silver View and Woodhaven Drives. The concerns voiced by members in attendance were for increases in traffic with a through road where residents purchase homes to enjoy the privacy and less intense use of private roads with cul-de-sacs. The owner voiced concern with the potential diminution in property values for lots that would now be located on a future through road. Staff has met with John Hallson, the owner of the property to the immediate west, who was concerned with the potential impact of an extension road through his property as it is his future plan to subdivide. Mr. Hallson chose to disregard his attorney’s letter at the meeting and took the position that he wanted no extension through his property because it would negate a potential subdivision of 3 lots. Review Exhibit G, during the review of the Meyer Dairy Addition and the Peterson Second Addition (Silver View Drive and Goldenview Drive) the same issues were raised by the property owners and developers. The City has no immediate or future plan to install through roads with the acquisition of these extension corridors. This policy reflects a basic part of good planning practice for an integrated road system when future development pressures create the need for through roads. The minority opinion felt the subdivision regulations would require the acquisition of a connection outlot in this case and determined that now is the time to seek the extension to the west. The City had already addressed a linkage to tlw north with the connecting corridor between Silver View and Goldenview. Access to all 8 lots shall be via the private road. No direct access will be allowed for any of the lots within the subdivision onto Watertown Road. The City will ask for a 33’ dedication of right-of-way for Watertown Road. Drainage and utility easements shall lie provided 10’ along the perimeter of all property lines except for the eastern perimeter where easements will be 25 - 35 ’ wide. Easement should also be expanded at shared lot lines of Lots 3 and 4. Drainage and utility easement should be 10’ wide along perimeter of the road outlot and 5 ’ on either side of the shared interior lot lines. Request for Council Action continued page 5 of 6 February 10, 1994 Zoning File #1862 f Septic Tcsting/SepCk Design Review Exhibits L 1-2. all septic testing has been provided as requested. Weckman approves all septic designs for all mounds proposed for principal and alternate sites. Lots 1-7 and alternate site for Lot 8. Paurk DedkaCkm Fees The subdivision will be submitted to the City Assessor's office to determine the fair market value of the 8 lot plat upon Council’s approval of the preliminary plat. Planning Cti . ♦ I U M K \ ^ , I Rcconynendatl The Planning Commission recommended approval of the 8 lot subdivision plan without a future extension corridor to the west fmding all standards of the RR-IB Zoning District have been met for all proposed lots and that all standards of the on-site septic code have been satisfied and that this iqiproval is subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. Dedication of 33’ of right-of-way for Watertown Road. Designation of drainage and utility easements 10’ wide along the perimeter of boundaries of the property and the perimeter of ‘he road outlot except for east boundary of property where drainage and utility easement shall be shown at 25’- 33’ widths and along shared lot lines of 3 and 4. 3’ drainage and utility easements can be shown on either of the shared lot lines of the remaining lots. Permit approval of MCWD for grading and drainage plan before plat can receive final approval of the Council. Applicant’s grading and drainage plans to be amended per City Engineer’s and MCWD’s review comments as follows: A.Pond on Lot 8 to be shown at a high water level of 1024 with an outlet ditch maintaining normal water level at 1023.3 to protect septic system on Lot 7. B D»*:nts along cul-de-sac and Watertown Road must be set at 2 1/2’ below proposed centerline street grade. Bonestroo Riosene Anderiik A Associates Engineers A Architects June 8. 1993 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth. BuOdtng and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323 Re: Russell Lund Estate File No. 139-1818 Ono G Bonewoo n •oop^T A iDsr-ie PE • x»pr C An«n* Pf Mervir ». krvM tic*‘-a»3 E k/rne- ^ f Coo* PE t^yynr E PE •aoe*’ G Schuncm P£ Suspr^ M Eoene C PA •Vpno Cor*uMSrt A SirM »£ P Goodt PE iOBP<t t P«PPr» P£ •cnaid y* hmf' p£ O umsu P£ C PoMpa A> A jp»^ A touaaor A£ Mara A htensor Pf Mchapr •autmanr P£ IPd » PE ■^hosnas • Af»iprs or a * a Dor>a«3 C •u«9ai« ^E Thomas E Arsgti PE ismaai Martinet P£ Mchaei » iftr Pf Phac J Pyne P£ ^pnes M tmQ A tC p ’’homas Ppifhcii'i P£ Mirriae- C uvnt»' P£ -•arnes • Mawno P£ /e"v D PE AenrW' a Anopnor PE Mara P tots PE Mara A iPO P£ Gary Monpo Pf Oaryp* j Pdgphor p| AMan tick k:nmux P£ Phiac ^ CjSMwes P£ Mart O MMhk Pf Mm B Jensen Pf L Phdkp GrauK M Pf tjipr) L WmPH pf Gary o Ar»sKjHi Pf f tMO *owy Pf tPth t Pi Oou^tfs J BenoE Pf Srsaam D GufUan Pf C pcoo Oawr Pf Cham A fhcioor' Lpo M PawPiMy Hanart m Omsn James r inqeB>mat Dear Jeanne. Subsequent to our inspection last Friday, we have prepared this letter regarding the proposed landing reconstruction on the Russell Lund Estate. We have reviewed the sketch of the proposed stairway and riprap. The proposal may be feasible but a more detailed plan is needed. The plan should have a ^an view and a profile drawn to scale showing the proposed changes in elevation and materials to be used. The plan should address the drainage and constructability problems that wid be encountered. We assume the following construction steps will take place: 1.Place silt fetKC along shoreline prior to start of work. 2.Remove existing bituminous pavement and dispose of off site. 3.Retain existing landscape timbers. 4.Grade areas for the stairway, landings and riprap. 5.Place railroad tics to construct the stairway approximately 4 feet wide on one side. 6.Place riprap and fabric to construct a drainageway approximately 4 feet wide on the opposite side. 7.Extend landscape timbers wall as needed to construct stairway. 8.construct intermediate landings out of concrete. We would recommend that a pipe and catchment basin be constructed at the top of the landing. This would collect the runoff from the house and yard area prior to reaching the stairway and would minim ze the possibilities for erosion. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERUK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson. P.E. 2335 yg/est Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612-6364600 Request for Council Action continued page 6 of 6 February 10, 1994 Zoning File #1862 C.Grading and drainage plans should show how erosion will be prevented at the downstream end of the pond outlet. D.Incorporation and design of emergency overflow for northeast pond. E.The first habitable floor elevation for a house on Lot 4 shall be 2’ above the emergency oveiflow elevation of the northeast pond. 5.Tlie City shall require access and utility easements over Outlot A. Developer shall create private covenants to deal with the shared ownership, upkeep and maintenance of said private road within Outlot A and drainage facilities. 6.Designation and dedication of existing pond in Lot 8 and retention pond in Lot 4 as drainage easements on plat. 7.Applicant shall fence off all protected drainfield sites prior to construction of roadway and drainage improvements. Fencing shall be maintained in place until lots are developed. 8.Council’s recommendation concerning the acquisition of drainage easement over drainage ditch within Lots 2 and 3, Daniels Long Lake Heights: A.To require developer to obtain easement B,To require no easement. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the majority opinion of the Planning Commission recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt v ’ amend the enclosed approval resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A CLASS III SUBDIVISION FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2590 WATERTOWN ROAD -file no. 1862 WHEREAS, Three Star Trucking, on August 27,1993, filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of an eight lot residential plat of property legally described as: The West 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 33, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, also that pan of said Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 which lies East of the West 1/4 of said Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4, and which lies West of the East 20 acres of said Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinatter the property ), and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Stamtes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono’s Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public he. ring on September 20, 1993, 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 February 14, 1994, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of Three Star Trucking, noting the following findings of fact: 1.The property is located within the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of two acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2.The property contains a total of approximately 19+ acres, with .89 acres of wet area. 3.The proposed plat consists of eight lots each meeting the minimum requirement of 2 acres of dry buildable area. Page 1 of 6 'V 4.All lots meet the standards of the RR-IB Zoning District. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. All existing improvements on Lot 8 meet the required setbacks from the newly defined lot lines. All eight lots have been found to have adequate and suitable soils for on-site septic treatment facilities. A private road shall serve all eight lots. The curb cut for the private road has been approved by the City Engineer finding there is adequate siting distance for egress and ingress for 40 mph road. No additional curb cuts will be allowed from this property. The City has determined that an extension road outlot to the west linking Golden View Drive is not required for this subdivision. There are no designated wetlands within the 194- acre parcel but subdivider shall provide detention ponds to control and treat runoff from the site. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the above findings, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Three Star Trucking per plat drawings by Mark S. Gronberg, a licensed surveyor of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc. dated September 16, 1991, revised February 1, 1994, subject to the following conditions: 1.Outlot A at a 50 ’ width shall be developed as a private road and shall be built per City’s standards. Road construction cannot commence until the subdivider has submitted engineering plans and the plans have been approved by the City Engineer. The subdivider shall execute a developer’s agreement («ee sample enclosed) and post a letter of credit (see sample enclosed) to be written to 150% of the cost of all road and site improvements. Page 2 of 6 2. 3. 4. Drainage and utility casements shall be 10’ wide along the perimeter of the boundaries of the property and the perimeter of the road outlot except for east boundary of the property where drainage and utility easements shall be shown at 25’-35’ widths and along the shared lot lines of 3 and 4. 5’ drainage and utility easements can be shown on either side of the shared interior lot lines. Applicant ’s surveyor/engineer to ameiKl final grading and drainage plans per City Engineer ’s and MCWD’s review comments as follows: A.Pond on Lot 8 to be shown at a high water level of 1024 with an outlet ditch maintaining normal water level at 1023.5 to protect septic system on Lot 7. B.Ditches along cul-de-sac and Watertown Road must be set at 2 1/2’ below proposed center line of street grade. C.Grading and drainage plan should show how erosion will be prevented at the downstream end of the pond outlet. D.Incorporation and design of emergency overflow for northeast pond. E.First habitable floor elevation for house on Lot 4 shall be 2’ above the emergency overflow elevation of the northeast pond. Applicant ’s final grading plan should show minimum first floor elevation for all undeveloped seven lots. F.Drainage easements shall be designated on the final plat and applicant shall grant drainage easements over the ponding areas (see sample attached). Applicant shall grant road and utility easements over Outlot A (sample enclosed). Developer shall create private covenants to deal with the shared ownership, upkeep and maintenance of said private road within Outlot A and drainage facilities. Staff has enclosed sample of an easement/covenant for applicant ’s use. Page 3 of 6 5.Applicant shall fence off all protected drainfield sites prior to construction of roadway and drainage improvements. Fencing shall be maintained in place until lots are developed. 6.The City shall (not) require subdivider obtain drainage easement over drainage ditch within Lots 2 and 3, Daniels Long Lake Heights. 7.Dedication of 33’ of right-of-way for Watertown Road. The following list of fuial submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows; 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (with one copy for the City’s records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200’. Drawing to include: A.Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronl^rg dated September 16, 1991, revised February 1, 1994. B.Dedication of ’drainage and utility easements" as noted in item 2 above of this resolution. C.Designation and dedication of drainage easements over detention areas located in Lots 4 and 8. D.Dedication of 33’ of right-of-way for Watertown Road. E.Naming of plat. 2.Legal documents required: A.Title opinion addressed 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. Page 4 of 6 B.The applicant must provide cenifted copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C.Sigr^ and executed drainage easement to be taken over the detention areas within plat. Signed and executed developer’s agreement and letter of credit for site improvements and construction of private road. E.Signed and executed road and utility easement over the private road outlot. F. G. Signed and executed declaration of private covenants Completed application for private road name. Please note the selection of the road name is separate action of the Council and should be submitted as soon as applicant has completed the selection of three name choices (see sample enclosed). 3.Fees to be paid: Total due: $375.00* A.Final plat fee = $175.00 B.Legal review and filing fees for subdivision and associated documents $200.00 *Park dedication fee shall be determined as soon as City Assessor has placed a fair market value on the undeveloped land. The subdivider shall be advised as soon as Assessor’s report has been filed with City. Park dedication fee shall be based on 8% of the fair market value of said land at time of preliminary plat approval. Page 5 of 6 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 14th day of February, 1994. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J, Callahan, Jr., Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of February 1994, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City, Notary Public Page 6 of 6 I J CITY OP OROMO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address #1 QC:> L 'vH ft Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) _ _ Please check one - Property _ _ abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application APPLICANT Naune Phone (home) RIA.c.1^Phone (work) C Address: Ca fU (a_ _ _ _ _ _ City: p//A\guth_ _ OWNER (if different JKhan applic^t)Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address• Zxtyx/Ur^Zip: 5 (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USB Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total/ all parcels Present Use (check)Residential: no. of units Other (specify)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Zoning District --n PROPOSAL Division tor Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building,sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:L Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density: Minimum Lot Size: J[_ _ _ Units per ^ Acres Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use: (check)Residential Other (specify) t r MIHUfOM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1.Completed Application Form 2.Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. 3.Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350* (you must’obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 4.As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment of fees (parlc fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, Covenants, etc. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $200.00 300.00 Preliminary Review (Class I i II Subdivision)300.00 Preliminary Review (Class III & all non-residential) 325.00 + 25.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 175.00 Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application Renewal of Final Subdivision Application 150.00 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all .additj.qnal fe^ l^sl^ablished by ordinance Applicant's Signature ill additional fe^ established Date Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday ot 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. RUN DATE 04/24/TScBATCH 002' V ..1■‘prop acor. ONNER NAME■.’TAXPAYER•NAME/A»OR. i,*. ^ * i • # ^AOOH . ONNER NAHC •.TAXPAYER r lOHE/AODR i V-^V . f p» SB '3S-110-23 AA 0007ooosa /'address unassioieoVlLt)r ORONOCITY or ORONOBOXUCRYSTAL BAY MM 5532S:f.»• r * SB SS-118-2S AA 0010 OOlAl HACKBERRY HILL DAVID P FISCHER ETAL DAVID FISCHER lAl HACKBERRY MILL LONO LAKE m 55SAA -r- i 4. PROP'AODR . •ONNER NAME TAXPAYER • ^ ‘/j.NAME/AODR Y.v>r ■•• SB SS-11B-2S 4A 0013 000T5 HACKBERRY KILL 0 0 PEASLEY ETAL OUNHREATH PEASLEY 95 HACKBERRY HILL LONO LAKE MN 5S35A HEKMEPIN COWnr PROPERTY INFOmATION SYSTEMPROPERTY 0*««RS LISTSB 33-11B-23 AA OOOB00185HACKBERRY HILLR H PERRY ETALR H PERRYIBS HACKBERRY HILLLONG LAKE MN 55356 SB S3-118-23 AA 0011 00125 HACKBERRY HILL P A A M L NELSON PHILLIP A NELSON 125 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118*23 AA OOIA 00081 HACKBERRY HILL 040 DALY DANIEL P DALY 01 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE m 55356 vPROP AOOR., ,y.00051 HACKBERRY HILL \ OWNER NAME’ 5 J M MIELKE 4 R J MIELKE ‘ ’AA 0016 J;, ; taxpayer -Richard j 4 janelle m hielke >NAME/ADOR . 51 HACKBERRY HILL --LONG LAKE MN 55356f'f .. .9*'“ f ,'-.J • f- -’V ♦. : . . >ROP ADOR ' V.. I^ONNER name /•. V TAXPAYER v*;^'i;'NAHE/A0DR r 'k 1 ’A. SB iSS-118-23 AA 0019 02A80 ' NAHRYOIM RO R N NAGMAN 4 j B NAGMAN RICHARD N 4 JUNE B HAGMAN S5 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE fM 55S56 . ,•' vX »v<rv *•SS-118-2S AA 002A '^^/ iPHdP BDOR .00066 HACKBERRY HILL •‘,,;<^?30MNER,MaM| 6.6AVARAS 4 J B MILLER TAXPAYER < .'THOMAS 6 GAVARAS ^^.iTiiNAriE/AOOR,’ . 66 HACKBERRY HILL W V' ORONO W 55356 * -ft** m • <■ly-fAV !•• SB 53-118-23 AA 0017 . 00035 HACKBERRY HILL R N HAGMAN ETAL RICHARD H HAGMAN 35 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 35-110-23 AA 0022 00000 HACKBERRY MILL J E MOCK 4 0 L HOCK JAMES 4 DANA HOCK 00 HACKBERRY HILL long lake m 55356 30 33-110-23 AA 0025 00050 HACKBERRY HILL CHARLES B AUTRY ET AL CHARLES B AUTRY 50 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE HN 55356 •* •. 1 • •r’ REPORT NO. PIASSAoi;.:'-PACE ."LVSO33-118-23 AA OOOA00155HACKBERRY HILLPETER IRHIN FOSSEN ETALMR PETER I FOSSEN155 HACKBERRY HILLLONG LAKE MN 55356 30 33-118-23 AA 0012 00109 HACKBERRY HILL KURT C SCHMID KURT C SCHMID lOA HACKBERRY MILL LONG LAKE MN 55356 30 35-110-23 AA 0015 ’ 00065 HACKBERRY HILL DONALD H DAHL ETAL DONALD M 4 KAREN S DAHL 65 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55356 30 33-110-23 AA OOlB 00035 HACKBERRY HILL: R H HAGMAN ETAL RICHARD H HAGMAN v 35 HACKBERRY MILL LOTK: lake HN 55356 . fi.. ^'T f*r ^ -f -1 • *%v iii p-t •A ' ^J*J > 4 hS ‘ » 1* m so 33-110-23 AA 0023 00096 HACKBERRY HILL RUBY L SIFORD RUBY L SI FORD 96 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55356 SO 33-11B-2S AA 0026 00036 HACKBERRY HILL H N NEAR ETAL WILLIAM H HEAR BOX 506 LONG LAKE HN 55356 •..'.4 V , ;!L-/. V•: ••. w. ■/T! : ? ‘.IV ^ 5SS56 •,'y/ *.• W|:^ rAl|>l»^AOOI(^5'OI4V 'l^nRTWI noCmii-^Pkmctk c;v‘^tr«<pAvl| - :^C: pA twcia c dickeyC:7.jJMAMI/AOOR 5 iiAS HATERTW#! RO ■••I-•■•>'HEftCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFOtHATION SYSTtHPROPERTY ONNERS LIST?f.12 0007IDICKEYSSlhhr-i •'■! ^*.V-V • J*/"AOOR »M : SS-lia-25 001002445 \r HOODHAVEN DR, SS-lia-25 A1_J^OOR•NAH^Vj;H P 'liiRRist/*imTAXPAYER JOlM T I PATRICIA L HARRIS *f;iJf>MHE/AOOlf * 244S HOODHAVEN DR «;) *1' LONG LAKE MN 5535A t rifOP*' ADDR •' i^SoNMEh.NAME^.’, vyAtAHPAYER Y?' ^SD; SJ-118-2S A2 0012 02i75 SILVER VIEH OR T H: ISAACS t R ISAACS Thomas h a rosalynda Isaacs DR 55S5A f^3»R0P ADDR V<^ OOiiO GOLDEN VIEW DR *^*tt*«R NAME { Sw?*^AYtR ‘J'V JOHN.T HALLS(HALLSON 0 BOX 171 Ld^ LAKE MN 55356 ;■!•<:•' r.'li.PROP ador;'. ’ 'OHNER name :. ‘.TAXPAYER Jf'>4 NAHE/ADDR S6;tS3-llS-23 A6 0001 02STO HATERTOHN RO ROBERT t SUESS ETAL -ROBERT F SUESS 2590 HATERTOHN RO155356 - f, — — 118-25 ♦♦0004 V^jmDROP ADORiV^00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO '•-.>WOW«R NAME ^' VILLAGE OF ORONO ’ > .^TAXPAYER .VILLAGE OF ORONO •»^^>naMe/aoor .;5;{ halter R BENSOI '4^,'CRYSTAL MN BENSON 55323 >A I58 33-118-23 61 0005 ^00225 HILLOH DR NJAMES D DILLMAN ,JAMES 0 DILLMAN •225 NILLON or NOLONG lake m 55356 '■'J*'v/.38 33-118-23 61 0016 = .02525 HOODHAVEN DR ^C J O'CONNOR A L S O'COTMOR CHRISTOPHER J O'COMIOR ^ t AND LYNETTE S O'COFMOR 2525 HOODHAVEN LONG LAKE MN 55356 d : A 58 33-118-23620016 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO D 0 PETERSON A K L PETERSON ' DONOVAN 0 A KAREN L PETERSON 2715 SILVER VIEN DR LONG LAKE MN 55356 58 55-118-23 63 0009 * 00038 ADDRESS UNASSI^D J F A H C P VOGT ET AL GVD HA 85 GOLDEN VIEH DR LONG LAKE MN 55356 . . 38 33-118-23 66 0002 •' 02590 HATERTOHN RD ROBERT F SUESS ETAL ROBERT F SUESS ^vi- 2590 HATERTOHN RO * LONG LAKE MN 55356 *5 ' A . %*.'•• . »■ •f . : sa ss-iia-2s ooos 00140 HACKBERRY HILL L E GLEASON ETAL LANRENCE E GLEASON 140 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55356 ; '•■t ■■'.v • ••I ;* REPORT38 33-118-25 61 000802565 HOODHAVEN DRNAN 8ASH0RENEAL K A MARY D BASHORE2565 HOODHAVEN ORLONG LAKE m 5535638 33-118-23 61 001702685HOODHAVEN DRMARK N HOLFMARK N HOLF 2685 HOODHAVEN DR LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 55-118-25 65 0006 02660 HATERTOHN RO T P GORMAN ALT GORMAN T P A L T GORMAN 2660 HATERTOHN RO S LONG LAKE MN 55356 ‘ 58 33-118-23 63 0016 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO il ’ jf ^ ! LILLIAN B PETERMAN ET AL : Afiii TAXPAYER TO LET FORFEIT •t ■'ho. I»l65560it'.^'^PAGE ' 5 :VV • ♦%^A 58 55-110-25 44 0005 **A•J 00170 HACKBERRY HILL 6».- jk LVILLAGE OF ORONO \ VILLAGE OF ORONO . i ^• /. HALTER R BENSON 1 ^ ^ ^' i?CRYSTAL BAY MN 55325 38 33-118-23 66 0006 00126 HACKBERRY HILL VIL OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55325 44 oozrACKDERRY HIUA ERNHART •• > '■"'.■^f-k;. •? ^K'l■■ A • i*A-1- • 4: -i ?‘- >• ■• •• l(£!if1 rC*‘ r'"'HEMNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEMPROPERTY OFMERS LISTSe 55-118-25 44 002802440HATERT0tt4 RD ...M « P ELLIS 'WALTER T ELLIS •2440 HATERTOIM ROAD !■LONG LAKE MN 55356 REPORT NOPAGE W-if-‘j fTOTAL BATCH:• •\•V '/> .... ,y< •. n ' • ' J*•' •«,. ,r I ■ -i!- .. .t . P1455401 1 .iV , . ; ] -f)02 00058 - ^ V k f: ♦ ‘ . i ... .^-..y.-f., •.'••/ .* * 1'."' .'• -r'. ■■'.■'.•' 40 ^ •, •.■' J if. U-A- ^ d' il f f *.•'vl’l- •.;f ■ I \ 'W's'a-’vi Li f ‘•I ■ .•»■ /!) ■ ; ‘‘Yv'y* . •■ ■ •','itA'.* •-'. 1^ "» r 1 SnM •;.;V^ i‘> . *u>* . ‘•v,4- •f' * ■•■’.’iV'/■■■■"'’j''' -■‘■i • , vi;; •?< >' ,1?.^ '■.■v"! '> • Vv’. I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON tHE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF V; V I., t f.• DATE V; ’-.; • .-ft -■ fr|^6|fr)3 „ 'f£( aifUo , n t* .u •F w. *- : :' I .; f > <• i' •t ‘A 'L C' • mi d.:i , i t. , 0) ♦1• I f ' I } ( I 1 '-i V-- -\\ \* ' *•*< %.y D 1 ^UG 25 190^ August 20, 1993 '3iS^® To the Orono City Council; I recently moved from Excelsior to the City of Long Lake. I am currently renting a town- home until the spring of 1994, at which time I plan to move to Orono. My wife, two children, and myself will be purchasing the property at 2590 Watertown Road. This is the homestead with the 20 acre parcel that is currently in sub-division. My concern is that the City Planning Council intends to build a road to service seven new homes in the area, and connect to roads west of the property. Before the final decision is made, please consider these factors; The majority of the families in the area are young couples with very young children. Young children will always play on or near the streets, riding bicycles, playing ball etc. The addition of a drive-through connection would surely Increase speeds and add to the amount of traffic through the neighborhood. One of the main reasons my family is planning to relocate to Orono is that I felt my children would be safer here than on a much busier street. I moved from Excelsior due to heavy, high speed traffic on the drive through residential streets, I hope I won't have to leave Orono for the same reason in the future. To conclude, I feel that a drive through connection would not benefit the area, and in fact would ultimately be a hazard. It would definitely cause an increase in traffic, creating more safety concerns in the future. Children should be able to play safely near their homes, without having to risk being Injured by a careless driver. If the city is truly concerned with the safety of it's residents, I hope you will seriously reconsider the plans for the connection. Sincerely, t — •/ i I 9II Neighborhood concerned about safety T^lEecdflorT I am one of the frustrated residents of 2nd Avenue that at tended last Monday ’s council meetly. Our neightorhood has organized, gathered data, and discussed the traffic problem that concerns our area in Ex celsior. Not only did we address the problem, we offered reasonable solutions in hopes of resolving the matter. Last April the council asked the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) to complete a traffic study involv ing 2nd and 3rd avenues. Divi sion Street, and Wheeler Drive. It’s unfortunate that the state was never asked to monitor the access from Highway 7 unto Division. - Nor was the state asked to complete a traffic count so one could determine the exact amount of traffic these streets are receiving. Instead of allow ing the state to perform their ex pertise, the city tock it upon itself to do a traffic count. I do not believe the city’s data to be accurate. I saw a group of teenagers jumping on the traffic counter — they found it humorous that a little hop could lick the counter and account for a vehicle. 'The city determined that 414 cars exit off Highway 7 unto Division. Of those, 175 bimed on to 2nd Avenue; the remainder continued down Division. The ci ty staff concluded that an average of 787 vehicles use 2nd Avenue per day. The city's data concludes that very few residents would be af fected if the access from Highway 7 onto Division was closed. Mr. Mason of Mason motors believes shutting off the access will affect the Excelsior business district. Is that a reasonable fear when only 175 vehicles exiting off the highway are using 2nd Avenue? Who is to determine that these 175 cars are going into town to. do business with Bill Mason or anyone else in Elxcelsior? I live on 2nd Avenue, and I see very few cars turn into town these days. .My neighlKirs and I believe that most of the 175 cars turning onto 2nd Avenue are go ing into Chanhassen. The closing of Giristmas Lake Road intensified the problem of Chanhassen residents using our residential streets as a shortcut to get home. I do sympathize with them. 'Their growing com munity does not have direct ac cess onto Mill Street from Highway 7. 'That is a problem, and it affects my neighborhood. It’s too bad that our elected of ficials can’t cooperate with the state’s recommendation to close the access from Highway 7 onto Division. The state recognizes that access to be a safety hazard. It is also very unfortunate that our elected officials neglectfully ignore a serious problem. One would think that the council would be concerned enough to at least assign a task force to in vestigate the situation. But our elected officials pro ceeded in their usual manner — their approach is to ignore the issue and hope it goes a’vay. Our neighborhood will con tinue talking with MnDOT in hopes of flnding a solution for our existing safety problem. We welcome any and all possible solutions. I am sincere whei; I state that I fear for my chil dren’s safety and the .safety of others living among these streets. A child's lixe is worth the effort to resolve this matter. .Many thanks to the Sun-Sailor for the great coverage regar ding this issue. Cindy Studer E.xcelsior ECFETiar~8pei iings for fallrwhitg] The Min” “tonka E^ly Childhood Family Education Pro9*am (ECFE) has several openings in various parent/child classes for the Fall/Winter ses sion that begins the week of Sept 20. mki-h am Clvm tnr the mini-series, “The Spirited Child’’ and the S.T.E.P. paren ting cl^s. ECFE is for ail families with children ages . birth through kindergarten. ECFE helps families meet the challenges of parenting bv provid ing informa- EFCE Rainbow Room expanding Minnetonka'School District’s E^arly Childhood Family Educa tion ’s Rainbow Room preschool is expanding to include an addi tional sessiofK for 4-year-old children. I I ExcelsiodS OLD 14EWSPAPERS AF Save your pape. ROBES • ADDIMOKS • S ; . , ..i 28, 1993 Recycling I id weekend classes. .iiusiness adminlstra- J computer systems, s and law enforcement. g business, criminal nore .tration iSf. P au I 34 1-7250 In ing infbnrtAtion sessions: uesday. June 22 Noon and 6 p.m. St. Paul Campus 00 E. Seventh St. Rm.301. Bldg. A tan ity University System iducator ULD LIGHT D V/E did! Its. the streets and aii ched the fireworks in lould not have done it ns of money and time individuals. RS ighborhood group growing in effort to close Hwj^Tjexit lsMe“\^’T5e~on counciTs~^ug. 2~a|eftda By John Mugford Last month, the Excelsior Ci ty Council decided it would not pursue steps to close the exit from eastbound Highway 7 onto Division Street. Since that decision, however, residents in the area betwe^ the trunk highway and Mill Street have organi^ in an ef fort to close the exit. In its quest for satisfaction, the group has met with state Rep. Jerry Knickerbocker, IR- Minnetonka, <^ned com munication with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), and gotten its plea back on the Excelsior City Coun cil agenda for the Aug. 2 meebiig. -At a meeting two wedis ago, 40 residents showed up and organized into eight groups, or neighborhood blocks. Elach block has two or three chairper sons who inform neighbors about upcoming meetings or ac tions by MnDOT or the city. Cin dy Studer, an informal leader of the residents, said she is now working a couple of hours a day on the quest. “We thought the council ig nored us as a group,” said Studer. “But we don ’t think they’re going to be able to ignore us much longer.” Mayor John Anderson said he did not agree. “We’ve put in some signs ovw there and reduced speeds in some places, just like the residents want^,’’ Anderson said. “And we’re certainly open to listening to anything m(x« they have to say or that the state Han to say. But when it comes to closing the exit, we just might not be able to please them. When you’re on the o)uncil, you realize you can ’t satisfy all the people all the time.” Last week the residents in- EXCELSIOR vited Knickerbocker to visit their neighborhood and watch as cars exited off Highway 7 onto Division Street, some taking ri^t turns onto Second Avenue and traveling to Mill Street. About a dozen residents stood with Knickerbocker at the exit ramp. Hie group’s goal is the same as when it started lobbying the council earlier this year — to get the exit closed. But now, in addi tion to pushing the idea that residents are not safe because of what they call high traffic counts for a residential area, the neighbors are also pushii^ the idea that the exit its^ is simply not safe. “We’U be asking the council to get an independeni engineering firm to look at whether the exit is safe,” Studer said. “If a firm finds that it’s unsafe, we want it closed. MnDOT recommends that exits like this one be 300 feet long. But this one ’s only 130 feet. Besides, I think it makes driven slow down too much while in traffic, and it comes up so quickly.” When the neighbors first ask ed the council earlier this year to consider closing the exit, their main complaint was that more and more residents of new sub divisions in Chanhassen were using the exit instead of taking alternat e routes. Neighbors such as Cathy Lar son and Tom Sweeney, 1)o^ nei^iborhood block chairs, said the problem increased when Shorewood closed off the Christmas Lake Road access to Mill Street. And now they say they fear that the opening of a Target Store and a Fleet Farm store in Chanhassen will increase traffic even more. But at an Excelsior City Coun cil meeting last mon^, council members cited a city traffic count of the area as one reason not to close the exit. ’I^t study showed that 414 cars exited di^y frwn Hi^way 7 onto Division Street. Of those, 17S, or what council members called a relatively low number, traveled to Second Street. They also said closing oil the exit will f«T:e motorists to take the Christmas Lake Road exit and come back through the Divi sion Street nei^iborhood. Bill Mason, president, of the &celsior Area Chamber of Conunerce, presmted the dty with a letto* expressing die chamber’s view (hat cutting off an y exit to Ihc City will hurt the business an^l resid ent ial communities. Knickerbocker told 'the residents he didn ’t have any im- me^te answers to their cm- cems, but said he would begin talking to MnDOT officials as W6ll. “I guess I want to know if the exit is safe,” Knidterbocker said while standing on Second Avenue. “I’d like to get the dist rict engineer of MnDOT out here to look at it and go fimn there.** studer said Monday that MnDOT crews will be out to look at the exit this wedi. “All the people living in new housing in Chanhassen keep us ing it as a shortcut to Mill Street and into those new bousing developments,” Studer said. “It’s created an unsafe situa- tion. Someone ’s going to get hurt or killed; our children are especially at risk. We want U closed and if the council isn ’t gt>- ing to do it, then well con tin ue working with the state.” /Residents angry after decision , • ,1 to leave Highway 7 ^«xit open By John Mugfocd Excelsior City Council members looked, listened, discussed, and decided Monday not to close an exit from Highway 7 onto Division Street. And as a result of their deci sion, several residents of the neighborhood near the exit ex claimed anger, vowing to take their request up to the Min nesota Department of Transpor tation (MnDOT). In April, several residents from Second and Third avenues in Excelsior said they were con cerned about safety in their neighborhood and asked the City Council to reduce speeds and add a stop sign, as well as close olf the Division Street exit from Highway 7. The City Council responded by putting in a slop sign at the cor ner of Division Street and Se cond Avenue, and asking MnDOT to consider reducing speeds in the neighborhood and examine the possibility of clos ing off the exit. MnDOT officials recommend ed a lower the speed limit on Third Avenue from 30 mph to 2S mph. But the top pnohty of residents in the area just south of Highway 7 is to have the Divi sion Street exit closed. They say theu* neighborhood is becoming increasingly un safe, especially for children, because a growing number of motorists are taking the Divi sion Street exit, traveling down Second Avenue and connecting with Mill Street, which leads to new housing projects and retail areas ui Chanhnssen. They say traffic has increased for two years, since Shorewood made Christmas Lake Road a dead end. cutting off its access to Mill Street. ' "Our neighborhood doesn't have sidewalks and many of the yards there are very sleep so the children have to walk and ride their bikes in the streets. ’ said Kammy Houghton, a Second Avenue resident. ’We re bring ing this issue up for safety s sake. The safety of the children has to he put above the businesses in town.** In referring to the businesses in town. Houghton was talking about the Excelsior Area Chamber of Commerce ’s posi tion that the exit should remain open. Several residents who spoke mentioned a letter from Bdl Mason. president of the chamber. sUUng that the chamber was opposed to closing the exit Mason also presented a mA petition with the nan^ of more than 100 people opposed to clos ing off the exit Many of those who signed the petition live in apartments on the south side of Highway 7, in the Excelsior Nursing Home, and on Linden Street. Excelsior United Methodist Church also wrote a letter opposing the clos ing of the exit Several residents from Second and Third avenues questioned why the chamber would take (he stance it did. They said motorists traveling west on Highway 7 have already passed Excelsior's downtown by the time they exit at Division Street, which is a block or so beyond the Mill Street bridge. '*11 I were a merchant on Water Street, 1 think I’d want the Division Street exit closed.” said Steve Morse, a Third venue^es idenTT^Thal^wouid mean motorists would have to exit at County Road 19 and go down Water Street to gel to Mill Street. That’s where all (he businesses are.” After several people said they didn’t understand how closing off the exit would hurt the downtown area. Mason spoke up "That’s not what the letter says,” Mason said. ‘‘Since I've been so eloquently quoted by my learned critics. ’ I think they should read the letter.” The letter from Mason staled that the chamber "strongly" op poses closing the exit. **lt is the chamber's opinion that the closing of any access to the city negatively affects the business and residential com- ______________________’ MlnoMoU Sun Puhik tisamonts IhM are in wkM kUnnMoU Sun Public kx:al boensing depanmen propneia bcanse to oparm HIGHWAY: To page 5a/ ORIH< • i*rnd Spcciallring La £fl for Adults and Ch Phon FREE initial« BROI • I •w ^ ICH H.M. S16.95/adult S12.95/childreryunder 12 plus tax and gratuity; includes brunch arid 2 hr. cruise •Reservations required !:i r.n. 5:«0 P.n. 1 3/4 hour public cruises cash bar: beer, wine & soft drinks $10/adult SS/children under 12 t 8;00 ];00 P.M.- P.M. 3 hour fireworks cruise, cash bar and appetizers $15/person •Reservations required 50 minimum by July 2nd EXCELSIOR PARK CHARTERS 701 Minnetonka Blvd • Excelsior • 474-4772 L d<ptrturr from iht Twm C»u for only SlO fou retetvt round crip COac^ irintporC4Ci plut a S^O |4mmg package Can now fO rtitnrt J tCJI Then relj> and l«i ch€ good iimet roe KEN’S fNMEATS Gtand OpeduilS sec 4 sun Cfifitd Brec 4 Pofi $l 00 115 Mot Dog 4 Pop sot c... 5 lb Tin of Lasagna W/ Loaf of Garlic Bread $12.99 Expires July 3 ' USOACnoice: T-Bone steak .—.....................$4.79 ID Porterhouse Steak ........<4 oo ir. I !.. I1 V'^ fy f-!^ J:)- •iy., •. • \ \ Highway From page 3A munity,” Mason's letter states. “Hie thorougMares are for the use of the entire populous, and should not be closed to anyone ’s use unless it can be proven to be a benefit to all.” And one by one, council members spoke in opposition to closing the exit ramp. Councilmember Bob Murphy said he was not in favor of mak ing “private streets” for any residents in the city. “First of all, the impact bn the businesses is not being taken in- jto account here,” Murphy said. “The thing is, if we close this ex it off, they ’ll simply go down to Christmas Lake Road and come back through your nei^borhood. That won ’t be -solving anything.” And Murphy said if more traf fic is diverted . through downtown, the fiveway in tersection at Second and Mill streets, near the Excelsior Post Office, will become even more dangerous. He suggested that' if the residents wanted to ensure the safety of their children, they should petition the city to build sidewalks, at the expense of the residents in the area. Other council members pointed to a recent traffic study conducted by the city. The study indicated that 414 cars per day exit off Highway 7 onto Division Street. Of those, the study show ed, 175 trav^ed to Second Avenue. ‘Tm going along with the rest of the council,” said Coun cilmember Patti Sue Selseth. “It seems only 2S percent of the traffic on Second Avenue came from Highway 7.” Other council members pointed out that MnDOT left it up to the city to decide the issue. However, Cindy Studer, of Se cond Avenue, said an official with MnDOT indicated that the amount of traffic going throu^ the neighborhood was high. Studer went to the MnDOT of fice Monday to retrieve a letter from R.E. Dixon, a traffic studies supervisor, and deliver it to Mayor John Anderson. The letter states: ‘Hie [Divi sion Street] access apparently funnels more traffic through residential neighborhoods th^ can comfortably be ac comodated. MnDOT feels that closing unsignalized access points on a majw highway such as Trunk Hi^iway 7 is a good safety measure and we recom mend doing so wherever possi ble; however, it is the city ’s decision to make.” Murphy said MnDOT was simply trying to save its^ “$7,000 or $8,000” by having the city close off the exit. Anderson told residents that the city has already helped them out and will continue to do so by adding more safety signs to the neighborhood. But outside the council chambers, Studer and several others said they will try to work _ with MnDOT to close the exit. “We feel shrugged off,” Studer said. “The council did nothing to help us.” U.S. Savings Bonds ior {ducation grow ALMOST AS f AST AS KIDS DO. Buy U S Savings Bonds — foe haH their face value — where you work or bank. If you keep them five years or more, you'll earn competitive, market-basTO rates or a guaranteed minimum rate, whichever is higher. For current rate information, call ^ .__ Sun^SaUor Newspaf Hk Snn*Sailv vmloaoMS oommenuke for Utebest readmg. Tber tbe writer end the name of the the week before an electkn. The scHur A Our best ever previev Sc r I I I I L Come tc “Christm SPECSPEC 4 Get your weekend off to a flying start with an Enterprise Rent-a-Car. Our special weekend rate is only $13-99 per day when you rent a subcompaa tOLini^ize car^' for 3-5 ^ys, including a ■ " Saturday and Sunday. A * one time fuel deposit of $6.00. (Optional CDW is available at $8.00 per day. . HOPKINS ST.L 1710 Hwy. 7 6801 1 /\'to oo'ie ■ tr/ ^^Neighborhood asks for closing Highway 7 Byi ohii »Uig fo tdL, r The last time a group of neighbors from C)e area of Divi sion Street and Second and Third avenues showed up at Ex celsior City Hall, they had no formal group name, and for that matter, no formal group. But Monday, the Excelsior Ci ty Council got to hear from members of Save Excelsior’s Neighborhood (S.E.N ), the growing group that wants the exit from Highway 7 onto Divi sion Street closed. They say pedestrians and children who play in tlie area are in danger because of Chanhassen motorists who use the exit to travel down Second Avenue to Mill Street. About 20 members of S E N. were at the meeting, as well as a handful of people who were op posed to the Roup's desire to close the exit. As was the case at a June meeting, council members told the group of neighbors that they would not dose off the exit, nor would they ask the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) to do so. And. the council also said it would not Lake S.E.N. up on its latest proposal to have the city pay for a study to determine whether Die 130-foot exit ramp is safe. **This IS something that is totally controlled and governed by the state." said Coun- cilmember Bob Murphy. **It's out of our hands." And, as was the case after the June meeting, the lesidenls of the area said they have only begun to fight. “I’m disappointed in the coun cil because we’re a Urge part of Ihc city," said Sieve Young, of Division Street. "But this doesn't mean well give up. Wc’rc just getting going." The members of the group say they ’re going to continue work ing with MnDOT officials to try ai^ get the exit closed. Or. they at leas', want someone to acknolwedge that the exit is not a sa/e one. At previous council meetings in which the residents had spoken. Cindy Sluder led the way for the group. But at Monday's meeting, several speakers presented S E.N.’s case. "You refer to us as Cindy Sluder’s group." said Chcrie EXCELSIOR Gordon, of Third Avenue. "She’s stUl one of our representatives, but we’ve become much more than that. We had a meeting in which 44 people attended." Gordon asked if the council would consider getting together in a meeting with MnDOT and the neighbors. "We keep hearing from the ci ty that it's MnDOT’s problem," she said. "And we hear from MnDOT that it’s the city ’s pro blem. We want to get all sides together and figure this out." When council members said they only have the power to ask MnDOT to consider closing the exit, the residents asked why Robert Dixon, a district super visor with MnDOT. had written a letter staling that the city could close the exit if it wanted to. As Gordon read a letter from Dixon in which the MnDOT of ficial said the state is in favor of having cities closing off unsafe exits, Morphy began laughing. "Is there something funny here?" Gordon and sevcial others asked Murphy. Earlier, Murphy had said that because MnDOT is in a budget- crunch, it would love to have cities close up exits on state highways. "Of course it would be at the expense of the cities." Muprhy said. John Christine, of S E.N., ask ed council members if they realized that the exit was unsafe and that cars exiting onto Divi- Sion Street cannot see pedestrians or other cars in the neighborhood. And Young asked if council members were aware lhal MnlXXr recommends that e.xils such as the one on Highway 7 be at least 300 feet long. He also said the recommended stopping distance for a car traveling 50 mph is 193 feet "Did you know that exit is on ly 130 feet long?" Young said. But City Manager Carl Zieman said many exits on Highway 7 don't meet MnDOT’s requirements. "Their specifications change all the time." Mayor John Anderson said "They 're respon sible for changing them We don't want this to get mlo a com munity against the city t>pe of thing. We're trying to work with yov and have done a lot for your neighborhood." Several residents from Linden Street and a btsiness owner, Ann Eenger, spoke against clos ing the e.xit. "I wanted to mention that 200 people signed a petition against closing the exit." said Jack Kerr, of Linden Street "The question is whether this will solve the problem of traffic on Second Avenue. People will just exit on Christmas Lake Road and go back through your neighborhood. Some of us see this as an inconvenience.'* Bea Kinghom, also of Linden Street, said she often sees children playing in the street on Second Avenue. "1 don't think that's safe," she said. "Right now when 1 drive (a Excelsior, I have one mile. But if this is closed. I'll have two miles. Also, the police say there arc no major accidents there." s ___________ THE MOST VALUABLE COMMODITY IS INFORMATION After years of providing extraordinary research for industry, the INSTITUTE is proud to offer its services to you. the consumer! Our expertise is now accessible to individuals who want to raise their "quality of life". It is our goal to provide you with the best information available. There arc no "miracle methods " or "quick fixes". We offer you practical Informa tion and proven methods Uiai will make the "system" work for you. SBorewo6d~- i.i:i unu .ksa .m i’av i uu vouuu vouh UIII.D'S KUUCA ItON Colicgc-Univcrsiiy -Trade School Grants and scholarships arc available through the govcrnmcnl if you know how lo find them and qualify! Ceriain deaJlinc/rcsiric- Uons may apply. u.iMitiN<; lilt coiircmATi; i.Mmi u IIKKAKIM; I HKOVtili illK (ilA.s.S CI ll.LNt; If your talents are over-iooktd or you feel stalled by artificial barriers, there arc options! Successful executives liavc the answers. it's not safe to travel In the U S. anymore, maybe not even in your own hometown. The only protection you have is knowing bow guiL lo be a vicunjji .wl JOD.S K)K thf: vo *.s The job market and the skills required are duanging dramaiicaJly. Will you be employable five years from now? 43 IM.IIiT.i: AKK IIOl.Nt; I V AM) AND IIAVK NO IN^FI- NI ION OK STOITIM.f Home-based businesses. The answer to income, flexibility and freedomi It's easier than you think! What are they and how do you get started? HNANUAl.INDf.l'KNm.NCr. iituoi;t.it ( 11 IK Wili III SLMAS How 10 get involved and succeed in the f^tcsi growing multi-billion dollar industry. iiandi .im; and s tokaok ok toxic .MAIKKIAI 'i Radiation leakage, chemical seepage into groundwater and misuse of landfills arc hazards that affect us all. Be infonnedi 8 PROTKCr YOUK.SKLK KKO.M CTJNTON'N TAX c man <;k..s nepare now or pay later. Can you affonl not to have this infonnaiion? S IAIM YOUR SUCCESSiiIOUY NOW Indicate the one(s) you want:[1][2]00 000(1] At S18 each and send to: AMERICAN RESEARCH & DATA INSTITUTE Howard Hughta Center 6601 Center Drive West • 5di Roor, Deportmeot W-22 • Lns Angeles, CA 90045 Satisfaction Cuaraniccd or Your Money Back The locus of our dosses is based on proper technique ond.f UNI JOHN W. PLOETZ Anomey at Law LAW OFFICES MORRIS, FULLER & SEAVER, P.A. A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION SUITE 525 SOUTHDALE OFFICE CENTRE 6600 FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55435 TELEPHONE (612) 927-8615 TELECOPIER (612) 927-8752 Real Prooerty Specialist Certified by the Minnesota State Bar Association A August 26, 1993 •• • * AUG 3 0 1993 Earl Fischer THREE STAR TRUCKING COMPANY 18025 County Road 6 Plymouth, MN 55446 Jean Maybush CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 yjL_c ;.j 1 msBa^n RE: City of Orono Zoning File No. 1843 a Proposed Eight Lot Subdivision Our File No. 16868 Dear Mr. Fischer and Ms. Maybush: Our office has been retained by Mr. John Hallson to resolve certain issues and concerns he has regarding the aforementioned proposed subdivision. As you may know Mr. Hallson is the fee owner of a parcel of land directly west of the proposed subdivision. Mr. Hallson's main concerns focus on the location of any proposed roadway to be dedicated in the aforementioned plat. Mr. Hallson's property is currently unplatted but Mr. Hallson contemplates platting said property at sometime in the future. Mr. Hallson's concerns focus on the proposed roadway location in the proposed plat which it may limit his ability to plat his existing property into three conforming lots, if the proposed road in the proposed plat would be required to the extended by the City through a future plat of Mr. Hallson*s property. • Mr. Hallson would set forth the following alternative proposals to remedy his concerns: 1.Mr. Hallson would include his property in the proposed plat currently before the City of Orono Planning Commission so that the location of any proposed roadway might be mutually agreed upon by all parties concerned. Mr. Hallson would be willing to pay a pro rata poirtion of the costs and expenses for the platting of the proposed plat as mutually agreed upon by all parties. or; Mr. Fischer and Ms. Maybush August 26, 1993 Page 2 9 2.Execution of a Mutual agreement by and between the City of Orono, Three Star Trucking Company emd Mr. Hall^on regarding the location of the proposed street.In conjunction with this alternative I enclose three sketches setting forth proposed locations for continuation of the roadway set forth in the proposed plat which would best meet Mr. Hallson's needs. After reviewing the aforementioned proposal please feel free to contact my office with any further questions or concerns regarding this matter. It is my understanding that this matter is set to be heard before a Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for September 20, 1993. Very truly yours. \v^. /PRDPCSAL 1 I ' . /propose I 2 proposaI 3 ■ROBERT F. SUESS fago WATERTOWN HOADI.ONC l^KE. MINNESOTA 55.156 TrleplwHi* (612) A73>5«W* WILD GOOSE CHASE FARMS BOX 65, HCB ROUTE 3 STAPLES. MINNESOTA 56479 THephone (21#) #94-2700 8/15/93 The City of Orono plans to build a street (East-West) through the undeveloped portion of the Hallson and Suess property which will connect with Golden View Drive. Please indicate your opinion in this matter; Name Address M Jf pa i ‘Cl For /'3 S' ) I A /O / r\ . --------// / /I L ^ ^ • / I .1 Against luCi', ^ u i y.Sl^c.<Q n 5 • f s' (jolc{^>-^ U> ^7ipd^ (_y/----- -^ 7 i (Lo^f. ^. ■r\ T v/ Kl .-liT o: s^' •u %■ U :i ^^U: • ••‘‘li f•■.*• M « ••* If* 0-33 I _____ : e--f^jT.->-1 ~N .•<. • « I '(S> • FkS3’ Kitts t*m if f(r3> upt^ )-.t .•s •M r > (f[j> ; <"~** Ii000»uvo< Cl» « 45J>/<Mp I €5) •^■^roosiMW ...1 J ? ' ^ •w.3« ft i i 6P‘ mrsuA K- (S> (HP I . »i szccao'” Aou ((^p Ja 6S>. i ,m (S5 Np^i -r I.- -•.1 -----=7""- < I f# •pT< Mb -to'. ^ 'is llil *'f? • • 4 •nn_ ^ ■«(2P i . c5i i • t $ •sksMi'- M •V, m • m ,©i i **5* I fJi? ' :^r i=i'i3 flu A p«r*------—[5^ L :-[T h"*i i. * ^ if * *^-gag A •• I < I « (@.J._._:i *%• •.•7»»44 *•-. C « *^<7 • ••— . I , i ‘ f . ’ . f Jk-* . Jiy • II ^ ' iiS-hvi^J':^. 7^> 1 ^ V -fc u «SS <M'1^ h}.r t , ^r- WM'" c'^ i fArv 'iaitf^ ♦' l »-vr 3!9 lA TTJTff '546 ' :^"3 .•S^ #• ■'■ iriaccr'j :«4f»* t^. *axr»^^^y*'ag^.•*■• 1^* -v^^. r-.»- • ■> •■ :-:'> ••* •..** • •Py ^ 7^- •^<.‘i.'^ "i** o « -V « ?■»»- • - 3 "•• • J *-' 'S ifl^ er^ ^--v, ;. ^ “ • .• 1 ' ' -L' _.. 1 it.*f~ ^ \ -1••r t^r 1^ ^-•* ^ - D Jp__L.-, «■ <r% ►■CAsTiT/U^^ ?=- ■:^i£fr ‘ .*?«: 5-m^ m ^ i . y*-: .* • ’ *--•»•••«:. 3^ ■.W ^- • • . ».\ ^-f -|^ .--.S^ii^.^ - .•••••• •-«*• ••' 'tr* ..•“••^^■•:***“ . ’ •• V^"* v f*- vr ' V *f .— <• - >i ••• *------ •*• ■•••Vi ^•. *M • ‘ •**• ••• • * • ^ ■*! ' -I f ••*'*•—•'r*'' *' ' .W>»‘« • ' * . •SI '*‘ir!) t£ ‘^ i.\. : .tr •f9.:: - r •■■>.' ire *'' ‘ "5*' ’v-p. ,«... .-;*T- ••• -••»TZ _^a « ^ 'v -A ••A ••••___%« { ct - •/• ixijjv rv tTnr— tU7 itec.'^ f**;' ^C-11 JtlS^r^ !*' t* *>• • *. - :.vir ’. . * ; _• f -M J5U j;^ • '•*- c _ ••-»«/ • •“ 9^^ a- ■«^-■■''* •.••*'*’ , . • Aa 5T •■' .A_;v ^ 41^) ';■■ . ► T.m i.2S iot.u its j ^ t t *^ • ♦•% »»•4 n '• - BURL-INGTCM -NCflTMERN , lltl (g);a —‘Ik* f'11 SWUCt * ('ll M«MM WttJV •^OOOHAVEN OR « !0001<ilCI I T«l>0 aom i t > (II*) :^TMSm *»•• '••l •H.M ■a-9 ’*r< 0m*, i *^n . lltl M4 ^ • *2 . ..V V i /'-»» I Ml , i (Hp *00^ 1 s 1.11SICZM «M m , AOM t 1 nil dP ! iia a S i k •i III!(f£> * • « « § i .< / lL • 3 t ® !"S *1 t 1 • ** -■ (II « •m (>l t’ 1". =« ft •UA#\f t* • i »• *0* M® •M f iAl ;. (S) ^1 t m •• t • 5 (III [i^i ,<S>*1(IM • .■'!S.* iiji ■ Ci^.,3 .cia * lyi • m jj <jar a ^ (Ml^. o. ^ (111 •• #« ‘iP I itti ' c*,*' I ^ ^ •■? •) V •*T f j • I I .* I • * • l-‘-’ •Cl|ACI ._* f » 1 f > 1 < i < f t * ^ t ItUMlit ........stoMu sEfftR oisrnicr boimimt -------------------so<oa oisiRict aou»«AAT ............................ MlEICiXO 0($IMCr eOlMMIT ...................................».,CPPKk«f 2Ai.»^t0v >€M€FIN COUNIT. BuRfAu or Puaic Sfffvici OEFAHnCNf Of PWE«Tt Pliatc ff onos I FRL- 1 / � '. / \ \ FRL - , 3 "··. \ ,. TL-13 58.4 c. ) \ \ ,6 � I 20._6c.,.!:. .. 'llll i ·\\ \ FRL-5 \. � FRL-4 • : r'. \. \ / I j ;:=�� • • ( �---------------. : • --..,, .... t -,-FRENCH·:._ LAKE _·:: . -.......... � ... 111 TL MIN�TONf<A CRYSTAL PROSP£ I ----�· LB .. 1 ��c.F.S.�111 1 . / i • 1 1 ' -- 3 ' 'r .. ·.ru w� • • ,--" ••. 111111 1 11"\1 111 " /• 7,�or J �-�-' ( Jo.." � TL-16 I TL· 1_� ::=::: / '2 • ,�· • • I �-' C.f.S. f . BB-10' "-· •• TANAGER -----LAKE TL-20 SMITH BAY • .6c,{. •• \ e MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT .o 14600 Minnetonka Boulevard Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345-1597 oHice: (612) 939-8320 fax; (612) 939-8244 DISTRICT ADMINISTRATOR: Ellen B. Sones BOARD OF MANAGERS: Thomas Macie. Jr.. Pres • C. Woodrow Love • Jorm E. Thomas Clarkson Undicy • Tnomas W. LaBounry • Martha S. Harttiei • Pamela G. Blixt WATEASNCO aOUNOAMT S1 December 23, 1993 Permit Application Mo. 93-1798 Applicant: Location: Purpose: Dear Mr. Fischer: Three Star Trucking 18025 Co. Road 6 Plymouth, MN 55447 City of Orono, T118, R23, Sec. 33, SE 1/4 Stormwater management plan involving construction of road and 8-lot subdivision. At the regularly scheduled December 21, 1993 meeting of the Board of Managers, the subject permit application was reviewed along with the following exhibits: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Permit Application 93-179 received October 7, 1993. Revised drainage calculations received December 3, 1993. Pond outlet design received December 3, 1993. Wetland delineation report received December 3, 1993. Wetland delineation data sheets received December 13, 1993. Revised preliminary plat and grading plan received December 13, 1993. Action was taken approving your permit application pending receipt and staff approval of the following exhibits: 1. 2. Incorporation and design of emergency overflow for northeast pond. Analysis of downstream capacity and certification that the project will not aggravate the current situation or a plan to upgrade the downstream drainage system as part of this project. The following condition shall be placed on the permit: 1.The minimum opening elevation for a house placed or. Lot 4 shall be elevation 1014.5 or 2 feet above the emergency overflow elevation of the northeast pond, whichever is highest. Please be advised that the project is not authorized until the above has been submitted, and you have been notified of permit issuance. Sincerely, Ellen B. Sones District Administrator EBS/cr c:Mark Gronberg, Coffin & Gronberg, Inc Jeanne Mabusth, City of Orono To: From: Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager September 20, 1993 #1862 Three Star Trucking - Septic Review I have reviewed the proposed septic system testing and des.gn for this property and would make the following comments. T.ots 1 and 2 Site evaluation completed in 1991 was approved for a proposed 2 lot subdivision. BoA sites were tested for three-bedroom homes, but topographic information provided as part of this subdivision indicates that five-bedroom sites are feasible. Lot 3 This site was tested in August of 1993 which indicated suitable area for primary and alternate drainfield sites. The percolation tests averaged approximately 40 minutes pei inch and are within acceptable limits. Site inspection, however, revealed that this site had been driven over considerably by heavy traffic leaving ruts from 3-12" deep across the drainfield sites. One or both of these sites may need to be relocated in order to avoid compacted soils. Additional percolation tests will be required to determine whether the existing sites are still suitable for sewage treatment. I^ts 4. S. 6 and 7 These four lots all have both primary and alternate drainfield sites located on slopes less than 6% with suitable percolation rates and meet required setback distances. Lot 8 This lot contains an existing residence with a septic system. City code requires that an r*temate drainfield site be located on this parcel for future use. Summary Suitable soil testing information has been provided for Lots 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Further information is required regarding the compaction of Lot 3 and the identification of an alternate site for Lot 8. Based on the above information, I would recommend tabling the application unti the additional soil testing information can be provided. /- 7^ To: From: Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager December 14, 1993 #1862 Three Star Trucking - Septic Review I have reviewed the proposed septic system testing and design for this property and would make the following comments. Lots 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 have been previously approved as they all have both primary and alternate drainfield sites located on slopes less than 6% with suitable percolation rates and meet required setback distances. The soil testing for Lot 3 had been rejected due to the identification of ruts up to 12" deep across both drainfield sites requiring testing for two new sites. Soil testing was also required for an alternate site on Lot 8, which contains an existing residence and requires an alternate drainfield site on this parcel for future use. Additional soil testing and system design have been submitted and approved for primary and alternate drainfield sites for Lot 3 as well as the funire site for Ix)t 8. All three sites are located on slopes less than 6% with suitable percolation rates and meet the required setback distances. Based on the above information, I would recommend approval of the application. M TRAN^PORTATIOM JUNE, 1980 THE CITY'S TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MUST REINFORCE THE LAND Orono^^this meii^reinforcing the permanent urban/rural land use goals. This means providing sufficient capacity for trips between Orono s residential neighborhoods and the commercial centers of Navarre and other lake area municipalities as well as the metropolitan area to the east of Orono. As a practical matter, this means little or no need for expansion of any highways or roads in the city in the future. HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS HAVE RESULTED IN A CITY WHICH IS PARTIALLY SrIIn AND pLtIALLY RURAL. Development patterns established 100 years ago are responsible for the dual personality that characterizes Orono The urban areas provide higher density housing opportunities and all of the neighborhood services necessary to support the residents urban and rural alike. The rural areas provide areas for low housing and quasi-agricultural activities. The lifestyles are differe , the needs and desires of the citizens are different and the requirements for public services are different. ORONO IS PARTLY IN THE METROPOLITAN URBAN SpVICE RURAL SERVICE AREA. The Metropolitan Council has established ^ that rings the Twin Cities separating urban and rural areas. MUSA area, metropolitan facilities, including more extensive systems, will be provided for urban development. ”“^2s Ind' developed density is expected to be low and metropolitan ^® capacities will not be provided. Map No. 6 indicates the actual location of^the boundary between the Urbc.n Service Area and the Rural Service Area as it passes through Orono. URBAN AND RURAL NEIGHBORHOODS REQUIRE DIFFERING LEVELS OF PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES. The urban areas of Orono have sufficient require and to financially support, municipal services such limited Irian roadway network. The rural areas, on the other hand, ^ave limited density and have environmental restraints prohibiting ur an ^ encroachments. The planned rural densities do not ®’‘^®"®type of public roadway systems nor can these rural densities supp Y mass transit system. \v> CMP 7-3 l[\^ © transportation.JUNE, 198C ORONO'S TRAIL SYSTEM PROVIDES RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES AS WELL AS LdCAL TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES. As part of our recreation-open space plan, Orono is proposing an extensive road-side bi.ke-hike trail linking the commercial area of Navarre with Spring Park, Tonka Bay (and Excelsior) wayzata, Long Lake and most of Orono*s urban neighborhoods. Besides offering walking and bicycle recreation, this trail system provides an excellent local alternative to auto travel between home and shopping or friends. In addition, the DNR's Luce Line Trail provides extended east-west linkage between several other cities and between several of Orono*s north-south bike trails. Taken together, these trails provide a cohesive network of alternative local transportation -outes. ORONO'S AIR TRANSPORTATION INVOLVEMENT IS LIMITED TO SEAPLANE OPERATION ON LONG LAKE AND LAKE MINNETONKA. Orono is not within any metropolitan airports search area and Orono is not within the normal landing or takeoff flight pattern of any regular airport. Maple Plain has a small field south of that City used by private planes that may fly over north west Orono on one runway pattern, but there is no adverse effect from the current usage level and the location is such that there are no special land use or height restrictions necessary. of Lake Minnetonka is open for sea plane usage except for the restricted bays of French Lake, Forest Lake and Tanager Lake. Sea Pl^ne usage has been generally very limited although the potential for conflicts on crowded bays does exist. The most critical problem to date, however, has been one of noise associated with sea plane takeoffs at odd hours. This has been occasional enough so*as not to warrant any significan policy formation in this Plan, ROADWAY MAINT'i:NANCE CONCERNS ARE PERHAPS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT FACTOR IN LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING FOR ORONO. Every level of government has been increasingly faced with skyrocketing road maintenance problems. Initial construction costs are significant, but the maintenance problem is never ending. Vehicle weights have been increasing, speed has been increasing, and winter safety solutions have caused rapid deterioration of roadway surfaces and bridges. At the same time, maintenance budgets are crimped by inflation, the rapidly rising cost ot asphalt, and _ limited maintenance fund income. This crunch is most severe a e level where levy-limitations prevent the hiring o-f sufficient maintenance crews or the replacement of well-used equipment. Thus, the planning concerns for new roadways include not only the initial cost- ene i . . question, but also the worry about spreading future maintenance capability beyond the reach of limited crews or limited budgets. CMP 7-7 I ru transportation JUNE, 1980 5. RURAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS WILL UTILIZE PRIVATE ROAD FEEDERS TO SUPPLEMENT THE EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD GRID. 3ec£ius6 of topo<3iT3phic3l limitations, th6 histoiric shape of rural land divisions, and the low density of rural land use, most new rural residential lots are best preserved by short dead-end roads running off the existing street system. The low number of dwellings on each road, the dead-end configuration and the scattered road locations make public roadway maintenance excessively costly compared to any public benefit. Therefore, most new rural lots will be directly served by privately owned and maintained roadways. New public streets will be accepted where a "through" configuration provides a general public benefit and/or where the number of residences justifies public maintenance expense. PRIVATE RURAL ROADWAYS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO RURAL DESIGN STANDARD^. City will regulate privat.e road design standards to ensure environmental protection and adequate weather access to all properties. The type and width of road surface required will vary with the number of residences to be served and hence the amount of expected vehicle usage. The length of dead-end roads will be limited for public safety purposes. THE CITY WILL GUARANTEE REASONABLE MAINTENANCE LEVELS AND PUBLIC ACCESS ON ALL PRIVATE ROADS. In the process of approving rural subdivisions, the City will acquire underlying public ingress, egre*?s, and access easements over all private road:.. These easements will ensure legal access of the public to all properties served by the private rc-d. Development contracts backed by acceptable forms of financial responsibility will assure that all private roads are designed and constructed according to City- approved standards and specifications. The City will further guarantee that all private roads ate maintained to reasonable standards at all times through required maintenance agreements and/or homeowner's associations, and that failure of the private group to so maintain their private road will be cause for the City to accomplish needed maintenance and to assess the benefitted properties for the direct cost of such maintenance. © CMP 7-12 M TRANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 6.THE CITY WILL PURSUE ADDITIONAL PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE-HIKE TRAlli'. FACILITIES. The completion of an interconnected bike-hike trail system is important to che further ance of alternative transportation incentives. The City will encourage Hennepin County to speedily implement the planned bike-hike trail system along several county roads. The separation of bicycle and pedestrian traffic .‘rom vehicular traffic is of the utmost importance in accident prevention. 7.THE CITY WILL PROMOTE IMPROVED MASS TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS. Orono has established a Park and Ride Transit System. Orono encourages improved bus scheduling and improved service, especially at off-peak hours. Orono strongly supports the •'Tonkamobile'' program and encourages expansion to provide improved Excels!>r-Wayzata service via Orono's North Shore neighborhoods. RURAL TRANSPORTATION POLICIES UBLIC STREETS IN THE RURAL AREA WILL BE PRIMARILY LIMITED TO THE EXISTING COLLECTOR AND ARTERIAL GRID SYSTEM. The low rural land use density does not require nor can it economically support an extensive public street system. Rural lot arrangements have always been served by the existing grid streets and are capable of subdivision to the planned rural density without requiring additional public street investments. 2.THE RING ROUTE CONCEPT UTILIZES AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE THE EXISTING RURAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM. ’ The principal corridor for traffic from Minnetrista and points west utilizes Hennepin County Roads No. 6 and 19 and State Highway 12.The City of Orono has constructed a key link between County Roads 6 and 19. Additional ring route traffic uses the existing north-south collector roads to travel away from the Lake toward these principal travel routes. 3.THE CITY OF ORONO WILL ENCOURAGE ALL NECESSARY ROAD SURFACE AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED TO ACCOMMODATE AND TO FACILITATE THROUGH TRAFFIC ON THE RING ROUT’E. This will include cooperation with the City of Long Lake in accommodating traffic on Highway 12. CMP 7-11 transpqrtatiqm JUNE, 1980 PURi TC transportation SERVICEa r«!°'“.‘“"s”isrf.;;.,. the heart of the Navarre commercial area and closest to the greatest number of Orono's urban residents. Commuter frequency service Provided through the remainder of Orono's urban area and the experimental service provides flexible-route service to local urban neighborhoods. EXISTING RAIL FACILITIES PROVIDE THE POTENTIAL FOR FUTURE PUBLIC T^NSIT AND FOR FUTURE INDUSTRIAL FREIGHT SERVICE. The branch rail line through southern Orono once had frequent passenger service to . has the potential for renewed service as a part of a region-wi e light-rail transportation system. The main rail line through nor Or^o has immediate potential for providing direct rail freight service to the Orono Industrial Park should such service ever be desired by one more of the industries located there. THE PROPOSED RECREATIONAL TRAIL SYSTEM OFFERS ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES. The complete bike-hike and recreational trail system is described in Chapter 8 and is shown on Map No. 16.These trai s provi e a coordinated alternative to auto transportation for local trips by a m all Orono residents. 1 ■r TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS ./no major changes or IMPROVEMENTS ARE EXPECTED IN ORONO S PUBLIC STREET ^ SYSTEM. The existing public road grid system is properly located and of adequate capacity to serve all of Orono's expected rural developments without new public street requirements. New rural residential ^ are expected to rely entirely on private roads where new access is require by new lot arrangements. in the urban area, a few short local street extensions may occur within the next ten years. Map No. 11 indicates forecast urban development in three locations each of which will probably be served by a new public street cul-de-sac. No new urban collector capacity will be require because of the limited number of dwellings in these developments. orono’s major forecast street improvement was the construction of Road as a Jink in the Ring Route between County Road 6 This entirely new road is expected to be completely finished e y summer of 1980. CMP 7-18 m TRANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 8. *1* 9. DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS AND RURAL STREET OR PRIVATE ROAD INTERSECTIONS WILL BE LIMITED FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY. Rural traffic speed is generally faster than that in urban neighborhoods requiring greater sight distances and a lesser number of intersection conflicts for the same degree of traffic safety. Joint use of carefully located private roads will generally be preferred over direct access onto public highways from separate properties. RURAL TRAILS ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE TOTAL ALTERNATE TRANSFORATION SYSTEM. Rural trails offer access to the Hennepin County Park Reserve Lands from all areas of the City. Rural trails offer horseback riding as well as walking and bicycle opportunities. The City will encourage completion of the planned bike-hike trail system and the private development of rural trails connecting the public trail system with individual rural properties. The City will continue tc restrict motorized use of trails within Orono as inappropriate to the trail's basic purpose and as incompatible with adjacent residential properties. THE CITY WILL NOT PROMOTE MASS TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR RURAL ORONO. The planned rural land use density cannot economically supporc public transit services. Existing bus routes pass through the rural area enroute between Long Lake, Wayzata and urban Orono. These routes are sufficient to serve Orono's rural needs and will in fact provide additional rural service as the need for additional urban service increases. No new route locations are necessary as rural residents desiring to use transit services will use the established park and ride locations in Navarre and Wayzata. CMP 7-13 fe3 (•■•VV. I (! . S 11.10 A.Improvements. All public and/or private improvements required by the City to be completed by the subdivider prior to Final Plat approval, shall be fully completed and shall have had a certificate of satisfactory completion issued,^y the City Engineer prior to endorsement of the Final Plat by the City. All public and/or private improvements required by the City to be completed by the subdivider after Final Plat approval shall be fully set forth in a subdivider's agreement to be executed prior to Final Subdivision approval. All local streets in subdivision where sewer and water are not available shall be private otherwise approved by the City at preliminary subdivision approval. The City reserves the right to determine whether a road is to be public or private in all areas of the City. B.Public Roads. Public streets and roads will be required to be pxatted, constructed and dedicated to the required by the Council consistent with the recommendati^ons of the Planning Commission and the City staff and the established City practices and design standards. Public roads shall ^P^^it^' and issued a certificate of satisfactory completion by tj® Engineer prior to Final Plat approval or, when ^ authorized by the Council, shall be subject to the conditions o subdivider^s''agreement to be executed prior to Final Plat approv /Private Roads. When the Preliminary Pi^t has been apKcovc-d *^^the basis of a private access road only access to three or more lots, the P«^ f te identified on the Final Plat as a separate outlot. The road shall be identified by name if the road serves four or mo^e lots. Whenever a private road outlot is P'^oposed, the subdivider shall be required to provide for \ P®"tS the CUy inassociation or road maintenance agreement acceptable to the city order to insure ownership and maintenance of the road outioc. D.Road and Utilities Easements. The Council may, upon recommendation of the Planning ^cm^mission and/or i y^s a^^^ require the sub"»ivider to convey to the City access utilities easements permitting public inaress, ° over private roads as a condition of Final Subdivision approval. 1 Whenever a private access road is authorized, the required outlot shall be included on and conveyed in a road and utilities easement in the standard City for . 2.Whenever areas of the plat are to be set asiue for public or private utility construction and use, sa^id areas shall be described and dedicated for public use «drainaqe This shall include areas shown on record plat drawings a.9 and utilities easements . j j i i pasement is3.Whenever a road and utilities ®®^.®'“®"p,^r required, the easement shall be fully executed P*'shall approval using the legal descriptions of the Final Plat ^J thereafter be filed in the chain of title of the property concurrent with the filing of the Final Plat. ...(4-1-84) ORONO CC 442 /v J'-? J • • N . S 11.32 safety and welfare of uT'no^t be'a^dverseirlflect^d This ttl City agrees aSd tL subdivider provides a sS?t!b?e peil^mance UL to complete the improvements in the subdividGr*s sgrGGitiGnt* R Access to improved Public Roadways Over Existing Private Roadways. Wherever the to^ the'^piblic roaltiV.^"tett^''p%" Itl‘^To''adway°'tt}A° b\^ suitably improved as ptlv”ded herein above for public roadways. Subd. 2. On-Site Roadways. a Gcadinq and Improvement Plan. Roadways shall be braaing construction standards graded and improved to aDoroved as to design and specifi- and specifications and s*iall • ^L^ordance with the construction riair?e.^^re^^ t^o^^iTe S^tVd ^rioTto^final subdivision approval. B.Topography and Arrangement. 1 Roadwavs shall be related appropriately to 1 V-\£k r»nrvpd whGrGVGr pOSSiblG tO the topography. All roadways shall be arranged avoid conformity of lot g the building sites at, or so as to obtain as many streets shall conform :!e%^ln%\i1.?dnn de“^i7n s^^air^I this Chapter. /-) All Streets shall be properly integrated with the existing and P*^°P°®® ^hi fshed in the Comprehensive dedicated right-of-way as established Municipal Plan. 3.All thoroughfares shall^^be^prop^ to specific traffic generators J“=h centers; to population densUtel; a'nd°to the pattern of existing and proposed land uses. i/4.Roadways shall h^ ^^to =°"£-™„hS much as possible to the .toP°9thP utility systems, and to traffic, to permit ^ -^f^ways necessary to providerequire the minimum number of roadways convGniGnt and saf6 accGSS to proper y. /s. The gridiron „VaV"roa7«\%"or necessarily be adhered to, a®®here such use will result inU-shaped roadways shal.l be encouraged wnete a more desirable layout. (4-1-84) ORONO CC 457 \ 4 (■ I f» §11.32 6. Cul-de-sacs shall be discouraged; proposed roadways shall be'extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be subdivided, unless prevented by topography or other physical, condi tions, or unless in the opinion of the City such extension is not necessary or desirable for the coordination of the layout of the subdivision with the existing layout or the most advantageous future development of adjacent tracts, 7.In business and industrial developments, the roadways and other accessways shall be planned in connection with the grouping of buildings, location of rail facilities, the provisions of alleys, truck loading and maneuvering areas, and walks and parking areas so as to minimize conflict of movement between the various types of traffic, including pedestrian. C.Blocks. 1.Blocks shall have sufficient width to provide for two (2) tiers of lots of appropriate depths. Exceptions to this prescribed block width shall be permitted in blocks adjacent to arterial roadways,railroads, or waterways. 2.The lengths, widths, and shapes of blocks shall be such as are appropriate for the locality and the type of development contemplated, but block lengths in residential areas shall not exceed one thousand five hundred (1,500) feet or twelve (12)times the minimum lot width required in the zoning district, nor be less than four hundred (400) feet in length from centerline to centerline of adjacent streets. Wherever practicable, blocks along arterials collector roadways shall be not less than one thousand (1,000) feet in length. 3.In all blocks the City shall require the reservation of an easement through the block to accommodate utili ties, drainage facilities, or pedestrian traffic. Pedestrlanways or crosswalks, not less than ten (10) feet hnnH^^d raooTthe City through the center of blocks more than eight hundred (800) feet long where deemed essential to provide circulation o to schools, playgrounds, shopping centers,transportation,° community facilities. Blocks designed for industrial uses shall be of such length and width as may be determined suitable by the City for prospective use. D.Access to Primary Arterials.Where a subdivision borders on or contains an existing arterial, the City may require that access to such roadway limited by one of the following means: 1.The subdivision of lots so as to back onto the arterials and front onto a parallel local or no access shall be provided from the arterial, and scree g be provided in a strip of land along the rear prope y lots . ORONO CC 458 (4-1-84) K © (■ (-- .. f . §11.32 2.A series of cul-de-sacs,U-shaped streets, or short loops entered from and designed generally at right angles to such a parallel street, with the rear lines of their terminal lots backing onto the arterial. 3.A marginal access or service road separated from the arterial by a planting or g’rass strip and having access thereto at suitable points. E. Road Names and Street Addresses. The sketch plan as submitted shall not indicate any names upon proposed streets. The City shall name all roads at the time of preliminary subdivision approval and assign street addresses. The loca^ postmaster shall be consulted by the Zoning Administrator. Names shall be sufficiently different in sound and in spelling from other road names in the area so as not to cause confusion. A road which is or is planned as a continuation of an existing road shall bear the same name. F.Road Regulatory Signs. The subdivider shall deposit with the City at the time of final subdivision approval the sum of money as determined by the City for each road sign and the installation cost thereof. The City shall install all road signs before issuance of certificates of occupancy for any residence on the streets approved. The City shall place all signs at developer's expense at all intersections within or abutting the subdivision, the type and location of which to be approved by the City. G.Reserve Strips. The creation of reserve strips shall not be permitted adjacent to a proposed street in such a manner as to deny access from adjacent property to such street. H.Construction of Roads and Dead-End Roads. Construction of Roads. The arrangement of streets shall provide for the continuation of streets between adjacent properties when such continuation is necessary "*■ convenient movement of traffic, effective fire protection,for efficient provision of utilities, and where such continuation is in accordance with the City Comprehensive Municipal Plan.If the adjacent property is undeveloped and the street must be a dead-end street temporarily, the right-of-way shall be extended to the property line. The City may limit the length of temporary dead-end streets in accordance with the design standards of this Chapter. 2.Dead-End Roads (Permanent). Where a road does not extend to the boundary of the subdivision and its continuation is not required by the City for access to j x g property, its terminus shall normally not be nearer to such boundary than fifty (50) feet. However, the City may require the reservation of an appropriate easement to accommoda e 9 ORONO CC 459 (4-1-84) \ ( ^ ‘: t- © »§ 11.33 D.Intersections shall be designed with a flat stopping area of at least thirty (30) feet in a residential area and sixty (60) feet in a commercial or industrial area. The stopping area shall be designed to provide a maximum grade-of two (2)percent. E.Where any street intersection will involve earth banks or existing vegetation inside any lot corner that would create a traffic hazard by limiting visibility, the subdxvider shall cut such ground and/or vegetation (including trees) in connection with the grading of the right-of-way to the extent deemed necessary by the City to provide an adequate sight distance. F.The crown of all streets, including intersections, shall be three percent (3%) or less. Subd. 4. Typical Section. The typical section indicated herein IS as determined for a Clay Subgrade (A-6 Soil Classifica tion) and may be subject to change. Soil borings may be required to be determined by the City. Private Street - Residential Units 3-6 R.O.W.* 50' M.P.W.** 24' Section 8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Over 7 50'28'8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Public Street - Residential Units 3-10 R.O.W.* 50' M.P.W.** 28' Section 8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Over 10 50'32'8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Maximum Maximum cul-de-sac length - 1,000' number of units on cul-de-sac - 10 Public Street - Commercial 'or Industrial Units 1+ R.O.W.* 70* M.P.W.** 32' Section 8" Class 4 8" Class 5 100% crushed 4" 2341 Bituminous surface *Right-of-Way Width ** Minimum Paved Width •* ORONO CC 462 (4-1- 34) C-- §11.40 SEC. 11.40. ROAD DEDICATION AND RESERVATIONS. Subd 1. New Perimeter Streets. Street systems in new subdivisions shall be laid out so as to eliminate or av'bid new perimeter half-streets. Where an existing half-street is adjacent to a new subdivision, the other half of the street shall be improved and dedicated by the subdivider. The City may authorize a new perimeter street where the subdiyider improves and dedicates the entire required street right-of-way width within his own subdivision boundaries. Subd 2. Widening and Realignment of Existing Roads. Where a subdivision borders an existing narrow road or when the Comprehensive Municipal Plan or some other agency indicates plans for realignment or widening a road that would require use of some of the land in the subdivision, the subdivider shall be required to improve and dedicate at his expense such areas for widening or realignment of such roads. Such frontage roads and streets shall be improved and dedicated by the subdivider at his own expense to the full width as required by this Chapter. Subd 3 Land reserved for any road purposes may not be counted in satisfying yard oc area requirements of the Zoning Chapter whether the land is to be dedicated to the City in fee simple or an easement is granted to the City. SEC. 11.41. DRAINAGE AND STORM SEWERS. Subd. 1. General Requirements. The City shall not approve any subdivision which does not make adequate provision for storm or flood water runoff.Surface water drainage patterns shall be shown for each and every lot and block The drainage system shall be separate and sewer systL. Storm sewers,where required, shall be designed by the method as approved by the City, an^d a copy tions shall be submitted along with plans. shall be provided so that surface water is not carried across or around any Intersection, nor for a distance of more hhan 600 feet in t e gutter in urban areas. When calculations indicate that curb capacities are exceeded at a point, ^l°“snce shall be made for flow beyond that point, and basins shall be used to intercept flow at that point. Subd.2. Nature of Storm Water Facilities. A.Location. The subdivision shall be required by the City to carry away by pipe or open ditch any water that may exist either previously to, or as ^ ^ subdivision. Such drainage facilities shall be , easementsright-of-way where feasible, or in Pecpetual unobstructed easement^ of appropriate width, and shall be constructed in accordance with the City's construction standards and specifications. ORONO CC 464 (4-1-84) §11.62 SEC. 11.62. SUBDIVISIONS. PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS, CLASS II AND III Subd. 1. Lands For Public Use.Pursuant to Minnesota vt./>V statutes. (1989), Section 462.358, subd. 2b,the City requires all cor/orktioL or other legal entities that subdivide land with the City of Orono as a prerequisite to approval of a lot fy''^ratr/e^e\\^n^/lku;d^ro\^r;o\h1rTea^nT^^ tra\^s°^?lpefsV=e;rg?ve^“pVrci°nU“e“o/thl“la^^ of the City pay to the City, for use in the acquisition, development or maintenance of public parks, playgroun ,> wetlands or open spaces and debt retirement in land previously acquired for such public purposes, an equivalent amount in cash based upon the fair market value of the developed. The form of contribution (cash or Ian , . combination thereof) shall be decided by the City Council based upon the need and conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Subd. 2. Dedicated Land Requirements. Any land to be dedicated as a requirement of this Section sha /<f^ifOed in adaptable for the above public purposes. Factors “S®d evaluating the adequacy of proposed dedicated areas shall include size, shape, topography, drainage, geology, tree cover, access an location. Subd. 3. Land Dedication Minimum Area.Subdividers shall be required to dedicate to the City for parks, playgrounds, trails, open spaces and other public purposes as a percentage of gross land area, or other such amount as may be determined by the City Council, as set forth below: A.Residential/agricultural/multiple residential ZDned land.Dedication requirement of 8% of the land being platted, subdivided or existing lot of recoid. B.Commercial/industrial zoned land. Dedicated requirement of 8% of the land being platted subdivided or existing let of record. Subd. 4. Cash Contribution in Lieu of Lands. instances where a cash contribution is to be ma e y subdivider, in lieu of a conveyance or dedication of land, t contribution to be contributed shall be equivalent tne fair market value of the equivalent undeveloped land wise have been conveyed or dedicated. The City shall such funds in a special fund named Park Dedication Funds. ORONO CC 471 (4-9-90) •« r - §11.62 Subd. 5. Fair Market Value of Lands. "Fair Market Value" for purposes of this Code shall be the land pre-development value to be determined by the City Council as of the time of preliminary plat application in accordance with the following: A.The City Assessor shall recommend to the City Council as to the fair market value of the land after consultation with the subdivider. '■'•v B.If agreement is not reached between the City Assessor and subdivider^ then the fair market value shall be determined in accordance with the following: 1.Fair market value as determined by the City Council based upon a current appraisal submitted to the City by the subdivider, at his expense. The appraisal shall be made by appraisers who are approved members of SREA or MAI, or equivalent real estate societies. 2. If the City disputes such appraisal amounts, it may obtain an appraisal of the property by a qualified real estate appraiser which the City Council selects and which appraisal may be accepted by the City as being an accurate appraisal at fair market value. The cost of the appraisal shall be paid by the subdivider. 3. The subdivider may appeal any final determination of fair market value as provided by Minnesota Statute Section 462.361. C.The determination of fair market value of the undeveloped land by the City Assessor, • City Council, or designated appraisers, shall be determined as of the time of preliminary subdivision approval is granted as long as there is final plat approval within the time limits as set forth in this chapter. The time of preliminary plat approval is utilized because the nature of the subdivision, its probable population, lot size and value, and other relevant factors are known. If an extension of the time limits in this chapter is approved by the City Council, the fair market value shall be determined as of the time of the approval of that extension. In determining the fair market value as of time of preliminary plat application, or the extension thereof, the factors to be included in the analysis shall include any and all factors which are generally accepted and used by approved members of SREA or MAI or equivalent real estate appraisal societies. D.Notwithstanding the above, in no event shall the cash contribution per lot be less than $500.00 per lot or $300.00 per dwelling unit. M ••t • ORONO CC 472 (4-9-90) ^3> §11.62 Subd. 6. Development of Land Previously Platted. (Repealed per Ordinance #89, Second Series, adopted October 8, 1990.) Subd. 7. Future Subdivision. Any land which is further subdivided, divided or replatted or applied for such subsequent -to May 1, 1990, shall be subject to the requirements of the ordxnanqe thL in eff4ct concerning dedication of land for public P-^rposes, and credit shall be given for any charges previously imposed upon ?hat land if the subdivider can prove that fees where previously pail in no event shall the City be liable for any payment which Ly be due because of a subsequent reduction in the application percentage of land or equivalent market value in cash to be dedicated. Subd. 8. Administrative Procedures. The City Council shall establish such administrative procedures as they may deem ^ Jlii '\—f- 1 /^2 t 1\ \ 1 o i i*“t 1 .D--;.... 0 • 2 I ; \ I \ I .T \ \ \ , . I . \ .. \' -:::-- I I I \ '1: \ \ \ /,' -i ' <-:-/ 2 1 · ,. \ � I ' ��• \\I )C. �,.-...._ -...._ 1 I : .. I lt I--·i ;... ----,�1'.,l.j '. �-�\ _j__,�'.J1 • .., -I I � ::- t - . --� ..... ' .,... -�· \, " ,I I e--� ' -r ' :S• .·, "t, . ... • l ;\�Ir'/��-,, ��' : ! � "' � " ' • 11,' ��·• ' ' \l • \ . ' ..... -.. \ !? .. -\ ' I • ., •. g l \ \ • ' ' I I I\ \ �1 \ \ \ '" \ . -. ... .... i� , , � ·, , l\ t � ' ' ' ' 'J. ' \ . \-r. I �1· . ' I \ \I •• ·\ ., I .. · I '..j > I • ,,_ ', \ -,-- • '\ U,_-,: ..... I_:_'.-: ... �--····-:··�\L'-J-�-=-_:_-_-_-_-=--=======�=:i...,,__-==::..�-= � /- '\ ,.·. l • • •• � ..\ c:-:;--.-, -;;-.-.:: \ I It ·-l � �-{- - I ,' J -1-I -.\.... -·1=:: -\ < . \ \ ',, \' i t,�� I I \ \ ' \. � t � -� r -I ...I • \ • \ , l \ \ ·� � · •, : I ' I • ' , 1 '1 I ·1 ..... A � ,' - . . . . . ... \ -:.. ... \ I � •\ ' • , ,• I • • I I \ I� Y4' I � r: � lo. I ., .' '... '...... \ I I ...... 1,: I t .· l : I .1 � i \ �, • a ,• · I , . ; , , . "' ... " .. , I • • ' ... � � \ •• ._ --�11' ' "' ' .. J:.. ,, ---------.. ' ' ,� ) 0 . • !,(I r--- ' I :> ' . L ' • ... \ ·- \ \ ' ' \ l I I I I 110 IJ t \ \ \ ' -.. � f' I °" � I :: ' I ;. 1 ., �" L I ----. ' t . _, I .. . ... --- -.. . ·-. -··-' • I ' I I ,. ' , . . . I 0 ' ·1·1ly;• I I 1-ll I ; 1m • : I. I �I I I tI I t I I' I 0 2 l), -a i--0 2 ---- ... II \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ' ' \ \, ' ' ' ' i• .... . - ... ... •'• \ ,I I '' .. J 30. i'.i. \ \ \ \ I I • I .J .. I• -- \ \ I '11! � \\ \ \ \ \ \ ' \ \ \ \ \ \I I : .. • -.. - r - \ \ \ ·'\ I� �It r,--\ I I . ' I ., �I .; .-: "'/__ ' .. '• I ' . ., . ' � ·----- I ····---····-, ,, ': \ -- I • I ' I • \ I .. 7- .. \ l'I\ ·• �' ...II I'\ • ., "' "'·I • " . .. �} """'-i---- \ \ 0 -- . I♦ I •• -ttll-_ ;'. , JC' ,I l !I: t \ il: ' .... 6 I) ______ _ -- ..... -.. - \ I // \ • " \ I \ I i I \ Jo . L:_' r-·- i.,)- I I ' \ ·-\-\ ,L ' l ' �, ,. • •• I I I It ' \ I I I \ ' .. 0 \ \ JtO ti ! ' \ \ \ ' ... \ ... \ " . ' ' "' ,c: I 0 Fll I '' .... I .. )-. ' . .... ·----.. c ' ' ';I,, 0 ( \ ' \ ... , • .: ·-- D \ / - --- JI, I .. ., 0 '.. ' t ii I .� I I\� I I ..• ' - '·� :\ ,( I' I I I �- 0 j 0 � o. o !!• Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects September 12, 1993 Ono G Bonesnxx PE PoOeri W ftcMerv. PE • Joiept) C Anderlik. PE Marvin L Sorvau. PE. Ptcrtard E Turner. PE Glenn R Ccx3k. PE Thorrvis E Noyei PE Rtobert G Schurx/H. PE SuianM Et wCPA •Senor Ccx^^jRar* Mowaid A Sanford PE. iCerm A Gordon, PE Rooert R PfWterle. PE Rcnaid W Posier. PE Oavid O LDSkoca. P£ Rooen C Ruisek. AiA Jerry A Bou»don, PE Mark A Hanjon. T E Mchae* T Rammam. PE Ted K PuM. PE Thomai R Andetvyi. AIA Donald C BufgartX. PE Thomjt E Angulo PE lynaei Marurva. PE M<hae< P Ran. PE Agnes M Rmg. AIC P Ptkio J Pyne PE Thomas W Peterson PE Mchaei C Lynch PE James R Maursd. PE Jerry D Ptoncrt. FE Scoo J Arganek. PE Kervsetn P Anderson. PE Uvfc P «QPl PE Mark ^ PE Gary JL Monen. PE Oan«« J Edgerton. PE A RKk SchmidL PE Pnap J CasN^. PE Mam O vud*i Pc Maes B Jer>sen. PE L PhiBo Gravel PE Karen L Wtemen PE Gary O Knvo/ia. PE F Todd Poster PE Keith R rapa PE Oou^s J Beno«L P£ Shawn O Gustafson PE Ceoko 0*rv»ef PE Paul G Heuer. PE John P Gorder. PE Charles A E/ickson Le M Pawetsky Hanm M Orsgn James F Enge hafol \ Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Bo,x 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Three Star Trucking Subdivision File No. 139-1S62 SEP 1 5 -^993 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the preliminary plat and grading plan for Three Star Trucking located north of Watertown Road in the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 33.There are several issues that need to be addressed regarding the grading, drainage, and pond design for the subdivision. The drainage for this property is an important issue due to the fact that much of the runoff currently drains easterly through the developed properties in the Daniels Long Lake Heights Addition. Tlie drainage swale along the east property line must be lowered to control the runoff within the subdivision. We recommend e,xtending the 1020 contour 50 feet to the south and providing a 1021 elevation at the southeast property corner. Tliis allows a 0.5% grade on the ditch while keeping it lower than Lots 12 and 13 in the Daniel’s Long Lake Heights Addition. The ditches along the cul-de-sac and Watertown Road must be set at least 2.5 feet below the proposed centerline street grade. Because the aiternate septic site on Lot 7 is sho'.vn at elevation 1027. the high water level of the existing pond on Lot 8 should be 1024. An outlet ditch should be provided for the pond to .set the normal water level at 1023.5. Calculations for the site runoff before and after development should be provided. The proposed culvert sizes and grades should be shown on the plan. The proposed holding pond shown on Lot 4 should be designed with an outlet control to store a 100 year rainfall event with a restricted outflow. Calculations should be provided which show the pond volume, high water level and peak flows. The plans should be sent to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed for their approval. The proposed cul-de-sac is approximately 1000 feet in length which is the ma.ximum 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612-636-4600 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Page -2- September 12, 1993 length allowed for a residential public street. We recommend that the street be connected to Golden View Drive, through the undeveloped portion of Hallson Estates, to provide a looped street and a more integrated street system for this area The new street should be constructed in accordance with City Standards. Please contact me at tlii.*! ''^fice if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, RO^tiNE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. X 1 0 : ^ -4 1 ^ BONESTROO Ir. 0 0 >- SOCX^^TES R . Bonestroo ffg la Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects January 7, 1994 • lltTn.Hr A^rvn M find A li I*II 1*1 Vet* A ff J ^yni* Pk 1 1*1 C 1*1 Ih40^* ^ IVrteflr. PI thO*nj\ W Pf 1 pf .M.HVWI 1 ^irvjU r|W 1’C^CK Ff .V«Hrwe«C lyrcaM l»*ff I)#v«in lewiu. fC Jjmtl « f f 1 Ptu iiiyn* r| ♦.ITfWl M C-**** f't r.AIA 0 feiUHh PI Knii V Y.,^. t*r Nufr-k 1*1 •«rr A |li4tftjLAI. fl Von J Ar^ri PI I>»iiAi*. * iv*<^ i*t Marl A MjiMifi. Pf 1 • t PI '■lUn .M Mv*rlai i i*a Vi t P.xjtmjr.*. rt « it#v pf Cr« III • -pf fed r 1 rill PP U#1i A PI P#«i< r. 1p| Itii4iwi* P AnrlrfWt.AlA Cwy w Miinrf« PI ItJftt 1' 1 DjniH J PI I ll.UIP^ A J ,4 Ivwi 1 A»%pt\A t«U Pf IfiiM PA.ty J Cr.^ Pf 1 L«il.lil M » 1-4 •» r I m Utif 0 n 1 1 i Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: ITiree Star Trucking Subdivision File No. 139-1843 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the revised preliminaiy jilal and grading plan, and runoff/ponding calculations submitted for the Three Star Trucking subdivision located north of Watertown Road in the Southeast Quarter of the Southca.st Quarter of Section 33. We recommend several modifications to the plan and calculntion.s. As noted in our previous letter dated September 12, 1993, the drainage swale on Lot I must be lowered to control the runoff within the subdivision. This change should be shown on the grading plan. The drainage for this property is an important issue due to the fact that much of the runoff currently drains easterly through the developed properties in the Daniels Long Lake Heights Addition. We recommend tJiat additional storage volume be provided in the pond on Lot 4 to reduce the outlet flows. Both the pond bottom and outlet could be lowered up to two feet if the culvert is extended to the cast. Also, the easterly property, existing drainage swale and existing culverts must be further investigated to determine the drainage capacity available downstream. Tlie e.xisting drainage swale and culverts may need to be improved at this time to prevent future property damage downstream. Further, we recommend that the City obtain a drainage easement over the swale. This easement should be either granted to the City or purchased by the developer. Tlicsc property owners should be contacted to discuss the project. A large portion of the pond on Lot 4 is shown within the wooden area. These trees will need to be removed unless the pond location i.s changed. The pond outlet that consists of both a 15 inch and a 36 inch culvert i.s acceptable, however, no detail has been provided that shows the downstream end. Tlic elevated 36 inch culvert will create a high potential for erosion and we recommend a drop manhole structure be added for control. The septic sites, house site and pond shown on Lot 4 may be rearranged if necessary to save the wooded area, however, testing for additional septic sites will need to be delayed Ms. Ji/anne A. Mabitsth City of Orono Page -2* January 7, ]004 '\ until the sprmg thaw. Unless all of the above information is provided, we feel that Lot 4 IS not buildable without signiGcant clearing of the wooded area. Hie City may want to request new trees be planted if this occurs. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK &. ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. November 5, 1993 GME CONSULTAIUTS, IIMC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 14000 SI sc Ave. Na/Minneapolis, MN 55447 Phone (612J 559-1859 / Fax (61SJ 559-0720 *»•••« fci ;nr. Earl Fischer •T'hree Star Trucking 13025 County Road 6 ' Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 GME Project No. 4378 RE: Wetland delineation for the Three Star Trucking Subdivision on Watertown Road in Orono, Minnesota • • •.4 Dear Mr. Fischer: Mi. a •. Following your verbal authorization, we have completed our services for the above referenced project. This report outlines the methods used to conduct the‘delineation, and presents our collected data. site Description • . f The proposed'subdivision consists of a farmstead surrounded .by pasture, and farm fields.. A man-made pond is located within a fenced pastured area near the north end of proposed Lot 8, north of the existing house. This pond was created by the current owner, and is located in a natural drainageway/depression. The pond is approximately 4 to 5 feet deep and 120 feet in diameter. A drainage ditch exits the pond on the east side and flows to'the nprth. .*4 ••t ^# ,1 :-7e understand that the engineering firm for the project, Coffin and Lironberg, Inc. has requested that the boundaries of the wetland be H<»iineated so that they can be surveyed to a site plan. .tetiland Assessment Procedures ~,.lor to performing the wetland delineation, we reviewed the -oDographic-survey for existing contours, Hennepin County Soil Survey •-formation, and U.S. Geological Quadrangle maps of the area. -•jr on-site wetland delineation was based on the 1989 Federal Manual r:r Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. The Federal ;*:cinual basesxwetland determination on significant aspects of hydric -soil conditions,-,hydrophitic vegetation, and hydrology. In the field, •,;a observed these characteristics near the pond, and staked the ooundary between the wetland and upland with lath and flagging. t 4 \ •ratland Aaaassment Results ^ • i. ‘'^ur site observations indicate that the man-made pond is located within c pastured area and that native vegetal ive conditions did not exist, ‘.^e observed small willow trees (an obligate wetland plant) along the edge of the-pond. Cattails (an obligate wetland plant) were located *. C-*# WILUAM C. KWASNY. RE GREGORY a REUTER. RE MARK 0. MltXSOP: THOMAS PAUL VENEMA. RE WYATT A. GUTZKE RE SANDRA J. FORREST An E9Ml Oppartimy EnvtofW WILLIAM E BLOEMENDAU RE MERVYN MINOESS. RE STEVEN J.RUESINK. RE -^Mr. Earl Fischer / GME Project No. 4378 November 5, 1993 near the center of the pond. Near the east edge of the pond where the drainage ditch exits to the north, we observed reed canary grass ja faculative wetland plant) . The vegetation away from the pond generally consisted of upland grasses and cultivated fields. Our observations’of the soil conditions indicate that they Uar^iHoiLdered a hydric soil. Surface water only was present within the pond shoreline. We observed saturated soil conditions in an approximately 5 to 10 foot ring around me pond. The saturated soils extended further outward southwest of the pond, as well as to the east for a short distance near the outlet. ;,*« did not observe groundwater or saturated soil conditions outside or our marked area. : approximate wetland boundaries are denoted on the attached Figure n aid you, or your survey crew, in locating and formally surveying the ^land boundaries on a site plan. r.: scuasien and Closure Che wetland will be impacted during the proposed development, we ^^rommend that you contact the U.S. Army Minnehaha Creek Watershed Management District which acts as the local qovernment unit (LGU), which is responsible for implementing the directives of the Board of Water and Soil Resoiarces, and the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act. i ^ If you have questions regarding this report, please contact us. Sincerely, ANTS. Timothjr F. fMcbienilm Environmental Biologist Pro j ect Managoxr r •I Sandra J. Forrest Senior Hydrogeologist Regional Environmental Division Manager Enclosure: Figure - Approximate Wetland Boundary cc:Vllr. Mario^Gronberg - coffin and Gronberg, Inc TFM:SJF:smc 0 •• ..•. *.»• s»-• H •••■- •--i IS < • -t 0IU GOMUlTAart. INC. ■ li,. • r: • / /S125390720 GME CONSULTANTS INC T-931 P-003 DEO 13 '93 12:17- nw| AsoticanvOwntr: ROU1WE ON^ OETSmONATION UETHOO^ rrJd !r.vntlatfOf($)u]l>^. DATA FORM M 34^jc ______--------- D«l*:. -i- Ptant^’munlty#/NamcS^jwU n^im- M a mora dataHad aha daacripdoft it naeataaiy. uaa tha back of data or a Raid notabook. ......J unvironmantal eondWona axist at tha plant community? - 5 _Mo Sc ftt no. axDlain on badO r«>v i . f . ■ - wMatadon. aoha, and/or hydrology babn algnUlcantly dlatufbad? |3 J /... U ^ -V NO____(H yaa, axplain on back) “ ‘--rrt Plant Spadaa 4 \->vtAt*nauv l^vw>-C/ 3^.Oj-.-A- rAytar'i^ /VQ 4. ■ n _________ , I,,, 0 _______________________ felIWW5 r • a «A VECETATIOM Indicator .. Status -Stratum Dominant Plant Spadaa —----------------- ' 12.—_______— 13 ____________- 14 ____________ 15.^----------------------- 16.,---------------------- 17.----------------------- 18 ______________ 19.-----------—-------- 20 -------------- Indicator Status Stratum Karcsni of dominant apaoiaa that ara OBL. FACW. Is iha hydrophytte vag«*,allon critarion mat? Yaa. o?»*onala; ■ ■— . NoV . loOifA^ SOILS Subgroup:^S#nM/phftMt —______________- 'v -- la tha aoUon tha hydrioaolla Hat? Yaa No-------- Undatarmln^---------- -y ts tha aoh a rtatoaol? Yaa____ No apip^n praaani? Yaa-------Ho^ lathaaoH: MotiJad?. Yaa____ j^^^O»<y<<? Yaa------- NoJS*.I: Motted?, Matrix Color: LMrK Othar hydrie aod Indk ilora:-------- Mottla Colors: kyliWf nywffc •was Miwmaatrav* la tha h>drte aol cfitarlon mat r YaaJS— No Rationala: HYDROLOCy .jj is tha ground auHaca Inundated? Yas __No JL- Surfaca watar depth: .N^H ts tha aoh saturatad? Yaa------- No2x_i;ts tha aoh saturatad? Yaa __ No l t / A -L SJoTh to fraaatandlng watar In ph/bdn pioba hola; N//\ Uat oihar Hold avUonoa of surfaca Inundation Of aoh saturation.____________ ia tha watland hydrology eritarion mat? Yaa I No’"^— Pstionala: JURISDICT»ONAL DETERMlNATtOM AND RATIONALE plant Qommuniiy a watland? Yaa rtMiionalatorjunadiGlionaldacialon:---- NoX 7..^form can ba uaad for tha Hydrlc 9o« Aaaaaamant Procadura and tha Plant Community ,V i r:a«ttfieation aooording to *SoU Taxonomy. 1.123390720 GME CONSULTANTS INC T-931 P-002 DEC 13 ’93 12:16 Raid ----lii/w yvif Prejaet/Sila:------.i/TT/g ' DATA POIU4 ROUTINE ONSITE DETEAlyiNATION METHOO^ Data: Stala: Plant Community i/Nama , ^ , _____ Coimly; Apallcant/Ownar <TacUar ---------— ptant Community i/Nama: J^nr^CA^. Not»: If a mora datalad aits daaodption la nee aiaaiy, uaa tha back d data fonn or a flald notabook. ^ 4 4viw»C.lcL<^^Do normal anvlfonmanUJ oonditiona axiat at tha plant community? Yaa____No X (Mno.a«plainonbad<) f ,ill, Haa tha vagatalloivaola, and/or hydfotegybaOT significantly diatuibad?4*. Yaa A No_____(M yaa, axplin Oft back) -... Dominant Plant Spadaa .VEGETATION Indicator: SUrtua Stratum Dominant Rant Spadaa ------------------------------------------------ Indicator Status Stratum V 4f>i ^—--- ■ -i~ 1 ■■—I ~ Qgt^-12. a./jVya»\d>rC| C->ra^GaujuJ IS. %/• 0. 7 A 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 10. 20. ^ dominant apadaa thm ara OBL. FACW. and/or FAC Jrophytta vagataiionerltarionmat? Yaa V No-------- •viufi. ( SOILS .Subgroup:^ Undetarminad il lii. toil Tmu^St^f<»*Noj^WsUe .pip«la' hydrio soil indi M a HYDROLOGY ^.ouidaurfaoamundatad? YaaJ^LZ --------Surfaoa watar dapth It ma toil laturatad? Yaa ^— No OMiin to fw^atandlno amtar In pd/Mi proba hola:._— *.*at '5thar f»»ld ovidanoa of iurfaca inuridotlon-of toil aaturatlon. tha wodand hydrology critarion mat? Yaa JJC— No Kaiionaio; _ JURtSOICnON^ OCTERMINA'nON AND RATIONALE la tha plant oommunity atianand? Yaa No___________ AiOionala tor juriadiciiipritf! oacist^n: “tbia data form can ba uaad for tha Hydrie Sol. Aaaaaaman! Procadura and tha Plan! Conununity Aaaaaamant Proeaduie. ^AcoonMnQ to *Soll Xojwnonty# 3*2 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 20, 1993 r ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Ch air Charles Schroeder, Candace Rowlette, Charles Nolan Jr., Sandra Smith, Stephen Peterson, Janice Berg, Dale Lindquist. The following represented the City Staff: Building & Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, and Recorder Marva Hurst. Chair Schroeder called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. (#1) #1862 THREE STAR TRUCKING 2590 WATERTOWN ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING The subdivision was reviewed as a sketch plan review at the J^y Planning Commission meeting. The application involves aproposal within a rural residential district requiring on-site septic testing and the assurance that there is two acres of dry buildable contiguous land within each of the lots. Each lot, with the exception of lot 8, is proposed at the minimum two acre dry contiguous with lot 4 having a .55 acre retention pond. Applicant’ alternate plan shows an extension to the west through the Halson’s property. AppUcant’s surveyor has shown a dashed line, where the 50 foot extension corridor would be located. Also, with the designation of the road, lot 7’s lot line is moved further east to assure enough dry contiguous. Mabusth noted the updated report from the engineer which should be reviewed duMg discussion ofgrading and drainage issues because there are several unanswered issues regardmg the size of the retention pond in lot 4. Primary concern is that if the pond had to be mcreased in size, where would the additional dry buildable area come from? The only available additional dry buildable would come from lot 8. Mr. Dunwreath Peasley, 95 Hackberry Hill, asked for clarification of lot locations and raised concerns about draining to east lot line. Chairman Schroeder read aloud the letter from the engineering firm Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, dated Sept. 12,1993. Schroeder asked Mabusth to clarify meaning of this letter. Mabusth explained that she is not able to get an accurate sizing of the pond and that Mark Gronberg would have comments and information to share regarding this issue. Gronberg explained his conversation with Shawn Gustafson of Bonestroo et al. They reviewed the numbers and the possible classifications for woods and pasture: good, fair, and poor. Gustafson had classified both wood and pasture as fair but after review he was comfortable with the numbers. They also determined that berm was actually higher than the high water mark of retention pond. There wUl have to be some type of erosion control at the ouUet of the drainage structure. The swale running along the back of lots 1 through 4 will carry the water into a holding pond instead of onto the lots on Hackberry Hill. Mabusth clarified for Peaseley how the swale would alleviate the problem of water drainage into those lots.» Gronberg suggested that it’s possible that the pond could be lowered to accommodate the need for a larger capacity holding pond. Schroeder asked how we would determine how that the creation of the subdivision and the berms, swale, pond is not going to make the Hackberry Hill residents worse off. Mabusth responded that the development guidelines and standards of the MCWD will assume that the condition is improved. Your current plan shows all runoff from property being directed along east lot to retention pond in northeast. Drainage from retention pond cannot be released at a greater velocity in a totally developed state than it does in an undeveloped state. All runoff from this site will be directed to northeast retention pond, and will no longer exit via Hackberry Hill. Peaseley continued to express his concerns about the drainage issues and that he feels that the propos^ development may not solve the problem. Gronberg feels that the swale, berm and holding pond will alleviate the problem. Schroeder inquired about the sizing of the culvert. Gronberg explained that it will actually be a weir (?) or trench with sloped sides and will be built of concrete or brick. Peaseley asked about the trees on the Suess property. Gronberg explained that the trees will stay and the fact that the drainage easement is wider than normal. Peaseley suggested that the mound septic system may not be effective in clay and suggests hooking up to sewer and holding tanks. Peterson asked the applicant what Halson has decided to do. Applicant responded that he understood Halson wasn ’t interested in joining in at this time. Halson stated that his main concern was where the road would be placed if an extension is requested. And that he would join in just to place the road but not create the lots since wrong placement of the road could ruin one of his lots. Mabusth reviewed placement of the road, including describing some history of other similar roads in subdivisions such as Meyer Dairy and Golden View. She reviewed the need for the City to address the issue of an extension road. Mabusth noted staff is recommending an extension to the west, and asked Planning Commission whether this property should be included for further connection to an integrated road system for the area. Rob Seuss, Jr., will be purchasing the original homestead (lot 8) and feels that the creation of this road would pose a safety concern for the children who reside on this road and Golden View as drivers may use it as short cut. -c Smith asked Seuss how he feels about setting aside the outlot realizing that the road may never actually be built. Seuss feels that road should never be built and would not I’ke to see outlot set aside for future use. Chair asked Mabusth to clarify the theory behind creating this integrated road system. Mabusth explained that it’s an ability to allow people to use secondary roads, releasing the burden on main roads, dealing with future subdivisions, integrating neighborhoods. Connecting roads also provides other options of access to and from properties in case of an emergency, where one section of road may be closed. Chair asked Mabusth to address the issue of setting aside rights of way. Mabusth explained that the City has done this in other areas, i.e. Rolling Meadows and that the City doesn’t ask to develop these roads but to reserve the right to do so in the future if need be. Smith clarified further why the City wants the option to plan for road as they may be needed in the future to alleviate traffic problems. Resident Jim Huseby, 125 Golden View stated that there are 17 children residing on Golden View not including Seuss’ children and that the residents live there because they don’t want to live on a busy road like Watertown. He feels that even though the City doesn’t intend to open the road, the fact that the City is planning for a future road is nearly the same as opening it. Resident Mike Hilbelink, 85 Golden View feels that the proposal to open a road do^n’t make Sense and that there doesn’t seem to be a need for it. He also felt that the Commission should represent the residents preference not to create the road. Mabusth reviewed the proposed road locations. Rowlette asked how planning for the road would affect Halson’s property and where would it be placed. Mabusth reviewed the options suggested by Halson’s attorney. Gronberg explained where the road would be placed and suggested that another option would be to place the road between lots 5 and 6 diagonally on the lot line. Peterson asked if a road is created between lots 6 and 7, would there be enough room for a house on lot 7. Gronberg responded that if the septic was moved further up the hill, there would be room. Rowlette asked if the pond between lots 7 and 8 is serving as a holding pond. Gronberg responded that it’s not contributing much as a holding pond because there is no berm and it would have to be modified. Rowlette asked if removal of that pond would increase drainage problems. Gronberg replied that it is not currently helping much as a holding pond. Resident Mike Hilbelink - is a Realtor felt that creation of the proposed road would lessen the value of properties and that the area has full access now and the road is not needed. Another resident felt that the proposed road would ruin 3 lots, 6 through 8. Schroeder asked if the road makes sense for the City over the long term and whether there are any safety concerns. Schroeder felt he can see the need for similar connections in other subdivisions but doesn ’t see it as much in this subdivision. Mabusth responded that the cul-de-sac is designed to handle emergency vehicles. Lindquist felt that the proposed road creates a hardship on lots 7 and 8. Rowlette felt the creation of the road would make it a seven lot subdivision. Mabusth asked if the road is needed ~ is it part of the planning for an integrated road system. Rowlette asked what might happen to Watertown should Highway 12 be on the south corridor. Would Watertown carry a lot more traffic and that maybe this proposed road would make more sense. Mike Hilbelink responds that’s why this road doesn ’t make sense. Cited fact that Minnetonka opened some cul-de-sacs and now the residents want to reverse those actions for safety reasons. Resident asked whether Halson would have to go through subdivision procedure/expense. Mabusth explained that he doesn ’t have to subdivide now but needs to be part of the planning and decision process. There was some discussion about septic issues and further testing and how the possibility of the need to increase the size of the holding pond would affect a decision now. It was moved by Rowlette, seconded by Lindquist to recommend approval of #1862 for Three Star Trucking, 2590 Watertown Road, for the Preliminary Subdivision as shown without the outlot assuming that is established that the berm will han(Ue all the runoff and keep the runoff away from Hackbeny Hill and will improve the situation, that the holding pond is adequate »• •YwmsmMmmm have been given up in the future. \ Vo & EASEMEKT/CREATION OF NEW EASEMENT - PUBLIC HEARING Bob Kast with BRW was present representing Mr. and Mrs. Rebers. Tt «/u<! moved bv Lindquist, seconded by Smith to recommend approval of appUcation #1869 L str;^dtt“ebers. 2080 ^^ayzata Boulevard, aa >i^ed ~ “ easement and vacating the old easement with the condiUons so stated. Vote. Ayes 7, y . iil872 ORONO WOODLAND, INC. - PAUL PHILLIPS, 21 ^NORTO - VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS - PUBLIC HEARING Paul Phillips was present. The Subdivision of a lot line rearrangement shall be completed as a plat reaUmg the riat “tSe*“ atoof d^raina^ge and ulUity easements. Tie shared lot Imes wdl be redefined and the easements will be rededicated in the final plat. It was moved by Smith, seconded by Nolan to recommend approval of appUcaUon #1872 as proposed. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#4) #1850 JAMES SPINNER, 940 NORTH ARM DRIVE - VARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Applicants contractor was present. Mabusth explained that the appUcation had ^n updated survey and hardcover inventory could l^ro^^ ^S^SSSture is within the 0- the new facts and to present plan hardcover75’as weU as much of the paved driveway and parking area, mere are v » e t£ js — -i* —N e r> 1 is-1/ J Bonestroo Anderl/k & 2 B u NESTROQ R330C I i=ite:s e* 2 Associates Engineers & Architects Maith 9, 1994 *|i| w ak#v»P *•! • Aivk* it r* I r*| ' 4 f .>.i n I i«| »• vriMf«.».| ff •'/•* ••« I i .»|S4J» I.U Unf^ vf A (m0^^ 0f *►*^1 V HV.Trrx »*l f.wi »</rt i )««wr 11 I otanu >k/A •r*/y A litru/tirjfx ^^^***'^ I a Iiru Pf •»«../*wi% Aivr-^ AM I>■..«.! tfwlC<>T« pf tfm4nj»» *.* *• *•• • V.,y fl^ ^5>riM 9^ig A»| f ; *V^ Pf f*%*friin VU' ^iwr* •! Vj<»ufiC wy<v.n PC JurtH Mau-a P|* ;c»*7 0 Prn.vf *'f >1 0 t J t'l Mrr P Ar^r\ #. pg VU>I f <OJfV p» A $««a p| Cj#/ w mo»in ! Pr D*/ ♦» J rc/jrrr^ Pc A Ml icrtrm,l •*f J Ai Vt4 f) •J*..M**» ••*'*-. ‘«r.rf ri »»W| t V<K 't/'-fl. •|f| i Kffm^ pf V.Mrf (t »<►•*•* * Pf l*a<^ C. Mrt-^it pf mJtti r ^ik9t>f Pf (I'duc •M •P-* ^.4 '■\iy I . Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building and Zoning Aebninistrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: 'Hiree Star Trucking Subdivision File No. 139-1843 Dear Jeanne, J "'ost recent revision to the preliminary plat and gradin® nlan submitted for the Three Star Trucking subdivision, located north of Watertown Roadln^thc engit'SSpoInf *" During preparation of final plans we would suggest minor revisions in the pond and outlet on ^t 4, Specifically, raising the high water level of the pond, decreasing Ihe area of the 1012 contour, constructing an overflow .spillway, and reducing the outlet size accordingly. Further, we recommend that the developer obtain a permanent drainage easement over the downstream swale. This easement should be cither granted to the City bv the adjacent property owners or arranged to be purcha.sed by the developer. Please contact me at this office if you have any question.s regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERUK Sc ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 219194 , v?< ^ITEM NO.: [J ' Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #1893 Christine Freeman, 2240 Shady wood Road - Variances - Resolution Pertinent Ordinances 3. Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) - Side yard setback variance Required = 10’ Existing = 16.7 ’ Proposed = 6.7 ’ Variance = 3’3" or 33% Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Review of hardcover 0-75 ’ setback area = 3,750 s.f. Existing = 0 Proposed = 0 75-250’ setback area = 12.453 s.f. Allowed = 3,113.2 s.f. or 25% Existing = 2,860.4 s.f. or 22.9%* Proposed = 3,106.4 s.f. or 24.9% (addition of 286 s.f. of new structtire and removal of 40 s.f. of paved area) No variance required ♦Both applicant and Steve Jensen, architect for applicant, have confirmed that none of the landscape areas are underlain with plastic or geotechnic fabric (791 s.f. or 7.5% of landscape area adjacent to residence, 1,265 s.f. or 12% of rock area adjacent to garage). Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Review of lot coverage Total lot area = 17,553 s.f. Allowed = 2,430.5 s.f. Existing = 1,836 s.f. or 11.3% Proposed = 2,122 s.fi or 13% No variance required Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 3 February 9, 1994 Zoning File <1^1893 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Addendum/Hardcover Statement C - Plat Map D - Property Owners List E - Hardcover Fact Sheet F - Elevations G - First Floor Plan H - Survey I - Neighbors Acknowledgement Forms J - Approval Letter from Neighbor to North Brief Review of Application Applicant proposes a 10’ x 28 1/2’ single story addition to the northwest side of the existing residence. A small portion of the addition will be placed over an existing paved walkway. The residence on the lot to the northwest has a cement stoop that extends 5’ from residence and is located approximately 6’ from the side lot line. There would be an approximate 12 + access corridor for access of emergency vehicles if the 10’ addition is approved on applicant’s property. In the original presentation of facts by staff for the review by the Planning Commission, staff questioned the exact areas shown and hardcover information. Applicant’s surveyor confirmed that area calculations were based on inclusion of area between rip rap or 929.5 and north lakeshore lot line. Staff has amended the hardcover and lot coverage facts to reflect area adjustment. Note no hardcover variance is required within the 75-250’ setback area. The application involves only a side setback variance for the proposed addition. Planning Commission members questioned whether entry addition could be reduced in width to minimize impact upon side yard. Applicant’s architect, Steve Jensen, noted that a minimum of 10’ was needed to provide an entry addition as existing room areas were already at a minimum. Jensen noted that the addition was only a single story addition that would also minimize the impact on the neighbor to the immediate northwest. Jensen also reviewed the existing improvements within first floor plan noting this was the only logical or ftinctional location for an entry addition. Members also called attention to the 18.5% of landscaped area that was not credited as hardcover. Applicant was advised that their approval of this setback variance would be conditioned on requirement that if plastic or geotechnic fabric is found beneath the landscai^ areas by the Building Inspector with spring inspections that the existence of such would be in Request for Council Action continued page 3 of 3 February 9, 1994 Zoning File #1893 violation of the conditions of this approval and would require immediate removal. For more detail on the review of this application, please review the minutes of the January 18th meeting and staff memo prepared for Planning Commission review enclosed. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended approval of the side setback variance as proposed by applicant. The enclosed approval resolution lias been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; To adopt and/or amend the approval resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #1893 WHEREAS, Christine Arko Freeman (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 2240 Shadywood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 8, Block 1, Wiley's Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a 10 ’ x 28’6" addition to the northwest side of the existing residence to be located 6’7" from side lot line instead of the required 10*. Minnesota: 1. 2. 3. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1893. The property is located in the LR-IC, Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1/2 acre or 21,780 s.f. in area. The property consists of 16,203 s.f. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 18, 1994, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following hardships and unique fmdings: Page 1 of 5 A. 4. 5. B. C. D. E. F. The house has been placed to the middle of the 50’ wide residential lot and any addition to east or west sides would require a variance. The proposed entry addition has been placed at the only functional or reasonable location on the existing layout of the first floor plan. The proposed addition will be a single story addition minimizing impact on substandard side yard. The neighbor to the northwest receiving most impact from proposed addition has submitted a letter approving the support of the proposed improvement. The proposed addition will not encroach the average lakeshore setback. All structural improvements are proposed at 13% where 15% would be allowed. G.Hardcover within the 75-250’ setback area is maintained at 3,106.4 s.f. or 24.9%. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 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. Page 2 of 5 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more o^ the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Cjde Section 10.25, Subdivisions 6 (B) to permit the construction of 10 ’ x 28’6" entry addition to the northwest side of the existing residence requiring approval of a 3’3" or 33% side setback variance subject to the following conditions: 1.Applicant is hereby placed on notice that if plastic or geotechnic fabric is found beneath landscape areas totalling approximately 18.5% in area that the existence of such would be in violation of the conditions of approval of this variance and will require the immediate removal. 2.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (February 14, 1995). 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terras of this resolution and on behalf of herself, herr heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of Februaiy, 1994 ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of February, 1993, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 \i STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of _, 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personiliy 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. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) NOTARY PUBUC _ day of , 199 before me a NotaryOn this _____________ Public within and for said county, personally appeared________________________________ _______________________known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 5 of 5 To: From: Date: Subject: Orono Planning Commission Members Mayor Callahan and Orono Councihnembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator 9 Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator ^ January 7, 1994 #1893 Christine Freeman, 2240 Shady wood Road - Variances - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances 1.Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) - Side yard setback variance. Required = Existing = Proposed = Variance = 10’ 16.7’ 6.7 ’ 3 ’ 3" or 33% 2.Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Review of hardcover. 0-75 ’ setback area = 3,750 s.f. Existing = 0% Proposed = 0% 75-250 ’ setback area = 11,094 s.f. Hardcover variance required. Allowed = 2,773.5 s.f. or 25% Existing = 3,106.4 s.f. or 28%* Proposed = 3,352.4 s.f. or 30.2% (addition of 286 s.f. of structure, removal of 40 s.f. of paved walk area) Variance = 578.9 s.f. or 5.2% Hardcover increase = 246 s.f. or 2.2% *Steve Jensen, the architect for the applicant, has confirmed that none of the landscape areas are underlain with plastic or geo-technic fabric (791 s.f. or 7.5% of landscape area adjacent to residence, 1,265 s.f. or 12% of rock area adjacent to garage). 3.Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Review of lot coverage Total lot area = 14,844 s.f. Allowed = 2,226.6 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,836 s.f. or 12.3% Proposed = 2,122 s.f. or 14.3% No variance required. Zoning File #1893 January 11, 1994 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Addendum/Hardcover Statement C - Plat Map D - Property Owners List E - Hardcover Fact Sheet F - Elevations G - First Floor Plan H - Survey Description of Request Applicant proposes a 10’ x 28Vi’ single story addition to the west side of the existing residence.A small portion of the addition will be placed over an existing paved walkway. Residence structure on the lot to the west has a cement stoop that extends 5 ’ from residence located approximately 6 ’ from the side lot line. There would be an approximate 12+’ access corridor for emergency vehicles if 10’ addition is approved. There seems to be a dispute betw«n the areas within the 75-250 ’ setback zone where lakeshore lots are defined at rip rap. Measurement is taken from rip rap line. Staff determines the lot area at approximately 14,844 s.f. The survey shows total lot area at 16,203 s.f. Staffs calculation has also considered the area beyond the survey line to the rip rap. It is not clear where the additional 1,400-b s.f. results from surveyor’s calculation. As already noted above, applicant’s architect has confirmed that 18.5% landscape area is not underlain with plastic. At this time of year, it is very difficult to confirm underliners and approval of any application mi. be based on the removal of any plastic or geo-technic fabric if discovered by Building Inspector upon final inspection. Staff has discussed this issue with the applicant and she stated that if an underliner is discovered by the inspector that she would complete removal. She too claims there is no underline beneath landscape areas. The proposed addition will not encroach an average lakeshore setback line. As applicant’s addendum notes, the stnicture will be single story and minimize visual impact on adjacent residence. Issues for Consideration 1.Can addition be reduced in width to minimize impact on side yard? 2.Review Exhibit G. Can entry addition be placed to street side of residence? What is undefined area to east of kitchen? Zoning File #m3 January 11, 1994 Page 3 3.Is this the only functional or reasonable option for an entry addition to residence. Options of Action Any recommendation of approval must include the disclaimer that if plastic or geo-technic fabric is found beneath landscape areas that the existence of such would be in violation of the conditions of approval of the variance and will require the immediate removal. CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.60 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) ^V.'1 ■«;: PROPERTY INFORMATION 2240 Shadywcod Road, Orono, MnSite Address Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) - - - - - Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired____________________^(month/year} I (^<JC)(do not) also own the, adjacent parcels of land. CITY OF OW FlUmCE OFFICE 1350200000 01 OEtl 175.C 0€CK R 175. C RECEiFf-THm YOU if28S050 cool ROl 712 10/22 Present use of property; Zoning District: residential other(specify) APPLICANT Phone (home) 377 Q335 Name Stev’e Jensen (Architect)Phone (work) 377- o335 Address: lll6 S. Vincent Ave City;Zip: 55405 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Christine Arko Freeman Phone (home) 471- ?622 Phone (work) 4?1 7^22 Address: 2240 Shadyv/ood Road City: Orono_ _ _ __—Zip: 5539^_ ___ description of request Estimated Construction Cost $ 20,000 To Accomodatej Describe request in details A low 1 story addition to an existi^ 2 story house (1^) 10* X 28*-6” for entry and study/dining,^ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage X Setback:Front ^ Side ___ Rear ___ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) hardship/description of unusual property conditions Describe undue hardship cr practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:^- - - -- see attached J (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALSAll of the informktioD must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your applicatxon considered complete 2.’-certified Propert^OraerrList of owners within ISO' (you must- obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3.Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4.Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include - -hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8% xll for reproduction). . . u 5, Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any c anges :r,rL°rf"fll^v'ari“%rets"(p^ovid: 1 Jopy 0%-xll”).Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provid ^ a. 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. 6. 7. Please the aboveTheApplicant and Property Owner must sign this applicatioiu remember that vour variance applica tion is not—complete —^ information has not been included._____ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information requxred or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff tile not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant f^Pe^es incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. . Owner's Signature Date —^_JllZ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 '^ays before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are , third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduiea review meetings of the Planning Comnisslon and Council. If an applicant unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building « Zoni g Office of this change prior to the meeting. 1 B Zoning Variation Request 2240 Shadywood Road, Orono Christine Arko Freeman Because of the narrow width of the site and the house location to the center of the site we must request a zoning variation to accomodate the indicated addition. From a functional standpoint the location shown on the drawings is the only reasonable possibility that will serve the owners' needs. We think the impact on the neighbors* property ( to the west ) is minimal as care was taken to protect any views from the house and the building height was kept to a minimum. Another relevant condition of the property is that the house to the West is within the required 10’ sideyard setback. « *. bay (^^RlAi Puf)jn *s NAVARRE AOON fOR VACATION RT C^^V^vE & TmE CRE a IION OF PC 234 an O 8 DAKOTA s 'i 1 1VINGST0^ * C^\ S'o 9C (ID (10) _5£ 50jS0 ■jrnrnoTr 7'’l»^J? <?l^- ?|(47)(<6) (45) (44)?(43) ►•/ 6 7- 6- 3 (MD(65)(64) (63) HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEH. . _0001 V Prop Aopr * 3 oceao ^wadyhood ro>u*OWNER NAME rv CHRlS’riNE ARKO FREEMANV J,TAXPAYER -.CHRISTINE ARKO FREEMANVADim 2i40 SHAOYHOOO ROV Vl :rKAYZATA HN 55591 Name JAMES b cothmaw etal #*; TAXPAYER-. ■.T- JAHES 6 COTHMANN ,? *;«MAME/AOOR V 221A SHAOYHOOO RO 25 AS 0125 SHAOYHOOO RO -«OHNER name' M M MEY JR A J R MEY TAXPAYER MlUlAM H MEY JR ■frt NAME/AOOR. ' 2256 SHAOYHOOO RO 55591 117-25 AS 0120 SHAOYHOOO RO e SATHER I K F SATHER'i <*E€R MAMEji’ J W SSiiitK • n. r »rinci , 1^.1 TiO<PAYEP : : ’j.JOHN A KATHLEEN SATHER ''^¥'>?VNAME/A00* ?^ :2EA5 SHAOYHOOO RO ,9 -7 HAYZATA MN 55591 .;;.^;;prop: aoor ■K >:^>;OIMER NAME ‘’.vV-* vf~- '^iiTAXPAYER ‘ -.‘jV total HATCH . . . . . . . . 001 00012 (.a; ♦* r'ACvV A- •• ‘ T 'O* -T" ^« .**r ^*■ PROPERTY OltlERS LIST58 17-117-25 A2 000202252 SHAOYHOOO RO RICHARO LEE KOKESH RICHARO L KOKESH 2252 SHAOYHOOO RO HAYZATA MN. 55591 I I i. . : •/ A•*.*•.V*'*u:.'y" v‘ IT .;):V58 17-117-25 A2 0005 02208 SHAOYHOOO RO 8 L BENNETT A M E BENNETT BARRY L A MARY ELLEN BENNETT •, 2208 SHAOYHOOO RO ... HAYZATA MN 55591 -..r;V\u,. •i ii!' •I ll -‘-f .‘Vi 58 17-117-iS AS 0126 02268; SHAOYHOOO RO DAK OHEN • OAVIO S OHEN 2268 SHADYHoOO RD HAYZATA MN 55591 *••**m 58 17-117-25 65 0129 ' 02257 SHADYHOOO RO 0 L SCHUOER A S H SCHUDER DANIEL L A SUSAN M SCHUOER nil MAXHELL APT 257 BOULDER CO . 60506 J;.•• • • f • «.; • i* «.• •X* ^ . '•-•.•••.i'. '•.■ •-.tv ;-- .f>• ;•*;V*' i,■' ♦ «••< V fv V' <>> I -A A , ■^4 *" t • .; I •\ ♦**, i 1* • •8 .4. yf rr *H* SB 17-117-25 62 0005 02226 SHAOYHOOO RO MICHAEL PIRICH TRUSTEE MICHAEL PIRICH 2226 SHAOYHOOO RO HAYZATA MN 5559138 17-117-25 65 0126 02266 SHADYHOOO RD EVELYN S TRUTNAU EVELYN S TRUTNAU 2266 SHAOYHOOO RO HAYZATA m 55591 58 17-117-25 65 0i27 02259 SHAOYHOOO RD H 0 SCHAFER ACE SCHAFE MICHAEL A CHRISTINA SCHAFER 2259 SHAOYHOOO RO HAYZATA MN 55591 •. .V>'•4 f t ' «i - ^ >' >r.'> •r-. v>, -.-f^ i ,j • ^ . .■ ; IS;’ .•t ii-iA i ;,..»r<' '.V''■•••'t;-v.r^ •?* V *. 6-.-.■sa is. •V -vt.Mr SCHAFER 58 17-117-Z5 65 0166 02229 SHADYHOOO RO JAY PIEPER SUSAN A TODD PIEPER 2229 SHADYHOOO RO HAYZATA MM 55591 . V. V *A ’‘*^1A '^• 1 ©R90ffl HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75'<175^250—'250 Existing H ardcover in Zone A. -X D.Sidewalk E.Patio /Deck 7 F.Landscape areas underlain BY PLASTIC SHEETING 6.Other .— x H ouse ^ — x LENGTH WIDTH ^y »*2* S.F. 7-Cf s.p. S.F. S.F. _ S.F. B.Garage -x c.Driveway x ------ 7^.^S.F. A C7 S.F. S.F ^S.F. ^ ^S.F. S.F. 19 ___ S.P. S.F. S.F _ S.F. S.F S.F Total H ardcover in Zone Total Property A rea in Zone X 100 '<4- S.F. •V S.F. A i [a}^L££^t B sV O-OAl' ".J o S lOC h«w 1 i*r. r <.i. •L '; f'! <*»»P^ iPWg (1)GKT^B-fes/>4»«ro<^ ~ JENSENa COMPANYlift lOUTH WMCCMT AM MN 9t40| FREEMAN HOUSE ■OAO MINMC90TA I I -=il L. '--_-_-_ -_-:-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ -_:-_-_ -_:-_-_ -, __ "--1.... _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_--,.-+ _-_-_--:---11_:::::E:==IE3E3JE:3::.:=::::;;::::==::i ___ _J,. __ "\ I I ------,_ , . • -----.. ·- ' l. ... JENSEN &COMPANY FREEMAN HOUSE --�MMO OIIDNO.MHmiamTa ......... ,� ------- "° Ollft L '°' ------------------------- ..,.,... �·-·--a#t'I� SHEEt a, 1- auKVbi runt \^nria rrceman ^0-00 ^\ DESCRIPTION: Lot Rt Block 1 WILEY'S PARK, City of Orono, Hennepin, County, Minnesota o Denotes Iron Monuments X Denotes Concrete Nall set in Blacktop. Total Lot Area s 16,2034— Sq. Ft. 1 hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 3rd day of May,, 1993. •Mils I (we) Adjacent Property Ovmers' Acknowledgement Form X- w «« #<1- [print name (s)] (print address/ improvement or proposed use of the "also referred to as Land Usehave reviewed the plans for proposed im^ property located at Application No. a..*rt/T 4-hi«; acknowledgement/ I (we) a.m I (we) understand that in disapproval of the property or use (are) not asked to declare 1 \ha^ I (we) am (are) aware of but merely to confirm proposed neighbor's project or use the improvement plans and that tne pr p requires Council approval. Property Owner property Owper Date ***************** I (we) [print najne(s)l [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed asTa property located at -------------------------^• Application No. -- - - I ,„e, understand that in -ecutin, this acKnowledgea^^^^^^^^^^^ (are) not asJced to declare-^pproval or ^^ but merely to confirm proposed neighbor's project or us the improvement plans and that tne p e requires Council approval. Date property owner Date PropaJ^ty Owner xy you hav4 any “^t^^renfs’^" o “the Bu”"aing1 bnfnro^i** “t^eaVt 10 da% prior to the scheduled meeting date. I (we)^— — [print address] irinx name(s)] ro^P-tVTolafed Application No. ///^ -* I (we) understand that in ®^®^’^^''^?33pprotal''of^the^ (are) not as)ced to declare Council that I (we) am (are) aware of but merely to confirm proposed neighbor's project or use the improvement plans and that tne prop requires Councii approval. foperty Owner Date Property Owner Date ^^,^t*^t*■k^k^k******•*^^ I (we) [print name(s)I of __[print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed to as Land Dse property located at- - - --- - - - - - -- - - Application No.-------- ■hhis ac)cnow 1 edgement/ I ^we)I („e) understand ^hnt in executing th.sa^^ (ara) not asked I (ve) am 1««'J"'*” but merely to tL proposed neighbor ’s project or u the improvement plans and that tne p v requires Council approval. Date property Owner Property Owner Cate xe you hav4 s^ubr/t yrui*cor,nfs ^to "the BuTri", at^east 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting a e. of & Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Fora. , . Llic i, .. ( Fin'iU^ of ^3^/- I (we) / IILh . V----------^-----[print address]- [print name(s)] have reviewed the plans Land Use property located at JlU/)/ea^4L. Application No. JML:'^ j A.U 4- •?« pxecutinq this acknowledgement, I (we) am I (we) understand that in ex disaooroval of the property or use (are) not asked to declare Council^that I (we) am (are) aware of but merely to confirm proposed neighbor's project or use the improvement plans and that P requires Council approval. **9 ^ ■LaJlJL> CFxyi Property Owner / - / - ^ y Date Property Owner ****************** Date ^^****************** I (we) [print name(s)] have reviewed the plans for the proposed as“ "n1 a‘se property located at --------------------------- Application No. --------,* I (we) understand that in ®*®=“^^^|gapp*otal"of^thl*p^^^^« (are) not asked f'^®”"^P^f/city Council that I (we) am ®‘?'*pge but merely to confirm “ I proposed neighbor's project or the improvement plans and that the prop requires Council approval. Property Owner Date property Owner Date « you hav4 -V ^rut^^rents'^to"thrBu ”rln/‘ ^^i’n“off?« a"xe*e“to 4a% prior to the scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Fo™ [print nanie(s)] have reviewed the plans for property located at Application No..cation wo# 4£jt3L —•^ . • ^ 4-Vii^ Acknow 1 adganiGnt/ I (wg) I (we) understand that in disapproval of the property or use l:iTL";e\r" confirm ^»r the City Councal^khat^IJ^J.^ the improvement plans and that the p requires Counc^approval. Date Date //i/f 3 Proper I (we) [print name(s)l [print address] ^^ the have reviewed the plans for the proposed to as Land Ose property located at------------------------- Application NO------------•acknowledgement, I (we) am I (we) understand that in disapproval of the property or use (are) not asked to declare^pprovel ^ ^ am (®”> rent° pl^Ts ^°nd1hVt“tL%roposed neighbor's project the improvement plans ai requires Council approval. Date Property Owner Date coperty owner have any information that may assist *'•'« Bui^l-"’ »If yo^ have any enhmit vour comments to tne oni*nro«ice ariMsVto"da%Vrior to the scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property Owners' Actnowledgement^Fom. of [print improvement or proposed use of the * “also referred to as Land Use I (we) [print name (s)] have reviewed the plans ^ ^ property located at A9///)^ Application No. . .4-1-11* c; Acknow 1 edQsniGnt# I 1 (we) understand that in j^g^pnroval of the property or use (are) not as)ced to declare °.„„eii'that I (we) aa (are) aware of but merely to confirm Crty Councrl^th^^.^^^^^.^„3P the improvement plans and that the p P requires Council approval. Date Propert yawner Property Owner Date ^*****..********* I (vTfe)[print name (s)] have reviewed the plans for the proposed tV »““anl Use property located at -------------------------------------- Application HO. --------.3C.cnowledgement, I (we) am I (we) understand that ®*®'“3^disapproval of the property or use (are) not as)ced to Cauncirt^^^ I (we) am <»”> but merely to confirm proposed neighbor's project or the improvement plans and that tne p P requires Council approval. Date property Owner Date property Owner the review of IK you hav4 any submit youi*co^ent.''^to "the Building t Zoni*n^“of£i« al^«st iS"da% prior to the scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form % . « ' i /m M t: I (we) T)^nr> !/-Vg>"’-gs [print name(s)] of .AjJi >u'c*/9 (^'^3 •■r.t-d AcZ [print address] I print rrrpe?.^^To1afe: Application NO.^elcnowledgement, 1 («e) am I (we) understand that in disapproval of the property or use (are) not asked cTty Council that I (we) am (are) a„a« of requires Council approval. 4. property Owner A LOLA. ')l- Property Owner ************ Date Date ************************** I (we)(print name(s)i - have reviewed the plans for the proposed j'rre? to as Land Dse property located at -------------------------- ■ ’ I („e) understand that in ®’'®=““”|3tpproval of thi property or use (are) not asked to declare-approval or pp^ ^ <r"\*^‘“iect‘'or “se requires Council approval. [print address] property Owner Date >roperty Owner Date : 4-Vie review of ly you hav4 any information that may "he Building a iSn^fnroiite a\^^“a?t^tr4a^ya “”ol\‘:Vh/”.ch.duled meeting date. I Adjacent Property Owners’ Acknowledgement Pora % I (we)qU\A S (print name(s)l (print address] ^ro^e^ty TolateS "" Application No.. ■ av®rutino this acknowledgementr I (we) am I (we) understand that in e.disapproval of the property or use (are) not asked to declare appro^l j („e) am (are) aware of but merely to confirm f«/^e City Council the improvement plans and that tne pr p rBcjuircs Couocil approval*•^ //' Property Owner ****♦*********’******* Date **#ii** **♦♦**<(***♦ I (we) (print naitie(s)] (print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed oL property located at --------------------------' Application No. ------_•, i . .^hi« aclcnow 1 edceinent» I (we) I (we) understand that disapproval of the property or use (are) not asked /Tit„ "^ ^ ‘*'^*ct”or' usebut merely to ''that Je proposed neighbor's project or uthe improvement plans and that tne p p requires Council approval. Date Property Owner Date Property Owner vwa review „ you have any :,\r/t y^t^co^en^^" o "he auilding a ^^'’least 10 da% prior to the scheduled meeting date. ________________________________ >f^. ^^Z.^A^.jyy.li’J Jyy/^ A/II 'iulA^/Pa^h? j^ . '*-■--______________________________________________ _Ay4^_____________ ' /^ y^^tvA___ {^/A^ Y7A-__________" I ft“- I <i -i ! Mjacent Property Owners' Actncwledge^ent Pom. /l [print name(s)l rrrpe^r/Toiafei Application No. /^3—‘ of -J%.___ (print address] .catron No. ,c3cnowledgen.ent, I (we) am I (we) understand that in "istpproval of thi property or use (are) not as)ced to declare Council that 1 (we) am but merely to confirm proposed neighbor s projec the improvement plans and that requires Council approval. PropGJ^'ty Owner REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 2/9/94 y' Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed: <51^ S' ^ ITEM NO.: //■% Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #1896 Allan and Judith Klotsche, 2760 Shadywood Road - Variances - Public Hearing Additional Exhibit L - Applicants ’ Letter of 2/7/94 Brief Review of Application Applicants seek approval of an average lakeshore setback variance and hardcover variance within the 75-250 ’ setback area for a proposed two story addition to be constructed at the lakeside or northwest side of the existing residence. The stricture will encroach no further into the average lakeshore setback than the existing residence shown at 8’. Applicants propose a 1.1% or 218 s.f. increase in hardcover within the 75-250 ’ setback area. The hardcover variance is magnified with the exclusion of the area of the driveway easement (1,872 s.f.) from the lot area as required by code. The driveway easement serves residences to immediate east and has existed for several years. The applicants have provided a list of hardships and unusual findings with both the addendum to the original application. Exhibit B. and most current submittal. Exhibit L. They are summarized as follows: 1. 3. 4. There is no hardcover within the 0-75 ’ setback area totaling some 10,380.8 s.f. in area. The house although constructed in the ’50s meets all required setbacks except for the average lakeshore setback. The addition will not encroach any further into the setback area than the existing residence. The new addition has been designed to minimize obstruction of property to the north. The neighbor to north has submitted a written notice advising of the approval of the proposed addition. The large pine trees within the lakeshore yard have already impacted the neighbor’s views to the lakeshore and the proposed addition falls well behind the tree. The neighbor to the south receives no impact. Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 2 February 9. 1994 Zoning File #1896 5.It is impossible to make any hardcover removals of the existing improvements within the rear yard portion of the property because of the layout of the house and sloping topography, the easement to the east, the treed higher elevations to the west and the street to the south. It is difficult to make any changes in retaining walls adjacent to driveway areas because of the potential of erosion and undermining of driveway area. The Planning Commission accepted the hardships but felt because of the size of the two story addition and the fact that removals consist of nonstrucmral hardcover that hardcover remain at the existing level of 31.1%. Please review the minutes of the January 18, 1994 meeting for more background on the discussion of that review. Members did ask the applicants to consider the removal of specific improvements but each was found to have a major impact on existing elevations or use of the limited rear yard area based on the sloping topography. The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the proposed improvement plan for the property but conditioned approval on hardcover remaining at 31.1 % within the 75-250 ’ setback area and directed applicants to provide an amended hardcover removal plan for Council s review. Planning Commission members further added that any improvements scheduled for removal would have to be completed by the final inspection of the Building Inspector for the proposed new structural improvements. Please review Exhibit L, applicants’ letter of February 7th that asks that the original proposal be presented for Council ’s consideration as additional hardcover removals were not acceptable or feasible. The enclosed staff memo dated January 10, 1994 will provide greater detaU and background on the original proposal presented to the Planning Commission. Options of Action Approval as proposed; or Approval as amended; or Denial. COUNCIL A CTION REQUESTED: Council is asked to provide conceptual direction to the staff so that an appropriate resolution can be prepared for action by the Council at their February 28th meeting. TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator January 10, 1994 SUBJECT:#1896 Allan and Judith Klotsche, 2760 Shady wood Road - Variances - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) - Review of lot coverage. Lot area = 29,014.1 s.f. (total lot area = 30,886.1 s.f. - 1,872 s.f. of driveway easement area) Allowed = 4,352.1 s.f. ov 15% Existing = 3,280.7 s.f. or 11.3% Proposed = 4,033.6 c=.f. or 13.9% Section 10.22, Subd. 1(B) - Average lakeshore setback variance Existing = 8’ Proposed = S’ No further encroachment of average lakeshore setback line Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover A.0-75 ’ setback area = 10,380.8 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 0 Proposed = 0 B.75-250 ’ setback area = 18,633.3 s.f. (total area = 20,505.3 s.f. - 1,872 s.f. of easement area) Allowed = 4,658.3 s.f. or 25% Existing = 5,799.3 s.f. or 31.1% Proposed = 6,017.3 s.f. or 32.2% Variance = 1,359 s.f, or 7.29% Hardcover increase = 218 s.f. or 1.1% (752.8 s.f. proposed addition, 534.8 s.f. of paved area and plastic underliner) Section 11.03 - Definition 24 - Lot area, minimum. Lot area cannot include vehicular or pedestrian easement areas. Zoning File #1896 January 10, 1994 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Addendum - Hardcover Statement C - Property Owners List D - Plat Map E - Survey F - Neighboring Property Owners Acknowledgement Forms G - Elaine Pagonis Letter, Property Owner to West H - 0-75’ Hardcover Inventory 1(1-2) - 75-250’ Hardcover Inventory Sheet and Site Plan J - Floor Plan K - Elevation Description of Request Applicants propose a two story lakeside addition to the residence. A portion of the structure will encroach the average lakeshore setback by 8’ and will extend no further than the existing structure, review Exhibit E. The neighbor to the west has submitted a letter approving the proposed two story addition. Exhibit G. Hardcover excesses exist on the property. Improvement results in an overall 1.1% increase of hardcover. Applicants propose 752.8 s.f. of strucmral improvements and the removal of 534.8 s.f. of nonstructural improvement. Lot coverage is proposed at 13.9%, review Exhibit I-l. Note deck areas designated as 5, 7, 8, 9 and 15 are included in structural coverage as deck structures are 6’ above existing grade. The 75-250’ setback area has been adjusted by staff to exclude the area of the driveway easement at 24’x78’. In review of the City’s files, it is not clear the year that the house was originally constructed. Staff would guess some time in the late ’50s. The former owner installed a 12 x21’ entry addition to existing residence in 1973. All major construction was completed prior to current lakeshore development standards. Property is served by both municipal sewer and water. Statement of Hardship (Review Exhibit B) Applicants have presented a very complete hardship statement. In reviewing unusual property conditions, staff would add the following findings: Zoning File #1896 January 10, 1994 Page 3 A.There is no hardcover within the 0-75’ setback area at 10,380.8 s.f. Total hardcover is at 20.7%. B.There is no additional contiguous lands available. Issues for Consideration 1. 2. Structural coverage is not in excess proposed at 13.9% (allowed 15%). 752.8 s.f. of structural hardcover is proposed where excesses exist in the 75-250 ’ setback area. Should applicants be asked to consider additional structural hardcover removals? Review Exhibits 1(1 and 2). Please refer to Exhibit K, note elevation reveals an access door providing access to the grade level storage area. Applicants must be asked if additional hardcover improvements are required at entrance to door. The application submittals did not include a floor plan for the lower level so it is difficult to discern what type of use will be made of this portion of structure. Applicants should provide clarification. Options of Action A.Approval as proposed or amended. Approval recommendation must include Ae condition that hardcover removals scheduled for removal must be completed prior to the final inspection for new construction (during winter months owners are allowed to complete the removal by final inspection rather than at the time of the footing inspection). OR B.Denial. Members are asked to refer to Section 10.08 for the necessary findings for denial. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATIOIt. Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 2760 Shadvwood Road. Qrono. Minnesot-a #lS"96 ($225.00) ' CITY OF DROHO FIRARCF OFFICE 1350200000 01 CEH 22-5.00 CHECK n. 225.00 RECEIPT-THM YOU aiymo cool ROI T09:C 12/17/f Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) 21-117-23-24-0040 Attach legal description to application if not n-ifomiiT-ari esiirvev Tract A, Registered Land :>urvey 1196, Files ofincluded on required survey. Registrar of Titles, County or Hennepin Date Property Acquired rrinsina in 1994-Marchrmonth/year; I |86^(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property:y residential ____other(specify)___________ Zoning District: lr -IC _____________ APPLICANT Phone (home) (612)471-0331 N€une Allan J. & Judith A. Klotsche Address: Shadywood Road,_____ Phone (wor)c) (612) 333-3182 Orono City: fWay7at*a—nwi 1 i nijl Zip:55391 ONNER (if different than applicant) IJame Bernard F. Feltes ____ Phone (home) (305) 942-9989 Phone (work)NA Address: 521 N. Riverside Drive Citv:Ponpano Beach, FL Zip: 33062 DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 70,000.00- - - - - (750 sq ft-ground floor) Describe request in detail : Addition of approx. 1500 sg.ft-2 story addition tO_ tjig^hyne-Addition of master suite/storage on living level and worlcroom/storage on VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear y Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:- - - - - Please see attached adaehdum_ _ _.. —- - -______ (atitiach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be gt1hn^^by the application deadline date in order for yonr application to be considered completes 1.^ Completed Application Form 2._jrCertified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must'^obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3.y Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4.Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8%"xll" for reproduction). 5.NA Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll"). 6» ^ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%"xll”). 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 your variance application is not complete if the above infonnation 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 -,y original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her 3cnowledge. Apolicant's Signature Date ^ OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this recwest-^\r'>/7 Owner's Signature ate Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning CossRlsslon 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. Klotsche 2760 Shadywood Road Orono/ Mn jx crs iT» ft# 1 d O . ^ hardcover variance proposal 1)The original building is constructed with few options for deletion of existing hardcover primarily because of driveway easement over which we have no control 2)Making adjustments to the back yard portion of the property is ineffective due to the layout of the house and garage on the prcperty, the easement on the east/ the natural, treed hill on the west and the street on the south 3)All areas supported by retaining walls cannot be altered or it would underinine the driveway areas 4)The substantial front and side yards are well beyond the reguired side set” backs and the 75* zone A setback and with the exception of the addition to the north, will not be altered in any way 5)The proposed addition is a logical, natural and unobtrusive use of dead space 6)We are willing to give up all areas underlain with plastic,444.8Sg.ft, at a considerable maintenance increase 7)we cure willing to give up a 2' cement walkway at 90 sq. ft 8)With the deletion of the plastic underlayment areas and the cement walkway area, the hardcover will increase by a mere 1%, including the proposed addition AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK VARIANCE 1)Angle of the addition was chosen to minimize obstruction to the north 2)The large pine tree already obstructs the northern neighbor's view and the proposed addition falls behind it 3)Neighbor to the south is not impacted 4)Consideration has been given to keeping the integrity of the house and yard intact with as little disturbance to tlie current setting as possible <vs4.-n-ii7-a 24 0009, ;.V\ PM)I> AODR 0t77S 4i$HAOYHOOD RO0»«ER. NAME u J,,l H riEXSCNHACKER,;{5*;i.yA><pAYE^t .V JOSEPH.r -fleischhacker and.i/ NAME/ATOR ' HARQUERITE FLEISCHHACKERL,HEM4EPIN COUNTY PROPERtV J»iFO^TION SYSTEHPROPERTY 0I#«RS LIST ’ .m 27.7S SHADYHOOD RO5SSSX , '* V '■50 21-117-25 24 0021 ^ ’ AODR , OOdS# ; ADDRESS UNASSZGNEO if.:* ,iO»t«R MAW. - I H FIEISCHHACKER . if-i TAXPAYER /I JOSEPH .F FLEISCHHACKER '^'‘'•''•aMAW/ADOR V *775 SHADYHOOD RD : : 'E)(CEL8X0R HN 55551 I V l t*Tf maw $ KEftCTlt SEVERXNSON 0042 RO I :‘fet*^AYER 'V KENNETH SEVERXNSON V ,^;LV naw /aoor . 2000 shaoynood ro .■ ii.'fUrf?’■A. _ EXCILSXOR M4 55551 ’a-ll7-25 24 0042 V--. cXCELSZOI V-iJ^4r>v. v^- ‘ii- v;-I■:i lwyxr - .v; 50/,21-lL.------------ . MAME K PAUL R U/TT V . ^T>AXPAYER; -,/ FAUt R NUTT ;.^rrNAHE/A0DR 1720 COMSTOCK LA 1 tv i ' ' FLYMOUTH W 55447 TAXPAYER •TOTAL BATCH NAHE/AObR »»'►A < 000 00012 : . ,..vy ‘ .V f*V • :.i •!7/.‘••V ••' J «K I f -U .,;- Vfc. ..%■*• ■< *.✓«■, I r.1*4*150 21-117-25 24 0014 .00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO DAVID C COOK DAVID C COOK 400 H HILLSIDE DR HAYZATA m 55591 * •, .■“• I' i •■ ••• SO 21-117-25 24 0040 -'• / 02740 SHADYHOOD RD . BERNARD F FELTES ••BERNARD F FELTES 1521 7TH ST S HOPKINS MN 55545 'I - 50 h-117-^5 24 0054 02705 SHADYNOOO RD T J CASEY i S D CASEY THOMAS J CASEY 2705 SHADY HOOO RD EXCELSIOR m 55551 . •7 SO 21-117-25 24 0045 j; 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGWO JOHN P THIMHESH JOHN P. t PATTI J THIMMESii ' •' 5450 FLORIDA AVE N MPLS MN 55427 4.* .J 'x'. .’i' •i-/ V^- 4 *• * i-' .^0 •I / •..< ^ f #.• 1*' •Vl': •*:;C- .‘ ' *4 N I ' ., •* ' S ! •-. :-f '■■ REPORT NO PAGE50 21-117-25 24 002000050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED THOMAS J CASEY ETAL THOMAS J CASEY 2705 SHADYHOOD RD EXCELSIOR MN 55551 50 21-117-25 24 0041 02700 SHADYHOOD RO M R MITTMER ASK MITTMER H R HITTMER ASK MITTMER 2700 SHADYHOOD RO EXCELSIOR MN 55551 * 'i. 50 21-117-25 24 0059 02771 SHADYHOOD RO R 0 A M J OGLE RICHARD G A MARLYS J OGLE 2771 SHADYHOOD RO EXCELSIOR m 55551 50 21-117-25 24 0045 02740 SHADYHOOD RO ELAINE T PAGONIS ELAINE T PAGONIS 2740 SHADYHOOD RO ' HAYZATA 194 55591 _ M:.,.-XM. r •' : ■;.,V •>•V *•'.■' ■>V ■••■V ;‘ V- •'v iV »•’.(Ml . * <f i ‘ 1-r.,-.T-. r . Vif't r i.*II *.»'i, * .•. >74. . 'll i.:-' V » . Mi’» *• 7 • >, » • . * . ^ V >V - *•;*■*; ,*u ^:(y* ; •' *" : . ' \ ‘-V'‘ : • .‘.n:'-:■' '■■ •' i i* ‘X^ -.'J- •• i‘ A.v>,r;?i •• 1. . y . I. : I' i. ‘ -*. >• REPORT NO0»MERS LIST 4 ** # ,PAGE•»•: •.*5 V*f •••,'. #; »•. 'B •-•,4 ' *; ;/f •*.; “. •.••*? • * ' • *. - ',1 •A *?*•. ‘V.*.* -f '•; *.I* * •■>v:.• •*i ■ . *t.**i .■■>’•/•\l •« *{ :u*^ ...• * M *f ' . V• * ■'■'V ‘ > v*^. T *4*'‘ ; ■•' • •. ‘*-7; vi'V # .•.!.•$• j.* . * ’ • ’• • . • I ’• »■-"i ' '4 ■“ '* ‘t-*’ -i ‘■'f*-'-. iTT •r ' .' • :>>:.i-V :j *i! ’ •• •■•• ■ !■' . I '‘W' • •' ■ y- v^>•;>.’:’■>! • >‘!^ iit'-Jcv: . -V .f: X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORFtATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEFWEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KN0NLED6E AND BELIEF. ^ ^ I J >t/l . BY MwqaDATE' -V ‘- 'V M- ‘ . ,. i.y\ *.< • . 4^ ^ •4'- ;■ •j V.^; M.**. . ..................... . ■. >.;'y ;V I >••'r.'eTWc: • -‘■■N ' I-' V- ‘ . . J >1 •-ii>> •• *''[■'i :.*'•*4*^r *<■•?*♦* ¥>,lv V ; ^ » » / !> *9^' >*1 ) 2 ' { 51)( .) 5, l l) " II ,, . • • t ' , .... . . . . . . . . , . . . . . " :.. ♦ •• . ·•.. . .. ,e(49 LO ('5 .•:· . . . . --..,__ --..... .,..--·---------· . . }I A \ .,.. \ ............................ � \ .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . • • • ♦ •••. . . . . . . . \ I >. -.-. I . I, I .... I ...... .. . .. . . . I .. •0D ". • i \-. 'a -\ =-- Comer of Deck ( Point Nearest to Lake ) ----------- ----::1-----LAKE MINNETONKA c::�DINARY HIGH..,. -c...... , - - _ • � ra __ -1\ -WATER --....... -,.., --E '-1 - - -,, ,, --1 ' L 929 4 -----'/ --, .. ' • :✓ l'/\ ---: I \ - -106.35" ---�----1�"' ,-----\ ..._2e.s5._.,,,, \ ' ' ... I \ I I I I/ a-� , ..._,o -I -LOT SURVEY • REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 196LOT A ORONO,MNESOTA --75 " Setback HENNEPIN COUNTY From 0.H.W. -I I • 1� �1 la 11 I , ( Point Ne I I I c.,..,�:I o--= - --------· , I Corner o1 ; ' __ ,,...fPACt 73' 1 ;-(#m.------r ... e lf11 .ff O• !!I I _I ". � _ 34.88' / 19.Gr .,- /� I : \ Pro� I , -152':"89 SF .I --2" CONC. SDWIC. ,-..., '-:::. ... _, I } 41' ,.,.er M. : --�p-� � \_ --- -= Comer of House ·j,ooc; otc11t �, t Point Neorest to Lake ) 3"Wl0[ CONC. PATIO · (OUTSIDE OF WOOO DEbfJ 56.50' I --i \ Addition � •• -, :a \ 7.HOUSE... ' ,, -•• WI[)( WOOO STAl,,_Y �•o· ' ,, .I f""..._...:::�:_ ,, ----= , ,.. �,=:::.. rRET. WAlL ,-:::....-::_ 72• f ,,_;, M5.90'1 � - - - 1 2.00· _....... ' ,"\ ----!_A tt,· l( \b �, � -�, 90' I -::i-57• ��--,. R£T. "' GARAGE ) . • • IRON MONUME NT FOUND o tRON MONUMENTSET :orner of House ---, Point Nearest to Lake ) �I --=:---l"Ac•: � ,<t- � > WOOO DECK-�"' \ I t �. ')/ �,_;;-, __ 30.20·--,,i -�'v"' \4.o ----c0NC'C�--7W 0 -- \ � ,,r-C J � 0 ·01 � E.'Np.'( r.HA1N � � � I /of\\" I -.,, • L�K � ----�--1 FENC 17s°oo'-DRIVEWAY EASEMENT PER -• --- • - DOCUMENT NO. 998572 - SHADYWOOD ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 19) rr :*I: (' ••• �'"' � � � -•· I • -'�,-,�--� . :' � .'.·. i.; -u • --1� u • f, ···;, :; • ' � . .. �t -�-··. Ill(' • ' ,... -LANDSCAPE ROCK W/P LASTlC BARRIER I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS Pl.AN. SURVEY OA AEPOAT WAS PAEPA�EO BY ME OA UNDER MY OIAECT SUPERVISION ANO THAT I AM A DUI Y AEGISTEREO LANO SURV£"ral u�,10ER THE LAWS C, • THE ST ATE OF MINNESOTA -s-.� /. OAT£l/-l,i-93 AEGISTAATION NO-: �;l 7 7 ,, L I • ·J� I .. -- -t,ll ,., -°"' !.> ,...;:,.� t/1- aa..- PRW C)O•Cll P.JC SUltl,fT.., cw MA Scale : t" = : � ....... n -·- Adjacent Property Owners* AcJcnowledgement Form I I//AL7JI/S £ U',r7/fe^______of — [print nameCsTj [print address] % have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at .^760 tWAciva'OO^ Rb also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _• I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not aslced to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor s project requires Council approval. /}/^ <p?6perty Owner jJa^) KJ. Date __ _ _> Property Owner D'*'te Z;?//4. /93. n— / ^^^j^*****-**'**********<k***A^* ■********'** I (we) (print na:Tie(s)](print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or property located at __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _referred to as Land Use Application No._ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (are) not asked to declare “approval or disapproval of t e p p y but merely to confirm for the City C ancil *hat I («e)_ am (are) a„ar= of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor^^pro^t or requires Council approval.^ll It o Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have anv information that may assist the ‘*'*3 ”13®^ this Land use Appl-.ation, please submit your ‘ zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheouled meeting date. FIIPO-hTLhNTIi: SECUR. tel : l-407-T.b^:-40yl Jan 07,94 ___13 : rH No . 015 P .0^ Sent Prcpertr^®”'' ii<3iraaSa5*enrTOT«C\ Q f\ I (we)PA60^n^ 1 print nam«(?) i ot ^ (print addr«8B ad ufld of th© to aB Land Usej^ave reviewea ----------^ property Xooated at-----(^r££2 Applloatlon NO. jjLjk--.oknownag*"'®"''' ^ *” I (we) understnnd that in flisanotoval of the property or uae , not asited to declare approve nh»t I (we) am (ate) aware o(are) not asKeo v ^Council that I («e) a ' , ^ or use but merely to confirm i proposed neighbor e pr 3 the improvement ' requires Councxl approvel.\, , xJ ^ ■jfopertyOwner Data .Ml Property Owner ^g^*^****#******#*©**^** Data **♦♦♦©****'*'*•** I (wo)[print n»me(9)l bav, reviewed the plan, for the propo.ed ^"P-^-rr^rerfeT" ^"‘h.^d b.'e proporty located at —^r'rSi- - -- Application No.- - -• .eknowledgement, I (we) am I (we) understand that in of the property or use (are) not eeked to ■!«=• c'ltv council'that I (we) am ‘***’ *”“* °* but merely to confirm for proposed neighbor'e proje the Improvement plans and that the p requiroB Council approvale [print address) / J._ ^porry Owner Date Property owner Date i ..a. ♦'ho rlfcv in the review of If you have any information **’•*-omments to the Building 6 this land uae hPP^^‘'**^^^''l,^B®prior to the^ scheduled meeting date,toning Office ot least 10 days prior a • * e n ^ EURO-hTLPNTIC ‘TECUR.TEL:l-d07-3b$-4091 ^- p 11 IMP I Jan 07.94 13:19 No.015 P.Ol & .«•••>>0*>- F'xCN : ►a.OTSCHE. ALLAH & JUDITH PHONE 1*0. : 612 471 0331 06 1994 ii;33AH P02 £'cAi^£. 'T P/i6oAJi% NAME .S(s4^.^cuty^cl,, ADDRESS RE I KLOTSCHE VARIANCE #1896 2760 SHADYWOCD RDAT; LOCATION TO; City of Orono Planning Commiasion/Council I have reviewed the proposed variance request regarding the cxjnstructlon of a two story addition to the property listed above# and find that this change to that property meets with my approval. Not only do I find thlat. 1 the renovation to this property will erV>ance the area# I also believe that the hardcover and average lakeshore setback variances will pose no difficulty to me or ny adjacent property. I support this project. V- hardcover CALCULA^OHJ^ORiCSHHEr smACxzoNit (CMCLB WE)75-250' 250-500' soo-ioofl' ExisTiwa Hawdcovcr in Zone * A* * House !• Oaracs c.D rivehay LSNSTH •X •X hioth • / ’ I.F. S.R S.R. S.F. S.F. S.P StFt sK **1 r.**, \ Dt. SlOEWAU -X S.F. S.F. Sf Pi 9 E.Eat Jo/. DECK F.LANOSeAPB UNOERUIK FUSTIC* " SMEtriNO ii Other -X « X • -X Total Karocovir m Zone - Total Property A rea ‘zx Zoks E3 •• • • io.3fln.fl__X 11 8»F» S.F. S.F, S»F» S.F. S.F. S.F _2 ___..... m (3 a' HAilDCOVER CAlXUlATIOH.i<ORK^. SCTIACX ZONE! <CtRCl£ ONE) cf-75'(^^5^2^500'500*101 Exzstino Kanocover in Zone A.• H ouse 33.20 ■1^8.8 '*H. Ret. Hall 56*.' * X * 1' Total KAHseaviN m Zone .w/Or1veway>.1n .Easement Total Pao oui ty Area '|n Zone *56 • 5.799.3 €.603.3 30/175.3 5«F* (l) leneth«a WniTH • « ; •' •4 4 — X .26.20 ••• * _ •104 .R •28.53*X.. 26.39 .752.89 •\• A — 3 •__ X .25'*75 / / Patlo/Deck *•• ••••M • • •11 Avg. • __X L • 24 ’ Avq.•264 • • • 8* • •• *• _ X . •• 6 Avg. • •48 4-a. gARAfif • — X .28.2 ■1000•c.D.1VWAY W Avg. • — X «36.4 Avg':.1456 (Driveway in Ease»nent)_67* Avg Patlo/Deck - 15* • _ X « 12 Avg. 19* (804.0 ) m 9?9 • •• 0,. SlQEWALJC * 2 — X «49 •f 9tn _ Patio/Oeck iO ^ X «32-1 ■ Patio/Deck • 4 •X —4 m ifi E.!at (0/. 39.3*. • _ X 3 ’.•■.1179 * F.Liimseof _ 4.5'— X _O l•illm ■(39.3 1 AREAS WpOUJUH 4, ^ X 12' Avo. • -Mft 1 FUMTie • .KECTIW 10- Avg. • _ X * m 30' Avo. • •• ■(300 1. • • • 1.5^ m _ X • • 45’ •.. •f67.Sl Steirway .. - e.Oth »^-X as*11s-•1f S.Fi (2) N S.F. (18) Proposed S.F. S.F. (16) S.F S.F S.F (i7r- (3)/ (4) (4A)Not Included S.F. S.F. S.F S.F S.F (5)4 (6)Delete w/Prop Addition (7)4 (8) .-f (9)+ S.F.(10)Delete w/Prop Addition S.F.(11)Delete w/Prop *Addtion S.F.(12)Delete w/Prop 'Addition S.F.(13)Delete w/*Prop Addition S.F.(14) 1:1: S S.F. S.F. LSJ (as. shown) Without D/W in Easement m 5799.3 20.505.3_ X IQQ ■ 28.3 % (Existing) +752.89 S.F. for Proposed Addition -534.80 S.F. for areas 6, 10, 11, 12, 13 6017.39 S.F. + 20505.3 x 100 = 29.3% (Proposed) ------106.35 ’f I LOT SURVEY REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 1196 LOT A ORONO, MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY ■75' Setback From O.H.W.I I I 2*sowK. 41- Lake ) / 8 , 34.88* Proposed 752.09 SF, Addition /^-^o-__ / WOOD DECK T 3'WIOe CONC. PATIO ' (OUTSlOe OF WOOD OEDf) 56.50 ‘* ^40' HOUSE 0 f\5.90" 2.00* \ 3^.90 I garage 4; -® •" .WOOO DECK 6 .\>^oo.^ r n-hk®II y—4* WIDE WOOO STAIRWAY hI M RET. WALL c ^1.90* . o, -'~~>^WOOO DECK 1 SZ. 100 WALKWAY I [| FENC L'^1.^175.00*- RET. WAL DRIVEWAY EASE document no . * SHADYWOOD ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 19) L ANDSCAI PLASTIC INDICATES AREAS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PL REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT -tr tnr: ?• C5,V VV“ O /7?^€ -3/Oe /^Wx* •J *i •. » to**v„ . CB IPoit-W’ brand fa* tranamMiai memo 7W1 f ««»••••» I rib r Ofe Pi V . il I ^ ..I'll Ana Juai Xloitoht 1710 Bhmdyirooa Rota tfaysAta, Ml&naaeta 9»39i February 7, 1994 city of Orono p.0. Bok 66 Crystal Bay, mn 55323 Attantlon: Jeanne Mabuath Re? Variance Application Zoning File <|ib96 Bnar Ms, Mabuath: responae to the Planning Commission Notice dated January 27, 1994 which you forwarded to us. That notice requested that we submit a revised site plan and hardcover inventory reflecting the removal of an additional 210 square feet Of hardcover improvements from our property located at 2760 Shadyvood Road. Please be advised that we are unable to remove additional hardcover as requested by the Planning Commission. Acoordlngly, we hereby request that our original variance plan (as presented to the Orono Planning Commlecion on January 18f 1994) bo presented to the orono city Council at its February 14th mddtlng• Pursuant to the Planning commission’s notice, the reasons why we are unable to remove additional hardcover are as follows: 1.The existing building is constructed with few options for deletion of .existing hardcover primarily because of an existing driveway easement over which we have no control, Making adjustments to the back yard portion of the property is ineffective due to the layout of the house and garage on the property, the easement on the east, the natural, tread hill on the west and the strart on the south. 3.All areas supported by retaining walls cannot be altered without undermining the driveway areae. 4.The substantial front and side yards are well beyond the required side setbacks and the 75' zone A setback and with tha awoopt-ion of tha addition to tho r ofth, will not be altered in any way. 2. rRuM : KLuTSChE, i, JUDITH PHONE NO. : 612 471 0331 Feb. 07 1994 11:28AM P03 *0^I City oC Orono February 7, 1994 Fage Two 5. 6. 7. The proposed addition is a logical, natural and unobtrusive use of dead apace. The proposed plan already sacrifices all areas underlain with plastic, 444,8 square feeu, at a Considerable maintenance increase. The proposed plan already contemplates removal of a 2' cement walkway at 90 oq. feet. above reasons are the same reasons which Were aubmitted with the original variance proposal. Circumstances have not changed since that time. Accordingly, tneae explanations have not changed. ^ Unless we hear further from you, we will expect that the Orono matter at its February 14th meeting. We will be in attendance at that meeting. If you have further questions or comments prior to that time, please let us know. Very truly yours. Judj Klotsche \ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ ^ DATE: 2/9^^ ITEM NO.:^ Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusih Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #1899 Donald and Carolyn Udell, 1210 Loma Linda Avenue - Variance - Resolution Review of Pertinent Ordinances - as Amended Per Planning Commission Recommendation Applicants have submitted a revised ha-dcover removal plan and hardcover inventory per Planning Commission’s directives. Ordinances are reviewed as follows: A.0-75 ’ setback area = 4,480 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 168 s.f. or 3.7% (330 s.f. of rock rip rap area is not included within hardcover calculations) Proposed = 168 s.f. or 3.7%* ♦Section 10.56, Subd. 16(F-1) - Allows stairways at a maximum 4’ width where steep topographies require stair access B.75-250 ’ setback area = 13,640 s.f. Allowed = 3,410 s.f. or 25% Existing = 4,792 s.f. or 35.1% (adjusted by staff to include patio at 201 s.f. and retaining walls at 350 s.f.) Proposed = 4,861.3 s.f. or 35.6%* Total hardcover increase = 69.3 s.f. or .5% Variance = 1,451.3 s.f. or 10.6% ♦Addition of 320 s.f. new structure, 66.7 s.f. overhang area in excess of 1 1/2’, 68 s.f. of new paved area Removal of 100.4 s.f. of shed, 25 s.f. timber : plus platform adjacent to shed, 260 s.f. of pavement beneath proposed entry addition Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 3 February 9, 1994 N C.250-500’ setback area = 14,080 s.f. Allowed = 4,224 j.f. or 30% Existing = 8,470 s.f. or 60% Proposed = 7,791 s.f. or 55.3% Variance = 3,567 s.f. or 25.3% Hardcover reduction = 679 s.f.* ♦Removal of 139.16 s.f. shed, 539.7 s.f. gravel driveway. Refer to Exhibit O, note 250.8 s.f. of gravel area not included in original hardcover facts adjacent to shed, 209.5 s.f. of gravel area located in Loma Linda right-of-way. These areas have no impact on original hardcover facts - 250.8 s.f. of gravel area must be removed or included as additional hardcover. Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Lot coverage - review of structural coverage on property Total area = 32,290 s.f. Allowed 4,830 s.f. or 15% Existing = 3,976 s.f. or 12.3% Proposed = 4,056.5 s.f. or 12.5% (addition of 320 s.f. new structure, removal of 239.5 s.f. of existing structure) No variance required Additional Exhibits N - Hardcover Inventory - Amended O - Plan of Hardcover Removals - Amended P - 10/16/79 Survey - Showing Existing Improvements Where Entry Addition is to be installed Brief Review of Application Applicants seek approval of a two story 8’ x 40’ addition (basement/first floor) that will meet all required setbacks. The application involves hardcover variance within the 75-250’ setback area prop sing an increase of 69.3 s.f. or .5% within the 75-250’ setback area. Major concern for the Planning Commission was the excessive hardcover on the property. It was the intent of the Planning Commission ’s recommendation to maintain hardcover close to the current 35% levei within the 75-250’ setback area and to attempt to seek reductions in the 250- 500’ setback now at 60%. Review Exhibit N, note applicants show the removal of some 1,000 s.f. of gravel drive within the 250-500’ setback area. As the hardcover facts noted above, the 250.5 s.f. of gravel area adjacent to shed was not included within the original hardcover Request for Council Action continued page 3 of 3 February 9, 1994 inventory and the 209.5 s.f. adjacent to the curb cut at Loma Linda Avenue cannot be included as it is located within the right-of-way. The 250.5 s.f. of gravel area not included in the original hardcover inventory by surveyor must be removed or added to existing hardcover. Only 539.7 s.f. of gravel driveway area can be included as a legal reduction. Applicants may be asked to further reduce gravel hardcover within 250-500 ’ setback area. Another concern was that a large oversized boat was parked within the right-of-way and not within the boundaries of applicants’ property. Planning Commission conditioned approval on the boat being relocated in a less conspicuous location on the property next fall. It was also noted that there is a great deal of exterior storage within the yard and asked that large garage be used for storage. Applicants also noted the desire to install a privacy fence. The privacy fence must be located 35 ’ in from street lot line of lakeshore lot (privacy fence cannot be placed at street lot line as Loma Linda is not considered a major thoroughfare, MSA funded or county road). There is an increase of 80.5 s.f. of strucmral hardcover on the property. New entry addition = 320 s.f. with removal of 239.5 s.f. or two storage sheds. Lot coverage is proposed at 12.5% where 15% would be allowed. Please review the enclosed staff memo dated Isiya ^ry 12th for more detail on this review that includes the history of the land use applications and building permits issued to the property. The hardcover facts listed above reflect the application as amended by the Planning Commission recommendation. The Planning Commission recommended approval but required the removal of a shed within the 75-250’ setback area and specific areas of gravel driveway located within 250-500 ’ setback area. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission approval and includes the notice to the applicants that the second residential structuic on the pioperty requires City approval before a building permit can be issued for strucmral alterations or improvements. Staff has also included a deadline of June 1, 1994 for restoration of all dismrbed area with namral ground cover. Council should decide if additional hardcover removals are required within the 250-500' setback area and if so, the resolution can be amended. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution. If application is to be denied, staff will draft a denial resolution for formal action at your February 28th meeting. N A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 FILE H999 WHEREAS, Donald R. Udell and Carolyn Udell (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 1210 I^ma Linda Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lots 1 and 2 and the North 15’ of Lot 3, Block 2 and Lot 2, Block 1, Saga Hills Revised, , Hennepin County, Minnesota, also that part of adjacent vacated Portland Place (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit construction of a 8 ’x40’ addition on the south side of the existing residence where 4,792 s.f. or 35.1 % hardcover in the 75-250’ setback area exists and where applicants propose 4,861.3 f. or 35.6% where only 25% is allowed. The proposed improvement within the 75-250’ setback will result in a 69.3 s.f. or .5% increase in hardcover. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. FINDINGS 1.This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1899. A* •The property is located in the LR-IB, Lakesbore Residential Zoning District requiring 43,560 s.f. or 1 acre in area. The subject property consists of 32,200 s.f . or .73 acres. Page 1 of 6 i 3. 4. 5. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 18, 1994 and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: A.The proposed improvement requires no setback variances or any other variance to the code. B.The proposed improvement located within the 75-250’ setback will result in 69.3 s.f. or .5% additional hardcover. C.Lot coverage is proposed at 12.5% where 15% is allowed. D.Applicants propose a 679 s.f. or 5.7% reduction within the 250-500’ setback area where no improvements are proposed. E.Applicants have submitted floor plans of the current entry noting a potential hazard for persons unfamiliar with the first floor entry and proximity of stairs to basement. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 6 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of an 8*x40 ’ entry addition at the south side of the existing residence resulting in an increase of 69.3 s.f. or .5% hardcover where 4,792 s.f. or 35.1 % exists. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Applicants are advised that the City must approve all structural alterations or improvements of second residential structure on property before a building permit can be issued by the staff. All hardcover removals as shown on page_of this resolution shall be completed prior to June 1, 1994 or at tlie time of the final inspection by the Building Inspector for new construction whichever comes first. All disturbed areas must be restored with natural ground cover. Applicants shall relocate oversized boat in a less conspicuous location on property by the fall of 1994. Boat must not be stored within the right-of-way of the public roadway. 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 (February 14, 1995). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of tliemselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 6 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of February, 1994, ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day of September, 1993, by Edward J. Callahan. Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on beha of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 6 ,'to U V<VK0V^«0 I ___A\J^+ I N O'^l «\l «U \ I ti i OY «Mo V t7> 10 Cb LAKE ( NORTH MINMETC lo \ .X N 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 PUBUC Page 6 of 6 TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator January 12, 1994 z N SUBJECT:/^1899 Donald and Carolyn Udell, 1210 Loma Linda Avenue - Variances Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Hardcover inventory. A.0-75’ setback area = 4,480 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 168 s.f. or 3.7% (330 s.f. of rock rip rap area is not included within hardcover calculations) Proposed = 168 s.f. or 3.7%* ♦Section 10.56, Subd. 16(F-1) - Allows stairways at a maximum 4’ width where steep topographies require stair access B.75-250’ setback area = 13,640 s.f. Allowed = 3,410 s.f. or 25% Existing = 4,792 s.f. or 35.1% (adjusted by staff to include patio and retaining walls. Exhibit E-2) Proposed = 5,107 s.f. or 37.4%* Variance = 1,697.7 s.f. or 12.4% ♦248 s.f. of additional hardcover (72 s.f. of paved area already exists beneath addition) + 66.7 s.f. of overhang in excess of 1 1/2’ total 314.7 s.f. C.250-500’ setback area = 14,080 s.f. Allowed = 4,224 s.f. or 30% Existing = 8,470 s.f. or 60% Proposed = 8,470 s.f. or 60% No changes proposed Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Lot coverage Total area = 32,200 s.f. Allowed 4,830 s.f. or 15% Existing = 3.976 s.f. or 12.3% Proposed = 4,296 s.f. or 13.3% No variance required •V Zoning File #1899 January 12, 1994 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Surve> E - 1-3 Hardcover Fact Sheets F - First Floor Plan G - Basement Floor Plan H - 1- 3 Elevations I - Proposed/Existing Roof Line J - 1-3 Photos of Residences K - Resolution #1156, Application 542, 6/30/80 L - Council Minutes 6/2/80 M - Building Permit for Two Story Garage 1982 Description of Request Applicants propose construction of a 8’x40 ’ two story entry addition (basement/first floor) that will meet the required 10’ setback from the south side property line and will be located behind the average lakeshore setback line. Applicants seek approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250’ setback area as excesses already exist and additional 2.3% of hardcover is proposed. In 1980 the applicants applied for a rear setback variance for the 24’x22 ’ garage addition to the rear of the existing principal structure. At that time the Udells owned the property to the immediate north, refer to Exhibit C. The properties consisted of three separate lots and contained three rental units, review Exhibits K and L. A condition of that approval required that Udell homestead lot be combined with the property to the immediate west. The variance involved side and rear setbacks from the rear lot line of Udell ’s homestead parcel. By combining the parcel to the west, the rear setback variance was eliminated and merely a side setback variance was required. Since 1980 the lot to the north has been sold. The City has had no problems with the rental units on the Udell property, refer to Resolution #1156, Exhibit K. ilie City recognized the nonconformities on the property but gave no direction as to legal stams of the rental unit once combination was realized. Applicants should be advised that any major structural alterations or improvements of the structure will require approval of the City before a building permit can be issued. Staff has made the necessary adjustment to both existing and proposed hardcover calculations as addition results in only 248 s f. or new hardcover, 6" of overhang has been included in hardcover calculations where hardcover did not exist beneath overhang. This totaled Zoning File m99 January 12, 1994 Page 3 • 66.7 s.f. in area. Applicants should advise where surveyor’s calculations would have included a 378 s.f. increase. The existing hardcover now includes patio and retaining wall area at 551 s.f. In 1982 the applicants were issued a building permit for a 44’x22’ detached garage under the allowed 1,000 s.f based on the former code requirements. If hardcover reviews were as sophisticated as they are today, this garage with additional paving would never have been allowed without the required hardcover variance. Statement of Hardship Please review applicants’ hardship statement on face of application. Applicants note that the proposed addition will be placed over an existing paved cement area and patio. Staff does not remember a patio area. If this is the case, there may not be a increase in hardcover for the proposed addition but merely an intensification of structural hardcover. Applicants have provided floor plans noting the unsafe condition of current use of existing access and potential for falling down stairs to basement. Issues for Consideration 1. 2. 3. How shall we deal with the hardcover excesses? Applicants show no removals. In order to offset the additional structural hardcover, applicants should be asked to remove the two separate sheds at a minimum, review Exhibits E 2-3. Are there other hardcover improvements that could be considered for removal? What about blacktop area? Can that be trimmed back? We must have a reduction in hardcover. Section 10.60, Subd. 13 requires oversized boats in excess of 20’ must be stored within a stiucture or offsite. ^ code only allows boats less than 20’ to be stored on a residential property. ^Based on the survey, it would appear that the large boat is stored within the City’s right-of-way. As the City has received no complaints on the storage of this boat, it may be helpful if boat could be relocated next winter to a less conspicuous location. What are the applicants’ plans for the second residential rental unit on property? How long will the use continue? Remember the City required the legal combination and that prior to 1980 the house was on a separate lot. 4.Once again, what are we going to do about hardcover? Lot coverage is not an issue. Zoning File #1899 January 12, 1994 Page 4 Options of Action N 1. 2. Approval as proposed; or Approval as amended. Hardcover removals must be completed by the final inspection for the two story addition; or 3.Denial of application as proposed. «A iCITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 T"lf~!<■ ($50.00 per each additional variance Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address /; ClVi OF OROHO 01 175.00 CHECK n 175.00LcrcTOT-ruAiii' vniiI i I tntfis I u'u !i2933S0 cool ROl i V/v v/C XUf UiU / Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) O7•• y/7-V/ 00^^ Attach legal description to appllca*-icn if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired _ _ _(month/year) I ^5^(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. /fuitJL AxJU. Present use of property: i,^>--T:esidential _ _ _other (specif y)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Zoning District:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT Phone (home) V7J /T^ _ _ Phone (work) ty: yyb. zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: ^^/xoC ^i-L^4J»njb^ _ _ Lot Area _ _ 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 and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: ^|Z. ^4.. itJi. tLr^ArL^JSt. W>i- £s4»----- (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for yoor application to be considered completes ,\1._ _^Completed Application Form 2. y Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must 'obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance" A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3.v/ Plat Map (obtained with property o:vners list). 4._Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor)to include hardcover calculations , as required (provide one (1) copy 8Jj"xll" for reproduction). 5. _ _Topographic survey ^existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%’'xll"). 6._Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%"xll'*). 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 yodi.- variance application la not complete if the above Inforaatlon 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 in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and corre^C^to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date -2 - OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further 'authorizes reasonable entry onto the -property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commiasiommembers, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of"^tiiis request. Signature \Owner's Date asL 9^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetxngs are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be presenv at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Cosoalsslon and Council. If an applicant Is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an ^ _I. A-^ X- X_ _ _ _ _tl J __ _ _ _ _ _ _^____ _ _ _9 X_ __ _ _J_ _f_ _W ^1 ^ m ^f.*7 ^ .•. h*". ••■.'S:;■'.■'* ^'' JffMlT-lir-aS 14^12LXN6)t>fVS5SM^\\P:PK» kwn •■■ouw^oitt.f^'QHmn wm >JirnKt^5V:TAW*AYKR JEFF 0 ^•' 5* 07-117-E5 W 0047 ✓ in>MP iOOR ■01100 NORTH ARH DR CRfilR NM1|9 A NOVOTNY ORE REXNEKE GARY A NOVOTNY AND PATRICK E REXNEKE F"i liM north AR^. ,ir^V V; T OMNO 111 553«4 h^:fiW<PAXW '1?; OlAHf WUXAHSON LINDA AVE ' i. 55S44 . jjj; PROP ADDR'i* ,-^}*A:Olt«R NMCV ^ TAXPAYER 'f 07-U7-2S 41 OflO OR > HUCLLER LER V\ ; 00 07-117-13 41 0074^ PROP ADDR i 01204 LONA------- " M^ OMNER NANI R' I J 6ANTNE ;TAXPAYfR LINDA AVE 6ANTNER ' 'ROM f JANICE CANTNER AVE >, ..,f^V- ,tv ' i-V- ! V V y ••f>HEttlEPlN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM •<• T SO 00-117-23 23 0002 PROP AOOR 01100 LONA LINDA AVE k^'*;']qW4R name HATTHEN N OURNS .1%J ‘,'TA><PAY|R * ; ‘ HATTHEN M OURNS 'NAHE/ACOR 1100 LONA LINDA AVE i ' • ' '4-•• ^ ****^•M*- V J-* • y t -y y-y '■■ PROPERTY Olf^ERS LIST .1' 38 07-117-23 14 0013 w'01155 LONA LINDA AVEEUGENE GEYEN ETALEUGENE A GEYEN1155 LOMA LINDA AVEMOUND HN 55344 4•A*.’•;:•. y{■.•..••/•A ^' > ». 30 07-117-23 14 0040V 01153 LONA LINDA AVE . D 0 A N J SAMS DOUG 4 MARY SAMS 6111 FRANCE AVE $ EDINA m 55410 ;N>. ■■ ■• •'■••••,. y r. Vtv’i ••-^;.v *..•.• ; -i ,v, •.'I-'. V . 0062 RM DR t • 30 07-117-23 41 0000 ^ 01295 LONA LINDA AVE C 0 ANDERSON 4 A N ANDERSON i-' V; CHARLES 4 ATM ANDERSON . ‘.y 1295 LOMA LINDA AVE 1 ' -'' MOUND MN 55364 $ ( 07-117-2S 3Vt>011 oiePi-'^.^RprARfi DR H B riUELpBlK4J R HUELLER JOSEPI^MARY HUELLER . 126VM0RTH ARH DR HN 5'?v " •t 4* ,v i \ ’’w 'X*,..•. * V . • * • I* ' , - '• I, -.%**• • • •• V X ■• 'ARM DR-:i... •1 ' '.■ "Hr ■ •' • t; 30 07-117-23 41 0004 01205 LOMA LINDA AVE K R HINRICHS ASM HINRXCHS- KEVIN R P SUZATME M HINRXCHS 1205 LOMA LINDA ORONO TM 55364 38«v07-117-23 41 0009 OJESDv. N0RT»I>m61 DR P K HUNtSMAtO K L HUNTSMAN PAUL K >4(RX$KNE L HUNTSMAN 1280^>ldRTH ARM DR MOUND (M 55364 07-117-M 41 0012 0121>SvJ«H to arm dr R L DUmt*m-£TAL RICHM L 12X0 NO ARH DRIVE MN 55364 •<l4S .V^ '_ :«V v/s *> ►V''* f'.r • 56 07-117-25 4^^077 0129r^-..445HA UK9DA AVE JACK E HASlUfC^AL RONALD t ^ICE OAKJNER 12M LO^LINDA AVE HOUND JIN 55564 ■ ■ ' '.r'■* •V • •'.■I'.Vi" •% *-V ‘ ? i^ u I 6 •-V k.' 56 07-117-25 41 0067 01210 LOHA LINDA AVE DONALD R UDELL ET AL DONALD R A CAROLYN UDELL 1210 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND HN 55564 I 38 08-117-23 23 0003 x . » '*. V 01190 LOMA LXNOA AVE DAVIDCO REAL EST INC OAVIDCO REAL EST INC C/O JEFFREY 0 LYTM 71 N MAIN ST CLARKSTON MX . 40014 .1 t / ;.'v ,V. W •'*,1 •'<V .; • . \* -r,. '•-.f 0014 NDA AVE ETAL •p -.-■v . V > HENNEPINWOP OHNEH NAIC•i«.sfi T*)<PAYHI ■ i'9M ^miir-zs se oooaC w7>bobv!S .WJo;v;sp»jci pu/ • ;*• jWliWWlitKIWATTIiOe’ V i; HOE ". •';/{,> )|]£Ua|'9o eiH ST ' ,.v 4:V JffMl wT , 55404 ,: .V,. f r '! ?• i m p>-iW lrw% ■:C?M **. » •*• V. *COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHAHOM SYSTEM,i ,.v .PROPERTY OFWERS LIST .•< •• •;,*..•••...■■•'uv;‘ •...*.•so 08-117-25 25 0027 \/ . "01200 lOHA UNOA AVE ‘I'EONUNO GRIFFIN ET ALDONALD R UOELL ; *1210 LOHA LINDA AVE 'HOUND m 55544 .'/,' ^ I- ^■V ‘•}'•'*''•• •'•••...v.V> •>•■ . :-■ ••• ■•■:•■“ I-X17-25 52 0007,v' ^ •- ■SPRUCE •- .‘ii.V ■J •I ■/ ::• 58 00' 01240 »i-nwfcfc r-fc ■'4 .’ ' •«>l 0 A HALLNER A L J HALLNER -i y DAVID A NALLNERr ; .' 1240 SPRUCE PL. •, ' HOUND m 55S44 . ■•■-V'. 50 00-117-25 52 OlJT^hv SPRUCE K H A E KENNETH A 2775 CASpcT POINT RO HAYZATA^ 555Y1 V? ■■V? ‘4 ■f •T. **» V:•. • -0* 58 08-117-25 52 000501220 LOHA LINDA H HYATT HOE ETAL H HYATT HOE 825 SO OTH ST HPLS HN 55404 58 00-117 01250 SPRUCE H H HOLFE H H HOLFE 1250 SPRUCE PLACE HOUND m 55564 •.(.. :.V v '-V' •J.5^,, »iiv ,r. 4 t • •.• v \, vr. •»;•■;'•.. vVff' ' •■ V;.' I•• • i'!'v;-''' f- ' v •.•ff s‘/- • ;> •'■•••••'J •-*'•/‘V'* m I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE •’ REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEttCPIN COUNTY DEPARTHEHT OF PROPERTY , TAJUT^L TO THE 8EST OF HY KNOHLEOGE and BELIEF. y7 A/X M*. ,. 1 . • f ' • •• ••f - * ^1* I- . . • •V-■'•v-' 4 Y . . V ' • .* .m‘ . A • •! %r : • • .» • date ! •I % • . 5f / V •.. I* ^ *• J "I 6'*\ ^ A V - .1 i •”> ’i -V'x '''*-: •‘ -I • .•! « r ■j»‘ ■. •• ••.%••:• r..' fl". • . ft J:- I’t N • I • .u..; mA. -i: . . / '/'ft ■ . -'v *a*Vv. .-VI.- s ’j • •■■•■• •:, ■ -‘r* •.*■ 0««! (.«•IA -. A -V)»|llNIitN LA/(IS)om•»w si«i» pfy«v?ir^ t yh.^)) A;:-> ^; I itf- .’3 ^ d (65) » •. n I t *......(20 ?; M c?5) ^•lO’S ;n »rt *? LOMA tlNpA AVE1 4^k)✓..X JO 'Va y •*■'»r*r>;U3»X n 2f‘:U ;i"i«Ail)?m 'J. j ^1 \ -'Vje_(io)?0 nf)JC-4011I'tw,r,v^ • 1 n“ ** i* ” •v w»l P<r> II' M *0 1 5CT*y •? 4^ p^">n* (50t» .;u37) ’i-fjtfMiia •0 (30) IT} X ___15L- • » ^(60) 36 xMV ikUli k£ Hmqod 4(5) ^ «to f \1 (6)a *'' fiia ’•*:*• » (8) ^ ••• 2M, I t9).•01 a ,q 9 ( 10) iTO 5 a / 1/ 68 ‘ U*?* ‘2-3'3‘2- »;3f~ ~ (^CO O’ *»• a fc^(20 t»tlr — (?5) • V ^vL l ^ S M?i) B I 4f II M >4 O 8 “. s *M Wl •V. 'U 's> *-k H H i. •C. *% »^ »% r* H H H H H r rr»« «r*r: *1 a STAr ;?I7 Mi 53’.Jim 53' ElH ^ **!1 f 8 S ; I ■nr*zzm H Oz > zo Zl H X > 31 S r > m :^ARDCOVER QLCUUTlOfl l^ORKSHEcT A.House B.Garage . C.DRIVEWAr D.Sior^ALK C.Patio / Deck F.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN PLASTIC SHEETING G.Other LENGTH 42. )^b-75/* 75-250 E X *250-500'500-IQ00' % S.P. V HIOrH X s.F. N X S.F. If _____S.F. X S.F. X • 8 S.F. / CF • iT'•r t * yt m S.F. i ^ ’ .r::^ S.F. X A •^S.F. t m S.F.*-fc’ yt S.F. X S • P •-• X •S • P • X S.F. X • S.F. X m S.F. -330. Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property A rea in Zone 4JS -r fT| 4 ^X 100 41^ .F. s.F. A 3 % MR & MRS DON UOftU. 1210 Loma Linda Av«l Mound MN 80384 m . « •••• • • V •a •«■»« HARDC0VE3 aLCULAriOM WORKSHE^I SETBACK zone: (circle o«e) 0-75 ExisTifiG Hardcover ih Zone A.House B.Garage c.Drivewat D.Sidewalk Patio/Deck F,Landscape AREAS UNDERLAY BY PLASTIC SHEETING G.Other LENGTH X X X X X X X X X V^-2^250-500'500-1000 width Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone A 42^,1 B '^lOLoma LIndaAm MoufKtMN 65394 S.P.ji4^ b n S.F. S.F. S.*.cr: S.F.»« S.F.r-* J4f0 S.F. 3M S.F. S.F. S.F, 1 » H JM..F. loo S.F. S.F. S.F. & S.F. S.F /3,<i40 ,.f. d] /3^40 V ,nn. -a< mm HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET - SETBACK zofiE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' ^^50-500^ 500-1000' 'ExisTifiG Hardcover in Zcme ✓ I/' A.House LEflGTH ' B. Garage . c.Driveway D.Sidewalk E.Patio / Deck p.Landscape areas UNDERLAIN BY PLASTIC sheeting ^ G.Other X X X X X X X X Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone X s.rr^ WIDTH X 6 45 S f F t X m /39 jjiS.F. X ____S.F. X .,, S t F •" X - -1S.F.'rJ ^ X /7(^o • S.F,*• / X % S.F. X zsi PT-'ZI..--' S.F.i _ S.F. _ S.F. . S.F. . S.F. . S.F. . S.F. /do ___ S.F. ____________S.F. ^47 O S.F. / ^O&O S.F.B ^ tAlo B /40S0 X lor « ^0 % ■• M«l & MRS DON UO£LL ’ 2! 0 Loma Linda Avii v'ound. MN 55364 1 L r r OFFICE FURNACE 1 BATH1 ROOM ROOM LAUNDRY ROOM PROPOSED ADDITION 30’ 0.0' FAMILY ROOM i 58’ 0.0" DON AND CAROLYN UDKIl 1210 LOMA LINDA AVE. MOUND, MN S5364 471 -8688 / /ir r * , !e ..f i //' ,! ■kJ o .y PROPOSED ADDl 1 ION - BASEMEN" V V ' i S2009*m MR & MRS DON UDELL 1210 Lomt Linda Ava Mound MN 55364 4/// -fl N /'A• •: ^- <s ■fA_ ^ j K' '.M 11 n s' DON AND CAROLYN UDELl 1210 LOMA LINDA AVE MOUND. MN 55364 4t4*rvi^A^ MOW U , , ^ 2vr irir ;•♦.» MA. * 4:***r •i ‘ MR A MRS DON UDELL.i 1310 Lorn* Linda Av«i Mound MN 55364 !I idio i I ho i j ! I I I i I I « MR 4 MR& DON UDELL. ^ 1110 Loma Linds Av«l I Mound MNS5364 •' I /V '/?oof C-zbis.~; ,*.•. '1 ' j . ,.... j^a-frci’s 'vO'^ NtAxT 7Yu^s. i T*o h/c^ !i ♦ X t ! ! ;<.! .i f n I I ^ i I i •1 ' ^ ^ J ' 7 1 “ ‘^IT^Hc<i C’^V'^f'C. *3^kikrt^ . .I ^^BUC, r*"O^T Oro$£as iSjbi^- l^^re*i<i To FctTs 3^<i J I •t .* f $ .A \ 7/It *t .) UJlst ^ll.u Ar'» ^ t 1 EJ. sriiAfv - i lAou^c I I I 1 I ' I i f I '•» !1 I i I I ‘i I I i i !I I I !I ! M i ^ <j,j.r.*ovi 1 I i I_. • • i t i '' •; : 1 i ! i 1 ! i , . i ••‘‘ • ' '/I' irj ii‘/'/i ,•; /;! rr;: I^r (TV •1 • I •• f ' ' t •• •• : , 1 •; t ] ? !1 i . I f •----------^---------- <--' ^00 5* L — .i-CLtitaL/if CLd £lu ------/.a /* Xrm4 X^mJ4 ^<- - ________T^ttr, J'j-'jfc ' . ____4/r^- f «//' :S%‘- vT cj Jjl - ^ ^. .ipQoi lr>fp >^o S’ /' n .^nnf o/}t< \ ^ Q if ___ ,7«^. ::# 1.899. '•\\“ ID da^f^ iXAjtiU f u ,p . S ‘S. - I I r— ! f i ) I '■,) CO bi ^ i ?“ » fX W -^<5 ^Z>xrL»- "/‘^- V J'lf O') ti- C£) \ SD 0 /y 4 0.4/tOLyiV (-^E^LL i^U'fudf AtJL.. hla<OKJl_ fUii *;;) C c'1_-y FCa/vr UiLto £#?(^TiiLi8br .• •«, ^.. iioaouiTioii o#TMaTvooyNeti.( m., .AIM____ city of OROlNCr ^ii Metl.» - : V ' >> ’::. v *■' V ’^4'*%" .##*•! - M •■ ■ ■' - il - - ••' wv‘. . .;:^ I» '* nCMtOIVG LOT COHTOIOUTf AMP VAUAMS AmOOL r ... ^ FOB DOM UDBXX, 1210 LOWL LXVOA ATBRIB . . < v„. ‘*-1 _ _, ttm City of Orooo la a Municipal oocpnrat uadar tha lam of tha ftata of Niaaaaotai and ...... ^ J I *, j, tPa City Coaaeil of tha City of Orooo haa adoptid soMiav^x l*t1**** for tha ocdariy. aeoacoic and aafa damlnpaant <C. land * • ** '__ ■Ad* tha Vlaaniao Caaaiaaioo and tha City CouacU ham idarad aa applicarion froai Don odall, UlO Loom Uada Am>Ma» to. ;. ---X-t:- appceval of aoaiaf ▼ariascaa to parmit ooaatroetioa of a aa<ai itt^hm ^«arata oa aaid pcopartyi aod - •. -M* !f*f - . -. aaoHMo# pasiBaat to rarim of thia appUcatim*. tha Citj^,,^ >Oaoeil sakaa tha folUarinv fiadin«a of ^' 1.Tha Odalla am or ham proparty iataraat in four tax paroala# upoo tihicb ara looatad thair jBoa»».>>A>tg thraa aaparata raatal dmlliaaa# and a datachad sasaga*^/;•%>5 2.Tha ^oparty inoludaa a portion of. oaeatad Portland FXa^- -‘ within which ia raaarvad a utilitiaa aaaaaaat for a natara^ 1.•. gaa liaa. « J.Tha total araa of tha proparty la 1.26 acrea '■'J f 4o TtiM propriety is locA^®d in tiM LR*1B xoniri9 discrlcx^ imich p«niitJ only ^Ingle-fdaily dotnehed dwellings on individual Lots# and which requiraa ac la^bt. 1.0 aciea lor •ach aaparata dwallinq and/or lot. 5.Tha axlating uaa ionaity of tha prop^^rty is .ii: awi5llinqs ^rl£r I par acra* f.Tha axiating propartiaa aca-aoo'^coofocaiag aa rugATda- r I TTW.I i-.' ^ , C ••■■/. y ■> ‘»<iry]mgwMTja|BF ■<S; f A . '•a. #aC**'u a-,Vi’"- i'"iTO-^fr\TTiSi^ijr-^^^ ... ,,_ . sjr^, •-1 •■' i.%r I I ■.I Clty€»rcww^^^ i i» . •-., % • •* " •1 iriU h« tiM •ad all aeaiaf oooa ox •T ooeur on aaid pxop«ty# proporty otmor or toy • rutar •ad that failar* to oorraet aach “Hltlnar aoti«« froa th* City •hall a«b)aet •aid prafarty to proaoaitioa for said vlolatloas»; iaol^taf paaalhlaa ' of op to • ISOO.OO fiaa or fO dprs la JaHyfOr>hs»^;w^Jfe ooeurrmea tharMf.^ ^ 2. IICROP 34.4S0I dido aatbMk aasiMm:jiruirraaT2«i$^ ooaatnietiao of aa attaohod parafo t» 2* -oC^.tbo lino batiwan Lota 1 and 2, Mloek dapa tot f45Sr;.’*^ xi^.■»' -rmgxmmem jarir P-aa«'~saaas;agg;4»gP HBaBI a to 3* •Qg-»t>a.pMpsrtii I, .Saga mST^ i» jasaii^ga)Tha ^plleaat shall hava 'tha mtiXitj tho oaaet locatiea of tha •■ •ppartaoaat assaaaat, aaaariag that tha eoaatnictioo will not aneroach on said' lina or or altamatlvaly« tha applicant shali'.at hia aapansa’/ •rranpa with tha utility to ralocata said.^as liaa uA''^v^^ t to paxmit tha construction to procaad. P fit b)Tha City Council in approval of this satbactc vaximncm -ry i harahy finds that tha applicant has danoostrataU a !v^ hardship dua to topography and axisting housa location sufficiant to justify said varianco, proviUad xill conditions of tnls resolution arc mac prior to appLicatioa for a builoing pansic. 3* Ths approvrl of thaaa variances shall sxpirs cne year'aftaastn final approval of this Rasolution if tha conditions have not ' boon not or tha building panaxt baa.not boon isaoed, iy>t -such aspiration shall not revoha tha agcaanantn-suida by toe * applicant in Sactiona Ic and Id ahova«- . : •li-'iv.v'... ,v.• k„. a •w mm t. V . 1 i 'mm ^••*•*'■’, ' f ’,. • ..i,^V ..•‘>"•-:'TV ' •%h . ...•1 •'•;‘ r ‘^>•-.•<1 Yv-%- '•• vt-W s ■'‘-J un; ^T - • f mF^BCifi> V.--V 1 '4^ ■' , ,Zn^ '1^'^H ^*■ ^»tr. ..i;..,f T^. . T?i '^^‘‘‘;U'’'C . * • *♦ rv-A ‘f ^ '-* ^ •. ;t- $S U this issoUtifii^^ltlM rtv. «Le!TpMSM IfaslPSgn thUTliwiIhrlti^ iMfera it shall bm tAo^tmd bf tbm City ». ^t* ►: -V j; il-; ■ ^»' ••». ;t^; .. ?“ 5 "I UI:b«»1»*I4¥^.^'T*;«- .•*•* ■; ic„ ;^'%?s^%T .<•. V. OMS":.: \ '9 * Dat« 6,-So ~^6:>♦‘.•f •*•4 V pu%r ' ^ • • • A4opt«4 this ___ £4ty Couttcll of th« City of Ctoru:. June 1980. by'•~ I -;.;u?iV® .* ■. k^v■•£ T} ^ 7^. ■- ^xvi ...7 .V‘ v’ '*:*^** . - V- •. .;.• r%X ,*’'S^ ^‘* ’’•«. * - ^ « p * % i i I *T*‘ ,^'.r •'«'^'■-••• -v ^ .V ^•> li - ^,vr - p p» f.n CVSTKII 3i»»CIliy --• -'”y •'^I H„ J BtoTOJ.- goflr-«lr^ «2!£i ar«{M!V ^ rawlatlea to 1MW«•‘jT?;.^- ^,V.’^^> , ,::. -^j] ■4?, ^ ' .*i. . t ■ ' *. ■ ^1 ’ I y% ir.4,* <•.«.», ,»p 1.ric^ii^ »nJ conr-*rv«tien EaiMiant of«r tl» w«tlnr J* 2.Oedlctlnr on th. pl.t of right Of «y fot tM ^ followin': "'.d*i ^ :. V a) . 4C' »..t Branch Bond b)30* RlghView L.an« 3.V.rlaftc® - Setback of anUal boro Roqulredt 150* PropoMdt JO * Variance fO B t r -> ♦ , •V - \m •-^ m •'. *< ve.—^ “ 70*1 varlmc# •©• propel >»—■»• ij bl -■ ■-^•#*1 B A 4. 5. -Mii-*!* ttocla, .l«»* ...t/«M P«2:'TLii2 110' tnm «MtanlMl bam waa loeatM IJQ •**"''*^ : . property U»e ,,>■,: * Park dedication fee for U»t 2 of llOb.Od “ ■tinnehaha Creek «atarahed Olatrlet approval of culvert else «. naaolation to addreaa 25* corridor. Motion, Ayee I4| - Raya (OK Deanna Maboatb, toning Adtalniatrator, preparodt^ 1210 Lone Linda Avenoe, dated Nay Jt, IMO, idlloA »»>v im- ': u- - i . -.. a, .m ^ ^*1* I k l/imo IS4I f ^ e tM ««U* r»«PO»« MMtWtiCK of •* feasible•location to attach a garageo ■" •*■*■ •»'. ■. 1- <• ’\l* /«, 'V a.■ •v *• • ..« C •‘.ta ■• 'V* v.^Ve '. a • •# *• . ». *V>.v '• • *4T 'S *'• !• * * (1 I **"■ a . V ;■ *i \ Hr- ttt, ma j, w»i-,'*»* ■*'■ -^« ,t, i«t «iM mi ital wilt* os tiM Oioll iiotrlot oollo for o aia “ OM rooldmtiol unit ^or ooro. roeofoiMo that tho osiotia^ otnctoroo tho Oiollo aof irod Um lota, tout tiM ^roporty bo lofoUy dofiaod •• two botldiof oltoo. f< mo VV •toff rowioMod tbo oototoadiof wlolotioao oo tho ono rootol oobia. fho violatiooo eowor o poriod of toa aad iavolwo tbo otorofo of ooUeoaood ooro. botutof iaopoetor roporto tbot tbo Oborf cotto«o io oonrootly oloor of oay violatioao. 9lmm rowiow tbo PUaaiaf Coosiooloo oiaiitoo of Manb 11, iprll 1, oad Hoy $, IMO for bMltfreoad iafooMition oad tbo PI ana tag Oooiiiaaloa roocoamdatioB. itieai taooo aotbaob of 7* tor Ooo - « trooo oob^oot to tbo followlaf oooditioooi fo approwo olio yard tMoll baaod oo too bardahip of topofrapby -C Vv •= : v . # •••.-nv; ..--‘rf:'; a)ftmar oootaot gas eoopaay to dotoiaiao oaoet iooattoo of otiUty oaaaooat i t blo^ 2 aad Lot 2, blocb 1 ooat bo logally nnidltii aa ooo boiidlag oito o)Lot Bloek I aad Lot 4 (•-U7-23-22-0004) Mat bo logally eooblnod aa ono boiidlag alto d)All oototaadiag violatioaa on rantal unit, aoat bo raoovod apocificallv tbo Obaro cottaga aad ttalieooaod ear problao Ceoaeil Maotlag - Joao 2, IftO o proaoat to dloeuaa thoirm.a Mrs. Odoll appl leaftoo. plaiuiing, oronote"bo^aoor2 aU iRmoorttaa^iM eoafoniMg^Ixi^tf^^ i .. .r m i 1 2»>»> MfiM cr wo«»eia«f; Wj-.’Titi 4. M pmr MdUbit IS • to olfB off oo roooUtiao •••#»•• to coolly to toaiao *to >o rooponaUlo for oil vlolotiooo J”? •*v.-S;(fItlOtJ—ii| *"*®In chnln £JTI r,2 OOd Lot a. Block 1 to bo toildlnfl alto SStoiiod^/'< cooblnad aa ooo logally t. 7. ■;owW '?vvii . • ■ < • jt a- totloo, kyoa (4) - Mayo (0).>, ym ----------------— IJItO tiM JTSCOiSd OBplIntioo for l»tO,^tod^iay*aa?*lMoJ*S!iS otataat aSli*l! ?S “ Itootioo application la baaloally tteono^t for a nlaor ahlft of »^rao ~toda aSSBTpJSblST 2SfiaId^i!*t£?iIkI*o4**^*** oUpo^ Btaff baa **r^n tbattboy «Si ^t«^otlon Olatrloc !SfLS*u5?I?S! !E?®*** *f c.yl«-n mo Hum*oparatloa «t 114 t^t sixpa llcanaaT^ ^oorvlca slip* »• in tli« 1979 SpuSotSir "*• roaoJutlon .,id tnarina tooacll NootlaB “ Juao 3, itio fw^lTr^iL!^ fS?*???' !? “f* "»• *PPli«atioa k-..;:^a r » » {/ 1 s*‘ ' 1 V ’.r ••>•'. ¥- n • r -. • 4|M . • - * ^ - ax* A.•■■?•• ' - cnTcfCMiOBro' Buili^ PemUt muiMam 1^ /__________ tiOAt OOCM#nOMt m».«. i)T * tt'9 fmmm-------------------1 tor- ------^ OATt iltUia -g*J^<>J!Z, J' iXPinii_ ~^lCT/f NQI*«| aT •MLOCR l^inR} -1 ITVrtOf IVOMK |eOW. TVH ^AAiO^CC i -^.-i valuatiom AISI<)i«tTlA(•To«iu •1 ^U.- ■■OAMi^UIImwTp [oAirfTAUJ "••»ne ATT. OfT A^.OATt f • rCfIMIT Fict _ . •ioo.Ptmiir iXX. ^O % rrATiPu ^ attay "* n£MAAKS: |MO«|.MilO.MOPOUOUM PAAKPtS1^ICiAMl SACCHAAGI ■ V W^fW Jl^ OATt total OUE ^0Z» ^ • • ■'«.■ -£ti<T r- —CatoA __frill I t| Ac.—/2 oa ICTIOM REQUtREO WORK REQUIRINO SERARATE RERMITI ACKNOm.ll • *) I CAU.«*»AJML CALfc|.,4^j^ *WO«AWeAL JWU 1 . .4 V •t » rsWMta ■ >OAAOW«*f|tui»«.'“II■* ^PtiAAct wfrfAu i;ttv 9*/mamf»u^nm -.a N TO: CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Cn'stal Bay. MN 55323 February 3, 1^94 RE; ZONING FILE #1899 DONALD R. 6 CAROLYN E. UDELL 1210 Loraa Linda Ave. Mound, MN 55364 ; PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON 5' - 250' area 2'100.4 SF X 2' platform 25.0 SF Total 125.4 SF Addition of hard cover within the 75* - 250' area Garden 15* x 4'60.0 SF Overhang on addition 20.0 SF Living room and bedroom eave addition 15.0 SF Outside step 8' x 4'32.0 SF Sidewalk to step 18* x 2'36.0 SF Total addition 163.0 SF Removal of hardcover in the 250* to 500’ area Shed 14.2’ x 9 .8’139.16 SF Gravel driveway as shown in blue 1,000.00 SF Total 1.139.16 SF Total to be removed 75' to 250' area 125.4 SF 250' to 500' area 1,139.16 SF Total removal 1,264.56 SF Total addition -163.00 SF We are removing more we are replacing. hardcover than 1,101.56 SF ii M Wl h* 8 ■V 4*v»i •U 4. -U f«««« •• u jp#« ?3» -*•4. 4i.»V»1 N»4.1.^' »>1 ••*1 »%•%»% '“n *\■s. ir4 1 X it <• <i. N|■V,■%t <»Jk -• * W 3 W S »» & HI A O »•< a « A =7?!: A »• M a o •*>— r 4 9 Ql. « A85, je72 23 e 00^ ^ 2- ^ 4 < Uu. 2L ^ 7: ^ 9c z C8 Q e 8 6s ill fA at rn % I I 1^n ll L* 5? 2» 3U» r!I*m o (/> ^05 |1fi N Z VS & I ri ! A N «. • ♦ % • I i T«i«l art* *jf t» JO lrt<a ccatflflla* 9l .......... ftocd .............* r., r . Aa auAvt'iD #• !•« lh_. m-^ t ^• REQUEST fX>R COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 2 % \ ^ 4s rreji NO.:'<55 Department Approral NaM Mickae) P. Gaffroe TUk Asst. Plaimiat A Zoaiag Adaaaistrstor l:/v ^‘jl^ Administrator Reriewed: fh Agenda Sectiilit Itan DecrtptifMi; FrciKh Lake North Basin - Potential Elimination of Shoreland Designation Council may recall that during our review and adoption of the Shoreland Ordinance, the DNR defined French Lake as having three distinct basins - South Basin at 930.0 ’, Sewage Lagoon at 934.3’, aiKl North Basin at 930.5’. At that time, DN’R indicated that all three basins constituted the boundary of tLc French Lake Basin, designated as a Natural Environment Lake. The Cuy drew its Shoreland District boundaries accordingly. It has been difficult for staff to justify to residents that the North Basin is a lake airf its surrounding land is shoreland when the "lake" is merely Type 6 and Type 3 wetlands. In my recent discussions with Ceil Strauss and Ed Fkk of the DNR, they feel there may be substantial justification (based on the three distinct OHWL’s) to redesignate the North Basin as a wetland, which would allow the City to remove it from the Shoreland designation. The same argument might apply for the old sewer lagoon. Unless Council directs otherwise, staff will pursue this via a letter aikl do''»'r; 5niation to the DNR. If successful, portions of Webber Hills and other subdivisions within 1 ,(XX)’ of the North Basin could then be redesignated by the Ciiv as outside the Shoreland zone, whicii would relieve them of the restrictive shoreland limitations while still being subject to Orono’s 2 acre rural zone requirements. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to indicate the Council s position regarding the redesignation of the French Lake North Basin. M m «. ; ¥L tm « ■ ••1 «1 # a' « ( • ------------ 1 ■-------------r^T*— L. 1 Q A N r • « TT’ I? W V MPt •« N 5.7 ocJ / '<■ / irrf r k«> • jBJpr......... 6 2^ 4 «c 0\’Ahurii \„; W-'O lt:m) fr \ I \^/‘ 4 / ( \y^ Ho \\ t ♦ % -1 ^ y 'N 1 \ N / »X- / 3 '< 7CVT ■prt-1 LOT Ot»*J r.'i^*. * Mo .\ 0H^i...fJ3O:|R^LAKE tt ^ ^1 :( 47t ntt0/ V •^^ /, ^^• I ., J '■• ,y '\ M* --r # «•••' / ^e ,\?:> m li» « •!• « II jmr11 ttMli/llf.^'m** VoJ'i Z S..I ,ygyqpHlA j^ SBT/in 77^ *’ vh s;JC.T1*1 Jil r,3lit (>• 'T y~^P[8Uttr''" **" * A>•»» aj “ , *« ^ «- r^:*XJbij i-..t-y ui i-u 4# ^1* I J-2L REQtTAT FOR COl'NCIL ACTION % Departmoit ApproraL NaflM Roe Moone TIU« City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: DATE: ITEM NO: ^\ dh Agenda Section: City Administ' Report 7Item Description: Crystal Bay Site UndcrgrouiKl Tank Removal and Soil Testing In September of 1993 the City of Orono received bids for consultant services and undcrgn>und fuel tank disposal for the Old Public Works site in Crystal Bay. The cost for the consultant services and the tank disposal amounted to $3,750. The initial soil testing indicated soil contamination in wo of the four fuel tank basins. Based on these initial testing "csults additional soil borings and analysis were required. The cost tor this additional testing was $8,751.00. Pasfd upon the results of the additional testing and aiulysis of soil samples, and discussion with Uk MPCA, it was determined further testing is required to evaluate the extent of soil contamination and to determine whcthci groundwater has been affected. The additional testing work proposed is to drill finir additional soil borings and to install three to four monitoring wells at these locations. The consultant will analyze water samples from the wells after the initial installation and again in approximately three months. Based on these testings the consultant will provide a report with the test results, and indicating whether any corrective action is needed. The cost of this work is approximately $12,400. Estimates have also been obtained for the disposal of 80 cubic yards of contaminated soil. The low bidder is Matthews Farms of Hutchinson, Minnesota in the amount of $2,465. The disposal of the soils by the low bidder would be done by land spreading and aerating as per PCA rules and regulations. A summary of all costs incurred and proposed in relation to the fuel tank disposal project is as follows: V I A r Request for CouncO Action contiiii^ page 2 of 2 February 8, 1994 Crystal Bay Site Underground Tank Removal & Soil Testing Consultanl fees for taiJc removal and related soil analysis - 9/9/93 $ 1,950 Tank disposal fees - 9/24/93 1,000 Additional consultanl fees and laboratory analysis fees -10/93 8.751 $12,501 Additional costs for monitoring wells - proposed Disposal of contaminated soil - proposed $12,378 2.465 $14,843 Mr. Gregg Brown of Braun Intertcc the city ’s tank removal consultant will be in attendance to review the attached report and the proposed additional work with the Council. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: A Motion to authorize the City to enter into a contract with Braun Intenec for the mstallaiion of four monitoring wells, two rounds of water sampling, and preparation of « report at a cost of $12,400 to be funded from the Buildmg Fund. B.Motion to approve Matthews Farms as the low bidder for disposal ot the contaminated soil at a cost of $2,465 to be funded from the Building Fund. BRAUN INTERTEC tmp 1343 MRw4uit MnwimM 53130114) 6l2<MM/00 ^ 4434444 Sc^itiM Smf¥mg wMfqmwfUR* January 28, 19^Project No, CMKX-93-0i63 Mr. John Gerhardson City of Orono Public Works Department P.O. Box 66 Cr>stal Bay. MN 55323 Dear Mr. Gerhardson: Re: Work Plan for Additional Remedial Investig^ion, City of Orono Propetty, 1285 Brown Road South. MPCA Leak #00006933 Thank you for rcntaaing Braun IntertK Corporation (Braun Intotec) regarding the additional remedid investigation activities to be conducted at the referenced site. Per the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) letter dated November 5, 1993, and upon your verbal request, Braun Intertec has prepared the att^hed work pin for additional remedial investigation (Rl). Seven soil borings were previously installed at this site during Nov«nber and December, 1993. Per the findings of chemical analysis of soils sampled from those soil borings and discussions with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPC.\), birther work will be required to evaluate the extent of soil contamination and to determine if grouLiwater has been impacted. Please refer to the attached work plan for the scope and methods of the additional remedial investigation. If you have any quntions regarding diis work plan, please conuct Greg Browne at (612) 683-8866. Sincerely, Gregory S. Browne Project Manager, Hydrogeologist Earl W. Windahl Supervisor, Remedial Service Section Attachment:Work Plan f: \wpniet\cmloi\93 -0163\0163 P02 City of Otdxk) Public Works Deparfflwnt Pn^ No. CMKX-93^163 January 28, 1W4 Pagc2 A.Introduction Additional remedial investigatton activitkt are necessary at the City of Orono proper,y located ct 1285 Brown Road South (Figure 1 in Appendix A is a site location map) be^ure the fall vertical and horizontal extern of soil contamination has not been defined for die area surrounding a former 3,(XX>-gallon unleaded gasoline underground storage tank (UST) and the suspr t' 1 leaking former 5S0~gallon diesel fuel UST. Braun Intertec observed the tank removal and performed all the necessary sampling and analysis aaivitia. A remslial investigation is also required to determine if the petroleum release may have impacted groundwater. B.Background B.l UST Excavation On November 1, 1993, Braun Intertec observed the removal of four USTs at the above- mentioned property. A site map is provided as Figure 2 in Appendix A. The tanks were removed by City of Orono personnd and the removal was supervised by an MPCA certified tank .''.'•av^ting contractor. Griffen Service Station Equipment, Inc. Two USTs, historically to have contained diesel fuel and having cqiacities of 560-galIons (Tank 1) and 3,0(X)-galIons (Tank 3) exhibited no apparent signs of contamination in the respective excavations based on field observations and soil chemied analysis. One additional 560-gallon dimel UST (Tank 4) exhibited signs of a release, and excavation activities including field screening, seemed successful in removing contaminated soil and delineating the venical md horizontal extent of petroleum contamination. However, laboratory analysis of basin soils from this tank excavation indicate that soil contamination remains at the base of the excavation and within the south and west sidewalls of the excavation. Because the vertical and horizontal extent of soil petroleum contamination was not defined during field activities bas«I on soil analytical r«ults, additional remedial investigation was required. The remaining tank, a 3,000-gallon unleaded gasoline UST (Tank 2), was excavated, and petroleum contaminated soil was detected tu a depth of 16 feet below grade where the ere jvation was halted because the reach of the backhoe could go no further. An estimated 85 cubic yards of petroleum contaminated soil was removed from this excavation, stockpiled on site, and later transported to the City of Orono facility located at 27(X) Kelly Parkway. MPCA verbal approval to transport the contaminated soil was given on November 2, 1993. Soil sample laboratory analysis indicated that the vertical extent of soil contamination has been delineated because of a non-de ’.xt reading of Gasoline Range Organics for the sample retrieved beneath the UST. Soil analytical results of samples retrieved from the east sidewall of the excavation indicated petroleum contamination. Because the horizontal extent of petroleum contamination associated with this UST was not defined in this UST basin, a remedial investigation was required by the MPCA. The release of petroleum was reported to the MPCA on November 1, 1993, and the site was assigned MPCA Leak4'0(XX)6933. City of Oroao Public Works Depafljaent Project No. CMKX-93-0163 January 28. 1994 Fife 3 B.2 Soil Borinc Investigntioa Braun IntertK conlucted seven penetratkm test borings duriog Novembv and Decenri>er, 1993. Please see Figure 3 in Appendix A for the fonner soil boring (ST-1 through ST-7) locations. Three soil borings were conducted in the area of the fonner 3,000- gallon unleaded gasoline UST basin and four were conducted in and around the area of the fonner S60-gallon diesel fuel UST which was suspected ti) have leaked. Laboratory analysis of soils collected from diese soil borings indicated the possiMe cofttamination of groundwater. C.Scope of Work Braun Intertec prc^>osa the following scope of work to address the petroleum contaminated soil surrounding the former 3,(X)0-gallon unleaded gasoline and 560-galIon diesel USTs described above, and to address the potential groundwater contamination which may be present at this site: Monitoring well permits will be t^tained prior to drilling aaivities. •Drilling four soil borings, one approximately 20 feet south of the fonner 3,000-gallon unleaded gasoline UST and three in the area of the 560-gallon diesel UST. The soil borings would extend approximately seven feet below the water table (25 feet below ground surface; groundwater was determined to be approximately 18 feet belo v ground surface during the initial soil boring program). Collecting soil samples at 2.5 foot vertical intervals using a split-spoon sampler. Field-screening soil samples for the presence of organic vtq^ using a PID or HD. Collecting a maximum of two soil samples from each boring for laboratory analysis. Sod samples for laboratory analysis will be collected from the depth interval yielding the highest PID reading and/or from the depth interval immediately above the apparent water table. Analyzing a minimum of one soil sample from the boring performed in the area of the former 3,0(X)-galIon unleaded gasoline UST for benzene, ethyl benzene, toluene and xylenes (BETX), methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), gasoline range organics (GRO) and percent total solids. For cost estimating purposes, it is assumed that only the sample from the water table interface from this boring will be analyzed. Analyzing a minimum of three soil samples from the borings performed in the area of the former 560-gallor. UST for benzene, ethyl benzene, toluene and xylenes (BETX), diesel range organics (DRO) and percent tot^ solids. For cost estimating purposes, it is assumed that only the sample from the water table interface from each boring will be analyzed. City of Orooo Public Works Dqjartment Project No. CMKX-93-0163 January 28. 1994 Pase4 Based on the field headspaa reults observed during drilling of the boring conducted , south of the former 3,000-gallon unleaded gasoline UST, Braun Intertw mzy or may not install a monitoring well at this location. If soil screening results indicate soil fi^nntaminatinn at this location, the boring will be completed as an above-grade monitoring well. If no signs of contaminatioc are exhibited, a well will not be installed in this boring, per MPCA verbal suggestion. Three above-grade monitoring wells will be installed in the remaining three soU borings which will surround the location of the former 560-gallon di«el fuel UST. For cost estimating purpose, it is assumed that four monitoring well wUl be installed at this site. Please sec Figure 3 in Appendix A for the proposed monitoring well locations (MW-1 through MW-4). The monitoring welts will be developed by a Braun Intertec field technician. A foil round of water level measurements will be collected following development of the monitoring wells. In-sini hydraulic conductivity tests will be conducted by Braun Intertec field personnel in two of the monitoring wells. The monitoring wells will be sampled after water levels have been obtained and again in approximately three months. The monitoring well which may be placed south (presumed downgradient) of the unleaded UST basin wfll be analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and GRO for the first round, and assuming no non petroleum related VOCs are detected. BETX and GRO the second round. The monitoring wells placed around the fuel oil UST basin will be analyzed for (VOCs) ami DRO for the first round, and assuming no non-petrclrom related VOCs are deteaed, BETX and DRO for the second round. A bailer blank will also be colleaed during both sampling events and will be analyzed for VOCs during the first round and BETX for the second round. Following completion of the remedial investigation, Braun Intertec will prepare a Remedial Investigation/Corrective Action Design Report in accordance with MPCA guidelines. The costs for the corrective aaion design assumes a groundwyter monitoring or no action alternative. If corrective action involving active remediation systems (e.g., soil venting, groundwater pumping and treating, bioremediatlon, etc.) are necessary, Braun Intertec will prepare a Comprehensive Corrective Action Plan (CCAP) based upon the listed unit costs. City of Orooo Public Works DqwtmeiU: Project No. CMKX-93-0163 January 28. 1994 Pages D.Methods SoQ Borings and Monitoring Well instiDation The penetration test borings will be pcffcnned with a truck-mounted core and auger drill using 6 1/4-inch auger. All down-hole equipment will be steam cleaned prior use, ai^ clean auger will be used for each bordiole. Sampling for the borings will be conducted in accordance with ASTM D 1586 'Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils.' Using this method, the bore hole will be advanced with the hollow-stem auger to the desired test depth. Then, a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches will drive a standard, 2-inch OD, split- barrel sampler a total penetration of 1 1/2 feet below the tip of the lead fl’ght of the hollow- stem auger. The blows for the last foot of penetration will be recorded and are used as an index of soil strength characteristics and for stratigraphic correlation. Samples will be taken at 2 1/2-foot vertical intervals to the termination depth of the borings. The monitoring wells will be constructed of two-inch schedule 40 PVC riser pipe and lO-foot, schedule 40, 0.010-inch slot screens. A six-inch protective casing with locking cover wHI be embedded in the surface seal around each monitoring well for protection. A typical well construction diagram is Included in Appendix B. Soils Classification Soils encountered in the borings will be visually and manually classified in the field by the crew chief in accordance with ASTM D 2487 'Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes' and ASTM D 2488 'Description and Identification of Soils (Visual and Manual Procedure).' All samples will then returned to the lalK»ratory for review of the field classifications by an environmental geologist. Representative samples will remain in our office for a period of 60 days to be available for examination. Organic Vapor Screening During the field investigation, soil samples will be examined visually by an environmental geologist for staining or other apparent signs of contamination. In addition, soils will be scanned for the presence of organic vapors using a photoionization detector (PID). The PID will be equipped with a 10.2 eV lamp and will be calibrated to a benzene standard. Jar Headspace Procedures Soils rec'^vered from the split-barrel sampler will be additionally analyzed with a PID using jar headspace procedures. The jar headspace procedure consists of placing the soil sample to half-fill a 250 ml clean glass jai. The opening of the jar is subsequently covered with aluminum foil and the cap tightly screw^ on. The jar is vigorously shaken for 15 seconds and allowed to set for at least 10 minutes. Following the 10-minute period, the sample jar is again vigorously shaken for 15 seconds. The cap is then unscrewed and the PID probe is inserted one-halt of the headspace depth. The highest reading observed on the PID is then recorded. City of Ofoao Public Works Depsrtmcnt Project No. CMKX-93-163 Jamary 28, 1994 Page 6 Chemical Soil SampUug Soil samples will be collected from the depth interval exhibiting the highest PIU reading and directly above the water table in each of the borings by an enviro nmental geologist for chemical analysis. Chemical Groundwater Samplinf Groundwater samples will be collected by an environmental geologist using clean, VGA glass, screw-top vials with Teflcn»-lined c^s. labeled, and transported to our laboratory under refrigerated conditions using Braun Intertec chain-of-custody procohires. Chemical Analysis All analyses are performed using EPA or other recognired standard procedures. Dau will be reviewed prior to release. Specific information on standard operating procttlures, detection limits, and qua’ity v mtrol measures is available upon rcqu«L E.Cost Estimate 1 isted below are the total project cost estimates for the anticipated work at Uie site. Cost Estimate Set tV e rkscription Cost Estimate C iulting Services Drilling Services Laboratory Services $4,073.00 3,500.00 4.8Q5.Q0 Project Total $12,378.00 The actual costs may be more or less than the estimate above; however, th^ total cost will not be exceeded by more than 10 percent without ycur additional authorization. Costs presented in this work plan are based on the scope of work and assumptions suted above. If additional work or personnel are required, costs will be added base»l on an hourly or unit cost basis in accordance with our first proposal dated June 9, 1993. Costs presented n this proposal are under the same unit pricing as the previous bids. Bids for an adci'ional monitoring well installation contractor will need to be obtained to cover Petrofund requirements. Coits included in this work plan art based on the assumption that the work plan will be authoiized within 30 days. If the project is not authorized within 30 '^ays, we reserve the Citj of Orooo Public Works DepattoMal Project No. CMKX-93-016J Janury 28, 1994 Pate? right to resubmit the cost estimate. Terms payment are 30 days with inters added to unpaid balancea in accordance with the attach^ General Conditions, which are a part of this proposed contract. Craun Intertec will contact Gopher State One-Call to request that they make arrangements for public utility representatives to determine the iocatk>ns of public undergrouid utilities. Braun Imertec requests that you or your authorized representative notify the Braun Intertec project manager immediately of the presence and location of any umlergrouiKl objects which are not the responsibility of public utilities. In authorizing this proposed contract, you agree to waive any claim against Braun IntotK and will indemnify and hold Braun Intertec harmless from any claim of liability, injury or loss allegedly arising from the damaging of underground objects not call»l to our attention prior to begiiming the work. We appreciate the opportunity to present this proposed contract to you. This work plan is being presented in duplicate, so thm if it is accep^le to you, one copy can be retained fur your records, and one copy can be signed and returned to us as written authorization to proceed. We will schedule the project upon receipt of ynur written authorization. Please proceed according to the above-stated *aaas. Authorizer's Name (please print or type) Authorizer ’s Signature Authorizer ’s Title Authorizer ’s Firm Date Appendix A Figures I •^1 •^ ^ - ><v^ »• i '' ^T y /.3-m -".T:y f^-fWt^- mC^ f^i m I ‘ ^:i'-w mm :Xv^^Hi^:^A‘-iP.>-/ ^ ' ', /I: /- -7/'.' 7'.'; •*'1V*" A •* ■* ?> ■' -“■nf'' V •^ /* L-'* *V -s ^y BRAUN- INTERTEC Site Location Map Remedial Investioation City of Orono PuDlic Works Department Orono, Minnesota INT 1 CAT€ i 9h E£T drawn SY:SAJ< 1 !i-n-03l 1 APR'D BY-' Of JOB No.cuKX>a3>ota3 3 OWQ.Nc ; pkj URE# 3CAL5 ’ ^4 XK5) 1 !l! — (/I in iq 3 m ^1 1 t 1 1 y% 7>1a \1 \ COo > F ^ ■*■'<>■%•o \\ \' % (/) CD 1 1 <%««> 1 No» "D 10 19 Vfl LO QD iB ■p F 2 F > m WfJ > 10 2 i ^i- ^ rn 5 > w c T) t-O c r- o r I- r Orel o o P o 5f;^5° 5S O :d \ m \ e P o g D K t |#l A 4 “f* c/i I ml ^ —,L„J ^ I T4- D C C H 09 o ;oo i/t8 CRYSTAL AVENUE AppeirdiJC B Example Well Construction Diagram MONITORING WELL FIELD DATA SHEET MNUi Wal WcQN •HtN< WcQ BJ4- Lf nioii aa4 Ekva^M 0.01*) Ctsm ______________ Stick ep (±0.1*) ef pipe idevBiM 0.0r««^ eip) CiO.n Appro b««i Appratilfiitr dcpOi la Sni WUK Cl drilling Depth to lop of sol Depth to boooRi of seel Depth to top of tcreen Depth to bottom of cenea Depth to bottom of boring Method of advance: HSA_________IJ). _ Casing _LD. ______ Tricone _OJ3.________ N .\ Pi P i Bumper foA 4*a4*»r 4-x7* black capped suxl .Type_ Lagth Lack# Neel Cement Ciogl Aho«« Sob Anaeuec of meietial os^ (]b} Tn» Di Total Length Cowplingt Yea __ No_ ScalMetBrial __________ Aaouitl of material used (lb) Fite Matoial _________ AtBOfot of material used (lb) Screes: Type Slot Size Length Diameter Plug/Point Reoiarits: Convicted by: BRAUN INTERTEC ■KAUN yem is co ippn^ at iiest Otmtni CuaiNMM md tfie ^niwfi pmfinsjil or aiMlianzaMi for iidip0 1.1 We jfrrr lo pro% »dr the prufe^sMinal <«rv ^^ntned m our «nfM free me m ^liH yo« We will provide yn« wnli reports vuiMMMif pnilesvK««iai ivpinioiw «id nT'trnmrn 1111?^ reganlifig cunf'wmiinve t>t (tiifigv tested or ol»serv«d to esuMrslicd or agree 1 ypnii cmena In perfomnnf onr BcrviLes. we wtH use thai degfee of cue Mid skill nrdtfwnly esertiscd under vimiiar cia umscaiiLev by repnubk members of our pfL»fe^^^*^n prai. tH:iflf in die same KKality 1.2 Tests and obscrvaijons will he conclucred usinf appropriMe procedures and prmotivls There is an mtiereni nsk that samples le observau*-»ns mav not he representative of dnnfs not sampled nr seen and. further, that condiuona may change over time If >ou direct the manner of taking samples %w nuking obsen ations or tests in any way that vanes from our recofnn tended procedures, you agree m hoKl us harmless from ail claims, damages, and experses ansing out of your di*ei;iu>n I J Wc will retereiKe i>ur field observaiHKis and sampling to av aitahie reterence p»>»nts We will not surscy. set. or check the accuracy 01 those points unless we accept that duty in wniing 1.4 Our duties do not include superv ising your contractors or commenting on. overseeing, or prov iding the means and methods of their work, unless we accept those duties in wniing We will not be responsible for the failure of your contractors lo pertorm in accordance with iheir undertakings and the provid'ng of our services shall not relieve others ol ihcir responsibilities to you iir to others U W> will provide a health and safety program ftir our employees, but wc will not be responsible for contractor, job. or sue health or safety unless we accept that duty in writing 1.6 If ycHJ so request in wnting. we will not release information regarding our serv ices lor INTERTEC General Conditions you or any mkofMiawMi dial we receive ycM. fxce^ for imonnaiKui dwi ui m Wt puMc JofTUun or an we are requirrd to relaaue by hm We ageec to comply with more n vtnctive conti dc wcia biv reipureimiHs prov that we are c ompm^med fee adiMmnal cosM 2: f#ur rw^niiaihfiitof 2.1 You agree » provide u-^ w ith acce'^s to die work sue Wf wiH use reuaenaMe care to mimmize damage 10 the sue in the avurve of Kim work some wM damage is ivcmal even when due care is enercised W e have me included the co«i of restoration of uoniial daiTiage in the estim.ited diarges At your option and expense we wilt correci nuntial damage W e agree to be respcwvsiMe for damage tse vond that which is normal and tnai IS caused by our negligence 2.2 You agree to prov ide us. in a timely manner, with the inforinatioo that yem have regarding buned ohfects keafed at the sue I ntil we have comptetod our field work, you jgree to provide us with alt your plans, changes in plans, and new informaiusn that refer to cite condiuons Y«m agree to hold us harmless trim all claims, damages, losses, and related expenses involving buned objects of whj^h you bad knowledge but did not timely call to our Jttemum or correctly show on the plans furnished to us. 13 "t ou will be responsible for the coopera tion of your employees and your c*ontractof »in observing ail radiation safety standards after we notify you that radiog*’ophic «vr gamini ray equipment or other nuclear testing or measunng devices are to be employed by us 2.4 You will notify us of any knowledge or suspicion of the presence of hayordous maienaJs in samples provided to us and. il we are coilccting samples, at the sue You further agree to prov ide us with documents relating to hazardous matenals at the site. If we observe or susp»' I the presence of hazardous matenals not anuc.paled in our agreement, wc may terminate our work widvmt hability to ytiy or others, and we will be paid for the services wc have provided 13 Neither dM ag fumwin nor die p«x>v idigt| of versKTs will operaM to make ut mi owatr. operator, generator. !ranspi*fier. ireaier. o^vrer. or a disposal facitey wMhm the meaning of the Resource Comervanon R«covcf7 .Act. as amended, or wMhm the meaning o4 my odktr law govermiif die haiuding. ireaimrnt, storage, or disposal of baiafilou* matenals You agfft to Kidd us harmless and mdrauufy ua from any such clami or kws that is not base d on our negligence 2.4 Dnllmg. well mtudimm , and remci£aik» services involve an inherent nsk of “cross- contamination" previously unc'ontaminaied air soil, and water If you are requesling us to undertake work itiM includes dns nsk. you agree to hold us harmless and indemnify us from cToss-conuminaiion claims ai.d damages, unless the km is caused by our negligence 2.7 You ag.nee to make disclosures required by taw In the event v^Hi do not own the sue from which cun 'unofed vani4j!»*s ore obtained, you ocknovitedge that if is your duty ic inform the owner of discovery of or release of ho/ardouv matenals You agree 10 hold harmless and indemnify us fans, all claims related to divck»sures made by us that are required by law and from all claims related to the informing or failure to inform the site owner of the discoverv of hozarious matenals Secfibfi 3: R^pOifi Qf>d r$cord$ y I We will furnish reports 10 you in duplicate W'e will retain analytical data for seven years and financial data for three years relating to the services performed following transnuQal of pmt final report 3.2 All samples remaining after tests are conducted and field and laboratory equipment that cannot be adequately cleansed of ha/aidous matenals arc your property They will be discarded or returned to you. at our di.vcrcuon. unless within 60 days of the report date you gi. c written direction to store or transfer the matenals. at your expense 33 Our reports, notes, calculations, and other documents arc instnjmei»b of our service lo you. Wc agree to provide our reports for your noil*ter tin. Ym rrpnm m oifccn or lo werf mt our wnarii afppR«^ai. ikhidi «r«a Boi Nf iwrgoiioiiaWy vitelKM L>o« yom wihm frmirot. we pnmite owtowiwwtt 10 cMiKn of oor reports or Irfiers of wrhn r. Not ooty iliiooe oten ofM ■ boufid by coo^MMMi ol oor iirsc Geocrol CooditKms m fUl and only if we X4 If yoo 4o M poy fbr oor ^ersiccs m aff«o4 yoo apic Omc we nwy letaoi all lepnm and wort nm yci dili»oiod to yoo. aM rrpnrts and other wort m yoor poMrstoM will be letoroad lo ys ^mand. and reports and cNlier wxwt will noi be oted by yoo lor any purpose wbaikurver omd iiry aa hdl 4.1 Our pneing for the wort ts piodii:aMd your ai:cepcani:c of die condoaona and alkKauoos of mks and frsp‘>nsibi!ities dcOTbed m oor apaanewt Youapeeiopay for services aa apeed upon or aLcardmf lo oor current S«.hedutc of Charps if there a no coher wncaeii agree mem as to pnee An esomaie or staaeoM of probobk cost is nut a firm figure unless stated aa soch 4JI You agree to pay invoices on receipt unksa yoo notify us in wnuag of a parocular nem dim is allepd to be mcorrect wuhin I? days from lecetp of the invoice Yooipeeio pay interest on unpaid balances beginning 30 days after invoice date at the rate of I 5% per ifiondi. bumot to escecd dm maxiinum rate allowed by law 43 If you direct us to tnviM.'e another, we will do so. but you agree to be rtsfKjnsible for our compensation unless you provide us with that third party 's wntten acceptance of all lerms of our agreemenf and unnl we agree to extend cTedii lo that person 4.4 You agree to compensaae us for oar reasonable expenses incurred if we are required to respond to legal process related to our services for you that anses out of a lawsuit or proceeding as to w iuch we are not a party. 4J If we are delayed by factors beyond our control, or il projcc* conditions or the scope or amount of work change, or if the standards or methods of tesung change, we will give you umely noocc of the change and we will nn;eive an equitable adjustmeat of our compensation Sudlbn 5: ConUnuify ctmnncmi It is cusiutnary for the consultant thm provides construction or rcmediauon iccoinmendaiions to be lecained to provide observation and related services dunng construction or remediation work. If we arc not retained to provide continuing services, you agree to hold us harmless from ail claims, losses, and expenses ansing out of any interpretations. oor wivt pnavuted by ywn or Sedhso A: tislt nlaca^ftm% b.1 ^OUMMiwe iiMlimnif J10 (AM I as a c pmodewt lo bofanan ^ pvidodbylaw Ejcbel ui apees to r xm^ good fatih efforo to fnolvt dtepnaes dnoufli a mumnlK acopMbb ADR prw adnwt We wii anempt lo resolve Runce. and we any punme any prnparfy ben nghis we have m order to sevuie pavmcfit of oer nmwees i\Dit AU dispuars shaM be governed by rite taw of the plave where our services aw mide*ed, or. if our services aie renrinrari m nne itum one stun, you and we agree rim riit taw of riK piece rim services were first reniteied will govern. Netriicr we nnr you wdl be liable to rile other for special, incidental, convcquenhal. or penal losses le damages, im Inriing but not lanirtcd lo chose ansang teom delay, loae of use. k»ss of profit^ 'f revenue, or the cost of capital. dJ We will not be liabk lo you for damages unless suit is cotineticed within two years of the date of injury or km or wiriMi two years of the date of compieijon of tnir s<*rv ices, whichever is earlier We will nm be liabk to you unless you have notified us of the discovery of the claimed negltgent act. error, or omissKUi within 30 days of the dale of its discovery and unless yv>u have given us an npportwiity lo wvescigaie and to recommend ways of eutigaong your damages h.4 Many nsks atfect us by vutue of entenng into this agreement to provide serv ices For vou to obuin the benefit of a tee which includes a lensooabk allowance for dealing w ith our liability. yo*i agree that our aggregate liability will not exceed the fee paid for our services or S50.000. whichever is greater, hjr our negligent acts, errors, or omissions, and you agree to indemnify us from all babililies to others in excess of that amount. If you arc unwilling to accept this alkxaLon of risk, we will waive this provision provided that, within 10 days of the date of this agreement, you agree, in wnting, to an increase in our fees of 10^ or S500. whichever is greater, to compensate us for the greater nsk undcruken. This mcrea.sed fee is not the purchase ot insurance. 6.5 In the event you fail to pay us within bO days following the mvoice date, we may consider the default a total breach of our agreement and we may, at our opoon. terminate all of our duoes without liability to you Of to others. 6.6 If we bnng a lawsuit against you to collect our invoiced fees and expenses, you agree lo pay our reasonable collection expenses, including reasonable Jttomeys' fees. If you bnik ^ lawsuit ^mist us rim »immuM or m 19 wfueb a verriKt is luudnud far ua. yuu wiii lumkww uk our costs of detense. metriilpg bums* but mi bmmd lo Mdexpert wumess faue. A 7.1 We will ifukMifyaad bold you harrakts expmaes caueed by our argitpfN acli, oflusMouw. or bfuucb of comruct and rikv^ of pervjns hvr wtHun we are kgallv mpoiwibk Y»3u will uukmnify and tend us Kamikss teom and agaum demands, damages, and expenses caused by vxiur weghpnt acts, emirs. onussKUM. Of bleach of comract and ihoae of persons for whom vivu arc legally responaibk 7J To riM exiffri rim may be nevessao m inckmnify eiriier of us under Sectwn 7 1. you and wc expressly waive, in favor of riM other only, any immumcv or exemp^m from liahihty thm exists under any wtvrker compenaaCHMi law S.1 These General CoodiUons and the ac complying propoaal or authonaanoii constitute rite entire agreement between you and us. and n su$.ersedes all prior agreemetm. anv past or fuime purchase or work order cowdicioiis. even if ine document is siped by both of us tJ Neither pam wilt as ign this agreement wuhoui the express wntter approval of the other, but we may subcomruct work as we deem neces.sary after nooce to you. riJ This agreement may be lenrmated in wniing by either party W e shall be compensated for serv ices rendered and expenses incurred in tefmjnatKNi that camioi reasonably be avoided. ecviMU s I RBQUBST POR COURCIL RCTIOB 0%T8: February XTDC VO 10 Departaeat Approval: . ■aaet Steve Sullivan A Title: Police Chief Adain. Reviewed:J^enda Section: City Adnin. Report itea Description: Police Liaison Prograa '•r Exhibits: Letter from Melanie DeLuca BAgiiflrgwad The Orono School District wants to contract with the Orono Police Department to provide a liaison officer. They are willing to pay for the service and understand we have no money budgeted to supplement what funds they have allocated. I have attached a letter from Ms. Melanie DeLuca which outlines the background in this proposal and identifies several areas in which a liaison officer could be used t^* benefit the students. There are also memy benefits to the police department. With this positive interaction with the students, I believe some juvenile crime would be prevented by changing the attitudes of the **at risk" students. Initially, there might be an increase of reported crime because an officer will be more available to receive spontaneous reports from students and staff. But, in the long term, I truly believe a good liaison program will make the school and our community a better place to live. Many of the areas identified by the school staff as p^ sible uses of a police liaison officer are already being done by oro..o police officers on an occasional basis. We already assist social workers and assistance teams, attempt to build a rapport with the students by chaperoning various activities, and try to prevent trouble by meeting with students to quell rumors. We also do classroom presentations when requested and meet with parent groups to educate and to inform them. One benefit of this school liaison progreun proposal is that the school is willing, emd eager, to pay for us to do these things on a more regular basis which should make our efforts even more effective. This is a great opportunity to further our partnership with the school to make Orono a better and safer place for our children to grow up. Requested Action Authorize Police Chief to develop a police liaison program with the Orono School District. > ' 'r / • '•I*/ A ^ORONQ m fS t littJUifC OCUlCA COKWUWITY C ducahom Omccrov BmM ecMCsnioiV assistant CQMKMvrnp CoucAnati Oiac ^cs ORONO Public Schools • 70S OLD C rystal B ay Road North , RO. Box 36 • Long Lake , Minnesota 55356-003C • 612.449.8350 Dale; Feb. 8.1994 Dear Chief SuHivan. The Orono Board of Eduction has authorized a levy of approximately $11.000 to address 'crime related costs*. The levy's primary irtent is to aiow school <Sstricts to contract wsh a efty or county law enforcemera agency to provide a peace offerer for laison services in the district's mkjde arto high schools. This funding has already been levied for the 93-94 fiscal year arxl for 94-95. Our desire is to proceed as expecMntly as posstoie so that a program could be in place as soon as possible. White the Orono School District by comparison is a very safe arxf positive place for yourtg people, we can rot igrcre the disturbing issues of violence and fear that are affecting our society as a whole. This cpportuntty to provide time for a peace officer to build relationships, irieract positr/ely with students and staff, and assist with prevention of criminal activity could be most effective in keeping our community a safe one. At this time the school district is see.king conceptual approval from a law enforcemert agency interested in providing this liaison service. At the point this is achieved we would propose a committee made up of both school and law enforcement / city personnel to develop a job description, recommend program specifics and interview for a mutually acceptable carxjidate fo' the position. Program recommendations from this group would then go to the respective boards and councils for final approval. The district befieves that develoing this program with the Orono Police Department would be mutually beneficial in that the schools are within your jurisdiction and require staff time now to deal with student issues. Th’i new source of revenue would allow addition time for an officer to also locus on prevention an j early intervention. Initial discussions by middle and high school staff arnf administration identified the following areas In which a liaison officer could benefit students: *Assist social workers, student assistance teams, and administration in issues related to criminai activity, chemical use. abuse, student conflicts, etc. *Interact with students to build rapport and tnjsl by being present periodically in the bu’Idngs. at school events (ie. sporting events, dances, etc.) or at student center activities (occasional evening or weekend activities such as coffeehouses, volleyba'i toi rnaments. or dances). *Help prevent problem behaviors by presence and followup on mmors. *Educate students on crime related topics through classroom presentations or visits as well as one-on-one during oflice hours or small group work. *Assist with specific programs (current or potential) designed to prevent crime such as the student leader program at me high school (PRIDE), SADD, and a confifci resolution program at the middle school. *Facilitate s»afl development meetings or parent education sessions that pertain to law enforcement (alcohui and drug abuse, violence prevention, abuse issues, etc.) Please feel free to contact me at 449-8351 with any additional questions you may have. I have been asked by our Superintendent, Dr. Wich, to facilitate this process and I am very excited at the opportunity this program will provide for a positive community / school partnership that will benefit young people. Director of Community Fducation I r*< REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 2/8/94 ITEM NO.: j Department Approval: . Name John R. Gerhardson^V'^ Title Public Works Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Item Description: Reallocation of Funds Community Development Block Grant Year XVIII The year XVIII of the Community Development Block Grant Program, the City allocated $2,736 to Park Planning. The funds must be used in 18 months or they must be reallocated or we lose the money. The time has expired and we must reallocate the funds to an existing project from year XVIII. The only ongoing project for year XVni is Housing Rehabilitation. I have prepared a resolution for Council review and approval. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt a resolution reallocating Year XVIII RESOLUTION TO AMEND PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS FOR 1992 (YEAR XVni) OF THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of Orono through a joint cooperation agreement with Hennepin County is a participant in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program, and WHEREAS, the City of Orono held a public hearing on February 14, 1994, to consider public comments on a proposed amendment to the Year XVin Urban Hennepin County -Statement of Project Use of Funds. BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Orono amends the Urban Hennepin County - Statement of Projected Use of Funds for Year XVIII by reallocating $2,736 from Park Planning #53098 to Housing Rehabilitation #53099 and authorizes submittal of this amendment to Hennepin County. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 14th day of February, 1994. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of February 1994, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public i To: From: Date: Subject: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Jack Brinkhaus, Public Works Supervisor January 28, 1994 Bid Award - Equipment & Materials Bid 1994 The City of Orono advertised for two successive weeks for street materials and equipment rental, with bid opening at 10:00 A.M. Friday, January 21, 1994. The enclosed tabulation contains a complete accounting of aU bids. For comparison purposes I have also included a copy of the 1993 bid tabulation. The accepted low bids for materials are determined by availability and location of materials. Traveling distance to a supplier is considered a cost factor when deteimining a low bid. When renting equipment with an operator, we are guided by the type, size of equipment, and an hourly rate. It is possible to award the low bid to more than one contractor when considering materials and equipment. In order to stimulate enthusiasm for the following year s work, we make sure to divide the work accordingly among these low bidders. In the event the low bidder is not available, the City reserves the right to purchase from the next alternate. I recommend that the City Council accept ±e bids as presented for the calendar year 1994. 1994 1993 Cl. 5 Gravel FA2 Class C Winter Sand Eit 3.00 4.86 1.93 Del 5.45 8.46 4.86 Pit 2.35 4.50 1.60 Del 5.10 8.10 4.25 X Limestone IW Clean 4.35 7.73 4.30 7.35 Limestone IVi" Minus 4.25 7.63 4.15 7.25 Limestone Clean 5.67 9M 5.55 8.70 Limestone Minus 4.25 7.14 4.00 7.05 MC 30, 70 250 800 1.86 1.75 Plant Del Placed Plant Del Placed 2331 AC 17.64 21.24 25.24 2331 MC No Bid No Bid 2341 AC 17.64 21.24 25.24 16.50 20.10 24.10 Modified Fine 2341 AC 18.71 22.31 26.31 Modified Fine 2341 MC No Bid 28.00 32.00 35.05 50/50 AC-MC No Bid 27.50 31.50 36.50 CORRUGATED METAL PIPE per foot (CMP) 1994 1993 12"6.00 5.25 15"7.25 6.25 18"8.50 7.90 24" 14 Gauge 15.00 12.00 24" 16 Gauge 12.50 10.00 36"23.00 17.00 r00t!"40.00 33.00 60"70.00 60.80 Aprons Each 12"35.00 31.50 15"45.00 39.60 18"57.00 51.30 24"89.94 80.25 VO252.00 225.00 48"567.00 541.80 60"1008.00 951.30 EQUIPMENT PER HOUR 1994 1993 Dump Truck 12 cy 40.00 36.00 Dump Truck 18 cy 55.00 55.00 Backhoe Vs cy 50.00 50.00 Vi cy 50.00 48.00 % cy 60.00 60.00 % Ton Pickup w/Plow 34.00 34.00 Wheel Loader 2 cy 50.00 50.00 2 Vi cy 65.00 — 3 cy 60.00 60.00 5 cy —90.00 C..X CITY OF ORONO10Q4 nin TABULATIONS FOR STREEl ’ MATERIALS & EQUIFMENT RENTAL A^rOuTN™ Sd m -EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATEModiried to Barton specs I ^ •i CITY OF ORONO1994 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTALALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATEI 1/2" CLEANCRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. 1 1/2" MINUSCRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. 3/4" CLEANCRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. 3/4" MINUSCRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. Bryan Rock Products 4.35 7.73 4.25 7.63 5.67 9.14 4.25 7.63 1 Wm Mueller & Sons 4.63 8.23 4.63 8.23 6.02 9.62 8.53 12.13 1 Shiely Co. H ............................................... ■ 5.40 10.41 4.60 8.30 6.05 11.00 4.60 1 7.14 1 MC 30. 70, 250, 800 CRS- 1 & 2 RC 250-800 GALLON GALLON GALLON PLANT DEL. & PLACED PLANT DEL. & PLACED PLANT DEL. & PLACED Wm Mueller & Sons 1.86 1 CITY OF ORONO 1994 BID 'fABULATIONS FOR STREE1' MATERIALS & EQUIPl\1ENl' REN'fAL ALL QUANl'ITlES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER IIOURLY RATE 2331 AC 2331 MC 1·0N TON PLAN'f DELIVERED PLACED PLANT DELIVERED Commercial Asphalt 20.10 Wm Mueller & Sons 17.64 21.24 25.24 Midwest Asphalt 22.68 26.65 26.00 2341 AC 2341 MC TON TON ' PLAN'I" DE!..IVERED PLACED PLAN'f DELIVERED Wm Mueller & Sons 17 .64 21.24 25.24 Midwest Asphalt 22.68 26.65 26.00 Commercial Asphalt 20.10 3 . .. . ' PLACED PLACED CITY OF ORONO1994 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTALALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATEMOD. FINE MIX2341 AC TON MOD. FINE MIX2341 MC TON 50-50 12341 AC/MC TON PLANT DEL.PLACED PLANT DEL.PLACED PLANT DEL.PLACED 1 Wm Mueller & Sons 18.71 22.31 26.31 — Midwest Asphalt 23.43 27.40 27.00 Commercial Asphalt 21.20 CITY OF ORONO1994 mi) TAIUJLAI IONS FOR SIRFEI’ MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTALALL QUANTITIES ARE RID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATEALL PRICES TOBE DELIVERED 12" CMP16 GAUGH 15" CMP16 GAUGE 18" CMP16 GAUGE 24" CMP14 GAUGE 24" CMP16 GAUGE 36" CMP14 GAUGE 48" CMP12 GAUGE 60" CMP 110 GAUGEH.V, Johnston 7.40 9.12 10.80 17.96 14.24 26.56 48.68 76.68All Steel Products 6.00 7.25 8.50 15.00 12.50 23.00 40.00 70.00 Contech 9.02 11.19 13.32 21.47 17.57 31.97 58.27 90.74 ALL PRICES TO BE DELIVERED 12" APRON 15" APRON 18" APRON 24" APRON 36" APRON 48" APRON 60" APRON II.V. Johnston 36.00 45.00 58.50 90.00 252.00 567.00 1008.00 All Steel Products 35.00 45.00 57.00 90.00 260.00 600.00 1100.00 Contech 36.68 46.59 60.43 89.94 265.77 573.56 1035.34 1 ALL PRICES TO BE DELIVERED 12" BAND 15" BAND 18" BAND 24" BAND 36" BAND 48" BAND 60" 1 BAND 1 H.V. Johnston 7.40**9.12**10.80**14.24**39.84 73.02 115.02 All Steel Products 8.00 9.00 10.00 15.00 30.00 80.00 140.00 Contech 9.02 11.19 13.32 21.47 31.97 87.41 J 136.11 7" Wide CITY OF ORONO1994 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTALALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE TRUCK TRUCK TRUCK TRUCK 1 PER HOUR PER HOUR PER HOUR PER HOUR CY RATE CY RATE CY RATE CY RATE Schoening Excavating 12 40.00 Volkenant & Sons Inc.12 42.00 18 55.00 1 , . r ••CITY OF ORONO1994 mi) TABULAHONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTALALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATEBACKIIOEBACKIIOEBACKIIOE 'PER HOUR PER HOUR PER HOUR CY RATE CY RATE CY RATE Schocning Excavating ‘A 50.00 Y4 60.00 Volkcnant & Sons >/3 50.00 %75.00 3/4 TON PICKUP W/8 PLOW PER HOUR I Schocning Excavating 34.00 1 WHEEL LOADER PER HOUR WHEEL LOADER PER HOUR WHEEL LOADER PER HOUR CY RAIE CY RATE CY RATE Schocning Excavating 2 50.00 3 60.00 Volkcnant & Sons V/i 65.00 Recreational Surfaces 3 80.00 CITY OF ORONO/1993 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTALALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATEFA-1 CLASS C FA-1CLASS 5 GRAVEL (SEAL COAT)(WINTER SAND)TON TON TON 1PITDEL.PIT DEL.PIT DEL. 1 Sa-Ag Inc.2.35 5.60 1.60 4.85 Wm Mueller & Sons 2.80 6.40 4.50 8.10 1.75 5.35 Barton Sand & Gravel Co.3.15 5.10 7.00 9.50 2.55 4.25 Shiely Co.7.50 10.36**2.95 5.52**1 1 Volkenant & Sons 10.86 ---------------H ! Includes Tax 1 CITY OF ORONO1993 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTALALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE1 1/2* CLEAN CRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. I 1/2* MINUS CRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. 3/4" CLEAN CRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. 3/4* MINUS CRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. Bryan Rock Products 4.30 7.35 4.15 7.25 5.55 8.70 4.00 7.05 Wm Mueller & Sons 4.35 7.95 5.65 9 25 4.25 7.85 Shiely Co.5.30 10.21**4.45 9.31**5.90 10.85**4.45 9.31** MC 30. 70, 250, 800 GALLON PLANT DEL. & PLACED CRS- 1 & 2 GALLON PLANT DEL. & PLACED RC 250-800 GALLON PLANT DEL. & PLACED Wm Mueller & Sons 1.75 CITY OF ORONO1993 DID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTALALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE Wm Mueller & Sons Midwest Asphalt Commercial Asphalt PLANT 16.50 2341 AC TON DELIVERED 20.10 25.50 1 PLANT 2331 ACroN DELIVERED PLACED PLANT 2331 MCTON DELIVERED PLACED 1 Commercial Asphalt 19.55 1 Wm Mueller & Sons 16.50 20.10 24.10 Midwest Asphalt 21.30 25.25 26.00 27.00 31.00 34.05 1 PLACED PLANT 2341 MC TON DELIVERED PLACED 24.10 26.00 27.50 31.50 34.05 1 CITY OF ORONO1993 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTALALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATEMOD. FINE MIX2341 ACTON MOD. FINE MIX2341 MCTON 50-502341 AC/MCTONPLANTDHL.PLACED PLANT DEL. PLACED PLANT DEL.PLACED Wm Mueller & Sons 17.50 21.10 25.10 Midwest Asphalt 22.00 26.00 27.00 28.00 32.00 35.05 27.50 31.50 36.50 1 Commercial Asphalt 20.40 . /CITY OF ORONO1993 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTALALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE1 ALL PRICES TO BE DELIVERED 12" CMP 16 GAUGE 15" CMP 16 GAUGE 18“ CMP 16 GAUGE 24" CMP 14 GAUGE 24" CMP 16 GAUGE 36" CMP 14 GAUGE 48" CMP 12 GAUGE 60" CMP 1 10 GAUGE 1 II.V. Johnston 6.17 7.60 9.03 14.73 11.89 21.78 40.36 63.10 All Steel Products 5.25 6.25 7.90 12.00 10.00 17.00 34.00 62.00 ■ Contech 6.25 7.10 8.15 12.50 10.35 19.65 33.00 60.80 ALL PRICES TO BE DELIVERED 12" APRON 15" APRON 18" APRON 24" APRON 36" APRON 48" APRON 60" 1 APRON 1 II.V. Johnston 31.50 39.60 51.30 76.50 225.00 541.80 951.30 1 All Steel Products 35.00 44.00 54.00 85.00 250.00 550.00 975.00 Contech 32.75 41.50 53.90 80.25 237.05 549.50 979.50 ALL PRICES TO BE DELIVERED 12" BAND 15" BAND 18" BAND 24" BAND 36" BAND 48" BAND 60" BAND ILV. Johnston 6.17 7.60 9.03 11.89 21.78 60.54 94.65 • All Steel Products 5.25 6.25 7.90 12.00 25.00 68.00 93.00 Contech 6.25 7.10 8.15 10.35 19.65 49.50 91.20 i CITY OF ORONO1993 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTALALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE TRUCK TRUCK TRUCK TRUCK 1 PER HOUR PER HOUR PER HOUR PER HOUR CY RATE CY RATE CY RATE CY RATE II Schoening Excavating 12 36.00 1 MBE Inc.14 42.00 \5Vi 45.00 y Volkenant Sc Sons Inc.12 42.00 18 55.00 *: i if CITY OF OKONO1993 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTALALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATEBACKIIOEPER HOUR CY Schoening Excavating Volkenant & Sons BACKHOE PER HOUR BACKHOE PER HOUR RATE CY RA'l'E CY RATE •A 48.00 %60.00 [ 50.00 %7^00 1 3/4 TON PICKUP 1 W/8 PLOW PER HOUR | Schoening Excavating 34.00 1 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 2/8/94 % % Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed: <p NO.: t Name: John R. Gerhardsoii|, Title: Public Works Director ^^^nc^^ectl Item Description: Seasonal Weight Restrictions Attached is a list of the recommended axle weight limit restrictions for each City street. The streets will be posted from March 15 through May 15, 1994. The normal length of time that restrictions are in effect is related to weather conditions. Certain streets might be closed to school buses if a street becomes impassible. In the past several years, we have allowed solid waste haulers to continue their normal operations, limiting them to gross weight on any single axle of seven tons or 14,000 pounds. If a street shows signs of severe breakup, we will limit the solid waste haulers to smaller vehicles. I have drafted a resolution for the 1994 weight limits for Council approval. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: , seconded by , that Council adopt ResolutionPROPOSED MOTION: Moved by__ if_____establishing the 1994 Weight Limits for City streets from March 15 through May 15, , nays1994. Ayes i The City of Orono ordains that axle weight limits are restricted on the following streets in the City of Orono from March 15, 1994 tlirough May 15, 1994 in accordance with regulations as provided in Chapter 6.11 of the Orono Municipal Code. No refuse collections vehicles shall be operated during the seasonal restriction time where the gross weight on any single axle exceeds 14,000 lbs. and no vehicles shall be operated upon any City street at any time where special posting specifically prohibits refuse collection vehicles. An axle limit exemption to public service vehicles namely Northern States Power Company, Wright-Hennepin Cooperative, Miimegasco, U.S. West Communication, Triax Cable and septic tank service companies that when responding to an emergency are hereby exempt from posted axle weight limit restrictions on City streets. An emergency response shall include but not be limited to power outages, gas leaks, emergency conununication, line down or severed, etc. Arbor Street Chippewa Lane Eagerness Point Road Baldur Park Road Concordia Street Fairview Cottage Barrett Avenue Corral Road Farview Lane Bayview Place Countr> Club Road Femdale Green Bederwood Drive Crestview Avenue Femdale Road West Birch Lane Crystal Avenue Forest Arms Lane Blaine Avenue Crystal Bay Road Forest Lake Drive Bohn’s Point Lane Crystal Place Forest Lake Landing Bohn’s Point Road Cygnet Place Fox Ridge Road Brackett’s Point Road Dahl Road Fox Street (S. Brown to Briar Street Dickenson Street Orono Orchard ) Brown Road, North Dickenson Street Alleys Fox Street (S. Brown Carman Road Dickey Lake Drive to Willow Drive) Carman Street Dunwoody Avenue Fox Street (#84 to Caroline Avenue Eastlake Street WUlow Drive) Casco Avenue East Long Lake Road Frederick Street Casco Circle Eileen Street Glendale Avenue Casco Point Road Elm Lane Grandview Avenue Cherry Avenue Elm Street Hackberry Hill Cherry Place Elmwood Avenue Hanlon Avenue Chevy Chase Drive Ethel Avenue Page 1 of 4 Heritage Drive • Heritage Lane High Lane Highwood Road Hunter Drive Ivy Place Keene Avenue Kelly Avenue Kenwood Way Lakeview Avenue Lafayette Ridge Court Lakeview Terrace Leaf Street Lilac Lane Linden Avenue Linden Lane Livingston Avenue Loma Linda Avenue Long Lake Boulevard Lydiard Avenue Lydiard Circle Lyman Avenue Lyric Avenue Maple Lane Maple Place Mapleridge Lane Minnetonka Avenue Minnetonka Highlands Minnie Avenue Myrtlewood Road Navarre Avenue Navarre Lane North Arm Drive North Arm Lane North Femdale Road Northern Avenue Oak Street Old Beach Road Old Long Lake Road Olive Avenue Orchard Beach Place Orchard Park Road Orono Lane Orono Orchard Road Orono Townline Road Park Avenue Park Drive Park Lane Partenwood Road Pheasant Lawn Road Prospect Avenue Railroad Avenue Rest Point Circle Rest Point Lane Russell Avenue Scotch Pine Lane Shevlin Drive Smith Avenue Spates Avenue Spring Hill Road Spruce Place Starkey Road Stubbs Bay Road Tamarack Drive Togo Road Tonka Avenue Tumham Road Union Cemetery Road Vine Place Watertown Road Wear Lane North Wear Circle Webb Street Webber Hills Road West Femdale Road West Lafayette Road West Lake Street Wildhurst Trail Willow Drive (Dickey Lake Dr. to Sixth Avenue) Willow Drive (Sixth Avenue to Medina City limits) Willow Drive (from South Brown Road to Fox Street) Willowbrook Road Windjammer Lane Woodhill Avenue Page 2 of 4 The following are nine-ion axle limit: Kelley Parkway Old Crystal Bay Road McCulley Road Tonkaview Lane Willow Drive (from Watertown Road to Long Lake) Willow Drive (from Fox Street to Watertown Road) Willow Drive (from Highway 12 375’ north to Otten Brothers driveway) The following bridge is limited to 18-ton per vehicle: 29 Tons per truck and full trailer or semi-trailer combination: Willow Drive The following bridges are limited to 19-ton per vehicle: 32 Tons per truck and full trailer or semi-trailer combination: Old Crystal Bay Road West Femdale Road Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held February 14, 1994. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of February 1994, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: Feb ITEM NO: % fv*''' V Department Approval: Name Tom Kuehn Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: 1994 Insurance Policy Premium Tabulation and Award Recommendation Exhibits:Insurance Policy Premium Tabulation ISSUE Adoption of award recommendations for renewal of insurance coverages effective January 1, 1994. DISCUSSION Attached is a comparative tabulation of the 1993 actual and 1994 insurance premiums, and the 1994 budget amounts. At this time we are recommending award and payment of the policies for all except the liquor liability, which renews April 1; and the worker compensation, which was approved and awarded at the December 13, 1993 Council meeting. The multi peril package premium reflects the addition of the garage keepers legal liability coverage at $198. The garage keepers legal liability provides coverage for non-owned property in the City’s care, custody, or control. This refers to such things as autos impounded and evidence h *ii. The public employees blanket bond coverage has been increased from $50,000 to $100,000 at a premium increase of $307, from $1,091 in 1993 to $1,398 in 1994. As discussed previously, the City will continue to carry an umbrella excess liability policy of $2 million in 1994 but will not longer waive the statutory limits established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04. This action results in a decrease in premium cost from $31,079 in 1993 to $20,574 in 1994, a savings of $10,505. The estimated cost for all policies and the agent of record for 1994 is $144,165 compared to $163,433 in 1993. The League of Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) through which the City purchases the bulk of its insurance coverages recently began to offer insurance coverage for the deferise of Councilmembers against open meeting law violation claims. A memorandum from the LMCIT explaining this coverage is attached. The cost of the coverage is $830. If the Council is interested in this coverage or would like additional information or explanation, staff will follow through as directed. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION continued Page 2 of 2 Februarv 8, 1994 1994 Insurance Policy Premium Tabulation and Award Recommendation RECOMMENDATION; It is recommended that the 1994 insurance coverage be awarded as presented in the attachment, except for the policies previously awarded, or renewing at a later date. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Proposed Motion Moved by , seconded by _, to award the insurance effective January 1, 1994 as follows: to the League~of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust for the multi peril package $74,084, for excess liability $20,574, and for the petrofund reimbursement $689; to Western National Insurance Group for boiler and machinery $296; to the St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co. for small computers $500; and to the United Fire and Casualty for surety bonds $1,505. Ayes Nays 6 POLICY Worker Compensation AWARDED TO LMCIT LMCIT ACTUAL PREMIUMS 1993 $ 46,178 Multi Peril Package, Including Property Vehicle Lia/Coll/Um/Equip Inland Marine General Liability Crime $ 8,316 8,827 2,590 52,925 59 RENEWAL PREMIUMS 1994 INSURANCE PREMIUMS BXTOGET 1994 __ (A)$ 37,354 4 53,337 $ 8,038 8,805 1,677 55,306 60 198(*) Builders Risk - New Facilities Total Multi Peril Package 93 §72.810 $ 74.084 $ 76.553 Petrofund Reimbursement LMCIT 2,610 689 800 Public Employees Bond U F & C 1,091 (B)1,398 1,455 Monies & Securities U F & C 107 107 105 Boiler Western Nat'l 433 296 349 Computers St. Paul Co.500 500 500 Umbrella Excess Liability LMCIT 31,079 (C)20,574 29,733 Liquor Liability for Golf Course St. Paul Co.1,375 (D)1,513 1,513 Agent of Record Grand Totals Apple Valley 7.250 .$163_^4^ 7,650 S144.165 (E)2.429 $166,774 (*) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) First time coverage 1994 Renewal approved at 12/13/93 Council meeting 1993, $50,000 coverage; 1994, $100,000 coverage 1993, $2 million with waiver of 1994, $2 million without waiver of immunity Renewal date April 1, estimated premium Net fee after commissions League of Minnesota Cities 3490 Leziogton Avenue Korth. StP8ul.MN5512&^ (612)490^ OPEN MEETING LAW DEFENSE COST REIMBURSEMENT COVERAGE NOW AVAILABLE Beginning November 15, 1993, LMCIT is offering an new Open Meeting Law Defense Cost coverage. This optional coverage will reimburse city officials for 80% of the legal costs they incur to defend themselves if they are charged with violating the Open Meeting Law. This new coverage is quite different from anything LMCIT (or anyone else, for that matter) has done before. We'll try in this memo to answer some of the questions that will come up when city officials are deciding whether this coverage makes sense for their city. I. Why is this needed? Doesn't oxir existing LMCIT coverage apply to Open Meeting Law claims? Generally, no. The LMCIT liability coverage is designed to respond to claims for damages. The Open Meeting Law doesn't pj^ovide for damages/ it provides for a $100 civil penalty, and loss of office for repeated violations. Fines and penalties are not "damages" for purposes of the liability coverage, and LMCIT therefor generally has no duty to get involved in defending Open Meeting Law charges under the liability coverage. The only exception is if the Open Meeting Law charge is co^ined with a claim for damages that is covered under the liability coverage. For instance, if an employee brought a wrongful termination action against a city, the employee might also charge that there was a violation of the open meeting as part of the termination process. In that case, piCIT would be responsible for defending the entire 7.^^® f?®”. Meeting Law charge as well as the covered liability claim, an open Meeting Law charge by itge.jf is not a claim for damages, and the LMCIT liability coverage would therefor not respond. II, why provide coverage for this type of exposure? one of LMCIT's member cities asked the Trust Board to consider adding this kind of coverage. The instance in which several council members incurred very sSbs?antial legal bills defending themselves against an Open Meeting Law charge. The Trust Board recognized that defending an Open Meeting Law charge can cost a city official a lot of money. Defense costs are often the most significant financial consequence of these lawsuits. While the statutory penalty of $100 might be relatively minor/ defense costs can easily run to thousands of dollars. And those costs are incurred whether or not the official is ultimately found to have violated the law. The Board acted on the assumption that most violations of the law are inadvertent and may even be on the advice of an attorney. The Board also realized that is easy for somebody to make an accusation of an Open Meeting Law violation, forcing the city council member to expend significant sums to defend him/herself regardless of the merits of the allegation. The threat of that kind of litigation could even be used as a tactic to intimidate or coerce council members in some cases. Finally^ the Board assumed that most city councilmembers act in good faith and try to comply with the law. But sometimes even,these best faith efforts are not enough to head off an Open Meeting Law lawsuit. III.Why should public funds be used to pay for defending someone who actually did violate the Open Meeting Law? Doesn't this encourage city officials to violate the law? The legislature has spelled out in the statute what the penalties are for violating the law: a $100 civil penalty, potential loss of office for repeated violations, and possibly an award of the plaintiff's attorneys' fees in some cases. If the individual has to pay for his/her own defense costs as well, the real monetary penalty to the individual can be many times greater that the penalty the legislature provided in the statute. And how much those defense costs are may not have much relation to how serious the violation was. If more serious penalties are needed to deter violations, the legislature can change the statutes. That makes more sense than relying on defense costs as a kind of hidden penalty that might be wildly disproportionate to the seriousness of the offense, and are incurred even if there was no offense. IV, Why is the coverage optional? Why not simply provide it as a standard part of the liability coverage? The LMCIT Board recognized that there are good public policy reasons why a city might want to protect its officials from this risk. But the Board also recognized that some cities might consider it inappropriate, to use their taxpayers' funds for this purpose. Making the coverage optional lets each city make this call for itself. V.What does the Open Meeting Lav Defense Cost Reinhxirsement Agreement cover? Under the new coverage, LMCIT will reimburse a city official for 80% of the defense cost incurred by the city official in defending an Open Meeting Law lawsuit. The Open Meeting Law Defense Costs Reimbursement Agreement is limited to $20,000. This is the most LMCIT will reimburse any one city official for defense costs for Open Meeting Law lawsuits commenced during the term of the insurance coverage agreement, regardless of the number of lawsuits or the number of actual alleged violations. VI.What doesn't it cover? There are two major kinds of costs for which this coverage would not reimburse the official: 1.Any fine or penalty for violating the open meeting law. 2.Any award that orders the city official to pay for the opposing party's attorney's fees. As an example, suppose a newspaper is successful in bringing an open meeting claim against a city official. The judge awards a $100 penalty against the official and also orders the official to pay the attorneys fees incurred by the newspaper in bringing the claim. The new coverage would not pay or reimburse either the penalty or the attorneys fees awarded. Note too that this coverage would not cover any legal costs that the city might incur if the city itself were a party to the Open Meeting Law litigation - unless, of course, it was part of a suit that also included a covered claim for damages, as discussed earlier. YU, How will the Open Meeting Law Defense Cost Reimbursement Agreement work? The coverage is significantly different than other coverage provided under the standard LMCIT coverage agreements in a couple important ways. First, unlike LMCIT's liability coveraoes, the Open Meeting Law coverage does not pay the legal costs on the city official's behalf. Instead, LMCIT will reimburse the city official for 80% of those costs, to a maximum of $20,000, after the official has incurred those costs. The city official remains responsible for paying his/her defense attorney, including the 20% which LMCIT will not reimburse as well as any costs over $20,000. Second, the city official retains-control of the litigation. The city official makes the decisions on what attorney to hire, whether to settle or compromise the litigation, whether to appeal, etc.. The coverage is. triggered when-a- lawsuit is served on the city official alleging a violation of the Minnesota Open Meeting Law If a lawsuit is filed during that term of the agreement, the city official has to do two things: 1.Notify LMCIT of the litigation; and 2.Select defense counsel. VIZI. How much will this coverage cost? Initially, we'll be basing the charge for this coverage on the premium for the city's liability coverage. Generally, the cost will be 1.5% of the liability premium, subject to a $500 minimum premium. In an individual city's case the premium could be somewhat higher if in the underwriter's judgement there is a substantially higher risk of Open Meeting Law claims in that city, though we expect this to be rare. IX.How do we go about adding this coverage for otir city? Have your agent contact LMCIT's underwriters at Berkley Risk Services and ask for an application form. The underwriters will be able to return quote fairly quickly. X.Whom can we call if we have other questions? If you need additional information or have other can contact Tom Grundhoefer or Pete Tritz at the or call the underwriter at Berkley Risk Services your city. We'd also appreciate any comments or city officials have for ways this coverage could for any other changes cities would like LMCIT to questions, you League office, who handles suggestions be improved, or consider. 10/93 :ImcilS I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MEEHNG FEB 1 4’1994 cmroFORONo DATE: February 8, 199^ ITEM NO.: / ^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: ' Request to Designate Funding for the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) Program When the DARE program was initiated seven years ago, the program expenditures were added to the Police Department budget in the amount of $1,600. These costs are shared with all of the contract cities. When reviewing the Police Department budget for expenditure reductions related to the Spring Park contract proposal, the DARE program expenditures were identified as a potential issue of concern for Spring Park. The potential concern is that the DARE program is provided in the Orono School District while Spring Park is in the Westonka School District. To eliminate this potential issue the DARE program expenditures were eliminated from the general police expenditure budget with the intention of requesting the Council to authorize other sources of funding for the program. One of the sources of funding is a new revenue source provided to Cities as a special distribution of Court fines from drug related offenses. This revenue is distributed based on the number of DARE classes provided by the pol'ce department. Although this revenue is not required to be used for DARE programs, it is staffs recommendation that this revenue be designated to fund the DARE program. The City recently received the distribution of this revenue in the amount of $1,016.77. If the DARE program requires additional funding, it is recommended drug forfeiture funds be used to cover the remaining expenditures. In past years the amount of DARE program expenditures has been approximately $1,600. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to designate the $1,016.77 special drug prevention revenue distribution toward the DARE program and to authorize the use of drug forfeiture funds in an amount not to exceed $600.00 for the 1994 DARE program. M oisrntcT count AOMiMiitnATiON I2TH rLOon counts towcn HCNNCniK COUNTY COvCnNMCNt CCNTCn NINNIAPOLIS. minn CSOTA SSA87 TAX leiai 3Aa*2i3i STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT OF MINNESOTA fourth JUOICIAU DISTRICT February 1, 1994 Orono Police Dept. Attn: Officer J. Cornick Jr. P.O. Box 86 Crystal Bay, liN. 55323 Dear Officer Cornick Jr, Enclosed is check for $1,016.77 which represents your share of fines collected in 1993 for the controlled substance offenses per Minnesota Statute 609.101 subdivision 3. Fines collected per Minnesota Statute 609.101 subd. 3 are to be disbursed as: 30% to the State and 70% to a local drug abuse prevention program in the county. The recommendation of the Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association was to disburse the funds (the 70%) on a percentage basis (based on the proportionate number of hours of drug prevention training provided) to each department that provided the certification of classroom instructional hours. If you have any questions, feel free to call - 348-6085. Sincerely, PomJ Paul Chaussee Court Division Supervisor RECEIVED FEB 7 1994 OflCNO POUCE DEPT. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION airy DATE: February ITEM NO: ^ 6 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Reconsideration - Tax Forfeit Property I have attached a memo from John Gerhardson updating the status of the tax forfeit property the Council had indicated they wanted to pursue for park use. The former owner of the property has applied to redeem or repurchase the property. Although the City can continue to pursue its claim to the property, the Council may want to reconsider its position based on this new situation in which the former owner is now in a position to repurchase the property. When the property was simply available and the property owner was going to lose the property whether the City made a claim to it or not, it made sense for the City to pursue the property. Now that the owner is in a position to redeem tlie property, the City’s pursuit of the property would be a significant hardship on the property owner. It is staffs recommendation that the City should not pursue the property for park land at the expense of the former property owner who, in the absence of the City’s claim, would be in a position to redeem the property. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to indicate the Council ’s position on continuing to pursue the tax forfeit property. ► TO: FROM: DATE: Ron Moorse, City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director February 8, 1994 SUBJECT:Reconsideration - Tax Forfeit Property Recently the City of Orono applied for a large parcel of land in the Saga Hill area that had been \TH0M\5 'I.» «»M •ftoi^rr». Ml M«itt».Kf T. iininT L •j m\ II 1111111 •riTtv^Aj KllbCtl4MINII.W I SUCM^MW tt4»l he •«wm4S n Mai i. • Ja MI-S I ual DWIN f.rrmo icoiuiM.t.|» 1 IKM>tY MURNANE • CONLLN • WHITE ..K: RR.AND IfRn»K^1t0^^t 4\Nr>ci%rir>i«A7TCR.ni :Y!« M t awIaFFRAY PI.A/A •mcm\H SlKFFTSAINT PAI u MINNTSOTA 55101 ni>X*HONH i6l2) 22 February 4, 1994 VIA VAX NO.473-0510 CITY OF ORONO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 ATTM NR JOHN GSRHARD80N JUIL' % SnOCM\NTl lUMM. A.IU^S*Wil I uM L. MOlUNTTlfMW 4S 4. C;il LK.\'. /t.' IXl'inr. 4NAAiAiI K^r.f n. NFiMikRi. niOMAXAMNUlY ASWfr V lUkKM CiROL t. I\K>B '%IU.UM% UMITR N,\jlOU:V M•4l AOMmtNO«h«M IlhWM i.MLlt>4>A I H UiLCS ft. Ml R.N 4.NK Re: 0.Larry Lee Parcel No. 07 117 23 0001, orono Our File No. 38594 Dear Mr. Gerhardson: This will confirm our telephone conferences of February 3rd and February 4th wherein we advised that our client. The Midway National Bank of St. Paul, a judgment creditor, has filed an application for repurchase of forfeited lands regarding the above property. For your information we are enclosing the front page of the application for repurchase and a copy of the plat drawing showing the location of the property owned by the Midway National Bank in relationship to the forfeited parcel. As eat forth in the application, it is in the intention of the Midway National Bank, if the application to repurchase is granted, to arrange for development of both parcels for residential purposes. If there are any additional questions, please let me know. J£B:pal enclosure cc: Jack Ritt (w/enclosures) isiAhiisinn 1‘Ho -{ ■>' Si *• « repubchase of forfeited lands Minn—»«•> To Til* #-•"* ^ Cottntr Comail-toKrt *»*-------”mass----=«.«,. «.«».<••T»* C««»tT Alrflw •<-------------------------------------------- r. t)fi^ t* /#rty -Z^*" .ftennspin.M>**•••• •Vl'Mif joUi MiC m^rr part/cn- See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made 3 fart hereof. ^ a"^ to «ha«xnll rv.i 1992 and.JlS3a ------ - „au.i« ;'“*^*^^SaSrri fflia Hn4sd.Sb«t«»' «d.S3/3£»< 12,967.S -amta.««-* a • •• J}oiUr9* u th^ ffspn Of , m A----------#ue#<^ •• fvU^^f Id ra„pjtpM in axrjrcclm wilh ^ aaaeaaitiLe bedng agiLitaTC.'3 vriil oniDtB tie tee cf JP »>= pnerty fix laridBltjal «B «dii.Armnr Bdl^ ' r. Pty*PO"^A'«'«***“-< i «»Z*«' *y U*/^ *A- ^ ,A« romcnfJM^^O^ U* l«i* »“*ma,m/>«oorrtw».«i»rf *o ** «HK cr 9T.. P w ,rebr«aiy..2- . « iia" attorney iS^tfitt at iHinnEiotfla Cfuntv «»< —^ J®Sf_£*JSB& PAUL 3E22SSSSS--- m ^lOwiii iktrm/t ttoi 2nd *,- ^ W m u * A ^ m to<A* __________j# 9A _______iSkAAAAAA/^'i ►ATnrClA A. L0WGM£N5?Y | « Aa«ZWl A ^ A AAAe\.V V/a ^ L'OdUr PUUJC'k.eS^MU CAA:S<V .••vu-rry > «fc ^ * i X* ' -. •» • •* f • *v *.la ••c.ito^I •• *Via •• ^•1 3 issm XMl imrnrnmm^J#•••••••••<•••1 4.JS •® V\Cki U a■^r^ 'T'* r»T‘•jSappife. -V y ftty V 8*'iSi e \\v \ ^ 1 i ^\ 1 \ '»4 - m i -** 1 tl * 9 -* • 1«v«91IB»9 (»>W) •. » •y.^; < •• :_• tf--i Mn| ■m, A /. tO) 1 Itf) TaERCROFT (B)m tl5)'(Z2)/(il / "w I t t t 1^•••■a.—^ I” •••t ; ; : : :!k» • •• # r •• y •• •• • • • «»«* • ^ ••• •■' y*I ^ •“m • « « m •• •■'. 'Ji‘r*"'^ • "r^y* t • • • • r.v'«j r*7*-V •t • • r*^**«* «•••♦..• • ; •« ••I • I ••• i i i !•*?—•; • • •! * • * •• *, W> ••*.••(••k. V rm I r*^-—»r**»y * • ti* •* * #I • m\ m ^ m • • * •^•••••••#* • .* ■'« US) 1A I ••F t 1 • W t .* -^ jJ.________j1_____L JU REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 2/8 % ITEM NO.: / ^ Department Approval: Name John R. Gertiardson Title Public Works Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Item Description: Water Tower Antenna Request Recently I received a request from Safe Link Corporation to consider the installation of an antenna on our water tower behind the City offices. The antenna wouid be a six foot fiberglass mounted on the railing at the top of the tower. Usually there are control cabinets that are placed in a nearby building. The control cabinets are 21" wide. 24" deep and 30" high. A standard rental fee is $100-150 per month. We have a similar agreement in place at the Navarre water tower for which Public Works receives 12 digital pagers at no cost. If Council agrees with this type of activity, we would present a more formal request at a later date. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to indicate the Council’s position regarding the rental of space for an antenna on the City’s water tower. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: ITEM NO 'N,, Department Approval: \am« John R. Gerhardson ^, Title Public Works DirectorL^'\»2 Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Item Description: 1994 Community Development Block Grant Program For the past several years, the City of Orono has been participating in the Community Development Block Grant Program. For 1994, the City should receive approximately $23,000. In the past, the City has allocated monies to community service organizations such as We Can, Interfailh Outreach, Westonka- Intervention, Housing Rehab and Stubbs Bay Sewer Connection Grant. In order to participate in the program, the City must conduct a public hearing to receive City input. A draft public hearing notice is included for Council review and approval. I have listed activities that the Council may want to consider. Those activities must be included in the public hearing notice but that does not mean they will be tunded once the public hearing has been conducted. It is recommended the public hearing date be March 14, 1994 at 7:30 p.m COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to establish a public hearing concerning the allocation of 1994 CDBG funds for 7:30 p.m. on March 14. 1994, and to approve the public hearing notice as drafted by staff. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 1994 URBAN HENT^EPLN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVTLOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGILUM f Notice is hereby given that the city cf Orono in cooperation with Hennepin County, pursuant to Title I of the Housing and Community Development Aa of 1974. as amended, is holding a public hearing on Monday, March 14, 1994, at 7;30 p.m. in the City Council Ch nbers, 2780 Kelley Parkway. The public hearing is on the bousing and community needs of the city and Urban Hennepin County, the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program Statement of Objectives, and the proposed use of the 1994 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program planning allocation of $23,000 by the city. In addition, during the July 1. 1994 to June 30. 1995 program year it is estimated that no additional program income from locally funded CDBG activities will be available to the city. The Statement of Objectives consists of the following seven program areas: (1) ADMINISTRATION, to maximize program benefit and effectively administer program funds; (2) HOUSING, to rehabilitate and assist in the development of housing which is affordable to low- and moderate-income households; (3)NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION, to maintain and preserve viable neighborhoods through concentrated community development activities; (4) PUBLIC FACILITIES, to improve existing and assist in the development of new public facilities which benefit low- and moderate-income persons; (5) ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, to provide financial assistance to businesses which will provide or retain employment to the benefit of low- and moderate-income persons; (6) Pl^BLIC SERVICES, to expand and improve the quantity and quality of public services available to low- and moderate-income persons; and (7) REMOVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL BARRIERS; to remove material and architectural barriers which restrict the nwbility and accessibility of elderly or disable persons. The city of Orono is proposing to undertake the following activities with 1994 Urban Hennepin County CDBG funds starting on or about July 1, 1994. Activity Budget Interfaith Outreach Community Partners Westonka Intervention We Can Park Planning Stubbs Bav Sewer Connection Grant $ 1,500 S 1,000 $ 1,000 S 2.700 $16,800 Subsequent increases or decreases in the community planning allocation or the budget of any funded activity by the greater of $10,000 or 50 percent of the allocated amount is a substantial change and pursuant to Urban Hennepin County policy will be subject to the amendment process. For additional information on the proposed activities, level of funding, objectives and performance, contract the city of Orono at 473-7357 or the Hennepin County Office of Planmng and Development at 541-7086. The public hearing is being held pursuant to MS 471.59. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 8^^ ITEM NO n Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Request for Funding for Performance Evaluation Training The clerical/technical and maintenance performance evaluation forms have now been completed. A new evaluation form has also been developed for the supervisory/administrative group. Prior to beginning the first round of evaluations with the new forms it is important that all supervisors are brought up-to-speed regarding the performance evaluation process and how to conduct effective performance evaluations. The most effective and cost effective way to do this is to bring together all of the supervisors for an in-house training session conducted by a training consultant. I have met with a training consultant to discuss a one-half day work shop on performance evaluation. The consultant outlined an effective one-half day work shop at a cost in the range of $750 to $950 depending on the amount of preparation time needed. I would like to proceed with planning for the work shop at a cost not to exceed $950.00. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to authorize a four hour performance evaluation work shop for a cost not to exceed $950.00 to be funded from the special projects contingency account. %^C/i %REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 8, 1994 ITEM NO Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator A dministrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Authorization of Additional Funding for Engineer Consulting Related to Highway 12 The City has contracted with the fimi of Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch (SRF) to provide engin^ring advice during the Highway 12 corridor selection process. The Council has periodically authorized the continuation of the funding for SRF. The most recent amount authorized has now been expended. Charleen Zimmer of SRF has indicated an authorization of an amount not to exceed $3,000 would be sufficient to cover a substantial time period in 1994 based on the amount of work SRF has recently been doing for the City. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to authorize additional funding for engineering consulting services by SRF in an amount not exceed $3,000.00, to be funded through the contingency account. % REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 8, ITEM NO.: ^ / Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Ff/h Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Park Commission Reappointments • At a recent Council meeting, Council was advised that the terms of three Park Commissioners had expired. These three are; Dick Flint, Sherokee Use and Susan Wilson. Council directed staff to determine whether the three are interested in being reappointed to an additional term. Ali three have indicated an interest in serving an additional term on the Park Commission. Council may at this time take action to reappoint each to an additional term. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to appoint; Dick Flint, Sherokee Use and Susan Wilson to additional terms on the Park Commission beginning 1/1/94 and expiring on 12/31/96. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE^§(^ij[Wy^l(y)?l?94 ITEM NO: ^ v Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Planning Commission Reappointments / The terms of two members of the Planning Commission will expire on March 31, 1994. These are Janice Berg and Dale Lindquist. I have attached a memo from Jeanne Mabusth indicating the attendance record for all Planning Commissioners for 1993, If the Council is supportive of reappointing Ms. Berg and Mr. Lindquist, staff will contact them to determine their interest in serving an additional term. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion indicating Council’s position regarding the eligibility of Commissioners Berg and Lindquist to serve additional terms on the Planning Commission. TO:Mayor and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorsc, City Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Budding & Zoning Administrator DATE:December 15, 1993 SUBJECT:Planning Commission Attendance Record for 1993 A. B. Record of attendance for members at eleven meetings of the year: Chair Charles Schroeder Asst. Chair Stephen Peterson Candace Rowlene no absences 2 absences (January and February) Tuesday meeting nights create conflicts with scheduled classes 5 absences (March, April, August, October, November) Record of attendance in April of 1993: for members at seven meetings - members appointed by CouncU Janice Berg Dale Lindquist Charles Nolan, Jr. Sandra Smith 2 absences (August, November) 1 absence (October) 1 absence (July) 1 absence (November). REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE:€»|;^94!^ 7 ITEM NO Department Approval: Name John R. Gerhardson . Title Public Works Director Administrator Reviewed: //, Agenda Sectteri^: Item Description: Burlington Northem/City of Orono Agreement Attached for review and approval is an agreement between Burlington Northern Railroad and the City of Orono for the replacement of the Old Crystal Bay Road Bridge. Language in the agreement relates to a permanent easement which Burlington Northern will grant to the City for an amount of $2,500. In addition. Burlington Northern is requesting reimbursement for estimated expenditures in the amount of $1,851 for flagging, temporary construction crossing if needed, inspection of construction by railroad personnel and track restoration if required. All of the above costs are reimbursed by MSA. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the agreement with Burlington Northern Railroad related to the replacement of the Old Crystal Bay Road Bridge. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ ^ 4 io^ ^ .m’iSafw,®*DATE; ITEM NO; uUuii Department Approval: Name Rod Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Consideration of Joint Council/Planning Commission Work Session Both the Council and the Planning Commission have agreed that the two groups should meet on some periodic basis to review genera! land use issues and specific issues that are facing the Planning Commission and the Council. As the four new Planning Commission members have now had an opportunity to deal with a range of planning issues and as the Planning Commission is currently in the process of a substantial review of the B2 (marina) ordinance, this may be an appropriate time for a joint work session. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; Consideration of a Joint Council/Planning Coiiii:iU>ion work session. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: Him ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Descriotion: Land Use Planning Workshops Planning Commission members have expressed an interest in attending the Land Use Planning workshops sponsored by the Government Training Service February through April 1994. Five of the seven members have expressed an interest in attending the basic planning seminar at $65.00 each. Seven have expressed an interest in attending the advanced seminar at $85.00. The fee for attendance at both seminars is as follows: Basic $325.00 Advanced 595.00 Total $920.00 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Staff would like permission to enroll Planning Commission members at both seminars. •m ••^ • %••#. •-.-A.:V:-.T.•• • • •• ‘#_»• « # • • #.«C •. .•■•’_>•.•.•...•. '^^%*.:.V • >• «•. ir '?- J .<W»««.tSM^&.oS*iOain offer workshops W necessitafe programjcancellation or pwlpoi^ f 'deisighedfespeciaiiy for.citizerirpfantiefs.;-:^^^^^^^^ be-notifiedwia.announce- ■fFioir Wnnwlfidae 6f : / ■ ments on WCCO radio; and other local.radio.sta;:; ,.c'. •« •* Jn which they live.-':-'. •» *f w " - r' i.* ‘.-■f .‘-A 5- !'■ i-'* $ *• —( .. * 1'*'; •* % i. -C*• • ' ••V. ■•• -V.r ■ Program Featiires'lhclude: '' •i An accomplished faculty with extensive * •; backgrounds in both planning and •.Jnstructioh -- •Presentatlonejocusing on current issues and timely information •Handy reference materials designed to ■- make your job easier • * . • If you. would like to make your contribution to solving land, use problems as informed and effective as possible. . REGISTER TODAY! THESE.PROGRAMS ARE.FOR YOU.-. . V .»• .* ■ . V. • •\. •^•m..«a *•m ..---------- -• - • . Registration fees for all workshops include a T\ meal, refreshment breaks and handout materi-.. als. See inside for details about group dis counts for three or more participants attending "Annual Planning Institute.". .• :‘ •a*’* *-• .* ' ’ IMPORTANT: To qualify for the group discount, registrations must be mailed in'the same enve- . Jope! ; 1 ■ WHO SHOULD ATTEND? 'Menibefs of planning commissions, boards of adjustment/appeals and governing bodies in . Minnesota cities; counties and townships. Also' "valuable for; members of other advisory com- - missions, housing and redevelopment authori ties, staff (especially-those without degrees in planning),-real estate professionals, and others CO-SPONSpRS r... .. . - . :• •Association of Metropolitan Municip^ities •Association of Minnesota Counties . •• •Humphrey.Institute of Public Affairs V • •League of Minnesota Cities .. . •Minnesota Association of Townships •Minnesota Chapter, American Planning •• Association ', - •Minnesota Planning.Association •Minnesota Plarining .. .;f' FURTHER INFORMATION. • Contact Barb Croucher (Registration) or Vivian- working Yn areas related to specialized work-- ■' Hart (Program) at"Governmenf'Raining 'shop topics......: V ■Service, (612) 222-7409 or-Minnesota Toll Free '(800)652-9719.. , .. . ..'’ REAL ESTATE CREDITS . Participants of ^Annual Planning Institutes", and. “Beybnd the Basics" can earn Continuing Real-. .Estate'Education'Credits.. •i w .REGISTRAtlON/QANCELLATION .Registe'c'at. least •Z'-day&: prior to the worksho'p- ; •date'.Using the fornis. in this brochure. Fill- out. Cone;.fbrmJarCeach^___ ;>rieeded.%Fees^wilLbe refunded. Iess.a $15.^ :;se.^c^felftfe;feastration.iscaricbned;?A^ ^*qfkih;g:|tdiyV*before.;;the;;prpg r. ¥VI ij-piGU r * Players in the-planning process Understanding the planning process .•.unaersianuirig.Elements o(,a comprehensive plan r>. '.t-r ••- BASIC PLANNING TOOLS — PART I: - ' 2Sn1ng.^arian ^ conditional use PERMJS ■•: Definitions. Rationale. Uses. Myths/Misconceptions. How - •,,to ’s. Non-conforming Uses: . -. . T.ZONING CASE STUDIES:* •' ^' -• HYPOTHETICAL PROBLEM SOLVING :.' ••Participants'are; placed'into small groups m which they. ' worlcorrruralor uitan zoning issues. • ^ --- YOUR LEGALUMITS; . YOUR ROLE AS A DECISION MAKER - •< •. The changing environment in land use I . - *- Legal limits":- - - ' ’ ;V *r Procedures-tdkeep from being sued ‘' •When something goes.wrong. who ’s liable? .-;•.. v.'r-ConfJiCfof interest*.:, •V..VwVHow-your attorney can help*' • * • -• •*; /Wideo ptesentatiom/Rudehaven* •’‘ . HOT isSUESr-^PART I:r L•.'ANSWERS Ta.YOUR.QUESTIONS (Faculty Panel) .. iBASiC PLANNING TOOLS — PART Hr -* SUBDIVISION REGULATION •. VDefinitiOfi. Rationale. Uses.- Content. Procedures. Design ; ;-Standards; Rhandal Guaranties. Special Provisions. - . ^ •EVALUAtlON OF A SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL; .OASIMULA-nOW; r ‘V * • , ' -^Participants'work in small groups-to evaluate a develop- .-'-i er*s subdivision-plan using standard planning tools — the 5 comprehensive plan.'ordinances; and maps. ;. . , - HOTISSUES —PART II: " : V •^ ^ ■' “ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS (Faculty Panel) • , .V >i-' fruiu UtUlJCi fcrycu iiwt dated findings of fact ........V • r* *-PLANNING FOR DEVELOPMENT ,. .. (Of Any Size). . . /. - -“..^V*- *' .- -• . Some definitions and background - .;v".. ,.<r ■How tools relate to each other : --V ,-.y •Subdivision exactions and dedications.'*:. -.V.--. ‘ -y - -Role of comprehensive plan: standards. ^. •' , : *j:V - . 5 Public and private secto*- perspectives.: =- Implementation strategies ' ; ’ v -Legal issues * • ‘ . '•* -. 7'• Pitfalls/words to the wise. . ‘; ‘ Adoption requirements - -. -. ' *» r' •.^ V. • ;• ' : • * .**- • ••BASIC LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS. Open Meeting Law : ^ Conf'ict of interest . Making findings of fact that supportyourJandruse;...^^y.> decisions \ ^SE LAW UpbATEr. 'v f.i.r.'VfRECENT CASE LAW UPDATE; -'/HATS HOT, WHAT’S NOT“ •Summary of recent land use cases.. •Proposed new zoning/enabling legislation'->*-.' ■. • -»* »v T coping ^with*ti^'realitiesofthe :.pla ^^^: PROCESS • . ' • How to (and how not to) conduct public.heanngs •,*., . ••• I pnal Guidelines ' ' ‘Legal guidelines - Practical tips from a local elected official * /.• », r. alternative URBAN AREA-WIDE REVIEW 1: . * QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION OF SPECIRC ;.,• SITUATIONS (Faculty Panel) ' - - -- -v;:*FACULTY'- ‘^ ■ -.-i ;■ ' ••MAN;TRAQUAIR'BALL;.pianner and Attorney.' . ..;^■-^tRasmussen•&'Ball••■-’•'-y■:; WILLIAM GRIFFITH;Attorney. Larkin. Hoffman^i ., . . 'yy '•'Daly i.lJndgrehrv^i^:-',• -, -. •‘■y,’*:;^.-’ty, •t • FACULTY •r' j Vi'S • Lzaiy OL.WM » - . - - •' .‘Robert LOCKYEAR, Director of Plarining and • M Mm • ___ ta # ' V-'- .••' . -.•:• V .’. PETER BACHMAN, Attorney; Leonard; iSlreetand^..-*. . . Deinard / .. 'y JOHN SHARDLOW, President: Dahlgrem* y'-.V2^ -.-c.-r.:' v" *;> V. •>•' s:. * -•.: -V** *.r. ' : - .***• r • •••.. •. •,*r • .• •• •*.*.. . *.? *.*. V—L. ^' r.,.... • , 4.^ /, '>« LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL^?^^ ^ Jq FOR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 1994 Special Event Permit - Home Display L C» * 'er Designers & Builders 52i '* h Stream Road Februai. 26-March 20 Weekend hours 12-6 p.m. Weekday hours 3-7 p.m. PARADES it SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OP ORONO, MINNESOTA Phone Number: 935-8402 Name: L.CRAMER DESIGNERS & BUILDERS Address: 5500 Lincoln Drive, Suite 180 Permit _Fee: S50.00 D'l r‘ ^^■ City, State, Zip; Edina, Minnesota 55436_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _pgQ Location of Parade or Event: 521 North Stream Road"‘~ fn a -\ ‘ Person(s) and/or Organiraticn(s) Handling the Event: Larry Cramer -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _L. CRAMER DESIGNERS & BUILDERS - Builders Association of the Twin Cities Date of Event; February 26 - March 20 Hours of Event_ _ _Weekd^ays Reason or Purpose; Home Display_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Insurance Company* "estfield Insurance Co. Amount; Agarpgatp si.nnn.nnn_ _ _ Copy of insurance certificates to be submitted with this application. ( SEE ATTACHED) I am aware of all applicable State and other laws regardinc parades and special e^erjvts and will abide by same. I also agree to hold the City of Orono h^tm>ess fppm all liabilities that may arise directly or indirectly from tme,^d5arade >dr special event approved by the granting of this permit. Signature 2/7/94 Date Approved:Denied:By:/ Remarks: NOTE; I have spoken to the Police Department and we are prepared to cooperate with the guidelines they have ^ .recomm^ded for this event. ''/j„ 1 I i mK TL 5i'S JECtlPT-rUM YOU kL-YiTlO COOi POi ICS: OOA .-S' / Sb- ~vj J •. ■ <x^COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Wed Feb 2 CHECK NO CHECK OAT|,/ CHECK AMOUNT 1994 02:56:25VENDOR DESCRIPTIONCITY COUNTY CREDIT UNI W/H & TRANSFERRED Page 1ACCOUNT •INVOICE PO NUM.MANUAL9999-2030 000663 IP 9999-2030 000656 IP 9999-2030 000654 >IP t 9999-2030 000664 IP 9999-2030 000666 IP 9999-2030 000665 Is ' ' ’• ‘ ‘iIP/ 9999-2030 000655 •' f '. IP 9999-2030 000668 IP 9999-2030 000667 • IP 9999-2030 000661 IP 9999-2030 000669 .IP 9999-2030 000657 •^. IP i 9999-2030 000659 IP 9999-2030 000651 IP 9999-2030 000653 /IP 9999-2030 000652 IP. ^A 9999-2030 000660 *•* IP 9999-2030 000662 v»*. 029874 0 1994/02/02 S5.156.00S5.156.00* 029875 1994/02/02 S139.13 S139.13* 029876 1994/02/02 S67.77 S67.77* 029877 1994/02/02 S9.422.24 S9.422.24* 029878 1994/02/02 S2.849.45 S2.849.45* 029879 1994/02/02 S35.982.42 $35,982.42* 029880 1994/02/02 >1.434.00 SI.434.00* 029881 1994/P2/02 S146.50 S146.50* 029882 1994/02/02 S164.00 S164.00* 029883 1094/02/02 S30.00 S30.00* 029884 1994/02/02 S350.00 S350.00* 029885 1994/02/02 S5.09 S5.09* 029886 1994/02/02 S2.834.74 S2.834.74* 029887 1994/02/02 SIOO.OO SIOO.OO* 029888 1994/02/02 S23.71 $23.71* 029889 1994/02/02 $863.46 $863.46* 029890 1994/02/02 $60.00 $60.00* 029891 1994/02/02 $3,483.00 S3.483.00* COLONIAL LIFE INS INS W/H COMMERCIAL LIFE INS INS W/H FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF W/H FED MEDCR FICA T FIRST NAT'iONAL BANK OF CITY SHARE FICA/MEDC FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF NET PAYROLL TRANSFR GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURA DEF COMP W/H HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPOR MARK THOMTON 1002667 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPOR DALE SKREEN tC026231 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST- W/H DEF COMP LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR W/H UNION DUES MINNESOTA BENEFIT INS W/H MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVE STATE TAX W/H MN STATE RETIREMENT-DE W/H DEF COMP PEBSCO/OBRA W/H DEF COMP PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYO W/H DEF COMP PERA LIFE INS PERA INS W/H PERA W/H f ))V.' • • VCOUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Wed Feb 2 1994 02:58:25CHECK NO CHECK DATf* CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION Page 2 •(029892 1994/02/02 S18.00 UNITED WAY $18.00*CHARITY W/H ACCOUNT • 9999-2030 INVOICE000658 PO NUM.MANUAL$63,129.51 .. •• », •*4 !•. * r '" »**.-. , .r ‘•."V ''•.t '* ■.•/. • •V,,.,,•*«. COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Frl Jan 21 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT029852»0298530298S4 029855 029856 029857 029858 029859 029860 029801 029862 029863 029884 029865 029866 029867 029868 029669 1994/fil/19 1994/01/19 1994/01/19 1994/01/19 1094/01/19 1094/01/19 1994/01/19 1994/01/19 1994/01/19 1004/01/19 1994/01/19 1994/01/19 1004/01/19 1994/01/19 1094/01/19 1994/01/19 1994/01/19 1004/01/19 55.036.00 S5.036.00*S137.18 S137.18*S67.77 $67.77* S9.142.94 S9.142.94* S2.813.99 S2.813.99* S36.726.16 S36.726.16* 51.434.00 SI.434.00* $491.54 $491.54* S146.50 S146 50* 5164.00 S164.00* 530.00 S30.00* $5.09 $5.09* $2,767.06 $2,767.06* 5100.00 SIOO.OO* S110.12$110.12* $863.46 $863.46* 578.00 $78.00* $3,458.08 S3.458.08* 1994 02:38:03. . . .. . . . . . . . . .DESCRIPTIONCITY COUNTY CREDIT UNI W/H & TRANSFERREDCOLONIAL LIFE INS INS W/HCOMMERCIAL LIFE INS INS W/H FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF WITHHELD FED MEDCR F FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CITY SHARE FICA/MEDC FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF NET PAYROLL TRANSFER GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURA DEF COMP W/H GROUP HEALTH PLAN W/H INSURANCE f'ENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPOR MARK THOMTON IC02667 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPOR DALE SKREEN iC026231 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST- W/H DEF COMP MINNESOTA BENEFIT INS W/H MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVE STATE TAX W/H MN STATE RETIREMENT-DE W/H DEF COMP PEBSCO/OBRA W/H DEF COMP PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYO W/H DEF COMP PERA LIFE INS PERA INS W/H PRA W/H ACCOUNT i9S99-20309999-20309999-2030 9999-2030 9990-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 INVOICE000637000642000644 000636 000634 00063S 000646 000647 000633 000632 000639 000648 000641 000649 000645 000650 000640 000638 PO HUM P*9« i MANUALipIPIP IP IP IP •IP IP IP IP IP IP IP Ip IP IP IP I .‘ 0 •Page 2PO NUM.manual ’:7' •V •. •/ COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Thu Feb 10 1994CHECK NO CHECK D.ATr"CHECK AMOUNT 05:02:04VENDOR Page 1DESCRIPTIONACCOUNT •INVOICE PO NUM.MANUAL0408-4305 027729 OH0200-4305 026864 OH0840-4305 026864 OH0549-430«i 026864 OH0200-4304 026864 OH9113-3841 026864 OH0569-4305 026864 OH0358-4305 026864 OH9001-1299 027382 OH0249-4305 027383 OH0408-4306 027384 OH0408-4306 027730 OH0359-4306 027385 OH0355-4306 027731 OH 9001-1299 027734 OH 0249-4305 027728 OH • 0480-4399 046712 OH 9115-3841 1710 OH 0080-4358 002314 OH 0080-4358 001417 OH 0020-4322 001414 OH 0590-4154 001416 OH 0099-4343 M10052 OH 9001-1299 388153 OH 9001-1299 387002 OH 0549-4345 12710 OH 029490 029897 029898 029899 029900 029901 029902 029903 029904 029905 1994/02/141994/02/141994/02/141094/02/141994/02/141994/02/141994/02/141994/02/141094/02/141994/02/141994/02/141994/02/141904/02/141994/02/14 1004/02/14 1994/02/14 1994/02/14 1994/02/14 1994/02/14 1994/02/14 1994/02/14 1994/02/14 1994/02/14 1994/02/14 1994/02/14 1994/02/14 $679$453$1,200$245$50$240$469$394$2,480$53$2,716$1,825$80$80 $1,176 $269 $12,414 $9,863 $9,863 $2,981 $2,981 $418 $418 1649900000755000005075052500 15 89 39- 06 06* 00 00* 50 50* $148.21 $148.21* $625.29 $625.29* $13.94 $13.94* $142.75 $142.75* $3,233.22 $5,421.01 $8,654.23* $948.50 $948.50* $36,209.87 BONESTROOBONESTROOBONESTRCX)BONESTROOBONESTROOBONESTROOBONESTROOBONESTROOBONESTROOBONESTROOBONESTROOBONESTROOBONESTROOBONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO ROSENEROSENEROSENEROSENEROSENEROSENEROSENEROSENEROSENEROSENEROSENEROSENEROSENEROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ASNASNASNASNASNASNASNASNASNASNASNASNASNASN ASN ASN BRAUN INTERTEC ENG COFFIN GRONBERG HENN COUNTY TREAS ENG CONSTR RFP 18ENG CONSULTING OCTENG CONSULTING OCTVALUE HYDRO TANKS PHENGRETAIu’^R OCTSALE FRENCH LmKE PROFERNDALE RD L.S. TESHWY12SAFETY IMPGENENG NOVMSATRAFFIC COUNTS NASSISTEASMNTS/INSPASSISTINSP DECREVISECOST ESTIMATEASSISTEASEMNTS DEC GEN ENG DEC MSA NEEDS/CERT MILES ENG CONSULT-UNDERGRD PLAT PREP FOR SUBDIV ROOM & BOARD DEC HENN CTY SHERIFF DPT BOOKING FEES DEC HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASU TRUTH IN TAXATION EX MINN UC FUND UNEMPLOYMNT COMP-'^TE PLUMBING/HEATING DOCTO THAW PIPES-CC BATHRO POPHAM HAIK & ASSOC DEC LEGAL POPHAM HAIK & ASSOC NOV LEGAL WIDMER BROS WATERMAIN BREAK FAGE 01/30/04 PiCB PiREQOi 200 02/24/94 PR;201CM PiREQOiEMP • NAME DPT471841060 474563330 476921419 471440471 475443462 472503991 400526026 475949721 464421014 472529007 464701464 507545424 469646502 464420432 469047444 474667412 475340151 477500099 475444249 477493977 344625354 471590463 477647270 475604753 504260307 472500574 121262417 440443542 477700023 334506241 464900535 476743251 470700901 469444107 475342943 473746173 470506520 460029194 475569177 267460042 472563051 474663206 470704904 475505292 464629444 500403192 477881539 ANDERSON. BRUCE L 31 BOBZIEN, SUE A 31 BORIS. iCOTT W 31 BOSMA. JAMIE L 12 BRINKHAUS. JOHN F 42 CHESWICK. GARY B 31 CONNICK. JAMES L 31 DEH80USKI, JAY C 31 ENGLISH III, IRVING 31 ERICKSON, KURT R 31 FISCHENICH, DAN T 31 FRITZLER. JOHN M 31 GAFFRON,MICHAEL P 33 QERHARDSON, JOHN R 42 GOMAN, DAVID J 35 GREGORY,JAMES D 42 HALLIN, DOROTHY H 12 HANSEN, STEVEN C 42 HANSING,CAROL J 31 HASEMAN,CAROLE 12 JENSEN. ROONEY W 93 JOHNSON.BRADLEY P 31 KARNITZ,RICKY D 31 KENNEN, JANICE M 31 KNUTSON.CHARLOTTE A 15 KUEHN, THOMAS M 15 MABUSTH,JEANNE A 33 MCNICHOLS, DAVID L 31 MOORSE, RONALD J 12 MOROWCZYNSKI, JAMES 31 08ERAIGNER. SCOTT Q 42 OBRIEN, RANDY L 92 OMAN, LYLE E 33 PALMER, GREGORY A 42 QUAST, WAYNE A 92 RATHBUN, BARRY J 92 SCHOENHOFF, JOHN B 31 SKREEN, DALE S 42 STEFFENHAGEN, RONALD 93 SULLIVAN. STEPHEN X 31 THOMTON,MARK R 31 TOMCHECK, LAWRENCE F 31 TOMCZYK,MARK W 31 VANG. BRUCE L 33 VEE, LINDA S 12 WALTERS.LINDA G 15 WcCKMAN,STEPHEN J 33 YTDGROSS4939.46 3195.42 414.46 1406.13 4454.41 5141.60 5099.69 5354.13 5242.11 4791.45 4974.31 5076.69 4439 69 16141 41 904.30 4324.70 3827.19 3841.54 1770.85 2072.59 46.35 5394.29 331.49 349.54 3099.75 6522.17 5554.97 4796.73 7335.51 4869.85 3947.60 3892.02 4439.64 3689.66 4828.51 4165.00 1205.95 3945.46 3827.21 6196.96 4714.42 4778.71 4880.04 3877.60 3256.13 3014.24 3490.89 CURRENTGROSS1651.41 1062.12 85.02 597.07 1621.37 1727.20 2092.41 1675.51 1640.66 1611.53 1540.29 1692.23 1483.13 2368.11 214.05 1730.02 1278.96 1449.05 622.52 090.40 30.90 1641.74 76.44 237.941042.57 2177.24 1854.88 1364.23 2511.84 1611.51 1593.05 1436.50 1443.12 1113.04 1443 42 1499 12174.72 1344.33 1278.97 2068.84 1615.44 1551.28 1611.52 1304.16 1194.94 1054.27 1186.48 izyfzzTii EMP i NAME DPT YTOGROSS CURRENt jGROSS469184026 18324677 470366069 473646272 476527186 CALLAHAN. EDWARD J GOETTEN. J DIANN HURR. j6ELLEN L JABBOUR. GABRIEL KELLEY. CHARLES 11 11 11 11 11 600.00 443.34 483.34 443.34 443.34 300.00 241.67241.67 241.6/ 241.67 1.266.88 \ h\ 4 It' CITY OF ORONO 02/11/94FRl. FEB 11. 1994 2:17 AM ---req; CHAR IMMEDIATE PAYMENT A/P loc: OR-FINCE- -job: 3361 932391Check OR 029906 OR 029907 OR 029901 OR 029909 OR 029910 OR 029911 OR 029912 OR 029913 OR 029914 OR 029915 OR 029916 OR 029917 OR 029918 OR 029919 OR 029920 OR 029921 OR 029922 OR 029923 OR 029924 OR 029925 OR 029926 OR 029927 OR 029928 Payee ID. / Payee Name CHECK REGISTER APIP0210 - -prog: CK200 <1.07>-Pafe 1 ---report id; CKREo---Date Check Amount Type Subs02/14/94 0.00 YM IP02/14/94 0 00 VH IP02/14/94 0 00 VM IP02/14/94 19.55 IP02/14/94 190.00 HW IP02/14/94 42 54 MW IP 02/14/94 19,387 50 MW IP 02/14/94 330 00 HW IP 02/14/94 187.25 MW IP 02/14/94 1.13 MW IP 02/14/94 4.629.59 MW IP 02/14/94 57.95 MW IP 02/14/94 161.57 MW IP 02/14/94 >25.53 MW IP 02/14/94 10.92 IP 02/14/94 255.00 MW IP 02/14/94 159 00 MW IP 02/14/94 211.55 HW IP 02/14/94 189.87 MW IP 02/J4/S4 6.00 MW IP 02/14/94 480.62 MW IP 02/14/94 26.00 HW IP 02/14/94 12.00 MW IP VOIO.STARTVOID.STARTVOID.START015T496014 020 1109 030 1099 054 T347 065 095 498 T504 114 T132 142 150 T337 T218 179 Void - Starter CheckVoid - Starter CheckVoid - Starter CheckA T * T ALAN BOYDEN ALL STAR ELECTRIC AMERICAN NATL BANK ANDERSON, BARBARA AT 4 7 INFO SYSTEM AT 4T BARTON SANO/GRAVEL BAYSIDE FLORAL BLACKOWIAK & SONS BUDGET PRINTING CELLULARONE CITY OF ST PAUL CITYVIEW PLMBQ 4 HTG COLE PUBLICATIONS COPY DUP PR INC CULLIGAN DARE AMERICA DIV OF EMERGENCY MGMNT DORADUS CORP VoidVoidVoid T ■ ■■'I! mmm] >k .? - V- :*! m ' rrr- it A- ■4 • ,.^ v ■■ > , A i::-. ' ■■ ‘ « « ■j j #o *CITY OF ORONOFRI, FEB 11. 18R4 02/11/942:17 AM CHAR. . . . .loc ;IMMEDIATEOR-FINCE---PAYMENT A/P-l«b: 3361 tJZSRIChtckPayctIDPayee Name Date Check Amount Type SubsOR029929T194DRIVERS LICENSE GUIDE CO 02/14/94 32.30 MW IPOR02993021?E-Z RECYCLING 02/14/94 5.265.00 IPOR029931nilFAST GLASS INC 02/14/94 203.81 MW IPOR029932272Q & K SERVICES 02/14/94 549.12 MW IPOR029933256GENUINE PARTS CO 02/14794 193.86 MW IPOR029934269GOVERW4T TRAING SERV 02/14/94 415.00 MW IPOR029935 T325 GREOa PALHEP 02/14/94 44.80 MW IPOR029939280HACH CHEMICAL CO 02/14/94 149.62 MW IPOR029937291HALLIN/DOROTHY 02/14/94 17 94 MW IPOR029939TOO!HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 02/14/94 334.25 MW IPOR0299391082IBSOH INC 02/14/94 64.91 MW IPOR 029940 T166 JAMES GREGORY 02/14/94 23.80 IPOR 029941 370 JIM HATCH SALES CO 02/14/94 194.60 IPOR 029942 397 KUEHN. THOMAS 02/14/94 50.18 MW IP08029943461MALLOY KARNOWSKI CO 02/14/94 1,431 00 MW IPOR 029944 T184 MAMA-LMC LABOR REL SERVICE 02/14/94 2,251.00 MW IPOR 029945 462 MARTINS NAVARRE 66 02/14/94 821.79 m IPOR 029946 474 METRO WASTE 02/14/94 20.717.00 MW IPOR029947477MIDWEST BSNS PROD 02/14/94 443.93 MW IPOR029948500MINN COMM 02/14/94 36 22 IPOR029949490MINNEGASCO02/14/94 5.139.50 MW IPOR029950T137MINNESOTA CLE 02/14/94 370.00 MW IP OR 029951 T094 MINNESOTA CONWAY 02/14/94 55.13 MW IP CITY or ORCWOFRI. FEB 11. 1994CheckFayceI&02/11/942:17 AM ---req: CHAR. . . . .loc ;(r Payee Name IMMEDIATE08-FINCE---Date PAYMENT A/P-job: 3361 6J2398-Check Amount Type SubsOR029952'450 MINNESOTA GFOA 02A4/94 Is . 00 MW IPOR 0299S3 Tito MINNESOTA MAYORS ASSOCIATION 02/14/94 20 00 MW IPOR029954495MN BENEFIT ASSN 02/14/94 24.9S MW IPOR029955T501mCHIEF or POLICE ASSN 02/14/94 430.00 MW IPOR0299561036HN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY 02/i4/94 249 21 MW IPOR029957T19tMN DEPT LABOR-INDUSTRY 02/14/94 10.00 MW IPOR029951T093MN DEPT Of NATL RESOURCES 02/14/94 S16.00 MW IPOR029959T502MN RURAL WATER ASSN.02/14/94 140.00 MW IPOR0299601087MN STATE TREASURER 02/14/94 3.012.30 MW IPOR029961T503MORTON INTL-MORTON SALT C2/14/94 4.2Se.75 MW IPOR029962415MPLS OXYGEN CO 02/14/94 lOS.tl MW IPOR029963T500 MUNICI-PALS/P WEIGEL TR 02/14/94 10.00 MW IPOR029964T498N. F.R.COMMUNICATIONS INC.02/14/94 127.46 MW IPOR029965546NAVARRE HARDWARE 02/14/94 257.00 MW IPOR029968571 NORWEST BANK MINN NA 02/14/94 236,372.25 MW IPOR029967562NSP02/14/94 5.430.27 IPOR029961565NSP02/14/94 1,139.39 MW IPOR 029969 545 O’SULLIVANS NAVARRE AUTO REPAI 02/14/94 21.95 MW IPOR029970582OMAN/LYLE 02/14/94 46.76 MW IP OR 029971 T379 ORONO SELF SERVICE 02/14/94 243.28 MW IP OR 029972 598 PERA INS 02/14/94 12.00 MW IP OR 029973 597 PUBLIC EMPL RET ASSN 02/14/94 9,070.01 IP OR 029974 T154 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT ASS 02/14/94 10.00 MW IP o oCITY OF ORONO 02/lI/?4_._IFWEDIATE- r T e_ _PAYMENT A/P_i aK *31ft 1 ftJ 93ftf -FRX, FEB 11. 1994 .Zri7 ---r jOO.Ww 4b .9 V aChtchID.F«ye« «»»•sssssssss ^sscssasssas »*«saaaaaaasaaasaaas*asasa=2*aOf 029S7S T200 PUBLIC SAFETY EQUIP CO Dite CHfck Amountaaaaaaaaaa a a a aaa aa aa a02/14/94 200.00 Typea a a aHW Sobsa a a aIPOR 029976 T170 PUMP L METER SERVICES INC 02/14/94 265 46 NW IPOR029977649OUAST/WAYNE 02/14/94 17.92 MW IPOR 029978 T505 RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING ASSO 02/14/94 100.00 MW IPOR 029979 669 RITZ CAMERA 02/14/94 17.66 NW IPOR 029980 T497 ROBERT OAHLKE 02/14/94 245 00 MW IPOR 029981 675 ROLLINS OIL CO 02/14/94 1,923.29 MW IPOR 029982 T499 ROSE MARY VICKERMAN AND CHARLE 02/14/94 643.00 HW IPOR0299831068SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES 02/14/94 3.065.00 IPOR 029984 T203 ST CLOUD STATE UNIVERSITY 02/14/94 530.00 MW IPOR 02998S 486 STAR TRIBUNE 02/14/94 19.50 HW IPOR 029986 739 STEVENS WELL DRILL 02/14/94 247.16 MW IPOR 029987 740 STRETCHERS 02/14/94 50.06 MW IPOR029988404THE LAKER 02/14/94 269.90 MW IPOR 029989 775 TOWN A COUNTRY 02/14/94 963.83 MW IPOR 029990 814 US WEST CELLULAR INC 02/14/94 257.39 MW IPOR029991 815 US WEST COMMUN 02/14/94 1,296.59 MW IPOR 029992 821 VILLAGE CHEVROLET 02/14/94 988 73 MW IP OR 029993 835 Warning lites of mn 02/14/94 66.03 MW IP OR 029994 841 WATERPRO 02/14/94 1,338.79 MW IP OR 029995 842 WAYZATA-CITY OF 02/14/94 1,289.66 MW IP OR 029996 T359 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE INC 02/14/94 15.00 IP OR 029997 866 WIDMER INC 02/14/94 318.00 MW IP Paoe 4 I: CKREO---••••••••••• L) • • CITY OF ORONO FRI, FEB 11, 199, 02/11/94 ---req: CHA --------loc: Check Payee ID. Payee Na e ••••••••• •••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••s••••••m OR 029991 175 WRlGHT HENN ELECTRIC OR 0295199 194 YOCUM OIL CO INC S U B TOT AL S: Total Void Machine Written Total Void Hand Wr ttenTotal Machin• Written Total Hand Writ en Total fteversals Total Cancelled Cheeks S U 8 T O T A L I""4£0IATE PA E A/P CH CK REGISTE APIP0210 P.age S OR-FI CE----j�b: 3361 IJZ391----------prog: C 200 <l.07 ----report id: CKREG��-Date C ec A oun pe ....... =-•= aaa••=•--••a•&: •••• 02/14/94 .01 "" 02/14/94 1.571.59 l"lw 0.00 0.00 343,218.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 343,218.01 Subs Rel o Note . ··•· . IP I Number of Checks Number of Checks N ber of Chee I Number of Chee ·s Number or Checks Number of Checks Processed· 3 Processed: 0 Processed: Sil Process�d: 0 Processed: 0 Processed : 0 u • t • INFORMATION ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING COUNCILMEEnNQ FEB 1 4 1994 CITYOFORONO OF MINITES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 18, 1994 ATTENDANCE The Orono Planning Commission met on January 18, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. with the following members present: Chair Charles Schroeder, Sandra Smith, Charles Nolan Jr., Candace Rowlette, Stephen Peterson, Janice Berg, and Dale Lindquist. The following represented the City staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth and Recorder Barbara Anderson. Chair Schroeder called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Schroeder aimounced that Item #3 was tabled per applicant’s request and Item #8 had been formally withdrawn by the applicant. ( i)#1901 TANDEM PROPERTIES 2645/3025 WATERTOWN ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth reviewed the proposal with the Planning Commission. Mark Gronberg, Jim Deanovic, and Robert Hare were present representing Tandem Properties. Lindquist inquired if the lot proposed for the park is not determined to be sacred ground would that property then revert to a lot and be sold. Mabusth advised that if the land is found to have no historical significance that it would be changed to a single family residential lot, as the Park Commission has no interest in park land in this area. The developer has also requested clarification regarding whether the costs of the proposed bike trail would be deducted from the park dedication fees. She noted that since this is a large development adjacent to Luce Line, staff felt that the trails should be public trails rather than private ones, and the value of trail land would be deducted from the park dedication fees. Chairman Schroeder noted that the Planning Commission had received two letters which he read into the Public Hearing. One was from Martha J. Reger, Area Trails and Waterways Supervisor with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and the second was from Shawn D. Gustafson, Principal Engineer with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. A petition from the Countryside Manor Homeowners Association was submitted by Eugene Hite, President. The petition was signed by nine residents of the Countryside development in opposition to connecting Countryside Drive to the road coming from Old Crystal Bay Road as proposed by the applicant. Mark Gronberg, Gronberg & Associates, representing the applicant, reviewed the proposal as presented in its current form. He discussed tfie ponding on the site which will ease the drainage concerns expressed by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). He noted that they feel it’s an acceptable solution to prevent erosion of the Luce Line Trail. He discussed the average lot sizes throughout the development. The topography on the Dickey property was discussed, and Mr. Gronberg reviewed the drainage patterns on the property. He stated that the DNR was reviewing the plans to ensure no additional runoff would impact the wetland on the DNR property. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HEIJD ON JANUARY 18, 1994 Commissioner Peterson expressed concern about whether adequate water retention was being provided on the site and whether the ponds were for aesthetic purposes only. Mr. Gronberg responded that they were trying to accomplish both; to enhance the existing wetland and provide adequate water storage. Discussion ensued regarding the existing drainage problems in the area and whether adequate measures were being taken to prevent exacerbating those problems. Mabusth noted the concern of the Engineer in regard to impact on downstream drainage areas. Eugene Hite stated that they had held a neighborhood meeting which had been well attended by the residents of Countryside, and they had noted several instances where existing w'ater problems in their neighborhood had required mitigating measures to be taken by the homeowners. He explained that there appears to be a natural stream in this area which causes water problems presently, and they are very concerned about what the development to the north will do to increase the runoff onto their properties. He stated that there are presently two houses in their development which have had standing water in their back yards most of the past summer. He stated that the developer has agreed to utilize some type of drain tile on the surface and possibly some type of French drain to help them resolve their water problems. He noted they had talked to ten of the eleven property owners in the development. He noted that there is a lot of runoff on the east side of Countryside which has required mitigation by the homeowner* and there are some ditches that have eroded between the lots on the south side. 'Fhey requested that the City take steps to ensure that the drainage problems do not worsen in these areas. Discussion ensued regarding the drainage flow on the site and the means by which some ot the water is stored and released later on. Phil Miller, 2435 Countryside Drive, stated that he had added rip rap along the side of his property and noted that the drainage along this area of his property causes problems. Mr. Gronberg reviewed the road location on the Coffin property and explained why the design included outlots to provide access to two back lots at the west boundary. He noted they chose to plat the subdivision in this way in order to preserve the existing trees and wetlands. Discussion ensued regarding possible alternative locations for the roadway. Commissioner Nolan felt that lowering the cul-de-sac and moving it slightly to the south could eliminate a setback variance. He also felt that access should be provided for Lot 7 from the north. He discussed the drainage from the development to the south of the Luce Line Trail and noted that there are several instances where after heavy rain storms yards are full of standing water, which can take up to a week to disperse. He was concerned about the amount of runoff that would come from the proposed development going through this area, and exacerbating existing drainage problems in this area. Mr. Gronberg reviewed the drainage patterns south of the development for the Commission. Commissioner Nolan requested that the City Engineer be requested to look at this area south of the development and the drainage calculations, as he was concerned that there may be a greater volume of water flowing to the south overall, even through it would be moving more slowly due to the retention measures proposed by the developer. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 18, 1994 Commissioner Smith inquired as to what the DNR would look at regarding drainage issues when reviewing this proposal. Mabusth responded that they would review the hydrological information submitted by the developer and potential impact on the DNR park land located downstream, the culverts of Luce Line, and use of the Luce Line bed as a drain. Discussion ensued regarding maintenance of the trails and culverts. Commissioner Nolan inquired about the septic systems located south of the drainage swale and Mr. Gronberg responded ii 4v«i. would be done with PVC pipe which would be under pressure so that if the system failed, it would not pump anything out. Commissioner Nolan commented he believed it could eliminate potential problems if the septic systems were located on the north side of the swale. Mabusth stated that there is not suitable area for another septic system to be located north of the drainageway. Chairman Schroeder inquired about the flag lot issue. Mabusth commented that it is not a variance to create a back lot under the new ordinance criteria. Commissioner Rowlette commented she was concerned about emergency vehicle access and telt that a loop driveway or turn-around should be provided for those lots. Jim Deanovic stated that their restrictive covenants prohibit extra structures on the lots so there will not be a conditional use permit issue. He stated they are willing to construct the bike trail if their cost can be deducted from the park dedication fee. The consensus of the Planning Commission was that the developer should be allowed park dedication credit for the cost of constructing the bike trails as long as they were public trails. Mabusth reviewed the process whereby the park dedication fees are calculated, based on the land value of the property. Eugene Hite commented that the Countryside homeowners would like to see the lot retained as a park no matter what the determination is regarding its historical status. Chairman Schroeder commented that the Park Commission had no funds available to develop the land as a park. Discussion ensued regarding the potential for a neighborhood park, and the consensus of the Planning Commission was that the parcel remain as a park rather than a lot. Mr. Hite commented that perhaps there was the possibility of holding that property as a common area for the neighborhood, and he requested that he be allowed to discuss this possibility at their homeowner ’s association meeting. Creative funding methods were discussed. Commissioner Smith inquired about the possibility of providing buffering and screening between Lots 2, 3 and 4 and the Luce Line Trail. Extensive discussion ensued regarding how the City can be protected from difficulties arising from the issue of wetland mitigation when the lots are sold in the future. Discussion ensued regarding whether the roadway should be connected or cul-de-saced on both ends with the potential for future connection being retained. Mabusth reminded the Commission that if the road is not connected, it would continue to be maintained by benefit lot owners. It will have to be privately maintained until such time as it is connected. Discussion ensued regarding whether to connect the roadway or leave it as two cul-de-sacs MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 18, 1994 with the easements in place to connect it at a future time. Mr, Gronbcrg stated that they would like to accommodate the neighborhood, and keep the cul-de-sacs as proposed, but they would like to have the streets designated as public streets. Eugene Hite commented the residents are concerned about the construction traffic using Countryside Lane. Mabusih explained that many streets that are cul-de-saced are private streets, and the City does not maintain them until they are connected through roads and at that point they are dedicated as public streets. She noted that the number of lots was sufficient to warrant conne. i'Mi at this time. Chairman Schroeder commented that it appeared that the Planning Commissi n did not believe there was a need to connect the roadway at this time, as long as easemenu are retained to permit connection in the future when the City felt it was necessary to do so. Mabusth reminded the Commission that if it was going to become necessary to connect the streets in the future, they should do it now while the development was being done to avoid the expense of having to do it later. Discussion ensued regarding the cost factors involved in roadway construction and the maintenance costs if the streets remain private. Chairman Schroeder commented that if the City has determined that the subdivision will be built, he did not see the public interest was diverted by keeping it two cul-de-sacs with the option to connect them in the future. Commissioner Rowlette commented she did not believe the Planning Commission could make a recommendation to the City Council until the drainage information was submitted. Chairman Schroeder noted that the consensus of the Planning Commission was that the proposal was a good one, and he would support it pending resolution of some issues, such as drainage, etc. Commissioner Rowlette moved, Lindquist seconded, to table ^1901 Tandem Properties, 2645/3025 Watertown Road. Ayes 7, nays 0. (m #1893 CHRISTINE A. FREEMAN, 2240 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING Steve Jensen, architect, stated he was present representing the applicant. Mabusth reviewed the proposal and stated that if the Planning Commission recommended approval it must include the disclaimer that if plastic or geo-technic fabric is found beneath landscaped areas, that the existence of such would be in violation of the conditions of approval, and will require immediate removal. Mr. Jensen stated that there is no hardcover variance but there was a setback variance. He noted that there is no plastic or geo-technic fabric in the vicinity of the garage. Commissioner Rowlette inquired if there was adequate area to accommodate emergency vehicles and Mabusth responded affirmatively. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGHELD ON JANUARY 18, 19M Mr. Jensen stated that this was a cabin which had been renovated and there ^ insutfiaent area within the house to provide for an adequate entryway or dining room. Schroeder inquired if the neighbors were in agreement with the proposal and Mr. Je^en ^ stated he had submitted a letter that evening in support of the project from the neighbor immediatelv adjacent to the property who would be most affected by the proposa . Commissioner Lindquist commented he was concerned about the proposed proximity ot the two structures. Commissioner Rowlette stated she was concerned about establishing a precedent if th^ recommended approval of the variance request. She inquired if the applicant would ^ willing to reduce the size of the proposed addition, thereby reducing the amount o t e variance needed to construct the addition. Mr. Jensen stated they had considered other alternatives, but none would be feasible except that which was proposed. Commissioner Peterson moved, Rowlette seconded, to recommend approval ot #1893 Variances for Christine Freeman, 2240 Shadywood Road, with the understooding that (he new area calculations are correct and that hardcover variances are not needed, and with t disclaimer that if plastic or geo-technic fabric is found beneath landscaped ar^, that e existence of such would be in violation of the conditions of approval, and will require immediate removal. Ayes 5, nays 2. (#3) #1894 GREG TRUCHINSKI, 1580 FOX STREET - AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING This item was pulled from the agenda at the request of the applicant. (#4) #1896 ALLAN AND JUDITH KLOTCHE, 2760 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING Mabusth reviewed the staff report. Allan Klotche was present and requested the Planning Commission to approve his request. He stated they felt it was a sizable lot and there was a fair amount of pavement in the existing driveway. They feel the addition will enhance the property and the neighbors are in support of the project. He stated the house was coi^tructed in the 1950 ’s and needs some remodeling. They proposed to remove some of the landscaping and have reduced the hardcover variance as low as possible. Discussion ensued regarding removal of a section of walkway which is obstructed by a pine tree. Mr. K otche said that he would do that if the Planning Commission required it. Commissioner Nolan inquired if the applicant would consider removing one of two staircases coming up from the driveway. Discussion ensued regarding where more hardcover could be removed on the site to redua the antoum of the variance. Chairman Schroeder inquired ,f the applicant believed he could reduce the amount of the variance to 31.1% and Mr. Klotche responded he believed they could reduce it further, and he would work with staff to accomplish this. J MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 18, 1994 Commissioner Lindquist moved, Peterson seconded, to recommend approval of #18% variance for Allan and Judith Klotche, 2860 Shadywood Road subject to removal of the wood walkway to the neighbor ’s drive and that the applicant make every effort to reduce the amount of the variance to 31.1%. Ayes 3, Nays 4. Motion failed. Chairman Schroeder moved, Nolan seconded, to recommend approval of #18% variance for Allan and Judith Klotche, 2860 Shadywood Roa'’ subject to keeping the hardcover at 31.1%. Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#5) #1897 R. HUNT GREENE AND JANE E. PICCARD, 865 PARTENWOOD ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING Mabusth reviewed the staff report and noted that statf received a letter from Ceil Strauss of the DNR, and noted that they recommended denial of the request as proposed. Mr. Greene stated that the redrawn addition does meet the requirements of the DNR. Mabusth noted that staff is unsure of the setback from Maxwell Bay, as no elevation was submitted on the current survey the City has been working with. Mr. Greene stated that there is no basement in the house and they have no storage. He stated that they have two teenage children to provide for. He noted that they constructed a small addition with a variance in 1986. He stated they are asking to go up to 5,161 square feet and since the lot is an exception they have tried to keep within a reasonable building envelope for the lot and the surrounding neighborhood. He noted that the house was Prairie architecture designed by John Howe and the addition will not cause any disruption to the neighborhood. He noted they have tried to retain the integrity of the architectural style in the design of the addition. Chairman Schroeder inquired if he had considered constructing a smaller garage, and Mr. Greene responded that it was essentially a 2 1/2 car garage, but they believed they could squeeze three cars into it. Commissioner Nolan stated he noticed the applicant had excessive eaves (overhangs) around the garage and he inquired if the applicant had considered removing them. Mr. Greene stated the overhang by the garage could be backed up to three feet which would help, but not remove the hardcover problem. Mabusth stated that staff was concerned about the setback from Maxwell Bay and advised the applicant’s surveyor to locate the designated elevation of 929.4’ from Maxwell Bay shoreline. Discussion ensued regarding the amount of the hardcover variance. Commissioner Rowlette commented she felt the application should be tabled until the hardcover issue was resolved. She commented that the lot may not permit any additional construction. Mr. Greene inquired if the Planning 'Commission was concerned about the addition or the elevation which was missing from his survey. Chairman Schroeder commented that they did not believe they could forward the application to the City Council without having complete information, and he also felt that the size of the garage should be reduced. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMLSSION MEETLNC; HELD ON JANUARY 18, 1994 Commissioner Rowlette moved, Nolan seconded, to table #1897 for R. Hunt Greene and Jane E. Piccard, 865 Partenwood Road, pending submission of a new survey showing correct elevations and a reduction in the size of the garage addition. Ayes 7, nays 0, (#6) #1898 PAUL AND ROSE HAUSER, 2801 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCES -PUBLIC HEARING Mabusth gave the staff report and noted that there was hardcover prc^x>sed at 30.8% in the 75-250 setback area. Discussion ensued regarding the design of the house. Commissioner Rowlette commented there was a 5.8% increase in the amount ot hardcover and inquired about the possibility of reducing that amount. Paul Hauser explained they had decided lo attach the garage to the house in order to gain the area above the garage which would be used for two bedrooms and a bathroom, which they needed as the house was so small. He stated they would also gain some much-needed storage space. He noted this would be an aesthetic improvement as well as a practical one. Commissioner Lindquist commented he was concerned about the 4’ side yard setback which would be created by the small kitchen addition on the south side. Commissioner Rowlette noted that the closest structure to the proposed garage was the brick garage on the adjacent parcel and she did not have a problem with that. She was more concerned about mitigating the hardcover area variance. Mr. Hauser stated they are not asking for more area than they need, and noted that it was a very difficult lot to build on. Commissioner Nolan inquired about the mudroom and it’s proposed location to the house and garage, and he inquired whether the existing deck would remain. Mr. Nolan responded that there would be an access onto the deck from the mudroom. Discussion ensued regarding the possibility of reducing the area of the addition in order to decrease the amount of hardcover. Chairman Schroeder stated he felt the proposed addition was too large a structure, and while he understood the nardship presented by the lot, he noted that all the lots on Casco Point were difficult lots. He stated he would be inclined to approve the after-the-fact variance on the deck and breakfast nook area, but felt the proposed addition was too large and should be reduced in size. Commissioner Rowlette noted that the Planning Commission has tried to be very consistent regarding hardcover levels they were willing to support, and while she understood the hardship the fact remained that the amount of hardcover was too great. Discussion ensued regarding possible means of reducing the hardcover on the property. The consensus of the Planning Commission was »hat the variance should be denied as proposed. The Commission suggested to the applicant that they could table the request to allow him time to think about it and perhaps redesign it and reduce the amount of hardcover. Commissioner Rowlette moved. Smith seconded, to table #1898 Variance request for Paul and Rose Hauser, 2801 Casco Point. Ayes 7, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 1 ^ 1994 (/TT) #1899 DONALD AND CAROLYN UDELL, 1210 LOMA LINDA AVT^JE VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING Planning and Zoning Administrator Mabusth reviewed the staff report. Donald Udell stated that the well was still in the same location and they used it, which prohibited expansion in that direction. He reviewed the proposed addition and discussed possibilities for hardcover removal. He noted they use the small storage shed to store gasoline as they don ’t like to store gas in the garage. He noted several areas where he could remove some hardcover. Commissioner Nolan stated he had counted 12 garage stalls and there were other vehicles stored in the yard. He noted that since there did not appear to be any shortage ot storage space, that some of the boats and other equipment should be stored inside. Commissioner Smith stated the large boat on the property should be stored off-site as it was illegal to have it where it was. Mr. Udell commented there were many similar boats stored in a similar manner in the area. He stated that the two trailers won ’t fit into the garage. Discussion ensued and it was commented that while the Commission understood the outside storage problems, the ordinance was still enforceable when applications were submitted for review and approval. Scott Udell, the applicant’s son, stated that the trailers will not fit into the garages; how'ever, there were possibilities for storing some of the other boats and equipment inside. Exterior storage on the site was discussed. Commissioner Lindquist inquired about the amount of hardcover which could be removed. Mr. Udell responded that the shed was % square feet, and while he would like to keep it, he would remove it if necessary. He described an area of hardcover which had been installed on the site due to water problems. Carolyn Udell explained their attempts to reduce erosion along the house because the topography in the area creates drainage problems for them. She explained the location of the rock and fabric, and noted that since it had been installed two years ago they had not had the water problems. She was concerned about them reoccurring if the Commission were to require its removal. Discussion ensued regarding drainage concerns and possible means ot reducing the amount of hardcover in the 75-250 area. Mr. Udell stated he was willing to remove the large shed, and would move the smaller shed into the 250-500 area. Commissioner Nolan commented he felt there was an excessive amount of exterior storage on the site and he requested that the yard be cleaned up and things put away inside. Chairman Schroeder stated he was willing to recommend approval of the application subject to removal of the two sheds and the hardcover and he felt the boat should be relocated on the property and the items stored outside should be moved inside. Mr. Udell asked if he could fence the area behind the large garage and store the speed boat there. The Commission felt that the upper story of the garage would provide some screening for it and it might provide a solution. 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 18, 1994 % CommissioDcr Nolan moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend approval of the variance subject to removal of the two sheds and the hardcover, and the boats shall be relocated to less conspicuous positions on the property. 6 Ayes, 1 nay. (#8) 1900 ALLAN AND GAYLE BOYDEN, 1436 BALDUR PARK ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING TO BE RESCHEDULED Planning and Zoning Administrator Mabusth informed the Commission that this item had been formally withdrawn by the applicants. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS 9.REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE TO COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 13, 1993 There was nothing to report. 10.OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION There were no other issues discussed. ADDITIONAL ITEMS 11.PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 15, 1993 MEETING. Chairman Schroeder moved, Peterson seconded, for approval of the November 15, 1993 Planning Commission Minutes as submitted. Ayes 7, nays 0. 12.PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT A REPRESENTATIVE TO ATTEND THE FEBRUARY 14, 1994 MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Commissioner Sandy Smith volunteered to attend that meeting. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Smith moved, Nolan seconded, to adjourn the meeting. Ayes 7, nays 0. The meeting was adjourned at 11:37 p.m. Respectfully submitted. Charles Schroeder, Chairman JWING COMMISSION MEETING fUARY 18, 1994 ed, to recommend approval of the variance rdcover, and the boats shall be relocated to Ayes, 1 nay. 1436 BALDUR PARK ROAD • rO BE RESCHEDULED [formed the Commission that this item had ION REPRESENTATIVE TO COUNCIL AL OF MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER for approval of the November 15, 1993 yes 7, nays 0. :CT A REPRESENTATIVE TO ATTEND t OF THE CITY COUNCIL i that meeting. >adjourn the meeting. Ayes 7, nays 0. The Respectfully submitted, Charles Schroeder, Chairman __Mnnakritoi 9un»S«tof —WW., F«x ft LMCD says payments for milfoil were not voluntary Opinion is change from previous statements By Jolio Milord Lake Minnetonka C>N)ser\'8- tkm District (rfficiab have made an about face in an ongoing bat Ue with Spring Park and Orono. In a recent interview*. Gene Strominen, executive director of the LMCD. said LMCD officials were wrong in saying that payments made between 1990 and 1999 by the lake<u^'s 14 cities for the agency's milfoil harvesting program were voluntary. As it Uims out, the LMCD’s at torney, Charles LeFevere, has stated in a written opinion that the pa>ments were indeed man datory according to state law. "We’re not viewing the milfoil payments as voluntary and we sh^d not have adcfa-essed them that way," Strommen said recently. "This is a change in our position in that some of us and some al our board members had been recently defending payments received from the cities as voluntary." Strommen also said some cities were correct in saying they weren't told the LMCD believed the payments were voluntary between 1990 and 1993. Spring Park and Orono in re cent months protested the amount they’ve paid toward the LMCD’s budget since 1990. Each year since then, the LMCD has sent bills to the 14 cities that con tained two budget categories: administrative and milfoil harvesting. Last year when Shorewood received its bill from the LMCD. its council pointed out that the total amount the LMCD was go ing to collect in 1994 exceeded the amount the LMCD was legally allowed to collect under a 1993 state law. According to state statutes enacted in 1990, the 14 cities in the LMCD could not levy more than .00242 percent of their pro- p^ty values to pay the LMCD bill, according to LeFevere, However, LeFevere stated the law did not prohibit tlie LMCD from collecting more than than that amount from the cities. But in early 1993, U)e Legislature pass^ a law stating the LMCD could not collect more than .00242 percent of the combined property values in the 14 cities. Late last year, when several cities questioned the LMCD about Uie law, LMCD officials said ^e organization had abided by the law because only the amount it received for the ad ministrative ixKiget was a man- datorv payment from the cities. And that amount, they said, was under .00843 percent of the cities’ property values. LMCD officials said the payments for the milfoil han'esting program, which when collected put the LMCO’s total revenues higher than state law allowed, were voluntary. Wlwn firing Park and Orono council mcnibers found out about Shorewood's inquiry, they said they had no idea a portion trf their payments each year since 1990 was voluntary. Both cities demande<l refunds. Orono asked for close to $30,000. Spring Park wants a refund of about $4,600. In January, LeFevere issued a written option stating he does not believe the cities have a legal right to receive refunds. LeFevere also stated; “It would appear to me that the payments for the years 1990 through 1993 can be defended as mandatory payments. The only reason there seems to be any question about this is tliat the amount included in the LMCD budget and assessed against Uie cities by the LMCD exceeds the amount which the cities were autliorized by law to raise. Therefore, it seems to have been assumed by some that only assessments up to the amount of the cities’ levies were man datory and any excess amounts were voluntary." In an interview, Spring Park Mayor Jerry Rockvam said the LMCD's changed opinion adds to its lack of credibility. "It’s because of things like tills that the LMCD’s credibility Is lip,’’ Rockvam said. "We know what the LMCD's attorney has said. But as of now we re still asking for a refund We’re forwarding the LMCD's opinion to our attorney to get his opinion of whether we should still pursue the refund." Strommen said before LeFevere issued his opinion, LMCD officials were under the impression that when they sent their bills to the 14 cities, the cities were required to pay only the administrative half of the budget. LMCD officials did not think the cities were required by law to pay the milfoil portion of the bill. But .Strommen said It is now' clear that when the LMCD sent bills to its member cities, the cities were required to pay the full amount, tvea if the amount exceeded .00242 pn^cent of the cities’ property values. "The cities did not have a legal right to refuse us," Strom men said in an interview. The LMCD launched Its milfoil harvesting program in 1989. Late that year, after the LMCD's budgeting procees was complete, LMCD wicials asked the 14 cities to make voluntary contributions above and beyond their regular contribution, Strommen said. "That year there’s no doubt the payments made by the cities were voluntary." Strommen said of the $60,ouo the LMCD received from tlie cities for the milfoil program in 1989. "That ’s becaiBe the pavm«its were out side of the budget process. But since then, we’ve included the milfoil contributions during our normal budgeting process. That didn't give die cities any choice by iaw' but to pay them. Those pavments have not been voluntary." At a recent meeting, the LMCD board, aware of the new state law, voted to reduce the amount it will collect in 1994 from the cities—for botli the ad ministrative and milfoil budgets. Last year, the LMCD approv ed collecting $166,500 from the cities In 1994. Of that, $77,000 would have gone to the ad ministrative budget and $63,ooo to the milfoil harvesting program. According to the 1993 state law, however, the LMCD can collect only $140,742 — which e<iuals 00242 percent of the pro perty values in tlie cities — for both accounts. Gabriel Jabbour. an Orono council member, said the LMCD sliould have known earlier last year tliat it would not be able to collect more than $140,742 from the cities In 1991. "They’re now acting like this is n now development they didn't know atwut," said Jabbour But Strommen said LMCD of ficials were not Informed of the law change until recently. "Nobody informed us, but tlwt’s not to say we shouldn’t have known," Strommen said. "It's certainly our obligation to find Ihinp like that out." TO: FROM; Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:February 7, 1994 SUBJECT:Update Memo Building Code Board of Appeals The Building Code Board of Appeals convened on Januaiy 26, 1994 to consider the need for a second exit from the third floor of the Jundt residence located at 1400 Bracketts Point Road. The five member board first met at the site and were provided with a tour of the home currently under renovation by the owners. After each board member had an opportunity to review the third floor area and ask questions of the owrars or the building official, the meeting was then reconvened at the City Council Chambers. The Board considered the pertinent sections of the building code referenced by both the building official and appellants ’ attorney. Members determined that only one section was applicable in this case as the building official had not employed a section of the code dealing with hazardous building and ordering the second exit through that specific section. If that section of the code was ordered by the building official, members would not have questioned his action. Appellants ’ attorney asked for special consideration under another section of the building code. Members concluded that the building would not be hazardous if a second exit was not required and that the proposed improvements did not intensify the use of the third floor. The findings of the Board of Appeals have been transmitted to the State Board for their review and final action. The City will receive final word from the State within ten days of the date of transmittal of the official findings, February 2, 1994. Eisinger Filling Project The Police Department has been working closely with the Zoning staff with the monitoring of the Eisinger fill project currently underway. The City has received several complaints over the condition of the roadway as being unsafe because of the nature of the soils deposited on the right-of-way. Two accidents have been reported as a result of the activity at the access point, one dealing with a dump truck and the other with ;» pickup truck attempting to enter the dump site. Staff called for a meeting of G «& L Construction. Eisinger ’s representatives, the City of Wayzata Engineer and Eagle Trucking, agent for G & L Construction, responsible hauler for all trucks participating in the fill project. Problems were reviewed with the agents. The City advised that we would be tagging all trucks that were dropping fill on the roadway creating the unsafe conditions. Review was made of their procedures at the Gleason Lake site to determine if there was a better way to keep truck s in a cleaner condition upon leaving the site. / Memo - Update February 7, 1994 Page 2 G & L advised that they had implemented a new procedure that they felt was working and asked if the City had seen any changes within the last two days. The police representative noted that he had seen marked differences in the condition of the roadway and that there was a need to maintain constant vigilance during the winter months as this season has provided enough hazards for the Highway 12 corridor. The representative from Eagle Trucking advised that there is constant radio communication with each hauling vehicle and that he could be reached immediately via a mobile phone. He noted that he was out on the roadway constantly monitoring the conditions ot the road, at eitter the Gleason Lake site or the fill site. As of the date of this memo, the City has received no complaint calls but the police have recorded an accident on February 3rd involving a pickup truck that was turning left into the fill area involving a car and another pickup truck. No one was injured. Staff continues to monitor the condition of the highway, the schedule of filling activities and the response of the hauling agent in cleaning up the roadway when requests are made by the City. We have no thing negative to report at this point regarding this new arrangement. W 3' 1994- LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT All Month Wednesday, Sat. & Sun. (All Month) Sunday, 6th Friday-Sunday 25th - 27th Saturday, 12th Sunday, 13th 2/1/94 SPECIAL EVENTS CALENDAR FEBRUARY 1994 Lord Fletcher's Broomball Minnetonka Mist Broomball Lafayette Club - Private Ice Fishing Party/Sleigh Ride N.W. Tonka Lions - Westonka Winter Fest Wayzata Chamber of Commerce Chilly Open Golf Tournament Annual Wayzata Fire Dept. Fishing Contest I lake MINNETONKA CONSERV ATION DISTRICT Deephaven Excelsior Greenwood MinnetonKa Mika. Bead) ?v1innelrista Mound Oioiio Sliorewood Spring Park Tonka Bay Victoria Wayzata Woodland TOTAL Less Minnetonka 1994 BUDGET DISTRIBUTION OF EXPENSE 1993 Market Value for LMCD 1994 Budget' Market Value Share of % of Total EWMPg. Market Value $63.000 Admin. Total Share Total Share of of Share of $77,742 $140.742 166.500 296.391.600 94.416.600 53.357,500 2.918,989.301 69.008,300 256.386.300 339.977.500 625.445.300 402.364,900 60,279.900 125.080.700 132.913.700 357.327.600 83.865.600 6.815,804.801 (2.918.939.30T) 8.18 5,153 6,360 11,513 12,704 2.61 1,644 2,029 3,673 5,362 1.47 926 1,143 2,069 2.464 20.00 12,600 15,548 28.148 33.300 1.91 1,203 1,485 2,688 3,180 7.08 4,460 5,505 9.965 11,338 9.4 5,922 7,308 13,230 15,518 17.27 10,880 13,426 24,306 28.555 11.11 6.999 8.638 15,637 17,665 1.66 1,046 1,290 2,336 3,629 3.45 2,174 2,683 4,856 5,627 3.67 2,312 2,853 5,165 5,812 9.87 6,218 7.673 13,891 17.400 2.32 1.462 1,803 3,265 3.946 100.00 63,000 77.742 140,742 166,500 2,896,815,500 •5.815.804,801 X .0000242 140,742 Tolal of market value less Miiuielonka because Miiuietonka is a constant 20% Calculatin n centaqe: City's market value divided by • 2.896,815.500 limes .80 equals per ceni Use only 80% because Mtka is 20% i.e. amount of city market value divided by 2.896,815.500 X .80 = % of total Take % of 140,742 for dollar amount of total share of budget »•Ml #* ♦ * vr •^ -t ^ .* LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT February 1, 1994 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: City Administrators Executive Director Gene Strommen Board Action on 1994 Budget Adjustment A 1993 law change effective 1/1/94 now limits the total funding from all municipalities in the district to .00242% of the total taxable market value within the district.,, unless three-fourths of the municipalities in the district pass a resolution concurring to the additional costs. On 1/26/94 the board approved a 1994 budget adjustment which reduces the total budget to .00242% of the total of market value. A reduction from $166,500 to $140,742 or $25,758 will be charged to the current administrative fund balance. Cities which have already paid their 1994 levy will receive an adjustment. A copy of the amended 1994 Distribution of Budgeted Expense among the member cities is enclosed. The board will evaluate its administrative and milfoil fund balances in February. The board will advise the cities of the direction it intends to take on the fund balances. Unaudited fund balances at fiscal year close 12/31/93 are: Administration — $266,394 (11.5 months reserve) Mi1foi1: Operations 144,672 (13.5 months reserve) Equipment reserve -- 175,000 Save the Lake -- 79,918 Total Fund Bal. $665,984 Please advise if you wish clarification or have questions. f •f i «i«f #♦*1. a »**r;;'•rm .'V ■«»!? 90C E Thursday Saturday Tuesday Thursday Friday Monday Wednesday WP:f LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Waysata Blvd., Suite 160, Wayzata, MN S5391 473-7033 12 •^M % «r*fVS T IT?T r** r> » ? ? ^L.M.C.D.ov<ne«uuij& FEBRUARY. 1994 Save the Lake Advisory Committee 5:30 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata Water Structures Conunittee 7:30 am, tl3S Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata Lake Use 4 Recreation Committee 5:30 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata Save the Lake Recognition Banquet 6:15 pm. Lord Fletchers of the Lake Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force 8:30 am, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata President’s Day Legal Holiday Office Closed Administrative Committee 5:15 pm. Tonka Bay City Hall Public Hearing Tonka Bay City Hall 6:30 pm, Lakeshore light fixture regulations 7:00 pm, Carlson variance, Colson variance LMCD Board of Directors Regular Meeting 7:30 pm. Tonka Bay City Hall lake MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 900 EAST WAYZATA L’OULEVARD. SUITE 160 • WAYZATA. MINNESOTA 55391 • TELEPHONE 612473-7033 February 1 , 1994 eucener .strommen executive director BOARD MEMBERS VViMiam A Johnstone Chair. Minnetonka Tom Penn Vice Chair. Tonka Bay Douglas E Babcock Secretary. Spring Park Robert Rascop Treasurer. Shorewood k!ike Bloom M*nnefonU3 B®3Ch Scott Carlson Minnetnsla Dave Cochran Greenwood Albert (Bert) Foster Deephaven James N Grathwol Excelsior Duane Markus Wayzata George C Owen Victoria Tom Reese Mound Robert E Slocum Woodland Orono Mr. Michael McDonough Water Recreation Specialist MN DNR Trails and Waterways Unit 500 Lafayette Rd St Paul, MN 55155-4052 Dear Mr. McDonough, The fishing access development on the shore of Coffee Channel, Lake Minnetonka, represents a public amenity which the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District board of directors warmly supports. The board is pleased to see that this improvement PQt only accommodate public shore fishing in a more pleasant, organized and safe manner, but wi11 also serve handicapped persons using the facility. The board also recognizes that shore erosion will be corrected as a result of the natural boulder and surface improvements. LMCD staff reviewed this project with the board at its January 26 meeting. We advised the board that project bids initially came in some $20,000 above the $30,000 estimate last fall. We further indicated to the board that there could be a financial shortfall with the new bids due to added storm water improvements added since the first bids. It is also our understanding that Hennepin County public works officials, while cooperating in many ways on this project, have not yet c.-nfirmed to what extent they will be able to participate financial 1y. The LMCD board views this improvement as a regional public benefit which it strongly supports. J;® concerned that the improvement is completed. me board therefore approved a contribution up to , $5,000.00 from its privately-funded Save the La fund to meet any shortfall up to that amount to assure its proper completion. We request that you keep the LMCD informed of the funding progress and the extent to which this funding is required. In the ®''®nt that Save th Lake" funds are included, the board would find it . ervc«4»ii Czjfiienl 30*'. Post Certumet Waste DNR TRAILS AND WATERWAYS UNIT, 2/1/94, P. 2 compliment to have the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District "Save the Lake" fund identified on any public recognition which might be posted at this site. Chair Bill Johnstone joins with the entire board in encouraging you and the DNR Trails and Waterways staff for the continuing effort on behalf of this shore fishing project. The board also recognizes the cooperation provided by the City of Spring Park officials and neighboring property owners, the Hennepin County Public Works Department and the Department of Environmental Management for their key roles in bringing this project to its anticipated development during the summer of 1994. Sincerely, LAKE MINNETONKA CONSER’^ATION DISTRICT 5s Eugene R. Strommen Executive Director cc: Mr. Vern Genslinger, County Engineer Ms. Janet Leick, Director, Environmental Managment Spring Park Mayor Jerry Rockvam bcc: Board LAKE MINNETOMKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT FEB 3 195 February 2, 1994 To: City Administrators From: Rachel Thibault, Admin. Technician Subj: Lakeshore lighting regulations In response to concerns that the number of bright, exposed lights on the lake are increasing, the LMCD has formed a Lakeshore Lighting subcommittee. The goal of the subcommittee is to look at alternatives for light fixtures that would provide security and safety, but not bo obtrusive to people using and living on the lake. The LMCD Code Section 2.03, Subd. 12. states that multiple dock licensees must ensure that their lights do not affect adjoining dock use areas and are not a hazard to navigation. The subcommittee plans to develop an ordinance that would specifically address acceptable types of light fixtxires for shoreline and dock lighting at residential and commercial sites. A further goal is to develop a model lighting ordinance that could be used by lake cities. A public hearing will be held on Wednesday, February 23, 6:30 PM at the Tonka Bay City Hall to discuss possible lakeshore lighting regulations. The LMCD Board invites your comments and suggestions. This subject has been addressed at the Technical Review Committee, Wo would like to know if any now ordinances have * I . boon adopted in your city addressing lakeshore lighting. If so, please forward a copy before 2/16, so wo may include it with the public hearing agenda. Thanks for your assistance! end: advance copy of public hearing notice LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT To: Lake Minnetonka Sun/Sailor for Excelsior/Shorewood, Minnetonka, Hayzata editions From: Eugene R. Stroauaen Executive Director 473-7033 Date: February 2, 1994 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE LAKESHORE LIGHT FIXTURE REGULATIONS The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District will hold a public hearing at Tonka Bay City Hall, 4901 Manitou Rd, Tonka Bay, 6:30 pm. Wed, February 23, 1994 to discuss alternatives for lighting on lakeshore and dock locations that would provide for safety and security without interference with watercraft navigation, residences on opposite shore of light sources, and the aesthetics of passive lake uses, summer and winter seasons. The goal is to develop an ordinance defining acceptable lakeshore light fixtures. Persons who support regulations on lighting sources, as well as residential and commercial property owners depending on lighting for security and other purposes are invited and encouraged to comment. _ j€^r>e R. . . .Lake Minnetonka Conservation District ♦X* ••V' 1 - • wf « f \ ,\V CITYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Partway Orono. MM 55356 Maiiiif Address: P 0. Bo* 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 0066 January 31, 1994 Mr. Marcel Jouscau Metropolitan Council 230 East 5th Street St. Paul. MN 55101 Dear Mr. Jouseau: This letter is to request your assistance in resolving an issue corKeming payments related conveyance of a sewer interceptor line from the MWCC to the City of Orono tn 1987_-rae MWCC has indicated that the current policy, adopted in 1989, requuing payments to the M from the cities to which an interceptor is conveyed: is applicable to the Orono situation. However, the negotiations regarding the conveyance were completed in 1987, long before the current policy was in effect. These negotiations did not include any discussion of payments by the City for the conveyed interceptor. The City is requesting the Metropolitan Council make a determination that the City of Orono is not required to make a payment for the mterceptor line, as this issue was resolved by the negotiations which occurred pnor to the current policy. Historymmmmmm to take on responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the unneeded Imes. ty agree, as part of the final negotiated agreement, to take on the operation and u^eeded lines. It was veiy clear in all meetings with the MWCC staff that the senlement agreement included all relevant items. There was never any indication that any be required by the City related to the conveyance of the sewer Imes no longer ne y MWCC. Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 Mr. Marcel Jouseau January 31, 1994 Page 2 It is very clear that if the issue of payments for tte uniKeded liiKs h»i been a part of the' interceptor project negotiations, the negotiations would have been handled much differently and they would have had much different results. To add a major fmancial requirement after the project was completed and after the City had negotiated in good faith is not reasonable or acceptable. It is not in the best interests of the City, the MWCC or the Metropolitan Council to reopen the negotiations at this point. The MWCC staff have indicated that if the conveyance issue had been addressed at the lime of the initial negotiations, the City would not have had to pay for the conveyed lines because there was no policy requiring payment at that time. They have also indicated that at this point they cannot an exception to the current policy because they have several pending reconveyance issues with other cit'es. Request The Orono conveyance situation is vastly different from other simations which have occurred since the time the 1989 reconveyance policy went into effect. It would not be contrary to the current reconveyance policy to eliminate the conveyance payment by Orono, since the project to which the conveyance is related was completed prior to the adoption of the current policy. The MWCC staff has indicated that if Orono were to approach the Metropolitan Council for a determination regarding this issue, the MWCC would have no problem if the Council made a determination that the payment is not required. This is the determination the City is requesting the Metropolitan Council to make. Please let me know what process the City needs to follow to obtain this determination. If you have any questions regarding this request, please call me. Sincerely, Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator RJM/lsv . A CITYof ORONO Post Office Bo* 66*Crystal Bay, Minnesota S5323* Municipal OfR< 35 On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka December 30# 1987 Metropolitan Waste Control Commission 350 Metro Square St. Paul, MN 55101 Attn; C.R. Payne, Assistant Director of Engineering Dear Ray, The following is our understanding of the conditions for the MWCC to construct alternative 3B of the Orono Minnetonka Beach nterceptor project 86-51-r elimination of City's lift station #10. Orono will donate a permanent e£ 'ment to MWCC for lift station. orono will acquire temporary easement from owners to the west to allow construction of the lift station. Orono will accept maintenance of gravity sewer lines no longer needed by MWCC. Orono will accept maintenance of two grinder constructed as a result of project 86-51. stations shall be of the type specified by the City Orono. orono will contribute to HWCC ?3,5®0 per year f°r 20 years to offset the cost of placing the lift station a location requested by the City of Orono. Orono will assist MWCC in the public hearing process BUILDING a ZONING - 473-7357 assessing administration a finance - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 2. 4. 5. 6 crrt W CaCNO 1 JUHELgOW-d LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATIOH DISTRICT WATER STRUCTURES COMMITTEE AGENDA fEB ^I ^ i ^^ 7:30 AM, Saturday, February 12, 1994 Norwest Bank Bldg, 900 E Wayzata Blvd, Rm 135 (Elevator handicapped access at west entrance, Wayzata Blvd) 1.Minnetonka Yacht Club New Multiple Dock License application, Deephaven, Carsons Bay; Public Hearing Report and Findings Multiple Dock License Renewals, per staff memo A.Without change, village certificates completed or expired, paid in full . . • ^B.Without change, village certificates completed or expired, deposit paid, balance due by 3/31/94 - subject to balance due being paid C.With minor changes as noted D.Excelsior Park Tavern, amenity review 3.ordinance relating to Storage of Unrestricted Watercraft; review of third reading as amended per LMCD’s attorney’s recommendations Resolution setting fees for multiple dock licenses; discussion of current and proposed fee structure for unrestricted watercraft, staff memo Pending issues before the committee (informational—not ready for action): A.Maple Forest Addition New Multiple Dock License application, Minnetrista, West Upper Lake; review of revised site plan for 8 slip dock, under consideration by City of Minnetrista B "Envelope concept" for multiple dock licenses, subcommittee meeting tentatively scheduled for 8:00 AM, Tuesday, February 22. 6.Additional business k'.•r ;. i .- - ■ ■vn.V- *-rVs^ % 4 f /•LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATIONJERVATION DISTRICT ■. I- " ! fc' ■ V Public Hearing:Minnetonka Yacht Club, New Mu 1 1 ip 1 e^uoca rV License Application .;: /^ ^ If. trt^ ♦' ^ .-V''i,r \ 7:00 PM.r Wednesday* January .26 V Tonka Bay,City Kali •* .-h ^ Members Present: Wm. Johnstone, Chair, Minnetonka; Bert Fos ter, Deephaven; James Grathwol, Excelsior; Joseph Zwak, Green wood; Ron Kline, Minnetrista; Tom Reese, Mound; Robert Rascop, Shorewood; Tom Penn, Tonka Bay; Craig Mollet, Victoria. Also present: Charles LeFevere, Counsel; Rachel Thibault, Administra- ' j ,«<^v " tive Technician; Eugene Strommen, Executive Director. . > ‘ The Public Hearing was convened by Chair Johnstone at 7 PM. f.1^- Thibault reported the Minnetonka Yacht Club (MYC) has sub mitted a new multiple dock license application for reconfigura tion of its docks at Site 1, Carsons Bay, Deephaven, as shown on a site plan dated 1/3/94. The application calls for twenty district mooring area buoys being converted to twenty dock slip storage spaces, all 10’ x 24*. Fifteen existing slips arc being reconfigured with no increase in size (six are being reduced in size). Ten,, s 1 ide storage spaces are proposed to be.i converted‘*to ^7,^ #*r \ * • *■ jj 'dock slips..tv •V .A Thibault said a detailed review showed that the docks on'the • northeast corner extend beyond the 100’^ distance from shore. The setbacks on the west do not meet the Code requirement which, . states that slips opening toward a side, site line be doubled or ^^?-at least equal to the slip depth, in this case 35’. The MYC'has i4*tv a difference of opinion as to how the 100’ from the 929.4 , 7-, shoreline is determined. y-\"‘r. Tom McGoldrick, 19575 Chimo West, Deephaven, described his property as east of the MYC property, adjacent to the Deephaven public launch site. He said that area of Carsons Bay is heavily trafficked because of the public launch, the MYC activities in servicing Lighthouse Island, and regattas.McGoldrick said he cannot see how this plan can do anything but make the traffic problem worse. He said, in his opinion, the MYC has not been a good neighbor. McGoldrick believes the proposed change will give the area a wharf-like appearance vs. the openness of the existing buoy field. He does not feel that combining all of the MYC shoreline in arriving at a density is logical. His main objection is the congestion this change will bring to the area. In addition he mentioned the aesthetic appearance, traffic flow,.in,.,tha area .and ii ■T ‘ • f*-, yryhiSti'. t ^ i'general management of the MYC property McGoldrick pointed out that-he v.‘.has 300*^ or shoreline could construct a 100 V dock to provide a ^safe/ swimnirri he were to do that the traff ic lane from, thefl public ^'launch would^^ « A*.-» . - "t •\ % '••■•-f3s.->■ January 26, 1994 0~ <4 r rf* V .; PUBLIC.HEARING - oINNETONKA YACHT CLUB ^ *' . -^4.^5^^* • ' -; • «' V . > “ - Bob Loeffel, 19605 Chimo West, Deepnaven, said the MYC ,oper ates six service boats which are constantly speeding in the No Wake'*zoneThe area is not safe for swimming. He believes the . •SMYC/cou1dVdo a better job of policing its service boats. In ir'* addition,^ he has observed increased activity at Lighthouse Is- V land.>' Loeffel said the MYC property is zoned residential with^a ^ non-conforming use. He said the City of Deephaven should be apprised of this application. Pat McGoldrick, 19575 Chimo West, Deephaven, said the road that has' been plowed on the ice for winter access from the ramp would meet the docks the MYC plans to put up. Penn asked how much further the new dock goes out compared to the current dock. Thibault responded it would be about 25 further east, and a new 100’ dock wing extending north is pro posed. In the information provided for the public hearing it was noted that the MYC has a special density license (SDL) for its three sites. It has 1898 lineal feet of shoreline at the three sites combined with 182 Boat Storage Units, or a 1:10 density. Site 1 has 290’ of shoreline with 36 Boat Storage Units. The District Mooring Area (DMA) does not count toward density. LeFevere said it appears to be necessary to address the SDL the ^ MYC*^ ho Ids for this site. There is a difference between combining sites for density purposes on the one hand, and for purposes of providing amenities on the other. There have been cases where the District has allowed applicants to provide ameni ties at more than one site. However, the Code allows all (com- bined) shoreline to be considered for density purposes only for municipalities. If this site has over 1:10’ density it is possi- ble there may have been an oversight in granting the SDL. It is *> : also possible that the site has been grandfathered. Xjiibault said it is her understanding that the SDL was granted based on 1:10’ density for all sites. It is also her understanding that the MYC does not need a new SDL unless they are adding additional slips. They ao need a new multiple dock license because of the reconfiguration. LeFevere agreed with her interpretation. . .Johnstone asked what discretion the Board has in granting a new multiple dock license. LeFevere responded that if the slip sizes are not increased and number of boats are not increased there is no need for a new special density license. He said the unique thing in this case is that additional boats are coming from a DMA. The LMCD Code encourages conversion of DMAs to slips and provides that the conversion can be made notwithstanding the **^?*'»'density"'(Sect. 2.04, Subd. 9,g)). The Board has the power and authority to grant a new multiple dock license adding these addi- tional. boats under the DMA authority. Johnstone said it is his understanding that the Board has the authority, but is not oLli- i: i f • V •0^ out that -there' is an additional restriction All of the slips must be within 100*.'f oC;»the ■r.., a f f * f PUBLIC HEARING - MINNETONKA YACHT CLUB January 26, 1994 Grathwol observed that McGoIdrick’s comment that a DMA is more aesthetic than a dock is contrary to the Code which encour ages conversion of DMAs to docks. McGoldrick said sail boats are an appealing sight. Visually, when he looks at a buoy field, he is looking through it. That is different than looking at a Structure-such as a dock. r , \ Zwak, suggested the removal of buoy fields opens up the water surface and offers a safety factor. Foster said the original^ thinking was that the District was trying to preserve as many square feet of the Lake as possible for the use ol the public. It is Foster’s personal opinion that some bays, such as Carsons Bay and St. Louis Bay, are natural, protected harbors. He does not believe the public normalIv drives through a DMA. J. D. MacRae, MYC board memoer and architect of the site plan, made the presentation for the MYC. He said the MYC consid ered the economics of the situation in that the slips were more rentable than the buoys. In addition the MYC had the problem of servicing the boats on the buoys with tenders because of the limited slips available on land. MacRae said it is important to resolve the question of the 100’ length limit. In preparing the plan the MYC considered the dock length would be 100’ parallel with the shoreline. He said the MYC could reconfigure for the additional slips and still maintain the 100’ length. MacRae said there is also the problem ofwthe side setback on the west. The City of Deephaven dock is 56.5’ from the proposed MYC dock. He does not feel that the MYC is infringing on the City dock. He would like to have an opinion from the city as to the site plan as presented. The MYC would like an opinion on these two matters. Rascop noted the difference between the size of the property Oil the site plan and the area on the half section map. MacRae said he was not aware o f any fill. Loe ffel said t he re was fill on the westerly side of the property. The site plan is a certi fied survey. Grathwol asked MacRae to comment on McGoldrick s remarks regarding the aesthetics of buoy fields. MacRae responded that there would naturally be different opinions. The benefit to the public, in this case, is that the boats would be 100’ closer to shore. MacRae said he likes the look of buoy fields. An added advantage is that the walkway to the new docks can be used during regattas for rigging sail boats. MacRae said the MYC has been a good neighbor to the ramp in that the public has used MYC facili ties for tie-up. while parking its vehicles. McGoldrick said there has to be better channel control from the ramp to the bay proper. Mrs. McGoldrick added that this is a ^ "slow* no*wake" zone- and the main violator is the MYC. i LeFevere said the Code creates some questions about what happens/in. determining the 100’ length in a corner situation such as this^one- He said there is no interpretation more favorable to thaiMYCL.than-,the staff presentation. The arc, as shown on the farf^jihcludes'al1 of the possible lines within 100’. 1:- 1^-1-. •I' • ¥^ ..•V i. . • *'/V- / - ft J I ‘ - •.• T ^ • hs-1 i *r 4 « %■ ngi*...•;>•■...•'..,•-V >* r ■»'•*••■• j=>*r vv The Minnetonka Yacht Club (MYC)’* has‘submi t ted a new mult iple dock license application for reconf igurat ion of its docks at Site I,'Carsons Bay, Deephaven, per' site p 1 an ' submitted ■' ^/•^^l/3/9A.‘ ■n--.■■V f a.’'^ Twenty DMA buoys would be converted to twenty dock-s l ip a*" spaces, 10’ x 24*. This is ul lowed under Code Sect ion^ i . *•<*'•% ' • ' H / »f b. c. 2.04, Subd. 9. ' " . Fifteen existing 14’ x 35’ slips would be reconfigured, with six reduced in size. Ten slide storage spaces charged at one WSU each V-., '/ ;y; , (10’ X 20’) would be converted to dock slips 9* x 24’r* /‘**T ' (1.5 WSU, each) • * /Cl'A-.v, •*t w ■ ’•f The proposed site plan has two discrepancies from the Code: a.' The northeast corner is beyond the 100* length limit. b.The required 35* side setback is not met on the west. Tom and Pat McGoldrick, 19575 Chimo West, neighbors to the east, expressed concern about the following: a.- Heavy traffic in area due to Deephaven public launch « -r- vt e.' Additional congestion due to narrowed boat traffic ^ >'* corridor ■ * • . . .•f ,, The winter traffic from the pub 1 ic ramp passing close'^» Jk 4 • Af •Sr' ft •1 fimV« *im \ T t-’/*• •:*■ %. *■ to the proposed new dockage on the east. .. ^ a, ' . .. v'. ■ . •'Vr<if.ai. 4./-' Bob Loeffel, 19605 Chimo West, neighbor to the east ,\said ’ that the property is zoned-resident ial wi th a non-conforming. use. Any change would need the City of Deephaven’s approv- al. 's-- 5.MYC has a special density license allowing 1:10’ boab'stor- * age density. The total shoreline for all three sites is 1,898’ with 182 boat storage units (BSU). However, the density at this site is greater than 1:10’ with 36 BSU on 290’ of shoreline (1:8’). The 20 DMA buoys would add. to this ’ ^d e n s X t y •..^..Viii, • - . >; - ^.V‘ •I •,'*K'. Y> fii'•i i-' I' 6. “5j The Code does not require a- new special tlensity license-, this case because no additional BSU are being added,^ but new dock license is required because of the reconfiguration. ' rv The’ DMA exchange is al lowed under • Sect iom 2.04y’ Subd '.'without d new special densi ty 1 icense. >. . . 4 -•.4 mm 1 • •■.i ;‘i ■ a V •. \\ — g } I T r IS — J-lL.p j. J ' 1•' f -. ------------- 1 . !? 1 1 ti^'i I TY- <JL a \ <i — i § 1 $ to**" f v< 3U• I ■^1 -< ----------1 t r\- iF > < > a: ■j' f ! O w, I f 5 e i 3 Illsn B> 01 t. •» 3 £ ^ §3 « a i i S = r = LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT CHECK LIST FOR NEW MULTIPLE DOCK LICENSE APPLICATION Business Name ond Address: Minnetonka Yocht Club, Site 1 c/o Cathy Allen, 19800 Lakeview Ave., Excelsior, MN 55331 Property is locoted in the city of: Deephoven LMCD Bay/Area; Carsons Bay /34 Sect. 2.03, Multiple Docks. Commerciol Docks. Mooring Areas. Lounching Romps. Subd. 3. Issuonce of License. Licenses required by this section moy be issued after a public hearing ond review by the Board. Proceedings for the issuonce of o license and the qrontinq of o voriance under Sect. 1.07 moy be combined and conducted os one proceeding. The Boord may impose conditions on the granting of o license, ^ihich conditions shall be m writing. o)Review Criteria. In exercising its discretion in granting or denying licenses, the Boord may consider, omong other things, whether the proposed focility: 1)is compatible with the LMCD wotercroft density clossificotion criteria. 2)will be structurolly safe for use by the intended users. 3)will comply with the regulations contained in this ordinonce. 4)will create o volume of troffic which will tend to be unsafe, or which will couse an undue burden on traffic, in the vicinity of the focility. 5)will be compotible with the adjacent development. 6)will be compatible with the mointenance of the natural beouty of the Loke. 7)will affect the quality of the woter ond the ecology of the Loke. 8)by reoson of noise, fumes or other nuisonce characteristics, will tend to be a source of nuisance or onnoyonce to persons in the vicinity of the facility. 9)will hove adequate sonitory and parking facilities which will be provided in connection with the proposed facility. 10)will serve the general public os apposed to a limited segment of the public or a limited geogrophicol oreo. 11)will obstruct or occupy too great an area of the public woter in relationship to its utility to the generol public. b)Factors Not Considered. The use of multiple dock or mooring areas or launching ramps on the Loke for the purpose of increosing non-riporian property values is not a valid consideration in licensing such facilities. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT February 3, 1994 To: Water Structures Committee From: Rachel Thibault Subj: Background on MINNETONKA YACHT CLUB'S boat storage density Attached is an historical boat storage summary for the Minnetonka Yacht club (MYC). This summary shows how the boat storage at the three MYC sites has fluctuated. MYC first applied for a special density license in 1989, when an application was submitted to add 22 slips to Lighthouse Island for a total of 67 boat storage units (BSU). The application was made in conjunction with the Lake Minnetonka Sailing School which has ownership of Lighthouse Island. The special density license was granted, with MYC providing amenities as described in the Findings & Order approved 9/27/89. At that time, the density was discussed as it related to Lighthouse Island. with 1004' of shoreline, the request for a total of 67 boats resulted in 1:15' density which is in compliance with special density requirements. A later review discussed at the 6/10/89 Water Structures Committee meeting, showed that the overall density at the three sites including the District Mooring Area (DMA) was 1:10.4'. The minutes do not give further detail on this discussion. The Carson's Bay site currently has 36 BSU on 290' of shoreline. This is a non-conforming situation with 1:8' boat storage density. Code Section 2.05 Special Density, Subd. 9 Non-conforming Structures, states that no change in the configuration which results in an increase in slip size may be made without first securing a new special density license. After further Code and detailed license background review, staff finds that a new special density license is required for the proposed site plan because of the non-conforming status of the Carsons Bay site. The ten slides, which are proposed to be converted to slips, are each increasing from a v/atercraft storage unit of 1, (10' x 20') to 1.5 (9* x 24'). end. MYC Boat Storage Sununary LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Mlnnetonk* Yacht Club Boat Storage Suroary 1970-1988 1970-1975 - up to 150 boats stored at Carsons Bay, Lighthouse Island. Tahoa Inland. and Deephaven Beach 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 proposed Lighthouse Tahoe_ 60T 601* 60T 54L 60T 52L 60T 52L 60T 50L 60T 60T ^8L 60T ^8L 60T ^8L 60T ^8L 40T 5SB 60L 40T 5SB 60L 40T 5SB 60L 40T, 21D, 6SB 60L Carsons Bay 14D 12S 16D 14S 16D 14S 16D 14S 16D 16S 160 16S 160 16S 160 16S 160 16S 160 16S 150 15S 150 15S 150 15S 150 15S 6M 8M 80MA 80MA lOOMA 150MA 15 OMA 200MA 20 OMA 5SB 200MA 5SB 200MA 5SB 20DMA 5SB 20DHA Total BSU 146 150 150 150 150 150 155 155 160 160 160 160 160 182 Frontage Boat Storage - 990.ft.600 ft.291 ft.+ (1003.8' per survey) T"Tranaient, SB-Servlce Boats* L*Llfta, D-Oock, S-Slldes, M-Moorlngs, DMA-Dlstrlct Mooring Area 4/25/89 1990 - 1993 Update: Lighthouse Tahoe Carsons Bay 1990 40Tp 21D,6SB 60L 15D,15S,5SB,20DMA 182 1991 40T, 21Dp 6SB 60L 15D,15S,5SB,20DMA 182 1992 40Tp 21Dp 5SB^60L 15Dp 15S,6SB^20DMA 182 1993 40T, 21D,5SB 60L 15D,15S,6SB^^20DMA 182 ♦One service boat was moved from Lighthouse Island to the Carsons Bay site and a tie-on service boat was changed to storage in a 3-sided slip. ♦♦Two service boats were moved from slides near shore to a platform over the water. •>/ -> / O 1 January 28,1994 Thomas J. McGoldrick 19575Chimo West Wayzata. MN 55391 Mr. Eugene R. Strommen Executive Director LMCD 900 East Wayzata Boulevard Suite 160 Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Mr. Strommen: Thank you for the opportunity to speak at the hearing on Wednesday, January 26.I thought it might be helpful to summarize the concerns I have relative to the proposal by the Minnetonka Yacht Club to restructure the Carson ’s Bay facility by eliminating the bouy field and adding docks. The impact of this proposal on the bay would be substantial . Before the LMCD makes a decision, I would hope that careful consideration be given to the following issues: 1.Dock expansion to the east toward the public ramp would further confine the boats ’ traffic flow from the public ramp in the most critical area of the bay, add to the congestion and create a safety hazard (especially because boats tend to idle in this area waiting for drivers to return after parking trailers). 2.The general appearance of a large wharf area would dramatically change the aesthetics of the bay from a "New England" like harbor of moored sailboats to a commercial appearing marina. The sight line of the marina would be directly off our property and would decrease the value of our lake shore. 3.The proposal may not officially add boat storage units, however, the method of changing existing BSUs to marina slips appears to be convoluted and not in keeping with what I believe to be the intent of existing regulations. The fact is, what is now 15 slips will become 46 slips. Converting 15 slides which house small rowboats to large slips capable of housing an entirely different type of craft is a substantial change and it is misleading to claim this is not adding additional boats. FEB 1 1994 Tl'-' L.M.C.D. , 0 • I ^ r ' of- J Mr. Euger^e R. Strommen Page 2 January 20,1994 4.To the best of my knowledge, there is a continuing history of MYC attempting to increase the size of this facility, at least as far back as 1975. LMCD has denied these requests for expansion because of the critical density issue on this end of Carson's Bay. 5.The logic of allowing the MYC to add the lake shore from three different locations and use this as a basis for determining how many boats can be stored in this facility is questionable and worthy of investigation. 6.The stated objectives of the MYC to make these additions to allow them to charge more money for dock fees and have a more convenient arrangement for their members hardly justifies a change of this magnitude which will effect the entire bay. Thank you for your consideration of these issues. If you or any board member of the LMCD have any further questions or would like to inspect this area from our property, please contact us. Sincerely, Thomas J. McGoldrick cc: Board of Directors STATE or ^DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PHONE NO. METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 55^06 772-7910 January 24, 1994 Hr. Eugene Stromnen, Executive Director Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 900 East Wayzata Boulevard, #160 Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Nr. Strommen: RE: MULTIPLE DOCK LICENSE APPLICATION, MINNETONKA YACHT CLUB, PERMIT #77-6521, CARSONS BAY (#34), LAKE MINNETONKA (27-133P), HENNEPIN COUNTY We have received the public hearing notice for a new multiple dock license application from the Minnetonka Yacht Club for an additional 20 mooring slips to the marina. Before any work is done on the proposed changes, the Minnetonka Yacht Club must amend DNR permit #77-6521 to accurately reflect the proposed dock configuration and the number of slips which will exist at the marina. A letter requesting the amendment of the permit, a statement justifying the proposed changes, a plan aepicting the proposed dock configuration, and an amendment fee of $75.OC (made payable to the Department of Natural Resources) must be submitted to this office before DNR permit #77-6521 can be amended. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this multiple dock license application. Should you have any questions please contact me at 772-7910. Sincerely, Joe Richter Hydrologist c:Lake Minnetonka File Carsons Bay (#34) Permit 77-6521 File JAN 251994 aa i/vs/vy AM eOllAI OPPORTUNITY E -.--I.OYER m LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT February 3, 1994 To;Water Structures Committee From: Rachel Thibault Administrative Technician Subj; 1994 Multiple Dock License renewals A.The following multiple dock licensees have submitted renewal without change applications for 1994 with ^ stipulations, etc. Village Certificates are approved or time (45 days) has expired. Application fees SXS iQ Staff recommenos approval. Baycliffe Property Owners Assoc., S Upper Lake Bayshore Manor Condominiums, Excelsior Bay Big Island Inc., Lower Lake S Boulder Bridge Farm Inc., S Upper Lake Cardinal Cove Beach Assn., Halsteds Bay Cedarhurst Assn., Robinsons Bay Chimo Assn., Carsons Bay Crane Island, Inc., S Upper Lake Crystal Bay Service, Crystal Bay City of Deephaven, Carsons & St Louis Bays Dennis Boats, Lower Lake S Driftwood Shores Assn, Harrisons Bay Eagle Bluff Assn., Halsteds Bay Forest Arms Improvement Assn., Forest Lake Grandview Point Assoc., Carsons Bay Gray's Landing HOA, Grays Bay city of Groenwood, St Albans Bay & Excslsioir Bay Halstead Acres Improvement Assn., Halsteds Bay Harborage Homeowners Assn., Smithtown Bay Hennepin County, Spring Park Bay Jennings Cove Dock Owners Assn, Jennings Bay Lafayette Club, Crystal Bay Lafayette Ridge HOA, Lafayette Bay Lakewinds Assn, Spring Park Bay Lord Fletchers of the Lake, Coffee Cove Maple Crest Estates, Jennings Bay , ^^ ^ Meadowbrook Boat Club, Inc., Grays Bay & Libbs Lake City of Minnetonka Beach, Crystal Bay, Lafayette Bay, Lower Xv3 ]c 6 N Minnetonka Edgewater Apts., Spring Park Bay Minnetonka Power Squadron, Big Island Passage City of Mound, Priests Bay, Cooks Bay, W Upper Lake, Phelps Bay, Black Lake, Emerald Lake, Seton Lake, Harrisons Bay, Jennings Bay, West Arm Navarre Cove HOA, Carmans Bay Pheasant Lawn HOA, Carmans Bay , , , , Prssbyterian Homes on Lake Mtka^ Black Lake Ridgewood Cove Property Owners, Jennings Bay Art Rossberg, S Upper Lake Multiple Dock License renewals, 212ISA, Page 2 Sandy Beach Place, West Arm (per new site plan) Seahorse Condo Assn., Jennings Bay Seton Village Assn., Harrisons Bay Thomas Developroent/Bayshore III, Smithtown Bay City of Tonka Bay, Gideons Bay Victoria Estates, North Arm Walden Tract X Property Owners, St Louis Bay Walter's Port Assn., Carmans Bay City of Wayzata, Wayzata Bay West Beach Apts., Coffee Cove West Point Place HOA, Lafayette Bay Willow Woods Corp., Gideons Bay Woodend Shores Beach Assn., W Upper Lake DISTRICT MOORING AREAS City of Deephaven, St Louis St Carsons Bay City of Excelsior, Excelsior Bay Methodist Lakeside Assembly, Wayzata Bay Wayzata Yacht Club, Wayzata Bay B.The following multiple dock licensees have submitted ranaval without changa applications for 1994 with orders, stipulations, etc. Village Certificates are approved or time (45 days) has expired.deposit was paid on the application fee with the balance due fey 3/31/94. Staff recommends approval subject to balance due being paid by 3/31/94. A1 & Alma's Supper Club, Cooks Bay Bayview Condominiums, Spring Park Bay Big Island Vets Camp, Veterans Bay Boat Rentals of Minnetonka, Harrisons Bay Chapman Place Marina, Cooks Bay Clay Cliffe IIOA, Old Channel Bay Curly's Minnetonka Marina, Lower Lake S Gayle's Marina Corp., Maxwell Bay Gray's Bay Marina, Grays Bay Harrison Harbor Twinhome Assn., Harrison Bay Howards Point Marina, S Upper Lake Minnetonka Portable Dredging, Gideons Bay Park Hill/Park Isl.^nd Apts., Black Lake TM Pizza Enterprises, Inc., Seton Lake RDP Partners/Upper Lake Mtka Yacht Club, Spring Park Bay (subject to docks being built and amenities being provided per Special Density License Order) Rockvam Boat Yards, Inc., Site 1, West Arm Rockvam Boat Yards, Inc., Site 2, West Arm (subject to as- built survey - which is being processed per J. Rockvam) Sailors World Marina, Smiths Bay Tonka Bay Marina, Lower Lake S Wayzata Yacht Club, Site 1, Wayzata Bay Wayzata Yacht Club, Site 2, Wayzata Bay Windward Marine, Inc., Browns Bay & Tanager Lake ••• Multiple Dock License renewals, 2/3/94, Page 3 C.The following multiple dock licensees have submitted new dock license applications with minor changes for 1994, with orders, stipulations, etc. 1)Beans Greenwood Marina, 21945 Minnetonka Blvd, Greenwood, on St. Albans Bay; Jim Bean, marina owner, submitted a new as-built survey 11/30/93. The survey revealed that the location of slip #104 is beyond 100', which was not apparent from the proposed site plan approved by the Board. Therefore, Bean submitted a letter, dated 1/31/94, proposing the relocation of slip 104 from the place beyond 100' to a new location within 100'. He also requested to move transient slip T-112 from its present location beyond 100' to the location of slip 104, per site plan attached. ♦Paid 20% deposit, balance due by 3/31/94, village certificate approved. 2)Herzog Acres Assoc*, 2803 McKenzie Pt. Road, Minnetonka, on Wayzata Bay; minor reconfiguration of two slips, #14 & #15 per site plan dated 12/28/93. This would be a reduction in slip size from 40' long to 24' long. (Herzog Acres has a non-conforming density of 1:12') ♦Paid in full, village certificate time expires 2/6/94. 3)Shorevood Yacht Club, 600 West Lake street, Shorewood, on Gideons Bay; new owner - John Holroyd of Holroyd Enterprises, Inc., 6905 Limerick Lane S., Edina, MN 55439 ♦Paid 20% deposit, balance due by 3/31/94, village v,*^tificate time has expired. 4)Baton View Association, c/o Jan Trapp, 4869 Bartlett Blvd, Mound, on Seton Lake; new owner - The four lots which the six-slip dock serves were scld and developed, and the new residents have formed an association, represented by Jan Trapp, treasurer. ♦Paid in full, and the village certificate approved. A copy of Article IV Dock and Access Easement of the association by-laws was submitted. This document describes the easement for each lot to access the docks, how the slips are allocated to each lot, as well as insurance and maintenance requirements for the dock and easement area. Multiple Dock License renewals, 2/3/94, Page 4 D.Excelsior Perk Tavern, 685 Excelsior Blvd, Excelsior on Excelsior Bay; renewal without change, paid deposit, balance due by 3/31/94, village certificate expires 2/6/94. Review of special density license amenities ffic A993 Attached are letters from Alice Bronstad, Excelsior Park Tavern, listing the amenities that were provided for the 1993 season. The list of eight required amenities, with substitution of free charter cruises for underprivileged and handicapped groups (100 people minimum) in place of the swimming pool for swim lessons, is also attached. It appears that item 4 relating to charter boat storage and service was not met in 1993. This is addressed by Alice in her letter of 12/21/93. end:Bean's 1/31/94 letter & site plan Herzog Acres' 12/24/93 letter & (2) site plans Excelsior Park Tavern letters of 12/21/93, 12/27/93 and 3/12/93, 7/28/93 board minutes excerpt i 3caii ’s Greenwood Marina, Inc. ST ALBAN'S BAY. BOX 329 EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 ,• t • I lh ‘.,1 r.ASOLirn CUSTOM CARi. REPAIR ^.t. l)M i Jim • LmeU l>.m {6121 474 7^M? January 31, !^.s. Rachel I'hihault L. >1 . C. D. 900 tast ’.tavzata 31vd. >»ayzata, Mn 55391 Tear Rachel; You were correct in noting our tie-spacegl04 is partially outsid? the 100 foot mark. I would oropose moving #104 in front of #56 & #57, and also moving tie-space#l12 (which is aprox. 140 feet from shore) adjacent to #30 as a transient ^ location. This would' entail moving a transient slip closer to shore and would allow us to use this space for the service department's drop offs, weekend towing and the like. A response to this proposal will be appreciated so we can continue our annual renewal application. «... w FEB 2 1994 i_m.c.d. I I I I / tr 7 --� 0 J .c.o -·-· ,, C, • . , " ·"' J ,·/ .. .. I • I I I December 24, 1993 Ms. Rachel Thibault Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 900 East Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 160 Wayzata MN 55391 Dear Ms. Thibault: Ir reply to your letter of December 21, 1993, I am enclosing a new application, along with a sketch, showing the minor changes to slips 14 and 15. As you indicated in your letter, there is no additional fee required. The reason for the change is that it allows us to tie off the boats so that they are in line with the strong northwesterly winds that we sometimes experience, especially in the fall of the year. Each slip is actually smaller than the previous layout. Thank you for your consideration. Season's Greetings to all of your staff. Sincerely, HERZOG ACRES ASSOCIATION Chuck Sunder Dock Chairman end. application and sketch oec ;;;3S3 ',..r f.c.D. . .·-. . . . I .... 1 ,. I . I Doc..k . lON - ./ / / / / / / 'f I - I cA / / / / / -/ / / / I 13 -l5b •/I "op,, ION - l-,f! � oot 'ft! 0 4'4 X.p. lilli I ■IIII Lake Minnetonka’s most versatile charter compcmy Decenber 21, 1993 X Ms. Rachel Thibeault Lake f-linnetonka Gjnservation District 900 East Wayzata Pi r’ Suite 160 Wayzata, 5539' Dear Rachel: In response to your request, here is a final report on amenities provided to satisfy the requiranents fear the Excelsior Park Tavern multiple dock license: 1)Charity cruises: date group §of guests August 15 August 23 St. Thomas the Apostle Cnurch, Minneapolis Sojourn clients & summer school paired students 60 40 September 11 Sojourn fundraiser - staff & benefactors October 9 Broken Wing Outreach, Richfield 12 (8 in wheelchairs, 1 of which .jere motorized) 2)Charter licensing of small boats - Process was underway with purchase of horns, fire extinguishers, life jackets and replacement of missing equipment. Insurance coverage was upgraded in readiness for charters. However, ail engines needed repair before Hennepin County Water Patrol could certify then. Consequer.tly, boats were not ready for lMCD licensing. Though repair was begun on all boats, it was not completed before the aid of the season. It is anticipated that all tour boats will be readi for licensing in May 1994 as it is apparent that a market exists for very small charters on a very occasional basis. Sincerely, /7/,‘•'C Alice Brcxistad Manager / / •.1 DEC C 2 i993 I : c‘:.* * 701 MINNETONKA BLVD • EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 (612)474-4772 • FAX (612) 474-4842 Lake Minnetonka's most versatile charter company Deccsnber 27, 1993 Ms. Rachel Thibeault Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 900 East V/ayzata Blvd., Suite 160 Wayzaca, Ml S5391 Dear Rachel: This is an addendum to my letter of December 21, 1993 in which I itemized the amenities provided to satisfy the requirements for the Excelsior Park Tavern multiple dock license. I had not included a listing of the cotimunity groups using the Tavern's meeting rooms on a oomplimentary basis. These include but aure not limited to: Minnetonka Public School District 276 - 3 to 4 meetings per month, year round Excelsior Area Oiamber of Ccmnerce - general meeting monthly; 1-2 ccramittee meetings/month 10 o'clock Club - daily coffee for retired business men of Excelsior area - 5 days/week, year round Optiniists Club - 2 meetings/month Minnetonka Juvenile Polios- 1 meeting per month These are standing meetings. Seme of the groups have additional events scheduled cn an "as needed" basis. For instance, the Minnetonka School District will have 12 meetings in Janucury 1994. If there is anything else I can provide yew with, please call me. Sincerely, UtU r.'i9S3 701 MINNETONKA BLVD • EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 474-4772 • FAX (612) 474-4842 •••k o n 685 Excelsior Blvd.. Excelsw. MN 55331 -------------—474-1113----------------- March 12, 1993 Ms. Rachel Thibault Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 900 East Wayzata Boulevard Suite 160 Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Rachel: Following is a summary'of‘'the'"araenitie3”which*will*'be provided -during-'the'^l 993’^season that are required as a stipulation of our multiple dock license: 1)Slip will be available as needed for Sheriff's Water Patrol 2)The syi.mming pool will be available for public swimming lessone/€hrough Minnetonka Community Education ft Services as weliCas a new service, a fishing launch for public charters corapiet^with guide, equipment and bait (See Board Action of 7/28/93) 3)Meeting room will available upon request and used tor meetings and events by many of the same clients as in 1992, namely the Excelsior Chamber of Commerce, Power Squadron, City of Excelsior, Lions Club, School District 276, LMLOA, LMCD, Excelsior-Lake Minnetonka Historical Society and many other corporate clients 4)Space will be available for charter boats with passenger service (specifically a classic 1956 Chris Craft for pleasure cruises, a 16' Lund for fishing excursions, a 24' Sea Ray for small picnic cruises and the 1909 streetcar boat, the Harriet) 5)Handicapped access to dock will be available 6)Lakeside deck pedestrian lookout will be available 7)Outdoor licensed food and beverage service will be available seven days/week 8)Dock attendants will be always on duty to monitor dock use I hope this meets your needs, please call immediately. Sincer*fely A. If you have any further questions, RECE.I'^hr> MAR 13 1993 LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS July 28. 1993 A..', E. s ior MOTION: Excelsior park TavenrA^enl ties. Excelsior Ear. Exc.i- H^ioN: Babcock stored.U./VxT^ ;:°k" T/re?„' .?craU^‘o“rV^VeVt [rbr„i™ip*psi*rn7on'dJr ‘p^^ “l/eH* ?t'‘^e7sr.00^'op.‘rp- rear and X.ve a written repor. SoTE^ Solioi ca^!e“unani.sously. LAKE MINNEl'ONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 3 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO STORAGE OF WATERCRAFT ON LAKE MINNETONKA AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES; AMENDING LMCD CODE SECTION 1.02, SUBDIVISION 41; ADDING SUBDIVISIONS 10 AND 11 TO SECTION 2.05 AND SUBDIVISION 55. a) TO SECTION 1.02; AMENDING SECTION 2.045, SUBDIVISION 3. a); AND AMENDING SECTION 1.02, SUBDIVISION 6) 'V THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT (LMCD) ORDAINS that the LMCD Code of Ordinances, be amended as follows: Section 1. LMCD Code Section 1.02, Subd. 41. is amended as follows; Subd. 41. "Restricted Watercraft" mean' any boat or vessel for use on or stored on the public waters of the Lake except for beats of vcoselj which arc 16 feet or leaa in length, and which are unmotorized of which use motors of 10 horaepower or Icaa. unrestricted watercraft as defined in this section. Section 2. LMCD Code Section 1.02 is amended by adding new Subdivision 55. a) as follows: 55.a^> "Unrestricted Watercraft" means anv boat or vessel for use pn Qf stprsd on the public waters of the Lake which is: 16 feet nr less in length and unmotorized: or ht 16 feet or less in length and which uses a motor of 10 horsepower or Ies$; 9£ c)20 feet or less in length and unmotorized. and which is propelled solely l?Y hmnaili power. Section 3. LMCD Code Section 2.05 is amended by adding new subdivisions 10 and 11 as follows: Subd. 10 Special Rule for Unrestricted VVatercraft at Non-Commercial Dock?.. Unrestricted watercraft, as defined in Section 1.02. shall not be counted fpr, purposes of determinint^ compliance with density limitations of this SCCtipn at nptb commercial docks. I^iihd II. Special Rule for Unrestricted Watercraft at Commercial Dpeks^ Unrestricte.! >vntercr.-ift. as defined in Section 1.02. shall not be counted for purpesesL of determining compliance with density limitations of this section at commercial provided: a)the watercraft arc not stored in the water of the Lake or on a mechanical liA._4n4 Changed per attorney' b>the Board finds that either: n the watercraft are used for public rental, are under the exclusive control of the rental organization, and do not number more than one such uncounted watercraft for each 25 feet of shoreline at the site (unless a greater number is required bv the Board as a public amenity); or recommen at ion 2)the watercraft are used for educational purposes, are under the exclusive; control of the educational organization . and do not number.more than one such uncounted watercraft for each 15 feet of shoreline at the site (unless a iLrcater number is required bv the Board as a public amenity). Section 4. LMCD Code Section 2.045, Subd. 3. a) is amended as follows: Subd. 3. a) "Off-Lake Storage Facilities" shall mean any dock, mooring area or launching ramp used by any club, business or association in conjunction with the storage of boats of restricted watercraft off the water of Lake Minnetonka. Section 5. LMCD Code Section 1.02, Subd. 6. is amended as fellows: Changed per 1 attorney's recommend. Subd. 6. "Boat Storage Units" means a space or facility available for mooring, docking or storing a watercraft to be used on the Lake. Boat storatie unit docs not include such a space or facility located on land unless it is used in conjunction with a commercial dock. This enactment is in effect from and after its passage and publication in accordance with the enabling act of the District. It is enacted by a majority vote of all the members of the Board and has the effect of an ordinance. Adopted by the LMCD Board of Directors this__day of , 1994. William Johnstone, Chair ATTEST: Dougl?*' E. Babcock, Secretary wp wto\u Qrestri.onl •.i r?? . .. * T’''i MINNETONKA CONS! ^^^February;;4, 1994 V-iiH. To: ^ Water Structures Coamittee *\t «»•, 4 •-■ •*;"*'’*■«*^.v« » 4V '* Subj I Suamary of fee inpact of unrestricted watercraft stored ^at multiple docks . The following is a list of licensees with boat storage units ^•.4(BSU) that are used only for unrestricted watercraft stored on land. , ^Number of BSU X '5-- Boat Rentals of Ntka 5.Gray's Bay Marina Rental Fishing boats Rental Fishing boats Rental Canoes on rack Rental Fishing boats 18 24 6 13»•' Howards Ft. Marina Total ' * The total amount of revenue generated from these unrestricted J.. watercraft is $610. I'. A C The/foilowing is a list of licensees with BSUs that are 4 M'r^rentedor reser^^ storage spaces. These slide spaces ^ ’can be used for unrestricted or restricted watercraft. Staff recommends that these slide spaces should be counted the same ^ ' as BSUs in the water.)l>iii|iih><>r of slide storage spaces 117>city of Deephaven ‘v* 10 36 7 18 10 22 2T0 Dennis Boats . city of Excelsior *Methodist Lakeside Assembly . •* Mtka Yacht Club I City of Tonka Bay Wayzata Yacht Club Total ‘..^•The total amount of revenue generated from these slides is currently $2,200. ' is also necessary to consider the sites with unrestricted r'K - watercraft that a. not included in the licensed BSUs at ’ .present and as a result are not paying fees. Staff expects ?.»*^that the following would be added into the BSUs for each A -r;*license under the proposed ordinance. '*■ ,: ■ • - ■ P • fHkvThey are a^’follows '1 k.. t V^ds ' J i' • ■' B rental boats - public amenity » ^ «• ..-4 ■■o«M •-i 13 canoes on racks .' 9 prams for sailing schooL^ V ts - public amenity»: ^ fi , . a. W}% ^atjwoui^ i»,9^ratedVis-S430^' V ------ LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 2/4/94 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Board Members Executive Director Gene Strommen News Report on Mayor's Meeting, Weekly News Editorial Opinion The enclosed Sailor news feature covering the January 28 quarterly Mayors Meeting fairly recaps the significant points made by Chair Johnstone and attending mayors. Attendance was good with mayors or council persons representing Excelsior, Greenwood, Minnetrista, Mound, Minnetonka Beach, Orono, Spring Park, Tonka Bay, Wayzata and Woodland. An observation or two is in order on some of the comments for the benefit of new board members, reminders to others. *LMCD's involvement in shoreland management -- The Management Plan presented in October, 1990, contained guidelines taken from the newly-published state guidelines for shoreland rules all MN cities were expected to adopt. The plan contained suggestions in an appendix standj>,rds which would seem to fit Lake Minneton/i.a s int.;::sive level of development. The standards contained added flexibility to benefit the cities. Some cities objected to LMCD considering the shoreland subject in its management plan study. LMCD completely removed shoreland references from the modified Management Plan adopted December, 1991. LMCD agrees it has no authority over shoreland management, and exercises none at this time *Milfoil harvesting -- in the low water years of 1988-1990, milfoil was the lake scourge with thick matts, virtually stopping boat traffic in certain areas, restricting access to residential docks. The cities willingly backed LMCD s moving forward to meet the challenge. Funding has included DNR, county and private dollars each year, cities paying about 1/2 of the annual cost, less than half in 89 and '90. Cost the last two years were about $100,000. *Reserves -- The $265,00 in admn reserves is now reduced by $25,000 as of 1/26 board action, and intended to be addressed in February. Current $240,000 is about 10 months operating costs. *Alternates -- LMCD's legal counsel advises the enabling legislation does not allow it, mr is it desirable. Board usually has ten or more members in attendance. Please note the Weekly News Opinion editorial ... •> Newstry 28 ;ant points jndance was tcelslot,cono,omments toters :rlinedjuidelinesadopt.£>intained.ties:t in itsillt Plan uthority this time 1988-1990, irtual1y ing access ^sd LMCD s las ?at, cities naif in 89 30,000 . reduced by o be ut 10 he enabling irable. endance. WtLKLY NtWS FebfViify 3.1994OpinionDon't pull the plug on the LMCD)y Michael KrauseWhen at least three cities which participate in the Lake Minnetonka Conservationdistrict (LMCD) vote to disband the organization, it must be taken seriously. HoweverK'fore other communities rush to judgment on the LMCD. we believe the residents ofhe Lake Minnetonka area should consider what might take this agency ’s place.The LMCD is not without its flaws. A structure th. i gives the same voting strength toMinnetonka which has by far the most population but relatively little lakeshore, as Woodland, which has only a few hundred people, or Orono. Mound and Shorewood. which have 6.000 to 10.000 residents and many miles of lakeshore. is not truly represen tative of the importance of the Lake to each city or the city to the Lake Another criticism of the LMCD is that its mission and responsibthites overlap with some of the duties of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the Department of Natural Resources. Hennepin County. Hennepin Parks, and even the municipahties ihemsclves. These are imporlani issues that need to be discussed, paniculaiiy more than 25 years after the LMCD was first formed. Its unique charter should be amended to more accu rately reflect the relative importance of the interests that come to bear on Lake .Minnetonka and recognize the imponance of this natural resource extends far bevond a tew feel of its shoreline. Representation Irom other agencies, sports and re- reanonal users, commercial interests on the Lake and ijihers should be pan ol the LMCD and its decision-making. .... Sorlinc out the various responsibilities of the agencies lhai have some junsdicllun over Lake .Minnetonka and its users will be more problemaiic, but still necessai^. Issues t)f water quality, surface uses and shoreline regulation cannot be se^ .tiaied irom one another. A mulii-lavered system such as now e\:sis makes ii dilhcuii somcumes lor citi zens to hold someone accountable and can create bureaucratic headaches for those people who must enter into the rcgulaioi7 maze.The fact remains, however, that of all the agencies with regulatory authority for Lake .Minnetonka, the LMCD is the one with the most local control and the closest lies to thepeople living in the municipalities that sunound the Lake. If the LMCD were to go awaylomoiTow. it would not mean regulation would go away. What it would mean is that thedecisions made at LMCD meetings at Tonka Bay City Hall or in the LMCD offices inWayzala would instead be made in downtown Minneapolis or in St. Paul. Rather than disband the LMCD we would prefer to sec a group of citizens from a wide variety of perspectives convened to lake a hard look at the structure and responsi bilities of the LMCD and the other rcgulaioo’ agencies. We believe there should be wide spread support for a new sin.iciure with fewer administrative layers among the 14 cities on the Lake and the other groups that use the Lake. State and regional authorities may even support the plan if it appears the decision-making process of a new entity is likely to balance die overall public interest in .le Lake with the more parochial interests of those who own Minnetonka ’s lakeshore. Lake Minnetonka is one of the most impoiiani natural resources in the metropolitan area and the stale. Its successful stewardship for future generations to come will always require a delicate balancing between local inieiesis and the interests of groups tar from its shores. Much of the local responsibility lor stewardship of Lake .Minnetonka now lies with the LMCD. Those who advocate that the L.MCD be abolished must be willing to concede authority over Lake .Minnetonka to regional and state agencies, or tell us how the local auihoniy invested in the L.MCD will be created in a new body Editor s note: Michael Krause wiis an editor with the Weekly News for eight years. He is now emploxed as a chief aide with the Hennepin County Boaid of Commissioners. A ‘ Area cities urged to take vote on LMCD future Pros and cons of agency discussed by area mayors Uy Juhii !Uugford During its 27-year history as an overseer of the largest lake in Hennepin County, the Lake Min netonka Conservation District has witnessed it share of debate. But the recent controversy concerning the LMCD has reached such heights that cities around the lake are in the pro cess of voting to either disband Uic agency or keep it intact. So far. three of the 14 cities that surround Lake Minnetonka have voted for the dissolution of U-.c LMCD. They are Orono, Spr ing Park and Wayzala. However. Uiree other cities Iiave given the LMCD a vote of confiJcnce by approving resolu tions to keep the organization m- tacl. Minnelrista. Mound and Woodland recently voted in favor of such resolutions. .According to stale statutes, in order for the cities around the lake to dissolve the LMCD, tliree-fourths would have to vote to disband it. Ihat means 10 or 11 cities — even LMCD officials are not sure of the exact count — would have to vole in favor of dissolv ing llic LMCD. With three cities furmly behind llie LMCD. and at least three or four others saying they will vote in favor of keeping the agency intact. Tonka Bay Mayor Vem llaug pointed out last week that it >eems likely the LMCD will survive. Yet. at a meeting last week of representatives from the 14 cities around the lake, several mayors and Bill Johnstone, chair of Uie LMCD, urged the re maining cities to also take votes concerning the LMCD’s future. “Even if there aren't enough votes to dissolve the LMCD, I think we’ve got to find out where the 14 cities stand." said Wayzala Mayor Bob Gisvold, whose city recently voted to dissolve the LMCD “If the LMCD has eight or nine cities opposed to it. even though that wouldn't be enough to dissolve it. then it has a big problem and should know about it." Minnelrista Mayor Scott Carlson, a former LMCD board member, said: “I think tlie kinds of discussions we’re hav ing concerning the dissolution are appropriate to make sure the direction of Hie LMCD is what the cities want to see. But after this is over. I’d really like to see more constructive work instead of complaints without suggested solutions.” Johnstone, the LMCD chair from Minnetonka, said: “I tliink it’s healthy that we take these votes and find out wheUier the organization is performms its functions and whether it can do some things belter.” But Jolinslone said he would like Uie cities to keep in mind that should Uiey vote to dissolve the LMCD. they miglil lose Uie luxury of having a local agency as the lake ’s manager. He also said Uie cities should remember that the LMCD is making changes in areas where it has been criticized. Jolinstone said the LMCD is trying to communicate and work belter with Uie cities, is looking into alternative revenue sources for operating Uie LMCD and harvesting milfoil from the lake, is considering a new. 1^ restrictive meUiod for licensing multiple-docks, is using up some of its reserves in order to reduce Uie amount paid by the cities, and is making a strong push to conclude its long-standing effort to have 700 car and trailer park ing spaces at public boat access sites around the lake. “The lake is an enormously valuable asset to the cities for a whole ho.st of reasons, including strong p.'‘operty values amt recreation.’’ Johastone said. “It’s important Uiat wtiatever organization results from this is an organization that includes a significant component of local control” But as several mayors |xiint«l out. Uie LMCD will have a dif ficult time overcoming pro blems perceived by its memlier ciUes. Gisvold told the mayors that Uie Wayzala City Council is not opposed to Uie idea of having the LMCD as Uie local manager of Uie lake. “We wouldn’t be op|N>se<l to Uie LMCD if it were following wliat it was orginally set up to do, manage the lake,’’ Gisvold said “But now it’s into harvesting milfoil and w e’re not sure we re getting enough l>;uig for our buck there Another one of our big problems with the LMCD started four or five years ago when it got into shoreland management. The l,MCD is sup posed to be Uie manager of Ihe L.MCI): To page I6A 3 no Minr«gtofU<a Sun*Sattor —Wtd.. Ftb. 2. 1994 LMCD: Mayors urge cities to take votes From page 2A lake.” Gisvold said the Wayzata council also thinks the LMCD is keei^ too large of a reserve, with more than $600,000 in several separate funds. “We'd love to have something like that in WayzaU,” Gisvold said. "Tt- LMCD could easily fund its operation for more than a year.” Greenwood Mayor Alan Albrecht said he has a problem with an LMCD policy that does not allow cities to send alter nates to meetings when their regular representatives cannot attend. He also said the LMCD convenes too many meetings, which in turn makes it diffcult for good people to volunteer as a representative. "There have been some un- portant issues voted on during the years when many represen tative from cities could not at tend,” Albrecht said. “In those instances, some cities were very interested and think the votes could have gone the other way. The cities involved somewhat resent that process. The LMCD has to allow cities to have alter nates with voting power.” Spnng Park Mayor Jerry Rockvam said the LMCD has a credibility problem. Spnng Park and Orono council members recently demanded refunds from the LMCD for the contributions they’ve made in recent years toward the milfoil harvesting program. Those two cities said they did not know their contributions to the mifoil program were volun tary since 1969, when the LMCD started the harvesting program. At that time, the LMCD asked the 14 cities to match their usual, mandatory contribution to the LMCD’s operating bu^et with a contribution to the milfoil harvesting program. Several weeks ago, LMCD of ficials said while they may not liave specifically stated that milfoil payments since then were voluntary, the cities should have known and should have questioned the LMCD if they thought the payments were too high. "We asked the LMCT) earlier this year whether the milfoil payment was voluntary and never heard back," Rockvam said. "That ’s where you lose credibility.” But several mayors backed the LMCD. Mound Mayor Skip Johnson said the LMCD is the best vehi cle for the 14 cities to have some say in how the lake is managed. He also said the LMCD should not not allow alternate voting members, as suggested by Albrecht. “City councils don ’t have alternate voting members,” Johnson said. "At our meetings, you ’ve got to be there to vote and it shouldn ’t be any different.” •C. Johnson also supported the LMCD’s policy of keejring a strong reserve for the day when an effective, and possibly expen sive milfoil treatment is discovered. "That ’s one reason I’d like to not see you spend the reserve down,” Johnson said. “I’ve always considered the harvesting program to be a stopgap measure until a biological control can be found. And that can get rather expensive." Excelsior Mayor John Ander son said while his city has not taken a vote, it will likely vote to keep the LMCD intact. He said: “I’m encouraged by the changes you ’re making.” $ ranw [i Hi Bill] «iTi] :';•»:i"::s 5-'<» TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorsc, City Administrator February 10, 1994 X SUBJECT:Fund Raising for Youth Center The Orono School District’s Community Education Director recently met with the North Tonka Crime Prevention Coalition to review several programs, one of which is a proposed youth center. The youth center is planned to serve as a supervised activity center for teens. The cost to staff the center is approximately $15,000 per year. At present there is $5,000 available for staftmg. The Community Education Director asked the Crim,' Prevention Coalition for ideas to address the gap in funding for the staffing of the center. Ideas proposed were to staff the center with volunteers and to raise additional funds through donations. The Crime Prevention Coalition Board determined that Chief Sullivan be authorized to work on the Board ’s behalf with the Community Education Director to do fund raising. After I discussed this with Chief Sullivan, it was determined that Council should be advised regarding the Crime Prevention Coalition fund raising efforts and the Chiefs proposed role, to determine whether the Council had any concerns regarding the Chiefs fund raising activities. Secondly, it was determined that if the Council did not object to tlie fund raising effort in general. Chief Sullivan should not do any personal solicitation; and his role should be limited to being one of several signatories on a letter of solicitation signed by all Board members of ^e Coalition. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns regarding the fund raising effort and the Chiefs role. cm HALL 3!5 W 4th Si VTDD 6i: # AtetniiCrBtiae # C«rkTr»«jwtf # EmnoMnDg # btp0Ctioiu # PlanauMr # Dm ProoMsinc PVBUCSCtVICES E9TVl*iJW No. •612<18^T9S FAX38lMn:43 # SbiM *Pariu •Cttmwrm •Ri»6im # Water UtiutMi # Sever UtiiitM ♦Crntrii Service POUCI STATION SOOW SlhSt. i6l2i3M>2S04 PAX 3HA31S5 riEE STATION COPluaSt <612)3S8'7U1 Pl-BUC UBRARY 225 East Ave VTDD fii: FAX»2S h.'> souo waste booee 1«73 Bench Sc 612 : 3BB> 1402 POBT AUTHORITY 217 PiumSu .612j38M731 FAX JKM782 CIVIL DEFENSE 419 Bush St t6l2i 38S-T450 FAX38S-9592 SHELDON THLATRE 3rd St ft Fan Ave 612138S-2S92 Bot Office 35A2S06 HOUSING ALTHORm 42S W 5tiiSc (612)388-7571 FAX 3864)661 QaJ^UdWug P.O. B^34 Rad WiM^, MiMfOidA 55066 c^r CF C?c:.3c^-3 III!futeSG^i'i J&nuary 24, 1994 FEB iwo.1 The Honorable Mayor Edward Callahan Mayor of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323—0066 Dear Mayor Callahan: Ae you have no doubt heard. Northern States Power Company is seeking approval from the State Legislature to temporarily store spent nuclear fuel on site in large, well-protected dry casks at the Red wing Prairie Island Nuclear Power Plant. Since 1986, at least tijn other nuclear plants have stored this material In similar containers until the Federal Government's long-term storage facility r«ady to receive high-level waste. In addition, all applicable State and federal regulatory agencies have approved NSP's proposal. The City of Red Wing needs your help. We strongly support the legislature granting this approval. If it is not approved and the plant is forced to shut down, the loss of this efficient power source will drive all of our electric rates up. This is conservatively estimated at $1.8 billion from our city treasuries and our constituents in the form of higher electric bills. The power plant is a significant tax revenue for the City. If the plant is shut down, our tax base is lost. Red wing would soon start collecting local government aid, taking money away from other cities. On behalf of the City, we feel our best alternative is for the legislature to approve this temporary storage. We all can "win" by avoiding higher electric rates and lost local government aid. The facility is in our "front yard" and the City of Red Wing, along with the vast majority of our citizens, favors this proposal and accepts the very minimal risk. Won't you join us? We need your help. Enclosed you will find an Information?1 packet and a sample resolution. We would respectfully request your council's approval and forwarding a copy to your legislators and one returned to us. If you have any questions or wish any additional information, please contact us or our City Administrator, Steve Perkins, at the above numbers or address. Thanks for your consideration and help Sincerely, !' A Romeo C. Cyr ^ Mayor Nancy MilcittaNancy Council President pas Enclosures - 2 MNnUNITM SOT INK RECYCLED PAPER An Equal Opportunity Employer Ertyworvner fAy frtmgm LocaBy GroeeV RESOLUTION NO. Supporting Legislation to Allow for the Temporary Storage of Spent Fuel by Northern States Power at their Prair'^ Island Nuclear Power Plant WHEREAS/ Northern State's Power Company's Prairie Island Power Plant has produced safe, low-cost electricity for more than twenty years and consistently ranks as one of the lowest cost, safest, most productive and efficient nuclear plants in the country; and WHEREAS/ the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has repeatedly recognized the Prairie Island Plant as one of the best run nuclear facilities in the country; and WHEREAS/ if the Prairie Island Power Plant is forced to close, the loss of this safe and low-cost base load twelve-hundred mega watt electric generating plant would cost not only NSP customers more in higher rates, but remove an efficient power source from the Mid-Continent Area Power Pool (MAPP) and thereby adversely affect all upper midwest electric consumers; and WHEREAS/ the Prairie Island Power Plant contributes substantial annual real estate tax payments, thereby reducing and in some cases eliminating traditional educational and local government aids, and the shut down of this plant with resulting lost tax base would cost the State and other cities and school districts millions of dollars in increased State-aid payments thereby affecting adversely the vast majority of Minnesota taxpayers; and WHEREAS/ the Prairie Island Power Plant will reach maximum capacity of its temporary storage facility for spent fuel in 1994 and all necessary permits and approvals from State and Federal regulatory agencies have been obtained so as to allow for the temporary storage of older spent fuel in dry casks, a method safely utilized by at least six other nuclear power plants; and WHEREAS/ the Prairie Island Power Plant is located within the City of Red wing and the City and the vast majority of residents strongly favor approval of State legislation to permit this temporary spent fuel storage and further that the City has requested the support of other Cities. NOW/ THEREFORE/ BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ that it supports the City of Red Wing's efforts to seek approval in the legislature to allow on-site teir.T'orary storage of spent nuclear fuel from the Prairie Island Plant until the U.S. Department of Energy meets its obligations to complete a national high-level permanent waste repository. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the (Citv Administrator/^itV Clerk) is hereby authorized and directed to forward a signed copy of this resolution to the Governor and State legislators representing the City in the State legislature and in like manner notify the City of Red wing of the city's adoption of thxs resolut jn. Adopted by the City Council this day of . 1994. (Mayor) ATTEST; (City Clerk-Treasurer) Northern States PowerCompany PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Information Packet z' • »: >NSP OverviewCustomers: 1.7 million Population served; 3 million Employees; 7,522 Service area: 5 states/49,000 sq. miles Generation capacity: 6,789 MW Peak demand: 1991 -7,080 MW 1993-6,990 MW Energy production; 58% Coal 37% Nuclear 5% Other Business interests: -electric operations -gas operations -integrated waste management -other non-regulated Issue—^__________________Prairie Island nuclear generating facility has operatedsince 1973. All spent fuel is stored at the plant and this storage space is limited. Without additional storage capacity, Prairie Island will run out of storage space in 1995-1996, leading to the premature closing of the plant in 1995. The PUC has approved a plan to temporarily store spent fuel in sealed-steel containers until it can be shipped to a permanent disposal facility. The Minnesota Court of Appeals has ruled that legislative approval is required to expand the spent fuel capacity. Legislative approval is necessary in the 1994 legislative session or the plant will be required to close in 1995. significance of the Prairie Island Plant«—, _ , _ _____ •Location: Red Wing, Goodhue County, Minnesota. Locatedadjacent to the Mdewakanton Sioux Community at Prairie Island.Energy: 8,300 MWhr (Enough to serve City of St. Paul one year)-Supplies 20% of NSP’s customers’ energy-Low cost: 1.5 cents/kwh Employment: 500 full-time employees Payroll: $27.8 million/yr Property Taxes (Pay ’94): -Goodhue County $4.9 million -City of Red Wing $6.2 million -School District 256 $11.5 million Total: $22.6 million •m, Direct Impacts of Early ShutdownTotal Cost on a present value basis $1.8 billion more. Electricity rales in some years for certain customers could increase as much as 19 percent. Loss of NSP jobs at Prairie Island and support areas - 500 employees, 150 of which are union jobs. A additional 150-200 craft union jobs are added during refueling outages. Loss of property taxes - $22.6 million/yr. Increased S02 emissions (10-15,000 tons/yr) and C02 emissions (5 million tons/yr.) •:StateAL AZ AR CA CO CT FL GA lA IL KS U ME MD MA Ml On-site Storage by StateMetric Tons of Spent Fuel1996 Estimate 2006 Estimate State 1996 Estimate0-10 0-0 0-50 270-450 1482 HTGR * 160-230 200-250 0-20 0-10 1230-1810 0-0 0-040 10-40 170-250 70-110 270-470 420-1210 250-580 240-350 600-1020 500-690 560-820 500-1010 100-160 3160-4310 tO-120 180-410 140-210 480-620 210-260 1000-1440 MN 100-150 320-420 *Indicates spent fuel elements; not measured In metric tons MS MO NE NY NJ NH NC OH OR PA SC TN TX VT VA WA Wi 90-170 0-0 20-90 50-160 70-160 0-0 290-380 70-120 0-0 190-690 600-760 240-570 0-0 0-0 300-460 00-160 30-80 2008 Estimate360-500 100-200 270-340 620-1040 560-920 0-170 750-1100 230-460 50-140 1480-2550 1250-1540 1050-1490 0-90 80-130 890-1180 320-440 320-520 f •1 Nuclear Plants Using Dry Cask StoragePlantUtilityYear Activated Surry Power Station Virginia Power 1986 H. B. Robinson Carolina Power & Light 1987 Oconee Duke Power • 1990 Ft. Saint Vrain Colorado Public Service • 1991 Calvert Cliffs Baltimore Gas & Electric•1992 Palisades • Consumers Power .1993 • • foiectivf cover L’d neutron shield MetilUc (Hing seats Cask body Cavity with fuel basket Neutron shield Outer shell >r • • n • ► 7 ^ Trunnion ( TN-40 Spent Fuel Storage Cask Height:' 16 J feet Diameter: 8.5 feet Weight: 122 tons i 4 ( • r ^ .-4 <■ 'ff' :r^ -iu: •n.*:: • • ^ • .^'* • *'-•' *“ •• •*‘'»r •■>*' « *k ^ •V • -?■•.•.••• •., ;.r :• V ' ;•••... •n••Chronology of NSP’s Plan for Temporary Nuclear Waste Storage May 1989 October 1989 January 1990 August 1990 May 1991 NSP announces plan for temp spent fuel storage NSP and slate agencies begin environmental review •• MEQB begins environmental review NSP applies to NRC for storage facility license •• MEQB accepts EIS, concludes no negative effects NSP submits application for Certificate of Need November 1991 ALJ holds public hearings IttliMii 'll I •lirtirtit •m#:^iliiu Jiv^l [t ^iirt tltH 4f mssgf^ %? MINUTES OF JANUARY 25, 1994 HIGHWAY 12 JOINT MEDIATION MEETING Present:City of Orono: Councilmember Hurr, Coimcilmember Goetten, Councilmember Jabbour, Mayor Callahan, City of Long Lake: Mayor Olson, Councilmember Rettinger, Councilmember Miller, Councilmember Hartfiel, City of Maple Plain: Chris Dietzen, MnDOT: Chuck Sigerrud, Terry Humbert, Val Reinaas, Mediator: Roger Williams. 1.The group discussed the notification of cities regarding the "System Plan" effort. This notification has not been accomplished. Terry Humbert indicated he believes the cities should be notified. Councilmember Jabbour suggested the cities be briefed at the next Policy Committee meeting. 2.Roger Williams indicated there were two main agenda items for this meeting. 1.) The Cities were to take a long term look at the local transportation system in relation to the "System Plan". 'y A0 .) MnDOT was to develop a work program for the System Plan process. Mayor Callahan indicated he believes the System Plan reflects a sideways movement by MnDOT regarding the EIS process. Mayor Callahan outlined several ideas for improving the safety and traffic movement efficiency of Highway 12 which could include upgrading Highway 12 to four lanes through Orono west of Willow Drive. He also indicated"that Orono citizens would not be supportive of expanding County Road 6 or Watertown Road. Mayor Callahan suggested the City of Long Lake work with MnDOT to combine the Hishway project with a downtown upgrade project jO that the highway project can assist with the downtown upgrade project. Terry Humbert indicated MnDOT needs tc develop a continuous solution from Delano to Wayzata versus a solution that stops at iX)ng Lake. He indicated that a two lane highway on Highway 12 will handle all the traffic from the western part of the state to Maple Plain. However, the commuter traffic from Maple Plain to Long Lake causes the traffic problems on Highway 12. He indicated that if MnDOT builds a highway sufficient to handle the State" traffic, they could argue that they do not have responsibility to provide a road to serve commuters. The local and county jurisdictions would then be responsible for handling commuters with the local road system. Mayor Olson indicated the problem with buUding a large central roadway is that "if you build it - they will come." It would result in a Burnsville type development west of Orono and Long Lake. He suggested that if local commuter traffic was prohibited from Minutes of Januan 25, 1994 Joint Mediation Meeting page 2 of 2 using Highway 12 there would not be a traffic problem on Highway 12. Mayor Olson proposed the following alternative to a four-lane highway: Develop County Road 6 and Watertown Road as two lane parkways to take commuter traffic north and south of Long Lake and connecting to Highway 12 east of Long Lake. This would result in three two-lane roadways to handle the peak hour traffic. Councilmember HartHel indicated the parkways could include bike/hike trails to create a trail loop that would provide access to the Wolsfeld Woods and Baker Park. He also indicated Orono would have control of the parkways in terms of things such at prohibiting commercial development and traffic control measures. Councilmember Goetten indicated if the parkways were to handle a high level of u-affic they would provide a less-than-ideal setting for a recreational trail. Mayor Olson indicated these roadways would only be busy during the two daily peak traffic times on weekdays. At other limes, such as weekends, they would have low traffic. Councilmember Jabbour questioned the value of the County 6 connection to Highway 12 versus the current route to 494. Councilmember Jabbour also questioned the benefit of redesigning and relocating Watenown Road since traffic from west of McCulley would tend to use Counl> Road 6 or Highway 12 versus Watertown Road. He also indicated that if numerous stop lights are installed on Highway 12 it will push traffic to County 6 and Watertown Road. Councilmember Hurr indicated that because Watertown Road is a city roadway, the cost of upgrading Watertown Road to a parkway would have to be borne by the City of Orono unless MnDOT or the County could be convinced to fund the upgrade. Mayor Callahan indicated that at the present time he does not see a need to upgrade Highway 12 or to upgrade Watertown Road or County 6. He suggested MnDOT keep the EIS process moving toward a solution. 3.Next Agenda. For the next meeting MnDOT will analyze the Long Lake proposal. MnDOT will need to analyze the Long Lake proposal in terms of fumre traffic volumes to determine whether the parkway proposal will draw enough traffic from Highway 12 to enable Highway 12 to remain a two lane roadway in the fumre. 4.Fumre Meeting Dates. Tuesday, February 22 at 3:00 p.m. Tuesday, March 15 at 3:00 p.m. Tuesday, March 29 at 3:00 p.m. DavWM.CM(& VctPimocNr CraigR. Rapp BraoWynPark DonAahtMorVi CiBatnharl K'nnaapoiia WiSam Burnt Fr«ay MnnsapoSa CoB^jaGrev* Tom Egan Eagan Maria Grimm StPHJi Coral Houia 3ooming>an Sutan Hoyt FaloonHaigfA w«rry Unha Moundt Viawr ioanLyndi Shako^ Frank Ongaro St Paul j'mProaaar Richflaid Mary Raymond Oaaphvran Dwyn TWdanbaig aairta OanaWhila Prior Uka ExEcunvf DtRicroii VamPaiaraon rSi: oesodotipnofmerropolifanmunia^litjes !0JLirubt \ fE3 I 0 1984 February 9, 1994 TO: Mayors, Managers/Administrators, and Contact Persons Enclosed is an invitation to a legislative reception sponsored by the AMM for Metropolitan Area Legislators and Metropolitan Council Members. The purpose of the reception is to explain the AMM position on various issues to the legislators and Met Council members through one-on-one discussion and an information packet. The major issues are city revenues (LGA/HACA/I/STF), Metropolitan Governance, and transportation funding with emphasis on long term guaranteed transit financing. As an AMM member city official, you are invited to attend the reception. As indicated on the enclosed invitation, the reception is on March 2 at 5:00 P.M. at the Kelly Inn in St. Paul. We hope that at least one person from each member city will attend. More are welcome! To make this year the most successful, we ask that you please call your legislators and urge them to attend. Also, since this invitation is being mailed to Mayors, Managers, and Contact Persons only, please extend this invitation to others on your council or staff who might be interested in attending. As per invitation, please RSVP to Carol Williams, 490-3301. Thank you. Vern Peterson, Executive Director Association ol? Metropolitan Municipalities 3490 lexiogtoD avenue north, sf. paul, minnesota 55126 (612) 490-3301 The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Cordially Invites You to a Reception For 21^0 Lefllstators from the Metropolitan Area and Metropolitan Council Members Wednesday, March 2,1994 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. President's Welcome 6 p.m. Buffington-Prentlss Rooms Kelly Inn - St. Paul - State Capitol St. Anthony at Rice Street \ David Childs President, AMM Manager, Minnetonka Craig Rapp Vice President, AMM Manager, Brooklyn Park Please Reply to Carol Williams. 490^1 By Friday, February 25,1994 Supported financially in part by: Springsted Inc. Briggs & Morgan Ehlers & Associates Inc. Leonard. Street and Deinard Miller & Schroeder Financial Inc. Faegre & Benson Holmes & Graven Dorsey & Whitney Heins. Schatz & Paquin Larkin. Hoffman. Daly & Lindgren. Ltd. GIRL SCOUTS CADETTE TROOP 1165 2870 Pheasant: Circle Mound, Minnesota 55364 Our Girl Scout troop has been learning about the worJc of Westonka Intervention. We learned about what they do to help people in our conuBunity. They have helped over 450 victims of domestic violence in the last 5 years. We also learned that Westonka Intervention has been given a building that needs to be moved to a new site. Someone has agreed to move it free, and many people have offered other help. The project needs more help from the commi^ity. Please make everyone in your organization aware of this group so that they can help in some way. As a troop, we are making Birthday Boxes to donate to shelters. We want the new house project to succeed so people can have better lives. Troop #1165 You can contact Westonka Intervention at: P.O.Box 34 Mound, MN 55364 472-2141 T ii— f EB 1 0 Girls who take great steps toward their futures! e 7 ^ . r SEE OVERSIZED DOCUMEnT!! ..WW '1.AT 6 a..-a PUN POii THREE STAR TRUCKING ·----------------· ·-·•4--•-----·-----------·-------·------·-·-•-•i-•---- ____________ ....._ ___ _ ----------........ ---