Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
08-22-1994 Council Packet
r M L AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, AUGUST 22, 1994. 7:30 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CH/VMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, .MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda, memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL *1. CONSENT AGENDA 2.Long Lake Water Quality Presentation by MCWD APPROVAL OF MINUTES *3. Regular Meeting of August 8. 1994 PARK COMMISSION CONLMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) POLICE CHIEF REPORT ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 4.^1913 Greg Truchinski, 1580 Fox Street - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Resolution 5.1^^*1947 Sailors World, 1955 Shoreline Drive - Amended Variance Application 6.^1^1951 Kendrick B. Melrose, 50 Cristofori Circle - Variance - Resolution 7./?1955 Andrew J. McDermott HI. 2702 Walters Port Lane - Variance - Resolution 8.tf\952 Christine Freeman. 2240 Shadywood Road - Amended Variance Approval - Resolution .MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 9.1995 Assessor's Agreement *10. Step Adjustment - Carole Haseman 11.199^’ Preliminary Budget and Tax Levy - Resolutions 12.Reques' to Remove Assessment From Tax Forfeit P:op>ny - 500 Hanlon Avenue *13. Request for Unpaid Leave of Absence - Jamie Bosma 14.Proposed Brush Disposal Program Change 15.Increase Hours of Officer Boris to Full Time Level *16. Resolution - No Parking on Brown Road North 17.Scheduling of a Joint Meeting to Review the Results of the Park Survey 18.Referral of Variance Application to Plamiing Commission CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT (♦19.) LICENSES (♦20.) BILLS AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY. AUGUST 22, 1994, 7:30 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA IfPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 08/17 08/18 08/22 08/23 08/30 09/05 09/06 09/12 09/13 09/13 09/19 09/26 - Highway 12 Policy meeting 5:30 p.m. - Kelly Avenue Drainage Infoi*maiion Meeting 7:30 p.m. - Council meeting 7:30 p.m. - Council Work Session 8:00 a.m. County Road 6 south of Highway 12 - First day tor filing of candidacy for November 8 municipal election - Holiday - Labor Day - Park Commission 7:15 p.m. - Council meeting 7:30 p.m. - 4.30 p.m. Last day for filing of candidacy for November 8 municipal election - State Primary Election Day - No public meetings between 6 & 8:00 p.m. - Planning Commission meeting 7:00 p.m. - Council meeting 7:30 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE ^ COUNCIL PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER II 8 DR OUR CITY RECORDS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER . .jaeag —aPB ——aMBgg-aaa —aa^teeaaa ——on— uj AT^^qT] /f.^ ) ► I ^ 7 V ^T < 1 8 f / y f ^ wt m ;»L5( TS ,v V * T' ©J y >.•*'- *% ' u la 'i- ID ^v^!) rsf-71/-"_ ______ , 1 1 P :t CV. M ii 'v. (1 k \ /“'f \ / \ / 7 / • . *»l >t i -T(l I •{- \ V \ .4j w I’ / »«« *.» O)-^ \<XL , I— ¥ 5 •••» 1••• • ML ■M*L o t. >! —Ft r. a t I V l ”B ‘V -/____J cf^.A i' 1 k.% 1 ’ U,.i / V imm» M \7\ / \ 1 Im 1 * % :i' n /. CO 1T o » pe; >-* 'O o y > c • • • n 3-S-e-e ,'^■3 ^o n 3 £ g g S iiB 2 ^ ‘O < 2. ■ X {- o ^ c _ a 7 ^ >"7 o 3 £ g U" S o ■—« •y. 'v/D H T5 n y D rr X X *Ti •X > 6 5*3 nor- y CO --I 1» T«: u/» I J n if VOc/« <y. & U •-1r*<•. N OO'. <V» I* *yF iiiioVO 'p vo ►— j ' .1 X o >: T r- ;; rr R o T5 y y —1 VD or »«i4n o> u a X X ►n *T3sr •—4 oQ V t-*V '’! y Xr o no X no y c7k •2; 50 n < '8 o o .-LI :u E*rs tfO i; X'o 5^ • Xo ^ r * r P <- r o P H > O > o o PC w 5.3 o >* o ^ n ^ y o n o ^OUf/c, ^Uc % request for coltscil action DATE: August 17, 1994"ffOUd ITEM NO: ^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:.Agenda Section: City Administrators Report LomS^Wmc"’Quality Presentation by MCWD executive summary of the project and a map are attached. COUNCIL ACTION REQUTaSTED: r MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT ^/#ED 0'^ 14600 Minnetonka Boulevard Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345*1597 office; (612)939-6320 fax: (612)939-8244 LAKl M!HN£TON»til DISTRICT ADMINISTRATOR: Ellen B Sores BOARD OF MANAGERS: Thomas Map»e Jf P ts •€ WoocJ'ow Love • John E Thomas Cta'ksor Lirdiev • Txmas W LaBo'in;y • Martha S Hart^e • Pamela G Bii*t Long Lake Improvement Project Recommendations Long Lake spans 271 acres in the CHies of Loiig Lake and Orono. Bordered by private land, sandy beaches, wetlands, and city parks, the lake averages 12 feet deep widi a maximum of 33 feet, inviting thousands of people for swimming f’shing, and boating. However. Long Lake is increasingly burdened bv algae, turbidity, low oxygen in bottom waters, and a population of rough fish like carp, bullheads, and suckers. Tlie State's system to cltissify the water qualih/ for use Indicates the lake is now borderline for swimming. The Long Lake Improvement Project is being initiated b> the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The goal of the project is to improve the lalce's appearance, enhance swimmable conditions and fishing, and improve tiie quality of water discharged to Lake Minnetonka 2 miles downstream. Studies on the lake ’s problems and restoration options were completed by the District in 1993. with implementation scheduled to begin in 1995. Based on the following recommendations, phosphorus (the primary' contaminant causing water quality problems) is expected to drop significantly. Reco o lu 11 ;ndation :Treat Lake Water (Reduce Internal Phosphorus Loading ) Phosphorus is an important lake contaminant that supports algal growth. It comes from the lake ’s bottom sediments (the "internal loaiding j and from stonnwater runoff (the "external loading"). Adding oxygen to bottom waters is vital to reduce internal loads, so submerged "hypolimnetic" aerators are recommended for the lake ’s two main basins. Ferric chloride would also be added to the lake hypolimnion to achieve a 3:1 iron to phosphorus ratio optimal for phosphorus removal. r Recommendation :Treat Incoming Water (Reduce External Phosphorus Loadlng ) Most of the runoff entering the lake flows in an unnamed stream nortli of County Road 6 in the Cities of Orono and Medina. This stream contributes about 80°/o of the lake’s external phosphorus load, so improvements here can have a significant effect. Recommended is a state-of-the-art series of three wet detention ponds/wetlands with an average depth of 8 teet across 5 acres. Tliis system will detain incoming w'ater so that sediment and phosphorus can settle out. The design of the system also promotes biological uptake of phosphorus by wetland vegetation. The water will then flow through an existing wetland for further treatment before entering Long Lake. ITie same benefits are anticipated on a smaller scale by expanding, deepening, and connecting two existing wet detention ponds/wetlands in the City of Long Lake park. Rseo:IT-1endation :Reduce NPS Pollution The lake receives no wastewater discharges, and its problems mainly arise from "non-point source (NPS) pollution" carried in runolT from 5,470 acres. A Public Information/Education Program is recommended to reduce non-point source pollution through these strategies: Yard Waste Management--Leaves and grass clippings left in the street eventually reach the lake, carrying phosphorus with it. Recommended are municipal ordinances and public education on alternatives like mulching. It is also recommended that the City of Long Lake continue street-sweeping, with highest priority given to areas draining the most to the lake. Urban Fertilizer Management—Phosphorus in fertilizer can also be washed into the lake, so it is recommended that the residential communities and the public consider using only phosphorus-free fertilizer unless soil tests indicate that phosphorus is needed. Livestock Waste Management-Much of the watershed draining to the lake is used as pasture. It is recommended that livestock areas be managed to reduce animal waste exposure to runoff that enters the lake. Agricultural Practices--Cropland comprises about 20% of the lake’s watershed, and its runoIT carries sediment, nutrients, bacteria, and organic contaminants. Recommended are farming practices like conser\^ation tillage, terracing, contouring, strip cropping, crop rotation, and fertilizer management. Additional Recommendations A Citizens Lake .Monitoring Program is recommended, along with continued monitoring by the District to assess water quality. Once significant improvements are made, it is recommended that tlie Minnesota DNR prepare a Fisheries Management Plan and potentially stock the lake with gamelish. Since the lake’s watershed will be completely developed in 2-3 decades, land use planning is recommended to protect the lake improvements, such as wetland preserv^ation and construction ot detention basins. • For more i.nkor .mation . please call the Mlnnehaha C reek Watershed District at 939-8320 • LLSim_______________• LAKE AERATION SYSTEMAPPROXIMATE LOCATION w OF WET DETENTION BASINSAOOITICmAL MCmiTORINC MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT - LONG LAKE Long Lake Improvement Project - Phase I BASC MAI* SOURCf:> MONTGOMERY WATSON ^W&nck W«nck AfsocUlsa. Ino \600 Piooaar C. Cantar knvlronmaotal BDfloaart Mopia Plain. MN SS359 AUG. 1994 Figure No. 1 .MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COLHSCIL MEETINtfiUiLb AUGUST 8, 1994 % '9. ROLL %9 The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Edward Callahan. Jr., Councilmembers J. Diann Goetten, Charles Kelley, JoElIen Hurr and Gabriel Jabbour. The following represented staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse. Building & Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron. City Attorney Kevin Staunton. Public Works Director John Gerhardson. City Engineer Glenn Cook and Recorder Lin Vee. Mayor Callahan called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. (*#1) CONSENT Kelley requested that Items #4 and #6 be added to the Consent Agenda. Goetten added Items ni and 8. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Hurr, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended Ayes 5, nays 0. (♦#2) APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES - REGULAR .MEETING OF JULY 25, 1994 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Hurr, to adopt the minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 25, 1994. Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION CO.M.MENT Park Commission Chair Dick Flint was present and commented that the Park Commission has been considering the "Friends of the Parks" award. Lili McMillan will be accepting suggestions for the September award. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Dale Lindquist was present representing the Planning Commission and had no comments PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public. {ify) #1942 WTLLIA.M J. STODDARD, 2605 KELLY AVTINTJE - CONDITIONAL USE PER.MIT - RESOLUTION NO. 3455 Mr. Stoddard was present. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COL^'CIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 8, 1994 (#3) #1942 WILLIAM J. STODDARD, 2605 KELLY AVENUE - Continued Mabusth explained that the applicant was seeking a conditional use permit for an existing guest house apartment of 20' x 36 ’ located above an existing detached garage on the propeny. He is also requesting connection of sewer and water to tlie unit to install a bathroom and kitchen area. The northwest comer of the structure is located 3.1 ’ from the lot line. The one acre zoning district requires two acres for a guest house and the property consists of 1.7 acres requiring a lot area variance. She added that the Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the application. Mabusth continued that the structure is considered a guest house because it is a detached structure. With the extension of sewer and w-ater. it could be considered a separate residential unit. It can never be rented. The living space above the garage has existed for 35-40 years. Mayor Callahan noted the neighbors approved of the improvements but he questioned the hardship. Stoddard responded that the living space above the garage has existed for r.in, ;,rars. Water has been connected but there are no records of this connection. The principal residence is very small with only two bedrooms. This extra space would help considerably with guests. Hurr asked if someone may want to subdivide in the future if a sewer and water unit were granted. Mabusth did not think anyone would want to consider this structure as a home because it is very small. It could not be subdivided because there is not adequate area. Jabbour felt if the applicant were charged for sewer and water, the City is indirectly telling him there are two building sites. He did not object to the improvements but felt the hook-ups should be done through the main residence with no additional connection charges. Mabusth disagreed noting the applicant is receiving the right to have an additional bathroom and kitchen for the period of time the structure is used as a guest house at very nominal fees. She added it has been the policy of the City to charge a separate sewer and water connection when there is a detached guest house apartment. This establishes a record of sewer and water to the detached structure. Hurr asked how the value would be changed by adding sewer and water to a non-conforming structure. Mabusth responded the value would increase. Jabbour asked the City Attorney if providing separate sewer and water connections to the guest house would give future owners a better chance of subdivision of the property. City Attorney Staunton replied that the guest house would be considered an accessory use. He did not understand the requirement for doubling the lot area requirement. Mabusdi agreed with Jabbour that adequate area tor a potential subdivision and separatit>n from the principal structure have been considered in the past in approving guest house use. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 8, 1994 (#3) <^1942 WILLIAM J. STODDARD, 2605 KELLY AVENLT) - Continued Kelley asked if the structure was to be used only as a garage with sewer and water if it would be assessed the connection fees. Mabusth stated there would be no connection charge but sewer service would not be approved because of potential use as a separate residential unit. Kelley noted that at the present time a drain cannot be installed in a garage that goes to a sewer line. Mabusth added that a request for sewer to a garage would require Council approval. Hurr asked how the code addresses improvement of non-conforming structures and the percentage of improvement. Mabusth responded that the code only addresses non-conforming uses, not structures. City Attorney Staunton added that if the use existed prior to zoning changes, the use was approved until there were major changes or intensification proposed. Gaffron explained that in the Flood Plain Ordinance there were regulations about the percentage of improvements to structures in the 0-75 ’ setback area, but the similar language in Section 10.03 about non-conformities applies to non-confcrming uses, but not to non-conforming structures. Stoddard commented that he bought a 100 year old home and guest house about a year ago that is in very good shape. He would like to make some improvements to continue the care of the property. In working with the City staff to obtain a building permit, he was advised that he had to apply for a conditional use permit and area variance. He requested Council to take action on the application with the condition that there would be no future subdivision allowed. He did not think the present or any future Council would grant a .subdivision for this property. Mayor Callahan commented that despite Stoddard ’s plans for the property, fumre owners may not have the same view. Any permission granted is related to the property, not the owner. Mayor Callahan asked about the available sewer unit since there seemed to be a shortage of units available to Orono. Mabusth replied that since this property was in a sewered district, there was adequate capacity available in tlie sewer line to support this additional sewer unit. Goeiten felt Council would support the proposed improvements but there was concern over the future u.se of the property. She would support approval of the application with the condition that no further subdivision of the property would be allowed. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Kelley, to approve Resolution No. 3455 granting a conditional use permit for the existing guest apartment above the detached garage and an area variance of 14,112 s.f. or .32 acres, subject to the conditions that no subdivision ot the lot will be allowed, the structure may never be used for rental purposes and a lire wall separation must be provided between lower level garage and first floor level guest apartment. Sewer and water is to be provided through the main residence with no additional sewer and water connection fees. Ayes 5. nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 8, 1994 (^3) n942 WILLIAM J. STODDARD, 2605 KELLY AVENUE - Continued Kelley asked how other members would feel about restricting the kitchen. Goetten did not object to the kitchen. Hurr felt more comfortable without the kitchen and was troubled with the hardships. Jabbour felt there was a trend towards families having e.xtended family members living with them and did not object to the kitchen. (*#4) #1945 ROBERT AND VELMA WOLFF, 4450 FOREST LAKE LANDING - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 3456 It was moved by Goenen, seconded by Jabbour, to adept Resolution No. 3456 that would permit the construction of a 10’ x 14’ three season porch at the sou»heast comer of the existing lakeside deck approving an intensification of a portion of the stmeture that encroaches the average lakeshore setback line by 26’, a side setback variance of 3.5 ’ or 35%, intensification of a portion of the stmemre that encroaches the required side yard, lot coverage variance for an intensification of structure where e.xcesses of 464.1 s.f. or 4.3% exist and a hardcover variance within the 75-250 ’ setback area of 1,390 s.f. or 20.5%. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#5) #1947 SAILORS WORLD, 1955 SHORELINE DRIVE - AMENDED VARIANCE APPLICATION It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Hurr, to table this application until the August 22, 1994 Council meeting as there were no representatives present. Ayes 5, nays 0. A neighbor who lives across from the marina expressed his frustration with coming to various meetings with no resolution to the problems. (♦#6) AMENDED SHORELAND FLEXIBILITY REQUEST - CITY OF MOUND It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Jabbour. to accept the information presented in the memo dated August 3, 1994 regarding the Shoreland Flexibility Request by the City of Mound. Ayes 5, nays 0. MAYOR/COLTNCIL REPORT 1.Jabbour reported he has been attending LMCD subcommittee meetings regarding the envelope issues for marinas. Docks are in the correct placements but boats extend well beyond the envelope encroaching into neighboring properties or setbacks. Hurr explained that at one time marina owners were allowed a certain number of boats at 20 ’ lengths and they wanted to keep that same number even though the boats have increased considerably in size. An envelope was e.stablished for the marina owner to decide how he could best u.se the envelope rather than how many boats would be allowed. r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 8, 1994 iMAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - Continued 2. Hurr requested that a work session be established to discuss the County Road 6/Watenown Road improvements. Since the Highway 12 mediation meeting was cancelled for August 23, a work session was scheduled for 8:00 a.m. on August 23, 1994. 3. Hurr reported on the committee meetings regarding Long Lake. City Administrator Moorse confirmed that the Watershed District will be scheduled for a presentation at the August 22, 1994 meeting. 4. Mayor Callahan commented on a letter received from the Regans at 3410 North Shore Drive regarding public landings. He added the letter was well-written with valid concerns and a reply would be made. Jabbour requested a copy of this letter be sent to the DNR Trails and Waterways Department, the LMCD, and the Hennepin County Public Works Department. ENGINEER’S REPORT 1. 3. 4. City Engineer Cook reported that the Old Crystal Bay Road Bridge has been tom down with new constniction to begin. The Brown Road project will begin in about two weeks. City Administrator Moorse explained the MWCC Reconveyance. In 1976 the MWCC took over one of the^ City ’s sewer lines to use as an interceptor with a purchase agreement over a 30 year period. In 1988, the MWCC decided to build their own interceptor and no longer needed Orono’s. The City then took the maintenance of the former interceptor. Several years later, the MWCC requested that die City make payment towards the interceptor. The City opposed this request. The MWCC has now made a proposal wherein the remaining 12 years left on the payments to the City by the MWCC would be somewhat reduced. Moorse felt the proposal was reasonable in concept, and involved significantly less dollars than the MWCC’s original proposal. Hurr requested additional time to review the information and suggested discussion continue at the next Budget meeting. Mayor Callahan asked about the meeting scheduled regarding the Kelley Avenue Drainage issue. City Administrator Moorse responded that an information meeting was scheduled to meet with those people, approximately 6 or 8, potentially most directly affected by a stormwater project. The Public Works Director and City Engineer will be in a' dance. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 8, 1994 ENGINEER’S REPORT -Continued 5.Jabbour requested an update on the HRA numbers. Moorse responded that he has been working with John Davies of Kraus Anderson on the tiu^e issues remaining. Approximately $16,000 remains to be paid out to three contractors upon completion of cement work and landscaping. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (♦i!7) APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES FOR SEPTEMBER STATE PRIMARY ELECTION - RESOLUTION NO. 3457 It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Jabbour, to approve Resolution No. 3457 appointing election judges for the September 13, 1994 primary election. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*/j«) EMPLOYMENT OF CITY RECORDER It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Jabbour, to approve the appointment of Sherry Frost as City Recorder. Ayes 5, nays 0. {.m CITY LEGAL SERVICES It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Kelley, to retain the firm of Popham Haik as the City ’s legal firm. /\^c3 5, nays 0. Hurr asked if the conditions discussed at the meeting with Popham Haik will be included. City Administrator Moorse confirmed that they will be included in the agreement. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT City Attorney Kevin Staunton had nothing to report. (/I^IO) LICENSES Home Occupation License - 650 North Brown Road The applicant, Warren Garrett, was present. Gaffron explained that the code requires home occupations to be licensed in compliance with the ten standards listed in the memo dated August 2, 1^4. In general, the standards include having no employed assistants, that it be the home occupation of only the persons living at the residence ,* s MESTJTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 8, 1994 Home Occupation License - 650 North Brown Road - Continued and that the home occupation happen within the dwelling. Staff feels there is a conflict because a proposed 1600 s.f. garage would house equipment to be used in the lawn care and snow removal business and employed assistants would come to the propeny to pick up trucks or work on equipment that is not within the principal structure. Staff would recommend denial since all standards are not met. One option Council may choose is to direct the applicant to apply for a variance if Council is favorable to allowing the home occupation. 'Home occupation" is listed as an accessory use, therefore a variance would be required to the performance standards for an allowed accessory use. Garrett commented that he had spent much time with Mabusth and questioned if the home occupation license was necessary. He intends to build the garage whether the home occupation license is granted or not. He responded to concerns stated in the staff memo. He would store off-season equipment in the garage. He has explained to the neighbors in the town homes his plans. The 28’ enclosed trailer he owns will te stored off-site at the new Long Lake Power Equipment building, of which he is a third owner. Employees will park at Long Lake Power Equipment while doira * ‘ daily work. He does have an office in his home to do paperwork and handle phone cah:. le j^reed there may be some excess fuel storage. He felt the impact on neighboring properties was minimal as the garage will be designed similar to the home and will have screening with evergreens on three sides. He did not feel there would be complaints of noise at odd hours in the wintertime because he would only be starting his own truck to go to work at 2:00 a.m. Exhaust odors would not be created by the pickup. Traffic on the driveway serving the town homes would only be two cars in the wintertime to carpool to the snow removal equipment and the cars would be parked in the garage. He stated the neighboi^g town homes had no major objections to his plans. The home occupation would not be visible from the street because he lives on a private road and his lot is 1200’ deep (almost 4 acres) with the proposed garage midway down the driveway. He would not need or want any signs. There are no products that he sells, only service. He would only store tools not used on a daily basis in the garage. Garrett commented on the staff review of home occupations since 1985. He felt there would be much less traffic in his business than a manicuring service. Luilding contractors would have equipment stored on site for their business. Finally, he objected to the statement uses that involve trucks, equipment, and employees coming and going generally have resulted in complaints." He thought this presumed he was guilty of violations before being given a chance. Goetten asked if there would be room for storage of off-season equipment at the Long ^ke Power Equipment building. Garrett responded there would not be room as this was an entirely separate business for retail sales of outdoor equipment. He presently stores equipment at 2285 Daniels Street in Long Lake and operates from there. Garrett added he would have personal equipment ti store in the garage as well as business equipment. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 8, 1994 Home Occupation License - 650 North Brown Road - Continued Jerry Knox, President of West Shore Town Homes, commented that they shared concern over Garrett running his business from his home. He asked if granting a home occupation license would grant Garrett more rights than he currently has. He added that Garrett is presently a great neighbor and he would have r.o problem with the home occupation if it stays the same as it currently exists. Hurr did not feel a violation of code related to home occupations could be allowed and she would not support any exemption to the code. Jabbour expressed concern with having any commercial equipment at the residential property but did not object to the office in the residence. He was also concerned about excesses of fuel to be stored on the property. Mayor Callahan asked Garrett if he operated a snow plowing service last winter. Garrett responded that he had from the building on Daniels Street but would prefer to have the business located on his own property. Garrett again questioned the necessity of obtaining a home occupation license. Jabbour felt Garrett’s business would be considered commercial if he took a deduction for equipment on his income tax. It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Goetten, to deny the home occupation license for Warren Garrett of 650 North Brown Road. Ayes 5, nays 0. Garrett asked if he had no employees working for him if the license would have passed. Members of the Council did not think so. (•/j^ll) BILLS It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Jabbour, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Jabbour, to adjourn the meeting at 8:59 p.m Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 8 <* ■ (I iirm i ► REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: August 18, 1994 ITEM NO : a Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #1913 Greg Tnichinski, 1580 Fox Street, After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Resolution Status of Application The Council tabled all review of this application at the July 25th meeting as applicant was not present to answer questions related to review of the application. Greg Tnichinski, the applicant, has advised that he will attend the August 22nd meeting. It is also staffs understanding that David MacMillan will be in attendance. The application remains the same as originally proposed in the staff memo of July 21, 1994. The packet has been recopied for Council’s convenience. The applicant has paid the penalty fee of $125.00. Please advise staff if Councilmembers seek additional information to assist in making their recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the approval resolution as drafted by staff per the Planning Commission recommendation, subject to the City ’s receipt of fiilly executed Hold Harmless Agreements by Whitney MacMillan and Greg Truchinski and a Covenant Not to Sue by David MacMillan. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 3 (A) FILE NO. 1913 WHEREAS, Greg J. Truchinski (hereinafter the "applicant") resides at a propeiy owned by Whitney MacMillan (hereinafter the "owner") located at 1580 Fox Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally descnbed as; Lot 1, Block 2, MacMillan Addition. Hennepin County. Minnesota (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, Che applicant has applied for an after-the-fact conditional use permit and variance application per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 (A) to penntt an existing towLstructure installed without the benetit of a buildmg permit to remain on tl^e property a1 a maximum 75' height to be located 32' from the west lot line instead of the required 75’. Minnesota; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City CouncU of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1913. 2.The property is located in the RR-IB Rural Residential Zoning District requiring two acres in area. The property consists of 2+ acres. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on April 18. 1994 and recommended approval of the proposed conditional use permit and variance based on the following unique findings and hardships; All affected property owners have approved the location of the existing antenna/tower structure. a. Page 1 of 5 4. 5. b.The structure could be placed on propeny meeting the required 75’ setback from ail lot lines. c.If structure was to be placed in a conforming location on the higher elevations to the north and west, tower would have greater visual impact on the adjacent residential property. d.The owner of the property and the adjacent property owner have agreed to execute agreements that would release the City from any liabilities should the structure in its present nonconforming location collapse and result in property damage. The Ciry Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship 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 finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow a 75’ antenna/tower structure to remain in its present location will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will its use depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council grants a conditional use permit and a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.^8, Subdivision 3 (A) to allow the antenna/tower strucnire to remain at a 32’ setback from the west lot line requiring a 43’ or 57% variance and grants a conditional use permit for an inde^ndent antenna/tower structure to be at a maximum height of 75’, subject to the following conditions. Page 2 of 5 r M 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Greg J. Truchinski, the applicant, shall obtain an after-the-fact/penalty building permit for the installation of the tower/antenna which shall also include the removal of 10 ’ of existing antenna. Greg J. Truchinski and Whitney MacMillan shall execute Hold Harmless Agreements and David MacMillan shall execute Covenant Not To Sue. The conditional use permit shall be valid through the applicant’s, Greg J. Truchinski, tenancy of the property. Prior to applicant’s moving or permanent relocation from this property, applicant shall be responsible for obtaining a demolition permit for the complete removal of the tower and base structure. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owner, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within ten days of the date of Council approval or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (August 5, 1994). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution. The undersigned owner has read, understoou and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his 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 CouncU on this 22nd day of August, 1994 ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )i The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 22nd day of August, 1994, 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 beha of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. On this day of , 199___, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. On this day of , 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 *he person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 5 of 5 , ■: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: July 21, 1994 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Tllle Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #1913 Greg Tnichinski, 1580 Fox Street - After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Resolution Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.28, Subd. 3 (A) (Review Section 10.20, Subd. 3 (K)l - Applicant must first obtain a conditional use permit before installing an independent tower/antenna structure. Structure was installed some time in the fall of 1993 and was noted by staff during a building inspection for an adjacent property. The structure is currently at 85’ and will be altered to 75’ at the request of neighboring property owner. Required Setback Original Proposal = 85’ Amended Proposed = 75’ Variance = 43’ or 57% Section 10.75, Subds. 1 & 2 - The above referenced section limits height to 65’. The code sections would allow increases of height above 65’ by applying for a conditional use permit. The code does not limit height as long as required setback is met. Section 10.03, Subd. 9 (D) - No detached garage or other accessory building shall be located nearer the front or street lot line than the principal building on that lot. Section 10.28, Subd. 3 (A) - Requires that an independent antenna tower must be subordinate to or supportive of principal use. The tower may not be classified as an accessory structure. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Addendum C - Property Owners List and Certification of Renotification D - Plat Map E - Survey - Existing F - Survey - Proposed G - Elevation of Tower/Antenna H - An'r’teur License * 1 ! Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 3 July 21, 1994 Zoning File #1913 I - Article Entitled "Antenna Height and Communications Effectiveness" J - Specifications - Universal Towers K - Neighbors’ Petition of Approval L - Appeals Before United States Courts of Appeals for the 8th Circuit M - David MacMillan Letter to Applicant Agreeing to 75 ’ Height N - Robert Mitchell Letter, Attorney for David MacMillan, 6/20/94 O - Covenant Not To Sue, David MacMillan P - Hold Harmless Agreement Whitney MacMillan Q - Staunton Memo 7/18/94 R - City Attorney ’s Drafts of Hold Harmless Agreements and Covenant S - Planning Commission Minutes 4/18/94 Description of Request Applicant lias installed an independent tower/antenna structure at an 85 ’ height without the benefit of a building permit and the required conditional use permit. The antenna, tower and base were installed by applicant. The strucmre was observed by the inspectors sometime in October of 1993. Applicant was advised of the need to apply for a conditional use permit. Review Exhibit E, it is both the applicant’s and owner’s preference to have the strucmre at the 75 ’ height approved at a 32’ setback requiring a setback variance. A copy of applicant’s amateur radio license has been submitted confirming the use as solely for private and hobby use. Applicant resides in residence on property as required by ordinance. The use is subordinate to or accessory to the principal residential use. The property is owned by Whitney MacMillan and Mr. MacMillan has signed the application as owner. Review Exhibits D. F and K, the property to the immediate east is owned by David MacMillan. Please note the petition was not been signed by David MacMillan. It is David MacMillan’s property to the immediate east that receives the most impact as strucmre would be located 32’ from his west lot line. Review Exhibits M and O, since the Planning Commission review, David MacMillan has submitted written confirmation that he would approve a maximum antenna height of 75 ’ at the present location. The applicant has advised that he would agree to altering the antenna to meet the 75 ’ height requested by David MacMillan. Mr. Truchinski ’s tower could be placed on the property meeting all required setbacks if it was moved to the higher elevations to the north and west. Placement of the strucmre on the higher elevations would have an increased visual impact on all surrounding properties. In fact, the more nothem location would have a greater impact on the David MacMillan property than it would in its present location. Request for Council Action continued page 3 of 3 July 21. 1994 Zoning File #1913 The Planning Commission did not have the benefit of David MacMillan’s final comments and agreement to approve the present location. The Planning Commission conditioned approval on both David MacMillan and Whitney MacMillan executing Hold Harmless Agreement^ releasing the City of any liability should the structure collapse and result in physical damage to the properties. David MacMillan’s attorney in his letter to the City (Exhibit N) suggests that the City’s ordinances and its interpretation of past court actions may need to be revised or reconsidered. As we have agreement between all parties, staff has not asked the City Attorney to comment any further but Council may wish to direct the City Attorney to provide more clarification on this issue. Review Exhibits Q and R, Mr. Staunton has amended the forms of the Covenant Not To Sue and the Hold Harmless Agreement to be executed by David MacMillan, Whitney MacMillan and now, Greg Truchmski. Copies of the amended exhibits have been sent to the applicant and property owners. Review Exhibit S, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the application as proposed subject to the City being released from all liabilities and granted the setback variance based on the finding that if the tower was to be placed in a conforming setback at the higher elevations this would exacerbate the visual impact of the tower. Options of Action To adopt or amend the approval resolution as drafted by staff per the Planning Commission recoi^endation subject to the execution of Hold Harmless Agreements by Whitney MacMillan and Greg Truchmski and a Covenant Not To Sue by David MacMillan. Conditional use permit specifically notes that permit will expire at the time Mr. Truchinski no longer resides on the property and that he will be responsible for the complete removal of the strucmre; or To deny the variance application and to grant a conditional use permit based on structure meeting the required setback from all lot lines. >-.r •'.f JX ij CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLIG^ffpN |j PROPERTi' LOC ATOR Site Address rOY OP^l'd //lU Type of Application to be Filed Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) APPLICANT Address \^<^D tpy ^ ___________ Phone (home)^*? -^ ~ ^ / ______ Phone (work) ^^ i V. ^ City nT'r'UC_______Zip^C Z I OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)-------- Name >wU. ^ \VV^< (\v XX a -> vv . Phone (work)_____ Address ' _______ DateProperty Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application $125.00 Residential Accessory Use $200.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $175.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land .Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore 4 r-yrv rr nor,kin I > k-l LMt-’Itt.' c nzcjrc I iitn/Tut. c» » .iU'U. f t V# ni rrw f: f ULi k A TL 125.L1.1 ccrrrfjT^ruAkik' vnij Mi-wi.lt I I i,*U PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $100.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-ihe-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee ^VliC'SVi r.ini 0,,i 'l itnjau^v i/wi iwA I A. L iC Lf.' *• OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation _____$175.00 Easement Vacation $ 75.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $300.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ______$300.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District______ Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify). REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail.2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. \y Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350’ (yo\i can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Plat Map. ^ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed suneyor) - refer to handout for survey information. ___ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ___Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). ___ List of the legal names (include marital satus) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). ___ Constniction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). ___ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: _______Date___________ 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 unusual expenses 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 ITUAJC^'^JU^ A Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s signature__ T Date 3~ (W -?V 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 schediJed 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 advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. [ ! ^ • -mor**'j‘ sk «O- J>) Oct. 26,1993 Greg Tmchinski 1580 Fox St. Wavzata Mn. 55391 476^9631 H. unlisted 621-5185 Pager. Dear Sirs: This is to let you know I wish to cooperate with you fully on the matter of my existing antenna structure. I of course am hopeful that you will allow me to keep the system up as is. Included in my permit application are photo’s from the neighbors house's. Plus photo’s of other prominent antenna installations. As you can see in the photos, even with all the leaves fallen, my anterma installation is completely hidden from my neighbor’s. With leaves on, you have to drive in front of my house to see it. When I’ve climbed to the top and stood on the top rung of the support structure, you cannot see any man made buildings when leaves are on the trees, and only some outline of my two closest neighbors house's with leaves gone. Both house's are more than 350 ft. from my house. It is difficult for me to see it as a visual burden on anybody. Please, if you could, take a look at the document "Anteima Height and Communications Effectiveness" that I’ve included. Prepared by the American Radio Relay League. Also included is a drawing of the support structure, the three imp>ortant antennas, and their heights. This is all 1 do, other than a little hunting. I work, and then talk to the world. I have a large sum of money tied up in this sophisticated antenna system. The antenna system is the heart of my hobby. This is also more than just a hobby. The Fedral Communication Commission is very pro-amateur radio because of our overwhelming public service record. Included with this application are 38 examples of that, which is just the tip of the iceburg. As of 1985 the FCC requires state and local goverments to use the least restrictive means available to meet legitimate zoning purposes. ♦ S i i II r V CERTIFICATE OP MAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. ) CITY OF ORONO ) I, Jamie Bosma, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of #1913, was mailed to the attached list of property owners. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 1st day of April, 1994. Jamie Bbsma mm DATE io/24/n. » t. •.ft *HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XHFOmATIQN SYSTEN REPORT NO PROP AODR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAIC/ADDR 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED NNITNEY MACMIILAN HHZTNEY HACNILLAN 1560 FOX ST NAYZATA MN 55391 u (^PROP AODR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR TOTAL BATCH 003 D0009 ^ . • I ^ i ■■ ■ • * ^ i s. * ; '• < ^\ " i i • :• • V •‘-V « . • * •,-‘V < % » •» •i .■< -• c>•PROPERTY ONNERS LIST PAGEWBATCH 003•SB 02-117-23 23 0000 38 02-117-23 23 0007 R 36 02-117-23 23 0008CPROP AODR 003B7 ORONO ORCHARD RJ) S 01560 FOX ST 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEDONNCR NAME D 0 i K M MACMILLAN NNITNEY MACMILLAN LONGRIDGE ASSOCTAXPAYER ^DAVID 0 MACMILLAN miTNEY MACMILLAN L0N6RIDGE ASSOC•NAME/AODR PO BOX 9300 DEPT 28 1560 FOX ST C/0 ROBERT J THEILERokVMPLS MN 55660 NAYZATA MN 55391 P 0 BOX 9300DEPT 26••MPLS MN 55660[o \SB 02-117-23 32 0001 36 02-117-23 32 0006 38 02-117-23 32 0007 ; PROP AODR 00AB5 ORONO ORCHARD RO S 01560 FOX ST 01570 FOX ST ONNER NAME EOHARO H HAMM NHITNEY MACMILLIAN S H REYNOLDS ADO REYNOLDSTAXPAYEREONARO MERSEY HAm NNITNEY MACMILLIAN S N REYNOLDS ADD REYNOLDSoNAME/AOOR AOS ST PETER ST 0440 1560 FOX ST 1570 FOX ST - i ST PAUL MN 55102 • NAYZATA MN 55391 NAYZATA MN 55391 i 4 • t» • ^ . , • 38 02-117-23 32 0006 38 03-117-23 16 0001 s 36 03-117-23 16 0002 PI635Adl9 '* M st ,r* ’f ■'»>#1• - »4»,• r • r vl:i' G/ ■■:vl 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED CARGILL HAC MILLAN JR ETAL LCNGRIDCE ASSOCIATES P 0 BOX 9300 DEPT 29 MPLS MN 55A90 f• . » •, 'f -■•n-fc'- 01660 FOX ST SUSAN V NORTON NORHEST BANK TRUST REAL ESTATE 6TH A MARQUETTE MPLS MN 55679-0066 • « >.;;; > ;•> • ; 4 .t?.«; .* • • I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HErMEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF HY KNONLEOGE ANO BELIEF. 4 4- ; r*f‘‘tr DAT ■ : o: V • .' w ’ 'if * t * ;v' \ t p / ^ O'- 1 O 'T E-c 5 . ^ 0) i- ^'55, ^ E ^ ■3 0 o”iT ^ '■ ^ *r. u V — _3<t f,:« ^ M •m____Ji • y<*». •>r : . . - ___--WWW ^ ' • • t • • • ■ • • ; • « • . . • r • '■.• - i ••'.•••' . • ’ 'r-'-i’S- •■'• - . • • • ^ :.•. . * ■• • •••; • • •• - * *• /'•• ■■".rvr r * - V' ;• -- .r^v-r -.•-•.* >1 *'r*l ^ • ' :*V*'7^^r V —{v * z^***^^ • .:^T i .V-*-* • ^ *v '4 V/’ * /-“ j.* <^ '•«. .*. •* • '**.*•..» * ^ • • * . : • • ..Vf‘rv.>- . •.; HUNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AMATEUR RADIO LICENSE NV0P GREG 0 TRUCHINSKI 1580 FOX ST WAYZATA MN 55391 Spaeiai Conditions . Effect!v« Date Expiration Date 10/05/93 10/05/03 Operator Privileges i I Station Privileges EXTRA PRIMARY THIS LICENSE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF GBANT ON THE BEVEHSE SICE NOT TRANSFERABLE fO«M II •* **.’■ z. ..*■“••, • * • • •' , • . ^ , ■• T **•*; j* .* * ' -•.*;.•• ; *,■-• '* * • ■iW^iiiiiii III, J..1 f• j f j i t .-' *• -^>v. /• 4 \* ^ ‘•Si __ *-' • ] ri /• V.'nKrr>" «tac30.»vi_ A W Antenna Height and Communications Effectiveness By Geraid L Hall. K1TD Associate Technical Editor Copyright © 1987 The American Radio Relay League, Inc. 225 Main Street Newington, CT 06111 1 J r * # tir EXECUTIVE SUMMARY * * * Amateur Radio communications between two distant points on the earth rely on signals propagating through the ionosphere. Acting as somewhat of a mirror at heights in the order of 150 miles, the ionosphere returns signals to the earth a thousand or more miles away. The vertical angle of radiation is the Key factor in determining effective communications distances beyond line of sight. For the greatest possible communications distance, the energy from the transmitter must be rad.ated at angles close to the horizon. For this to take place, a horizontal antenna must be placed high above the ground in terms of wavelengths. The length of a radio wave is inversely related to its frequency. A beam type of antenna at a height of 70 feet or more will provide greatly superior performance over the same antenna at 35 feet, all other factors being equal. To a distant receiving station, a transmitting antenna at 70 feet will provide the effect of approximately 3 to 4 times more transmitter power than the same antenna at 35 feet. Dependin'^ on the level of noise and interference, this performance disparity is often enough to mean the difference oetween making distant radio contact with fairly reliable signals, and being unable to make distant contact at all. Thus, the antenna at 35 feet is un satisfactory, while the same antenna at 70 feet is quite satisfactory. The 70-foot height is used only for the purpose of illustration, however, and should not be constiued as the optimum height for antennas. Heights above 100 feet will give significantly better performance than at 70 feet. If an amateur operator is restricted to the use of low antennas, it is reasonable to assume he will obtain more powerful transmitting equipment to compensate for the loss of antenna effectiveness. For example, he might increase his transmitter power from 500 watts to 1.5 kilowatts, to compensate for a three-fold loss in antenna effectiveness because of height limitations. This increase in power, in turn, increases the possibilities for his signal to overload nearby television and radio receivers, creating interference for viewers and listeners. A high amateur antenna provides a greater degree of immunity from television interference than does a low antenna. The sole source of radiated RF energy from the Amateur Radio station is its antenna. Raising that antenna to an increased height, well above the level of existing antennas for television reception, will reduce the possibility of interference to television reception from fundamental overload. Antenna Height and Communications Effectiveness B> Ge'ald L hall KlTD Associate Technical Editor The purpose of this paoer is to P’'o\ide aenerai information aPojt communications effectiveness as related to the physical height of antennas Tne performance of horizontal antennas at heights of 35 and 7'j f--‘et IS examined in oetail Vertical arrays are not consiaered here Decause at short-wave frequencies, over average terrain and at low rao ation angles, they are less effective than are honzo-tai antennas. ionospheric Propagation Frequencies oetween 3 ana 30 megahertz (ab breviated MHz) are often called tne short-wave ” bands. In engineering terms tnis range of frequencies is defined as the high-frequency or HF portion of the radio spectrum. HF radio communications between two points that are separated by distances of more than about 15 to 25 miles depend almost solely upon propagation of radio signals through the ionosphere. The ionosphere IS a region of the earth's upper atmosphere which is ionized Dy ultraviolet rays received from the sun The ionosphere has the property that it will refract or bend radio waves wmcn pass through it. However, the ionosphere is not one single ■‘blanket" of ionization. Instead, for reasons not fully understood, a few discrete layers are formed at different heights above the earth. From the standpoint of radio propa'' * on. each ionized layer has distinctive characteristics, related primarily to diffeient amounts of ion>zation in the various layers. The ionized layer which is most useful for HF radio com munications IS called the F laver. Tne F layer exists at heights varying from approxi mately 130 to 260 miles above the eartn ’s surface Both the layer height and the amount of lonizaiion depend upon the latitude from the equator the time of day the season of the year, ana uoon the level of sunspot activity Sunspot activity varies generally m cycles that are approximately 11 years in duration although short-term bursts of activity may create changes in propagation conditions that last for less than an rour. The ionosphere IS not homogeneous, and is undergoing continual change Tne F layer disappears a: night in periods of low and medium solar activity, as tne ultraviolet energy required to sustain ionization is no longer received from the sun. The amount of bending that will be imparted to a passing radio wave is related directly to the intensity of ionization in this layer, and to the frequency of the radio wave. A triangle may thus be used to portray the cross- sectional path of ionospheric radio-wave travel, as shown in Fig 1. The base of the triangle is the surface of the ■ -i.'i .I' t ii«-- Fig 1—A simplified cross-sectional representation of ionospheric propagation. Typically the F layer exists at a height of ISO miles above the earth at mid-tatitudes. The distance between the transmitter and the receiver may range from a few miles to 2500 miles under normal conditions. earth between two distant points, and the apex of the triang'e is the point which represents refraction in the ionosphere. If all the necessary conditions are met. the radio 'wave will travel from the first poiht on the earth's surface to the ionosphere, where it will be bent suf ficiently to travel to the second point on the earth, many hundreds of miles away. Of course the earth's surface is not a flat plane, pui irystead is c-.'ved High-frequency raaio waves behave in essentially the same manner as light waves —they tend to travel m straight lines, but with a slight amount of downward bending caused by refraction in the air. For this reason it is not possible to communicate bv a direct path over distances greater than about 15 to 25 miles in this frequency range The curvature of the earih causes the surface to "fall away ” from the path of tne radio v^ave v/ith greater distances Therefore it ts t.he ionosphere that permits HF radio communication to oe made between points separated by thousands of miles. Th} range of frequencies from 3 to 30 MHz is unique in this respect, as ionospheric propagation >s not consistently supported for any frequencies outside this range. One of the necessary conditions for lonospr.enc communications is that the ladio wave must encounter the ionosphere at the correct angle. This is illustrateo in Fig 2. Radio waves which leave the earth at high angles above the horizon may receive only very slight bending, and are then lost to outer space. For the same fixed frequency of operation, as the radiation angle is lowered toward the horizon, a point is reached where the bending of the wave is sufficient to return Ihe wave iOS'ZtZ LAyc«< • • Fig 2 —Behavior of radio waves encountering the ionosphere. Rays entering the ionized region at angles above the critical angle are not bent enough to be returned to earth, and are lost to space. Waves entering at angles below the critical angle reach the earth at increasingly greater distances as the angle approaches the horizontal. The maximum distance that may normally be covered in a single hop is 2500 miles. Greater distances may be covered with multiple hops. to the earth. At successively lower angles, the wave returns to the earth at increasing distances. If the radio wave leaves the earth at a radiation angle of zero degrees, just toward the horizon (or just tangent to the earth’s surface), the maximum distance that may be reached under usual ionospheric conditions is approximately 2500 rules (4000 kilometers). However, the earth itself acts as a reflector of radio waves. Quite often a radio signal will be reflected from the reception point on the earth into the ionosphere again, reaching the earth a second time at a still more distant point. As in the case of light waves, the angle of reflection is the same as the angle of incidence, so a wave striking the surface of the earth at an angle of, say, 15® is reflected upward from the surface at the same angle. Thus, the distance to the second point of reception will be approximately twice the distance of the first. This effect IS also illustrated in Fig 2, where the signal travels from the transmitter at the left of the drawing via the ionosphere to Point A. in the center of the drawing From Point A the signal travels via the ionosphere again to Point B. at the right. Signal travel from the earth through the ionosphere and back to the earth is called a hop. Under some conditions it is possible for as many as four or five signal hops to occur over a radio path, but no more than two or three hops is the norm. In this way. HF communications can be conducted over thousands of miles. With regard to signal hopping, two important points should be recognized. First, a significant loss of signal occurs with each hop. Lower layers of the ionosphere absorb energy from the signals as they pass through, and the lonospfiere fends to scatter the radio energy in various directions, rather than confining it in a tight bundle. The earth also scatters the energy at a rellection point. Thus, only a small fraction of the transmitted energy reaches a distant receiving point. Again refer to Fig 2. Two radio paths (heavy lines) are shown from the transmitter to Point B. a 1-hop path and a 2-hop path. Measurements indicate that although there can be great variation in the ratio of the two signal strengths in a situation such as this, the signal power received at Point B will generally be from five to ten times greater for the 1-hop wave than (or the 2-hop wave. (The terrain at the mid-path reflection point for the 2-hop wave, the angle at which the wave is reflected from the earth, and the condition of the ionosphere in the vicinity of all the refraction points are the primary factors in determining the signal-strength ratio.) Signal levels are generally compared in decibels, abbreviated dB. The decibel is a logarithmic unit. Three decibels difference in signal strengths is equivalent to a power ratio of 2:1 ; a difference of 10 dB equates to a power ratio of 10:1. Thus, the signal loss for an additional hop is about 7 to 10 dB. The additional loss per hop becomes significant at greater distances. For a simplified example, a distance of 4000 miles can be covered in 2 hops of 2000 miles each or in four hops of 1000 miles each. For illustration, assume the loss for additional hops is 10 dB. or a 1/10 power ratio. Under such conditions, the 4-hop signal will be received with only 1/100 the power or 20 dB below that received in two hops. The reason for this is that only 1/10 of the 2-hop signal is received for the first additional (3rd) hop. and only 1/10 of that 1/10 for the second additional (4th) hop. It is for this reason that no more than four or five propagation hops are useful: the received signal becomes too weak to be heard. Mi 1 1 6C9*»ir Fig 3 —Distance plotted against wave angle (one-hop transmission) for the nominal range of virtual heights for the E and F2 layers, and for the FI layer. The second important point to be recognized in multihop propagation is that the trigonometry of the first hop generally establishes the trigonometry for ail succeeding hops. And it is the raoiation angle at the transmitter which sets up the trigonometry for the first hop. Solving a propagation triangle is simplified witn the aid of the graph in Fig 3.’ In this graph the radiation angle in degrees is given on the left, and the single-hop distance for the effective layer height along the bottom. Table 1 shows the optimum propagation distance for various radiation angles. The data for this table was read from the graph of Fig 3, based on an assumed F-layer height of 131 miles. From Table 1. if the radiation angle from a given transmitting antenna is concentrated at 30°. the first and succeeding hops in radio propagation will span about 650 miles each With a usable maximum limit of five hops under the best of conditions, one can project that the greatest distance for optimum communications for a 30° wave angle is five times 650 miles, or 3250 miles. For effective communications over greater distances, it would be necessary to lower the radiation angle at the transmitter antenna site. As will be discussed shortly, this can be done only by increasing the height of the hori zontal transmitting antenna. Although the discussion m the preceding para graphs has been in terms of a transmitting antenna, the same principles apply when the antenna is used for reception. A high antenna will receive low-angle signals more effectively than will a low antenna. The point of these several paragraphs may be summarized briefly; The vertical angle of radiation is the key factor in determining effective communications distances beyond line of sight. Table 1—Propagation Distance versus Radiation Angle (Data extracted from Fig 3) Raa.a:ion ODtirr.Ltn Ang:e.P'ODagaticn Degrees Distance. .Mnes 2 2250 4 2100 8 1650 to 1500 15 1200 20 1000 30 650 40 450 Scientists and engineers recognize that moo* other than signal hopping account for the propagatic of radio waves over thousands of miles Howeve studies of actual radio propagation in which the writi has participated have displayed signals with as many c 5 hops, so the hopping mode is one distinct possibility Whatever the propagation mode, there is unanimoc agreement that the most effective communications at H most often accompany the lowest radiation angle. Horizontal Antennas A simple antenna that is commonly used for H communications is the horizontal half-wave dipole. Th dipole IS a straight length of wire (or tubing) into whic radio-frequency energy is fed at the center. Because c its simplicity, the dipole may be easily subjected t theoretical performance analyses. Further^he result of proper analyses are borne out in practice. For thes reasons, the half-wave dipole becomes a convenier performance standard against which other antenn. systems can be compared. The dipole antenna, whei viewed from one end. radiates an equal amount of powe in all directions. Because the earth acts as a reflector for HF radi waves, the directive properties of any antenna ar- modified considerably by the earth underneath it. If ; dipole antenna is placed horizontally above the eartl" most of the energy radiated downward from the dipoF is reflected upward The reflected v^aves combine wit,' the direct waves (those radiated at angles above th* horizontal) in various ways, depending on the height c the antenna, the frequency, and the electrical character istics of the ground under and around the antenna. At some vertical angles above the horizon, the direc and reflected waves may be exactly in phase—that is the maximum signal or field strengths of both waves are reached at the same instant at some distant point. In thii ’From The ARRL Antenna Book, 14th ed i'on. Chapter 1. Fig 12 2HF backscatler studies by Raytheon Company under contract with Rome Air Development Center. Griffiss AFB. NY. A par of this study was done at Raytheon's South Dartmouth. Mass, field site. Jan-Jun. 1960. 9C Table 2—Electrical Heights For Amateur Bands below 30 MHz Fig 4—Elevation-plarre pattern for a horizontal dipole at a height of Vi wavelength (solid line) and in free space (broken line). Fig 5—Elevation-plane pattern tor a hoiizontal dipole at a height of 1 wavelength (solid Une) and in free space (broken line). case the resultant field strength is equal to the sum of the two components. At other vertical angles the two waves may be completely out of phase at some distant point—that is. the fields are maximum at the same instant but the phase directions are opposite. The resultant field strength in this case is the difference between the two At still other angles the resultant field will have intermediate values Thus, the effect of the ground is to increase the intensity of radiation at some vertical angles and to decrease it at others. The elevation angles at which the maxima and minima occur depend primarily on the antenna height above ground. (The electrical characteristics of the ground have some slight effect.) If the earth is considered to be a perfect reflector, straightforward trigonometric calculations can be made to oetermine the relative amount of radiation intensity at any vertical angle for any dipole height. Graphs from such calculations may be plotted as circular or polar diagrams, called radiation patterns Fig 4 shows the vertical radiation pattern for a dipole antenna positioned one-naif wavelength above the ground, viewed from one end. and Fig 5 for a height of one wavelength. The radiation from the dipole if in free space is shown by the broVin lines, and appear as semi-circles. In the plots of Figs 4 and 5. the radiation angle 35 reef TO reef pnysical physcai Frequency heigr.:netgdt 1.8 MHz 0 06 wavelength 0 13 wavelength 3 5 0 12 0 25 70 0 25 0 50 10 1 036 0 72 14 0 0 50 1 00 18 1 0 64 1 29 21.0 0.75 1 49 24 9 0 89 1 77 28 0 1 00 1 99 above the horizon is represented m the same fashion that angles are measured on a protractor. The concentric circles are calibrated to represent ratios of field strengths, referenced to the strength represented by the outer circle. The circles are calibrated m decibels. Diminishing strengths are plotted toward the center. Antenna heights are usually discussed m terms of wavelengths. The reason for this is that the length of a radio wave is inversely proportional to its frequency. Therefore a fixed physical height will represent different electrical heights at different radio frequencies. For example, a height of 70 feet represents one wavelength at a frequency of 14 MHz. But the same 70-foot height represents only V? wavelength for a frequency of 7 MHz. For physical antenna heights of 35 and 70 feet. Table 2 shows the electrical heights in wavelengths for all the amateur bands below 30 MHz. The lobes and nulls of the pattern of Figs 4 and 5 illustrate what was described earlier, that the effect of the earth beneath the antenna is to increase the intensity of radiation at some vertical angles and to decrease it at others. At a height of v? wavelength (Fig 4). the radiated energy is strongest at a radiation angle of 30®. an angle which was determined earlier to provide a maximum effective communications distance of about 3250 miles under the conditions assumed The pattern of Fig 4 represents the radiation from a dipole for 14 MHz at a height of 35 feet. As The horizontal antenna is raised to even greater heights, additional lobes are formed, and those that exist move closer to the horizon. But yet the maximum amplitude of the existing lobes is not diminished. As may be seen from Fig 5. for an antenna height of 1 wavelength, the energy in the lower lobes is strongest at 15®. And Table 1 indicates that the optimum propagation distance per hop for 15® is 1200 miles. Under the very same conditions as before. 5-hop propagation, one may see that the greatest distance for optimum communication now IS 5 x 1200 or 6000 miles. The pattern of Fig 5 represents a 14-MHz dipole at a height of 70 feet. Thus, for the conditions assumed, the optimum communications distance has been extended from 3250 miles to 6000 miles, merely by raising the ^ ' compass directions. a> a solid i;ne The broken line in Fig 6 shows the oattern of a half-wavelength dipole, for comparison. Fig 7 shows the elevation plane or vertical- profile pattern. This pattern is that seen from the ends of the elements, with the antenna in free space The solid line again represents the Yagi. and the broken line the dipole, that “perfect circle" which was mentioned earlier. Performance of most other Yagi-type arrays with three Of four elements will not be significantly different from the patterns shown here Another often-used type of beam antenna is the quad array. Typically, a quad is constructed with two or more wire elements in the form of a souare o. a diamond. The conducting wires are usually supported by X-shaped frames of wood or fiberglass material For the same number of elements and spacing, the performance of a quad beam is generally similar to that of a Yagi beam. The vertical patterns of Figs 4 and 5 were calculated by assuming the earth is a perfect reflector, an unrealistic situation. Actual earth does not reflect all of the radio- frequency energy striking it; some absorption takes place. Over real earth, therefore, the patterns will be slightly different, depending upon the electrical con ductivity and dielectric constant of the soil, and upon the radio frequency. Computer programs are available to take these factors into account, and raliable calculations of patterns over real earth may oe made. Yagi patterns over real earth are shown m Figs 8 through 14. These patterns were calculated with an Apple lie personal computer 3 "Average" soil conditions were used for these plots, that is. a conductivity of 5 milhsiemens per meter and a dielectric constant of 15 ■* These patterns compare the performance of Yagi arrays at heights of 35 and 70 feet. In Figs 6 through 12. the broken line is the plot for a 35-foot height, and the solid line for 70 feet. For 24.9 and 28 MHz. F-gs 13 and 14. it is helpful to present the 35- and 70-foot patterns m separate graphs, for clarity. Otherwise the multiple lobes become indis tinguishable ^A commercially available sofiA-are p'ligram ANNIE, was used to calculate all oattems presented in th's paper ••Such soil conditions may be considered typical for the central part of tne United Stales sucn as the Ohio ana Mississippi river val'eys. «? Fig 8—Vertical-profile pattern of a 7-MHz Yagi beam over average earth at a height of 70 feet (solid line) and at 35 (eel (broken line). Fig 9—Vertical-protile pattern of a 10.1*MHz Yagi beam at 70 feet (solid tine) and at 35 feet (broken line). »o Fig 10—Vertical-profile pattern of a 14-MHz Yagi beam at 70 feet (solid line) and at 35 feet (broken line). Fig 11 —Vertical-Mrofile pattern of an 18.1 -MHz Yagi beam at 70 feet (solid line) and at 35 feet (broken kre). Fig 12 —Vertical-profile pattern of a 21 -MHz Yagi beam at 70 feet (solid line) and at 35 feet (broken line). i| \ ■ -.g— antenna from 35 to 70 feet Even greater heights would provide still greater communications distances unoer the same conditions The radiation angle of the lowest lobe for a hori zontal antenna above the ground may be Determined mathematically. s sin where h 0 25 the wave angle or radiation angle ; the antenna height above ground in wavelengths (see Table 2) In short, the higher the horizontal antenna, the lower IS the lowest looe of the pattern Therefore, tne higher an HF antenna can be placed, the farther it will provide effective communications because of the resulting lower radiation angle This is true for any horizontal antenna Electrical Characteristics of HF Antennas As mentioned previously, a dipole antenna, when viewed from one end of the conductor, radiates an ecual amount of power in all directions. The plotted radiation pattern is a perfect circle. If the dipole is vertical, this circle represents the azimuth coverage, with an equal amount of power radiated m every compass direction For point-to-point communications, however, it is bene ficial to concentrate the radiated energy into a beam which IS aimed toward a single distant point. An analogy can be made by comparing the light emanating from a bare electric lamp to that from an automobile headlight. For illuminating a distant point, the headlight is far more effective. Antennas designed to concentrate the radiated energy into a beam are called beam antennas. For a fixed amount of transmitter power fed to the transmitting antenna, beam antennas provide increased signal strength at a distant receiver. In radio communications, the use of a beam antenna is also beneficial during reception, because the antenna pattern for transmission IS the same as for reception A beam antenna helps to reject signals f'om unwanted directions, and in effect boosts the strength of signals received from the desired direction Tne increase m signal or field strength which a beam antenna offers is frequently referenced to a dipole antenna by a term called gam. Gam is commonly expressed m oecioels One type of beam antenna is a Yagi, named after one of its Japanese inventors. Different varieties of Yagi antennas exist, each having somewhat different characteristics. Many antennas erected for television reception are a form of multi element Yagi beam. Subsequent discussions m this paper refer to a 3-element Yagi array, one having a driven element, a parasitic director and a parasitic reflector The parasitic elements are not fed any power directly; instead they are excited through mutual coupling to the driven element, and in turn also radiate power Each parasitic element is spaced 0.2 wavelength from the driven element, and Fig 6—Computer-calculated azimuth-plane radiation pattern tor a horizontal 3-element Yagi array (solid line), and tor a comparison dipole (bioken line). Fig 7—Computer-calculated elevation-plane or vertical- profile pattern of a horizontal Yagi array, solid line, and for a comparison dipole, broken line. These patterns are those seen from the ends of the elements with the antennas in free space. the theoretical gam of this array, determined through computer analysis, is 7.2 dB over a dipole. This means that for the same transmitter power, the effective radiated power of the Yagi in its favored direction is 5.2 times that of the dipole in the same direction The theoretical front- to-back ratio of the Yagi antenna is 12 dB. meaning the power radiated in its forward direction is. 15.7 times that radiated m the opposite direction. Values for a practical antenna of this type are quite close to theoretical. Computer-calculated radiation patterns for the horizontal Yagi array are presented m Figs 6 and 7. Fig 6 sho .s the azimuth plane, the response m various Fig 13 —At A, vertical-profile pattern of a 24.9-MHz Yagi beam at 35 feet, and at B. 70 feet. (A) Fig 8 shows the vertical profile for 7-MHz Yagi beams. For a height of 35 feet, the energy is maximum at a vertical angle of 34® above the horizon. At a height of 70 feet, maximum radiation occurs at an angle of 24®. Table 3 —Comparison of Yagi Beams at Heights of 35 and 70 Feet Frequency 7.0 10.1 14.0 18.1 21 0 24 9 28 0 (-At 35 Feet ) £/ev angle of max. raa.ation 34 degrees 29 24 20 18 15 14 (•At 70 Feet-) Ew. angle of max raaiaion 24 degrees 18 14 11 9 8 Performance difte ’erce at 5® 5.7 decibels 5.7 5.6 5.4 5 2 4 9 4 6 This is 10 “ lower than for the same antenna at 35 feet. In addition, in the 2- to 10-degree elevation range, those angles that are necessary for communicating over thousands of miles, the performance of the low Yagi beam is nominally 5.6 dB below that of the high Yagi. At a wave angle of 5 0®. the response of the Yagi at 70 feet IS superior by 5.7 dB. Similar data can be obtained from Figs 9 through 14 for the amateur frequencies from 10.1 through 28 MHz. The differences in performance for the amateur bands from 7 to 28 MHz are summarized in Taole 3 As Table 3 indicates, a Yagi antenna at 7'0 feet provides far greater radiation at low angles for all frequencies than the same antenna at 35 feet. This translates to greater communications effectiveness at long distances, and is especially true for the lower frequencies. At a 5“ wave angle, the differences in field strengths range from 4.6 to 5.7 dB. This means that the power at a distant receiving antenna for most propa gation conditions will be from 2.9 to 3.7 times stronger from a Yagi antenna at 70 feet, compared to the same Yagi at 35 feet. Heights greater than 70 feet will produce even higher power ratios. In summary, a high Yagi antenna provides superior performance over a low Yagi. all other factors being equal. Depending on the level of noise and interference, the performance differences related to height are often enough to mean the difference between making distant radio contact with fairly reliable signals, and being unable to maxe contact at all. Very High and Ultra High Frequencies Commonly used amateur frequencies higher than those discussed earlier are the very high frequency portion of the spectrum, abbreviated VHF. and the ultra high frequencies, or UHF. The VHF range covers 3C to 300 MHz. and the UHF range from 300 to 3000 MHz. In an earlier section it was mentioned that HF antennas must be large to be effective. To some degree, however, those considerations are not unique to that frequency range. They apply in general to VHF and UHF as well. A difference at VHF and UHF is that antennas may be physically small m order to realize optimuin electrical lengths. However, a disadvantage of physically small antennas is that they present less surtace area to passing radio waves, and are therefore less effective m picking up incoming signals. This effect is termed pickup efficiency. Pickup efficiency is reciprocative; it applies, to transmitted sig-als as well as to received signals. To obtain higher pickup efficiency and therefore greater communications effectiveness, many antenna elements are required at VHP and UHF. The elements are usually installed on multiple booms. Single, vertical radiators, even at elevated heights, are ineffective for distances beyond a few miles at these frequency ranges This is true because of low pickup efficiency and because of the omnidirectional characteristic of the radiator. Stacked vertical radiators are sometimes used to obtain gam with omnidirectional coverage. Although ionospheric propagation does sometimes occur at the lower end of the VHP range, propagation at too MHz and above is almost always over a line-of- sight path Under usual conditions, signals at these frequencies encounter very little refraction in air. There fore it behooves a person using these frequencies to place his antenna as high as possible, so it can see farther Certainly the antenna must be above sur rounding objects, such as dense foliage and man-made structures Such objects absorb radio-frequency energy in this portion of the spectrum, and therefore tend to block the signal from propagating Objects such as hills, steel structures and many commercial or industrial buildings will block VHP signals to an even greater degree" creating ••shadows" behind them. At VHP and UHP. the lowest lobes for Yagi arrays at 35 and 70 feet are only a few degrees above the horizontal. However, for line-of-sight communications, the radiation angle should be zero, if possible., unless one wishes to communicate with airplanes or objects in outer space. Even more desirable are negative angles from high locations, so the antenna can ••look down on the te. iin At VHP and UHP the radiation angles for 35-fr 3t heights are twice those occurring for the 70-foot heights. Therefore at VHP it is also beneficial to place the antenna as high as possible, and m the clear from surrounding objects. Amateur Radio operators wishing to contact other amateurs at great distances use a time-worn but true expression, •‘"por the best results, put your antenna as high as you possibly can.’’ Many amateurs in various parts of the world put their big antennas atop 120-foot towers, and enjoy communications with amateurs in foreign countries when neighboring amateurs with much lower antennas cannot even hear the foreign signals. Conclusion The preceding information has dealt with antenna height and communications effectiveness It has been shown that for all amateur frequencies, high horizontal antennas will outperform low antennas. Information has been developed to show a consistent power gam of the hiqher antennas over low ones, that is. at 70 feet and 35 feet. The 70-foot height was chosen only for the purpose of illustration, and is not intended to be construed as the optimum height for antennas. Heights above 100 feet will give significantly better performance than at 70 feet. It is reasonable to assume that if an amateur operator is restricted to the use of low antennas, he will obtain transmitting equipment with a corresponding increase in power output to compensate for the loss of antenna ehectiveness. Por example, he might increase his transmitter power from 500 watts to 1 .5 kilowatts to compensate for a three-fold loss in antenna effectiveness because of height limitations. It should be realized that this increase in power, in turn, increases the possibilities for his stronger signal to overload nearby television and radio receivers, creating interference tor viewers and listeners. There is one further consideration concerning .amateur antenna height with regard to television and radio interference. In essence, the sole source of radiated PP energy from an Amateur Radio station is its antenna. Ra sing that antenna to an increased height, far above *he level of existing antennas for television reception, will reduce the possibility of interference to television reception from fundamental overload. AMATEim AWBST 1S67 " CALIfORlU FIR! Hllllon-aer« Stanlalaua Kat- lonal roraat Flra, cauaad by lightnlns. 5,000 flra£l9»»tara urad - 1 klllad - 16 hoaaa and J« outbulldlnsa daatroyad - jovamor daclarad a Jl-co«nty aaarsaney. Aaataura aannad y.S. Foraat Saralca Kaad^tiartara, at Sonora, and aarloua ^lald locatlona. *« haaajuaad thalr own radio a^ulp- ■ ant to aaalat tha 7.500 paoplt who had to aaacaata thalr hoaaa. Haalth and wallara aaaaajaa aara «ant £or tha 115 aaaeuaaa In tha Had Croaa ahaltara. Saataur radio halpad eoordl- nata food, clothlno and ahaltar whan thay waran’t r.aadad for priority fir* actlaltlaa. ROVEIBU ISI7 - iiUS tlPLOSIOB Paapaa, Taxaa, butana axplo- alon klllad thraa and Injurad thlrty-aavan. Haaa prealdad coaaunl cat Iona for Had Croaa poata at Paapa, Chlldraaa, Aaarlllo and Wichita Falla Into tha dlaaatar araa.- OICUEEl 1987 ’ HUMbAS, KISS- ISSIPPI, TimSSII TOtRADOS Scv€F« thunderstor«i and tor- nado«a with 200 HPH windfp killfd aix paopltn Injured 150 and left IpSOO honelaaa. Anataur radio operatora aent 27S welfare aeaeagea and aealated fire etatlone« the Red Croaa and the Departeent of Eaereency Han- aoeaent• HAT 1918 - CALa TAII CARS OVfRIURIID fiakerafleldp California “ Plt<» railroad tank cara overturned and becan leaking a volatllo toxir aubetance. The High achool and a hoapital were evacuated. Mae radio oporatore were called for aaelgnnente to varioua cooeunica- tlon poete with the fire and pol ice departaente. JOLI 1S£6 - ion. TiilRS CQlllll Altoona^ Iowa - Two freight traine collided. Two killed. Care containing denatured alcohol overturncd, creellnc pceclblllty of large oxplceion. 1,500 Ic w r f n f f'T ^ith tho Polk County •■•rponey director end the eonnend poet. AIKQST 1988 - 0U60I FOUST fiU Cronte Poee, Orojon - The Welker Hounteln fire reeulted In eetebllehins a Bed Croee eeecue- tlon center, at Merlin. Haae linked the center. Bed Croee dir ector and tha Josephine County •■er^ency coordinator. Twenty haaa donated 146 houro of eer- elcc. lOTIUii 1988 - AlUUA TOUAOO Tuecalooea, Blabena — B tor nado destroyed twelve honee and ^eaased 100 others. All utili ties failed. Bed Croee aeked for eeeteur radio aeelatance with food service and shelter tease. Coaaunicatlone were eetablleh- cd between eoasand bases and the center of the disaster area. Meeeagee ware sent relating to nedlcine, food, shelter, statue of vlctlne and relatlvee and dee- age aurveya. lOVMBM 1988 “ TROPICAL STORE illlH Gulf Coaet of Florida - Store overturned a tractor—trailer rig carrying nethyl broalde gas. Collier County haae node radio contact with '•Cheatrec“ for the fire chief. Cheatrec le a spec ial eaergency center eatobllehed by the Chealeal Transporters Ass ociation. The haae used -auto- pateh" to allow the chief to apeak directly to Cheatrec off icials. (The nearest phone to the accident scene was three alles away.) The accident scattered 32 1,500 pound cylinders of the dangeroue gae. A leak required area evacuation. The haae eel up radio contact between the eeer- ganoy operations center and the achool evacuation center, eatab- llahlng another autopatch link. KOVEHBER 1968 * RICH. PLASTICS HFE Conofloo/ Michigan ~ Fir# In # plafltlc# leanufacturlng plant. Purnfld labolo pr#v®ntc<3 ld#ntlfl- catlon. eoo local r#flld«nt# war# avacuat«d. Th© radio aeateur# operated at the fire halls cen tral dlepatch and the dioaeter ronrdlnatlon center . d#part«#nt#s the Red Croe# and th# Salvation hrmj w#r# provided radio cc«#unl cat lone by th# ha##« 40 fir# fiphter# and two ##at#ur radio op#r#tor# w#r# tr##t#d for toxic fm«# and ##okte Th# a#at#ur« contacted a fel low h#ei« who U a r##earch ch#«- let for Dow Ch##lcal Corporation, In hldlend, who wae abl# to iden tify th# chealeal# #nd olv# ad vice about^eepondlng. HARCH 1989 - ORK05 BLIZZARD LaCrandtg Oregon - A xero- viaibiiity blixxards with 80 MFIf wind#H #trand#d aotori#!#. Ka«# provided co##unl cat lone for th# •nargency ■anageeent offic## th# Salvation Ar#y, the e#erg#ncy op eration# centers the church evac uation #ite and the aearch-and- r#ac8j# tea## ##nnlng th# road cloeurea. SPRIR6 1989 - PAlfllA-BIlIRSOTA FLOOII Fargop Horth Dakota to Hoor- h#ad, Hinneaot# - Riv#r cr##t#d 28-fe#t above flood stag# (th«ir wor#t flood of thl# century!. The aeateur radio operatora par ticipated In -3kywam-p for th# Rationel v#ather Senric#, Mnnlng th# eaergency operation# center, the dieaeter eervlce# group#, th# evacuetlon centers th# Aray Corp# of Engineer#, Red Crof# and the county #aergency coordinetor# along th# flood rout#* The h#e# #l#o #onltored leaky dike# and helped coordlnat# #and- bagging €oa#unlcatlona for the Aray Corpe of Engineer#• Thirty heas participated In the three- day activity* JURE 1989 • LOOISIARA TORRADO Otoosc T*te, Loulsle*^® - A violent ternsdo destroyed one- third of the town, killing two and Injuring eany. The haae using th# Boeedale repeater sounded the alare, notifying the state Patrol, Bed Cross «nd other disaster groups. Th. Baton Rouge weather bureau had not detected the tornado prior to the han radio alert. within 30 Rclnutee the har.e were traneelttlng eeercency and wellare fioseages for Uielr co»i- runJly. Ao Ih. tornaJo roved to- • e -. I r«porti» dlr#ctly to th«* w#«th«r bur««u. Vh«n th« f^ation«l Cunrd •rrlv^ th^ h«p« ir#r« ••lco<3 to th«« «nd the lew enforcevcnt official#* About fO aaatetir radio oparatora help ed durln9 the diaaatar. JOLT im - 0Jt£€CI fOlIST Flfl Korth««at«rn Or«9on - 8,000 •era "3uaalt" (Ira. Tha National Foraat Sr«t«> radio waa quickly City, and with oaarloadad with coaaunlcatlooa Dafanaa. In Vaohlngton. from tha aany othar £lraa In tha p^c.. to raport on tha axtent of •al lowa-Whltaan National Foraat. dlaordar. St. Croix waa In talk to the Puerto Rlcana about the daea9a aaaeaaaient reporta. S«pt. I7tb - ?lr^Io Islaeds %^lnda In evcaaa of 210 Hrrr. 5eeen killed In St* Croix* with ^Ot of the ho«ee deatroyed. Be tween 20 and 2S hana actively operated there during the etor*. S<pt. H-30 - Potrto llco ffaee linked that area with the United Hatlone etatlon* in Few the Depart- The Foreet Sereice fire aanasere uacd aaateur radio operetora to reach the bate caepe in the fire Coincidentally, the foreet Service had slven the aaateure pereieeion to put up their **Spout a etate of anarchy, with Jail prieonere looee, eerchante hold ing lootere at gun point and local police were not reporting for duty. Baeed upon thie ha«-e%ipplied Information, Preeident Bueh or- Springe* repeater, at the 5,500- regular Amy troope and the foot level in the Blue Hountaine* to-St. Croix to reetore Thie repeater, capable of three- ^^der. Ham radio handled the re- etate coverage, wee used for the p^^te and the deciaione. Borne fire communicatione. The prev- Included In tha para- ioue year tha hame helped with taame, into the dleaa- the Tepee Butte fire. aitea, to eetablieh addlticn- a I coaeiunicatlone. Kama mtatione aboard the U85 Valdex, which waa at the Puerto path of daath and da- handlad 42J tha Eaatarn Carib- P^on* patchaa fof craw.an and local ielandere to their loved onee in the Statoia Ram radio wee their only link availablea S«pt. Jilt - Sooth Cirolloa Haeelve destruction. 135 HFH winde, power linee and treea down and roofe collapeing. The hame 1989 - HIMICANE HUGO Left a atruction in bean, Puerto Rico and South Caro lina. Romee and neighborhoode were turned into rubble. The hame eerved government and wel fare agenclee, including Civil Defence, the Red Croee and the Fational Cuard. Before the etora hit, begin- began preparing for the eterm on ning September 16th, amateur September 16th, organizing mem- rad lo nete were eet up* on 20 here and reeourcee. They remain- metere and operated contlnuouely ed active for the next 10 daya, duty with the Red Croee during for the next nine daye. Official linking various emergency opera- eight-day period, government meesagee, damage re- ting centere for the Department 1989-CALIfOMIA QUAK The third largeat earthguake to hit the continental Unitae State# thia century, on October 17th, leee, meaeurlng 7.i ©n the Richter ecale. Hany dead, injur ed and homeleae. In Santa Cruz County, 40 mllca eouth of San Francieco. 5V2 homea were deetroyed, 2047 muffered heavy damage and 7210 minor dam age. 44 6 mobile homee were des troyed or received major damage. 10.000 people were homeleee, with 3.000 of them remaining homeleee two morthe after the guake. The guake wae centered at Santa Cruz and tha damage area extended from the Oakland/San Francieco area, on the north end, to the Robtieter/Salinee area, on the eouth. The guake lasted 15 aeconde. The Santa Cruz area exper ienced mlidee, damaged bridges, closed roads and loea of power and telephone#. Hany radio communication# circuile failed. One Santa Cruz tioepital re- guired evacuation of patients to otlier hoapitale, due to structur al damage. The hame coordinated ambulances and helicopters. Since the helicopters did not have radio contact directly with the hoepltala aaateur radio wae used to relay the landing mitee. llama alec reported gae leaks, broken water and aewer line#. Some ware aeelgned to aearch-and- reacue teama to help trapped vic- tima in collapsed buildings. Of the 370 amateur radio volunteers about half of them were assigned ports, welfare Ingulriee and other information wae handled for government and non-government re lief agencies and for diploaatic miceione located in Washington. D.C. Mas# in Trinidad. St. Lucia. of Emergency Preparedness, the Red Cross, Rational Weather Ser vice, hospitals. Rational Guard and the local police stations (whsn power and phones were down). The Oakland/San Francisco arts suffered leee damage than Santa Cruz but it had the greatest loss of life when the one mile stretch of the Himitz Freeway collapsed on care using the lower leval. Part of tlie 1-00 Bay Bridge also collapsed. Twenty-two of Oak-With aoaa atatione and anten- Dominica. St. -Vincent and other nae deatroyed, and with the high ]and*e largest buildings suffered about 250 million dollars in dam age. Fifty hams aeeiated the many shelters operating in San Fran cieco, with many cosing fros aa far away as Orsgon and Revada to help. locations made contact with manpower drain on local hams, atatsaida hams who passed the volunteer ham operators case to health-and-wolfart meeaagaa to South Carolina from nearby states relatives and frlandt in the U.S. to aaslat. Jn addition to heavy The amateur radio -Hurricane emergency traffic, the hams Vatch** net obtained meteorologi- handled ccmmunlcation# coordlna- cal reports froc haae In the path ting the distribution of food, of the etora. including one ha# water, clothing and other eaeen- whose boat anemometer waa reading tial itess 120 MPH winds. Theas reporta ------------------ wore passed rsculerly to the Rat ional Hurricane Center, In Hlaai. Florida. The Acerlcan Radio Relay League headquarters station. VIAV. In NruJneten. Connecticut, provided 5panlsh-Bpcaklnq hane lo Prepared by V7JGM. fro# In formation condensed from the acre detailed reports which appear monthly. In the ‘Tubllc Service** columns of QST macailne, which Is published by the Araerlcan Radio Relay League./ r lli^'l\0 \l^ AV’ vy/^» R»;ir^X -I ' ,.i •• \n i\i? ir^\ m pi i Universal Manufacturing Co. 43900 Groesbeck Hwy. Clinton Two., Ml 48036 (3131 463-2560 FAX (3131 463 2964 FREE STANDING ALUMINUM TOWER No need for unsightly and space consuming guy wires LIGHTWEIGHT-RUST FREE-EASY TO ASSEMBLE-RUGGED STRENGTH FOR TV - FM - HAM RADIO - INDUSTRIAL INSTALLATIONS - FIRE - POLICE - MARINE • CB CHOOSING THE PROPER TOWER . coMra ara aada In 10 foot aectlona to glva Daolda on the t««.eT height that you -nrV-l**!* “«> '*'• “* •• j*j Tha aodel nuabar la aaraly the wind Choeaa the tower aodal that la racnMin-f ^ ^’-our antenna calculation teaulted In a loading follows! by the height alte. “ ^ jq {.at high, the aodel you want la 5-50. tower dcalgsed tor flwe a^re feat and n la raco^ended that you do not exceed 6 ft. The table on page 5 will tell you ' •b«wa top of tower with any antenna configuration.example, 80h. roof mounted guyed tower.yVvodel 5-50 Tower WARRAJrrr: I'olvcrtsl Tower* ere karruced agalaat defective narerlal or * within aubject to repair or to oaterlil repleceoant only If fallurr reeulti free 1 yaar ' —product, wblch have been --t.ct.d^^to^ alauac. neglect, accident, taproper In.t.ll.tlon or application, nor ihall “ j 3mc* ;.v. been repaired or aubalantlally altered out.lde of our factory. Thl. we r.ty Ilea of all other warrentle* expreeeed or lapllei. Tower 4*50 t ji ► B18 JANUARY 1990 UNIVERSAL TOWERS PRICES AND MODELS (inttnrid si2t In sciu^ro fMt) 2 w 5 6 7 9 12 15 16 21 23 35 30ft.4-30 $335 9-30 $451 12-30 $593 21-30 $704 23-30 $932 35-30 $1050 40ft.4-40 $562 7-40 $706 9-40 $787 12-40 $932 15-40 $1042 21-40 $1157 , 23-40 •1385 50ft.4-50 $792 5-50 $900. 7-50 $1013 9-50 $1126 15-50 $1496 16-50 $1614 0 6Cft.4-60 $1127 6-60 $1382. 7-60 $1471 9-60 $1577 70ft.3-70 $1469 4-70 $1805. 6-70 $1838 7-70 $1922 80ft.3-80 $1920 4-30 $2293 IICES SU8JICT TOCH ANCE WIT HOUT NO TICE 90ft.2-90 $2375 PlUf K: ADov« pnc« OO not includ# occMSori^s. Accessories Rotor Wt. 2# ... R-U $3027 Wt. Z-l/20 R-14 $45.33 Mount FLAT ROOF MOUNTS FOR GUYED TOWERS Bases Wt. Wt. Wt. Wt. 19# ... B-14 $ 60.58 25# ... B-18 $ 60.58 45# ... B-22 $106.04 55# ... B-26 $136.33 k « r 0 1 N • w • m # « »hj Alum. Mast. Wt. Wt. Wt. Wt.- 13 3-1/2# ..1-1/4 o.d.xlOft. 5- 1/2# ..1-1/2 o.d.xlOft. 6- 3/4# ..2" o.d. X 8ft.-lA*2" o.d. X 16ft. - $30.27 $37.84 $45.41 $90.88 Wt. - 10# ... RFM-14 $42.32 Flat Roof Mounts Wt.- Wt.- Wt.- 25# . PJM 2'’'*' . RPM 35»/ • RFM - 18 . $ 66.69 22 . $ 99.96 26 . $133.33 t ‘ V f I I i 11; 11 \i LItl¥k r 1UNIVERSAL TOWERS SECTIONAL DESIGNATIONS Univcnai Aluminum Tower Sections arc 10 feet in lenfth and are an etyuiiateral triangular welded mm. dcsifnattd as 11". 14" ir'. 22" and 26". They are TYPICAL ASSEMBLY STRAIGHT SECTION TOP SECTION m STRAIGHT SECTION Wt-13^ ... H” Top $113.66 Wt-14-* ... 14” Top $143.22 Wt-31^ ... 18” Top $259.72 Wt-13^ ... 14” Taper $126.00 Wt.-29* ... 18" Taper $226.00 Wt-34* ... 22” Taper $337.00 ... 26” Taper $453.00 Wt-12<'... 11” Straight $112.00 Wt.-13^ ... 14” Straight $126.00 Wt.-29* ... 18” Straight $226.00 Wt.-34<^ ... 22” Straight $337.00 Wt.-47'^ ... 26” Straight $453 00 B 14 B-18 B22 B-26 BASES approximately Vi cu. yd. concrete 1-% cu. yd. concrete — (Hole 3' x 3' x 4' deep) 2 cu. yd. concrete - Hole (4' x 4' x 4* deep) 4 cu. yd. concrete — Hole (4-!4* x 4 *A' x 5 ’ deep) The B-18 . B-22 and B-26 should be bolted to the bottom tower section of your particular configuration. Th*s will insure correct equilateral spread of the base. While concrete is setting up, base can be leveled by using a carpenters level on the upright of the section used to keep the base spread. Concrete should be allowed set up for 3 to 4 days before erecting remainder of tower. NOTE: All boses should be put in omount el concrete recommended. CAUTION DO NOT VOID YOUR WARRANTY Aluminum Tower sections should NEVER be placed directly in concrete" Corrosive effects of cement will DESTROY alumjnum tower sections. Use only Universal Bases as shown. Tower sections also require drainage to mimmife the possibility of freezing ana splitting. Universal bases allow the tower to dram properly and obviate the possibility of damage. Use of an Universal Tower without the proper base VOIDS ALL WARRANTIES. r heavy duty \RY 1990 Wl » in «4U«r* fMt) 30" I tapered section $670.00 fey 30 straight section $570.00 a ' (1 3' i B-30 BASE r ■$212-57 Flat Roof Mounts RFM - 30 - $186.52 For Guyed Towers bearing $90.70 1-5/8" SC $116.52 2-3/16"SC 4-B Hole for the B-30 Tower, “ deep, with 6 cu. yd. concrete. The B-30 base should be bolted to the section of your P^^^^cular configu This will insure correctspread of base. While concrete is ^ettin up, base can be- ^ usedenters level on the upright section used to keep the base spread.Allow concrete 3 to 4 days to set up, before erecting balance of tower._ _ _ __ WOTi: AM *K«uld ba put in aiwunt »f canctf TOP PLATE Flange Bearing Mount- $21.24 This plate to be WELDED to Top Section, (as shown below) m bC (/)z CDO c) < fO Z (O C3 ^ n C/) U4 O -J <zo pa Ulc/s intt UlI <cnce 111 > 2 11 g >• w X Z o ff) X < LL O O in <N r) CD n £2 CDr) o CO G. 5 »- co c u > § X o 0) JO (/) 0}ow.o oocn cn 6 o oc o<c C (Cs "ri </) k. 0) > ‘E D 1 KiOOfL1 Hf IGMT ft ^ mfl^O LOAC sa rr A •r“ 1 StCTlONS WHICH COMPAISC TOMiR (Sif Sftm^ Tm Tmmh^Torn •AS€ H.D.35-UO ho 3U.50 178 30 Tap. 26 Tap. 22 Tap. l8Top B-30 H.D.21-50 50 21.08 190 30 Tap. 26 Tap. 22 Tap. l8Tap. lU Top B-30 H.D.9-60 60 9.29 202 30 Tap. 26 Tap. 22 Tip. iSTip. Ill Tip. UTop B-30 H.D.16-60 60 16.37 237 30 Tap. 26 Sir. 26 Tip. 22Tap 18 T^ UiTop B-30 H.D.21-60 60 a. 08 256 30 Sir. 30 Tap. 26 Tap. 22Tip. 18 Tap. lUTop B-30 H.D.8-70 70 7.07 231 30 Tap. 26 Tap. 22 Tip. l8Str. 18 Tap. Ik Tap. UTop B-30 H.D.12-70 70 11.91 285 30 Str. 30 Tap. 26 Tap. 22Tap. 18 Str. 18 Tap. lUTop B-30 H.D. i 17-70 70 16.37 303 30 Str. 30 Tap. 26 Str. 26Tap. 22 Tap. 18 Tap. iLTop B-30 H.D.21-70 70 21.08 322 30 Str. 30 Str. 30 Tap. 26Tap. 22 Tap. 18 T^. litTop B-30 H.D.8-80 80 7.27 283 30 Tap. 26 Str. 26 Tap. 22Str. 22 Tap. 18 Tap. lii Tap. UTop B-30 H.D.9-80 80 9.29 302 30 Str. 30 Tap.26 Tap. 22Str. 22 Tap. 18 Tap. Hi T^. UTop B-30 H.D.11-80 80 10.79 337 30 Str. 30 Tap. 26 Str. 26Tap. 22 Str. 22 Tap. 18 Tap. UiTop B-30 H.D.12-80 80 U.91 351 30 Str. 30 Str. 30 Tap. 26Tap. 22 Tap. 18 Str. 18 Tap. lUTop B-30 R.D.16-80'80 15.7U 369 30 Str. 30 Str. 30 Tap. 26Str. 26 Tap. 22 Tap. 18 Tap lliTop B-30 H.D,U-90 90 U.38 296 30 Tap. 26 Str. 26 Tap. 22Str. 22 Tap. 18 Tap. Hi Str. liiTap. UTop B-30 H.D.3-90 90 7.20 350 30 Str. 30 Tap. 26 Str. 26Tap. 22 Str. 22 Tap. 18 Tip. IbStr. UiTop B-30 H.D.11-90 90 10.79 U03 30 Str. 30 Str. 30 Tap. 26Str. 26 Tap. 22 Str. 22 Tap. l8Tap. lliTop B-30 H.D,U-100 100 Iu38 U13 30 Str. 30 Str. 30 Str. 30T^. 26 Tap. 22 Tap. l8 Tap. lliStr. Hi Tap. UTop B-30 H.D,8-100 100 7.U9 U35 30 Str. 30 Str. 30 Str. 30 Tap 26 Tap. 22 Str. 22 Tip. l8 Tap Hi Str. Hi Top B-30 loatt 4 - a r V 's; v(\-K UNIVERSAL TOWERS !•) Check the instructions for your particular base to dig proper sire hole. Place each ten^foot toner section end to end in correct order of asseabiyi sUrt by putting the bottoa section at which place the tower will stand. Mike ure enough clearance exists so that the tower can later be walked up to its upright position without overhead interference. 2.) Bolt the bottoa 10 feet of tower to the base and place it in the hole. Be sure tilt direction is coaaon for all base legs and positioned proper ly as concrete is poured. 3.) Getting bottoa section pluab is /) J very iaportant. Vfhile concrete is —X—r—^ setting up, base can be levelled by using a carpenters level on the up right of the section used to keep the base spread <.) Allow 3 to 4 days for concrete to set up. 5.) Remove one bolt froa each front leg and three bolts from rear leg as shown. Tilt bottoa 10 ft. sec tion to ground and connect remain ing tower sections into the final assembly. Attach all wiring and fit antenna to tower. 6.) Walk up tower to its upright posi tion, replacing bolts in the base to secure the tower. tm 0 % 0 S • w 0 :V ^N40• L L tt "4 :;i 1 UniverssI Manufacturing Co. 43900 Groesbeck Hwy. Clinton Tivyp., Ml 48036 (313) 463-2560 FAX (313) 463-2964 ALUMINUM TOWER ' * / I' :t • ^ * 'V, ■ ■ / • *mi i- ’ . * I »» % %^ * ■at—-r i . I AM A NEIGHBOR OF GREG TRUCHINSKI ’S AND I HAVE NO OBJECTIONS TO HIM HAVING HIS ANTENNA. /. (K^J\ 'RTiA'a i4i>7c U I jLfOvzj^ U i ^\\cx^Wvvi?0 -------------- Fl--' ‘ r - iV' . 5 ' it \i 4fc- ■■;•i-.V • ^r- V ;• v>. ■•; i v-. vfi:i ]ir.i 1 \i m ^ , • § ; h ( ( United States Court of Appeals L FOR TIIF EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 93-1026 Sylvia Pentelr Appellant, V. City of Mendota Heights, Appellee * * * * * * * * * Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. Submitted: October 13, 1993 Filed: January 18, 1993 Before McMILLIAN, BOWMAN, and MAGILL, Circuit Judges. BOWMAN, Circuit Judge. Pursuant to its zoning ordinance, the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, denied Sylvia Pentel, an amateur radio operator, permission to erect a 65-foot radio antenna tower in her yard. Pentel then sued the city, claiming that the zoning ordinance was preempted by a Federal Communications Commission ruling known as PRB-1, which requires the city reasonably to accommodate her amateur communications. The District Court granted summary judgment to the city, and Pentel appeals. Because we conclude that the city did not reasonably accommodate Pentel when it limited her to the continuing use of her ineffective 56.5-foot antenna, we reverse and grant summary judgment to Pentel. 4 t United States Court of AppealsFOR THE EIGHTH CWCUIT No. 93-1026 Sylvia Pentel, Appellant, V. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. City of Mendota Heights, Appellee Submitted: October 13, 1993 Filed; January 18, 1993 Before McMILLIAN, BOWMAN, and MAGILL, Circuit Judges. BOWMAN, Circuit Judge. Pursuant to its zoning ordinance, the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, denied Sylvia Pentel, an amateur radio operator, permission to erect a 63-foot radio antenna tower in her yard. Pentel then sued the city, claiming that the zoning ordinance was preempted by a Federal Communications Commission ruling known as PRB-1, which requires the city reasonably to accommodate her amateur communications. The District Court granted summary judgment to the city, and Pentel appeals. Because we conclude that the city did not reasonably accommodate Pentel when it limited her to the continuing use of her ineffective 56.5-foot antenna, we reverse and grant summary judgment to Pentel. A ♦«* Pentel is an communications to : licensed by the FCC and a station from I" radio antenna that x Over the next two y< radio communications and she was able t Pentel concluded th< for domestic, much ] Accordingly, I sophisticated anteni steel tower that me fully extended. Thi; professionally in specifications, was aluminum antennas.’ Pentel was una that she was violat all structures, inc! ’Pentel's propc existing set-up for antenna dissipates directional antenna increasing her abi! direction. Second, height. Pentel's ex replacement antenna, nearby trees, thus i ( I. Pentel is an amateur radio operator who uses radio communications to serve the public interest* After she was licensed by the FCC in December 1988 to operate an amateur radio and a station from her home, she installed on her roof a vertical radio antenna that reaches a height from the ground of 56.5 feet. Over the next two years, Pentel was unable to establish reliable radio communications with other amateurs across the United States, and she was able to establish only one international contact. Pentel concluded that her existing antenna thus was not adequate for domestic, much less international, communications. Accordingly, Pentel began preparing to install a more sophisticated antenna. The replacement was to be a retractable steel tower that measured 30 feet when lowered and 68 feet when fully extended. This tower, which Pentel planned to have installed professionally in accordance with its manufacturer's specifications, was to have mounted on its top two directional aluminum antennas.^ Pentel was unaware when she installed her original antenna that she was violating the city's zoning ordinance, which limits all structures, including radio antennas, to a height of twenty- 'pentel's proposed antenna would be more effective than her existing set-up for two reasons. First, Pentyl's current vertical antenna di'^sipates signals in all directions, while her propose directional antenna would concentrate and collect signals. increasing her ability to transmit and receive in a specific direction. Second, an antenna's effectiveness increases with its height. Pentel's existing antenna is blocked by trees. Her taller replacement antenna, when extended, would be at or near the tops of nearby trees, thus improving her signal transmission and reception. -2- II. We review de novo the district court's grant of sumnary judgment. United States ex rel. Glass v. Medtronic. Tnn.^ 957 F.2d 605, 607 (8th Cir. 1992). Because the parties agree that no material facts are in dispute, summary judgment is appropriate in favor of the party that is entitled as a matter of law to a judgment in its favor. See Fed. R. civ. P. 56(c); Celot . Coro, v. Catrett. 477 U.S. 317, 322-23, 326 (1986). Cases centering on zoning regulations governing amateur radio sntenna towers present a unique tension among the various parties' interests. On the one hand, a local municipality, through the exercise of its traditional police rcwers, may regulate the height and placement of radio antenna towers erected in residential districts. A municipality's motivations for such regulation include the possibilities that an antenna may block the line of sight of pedestrians or drivers; constitute prominent eyesore that also may interfere with a scenic view; fall on nearby residences; or decrease property values. Amateur radio operators, on the other hand, plainly have an interest in maintaining successful amateur communications and in sustaining a strong network of radio amateurs. The federal government's interests are aligned with those of the amateurs, for amateur radio volunteers afford reliable emergency preparedness, national security, and disaster relief communications. Because there is a direct correlation between an amateur's antenna height and her at'.iity successfully to transmit and receive radio signals, federal interests are furthered when local regulations do not unduly restrict the erection of amateur radio antennas. The FCC was attempting to referee the tension between these interests when it issued PRB-1, in which it attempted "to strike a balance between the federal interest in promoting .imateur -4- I. Pentel is an amateur radio operator who uses radio comnunications to serve the public interest. After she was licensed by the FCC in December 1988 to operate an amateur radio and a station from her home, she installed on her roof a vertical radio antenna that reaches a height from the ground of 56.5 feet. Over the next two years, Pentel was unable to establish reliable radio communications with other amateurs across the United States, and she was able to establish only one international contact. Pentel concluded that her existing antenna thus was rot adequate for domestic, much less international, communications. Accordingly, Pentel began preparing to install a more sophisticated antenna. The replacement was to be a retractable steel tower that measured 30 feet when lowered and 68 feet when fully extended. This tower, which Pentel planned to have installed professionally in accordaiice with its manufacturer's specifications, was to have mounted on its top two directional aluminum antennas.' Pentel was unaware when she installed her original antenna that she was violating the city's zoning ordinance, which limits all structures, including radio antennas, to a height of twenty- 'Pentel's proposed antenna would be more effective than her existing set-up for two reasons. First, Pentel's current vertical antenna dissipates signals in all directions, while her proposed directional antenna would concentrate and collect signals, thus increasing her ability to transmit and receive in a specific direction. Second, an antenna's effectiveness increases with its height. Pentel's existing antenna is blocked by trees. Her taller replacement antenna, when extended, would be at or near the tops of nearby trees, thus improving her signal transmission and reception. -2- /*i five feet.2 While preparing to install her new antenna, Pcntcl became aware of the city's restrictions, and in January 1991 she filed for a variance pursuant to Mendota Heights, Minn., Zoning Ordinance § 5.5 (1981). The city evaluated Pentel's application through a planning report prepared by a city staff member, and at a planning commission meeting and two city council meetings. The city then sent Pentel a letter in February 1991 tell .ng her that her application had been denied. The letter did not state any factual reasons for the denial, or what Pentel could do to gain the city's approval. In an attempt to offer Pentel a reasonable accom.modation, as required by In re Federal Preemption of State and Local_Regulations Pertaining to Amateur R;idio Facilities. 101 F.C.C.2d 952, 50 Fed. Reg. 38,813 (1985) (..odified at 47 C.F.R. § 97.15(e) (1992)) [hereinafter PRB-1], the city council granted Pentel a special—use permit that allowed her to continue using her existing antenna, which she had erected in contravention of the city's zoning ordinance. Pentel then filed suit against the city in the District Court, claiming that the city's ordinance was preempted by PRB-1 in that the city had not reasonably accommodated her. Agreeing that there were no disputed issues of material fact, Pentel and the city both moved for summary judgment. The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the city on all claims.^ Pentel appeals. The parties failed to furnish this Court a copy of § 8B.4(1) of the Mendota Heights zoning ordinance, and the city was unable to furnish a copy when contacted by this Court. We do not pursue the issue, however, because the parties agree, and the District Court found, that this section limits Pentel's radio antenna tower to a maximum height of 25 feet. In addition to her preemption challenge, Pentel raised various other constitutional challenges that are not renewed here. -3- operations and the legitimate interests of local governments in regulating local zoning matters.” PRB-1 5 22. After weighing local, federal, and amateur interests, the FCC issued a ruling that has a limited preemptive effect on local regulations. See PRB-1 «I 24. The federal courts that have addressed this ruling have upheld its preemptive effect. See. e.o., Evans v. Board of County Cprrmlrs, 994 F.2d 755, 760-61 (10th Cir. 1993); Themes v. City of Lakeside Park. Kv.. 779 F.2d 1187, 1188-89 (6th Cir. 1986) (per curiam). f Courts applying PRB-1 have discerned two means by which PRB-1 may preempt a local ordinance. First, the local regulation may be preempted on its face. The city's zoning ordinance does not conflict on its face with PRB-1 because it neither bans nor imposes an unvarying height restriction on amateur radio antennas. Se^ Evans V. Board of Countv Comm'rs. 752 F. Supp. 973, 976-77 (D. Colo. 1990); Bulchis v. City of Edmonds, 671 F. Supp. 1270, 1274 (W.D. Wash. 1987).* Second, PRB-1 also preempts a zoning ordinance that a city has not applied in a manner that reasonably accommodates amateur communications. See Evans. 994 F.2d at 761; MacMillan v.—City of Rocky River. 748 F. Supp. 1241, 1248 (N.D. Ohio 1990). The FCC refused to specify a height below which local governments could not regulate, and instead declared that “local regulations which involve placement, screening, or height of antennas based on health, safety, or aesthetic considerations must be crafted to accommodate reasonably amateur communications, and to represent the minimum practicable regulation to accomplish the local authority's legitimate purpose." PRB-1 5 25. ^Pentel's argument that the city's ordinance is void for vagueness is without merit. See'Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 357-58 (1983); Williams v. City of Columbia. 906 F.2d 994, 998 (4th Cir. 1990). -5- r Initially, wo nust discuss the extent to which this language requires nunicipalities to yield to amateur interests. Although some courts have evaluated whether the municipality properly balanced its interests against the federal government's interests in promoting amateur communications, seg Williams y, qji-v nf Calcnbia, 906 F.2d 994, 998 (4th Cir. 1990); MacMillan ,48 F. supp. at 1248, we read PRB-1 as requiring municipalities to do more—PRB-1 specifically requires the city to accommodate reasonably amateur communications.* see Evans. 994 F.2d at 762-63. This distinction is important, because a standard that requires a city to accommodate amateur communications in a reasonable fashion IS certainly more rigorous th.n.i one that simply requires a city to balance local and federal interests when deciding whether to permit a radio antenna. Application of this reasonable acconnodatlon standard, er, does not require the city to allow the amateur to erect any antenna she desires. Instead, it requires only that the city "considerf] the application, ma[k]e factual findings, and attenpt[] to negotiate a satisfactory compromise with the applicant." Howard V. City of Rnriinqame, 937 F.2d 1376, 1380 (9th Cir. 1991); see. 994 F.2d at 762 (stating that the county was willing to permit a crank-up tower, a shorter tower, or a tower located elsewhere); Williams, 906 F.2d at 997 (stating that the city suggested a limitation on the hours the antenna could be extended, and noting that the amateur could apply for a shorter antenna). Under this approach, a local regulation that impairs amateur radio communications is preempted as applied if the city has not crafted It "to accommodate reasonably amateur communications" while using consider,the FCC states that, in operator i^tere<ir^^^^ before it, it weighed federal and amateur balancina those of local governments. After app^Spriatfwfl standard that the FCC concluded was amateSr t ^ government must reasonably accommodateamateur radio communications. ^ PRB-1 22, 24. -6- "the mininun practicable regulation [necessary] to acconplish the local authority's legitinate purpose." PRB-1 ^ 25. The city infonned Pentel that her application had been denied via a baro-bones letter that did not list any bases for the denial. Because the city council failed to make any factual findings,^ see White Bear Rod & Gun Club v. City of Hugo. 388 N.W.2d 739, 742 (Minn. 1986) (holding in a case reviewing a city council's denial of a special-use permit that a cryptic listing of reasons for the denial did not constitute factual findings) ; VanLandschoot v. City of Mendota Heights. 336 N.W.2d 503, 509 n.7 (Minn. 1983) (stating that variances and special-use permits are treated identically on judicial review) , we need not consider whether, if it had, such findings would be afforded preclusive effect here, see University of Tenn. v. Elliott. 478 U.S. 788, 797-99 (1986). Although the city failed to make any factual findings, the planning report and hearings suggest four potential justifications for the city's denial of Pentel's variance application. vje now turn to those justifications. First, the city had no reason to fear that the antenna would interfere with other residents' television and radio reception; the city's planning report states that Pentel was prohibited by the FCC from causing, and that she could lose her license if she failed to correct, such a problem. Second, the city expressed concerns about the tower's safety in light of the strong winds that frequent the Mississippi River valley. Pentel presented to the city the manufacturer's ^Mendota Heights, Minn., Zoning Ordinance § 5.5(5) (1981) states that the city council's action in denying a variance application "shall constitute a finding and determination by the City Council that the conditions required for approval do not exist." This conclusory language does not provide a court with any documented, enumerated factual findings to review. The city may have made factual findings for its purposes, but it has not for ours. -7- specifications, which rate the tower secure in cighty-inile-per-hour winds. Although the city generally relics on such specifications produced by manufacturers, it declined to do so in this case. In addition, the tower was retractable, and the city could require Pentel to retract it whenever bad weather threatened. Moreover, the city in 1987 allowed a nearby amateur radio operator to erect a similar tower, and that one was closer to the operator's property line than Pentel's was to be. The record before us thus does not establish a factual basis for the city's safety concerns. Third, the city claims that it believed it reasonably accommodated Pentel because she already successfully engages in amateur communications. Pentel submitted with her application a letter of commendation for her public services. The city's planning report concluded that this letter demonstrated the adequacy of Pentel's current antenna. Pentel has pointed out, however, that the public services cited in the letter were not related to the amateur communications in which she engaged from her home. In fact, the letter m.akes it clear that the amateur communications for which Pentel was to be commended were conducted at the Air National Guard base in Minneapolis. In addition, the mayor and some members of the city council indicated in their depositions that they concluded from Pentel's statements at the hearings that she already was communicating effectively, albeit not to the extent she desired. The hearings' minutes indicate that Pentel stated that she was able to reach only sporadically various places in the United States, and that her current antenna did not allow reliable long-range transmissions. When prompted, her attorney reluctantly attempted to quantify the communications: he characterized Pentel's current chances for making contact at 40 percent, and estimated those chances at 80 to 90 percent with the improved tower. The context of these remarks and Pentel's other statements indicate that these chances of success referred to domestic communications only. -8- This quantification of Pentcl's ability to comnunicato was thoroughly nischaractcrized by the mayor at his deposition, where he stated that Pentel was able to communicate worldwide 60 to 70 percent of the time, but that she wanted to have reliable worldwide communications 100 percent of the time. One city councilmember understood Pentel's statements regarding her transmission success, but others demonstrated a fuzzy understanding, at best, of Pentel^s situation. Although what constitutes "successful" amateur communications is difficult to quantify, the evidence in the record does not justify a finding by the city that Pentel's old antenna enabled her "successfully" to engage in amateur communications, and the city was unreasonable if it so found. On the record before us, the city's first three concerns lack factual support. The city's last reason for denying Pentel's application, that the antenna tower would be unsightly, rests on subjective considerations and is difficult for a reviewing court to evaluate. This reason is undercut, however, by the city's willingness to allow Pentel to keep her present roof-mounted antenna, which reaches a height only slightly below that of her proposed antenna tower, and by the city's allowance of a similar antenna tower nearby. We acknowledge the possible aesthetic difference between an antenna tower and a roof-mounted antenna, put there is no indication in the record that the city attempted to find any compromise that would have accommodated Pentel's amateur communications. The city's decision to grant a variance that allows Pentel to continue using a wholly inadequate antenna does not constitute an accommodation in any practical sense. In addition, because the city did not reasonably accommodate Pentel, it obviously did not use the least restrictive met available to meet its legitimate zoning purposes. We therefore hold that the city's zoning ordinance as applied in this case is preempted by PRB-1. -9- III.We exhort the parties to work together to arrive at a satisfactory solution to this controversy. PRB-1 requires the city reasonably to acconnodate Pentel's needs as an amateur radio operator; what is allowed is the "minimum practicable regulation [necessary] to accomplish the local authority's legitimate purpose." PRB-1 f 25. The District Court's grant of summary judgment to the city is reversed, and the case is remanded to the District Court for the entry of summary judgment in favor of Pentel. Our decision does not mean that the city necessarily must grant Rental's application as it now stands, but it does mean that the city must make a reasonable accommodation for her interests. A true copy Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT -10- LINDQUIST & VENNUM 4^00 IDS R 00 SouTx E)GMn^ STRtrr MiS>MEAPOus Minnesota 55402-2205 Tel£Phon £ 612-371-3211 Fax 612 371-3207 NIn D cnvtrUnoQqiST Vennum & CHR*STTS?;fN 600 i7t>< STT^trr Suit ^ 2125 D enver Colorado 80202 5401 TcLEPHONf 303-573-5900 Attorneys At Law ROBERT G. MITCHELL, JR. (612) 371-3262 June 20, 1994 City of Orono R>._0 600 Kelley Boulevard j j ^ 2 2 1994 Long Lake, MN 55356 C\TY CF CFO>:C Re: Application No. 1894/1913 Greg Truchinski 1580 Fox Street Radio Tower Ladies and Gentlemen: We represent David MacMillan who lives at 387 Orono Orchard Road Souih. The David MacMillan property is adjacent to the Truchinski property on the north and east and the radio tower in question is in view from the MacMillan land extending above the tree tops as it does. We are told that the radio tower is now 85 feet tall, but that has not been verified. I am familiar with the assertion that the height of an amateur radio tower is exempt from local land use legulation under the theory that the Federal Communications Commission, a federal agency, has preempted local land use control of the height issue. This is not correct. I enclose a chart showing cases decided since the FCC action, generally known as PRB-1 adopted September 16, 1985, and the Pentel vs. MenJota Heights case filed January 18, 1993. TTiose cases show that the courts have adopted a balancing test between the interests of the local community, its residents and the land use regulations designed to protect those interests, the interests of the property owner who wishes to have an amateur radio tower and the interests of the FCC. As you can see from the chart, tower heights in the 65 foot range are the norm. The next level of legal inquiry goes to whether the local community regulates amateur radio tower heights, either generally or specifically. The answer in Orono is that there has always been a general height regulation concerning structures (i.e. 30 feet in Zone R-IA, § 10.20, subdivision 5(A)), which includes radio towers, but in addition, in your ordinance adopted on April 1, 1984, you have a specific provision which appli."s to radio towers like the Greg Truchinski radio tower. Let me explain. 4 mm rtioit] r LINDQUIST & V ENNUM k\ June 20, 1994 Page 3 level. Even if the tower is only 65 feet tall, it is objectionable to Mr. MacMillan that it be moved to an area of the Truchinski land at a higher elevation above sea level for that will make even the lower tower more visible from the MacMillan property. Therefore.' Mr. MacMillan endorses whatever municipal permission is necessary for the Truchinski tower to stay in its present location at a height above ground level of 65 feet I enclose herewith a covenant not to sue signed by David MacMillan to take Orono off the hook should there be any problem with the tower falling over onto the MacMillans* property. I think the foregoing completely and accurately sets forth the proper handlina of this matter. I therefore respectfully request the Planning Commission to take the ^ following actions: 1.Approve the tower height at 65 feet in Zone R-IA pursuant to the provisions of Orono Ordinance Section 10.20, subdivision 3(K); Grant whatever municipal approval is necessary such that the e.\isting tower may remain where it is and closer to the MacMillan lot line than 65 feet on the strength ot David MacMillan’s covenant not to sue attached; and 3.Such other action as Orono may require not inconsistent with the above paragraphs. Thank you for your consideration of Mr. MacMillan’s position. Respectfully submitted. RGM/gjg Robert G. Mitchell, Jr. cc: David D. MacMillan 1 . nifvi OlcllU Hlaintiff's Claim Tower Height Preemption?Court’s HoldingHoward v.City of Btulirtgarne937 F.2ci 1376 (OlhCir. 1991) California Denial of application to increase antenna height.51 feet Paitial preemption City Iree to deny permit as long as it tins considered the application, made factual findings, and attempted to negotiate satisbictory compromise.Giiscfike V.City of Oklahoma City 763 F 2(J 379 (1985) Oklafioma Challenge city’s tilankel height zoning restnclions. 78 feet No explicit FCC action to preempt state law.Neither federal statutes nor regulations preempt City ol Oklahoma City’s zoning regulations regarding radio antennas In ro Medina Resolution 80 18 (no Clio hero) Minnesota Application for amended conditional use permit and vaiiance. 4 at 65 feet 2 at 70 feet No. reasonable accommodation City council granted conditional use |)ermil subject to ceitain limitations, including licight. Oodony v. Incorporated Village of Sands Point 681 F.Supp. 1009 (E.D.N.Y. 1987) Now York Ctiallenged denial of zoning variance. 86 feet 0 Yes.Summary judgment denied declaring city unreasonable in limiting antenna freight to 56.5 feet. City also failed to make findings. Court ordered parties to at live at compromise. Reversed and remanded case to district court for entry of summary judgment in favor or Pentel. City’s fieight limitations of accessory buildings at 25 feet. Penlel v. City of Mendota Heights 8ih Cif. Couit of Ap|)eals Docket No 93 1026 (Oct 1993) Minnesota Challenged denial to extend antenna 11 5 feel proposed 68 leet No, leasonatile aixommodation. PRB-1 requires tire City reasonably to accomiirodato Peniel’s needs as air aiiraieui radio operator. Reversed and renranded to tire district court lor summ.riy judgment in favor ol Pentel r ( United States Court of Appeals KOK THE tlGimi CIKCUIT No. 93-1026 Sylvia Pentel, Appellant, V. City of .Mendota Heic.tts, Atoeilee. it it « ♦ ★ * -k » Appeal frcn the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. Subnitted:October 13,1993 Filed:January 13,1993 Before McMIlLIAJ,’, 30WMA.N, and M.AGILL, Cir cuit . BOVvMAiN, Circuit Judge. Pursuant to its toning ord inance, the Citv .Minnesota, denied Sylvia Pentel, a.n anateur radio operator, pemission to erect a 6S-foot radio antenna tower in her yard. Pentel then sued the city, claining that the toning ordinance was preer.pted a Federal Connunications Comissicn ruling known as PRB-1, which requires the city reasonably to accoionodate her anateur connunicaticns. The District Court granted sunnary judgnent to the city, and Pentel appeals. Because we conclude that the city did not reasonably acconnodate Pentel whe.n it linited her to t.he continuing use of her ineffective 56.5-foot antenna, we reverse and grant sunnary judgnent to Pentel. r Peri tel is 3n anateur radio operator vho uses radio ccrnunications to ser/e the public interest. After she vas licensed by t.he FCC in December 1938 to operate an anateur radio and a station from her hone, she installed on her roof a vertical radio antenna that reaches a hei-^’ht iron the ground of 56.5 feet. next two '^ears, Pentel was unable to establish relia.^le radio ccinnunications with other amateurs across the United States, and she was able to establish only one international contact. Pentel concluded that her existing antenna thus was not adequate for domestic, much less international, communications. Accordingly, Pentel began preparing to install a more sophisticated antenna. The replacement was to be a retractable steel tower t.hat measured 30 feet when lowered and 63 feet when fully extended. This tower, which Pentel planned to have installed orofessionallv in accordance with its manuracturer's soecifications, was to .have mounted on its top two directional aluminum antennas. Pentel was unaware when she installed her original antenna that she was violating t.he city^s zoning ordinance, which limits all structures, including radio antennas, to a height or twen^j— ’pentel's proposed antenna would be more effective than her existing set-up for two reasons. First, Pentel's current vertical antenna dissipates signals in all directions, while her proposed directional antenna would concentrate and collect signals, thus increasing her ability to transmit and receive in a specific direction. Second, an antenna^s effectiveness increases with its height. Pentel's existing antenna is blocked by trees. Her tal-er replacement antenna, when extended, would be at or near the tops or nearby trees, thus i.mprov'ing her signal transmission and reception. J r five feet.‘ While preparing to install her new antenna, Pentel becane aware of the city's restrictions, and in January 1991 she filed for a variance pursuant to Kendota Heights, Minn., Zoning Ordinance § 5.5 (1981). The city evaluated Pentel's application through a planning report prepared by a city staff nenber, and at a planning connission neeting and two city council meetings. The city then sent Pentel a letter in February 1991 telling her that her application had been denied. The letter did not state any factual findings, reasons for the denial, cr what Pentel could do to gain the city's approval. In an attempt to offer Pentel a reasonable accommodation, as required by In re Federal Preemption of State and Local Peculations Pertaining to Amateur Padio Facilities. 101 F.C.C.Zd 952 , 50 .^ed. .Peg. 38,813 (1985) (codified at 47 C.F.R. § 97.15(e) (1992)) [hereinafter PR3-1], the city council granted Pentel a special-use permit that allowed her to continue using her existing antenna, which she had erected in contravention of the citv's tonina ordinance. Pe.ntel then filed suit against the city in the District Court, claiming that the city's ordinance was preempted by PP.B-1 in that the city had not reasonably accomodated her. Agreeing that there were no cisputed issues of material fact, Pentel and the city both moved for summary judgm.e.nt. The District Court granted su.m.mary judgment in favor of the oitv on all claims.^ Pentel aooeals. The parties failed to furnish t.his Court a copy of § 8B.4(1) of the Mendota Heights zoning ordina.nce, and the city was unable to furnish a copy when contacted by this Court. We do not pursue t.he issue, however, because the parties agree, and the District Court found, t.hat this section limits Pentel's radio antenna tower to a maximum height of 25 feet. ^In addition to her preemption challenge, Pe.ntel raised various other constitutional c.hallenges that are not renewed here. _ T _ r ( We review de novo the district court's grant of sur.rary judgnent. United States ex rel. Glass v. Medtronic. Inc.. 957 F.2d 605, 607 (Sth Cir. 1992). Because the parties agree that no naterial facts are in dispute, sur.r.ary judgment is appropriate in favor of the party that is entitled as a natter of lav to a judgment in its favor. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); Celotex Coro, v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23, 326 (1986). Cases centering on coning regulations governing a.nateur radio antenna towers present a unique tension anong the various parties' interests. Cn the one hand, a local nunicipality, through the exercise of its traditional police powers, nay regulate the height and placenent of r^’dio antenna towers erected in residential districts. A nunicipality's notivations for such regulation include the possibilities that an antenna nay block the line of sight of pedestrians or drivers; constitute a prcninent eyesore that also nay interfere with a scenic view; fall on nearby residences; or decrease property values. Anateur radio operators, on the other hand, plainly have an interest in naintaining successful anateur ccnnunications and in sustaining a strong network of radio anateurs. The federal governnent's interests are aligned with those of the anateurs, for anateur radio volunteers afford reliable e.nergency preparedness, national security, and disaster relief connunications. Because there is a direct correlation between an anateur's antenna height and her ability successfully to transnit and receive radio signals, federal interests are furthered when local regulations do not unduly restrict the erection of anateur radio antennas. The FCC was attenpti.ng to referee t.he tension between these interests when it issued PRB-1, in which it attenpted "to strike a balance between the federal interest in promoting amateur -4- / cperacions and tde legitimate interests of local governments in regulating local zoning matters." PRB-1 ' 22. After weighing local, federal, and amateur interests, the .=-CC issued a ruling that has a limited preemptive effect on local regulations. PRB-1 ^ 24. The federal courts that have addressed this ruling have upheld 1 wla oreemctive effect.See. e.c._.Evans V. Beard of County Commlrs, 994 F.2d 755, 76C-61 (10th Cir. 1993); Themes v. Citv T;.V^c;iHP Park. Kv.., 779 F.2d 1187, 1188-69 (6th Cir. 1986) (per curiam). Courts applying PR3-1 have discerned two means by which PR3-1 may preempt a'local ordinance. First, the local regulation may be preempted on its face. The city's coning ordinance dees not conflict on its face with PR3-1 because it neither bans nor imposes an unvarying height restriction on amateur radio antennas. Evans V- Board of Countv Comm'rs, 752 F. Supp. 973, 976-77 (D. Colo. 1990); y, citv of Edmond_s_, 671 F. Supp. 1270, 1274 (W.D. Wash. 1987).“ Second, ?R3-1 also preempts a coning ordinance that a city has not applied in a manner that reasonably accommodates amateur com-munications. ^ Evans, 994 F.2d at 761; yarMiVian v. ooeVy River. 748 F. Supp. 1241, 1248 (N.D. Ohio 1990). The FCC refused to specify a .height below which local governments could not regulate, and instead declared that "local regulations which involve placement, screening, or height of antennas based on health, safety, or aesthetic considerations must be crafted uO accommodate reasonably amateur corn.. :nications, and wO rep..esent ..he minimum practicable regulation to accomplish the local authority's legitimate purpose." FR3-1 5 25. ‘■Pentel's argument that the city's ordinance is void for vagueness is without merit. See' Kolender v-—Lawson, 461 . • ' 357-58 (1983); Williams v. Citv of Columbia. 906 F. 2d 994, ,98 Cir. 1990). -5- / ( "the ninir.u.T. practicable regulation [necessary] to acccrplish the local authority's legitinate purpose." PR3-1 ^ 25. The city informed Pentel that her application had been denied via a bare-bones letter that did not list any bases for the denial. Because the city council failed to r.ake any factual findings,‘ see White Bear Pod & Gun Club v. Citv of Hugo, 388 h;.W.2d 739, 742 (Minn. 1986) (holding in a case reviewing a city council's denial of a special-use pemit that a cryptic listing of reasons for the denial did not constitute factual findings) ; VanLandschoot v. Citv of Mer.dota Heiohts. 336 N.W.2d 503, 509 n.7 (Mi.nn. 1983) (stating t.hat variances and special-use pemits are treated identically on judicial review) , we need not consider whether, if it had, such findi.ngs would be afforded preclusive effect here, see University of Tenn. v. Bllictt. 473 U.S. 788, 797-99 (1986). Although the city failed to r.ake any factual findings, the planning report and heari.ngs suggest four potential justifications for the city's denial of Pentel's variance application. We now turn to those justifications. First, the city had no reason to fear that the antenna would interfere with other residents' television a.nd radio reception; the city's plan.ning report states that Pe.ntel was prohibited by the ?CC from causing, and that she % could lose her license if she failed to correct, such a problen. Second, the city expressed concerns about the tower's safety i.n light of the strong winds that frequent the .Mississippi Riv'er vallev. rental oresented to the citv the nanufacturer's ^endota Heights, Minn., Zoning Ordinance § 5.5(5) (1981) states t.hat t.he city council's action in denying a variance application "shall constitute a finding and determination by the City Council that the conditions required for approval do .not exist." This conclusory language does not provide a court with any documented, enumerated factual findings to review. The city may have made factual findings for its purposes, but it has not for ours. -7- r Goecificaricr.s, wnich rate the tower secure ir. eichty-nile-per-hour winds. Although the city generally relies cn such specifications produced by manufacturers, it declined to do so in this case. In addition, the tower was retractable, and the city could require Pentel to retract it whenever bad weather threatened. .Moreover, t.he citv i.n 1987 allowed a .nearby amateur radio operator to erect a similar tower, and that one was closer to the operator's property line than Pentel's was to be. The record before us thus does not establish a factual basis for the city's safety concerns. Third, the city claims that it believed it reasonably accommodated Pentel because she already successfully engages in amateur ccm-.unications. Pentel submitted with her application a letter of commendation for her public ser'/ices. The city's olanninc reoort concluded that this letter demonstrated the adequacy of Pentel's current antenna. Pentel has pointed out, .however, that the public services cited in the letter were not related to the amateur communications in which she engaged from her hcm.e. In fact, the letter m.akes it clear that the amateur communications for which Pentel was to be commended were conducted at the Air National Guard base in Minneapolis. In addition, the mayor and some membiers of the city council indicated in their depositions that they concluded from. Pentel's statem.ents at the heari.ngs t.hat she already was communicating effectively, albeit not to the extent she desired. The heari.ngs' m.inutes indicate that Pentel stated that she was able to reac.h only sporadically various places in the United States, and that her curre.nt antenna did not allow reliable long-range transmissions. Vvhe.n prom.pted, her attorney reluctantly attempted to quantify the communications: he characterized Pentel's current c.hances for m.aki.ng co.ntact at 4 0 percent, and estimated those chances at 80 to 90 percent with the improved tower. The context of these remarks and Pentel's ot.her statements 'indicate that these chances of success referred to domestic communications only. -3- T-is quantification of Pentel's ability to connunicate v tbcrouqbly r.ischaracterited by tbe r.aycr at his deposition, where he stated that Pentei was able to corjr.unicatc worldwide 60 to 70 percent or the tine, but that she wanted to have reliable worldwide connunications 100 percent of the tine. One city councilner.ber understood Fentel's statenents regarding her transnission success, but others der.onstrated a fuzty understanding, at best, of Fentel's situation. Although what constitutes "successful" anateur connunications is difficult to quantify, the evidence in the record Goes not justify a finding by the city that Fentel's old antenna enaoled her "successfully" to engage in anateur connunications, and the city was unreasonable if it so found. On the record before us, the city's first three concerns lack factual support. The city's last reason for denying Fentel's application, that the antenna tower would be unsightly, rests on subjective considerations and is difficult for a reviewing court to evaluate. This reason is undercut, however, by the city's willingness to allow Pentei to keep her present roof-r.ounted antenna, which reac.hes a .heig.ht only slightly below that cf .her proposed antenna tower, and by the city's allowance of a sinilar antenna tower nearby. We acknowledge the possible aesthetic difference between nere is noan^ antenna tower and a roof-nounted ante.nna, tut incication in the record that the city attenpted to find any ccr.prcr.ise that would have acco.rncdated Fentel's a.tateur cc.rcr.unications. T.he city's decision to grant a variance that allows Fentel to continue using a wholly inadequate antenna does not constitute an aCw0...rodation in any practical sense. I.n addition, because t.he did not reasonably acconunodate Fentel, it obviously did .not use ^.he least restrictive mea.ns available to neet its legitir.ate toning purposes. We therefore hold that the city's toning ordinance as applied in this case is preenpted by P.R3-1. X ^ •we ex.-.or-- t.*>e Ferries to ■-■ork together to arrive at a s-f = 'actorv solution to tnis controversy. PRB-1 requires the city -elionably 'to accon.T.odate Pentel's needs as an anateur radio -o-rator: vnat is alloved is the •T.inirun rracticaole regulation f-ec»ssa-.-' to acconplish the local authority's legltir.ate ou-pose."” -=?.3-l s 25- District Court's grant of surir.ary ■judonent to the city is reversed, and the case is renanded to the Dis---ct court for the entry of surrr.ary judgr.ent in favor o. pen-e’ our decision does net nean that the city necessarily nust grant Pentel's apolicaticn as it now stands, but it does nean that 4, ; a reasonable accoror.odab-.on -c.. ..e- .^r.tereswj. rr.e cibv ...u.w>w a —— A true copy Attest: COVENANT NOT TO SUE David D. MacMillan and Karen MacMillan covenant not to sue the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City for any claim, damage, loss, or expense arising out of or resulting from the consequence of Mr. Greg Truchinski's antennas, or support structures unlikely to collapse, crossing Mr. David MacMillan's property line. David D. MacMillan STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ _ _ _ day of June, 1994, by David D. MacMillan. Notary Public HOLD HARMLESS AND INDExVlNIFICATION AGREEMENT ujl(iL'L f-w, harmless the fcity. the City Council, and the agents and employees of the r^r\y shall indemnify and hold City from and against all claims, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fee. which the City City Council and agents and employees of the City may suffer or for which it may be held liable, arising out of or resulting from the assertion against them of any claims, debts cr obligations in the conseqtience of Mr, Greg Truchinski’s antennas, or support struf tures unlikely collapse. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 4th day of May_________. 19_94. bv Whitney MacMillan_____ ■ AAAAA » ^ ALLISCN G. OIMLOCK ' sr.: 1 Kv (X Oi.'‘.t; ‘.tiCsoiA HE nNEP!N COiiNn' UyCt;"rn Jir 29, 19W JvWVWWVWWWVVWVVWVWAVWwi vi < 1 j * J ^ POPHAM HAIK N1FM0R.\XM2M. 330(1 P;ner Jainay Tov-er 222 Soucii Ninih Sieci Minriccpolis. Mauicscta 5f-02 (512) 533-iSOO VLA facsimile TO: FROM: RE; DATE; Jean Mabusth. Citv ’ of Orono Kevin P. Staunion^^VAf^ Truchinski CondidJnal Use Permit Application July 18. 1994 I am wnting in response to your request for advice on the above-referenced matter. You initially asked us to look into wo issues arising out of the Truchinski application. First, you asked for analysis of attorney Robert Mitchell’s June 20. 1994 letrei regarding the law 20vemin^ the Ciry*s abiliw to deny the application lor a conditional use pennit. Mr. Mitchell represents Mi. and Mrs. David D. MacMillan. Mr. Truchinski’s neiglibors. Since your original request, you have indicated that you no longer want an analysis of Mr. Mitchell s opinion. We have discontinued our v-'ovk on that analysis. Please note, however, that our preliminary analysis is not entirely consistent with Mr. Mitchell’s analysis of the issue. Let me know ’ if you would like work on this issue completed. Your second inquiry related to Mr. Tmchinski’s request for a variance regarding the location of his radio tower. .Apparently, the radio tower is locatad close enough to die adjoining property (owned by Mr. and Mrs. David MacMillan) that, were it to fall, it could fall on to the MacMillan’s propeny. pcientialiy causing damage there. .Although the current locauon of the radio tower is closer to the adjoining property than is allowed by the code (and consequently. Mr. Tmehmski needs a variance), the terrain of the applicant’s property is such that placement of the radio tower on a portion of the propeny which would comply with the code would require the tower to be positioned on higher ground than its current ocation. therebv resulting m an ultimate heigfit above sea level that is higher than the current eighL Although the neighbors at one point had objected to the height of the tower at its present location. d;ey have made it clear that they prefer the tower in its present location tor aes v- c reasons. 219/22051-98 ■7/18.'9J r ,j . J • <J ^j . t - : ' ' Consis*.£nt with this preference, they have offered to execute a covenant net to sue.' I have slieh*tly revised ±eir proposed covenant and attached it for your review. At the sane tune, wiimey MacMillan, the owner of Lhe propeny occupied by the applicant has agreed to execute a hol'd harmless and inderr.mficauon agreement. I have also revised this dccunent and anached a copy for your review. In addition to these two documents. I recommend Lhai vou ohtain'a hold harmlk^s and indemnification agreement from Mr. Tmehinsk:. I have u-tach-ran agreement for him as %vell. .All three agreements have been revised to rerlect mrTicient consideration for the promises rendered. Together, these Lhree agreements should work to insulate the City from any liabiHty in the event that the tower were to fall and cause damage on the adjoining property. It appears that there is ample factual basis for granting a variance in this instance. Aside from the fact that the affected neighbors are in favor of the variance, the terrain of the applicant’s property appears to impose a suiticient hardship to justify a variance As mentioned earlier, placement of the radio tower on a locauon of the propercy which would not require a variance would exacerbate the adverse aesthetic impact of the radio tower. Therefore, it appears that the City is entitled to grant a variance. I hope this information is helpful. Please feel free to contact me if you have further questions. cc; i homes J. Barrett, Esq. ‘ Note that, although it is helpful for David and Karen MacMillan to agree not to aue, their agreement will not be binding on subsequent owners of their property. Hence, it is critical that enforceable hold harmless agreements be obtained from Whimey Mac. Ii an an Greg Truchinski. ;i9/a:051495 7/1S.9J r oT i 4 >tif •• •• r A.w ^ ^ N COVENANT NOT TO SUE WTIEREAS. David D. and Karen MacMillan own property in the City of Orono adjacent to property ow-ned by Whitney MacMillan and located at ------------------------------ and WHEREAS. Wliilney MacMillan leases his property to Greg Truchinski: and WHEREAS. Mr. Truchinski has constructed a radio antenna and supporting sirjcture on Whitney MacMillan ’s property for which he needs a conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, the radio antenna and support strucrore are located closer to the property of David D. and Karen NfacMillan than is allowed by the Orono Code; and WHEREAS. David D. and Karen MacMillan would prefer that the radio antenna and support structure remain in their present location because movement to another location would make them more visible from the property of David D. and Karen MacMillan, NOW', THEREFORE, in exchange for Mr. Truchinski’s agreement not to move the radio antenna and supporting struemres and his further agreement to limit the height of the radio antenna and structure to a tool of 75 feet above ground level, David D. and Karen MacMillan hereby covenant and agree not to sue the Orono City Council, and the agents and employees of the City of Orono for any claim, damage, loss, or expense arising out of or resulting from the collapse of Mr. Greg Truchinski s antennas and/or support structures. David D. MacMillan Karen MacMillan STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged betorc me this-----day ot ____________^ 1994, by David D. MacMillan and Karen MacMillan. Notary Public 2:9/22051498 7/19.^4 UT lir y4 r A.W & hold harmless AiND INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT WTiEREAS. Mr. Greg Truchinsld leases property in the City of Orono from Mr. Whitney MacMillan: and Vt/TTFTJPAS Mr Greg Truchinski has constructed a radio antenna and supporting structure oTivIr. wkW MacMillan’s property for ^hich he needs a conditional use permit from the City of Orono; and WHERE \S the radio antenna and support structure arc located closer to the property of David D. and K^en MacMillan (the neighboring property owners) than is allow by the Orono Code; and WHEREAS, were the antenna and support structure to collapse, it could cause damage on the property of David D. and Karen MacMillan; and WHEREAS. Mr. Truchinski needs a variance from the City ot Orono m order to locate the radio tower and support structure in its current place. NOW THEREFORE, in exchange for the anticipated agreement of the (>ono City Council to »r’ant Mr. Truchinski a variance from the requiiements of the Orono City Code. Mr. Truchinski hereby agrees to define, indemnify and hold harmless the City, the City Counc . LT^Ta^enJ of th.e City from and against all claims, damages, los^s or cCnses anomey fees, which the City. City' Council and agents and employees of ihi City may suffer or for which it may be held liable, ansmg out ot or resu.^g j;*® assertion against them cf any claims, debts or obUgacons in consequence ot the collapse of Mr. Greg fruchinski’s antennas or support structures. Greg Truchinsld STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged betore me this _____ ■ 1994, by Greg Truchinski. day of Notary Public 21<J/2:G5U98 7/l9;^4 r r ^ V- HOLD IUR.MI.ESS AM) INDEMMFICATION AGREK.MKNT WTIEREAS, Mr. Whitney MacMillan owns property in the City of Orono which he kases to Mr. Greg Tnichinski: and WHEREAS, Mr. Greg Truchinski has constructed a radio antenna and supporting structure on Mr. WTutney MacMiUan ’s property for which he needs a condiuonal use pcnuit from the Citv' of Orono; and WHEREAS the radio antenna and support structure are located close to the Mighboring propeny of David D. and Kaien .MacMillan and is allowed by the Orono code: and WHERE AS the location of the radio antenna and support structure is closer enough to the properu' of David D. and Karen MacMillan that, were the antenna and support structure to coUapse, it could potentially cause damage on the property* of David D. and Karen MacMillan: and vy^HEREAS. the location of the radio tower retjuires a grant of a variance from the City of Orono. MOW, THEREFORE, in exchange for the anticipated issuance ot variance by the Orono Citv Council allowing the radio tower to stay in its present loc^mon. Whimey MacMillan hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, the City Counc , and the agents and employees of the City from and against aU claims, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fees, which the City. City Council and agents and eraployMS of the City may suffer or for which it may be held liable, ansing out of or resultmg from the assertion against them of any claims, debts or obligations in the consequence ot the collapse of Mr. Greg Truchinski’s antennas or support structures. Whitney MacMillan STATE OF MLXNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged betore me this ______1., 1994, by________________________ day of Notary Public 2 19.C203149S 7/19/54 (#7) #1912 TIM HILLMAN. 400 LEAF STREET - VARl.ANCES - PLIBLIC IIE.VRING (CONl'C^nJED) SmUh inquired about the old 'Vif\rHrn."ird ^ -<*inquired if Mr. ^ .1.. assistance of a couple of friends. He proposed to ha?e°lte t^^id °consuuction completed by fall and intended to complete the mienor during the winter months. Nolan commenced he was uncomfortable be reworked so that they ‘ ssible" Peterson commenced he'feit the proposed he would like to see t^ tew ^ut he felt that the variances should be eliminated plans were 4" ^ j;„„ures would be removed, and Hillman on the south side. Smith «k . |. j inquired if there pi:rnrh?c“ and Malusth responded that such limimtions are spelled out in the Municipal Code. u was moved bv Peterson, seconded by Berg, to recommend approval of #1912 Variances for Tim Hillman. JOO Leaf Street, subject to the tollowing conditions. 1. The applicant shal. ciQblish and adhere to time limits for the construction. 2. The exterior of the garage shall match the comtruction ■^’^te'ial^ house; this is to be completed prior to issuance ot a Cemficate ot Occupancy. 3. All exterior storage violations shall be removed prior to issuance of a building permit. d. The City Engineer shail review the drainage concerns and work with the applicant to resolve problems. Ayes 4, nays 2. Smith and Nolan voted nay. (,^8) #1913 GREG J. TRUCmNSKI, 1580 FOX STREET - CONDITIONAL USE PERiVHT - PLT5LIC HEARING Gree Truchinski was present and requested that he be allowed to keep the tower in its present location because it provided less of an impact on adjacent properties. Mrs. David McMillan was present and stated that the have a visual impact on their property but it would be greater if th further up the hill. She asked if the crossbars on the tower could be lo , reduce the impact on their property. mm mmsi mrt] mm RliW Rmnu Rminnwa RT?V« RiinKra KCiTt] u TJLa./—^ /<r^ /A y <J> ) REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION C/ft, ®DATE: August 17. 19?K ITEM NO.: 3 Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #1947 Sailors World, 1955 Shoreline Drive - Amended Variance/ Commercial Site Plan Review- Status of Application The application was tabled at your August 8th meeting as applicant was not in attendance. Gary DeSantis has confirmed that he will be present at your August 22nd meeting. He has also been asked to contact Camilo Castellon, the neighboring property owner, to let him also know that he will attend the August 22nd meeting. As of this writing, staff has received no written or oral comments from Mr. Castellon concerning his prelerence tor either Stalls 21 or 34 as he has advised both block his view of the lake. Please advise statt prior to the meeting if additional information is needed to assist you in making your recommendation. The original staff packet prepared for your August 8th meeting has been recopied for your convenience. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To provide conceptu;., .tu-ction to staff so that an appropriate resolution can be drafted for Council’s action at thei- ^mber 12th meeting. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: July 29, 1994 ITEM NO. Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Sailors World, 1955 Shoreline DriveItem Description: #1947 r. , • Variance/Commercial Site Plan Review - Resolution Amended Additional Exhibits K - Speed Letter, Ceil Strauss of DNR L - Site Plan of Location Approved by DNR M - Engineer's Report Brief Description of Amended Application The applicant has filed the necessary amendea variance/commercial site plan review application as directed by Council at their June 27th meeting. Review Exhibit J. Applicant s proposal involves the relocation of the storage module to Stall 21 tn an attempt to mtmmizet e visual impact upon an adjacent residential neighbor to the west. Review Exhibu The neighbor's property is identified as Parcel A. The neighboring property owner ^dy'*** *ai relocating structure to Stall 21 would still have a negative impact upon his views. Staff noted the ordinances of the City do not afford a property owner on the opposite side of the street a right to a lake view and that the City has not been made aware ot any special view easement in favor of the land owner. The applicant advised that this does not exisr. It is Mr. DeSantis intent to maintain a friendly and cooperative relationship with the adjacent neighbors. This is why he has filed for the amended variance application. Planning Commission members preferred Stalls 16 - 20, finding the area suitably screened with exisiing dense vegeiation noling also (hai placement of a smicturc to the south side of property would minimize sighting problems at access location, they also noted that only the 8 ’ side would be exposed to the roadway with the use ot Stalls 17-^0. Staff reviewed the concerns of the Department ot Natural Resources noting that they Exhibit I. Stalls 16 - 18 are located within the DNR 50' required lakeshore setback. The Planning Commission unanimously approved the amended allow sIL World-to relocate the 8' x 20' storage module now Stall 16 17 18, 19. 20 or 21 and directed statt to contact the DNR to determine what sta would t; aceepmble for the reloc.ion of the struemre and for staff to make an -'js- landscaping needs and safety issues regarding visual impact ot struciuic lot line. Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 3 July 29, 1994 ^1947 Sailors World. 1955 Shoreline Drive Review Exhibits K . d L. Ceil Strauss of the DNR has approved either Stalls 19 or 20. Review Exhibit M, staff met with the Engineer at the site to review any sighting issues with the use of Stalls 19, 20 or 21. We both recommend against the use of Stall 20 because of potential hazards with the side loading doors adjacent to access drive to marina. Stalls 19 and 21 would not impact sighting at intersection Existing landscaping will not provide desired screening of structure. Evergreen type plantings were recommended by Planning Commission and they asked that a landscape plan be provided by the end of August with a planting schedule. Comparison of Stalls 19 and 21. Stall 19 1. Structure located within 0-75' lakeshore setback. 2. Loss of use of Stalls 16 and possibly 17. 3. Less visual impact as 8’ side e.xposed to County road. 4. No sighting problem at intersection. 5. Location acceptable to neighboring property owner. Stall 21 1. Struemre located out of lakeshore setback. 2. No loss of additional stalls. 3. More visual impact ^ 20 ’ side exposed to County road. 4. No sighting problem at intersection. 5. Location not acceptable to neighboring property owner. Options of Action To deny request to amend variance Application #1874, OR To approve applicant’s amended variance application and to approve Stall___as new location for 8' x 20 ’ storage module requiring landscape plan with planting schedule of evergreen plantings by August 22. 1994 Council meeting. COUNCIL ACTION RLt^IJESTED: To provide conceptual direction to staff so that an appropriate resolution can be dratted for Council’s action at their August 22nd meeting. Isv To: From: Date: Subject: Orono Planning Commission Members Mavor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator July 12, 1994 #1947 Sailors World. 1955 Shoreline Drive - Amended Variance/Commercial Site Plan - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances 1. Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) and Section iv/.41. Subdivision 10 (D) - Hardcover within 75-250’ setback area. Total area = o.lOO s.f .Mlowed = 1,525 s.f. or 25% E.xisting = 5.100 s.f. or 83.6% (approved in Orono Resolution No. 2891) Proposed = 5,100 s.f.. no change proposed New strucmral hardcover is e.xchanged for non-structural hardcover totaling 160 s.f.. this was also approved in Application #1874 2. Section 10.41, Subdivision 2 - All building permits within the B-2 zone must be approved by Council. 3. Section 10.41, Subdivision 5 (A) - Variance. Required = 48 Existing = 42 (approved in Resolution No. 2891) Proposed = 41 (Application #1874 resulted in loss of two stalls) 4. Section 10.41, Subdivision 9 (B) - Required yard areas (land.scape - green space area). A. Front yard. Required = 30' Existing = 10’ Proposed = 10’ Variance = 20’ or 66% (original substandard setback involved only parking areas and now structure is proposed at 10’ or at edge of exi.sting landscape area) r Zoning File #1947 July 13, 1994 Pace 2 5. Section 10.41, Subdivision 10 (C) - Setback variance for siructure Required setback = 50 ’ ^ Proposed = 10 ’ ^ Variance = 40 ’ or 80% List of Exhibits A “ Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners ’ List D - DNR Letter 12/13/93 E - Minnetonka Center for the Arts Letter 10/2S/93 F - Planning Commission Minutes 11/15/93 G - Council Minutes 12/13/93 H - Resolution No. 3371 I - Original Site Plan J - Amended Site Plan Description of Request In December of 1993, Council granted approval of multiple variances to allow the installation of an 8’ x 20’ storage module in the street yard of Sailors World as shown in Exhibit I. The module was to be installed within parking stall 34. Review E.xhibit J, the amended plan now locates the storage module within parking stall 21. At the June 27th meeting of the Council, Mr. DeSantis and the neighbor to the immediate west acmss the street from the facility, appeared before the Council. Refer to Exhibit B, the location of the neighboring property owner’s property is shown as Parcel A. Mr. DeSantis advised that he wanted to maintain a friendly, cooperative relationship with the adjacent neighbors and advised Council that the property owner was concerned because his view ot tlie lake would be completely blocked by the new marina facility and the storage tacility. If structure was moved further south, the new location would provide him a view' of the lake. The ordinances of the City do not afford a propeny owner on the opposite side of the street a lake view, only adjacent residential landowners. To staffs knowledge there is no view easement in favor of the landowner over the marir.a property. Council immediately advised Mr. DeSantis that he would have to apply for the necessary variances for the City to reconsider the proposal. r Zoning File #1947 July 13. 1994 Paee 3 Review of Current l*roposiil The module would now be located 10' from the street lot line. Application #1874 proposed a 28 ’ setback. 'Fite storage module has doors on both sides of the structure. Planning Commission members were under the impression that the storage facility would be accessed only on one side Review Exhibit J. The storage module will now abut landscaped area along the west/sireet lot line. Review E.xhibit I, note that an existing planting will be removed along the north side with the installation of the storage imxlule. Applicant proposes plantings witl'-n the 10 ’ landscape area and along the south and north side. Special care must be given to any plantings within the 10 ’ wide landscape area because of the sighting issues at the intersection with the County road. As structure must be accessed on both sides, there will be a need to provide adequate space to facilitate access along the west side of structure. The storage module will occupy one parking stall as opposed to original proposal that resulted in the loss ot two stalls. Review E.xhibit E, note letter from Minnetonka Center for the Arts. Review Exhibit D. The DNR limits approval of any impiovement to no net increase in imperv ious surface. Note the module will be extended northward within a portion of a non hardcover area. Applicant must provide for a non-hardcover surface in another area to offset increase of approximately 20 -b square feet of new hardcover. Issues for Consideration 1. How should landscaping be addressed adjacent to curb cut^ at intersection ot County- Road? ... limit on maximum growth height to 3’? ... other.^ 2.If plan is approved, applicant must designate non-hardcover area to ottset 20-some square feel expansion of structural hardcover placed over existing non-hardcover. 3.Applicant has submitted this revised plan at the request ot an adjacent property owner who claimed visual irap.ici of an 8' hiiih. 8' x 20' storage module il placed within parking stall 34. Does the fact that the property owner has no legal claim to a view ol the lake have any bearing on your consideration? 4.Does the fact that the structure is accessed on both sides impact the tinal location o structure on property? Are there additional safety concerns with moving structure closer to street lot line? 5.What options for improvement do Planning Commission members prcacr.^ A N' CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION A' I /r Initial Application Fee S200.00 ($50. OQ_per-each^ additionaLv|^ance) ^^jeflgwaPvariance Fee $100.(X^^’ CIT(no'cBange from^dngin^ application) Variance for non-conforming structures $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY ESTORMATION . Site Address_____/T>S~vS~ ^Cnnrc- >V> <> •_______________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)___________________________ Attach legal description to a^lication if not included on required surv'ey. Date Property Acquired /*7 ^ I,—_______________________(mo4^year)^ rTTv ,-r ■---^*7I » u*? c;'.c'f♦w ^ l. C L'l ♦ a Lu * * ^ I ' ‘ ? l ‘ M * » 11 -•*? •'la!V'A euM I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ___residential ___other (specify) Zoning District: _______________________________ \ r Z/' ^ //, /A Phone (home) ^ ^ /V \ vVn \ySJjPhone(work) Address:7~f5~5^ SK.\Tf f«^<. . / Cit>’:~ _______Zip: 5~S~~> .APPLICAi^ Name ( A OW^NER (i^^ferent than applicant) Name f._____ Phone^home) Phone (work) Address:Citv:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request indetail:____ Estimated Construction Cost S (attach additional sheets if necessary) i vv • vV ,V A W't V^V .-vOv'C?.' c f .* VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot .Area Lot Coverage__ ___Lot Width _X. Hardcover ___ /^-^tback: FrontSide Rear ^ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) 0 C HARDSHTP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical diffii^lty or unusual proper^ conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:, ho .i NC -T^cL A va.(tfAcr — * ^ C" f y<'t‘ 6c Z<i/ ^/'c . C . /-li* /Of ff e fC .-7 (attach additional sheets if necessary) MM om; 09/09/«■y^!ikra\ bo2 ^ 1^'-V •V.3r:^.1r-r ;‘.i•4 PROP AOOR •?;0Rner nahc •^taxpayer :>.< rIh , 10-117-23 <#2 0005 *01930 SMORELINC DR R C STIERNA I P A STIERNA TAXPAYER >;• ROBERT C I PATRICIA STIERNA . v‘>i; |UHE/AODR*» 1950 SMORELUJE DRHAVZATA M4 55591r*'' 1 ^ «■ .'.i’ •'. **• i i. •.(; •... • ■ ■ 1-'''- ■K PMPikmn I UttHEPIM CCXJMfV t'ROl’ERrV lUrORMATIOtl SVvlttl PROPERTY 0HIIER3 LIST58 10-117-25 42 000701940 DHOPELIHE OR A R T4ETTLES 1 A T 44ETTLES ALAN NETTLES A A4t4E NETTLES 1940 SHOREL144E DR HAYZATA H24 55591 REPORT 440. P14SS401 PAOE 758 10-117-25 42 001401955 SHORELINE DR09MER NAHE'• SAILORS HORLOi r;taxpayer HTXA marina a yacht club 144C 1..' NAME/AOORt 1955 SH0RELI44E DR HAYZATA MN 55591I • I ■ » # * S‘i • • r • > •/■‘ PROP ADDR 0»t«R NAME TAXPAYER V ' NAME/ADOR • MINNET04 ;i. f vi V - - • • 58 10-117-25 42 0022 01960 SHORELINE DR SMITH’S BAY MARINA INC SMITH'S BAY MARI44A INC 11708 HAYZATA BLVO MINNETONKA MN 55545 ■:;vV’-' , . w ■r i’-'- •;i vvj‘C'‘!V!" •iW: •• • ;•-. •• •. ‘ I A’/ • r •• I • . • • , ’• • ' *1 u*j I • ■ I 1 . * * 'MB ’*;?• V * *# - • i - *r :!V * ' ’ V* • ’A- • ' I • ’ . ■\ y ^n I *0/ ' ■ I . ‘if -fi v;*.. »•.* • ‘ I . t-'. . • sJ58 10-117-25 42 001201950 SHOREL144E DR C A M L CASTELLON CAHliC A lUiRIA L CASTELLON 19FJ CHORELINC DR 5L59158 10-117-25 42 001500058 ADDRESS Ut4ASSlGNE0J V SPATES ETALMTKA MAR144A A YACHT CLUB INC1955 SHORELINE OR HAYZATA 4M 55391 W.VZATA 4fl458 10-117-25 42 002101980 SPATES AVE 0 CREAR A M B CREAR DA44IEL CREAR 1980 SPATES AVE HAYZATA MN 55591 U•J TOTAL BATCH 002 00007 IT^ • 1 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTAT1044 OF 1NF0RMATI044 AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE 44E 4444EP141 COLB4TY DEPARTME44T OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY K440HLE0GE A44D BELIEF. ’• V BWV - STATE OF ^.department of natural resources ¥I^R0 waters - 1200 WAR.VER ROAD, ST. PAUL, Mli PHONENO. 772-7910 December 13, 1993 Hike Gaffron City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 RE: SAILORS WORLD (#1874), 1955 SHORELINE MINNETONKA (27-133, 26), CITY OF ORONO, HENNEPIN COU14TY Dear Mr. Gaffron: T have coments on the following land use application which is Lheduled for public hearing before the City Council on December 13, 1993. The aoDlicant originally requested several variances to place two I?orace unTts on a portion of the property that is currently veqetited. I have reviewed a revised plan that involves; placing one storage unit on a current parking spot, a parking agreement with Art Center, and no net increase in impervious surface. The DNR has no objection to the city approving this revised plan subject to the conditions in the city's Notice of Planning Corrunission Action dated November 17, 1993 . Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, A Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist c: Gary DeSantis, Sailors World Ed Pick, Shoreland Hydrologist Lake Minnetonka file 27-133, #26 DEC 1 4 ICqr AN EQUAL OPPCRTUNIT'' EMPLOYER O MINNETONKAcenter for the arts 2240 North Shore Drive • Wovzat.t. ■'•'N 33191 • ibl.) 4- 3-/ 361 /f■ //, /} / /; CL^ October 28, 1993 (^yD Mr. Gary De Santis Sailors World P.O. Bux 176 Crystal Bay. MN. 55323 Dear Gary: the following arrangements would apply: 1. Your personnel will p^rk cars, designated with a Sailors World Parking Pass, along the eastern side of our east parking lot, adjacent to Briar Street. 2 Parking will be available most weekends, with the exception of the weekend when the parking lot is rented to a private party. If the Art Center is planning any additional, majo requiring parking on weekends, wo will, of course, let you know in advance. 3. Liability for any damage that occurs will remain the responsibility of Sailors World. 4. Sailors World will give the Art Center an option to use its parking area during the annual Holiday House fundraiser at the Art Center, which is generally held the week before Thanksgiving. Gan/ we appreciate vour offer of compensation, but invite you instead to make a charitable coniribulion to our Annual Fund (information enclosed). Your busines^ name would then appear in our Annual Report and newsletter, as a supporter of the ah Center. Thanks, Gary. -Sincerely, \ Ann Larsen Executive Director planning C0IV1IV1ISSI0N MINUTES CITY OF ORONO NOVEMBER 15, 1993 jSiSfid Gary DeSantis/Sailors World . . 1955 Shoreline Drive - Variances - continuation of Public Hearing Buiidinq and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth gave the staff report. Gary DeSantis, the applicant, was present and explained tne lack of storage space was a hardship ana he requested the Planning Commiss.cn to approve his request. He stated the DNR was concerned about locating the proposed storage module as tar away from the water as nossible He stated he was willing tc provide landscaping and screening to buffer the module ?ror^ me v^w fmm the roadway. He stated that Ceil Strauss of the DNR had said she would send a letter to the Plannino Commission stating that the proposed location was acceptable. Mr DeSantis discussed the exterior appearance of the building and exola.neo wny it was not feasible to make an addition onto the existing builcmg because of the existing winoow ana door placement. Commissioner Nolan inquired how much the setback variance would be if the mociuie wer^ placed as shown on the plans and Ms. Mabusth responoed that it would requite a -0 setback variance. Mr. DeSantis stated that the position of the module ^ was the position selected by the DNR. He noted that it could be moved ir the Planning Commission preforred 3 diffGrent loc3tion. Chairman Schroeder stated he was sympathetic to the applicant's supportive of the proposed location. Commissioner Peterson inquired ™.® movable, and Mr. DeSantis responded that it could be moved frorn one it were placed directly on the asphalt and not on a foundation. Ms. Mabus. n^saniis that the structure was designed to blend in with the principal structure. Mr. Debantis reviewed the proposed landscaping to screen the storage module. Commissioner Nolan inquired about the trash enclosure and whether the or the ^ occupied by a walkway was necessary, and Mr. DeSantis responded -'^'^^^tively^ Discussion ensued regarding the feasibility of constructing an addition onto he ^>^'st building. Mr. DeSantis explained why this was not practicable because of the plac.m windows and doors in the principal structure. Commissioner Lindquist moved, Peterson seconded,._t;o °i:i,:;c:lv setback to allow a storaoe module to be pla ced on Space without a oyn on the asphalt, subject to the following stipulations: 1, The applicant provide a landscape plan for staff review and approval for screening o' the proposed storage module. 2. The doors of the storage module face away from the street. Commissioners Schroeder, Nolan, Peterson, and Lindquist voted aye . Motion ca (#6)1874 GARY DESANTIS/SAXLORS WORLD, 1955 SHORELINE DRFV'E - /4i:>TAMrT ’ - resolution no. 33/1VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO Gaffron reviewed u^e staff report, and noted tliat staff and Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance request. Gar/ DeSantis stated he had invited the Counciimembers to come out and look at uhe site and noted that he was concerned about being able to maintain the site as he would Lke to, ^ keep it neat without the storags module. He requested he be allowed to install L.e sc.eer.in, on the north and west sides ot the module. Councilmember Hurr arrived at 8:00 p.m. Goetten stated she had visited the site. Jabbour inquired what the module would be used to smre and Mr. DeSantis resoonded that it would be used to store seasonal equipment a.u would be utilized year around. .Si list of the items mat would be storeo was inciudea in th Council pac.ket. Jabbour moved Hutr seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3371 approving jlST-S Variance for Gary DeSantis/Saiior's World located at 1955 Shoreline Drive suoiec: to the tollowing condicions; 1. j. Tne applicant shall combine the two lots into i single parcel. The Council remms the right :o revisit the variance request. Tne exterior of the storage module shall be painted tfie same color as the principal structure. Tne aoolicant snail m.aintain a parking agreement with the Center. .A.yes A, nays 0. Mayor Callahan commented that he felt the storage module should have oeen when the main building was done. Mr. DeSantis agreed, but note a the structure and not allow it to fall into disrepair. (*.#7) #1887 RODNEY J. BATZLAEF, 1115 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - RENEW .AL VARLANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3372 It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Goetten. to Rno/south. approving the variance renewal #1887 for Rodney J. Batzlarr at 11 Aves 4, nays 0. CITY of ORONO Wi RESOLLTIOiN OF THE CITY' COUNCIL Q O rjr •?’ NO. ^ ^ -_______ RESOLljTIOX GILYNTCsG VARLYNCES TO MUMCIP.YL ZONTNG CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIYTSION 2, SECl’ION 10.41. SUBDI\TSION 5 (A), SECTION 10.41. SUBDrVHSION 9 (B), SECTION 10.41. SUBDIVISION 10 (D) .AND SECTION 10.56. SL'BDIVTSIO.N 16 (L), A.ND PER SECTIO.N 10.41, SUBDDTSIO.N 2 .APPROVES .AN .AMENTIED CO.MMERCLAI> SITE PL.AN FOR S.ATLORS WORLD. LNC. FILE .NO. 1874 WTTF.RFAS Gar-' DeSantis of Sailors World Marina and ^acht Club, Inc., a V™=sot2 corporation (heremafier 'the applicant-) has an interest _in the properP.- located at 1955 Shoreline Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "tne City ) and legally aescribwd as follows: Exhibit .A. attached (hereinafter "the propert}-"): ana WIIERE.AS. the aoplicant proposes the installation of an S x S x 20 accessory storaoe module on the orooem-. which module constitutes structural hardcover, an encroachment in the'reouired street yard, and which will reduce the number or parking spaces on the property . and therefore has aoplied to the City for variances to Mumcipal Zoiimg Code Se.tio _ Subdivision ’ Section 10,56, Subdivision 16 (U and Section 10.41. Suooivision 10 (D) to pe™ t Tchanve in the nature of existing hardcover in the 75-:50’ zone which contauis a. 100 s f or S3 of/hardcover as approved in Resolution ,N'o. 3S91 of the City Council, where ody I's'cs . f or 25fc hardcover would normally be allowed, and for a variance to Section 10^-1. Subdivision 5 {A) to allow reduction of one parking stall trom tne 42 stalls approved m R*solution No. 2S91 which eranted a variance to the 48 stall requirement tor tms site. 4 ^ a varrlcTto Section 10,41,-Subdivision 9 <6) to allow a 28' ^‘-;.>“-/™=5Vcuon 0 df smicmre wh»r ‘* a '^0’ street setback would normally be required, and per Section 1U.41 “lion 2 s^eks 'approval of an amended cotrunercial s.te plan to allow the installation oi said Storage module. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLItED by the City Council of Orono, findings 1.This application was reviewed as Zoning File Pase 1 of 6 •^v% Jii CITY of ORONOMSOUTION OF THE CITY COlTfCILNO, 3 3 7 r The Orono City Council granted variances and af v-a: for a comme ! . .:e plan review for Smith’s Bay Marina and \acht CIuu. Inc (Zoning Application #1592) per Resolution No. 2S91 on October 22. 1990. Pursuant to that resolution, the current property owners constructed a manna clubhouse and have comnleted the maioritv of the site improvements required with that approval. The applicant has requested approval for installation of an S’ .\ S’ x 20 ’ removable storage module on the propen>'. based on the following stated hardshios; A A hardshin exists due to B. ack of eouioment storage for marina related A 4 ^ activities to effectively run the marina business. This lack of storage results in an inabilitv to accommodate customers demauds for facilities to store personal boating equipment. The am cunt and type of items proposed to ’oe stored in this module are enumerated in the applicant s letter to the Orotio Plarining Commission dated November 1. 1993 and incorporated herem by rererence. C. .A small exvensioii to the existing building could be ot dimension no more than 6' x 6’ in area v. ithout encroaching on existing wmdows, doorways, or extending in.o uie sue parking area. The site layout makes it very’ difficult to relocate the sua" ; parking space whicn vvill be eliminated by placement of the storage m^' ale without a significant reconfiguration of the narkmg layout or encroachment into the designated non hardcover landscape areas. To compensate for loss of this space, which reduces the number of spaces to 41 where 42 were approved via Resoluuon 2891 and 48 would normally be required, the applicant has provided a lener of agreement w'ith Lhe .Minnetonka .An Center approximately l/^ mile w'est or the marina, for ovenlow parking. The proposed location of the storage module in parking stall #34 of the previously approved commercial site plan, places the module outside Lhe 0-75 ’ lakeshore setback zone where no structures would normally oe allov/ed, thus meeting the major objection the DNR had to this proposal. Page 2 of 6 ial sits lication to that id have aval. X 20’ stated related storage ities to ale are lission a more rways. wnicn jficant d nor*- educes and 4S at with la, for ’iously eshore ng the ,//o Oi CITY of ORONORESOLUTION OF THE COT COUNCILNO. 3 3 7- ’4!?1 ho5>" /. 6 The proposed location of the storage module located 2S’ from the Counr> Road 15*ri2ht-of-vvay where a 30' street yard is normally required, is a location that is extremely visible from said road, and therefore visual screening of the module by use Of eversreen type vegetation is imperative lo rcOuwS the n..Lati\e visual impacts. It is the clear intern of .Municipal Code Section 10.41. Subdivision / (b ’l that required landscape areas not be used for the storage of boats, equipment, or materials. Tne proposed storage module will provide storage such that none ot the landscape areas per the approved site plan need be encumbered with storage of any hind. S This nropenv currentlv consists of two tax parcels. The boundary ’ Ime between the t^:o parcels abuts parking stall #34. Tms leaves virtually no setback oetween the parcel side lot ime and the module. Technically this requires a side setoa... variance unless the two propenies are legally combined. The propemes snouiu therefore be combined. 9 The Citv' Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Plannmg Commission, repons by City^ start, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on me healm. saiety ana welfare of the community. 10 The Citv' Council fmds that the conditions existing on this property are pe'.uliar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; mat arantmg the variance would not adversely affect traffic conaitions. light, air nor ^ose a fire hazard or other danger to neighbormg prope.ny: would nm merely Lrve as a convemence to the applicant, but is necessary- to a levi.te demonstrable harashm or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a suostannal propsr^^ right of the applicant; and would be in keepmg with me spint and mten. or th. Zonins Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER .MST) CO.NUITIONS 1-. j .. /->r mor» nf fh* findin'^'' 'ted above, the Orono City CouncilBased upon one or mor^ ot m,. iinam^- .. o* v 9* v '>rvTnFi T’^nrove^ the installation of an S x o x ..U herebv grants the vanances as set forth abov., md wypro - Pass 2 of 6 MCt iara trifltj mvmimbhummsm MCK«] [•SW railDJ Simile Mmt CITY of ORONORilSOLLTlON OF THE Cm* COUNCIL NO.33 10. 11. Tiion of or non-comoliance with any of ±t terms and conditions or this r oiution shaU constitute a violation of the zonmg coae. snail auiomatiwall\ temmaie any authonty granted hermn. and shall be punishable as a rmsdemeano'-. The --ndersi<»ned apolicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the tejms ^'this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assi,^. hLSy ag.ees to th.e recording of this resolution m the Cham ot Title or th. property. Adopted by the City Council of th.e City of Orono. Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 13th day of December. 1993. ATXBST: 'b^<<thy M. IMn. City ClerK Edwjird J. ■l/l /] / N Troperty' Owner (s)!C7✓ / S'T'ATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregomg wes ^ rtrsHi •KIIlTtJ Msaw o c? »*?o O t exhibit a Comniencing at the = ay^’li^rorco'unty Road Ho. 7 -;rof?.oSrfa:L “yi.J^s laV ‘ -0^4- Whence North 37 thence North 53 of North line o^ Gi. ^ „ ^oo^ thence Southwesterly 4^ decrees 4 5 minutes «esw 1 . g* -•ncludinc accretions,. "OP-Aninutes West . 5 f eet to b ?,nn.na (hereinafter "the ON LAKE MINNETONKA", Hennep... toun.,, pzovQi^^Y*^) f 3.nd '•r- <y FROM SPEED LETTER-V, -H^S-oSiq <!r D \/Z;v^t3 iUB/ECf, J f «r « MESSAGE :::*>-' ■ -fe I . I K vJ 11-^y _i_ <—J O'JUv N rzk.jL^JLa^ ^ io^ CL-c:^ u fi "Zi-—^ *Z-0 cx ly —^ ^ / ]L Uy-y'-'-J'-"*'^ rTT 4o ~i~!^s \ kvO «-i. ;« Ml « :« *4 ■ nfowjoo — • «ot .............. MAOC U SA >4- 1.^0:iU/ DATE T=f/i '=1 /SIGNED, V C ' RCCIPIfST DETAIN V\HiTE COPv R£TLRS Pis^ CQPV .,.0;------icOUM ) Y-....I K OAj)-Mo.• . -i Wq'iWyu thy t( is, t..ff /rj .V*; i%)V/ \<fl {}•*%f of ir^it p'%1 3 UfJ y/%(}j c /i\t; ef fXi.fnv^nf----^-^'f)fr'oA^k -I/I «i ni’ ^ \k y.4'‘”'° __f- .\f,%\.J^0 ..__^VI. T - T - -..■ 'jKj' \ ..... rti^) fr^'j/ "wjU?;--i^_r“*""''■ It-:'. .',..I I hhhi I r —fci \/'ift) <r0»o»J.f.rJ-/-d’ t \*» V>,('? ■Yrfi'i <I^r O'\ r. /.\:t, A 7--.....-1......i\ ' * r^* * jj"* < ^ uri y L ■:. rtTiX €^mo - P'.'ti'C(M r-v |lfi *A I s'-5t'Y • \ «I?.--A w lUutfwif' - J , ,A ;>.vV'X/’^ Si <f \i* *1 o \ ^— -I \tr\ siv/rAy' l?C ^ " (<?iv • nAituMo/H,v ('<>':.r.y..\ < M «> , i . y~ y .-^.i t'M.'crv'))\ I r;\___ \.:'!_ .M ■: I ^-'/i'/)V^f]i y \ «. * I *v-« I APR.t.\?-YSV'i pi y.* o \ *^ M V I '?\ C \ » \" f \ .^ |fA\ ■ \.A.. Vv V'*''-'- V V Uinr^ UMi»- \\' •■' 'f y. - n- V'.—J—X,,-- ' — 'T-.I. "A yv^ jyk rop» 'N___:/, /‘ r,»tHCUYL Smt'C.lUHE } \''^}:^ - VY \ V { 1 .. \ V ;V \ ;a * •_ t TW ^; \ .A i {I'fToriMti t rtAxi*. S L /ir«il«y ^ ^ - •»—- -*• *• -. f •^ 1 A£s1l -Mte-ss - Y|i IW : ' "• rif. .^1. -r/ V»- rp fi-r ;.* / . J • ; o i Y : ' 'i \ u/rn\Uvu. ^ L » \%-• -1 »/ ^ Niy 'Ic.s t*Ht^ /> • * '.s.V- n \\© s h.] v:syil I ^AY'4''M '■ ^-1 \\- ‘-aV- IV' // cvcc< M \ t- Y© - ArYS'if' 0<x -' ••; -viC^A'-A '/ » .• •' /.*%%v\ r%*w Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & AssociatesEngineers * Architects August 3, 1994 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Sailor’s World File No. 139-Gen C PCdscer Pf •JCltC'' C. AnCCfA Vjrvr PIPC'MT I PIf Cooa. Pf VcTii I Scyti P| PcCPT a 5cnu-<c^ Pf V ftef^ C PA ra'tr A WrVfcTJ P£A CofVon. PC fcert I PVPf-f pf W ^«Pf. »ca UMMOrj PCPLJitK AiA J#fry A 9o^fS9^ Pf VAft A h#n«rt, P|T liu(m«rv\ PI Pfr»0^il ff AAdMaA. A C pfTPtsrrjs A. p|PTtjpnc j kr^ee*^ Pt, MarfAet Pf A^s M A ic PT*^cn•Jl XW ^len. P« C. Ly*XP Pt Pt□ PP'ttHh. P4 SCOIt i A-Jjntt, PfP AAcr-ari Pfv#r« I Ml pfM«r« AQjry w Monen. Pf Pau a Qjrnon. A jA. Or^*t« i Cc^tTaa Pfc A «KH PSProp jL Ciff>M«i(. PC lU*t 3 \t»kl PC V ei f »f k. P^tK? C'»«« Pf I PfGary a Pff ’bofl Feur Pf Pen I nc* ®£ Do.v«i J S pw Pf0 OjKJ^lOr Pf CeclPo OMft PIflMt 0 Hf jf'. PI Jgnn P Ge«vf Pt CAJAM a fTtuson Leo V pp»iMrs*y Hjr«n .M C'MP jam« f {ngrorct Dear Jeanne, We have inspected the parking lot at Sailor’s World on Shoreline Drive with respect to the proposed location of the storage building. Either of the two parking spaces, 19 and 21, are acceptable locations for the storage building from an engineering standpoint, as they do not interfere with the access to and from the lot. Space 21 will eliminate one parking space, but will not solve the lake view problem. Space 19 has better screening, but this location may eliminate two or three parking spaces due to the difficulty of access to the corner spaces. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, LNC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. ' V. ^ . IDepartment Approval:Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:D.ATE: Aueusi 18. 1994 item no.:' ^ ^----------Agenda Se^ioi^ Zoning vO V..di C rte,n Description: <^1951 KendricklCrdrose. 50 Cris.ifori Circle - Va™nce-TRS;;iUli^^^c. Applicalion: Rcquesi for side setback variance to constntct roont/deck/stairway addition. List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Area Topography C - Notice ol Planning Commission Action D - Memo and Exhibits of 8/11/94 thtTwrveaT old "Il'T ‘ ">e s«=cond owner ofthis WO year old residence, and requests a side setback variance to allow construction of a family room, deck and stairway to be located 31.4’ from the south lot line where a 50' setback s 'iorm^*Iy required. Applicant s stated hardships note that while the site consists of 23 acres granted a front setback variance lor the original construction, and placement of the house un against the side setback line. Applicant notes the layout of the house and adjacent topography >ields no other reasonable location for the addition. He funher notes that e.xiting topography Zoem Tnl for the adjacent propeny approximately 150’ from applicaZ's tore neiZbor ' invisible from any ♦ « Planning Commission Recommendation nginal house location variance were equally applicable to this addition, and that the 31 4’ ^nback meets the standards set up for the adjacent Cristifori Woods PRD Planning Commission also agreed that the likelihood of the hiture residence to the immediate south of the Stol'V'' topography section and sketch attached as Staff Recommendation A resolution rellecting the Planning Commission recommendation is attached for Council COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: rc V lew Proposed .Motion Moved bv , seconded by , to adopt Resolution ___granting approval for a side setback variance for the proposed addition for Kendrick M^s'e\t 50 Crislitori Circle. Vote.* uves, navs. A. The site consists of 23 acres but the topography has placed severe limits on the building site. B. The location ot the kitchen within the icsidence limits the proposed family room expansion to the east and south. C. Extensive vegetation exists along the south lot line and the natural building site for the adjacent property would be approximately 150 ’ or more south from the applicant’s property. D. The setback proposed at 31.4’ is no less than the minimum 30’ side setback approved for lots within the adjacent PRD of Cristifori Woods. E. The existing house was placed 75' from the west lot line rather than the standard 100 ’ via a variance granted in 1992, and at ohe 50’ south ; Je setback line due to steeply sloping topography and to minimize erosion and the need for major cutting into steep elevations. F. Severe slopes to the east and north required placement of die house at this location in order to minimize the impact on existing dense vegetation. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by Ci;y staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. '’ he City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to otb-r property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adverse^ 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 r-.-'Mcant, but is necessar>' 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 u.e City. Page 2 of 5 r CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.27, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a family room addition, deck and stairway to be located 31.4’ from the south side lot line where a 50 ’ setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions: 1. 3. 4. Construction shall adhere to the site plan and construction plan attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. 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 (August 22, 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 applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 22th day of August, 1994. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 5 . STATE OF MINNESOTA ) % COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 22nd day of August, 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 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) 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 davof , 199 ___, before me a Notary Public I within and for said County, personally appeared I known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) e.xecuted the same as his (their) free act and deed. . ! Notary Public Pace 4 of 5 ■tr r 1^' i' p Notice co^LMISSlON Bay. MN 55323 ACTION^ '^. v-pndrick B MeIrose~ COPIES TO: Bruce Bren ^ K p!.h 106 Broadway Avenue So.2626 Crosby Road \ ' Wayzaia, MN 55391 Wayzata. _____ TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: 8/15/94 VOTE: 4 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted, NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is contirmed as: City Council Monday, August 22, 1994, meeting starts at 7:30 p.m. If vou desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. J TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, Citv Administrator FROM: DATE: Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator August 11, 1994 SUBJECT: .^1951 Kendrick Melrose, 50 Cristifori Circle - Variance - Public Hearinsi Pertinent Ordinances * f A ^ m. * Section 10.27, Subd. 5 (B) - Side yard setback variance required = 50’ Existing Principal structure =49 ’ 'll M ^ ** Existing Deck structure =42’/rove<r. ~ it r Proposed principal = 35.9’ ^ Proposed deck/stairs = 31.4 ’’^ Variance = 18.6’ or 11.1% f. ’2. List of Exhioits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Original Survey E - Weckman Memo 8/3/94 F - Current Survey G - Detail of Survey II - Lower Level Floor Plan I - First Floor Level Floor Plan J - West Elevation K - East Elevation L - South Elevation M - Staff Sketch N - Resolution ^1095 - Resolution Approving Street Setback Variance Description of Request In March of 1992 the original land owner received a street setback variance to allow structure to be placed 75’ from the street line rather than the required 100’. The variance setback was approved based on the steep topographies, narrow width of gentled sloped building envelope and location of dense vegetation to the east. The house was built in the summer of 1992. The residence is under new ownership and the current owner seeks approval of a side setback variance that will allow for the expansion of a first floor family room and lower level exercise room. Tlie existing principal structure is located 49 ’± from the south side lot line. Proposed principal struc'ua' will be 35.9*. An existing deck/stair structure encroaches 8’ into the required 50’ side yard. The propo.sed additions will encroach 18.6’ into the side yard. Zoning File #1951 August 11, 1994 Page 2 Review Exhibit E, Weckman confirms that the proposed expansions will have no impact on existing and alternate septic sites located to the nonh of the residence structure. Review Exhibit I, the owner notes need to expand to the east and south of the existing kitchen area within the first floor (Exhibit I) for a family room as house was placed right at required side setback. A structural addition could not be placed to the north of the kitchen as it would have a major impact on the existing interior layout and overall concept/function of current house design. Statement of Hardships Please refer to Exhibit A, applicant notes the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. The site consists of 23 acres but the topography has placed severe limits on the building site. Location of kitchen within residence requiring e.xpansion to east and south. Extensive vegetation exists along the south lot line and natural building site for property to immediate south would be approximately 150 ’ or more from the north lot line or the south lot line of the subject property. The lots within Cristifori Woods PRD, refer to Exhibit C, all were approved with special setbacks 50 ’ front/rear and 30 ’ sides. Staff would add hardships set forth in Resolution #3090, E.xhibit N. Issues for Consideration 1. Are the hardships valid for a house that is only two years old that was already granted a street setback variance for new construction? 2. Why is it necessary to have the deck encroach any funher into the south side lot line, refer to staff sketch. Exhibit M., At your site inspection, note the topography and the improvements below the existing deck. Why must the stairs access at the south side where there is already a substandard setback? There is adequate area and similar topography to the north and east of the proposed family room addition? 3.Should the area of family room addition be reduced in size in order to minimize encroachment of side yard setback? 4. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. r CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S200.00 ($50.00 per each additional varia] Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) #1 o /•••TV T U f » VI V*»Vtc* ^ I ,1 u VI I* AVI ’ ’•» If W»r*W^ X w'W'te V V'VV w* Ul lit r r*M»’ VA i?V/t I 1. c V • V •.-.-I • ••W' • V PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address bO rCii LOOl fiOi TC~ riST//=a/? /dire / Propern' Identification Number (P.I.D.)___________________________ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Propesy^Acquired_______\JU rlC.________________________ I (do) not)^lso own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) Presentuse ofpropern'; A residential Zoning District: ether (specify) 4 ^ t - .APPLICANT . / Name Kandr/c K €. Phone (home) -47 6 - 7 Address: £-o CLris7/^f>rt (L i'y ^cU Cit\': Phone (work) ?F7 - ! _______________Zip: S’S3^’^ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phonefhome) Phone (work) .Address:Citv:Zip: DESCRIPTION D^cribe reg 'Tb ri 3N OF REQUEST ^stiinaied Coytruction Cost $■ . (gOjOCOy- -v guest indetail: 4dd ICoon.\ i\,dci i 7 i o'y ( /4-6 ^ ) tCQ.. o l4-o >VA OFF (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area X Setback: Other (specify) ___Lot Width _ Front _f^Side M - C. Hardcover _ Rear _ l>^r/<anc «? Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore 3^ /-ro/*t /i)?-//n< y HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unustial property conditions preventmg compliance widi Zoning Code requirements: fLf . yXjL hot/Cl Li/»n 7-e 4 . a J t~Kj |)o»Mg T e r<> fv«. i^\\ •SgK-‘a<^'« ^ V'g >v> *7 ^\i r lUtT/4 7 /m. rc on ~f ^\X $Ow>tH l^OifS o 7^<i ^ 7/liI i r/c f~a. />» I O />1 A>)c/sT" . (attach additional sheets if necessary) i\J O iJL * ^L ot tS (X D n*/ti ^ 5a</c//r»^ / Xo ^ r D1 0 r t-O 7^ »■ 7 A/ L.OT A/ A7 -C 'The /77<9CT e^'/fde.c. y-t.fj J\QJ ‘T'/iKee Bot Ide>n / ~fd'*Oy ^ U' o cf 3 d,o7^ j ^// rj A /wl ^AT-iacL “r'A .•4. V' V' • V -V vr-;/ ft\ I w T,*;“ WX IV REQUIRED SUBMITTALSAll of the following information must be submitted bv tl^application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete,— 1. 2. j. 4. 3. 6. 7. 8. 9. V Completed Application Form Cenified Property Owners List of owners within 150’ (>'ou must obtain this list from Hennepin Counrv Department of Finance, A-60a, Govt Center, Plat Map (obtained with property owners list),. _ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed suiw^eydr) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 81'ii x 11 for reproduction. Topographic sur\-ey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existmg grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8>A" x IT for reproduction.^ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation view-s (provide one (1) copy S'/i" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please anach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. ^mrnrnmmmmam The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance appliration is not complete if the above information has not been include APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE . u u ^ The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zonmg Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this applicai on, and cenifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knovdedge. Applicant ’s Signamre -------Date ^ OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by cfty staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Couned members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting Planning c . 1. mission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applic^ts must be present at aU scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrang^ents to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Budding & Zoning Office ot fhis change prior to the meeting. 8 HEM4EPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INrORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST38 06-117-23 11 000<»06050 BAYSIDE RD GAM C0(TNELL GARY D CONNELL 6050 BAYSIDE RO MAPLE PLAIN MN38 31-118-23 61 000306065 HATERTOHN RO EARL N CORN ETAL EARL N DORN 6065 HATERTOHN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 5535938 31-118-23 61 0012 06025 HATERTOHN RD J S A P D RICE JEROME STANLEY RICE 6025 HATERTOHN RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 31-118-23 63 0016 00165 CRISTOFORl CIR H F A E KNAPP HILLIAM F A EVELYN KNAPP 6300 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 REPORT NO. PAGE38 06-117-23 11 000606010 BAYSIDE RO CURTIS A ELIZABETH LEVANG CURTIS A ELIZABETH LEVANG 6010 BAYSIDE RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 5535938 31-118-23 61 000606105 HATERTOHN RD D GIGUERE A A 6IGUERE PAMMALEE MARIE .SAHCHUK 6105 HATERTOHN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 5535936 31-118-23 63 0002 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STATE OF MINN STATE OF MINN (DNR)(LUCE LINE TRAIL) 38 31-118-23 63 0015 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED H F A E KNAPP HILLIAM F A EVELYN KNAPP 6300 BAYSIDE RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 PI63560136 38 31-118-23 66 0006 00050 CRISTOFORl CIR KENDRICK B MELROSE KENDRICK B MELROSE 50 CRISTOFOI CIR MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWERS LIST REPORT NO. PIA55A01 PAGE S7 %♦y- ■^assil:-r.'.v«» •'i' ^ '* ^ I . V1 . *>-if> V.^. V'.S '^r '-.4.‘ f tuv*' : i » *1 V, _ .enTTcv TM4T THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE m"?SS a™ ot inJSS atiw as it appears this w« » ™ OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BE OF HY KNOHLEOGE AND BELIEF. • ■ ’ -A' •? •*» ' • T -M fikan t «, . • A*. • . ’ »■* S'*. > t“■rv • ;v, >%... • • - ■ -*. *4 “• I O CD f c JC f N r <i> \* report no. PI4XW01 PAGE 37 - O 1^0.00 J X. .* n Horth \.i o ?fry /•I ■ \‘ ) .'.f >.;>- . . <' p ■*' ■ • . • , • • • • ^ . j »’• ? ••t« ^ • • ’ . . '■ *,* ' .V - < • • . • *. • *• { .'.v•,•; • I « ™%ECO«K rty taxation , to the best MmAA ■’ i>t • * •• ; T*" ‘ * ' \P .. *•••••. -BE >.-v;•■.■;•' ' , t* 1 4 Jrf ' ■ . ■ * , • • < • •• • H -- ■ S.-'ii- \ : ^ n 5-. t» • • ss! [» '<.l« g _ C cf &?3 §50 OR CB O (? D*rj ^ O t* o yg-ft" i=’g o cn H h*- H i O yn d A y CT CT ct y y s:I (» o (» o 0 tt H|W& Ct \ e+c+ < y 0 AO) •4 wH ►1 > 0 9 0 0 O H O o O 0 H i t— H i H i 3 c+ a: w ct y 0 o y 0 o 0H- ct ct c H- o •« g no.n r ' I TO:Jeanne A. Mabusih, Building & Zoning Administrator FROM:Stephen Weckman. On-Site Systems Manager DATE:August 3, 1994 SUBJECT: Application #1951, Kendrick Melrose - Septic Review The purpose of the septic review is to determine whether the proposed addition to die south side of the existing house will affect the existing septic system as well as the future drainfield site. The existing and fi'ture drainfield sites are several hundred feet north of the existing house and will not be affected by the proposed addition. The addition is a family room which will not affect the water usage within the residence and is not near the existing system or the future drainfield site. Based on the above information, the home addition will not affect the existing sewage treatment system, nor will it affect the fumre drainfield site. r r ' f ' it • ^ J 4 • .• - . . • r • ,\ .‘i , ' ' " ^m • t * ^ .*•,. * • ' '♦♦•(•. * • . ... • ■ ■ • • • - ‘ ^ ■ ^ * * •• * • •»*•••“• . • •• r. vr • -• '• ' W'SV-< •‘■-V'' 1 • ; •• * •* . i • •.■ V » V n • f. •. ^ * A ■? " •*- -.:5 TWail: l"*30’ W-23t : >I •^vrvCr->-.r* , •• * .• . 4 • t . - J < ; «• • % • •• 4 \- 9- V U)T - '■ > • * <• • * / / ---------- 3 leafed. ■ 1'P PiX J3n. ♦ V . f •• > I ' 1 ' / ■•., ;v'^v.v/;'V':-^’;kf >,.. -1.2^ '• li^y - ■■ _:'\ *i'' r/l ^■.J^.../lA •. •' * . • • • /. .« »• * I. • ' % ' I•. # V* . ^ ^ . .f / 0.-. « • .* -> V y iT T S I ••■itf • < r ) ^ *r -*.S‘ e';-t' « * • i-.i«ri/ef.,T- PBc’js^sKvt •, m:. »Irk^i' ](S m ^ ^ \ f K* • A ..itfiinansB «|iamft>ic;ai»)v^ fv^ir rT. ^.K-' Vv.v • - : .1' • vr ;a'V. ...% * • ;. V ‘ K'«r^O.‘ •••I » • rrt^r•t. ••'T.- . ••• V'.iV'’*' .' ,* \ •.# s**"Trm • I — I \ _____L • mm • 9 ■.A * .« f » •!.» •. ■ yj.faiy S’lttKnf^n-^fT.srA. % • ‘•.•:V.'-’;-v • .v^- • ': • '“; ;V '• ••• . •- V ^- '^'.'V Hi A. i* ^■, ,■ .X-. ■f«i t :> * • ’ . * * 1 •' t • *•' •. , •^^•.♦^ • ' ‘ f .• ’’ '"V****? *• .. 'i • • <i • . •• •.. t V •* ;. > ■:> •’ ;■»•' ' •'.' V;... •. • « ^e- v* I //< * V *^ * . •. j' • f * 4.! • - V. i . y ,«^t7 —4 •.i.-. Llfl^ . .«.. ,k .^ • • •*•.* I • ! <pM'<''-^ . ^ ... J- ‘ i . .’4‘. . • '• ».4'vr*v ’-••% ' ^ Vi^ ^r—,.., . •■■■;.■ l-l,''' •••• • /• '■ a ^^ •» .» •«■ '*lv* • • •.• ) .• * t • % i • 0 V,J^S/,.1 •1- ' • • » .• f • Fr ; fyCH^’*U .* 1 •s, t 0 .*'• •:X“ > ■ •*•.. * xa « •••■>••> a « •,. .4 1:^ ^ , ^*1 •« f. -a * ' *’. V’ * f* I ’*•*••• \V ■V ► X>TU .* •; ( . • • * , ' . ://0 ’~J^i2£ir *•!•* ♦ * _ _ i N>* • • i' • T; •! • . . .f.M -* • I .*••.« ;%»V • I,;. V • -» ^ ;i.;* »• • •.^ •*• * • i ♦ I . . . • ■ • . j I • .• • « t ; . .1 > / -V * i * *•• • . •■. ; •: * . « ■ ■ ..........................., : L.:^iL _ u. _i • ■•'■' •• “. ‘1 1 iW* • •,..•••/ - I ~ . ..,: . ; . iV' * .• ‘ r. • . •' ?;• ■ u \* %'•> ^ •%.* vr%v^ x*<VkiC«vU^irA'< *-v... 2J> %•'' > .. t f; » MM A* * -istii: ' -^- » . 1 Z Z^ » i% 11 . «4 vl ' 1 s • 4 ' 1 ^•'v‘v i %• . • 1 •. _ •. i?<. j +U..__ . . 4 ' i 1 fe •;( ■ ■r •K* - i f f.j .■ t.. . ' \ . '• • 1 .4 •■ ■ t ^' '•> 1 • • '••: \ - .i t \. .1aV6»" TT • ' . . •', ' r. : .\i • •'.- >' J. V *•. I I • # \ V'•. • •• *.V • •• •* % * ' 1 r" •' 4 *. —HP ‘ ‘ • ' IIHil II ,• ■ •% . * ./. I ' I •>1 ^ t ',’i t I M . «. I • \. t « • . - :.•••*• ’ . * •##*•*•'• . s* . . . . • * • • * • ' • / * fcl•• ........................................................*■« ♦ . .tS^.'.'i. rrrJ. 1 ' *. I * . ' • ■ *. y li •* I « • I • .. . < • * • • • . < . • 1.1 . • ► . • !.’• % • U .* f. ., .. • f- \ % • .• • . •i • fc ( * ** •• .* • »’ J . f •» ■ «* . f A • • •. • • « ....i ; •• i‘ ^ ,rj L-V __mA. (L-u------ .—^ w. I i*- • •.'*• I* A ' ,• • •• • '-.''j »•■*.«• • A->—T ••• wt ’M . .... .^ .*. •. %»»’•. < \\ * • ^/ «i r • t • i :m ^ • * • * \'rv;• .-•> • • •TT'ufS-S ,. • • V., -.v^ •• f •/: . • r. ‘ -V'■?.■'*.>•' • • I .• j < •’ \ ■- i ’ . v-^ *-,iv . •m. > . T“* • ^'i *1 V «• I '. *r>4 r *•• ••■ , .»i *•.'V'-*•*** •**‘ ^ *‘*' *^.'*^» rr/»* V.* ,% , (• •»»•*• '• • •% •■*'•** ' ’ ’ 4’ 4. * 1 % I *• >V '1' .• ' . ■ /• •. ! I •I . *1 * Iy i « •. •• . , f. i m A /. », ;• i ••. • • • • • • • • «. • * .*• 1« ? * ’ » • ♦ % • ‘<0 •• • •4, f / . • • «.• • :•> v-^ % •/ - * • tf: I > • ’ •* • .< ■.; .r ‘.I i *•»v .•: • V • t. .» - vr xv'.•* t 4, *•* • V ^ I ^ . • ^ ' > '-J .• t •>'•»» ;•. 1.4' • •f ^ • • vU ^ii • :v ! .< f'-M,••;,•/•,.>•. Vj. ............i# -» I : ikL7;>l <■ « fl- . 'i \ » r • • l» ♦ . r Time rsx*vsi rnY^K«j MAI CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3095 __________ 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 variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properry; would not merelv serve as a convenience to the applicant, but i.s necessarv 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 Coae and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 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 Sections 10.27, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a principal dwelling 75* from the front lot line, subject to the following conditions; A copy of the easement from the adjacent property to the w^est granting access to 4180 Bayside Road must be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit. Authorities granted by this resolution 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 approval, or this variance will expire on that date (March 23, 1993). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall e punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 2 of 4 - %CITY of ORONORESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3095 4.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of March, 1992. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of March 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municxpal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf oZ the City. NOTAftWuBUC ■- M^NESOTAHennepin coonty My commission r STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3095__________ 199 AV... ^ day of _ _/y\ drcjrx - - - - - - - - -r before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared ^^the person(s) descAbed in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. LINDA S. VLE notary public - MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My co»fl«’'iiSion e»plt«» #-12-98 NOTARY PUBLIC , 199^, before me STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this ______ day of ----------------■ —, a Notary Public within and forsaid County,personally appeared iJ _________________ known to me to be the person(s) oescribed in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. MiiLeOSMA HBWBM COUNTY MyComm.6pi«12-lM7 NOTAIJ^^Ut -LIC ’ Page 4 cf 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) CITY OF ORONO ) RESOLUTION #3095 I Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk of the City of Orono. Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Orono with the original record of such resolution in the Minutes of the proceedings of said City Council at a meeting of said City Council held on _ _ _ _March 23_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, 19 92 # and f.it the same is a true and correct copy of said resolution was duly adopted by said City Council ct said meeting. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set 24th , day my hand and seal this (SEAL) r \ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: August ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Assist. Planning & Zoning Administrator flem Description: #1955 Andrew J. McEtennott III, 27U2 Walters Port Lane - Varianc Resolution Application: Request for street setback variance for construction cf screen porch above existing upper level deck located 34’ from front lot line instead of required 35’ setback. List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Planning Commi‘'«ion Action Notice C - Memo and Exhibits of 8/3/94 Please review the memo of August 3rd. Driefly. applicant proposes to construct a 12'xl6’ ”^n porch above the existing upper level deck at the north end ot the house^ Due o the aneline^of the existing house on the property, this deck and proposed screen porch * inm the required 35’ front setback from the private outlot road known as Walters Port Lan . Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission reviewed this at their August 15th meeting and unanimously recommended approval based on the applicant’s statement ot hardships. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the attached resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Proposed Motion: of a screened porch. Vote:____ayes,-------na\s. to adopt Resolution #____approving a c A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE #1955 WHEREAS, Andrew J. McDermott III (hereinafter The applicant") is owner of the property located at 2702 Walters Port Lane within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1; Outlot 2, together with a nonexclusive easement for ingress and egress over Outlots 1 and 3, all in Walters Port, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, th'* applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a screen porch above an existing upper level deck, such porch to be located 34 ’ from the front lot line w'here a 35’ setback is normally required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: 1. 2. 3. FINDINGS Tliis application was reviewed as Zoning File #1955. The property is located in the LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. The Orono Plamiing Commission reviewed this application on August 15, 1994, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: Pace 1 of 5 r A. B. C. D. E. One comer of the proposed screen porch will encroach V into the required 35 ’ setback, such encroachment covering approximately 5 s.f. The screen porch will be constructed directly above the existing upper level deck which similarly encroaches the front setback as noted above. The proposed location of the screen porch requires no other setback variances, even though a large portion of the existing house is located nearer the rear lot line than the current code requirements. The proposed screen porch location will be the least obtrusive to the site and to the neighbors. The current floor plan and unusual shape and orientation of the property limit locations for lake views from the house or yard. 4. 5. F. No other variances are necessary. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the 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. Page 2 of 5 r CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a screen porch above the existing deck, to be located 34 ’ from the front lot line where a 35’ setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions; 1. 2. 3. 4. Construction shall adhere to the site plan and construction plans attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. 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 (August 22, 1995). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constimte a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 22nd day of August, 1994. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 Of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 22nd day of August, 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 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. On this day of , 199___, before me a Notary Public withinand for said County, personally appeared ____________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of ss. , 199 , before me a Notary Public withinand 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) e.xecuted the same as his (their) tree act and deed. Notary Public Pace 4 of 5 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, iVLN 55323 473-7357 TO:Andrew McDermott III 2702 Walters Port Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 ZONING FILE ^^1955 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: 8/18/94 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETING: 8/15/94 VOTE:4 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday. August 22. 1994, meeting stans at 7:30 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Com^ -ssion minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the P.a; ning Commission. To;Orono Planning Commission Members Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse. City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusih, Building & Zoning Admini August 3. 1994 strator Andrew J. McDermott III WoUi* n r Hearing ^ermott, ill, .702 Walters Port I^ne - Variance - Public Pertinent Ordinance i?teTnsmli;d wdSfren^^^ *^«™ed porch yard setback. ^ i>l«ghtly encroaches required street Required =35' Existing = 34’ Proposed = 34’ Variance = 1’ or 2.8% f^'acrl!f,f ’are “a “""°" ' """" “'"“S' propeny less than Total lot area = 18,643 s.f. Allowed = 2,796 s.f. or 15% Existing = 2,326.5 s.f. or 12.4% No change proposed. Brief Review of Hardcover setback area 5,675 s.f. based on 5/13/91 review of Application #1633 ped area unde upon Ihe completion of the review of Apphcatlon m33) “ “ i,„- .• s^r.0, ’ . on 0/iJ/yi review of Applicatio wi!h®,m,J„.„ landscaped area underlainwith unwoven geotechnic fabric was approved by Council upon the completion of the revit Proposed = 1,608.8 s.f. or 28.3% 250-500’ setback area = 12,918 s.f. Existing = 2,495 s.f. or 19% Proposed = 2,495 s.f. or 19% (allowed = 30%) List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Propeny Owners’ List Zoning File ^1955 August 3, 1994 Page 2 D - Sur\ey E - Hardcover Site Plan F-1-3 Hardcover Inventory G - Framing Plan H - Elevation I - Orono Council Minutes 5/13/91 J - Orono Council Minutes 5/28/91 K - Council Action Notice 5/31/91 L - Resolution No. 2963 M - Floor Plan - Application #1633 N - Orono Council Minutes 6/24/91 Brief Review of Request In May of 1991, the applicant received approval of setback variances to the rear lot line for a three season porch a bathroom addition and a deck/walkway connecting three season porch with north side deck. All the improvements were located within the 250-500 ’ setback area of the property. Hardcover within the 75-250 ’ setback area was inventoried at 33%. The applicant was required to remove some 316.5 s.f. or plastic underliner beneath a landscaped area as a trade-off for the improvements within the 250-500 ’ setback area. Hardcover within the 75-250 setback area was to be reduced to 1.608.8 s.f. or 28.3%. During the review of that application. Council considered the use of a geogrid fabric as a replacement for plastic underlmers in an attempt to control weeds. Council deemed this to be less objectionable than the use of chemicals. At the May 28, 1991 meeting of the Council, unwoven geogrid fabric was approved as non-hardcover. Applicant was advised of the Council’s decision and removed the plastic underliner within the street yard and installed unwoven geogrid fabric. As applicant installed the geogrid fabric with the approval of the City (refer to Exhibits I, J, K and N), this area of hardcover was not included in the current hardcover inventory for the 75-250 ’ setback area. The current application involves the installation of a screened porch within a portion of the existing deck (refer to E,\hibit D). Unformnately, a ponion of that deck encroaches the required 35’ street yard by 1’. As the deck structure is to be intensilied with the installation ot a screened porch, the applicant was asked to file a setback variance application. No other variances are required. Statement of Hardship Please review Exhibit A. Zoning File #1955 August 3, 1994 Page 3 Issues for Consideration 1. c , Are the hardships or unusual findings presented by applicant valid? Will the structure have any impact on adjacent residences. Refer to E.xhibit B. there is no impact upon an average lakeshore setback nor is a lakeshore lot ’s view of the lagoon or lake blocked by the proposed screened porch. Other issues raised by Planning Commission members. Options of Action Approval as proposed or amended, subject to any conditions determined necessary by the Planning Commission. /V CITY OF omq_ __ ■;iZ jr'auu i0z02^qqcq^^ 2Ay.n/j -.\o _ oc Cn-Y OF ORONO - VARIANCE ,VPPLICATIONIniiial Application Fee S200.00 (S50.00 per esch additiooAl variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming stnicturea $200. After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) ProoerTV Identification Number (P.I.D.) “X 1 - H1 ~ A^cgal description to appUcatton if not included on «quned suavey. ...a DatfiProperry Acquired-------------------------------------------------- ' I ®(do not) also ^n tte '’V'er (specify)_______________________ Present use 01 property. _2^residentiai ----- t' Zoning District:______________—-------------------- Phocc 0iome)^7 ------ APPLIC^y^ r» iL.vfT-r-r"^ Phnnefwork)11>«r-^«i-*^^ tl^-rZlZ. op-p ^^ T^citTokam zipi CsTiT♦,rld-r-r0,Dr? Pon.-r U^^Clty..(.^.^^ap KA>Ni__ . OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ■ _______£k!A£-------- PhonelTiome) Phone (work)_ Address:City:Zip: description of request Estimated Construedon Cost ^a>.soo.00 setback (see site plan). Lot Area Lot Width X Setback: J^Froni Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) a„„BPn.ESC«jrao» OF Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty c f PUO CO Ch. locacton of Che existing ^^tuTual^rprorthl^rorolcx'^ I purchased the property; views from the house or yard. current floor plan and limited ^ obtrusive to the site and This is the only location where it will be the least oocru neighbors. Again only one small corner will '1 ‘^m^jir °he .creL conscmccea In 198, ,. only IC feet from the same road. r / in-i REQUIRED SUBMnr.VLS All nf »hP tnllnwin? ipfoirnation must be su bmitted bv the application deadline date in ordex for vQur soplication to be considcr6d compl€t6^ 1. 2. 3. 4. 6. 7. 3. 9. Completed Application Form . - Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150 ’ Q’ou rrust obtam ^ list Irom Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Ceuter, 348-3271). Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed sun,*eyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8/: x 11 lor Tooo?raDhic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes m existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'A." x 11 ” for reproduction Sketches or plans or floor & elevation views (provice one (1) copy 8 x 11 ). LL^' of the legal names (include mantal status) of all persons with an mterest m the DroDcrty. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notincd of tins iipplication. .Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The ApplicoDC and Property Owner muse sign this application. Please remember that your .orionre nnnlieotinn is not com pl-e if the above infortnation haa not been includsL m apS^ Lfeb^ atree?^ provide all infottnation required or requested by the Zoning agrees to pav additiottnl fees (suff tune not covered by original fee pavment) "^tJ e.vpenses' incurred in review of this applicat.on and cend.es that the infonnation supplied is -rae aja^^n^^th^best of his/her nnowtedge^ Date 7 / !dn V_______•Applicant’s Signature tortJ^tS^edges and agrees to dus application and furdicr authorizes reasonable encrv onto the property by City sta«.^osultants, agents.^ Comnnss.on members, and Conned members for purposes of imcgjftiad&h and veriiicction oi this request. Owner’s Signature Date f y 7' ' ■ . Anniicant must have ail subn/rtais into the City otfices 25 days before the Planning Co^ssimi MeeL Planning Commission .Meetings are held on the third Monday _ot «ch mon^^ ADoUcmits must be present at all scheduled review meetmgs of the Planning Commission 'aid Council. If an ap^cant is unable to attend a scheduled meetmg, please ^e to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Buildmg & Zoomg Offic this change prior to the meeting. 8 J r vA S. rs» O inrs< GOVT LOT 5 RUN DATE 07/19/9A■*. *V BATCH OOSPROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODRt«•it.-» PROP ADDR (M«R NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR/ *A I PROP AODR 0»tCR NAME . TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR • • PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER ] NAME/ADOR . f . A \ ► .» » • km* HEftlEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OMNERS LIST58 21-117-25 23 002802745 KELLY AVER I J STENARTRONALD C A JEAN C STENART2745 KELLY AVEEXCELSIOR MN 5533138 21-117-23 23 003402710 KELLY AVE LEE R MUNKELHITZ LEE R MUNKELHITZ 2710 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 21-117-23 23 0041 02694 KELLY AVE DAL UPHOFF DARYL L A LUCY S UPHOFF 2699 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 21-117-23 23 0051 02710 PENCE LA DEAN E TERRY DEAN E TERRY 2710 PENCE LANE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 538 21-117-23 23 002902701 PENCE LA P J RANDALL A L K SEGAR PAUL RANDALL A LORI SEGAR 2701 PENCE LA EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 21-117-25 23 005502700 KELLY AVE R 8 RICE ADO RICE RICHARD B A DEBORAH D RICE 2700 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 t38 21-117-23 23 003902702 HALTERS PORT LA ANDREH J MCDERMOTT 111 ANDREH J MCDERMOTT III 2702 HALTERS PORT LA EXCELSIOR MN 553^1 38 21-117-23 23 004002701 KELLY AVET R A H H STORLIETED R A WENDY HEIHE STORLIE2701 KELLY AVEEXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 21-117-23 23 0042 02703 HALTERS PORT LA WILLIAM H REESE JR A WIFE WILLIAM H REESE JR 2703 HALTERS PORT LANE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 21-117-23 23 0043 02705 HALTERS PORT LA D J BELL ASK »^SELY DOUGLAS BELL A SUSAN HESELY 2705 HALTER'S PORT LA EXCELSIOR MN 55331 i « © TOTAL BATCH OOS 00010 © 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 KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF.. 01 DATE I-* - •• I * f !• • * A ’ • * r * • " : ■ Cert ifi:ate of Survey for AnCren McCerwott 0^ Lot I, BIoca 1 and Outloi Z, walters-Pcri Hennepin Count/, Minnesota I I aiccT ■ ■ repres*ntation of a survey of the tounOar.es of Lor 1 ..CS. or..a, ano Date 4-r9-a7 Scale, i** * 4C ‘ Ircr *^aryer Judicial lancndrii Soct el^vtfticnCli'ii COrFIN a GJiCfePERG, INC. ^. TrVTe rg*^7TtrT.erg Yn. wtf. No. Vir-'^ engineers, LinJ Surveyors. PLarr.ers Long Lake. H;r.nesoia P , / I I Cert Iflc«te of Survey for Andrew WcOerPotl Of lot 1. 9locfc I and Outlet Z, waitert-Pert Hennepin County. Minnesota rx c i d «I ‘ I \ Jt/r^ t r 3 UA.»COM I r.. r.*ny Certify V»ji fftis \% a true ind cVrect representation of a survey of l^e Po^ariei of tot I. 3lo^fc !. Outlot 2.vooetrw»r with a noneicluiive easeMit for ingress and egress ever (Ajtlots t md 3. ill « trrs-Aort. ici»rdina to the recorded ^t thereof. The East boundary line cf said plat is marSM 5y .uui.iil Uncmarks pursuant to Torrens CaW NO. 14546. and the location of an cilsilng house. mU. :o.^s. jrivr%4y and power poles. It does not purport 10 Show any other Improvements or mcroachments. COrriM 4 GaCMHCftfi, iftC. 3ate 4-Z9-B7 ,1* ■ '4» O • /*-• a i - ■ atr Mo I Iron aiarter Judicial tanOMarn T TC5 KarV 5. uror^rg Hn. Ltt. No. Engineers, land Surveyors. Planners long lake. Minnesota Spot elevation r 3* "7 OX ^ HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET /‘li SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE)(o-7^75-250'25-500’500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House S.F. L^ofxti Width : X S.F. \ X S.F. X «S.F. B. Garage X 8 S.F. \ / C. Driveway X .!? • S.F. •'^***-- X ____S.F. a D. Sidewalk X *»S.F. X SI S.F. E. Patio/Deck X a.S.F. r^vr^ X 8 S.F. 'it F. Landscape X • S.F. Uoderiain X »S.F. w By Plastic X 8 S.F. r G. Other X S S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER LN ZONE ______ TOTAL PROPERTY .\REA IN ZONE •7 SO S.F. B A O - 3 7 S'O X too =o % PROPOSED HARDCOVER LN ZONE A. House X s S.F. Width X =S.F. X S S.F. X s S.F. B. Garage X S.F. C. Driveway X _S.F. X 8 S.F. D. Sidewalk X 8 S.F. X 8 S.F. E. Patio/Deck X 8 S.F. X s S.F. F. Landscape X S.F. Underlain X =S.F. By Plastic X S S.F. G. Ocher X S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 0 S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY ARE-\ IN ZONE -TS73 S.F. B A O - B 7 b O X 100 ■___Cl___ I J r Tlo'^ R?n T HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ rYTomsfr. HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ^A«.A6iL 25-500* LeofUi I CT X X X Wf-Klttl 2.*5:s ■Dr—Oftge C. Driveway 1 2N X X ^c JdxTS I c I u D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck 3 %X X 1 2 F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTT .^EA IN ZONE / AA w„ofe.*g> - s (t |T-L ' PROPOSED hardcover IN ZONE A. House _______________ LesgiQ Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway _X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Occk X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A____________^ ® • 500-1000 ’ X 100 f i 4 3 so S.F. S.F. Mu 0 S' a S.F. S.F. I O o as -=!-€■•a I S.F 12 54 3 S.F; S.F. ]-life S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. I U Qg.fes.F. X~\ S.F. _23ufV A B fO S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.- iT> S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. GT ±li:A B % HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET .--------------- 75-250' ( 25-500’SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____(n 0.*?^IS C -7 » L. X X X VtdilJ — I \ B. Garage C. Driveway 'li? X X D. Sidewalk ‘.S X X E. Patio/Deck t X 7. O F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic n.fc X X I: G. Other X X TOTAL HARDCOVER LN ZONE TOTAL PROP^Ry ^A IN ZONE ^ ^ r PROPOSED HARDCOVTR IN ZONE A. House ______________ * Lengm Wldta X X B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Pauo/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AR£-^ IN ZONE \ ^ r\ ( g,X 100 = »•2-60. O 1 t^S.O SJ. S.F. S.F. Is Li • O S.F. LO> ^IbHl-l S.F.' S'S.F. s S.F. S.F. T.S-S.F. M b |X- o ^ \-7 .n S.F. a xt-r S.F. -no.S.F. a U-otJ S.F. r=.^SO S.F. S.F. S.F. . A 1 X A»-h S.F.B ”%• S.F. S.F. ;=S.F. a S.F. S.F. i. s S.F. a S.F. S.F. a S.F. S.F. a S.F. r=S.F. s S.F. a S.F. _ _S.F. S.F.A IX ‘niVj S.F.B /Y d “5 L ■::) I KA^Lc^r-’^'r ; ■; •:'‘v; ^ w— r :. r o ^f‘*at.v*-« i It Mi ■/i L { ^ w..- ■'i ■/ vL^ 1 ORONO CITY COONCIL MEETING HELD MAY 13, 1991 All voted aye. Motion (#7)ZONING FILE #1631-HOMMEYER CONTINUED originally granted November 23, 1987. passed. (#8)ZONING FILE #1633-ANDREW MCDERMOTT 2702 WALTERS PORT LANE VARIANCE-RESOLUTION #2963 Andrew McDermott was present. Bernhardson reviewed the issues involved with Mi. McDermott's Variance request, as outlined in Jeanne Mabusth's April 10, 1991 memo. He noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval of this application. Goetten stated that hardcover ii the 75-250 foot setback area exceeds what is allowed. She indicated that she would like to see the 5.57% of landscaping plastic removed in light of the McDermott's request to add hardcover to the property. Callahan stated that excess hardcover, in the form of landscape areas with underlying plastic, is not allowed and is to be automatically removed. Goetten agreed with Callahan, and noted that the Planning Commission had not included removal of the landscaping plastic in their recommendation for this application. McDermott stated that his improvement plans do not include any improvements within the 75-250 foot setback area. Goetten indicated to Mr. McDermott, that in her opinion, a reauest to remove 51 excess hardcover from the 75-250 foot setback arsca was not asking too much, and would bring the hardcover percent closer to the 25% allowed for that area. Jabbour concurred with Goetten. .. u was moved by Goetten, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt Resolution #2963, as amended, to include language requiring the applicant t •> remove 5.57% hardcover from the 75-250 foot setback area. Jabbour requested Staff to bring back for Council's review information depicting alternatives to landscaping plastic that may be acceptable from a hardcover standpoint. All voted aye. Motion passed. (#9)ZONING FILE #1635-JOHN O’SULLIVAN/ERWIN SMITH 2420 SHADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCE-COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN-RESOLUTION #2964 John O'Sullivan was present. Bernhardson pcovided a brief explanation of the request to place an addition onto O'Sullivan' :j Service Station. - 3 - ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 28, 1991(#8*)ZONING FILE #1643-DAVID J. NELSON 740 WILLOW DRIVE SOUTH RENEl^AL VARIANCE-RESOLUTION #29G7It was moved bv Jabbour, seconded bv Goetten, to adoot Resolution #2967, granting a renewal of a side setback Variance to permit the construction of an attached two stall garage at 740 Willov; Drive South. All voted aye. Motion passed.* (#9)HARDCOVER STATUS OF V7EED CONTROL FABRICS Gaffron presented Council with* a variety of literature regarding weed control fabrics. He also distributed several samples of different types of v/oven and non-woven weed control fabrics. He stated that the non-woven fabrics have a much higher permeability range of 10 to 100 times that of woven fabrics. He added that the local garden centers sell both non-woven and woven varieties. Gaffron suggested that it v;ould create a problem, from an enforcement standpoint, jf Council agreed to allow the use of non-woven versus woven fabrics, but by doing so, it will tell the residents that the City prefers non-v;oven over woven fabrics. Also, certain fabrics, manufactured for other uses, have been treated with .irious chemicals and/or resins that will make them impermeable and those should not be used. Jabbour indicated that he would like to find out what percent of water will not pass through permeable fabric and use that percent v;hen figuring hardcover percentages. Gaffron advised that there are various methods of testing. Most tests involve a falling or constant head of water focused on a square foot of fabric, and the rats that water runs through is determined. The woven fabrics will typically take up to 25 gallons per minute, per square foot. The non-v/oven fabrics Vi/ill take 10 times as much. Gaffron said, "I cannot tell you whether 25 gallons per minute is good, or if we need to approach 250 gallons per minute. From just reading the product literature it v/ill be nearly impossible to determine how each of the various products have been tested." Callahan asked why Council is considering a revision to the existing Hardcover Ordinance, which does not allow permeable fabric. Jabbour replied, "People want a method for controlling weeds, and most will use plastic. When v/e find out that plastic is being used under landscaping, we ask to have it removed. I think it would be beneficial for everyone if v/e provide an alternative. I think it would help the City if v/e could steer people av/ay from using plastic, yet offer an alternative that will help keep weeds down." Mabusth added that if people cannot use plastic, or fabric, they will be more likely to use chemicals to control weeds. - 9 - - -il I , • *, n * i . i OKONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 28, 1991 'I(I9)HARDCOVER STATUS OF WEED CONTROL FABRICS CONTINUEDGoetten stated that anything which allows rain to seep the ground should not be classified as haracover. nto riayor Peterson agreed with Jabbour that o^-erin^ tne olastic that is put under lancscapmg. -t is rr.uch - -w allow the use of fabric, tnan to have piastic everywnere. Callahan noted that allowing the use of fabric will not automatically mean that everyone will stop using chemicals. Goetten agreed with Jabbour and Mayor Peterson that allowing the use of non-woven fabrics would benefit the City. Butler reiterated Goetten's point about the inability to cla-sify anything that allows water to penetrate as harccove.. 5he“ said, "^I would much rather have someone cover portions o. yard with something that allows watar to run through, than have them hire a company to come out and spray everything. Bernhardson asked whether the fabric would allow water to penetrate at the sane rate if it is located under rockbeds. Gaffron advised t.hat the fabric functions best when it is in contact with the ground, as opposed to be’ng in open air. fabrics, which typically allow up to 2o gallons Ot v.at_r p^.. rai nute to pass through. Butler noted that Staff’s recommendation speciriraliy stages allowing the use of non-woven fabric. She questioned whetner a distinction should be made between woven ana non-woven. best to inform the residents of tne- best solution. It was moved bv Butler, seconded by Goetten, to araena the current herdeever pclicy to allow the use of weed control fabric as non-hardcover when placed below clean, perLable landscape rock, wood chips, or similar ^ lAnrfscaoe beds. Further, Staff is directea to update the hardcover informational brochure to reflect current hardcover policy. notion., Ayes-4. Callahan, Nay. Motion passea. -lo st%\V I ( I •! O MC«] •1^*1^ riitT* F»73a -^04^o oN uCITY of ORONORESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ___2963 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) PILE #1633 NHEREAS, Andrew J. McDermott, III (hereinafter "the aoplicant") is the owner of the property located at 2702 Walters Port Lane within the City of Orono (hereinafter 'City ) ana legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, and Outlet 2, Walters Port, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit construction of a 12'xl3' three season porch to be located 8' from the rear lot line instead of the required 30 , a 7'x8lj' bathroom addition to be located 10' from tbe rear lot line instead of the required 30', and a connecting 6 wide deck/walkway connecting three season porch to north side ec o be located 18' from the rear lot line instead of the required 30' . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1633. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1 acre in area for each residential lot. The property consists of 19,343 s.f. or .44 acres. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on April 15, 1991 and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings. A) The unusual shape of the lot B) The existing floor plan in relation to the proposed addition requires expansion along the west or rear side of structure. Page 1 of 4 ®-A?"O O <<?*csHO?'r CITY of OROXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. C) The house has encroachr'1 ,<nto the 30* rear setback foT 23 years. Whereas the principal structure was placed 11’ from the rear lot line instead of the required 30*. 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that grantino the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditionsr light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property? would not nerely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is n cessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping wi^-h the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. 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 variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit construction of a three season porch, 6' wide deck/walkway and bathroom addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall remove 316.5 s.f. or 5.57% of plastic underliner within landscape area located within the 75-250' setback area prior to the footing inspection by the Orono Building Inspector for structural additions to the residence. Hardcover within the 75-250' setback area shall be amended to 1,608.8 s.f. or 28.3%. 2. Authorities granted by this resolution 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 (May 13, 1992). 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 2 of 4 o o■_ m -I >• N CITY of OROXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __2Q63 4, The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 13th day of May, 1991. City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor roperty/bwner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day of May, 1991, by Barbara A. Peterson & 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. Page 3 of 4 o o-S'-..>4 ' - - STAT^^^^^ESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN j ss. CITY of ORONRESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ^ T NO. _ on this -- a-HT^S?^t|d-^Sw^y7-re-r'soniiry the same as his (theirJ --ee a^- Ixjlll^q-^ f^PS notary public V,“hennepim counts My commissKMi •xpira* 9-^32 MY COMHxbSiUl^ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) SS. 109 , before me a i„e to ba tne P®' ^^^'^^w^edged t\"a\ hr(treyrexecuted foregoing %^eract and deed, the same as his (tneir; r- NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMiSSiON EXFiKt-iT Page 4 of 4 I Or.ATION ON SI _<:Hccr I 4n«r <4wo«cw m of^MorrW/ItTffAl i»«Ar <•*>.o/ioajo » A#a/.7;?r-»y5-tf rr I nc Df^Morr £Ai PoAr L*J. iaJ. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#7)SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONTINUEDwould reconmend that the property owner apply to the City for a permanent sign that would provide the ability to display temporary advertisements. The main focus of this Ordinance Amendment is to discourage the use of the yellow, bread-board type signs throughout the business areas. It is the consensus ofStaff and Planning Commission that these signs are aesthetically undesirable." Jabbour commented that John O'Sullivan had been present at the Planning Commission meeting when the Public Kearina on this matter was held. Bernhardson asked Mabusth if Staff had notified the iMerchants Association of the particular language proposed for the Ordinance Amendment. Mabusth replied, "I believe John O'Sullivan understood what was being proposed. The Merchants Association provided me with some final input. As I understand it, the amendment met v/ith their approval. They were mainly concerned about the existing Ordinance which allowed only one temporary sign every 24 months. There was one business owner on Wayzata Boulevard who did not approve of the aspect of the four signs per year aoplving to all tenants within one building. To that property owner, I would recommend a permanent sign, that would provide flexibility for advertising." Jabbour asked Mabusth in what capacity John O'Sullivan was present at the Planning Commission meeting. Mabusth stated that he was present on his own behalf for an application pertaining to an addition to his service station, but then stayed for the Temporary Sign Public Hearing and reoresented the Navarre business owners. She asked Council if they would prefer to have the area merchants review the proposed amendment prior to Council action. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Goetten, to table this item until th ? Orono business ov;ners have reviewed the proposed amendment. All voted aye. Motion passed. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT: (#8)HARDCOVER REVIEW OF FINDINGS Mabusth advised that at the June 17, 1991 Planning Commission meeting, Charlie Kelley raised t.he question of whether Council intended to allow the use of non-voven fabric v/ithin the 0-75 foot setback area, and if so, to what degree. Goetten stated that she had been of the understanding that when Council took action approving the use of non-woven fabric. X \\c - 6 - o-«X N (ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991i*Y All a 1 hardcover review CONTINUED j i ^A.-T,endment. and suggested referring the issue to the Planning Commission. Butler stated that Council may wish to prohibit use of the non-v/oven fabric within the 0-75 foot setback area. Mayor Peterson stated that she, too, was of the understandinc that some restrictions would be incorporated into the Ordinance Amendment. She added that she had not intended to allow the use of the non-woven fabric within the 0-/5 foot setback area. Callahan, who had voted against the motion to allow the use of non-woven fabric, indicated that his unaerstanding o Council’s action was that non-woven, geotechnic fabric, wouxd be considered as hardcover. Jabbour suggested assigning a certain percentage for which non-woven fabric would be considered as hardcover. He said. If wrassign as certain factor to the non-woven fabric, we can more eLri“contiol the extent of its use. If it is considered ss even a fraction of a percent of hardcover, it canno. be used in the C-75 foot setback area at all, as we do not allow anything there." He asked Gaffron to comment on his proposal. Gaffron indicated that he would prefer that a hardcover factor not be assigned to the non-woven as it would further complicate an already complex calculation, that from e.xperience seems often impossible for anyone but City Staff to He said, "If it is Council's wish to have nothing but trees, shrubs, and grass v^ithin the 0-75 foot setback area, then that should be stated, though there will be numerous Varianc requests." Mabusth noted that geotechnic fabric has been as a raethod of stabilization for steep, eroding banks along the shoreline. Callahan stated that for the most part, the requests that have come before Council involving landscaping plastic has had to do with its removal as a trade-off ^ elsewhere on that property. He said, I do _ ;l1 instance where someone has requeste i a Variance to inswall landscaping plastic. It may be appropriate to establish ^ policy stating that non-woven fabric cannot be used as a wrade-off for other forms of hardcover. It was the consensus of the Council that this issue should - 7 - ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991(#8)HARDCOVER REVIEW CONTINUED be reviev/ed by the Planning Commission.Kelley asked Council what policy will interim.be in effect in theCallahan suggested leaving t.-.e pre-existing Ordinance as is (v(/hich states that any weed control material, plastic or fabric, is considered as hardcover) until an appropriate amendment is recommended by Planning Commission and adopted by Council. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to rescind the Ordinance relating to non—woven fabric until such time that an Ordinance Amendment is drafted and adopted. All voted aye. Motion passed. Gaffron noted that in light of the action previously taken by Council, he knows of several people that have installed non-woven fabric on their property. Council stated that they could foresee no problem with the existing situations. Staff was asked to continue urging people to use the fabric, as opposed to plastic, but with an understanding that during the interim period of fine tuning the ordinance amendment, the fabric will be considered hardcover. OTHER Mayor Peterson stated that she would be meeting with Betsy Swartwood, Mayor of the City of Long Lake, to discuss some of the issues of mutual concern for both cities. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT: (#9/STUBBS BAY SEWER Bernhardson presented Council with information pertaining to the issues of financing the project, further engineering v.’ork that should be done on the project, and the areas to be included in the project. He said, "The City could opt to contribute a certain amount to the cost of project, which would defray the cost to the individual residents. However, there is really no way of knowing what degree of financial involvement on the City's behalf v/ill make the project acceptable to the residents. VJould the City consider a request from the residents to defray the project costs by 50%? The City could either determine a certain percentage of participation and ask the residents if >_hat v/ould be acceptable, or ask the residents for input as to what they would consider to be an acceptable level of City participation. Sutler stated that it would be difficult for the City to indicate its v/illingness to psy a certain percent of the project costs, because the project costs are not known at this time. - 8 - l73T KUtWtJ RBSP.UiWtJ LfKK3 RIMililS Rwiion mm •UltiM mtjtictj mm ^jTTiFnrre ramiis immsi wintiij Minim •■flrsBrw a.-r- A RESOLUTION AMENDLNG RESOLUTION #3383 BY GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) FILE #1952 WHEREAS, Christine Freeman (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 2240 Shady wood 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 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) to permit existing hardcover to remain in excess of the allowable percentages, such variance being an amendment to previous hardcover allowances stipulated in City Council Resolution #3383. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1952. The property is located in the LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zonimi District. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 15, 1994, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findiims: Page 1 of 6 r A. In following up the hardcover stipulations of Resolution 1^^3383 which also granted a side setback variance, the City determined that a gravel hardcover area in excess of the allowed amounts of hardcover existed near the garage but had not been accounted for in that review. The property owner has requested to keep said gravel area. B. Portions of the existing grave! areas provide a safe place for guests to park to keep their cars off the street. There is little room along the street for parking of additional cars. C. Due to the steep slope from the street to the yard level, replacing portions of the gravel with grass or other landscape would make it impossible to access the yard. 4. D. It is reasonable to allow an approximately 3’ wide strip of gravel along the rear of the garage for firewood storage requested by the applicant. E. The remainder of the gravel to the left side of the sidewalk and the rear of the garage is not necessary for reasonable use of the property, contributes to e.xcessive hardcover on the property, and should be reverted to nonhardcover grass area. F. The gravel area to the right or east/southeast side of the sidewalk should be allowed to remain for the reasons noted above. The hardcover area between the sidewalk and the garage should be removed as it contributes to excessive hardcover on the property. G. All other hardcover originally proposed by the applicant to be removed in landscape areas adjacent to the house should be removed. City staff have reviewed and corrected the hardcover calculations Resolution /^3383 allowed 3,106.4 s.f. of hardcover on the property behind the 75* setback line. The Plaiming Commission recommendation noted above effectively allows 3,772 s.f. or an additional 666 s.f. above that amount approved in Resolution ^3383. Page 2 of 6 5. The City Council fir.ds that the conditions existing on this propeny are peculiar to it anil 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 propeny; 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 richt of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Counci has considered this application including the findings and recommendaiions of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by tiic applic nt and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the -ommunity. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22. Subdivision 2 and 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) to permit an amendment of Resolution and permit the retention of excessive hardcover on the property, subject to the following conditions; 1. No hardcover is allowed in the 0-75’ zone. Hardcover in the 75-250’ zone will be allowed at a level of 23.4% and in the 250-500’ zone at a level of 56.4% per the calculations and site plan attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. 2. Prior to commencement/continuation of construction on the addition approved in Resolution #3383. applicant shall remove those areas of hardcover not approved in condition 1 above, and shall convert the unapproved gravel hardcover area behind the garage to nonhardcover grass. 3 Authorities cranted 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 (August 22. 1995). 4 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 anv authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Pace 3 of 6 5.ITie undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title ot the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 22nd day of August, 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 22nd day of August. 1994, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City C erk of the Citv of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on be of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 6 'p/2^Pe>su-ta. He ftr^ SrAT^F cA-t,cA^C. ^ 3B22s z:Q[ (^AJd tP(/ST7^ otz p^f>o:c^ ..-J77x£'y^ ^53'B ^ iT, __/^o^S.€'............... '2^0 ;*<■ '3^~ ....„/^Oi>'T7c>M __i^hJTru-i /CRr-of^ __S ^’QP<Si^L S, ot^UlAi-K, S> X 2 . Z- ____ __/O ^ 2-3 . X a ^ _ !< 7 -r _/S ____ .._.2B6. 8o \CK._..C20-'7 x t '=\'> - 5- __________?-2-2> & 2 2-?b& c. __^ 2.’?D - ^ P - (sfc. S xzO =■ zpzo^-^^_^ i « _.Pb^Af-K __S^^p b>t,t,K- .-.6>fSiSi-S>4)^i^^Gt=e-. 26.,2. .X 20.S.... .._,.^/S/iv«. 3.7 ____ .._ S. >: V5' ___ Acr«ox ./Ox 73 2 >- 27______ ' T /i37-T A7'bo. - 5fc,V % _Ab.. 2>7_-!j£. 2omPAW^.om to (?(2(6,_ HC..0-«1-CS , 3aaJ 5.7 16f. or A-7S'lCpi'>fc*^ ■>!'-.‘-'®.»“&»;o-r=o5 = sZ, ________..3 )06> >.^.fUf'-xi^zW —.—V--------. y. ‘ f —. - P.c c/ino' ■ 2-2-3.B+ /S3 *-/ ■='3'7'7 'Z- *5.?^. -/2,Z73 si. _ _ie. Cl'^'^^'^'ZoFosAu /«tXo</j3 ,,(6^ 6C?U sQ-, -- -TSr IKC-l:. V. . -•'.=.■WBawarK^ ''fotary Public within and for le foregoing instrument.and let and deed. Otar}' Public within and for foregoing instrument,and :t and deed. 0 § —O IA 33 1 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 TO: Christine Freeman 2240 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: ZONING HLE #1952 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: 8/19/94 COPIES TO: Variance (Amendment) DATE OF MEETING:8/15/94 VOTE:4 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Hardcover behind garage north (west) of sidewalk to be removed except for 3 ’ strip adjacent to garage for firewood storage. Hardcover calculations have been corrected by staff (see memo). Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, August 22, 1994, meeting starts at 7:30 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator August 4, 1994 (5X4 SUBJECT: /Cl 952 Christine Freeman, 2240 Shady wood Road - Amended Variance Application - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Amended hardcover variance within 75-250’ setback area and 250-500’ setback area. A. 75-250’ setback area = 10,644.5 s.f. Allowed = 2,661 s.f. or 25% Existing = 3,995.9 s.f. or 37.5% Proposed = 3,634.9 s.f. or 34%* ♦614.s.f. or 5.8% landscape area to be removed; 1,113.5 s.f. or 10.5% gravel/parking and driveway area to remain. B. 250-500’ setback area = 1,714.8 s.f. Allowed = 514.4 s.f. or 30% Existing = 1.033.78 s.f. or 60.28% Proposed = 948.4 s.f. or 55.3%* *104.6 s.f. or 6.09% landscape area underlain with plastic to be removed; 410.4 s.f. or 23.9% gravel driveway area to remain. List of E.\hibits A - Application B - Applicant ’s Addendum C - Plat Map D - Property Owners List E - Resolution #3383 - Approval Application #1893 Approved 2/14/94 FI-2 Hardcover Fact Sheets G - Floor Plan Application #1893 H - Amended Hardcover Site Plan Description of Request In Februaiy of 1994 the Citv approved a side setback variance for a 10’.x28.6 ’ addition to the west side of the existing residence. Approval of the side setback variance was conditioned on the hardcover being maintained at a conforming percentage. 791 s.f. or 7.5% of landscape area • ^ Zoning File ^1952 August 4. 1994 Page 2 underlain with plastic was to be removed and re jk areas defined as landscape areas in the site plan that were adjacent to the garage totalling some 1.265 s.f. in area was to be cleared of all plastic underliner. The application was reviewed in the middle of winter. Upon our site inspection the landscape areas adjacent to the home were confirmed as having plastic unuerliner. It was more difficult to determine the rock areas adjacent to the garage. In any event the building inspector was to the complete an inspection of the landscape area prior to the tooting inspection for the new construction. At the site inspection, the building inspector noted that a car was parked to the rear or north side of the detached garage. Members may remember that at the time of the variance review there was no sign of the crushed rock area adjacent to the garage ever being plowed. The rock area shown on the amended hardcover site plan. Exhibit H. is now designated as an access drive and off street parking area to the rear of the garage. If crushed rock is used for driveway or parking areas, these areas are considered hardcover regardless of whether there is a plastic underliner. Applicant has filed an amended vauance application to allow the access drive and parking area to remain in use requiring approval of hardcover variances as noted above. Statement of Hardship Review Exhibit B, applicant notes the limitation of the long narrow lot and the placement ot ^e detached garage in relation to the road right-of-way. There is no safe parking area for vehicles lo the street side of garage nor at the street side of the limited frontage at 36 . Applicant s architect notes that the original garage doors have been recently replaced was pushed into the garage. The applicant also notes a restrictive topography and shade trees in the area prohibiting growth of natural groundcover. Issues for Consideration Is the safety issue valid? - - limited lot width at 36 ’ adjacent to roadway - - no room for1. 3. off street parking to street side of detached garage. Parking area to the north side of the garage is at 28' width. Can this area be •rimmed back providing a minimum of two off street parking stalls? Area would equal -34 s.f. or 2.19% further reduction in hardcover (refer to Exhibit H). Do the majority of properties in this neighborhood have off street parking areas? 4. Other issued raised by Planning Commission, Zoning File #1952 August 4, 1994 Page 3 Options of Action To deny applicant ’s amended application and require immediate removal of plastic underliner beneath crushed rock area. Area can no longer be driven upon or require the removal of the crushed rock and the restoration of the area to namral groundcover; or Approval of the application as proposed or amended If a section of the gravel parking area is to be removed, Planning Commission should make a recommendation as to deadline for the removal. CITY OF ORONO - VARL^'CE APPLICATION Initial Application Fes S200.00 (S50.00 per each, additional variance Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 ^ (no change from original applica Variance for non-conforming scnicr After-the-Fact Fees (Double appUcauon fee) PROPERTY rNFORMATIO.N Sice Address /V r% fx o CiJt"•r U’M U'ItU* (J • W » f.* A * k. t Vv »f’<'h* t» A w'w’V*-V'V'VV'V ’’ fM fTVV'A u *l.mruv\* Ul I T.-r Jk U k. A V' V* • V 7 ; »i * 4 VV'» V L L r lT iI* T_ T w a # *V* VT'f ? j ...................... . — 4. V ‘ . w'V •*V U V‘ W' 4 f>vi » vC //. o ? r>sAo AA isI Procerty Ideatificatioo Number (P.I.D.), a SsoI dercnpuou ro app.icat.oa u noc mduaeu on ,equ, Date Property Acquired gpoo I ouired survey. (month/year) I m d^acir'*' °VSt(sue=ify)Present use ot properry: _J<_r-s.ae.'iciai —. Zoning District: Phone fhcme) ______— Name ^ <gTg^/e ^<»>fi^Lip: rro74>_ pUp-i»»~hnrr.p.'> 1 - lUt'U Phone (-.vork)____ Clrv: Q(^o>ao_________Zip:5'$'3°i I __ T-ii-rMTTCT PsrimatedCocstrucnoQCoSvS___^. description of REQLTST to Describe request mdetail: yr> ---------L ^ j^cc.e-%s . varlvnces required Lot ,\tea ___Lot W.dtn Setbac.k:Front Side K Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specif/)VJLLk^i ---------------------------------------------------------------- HARDSHEP/DESCRIFnON prevouting Describe undue brnd.mp_ or pmcticddiifKalw^^ ------- compliance with Zoning Code requirem •— X>A=ta.//tTg --------------------------------------------------------- - - ‘ TaJ _____ /r"r TO Mo<^ ■(attach additional sheets if necessary; _ REQUIRED SUBMETTALS AH nf the foUowina informatinn must be submiftpfi hv the appUcatioa deadlme date_in order for vour aPDlication to be considered complete: • - 1. 2. j. 4. 3. 6. 7. S. 9. Comolered AoDlicatioa Form Certified Property Orars List of owners ifQ' (yen must obom^ list xrom Hennepin Counr/ Department of Finance, A-503. Govi Center, j4S-j271). Plat Map (obtained '.vith property owners list). Certificate of Sur^'cv (siened by a licensed sur/eyor) and include hardcover caicuiations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'A.' x IT for ToDoaraomc survev (e.xistin? and prooosed elevations) ii any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy S*/.' x 11" for reproduction.^^ Sketches or plans of floor elevation views (provide one (1) copy SI-: x 11 ). List of the legal names (include mantai status) of ail persons with an interest in the nronert>' Pais would include name(s) of appiicant(s) if not current owner(S). As ‘an addendum to this application, please anach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. « Tne Anolicant and Prooerrv' Owner must sign this application. Please remember ^at your ..orion;; -.pplirnrinn is not complete if the above inform ation has not been included. The applicant herebv agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zomng Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by ongmal fee payment) 2LQd/or consultant e.xpenses incurred in review of this application, and certuies that the information supplied is true^d^^s^ect to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature OWTiPiR’S SIGNATURE , ^ ^ . . . The owner hereby acjcnowledges and agrees to this application and further authormes reasonable entry onto the property by City suff, consultants, ag^. Commission memcers. and CouncU members for purposesptdnvestigation and^jj^J^J^^of this request. Owner’s Sigmmre Date ------ AppUcaffl must have all submittals ipto ±e City offices 23 days before the Plannipg Co^ssioa Meeting Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday or each moil . Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commissioa and Council. If an anoheant is uruible to attend a scheduled meeting, please ^e arrang^ea^ to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office or fhi5; change prior to the meeting. r required submettals AH of infnrmntioa hv the appUcatioo deadline date in ord er for ^"r»lirorioa to hr rnnsidered complere : ■ . 1. L. J 4 m 3. y*0. / . 3. 9. Cocplewd Apptoooo Fora ^ ____^ _ ----C;rtu;sd Propon;/ 0»-t.-3 L;st or ou-oe:= ^ 0 c J -oLa ^ .uc a ----Hearopin CouttW D«par=sst of Finarce, A-oo.-. Govi 1). Diac Mao (obtau-cc '■vicb prcpercy ov-xers UsO- ...................... — CeiHlca« of Surrey (s.good by a ----calculations as requL-sd. In additron, crovic: or:e (1) copy Sr. ,c rl . reproduction. jcdprocosed elevations) if any changes in existing arace - i?:fo ”o"d [; idSi:n“a"vile one (1, copy S- x II" for reproduction ake-c-es or pians of floor ii. eievation views (provice one t.) copy s h x 1. ). - ;the legal names (include mar.tal starus) of ail persons with an mterest in u„ ----orVoe-r/ Tnis would inciude came(s) of appiicantis) u not current owner(s). AS “Addendum to this application, please arnch a separate list o. any other pe.sons vou wish ao'^ifled ot th:s appiicatioa. ___Addicional icc.-ns as n:ay be requested by C;cy s'on. A O’^Te'’ rnu'i dus acohcauioc. Please remeuioe. chat iojjr pro an — rea.u^ ^on^S^tela^S ^;r“c?t:^naii%rns^f - - inforaaation supplied is mi^d^^ect to the best ot ms/ber .k^owled,.. . e- DateAcDiicanc's Signature U/^ ------------------------- —i—*■ tS^ec and agrees to this application and narther a^tcrlne.^easc^e ^e ptonerty by Ci^y saff. coosultana. ag^. Conamass.on memcers. mu Councu members for pLoses^vesiigauon and^-if^oi tnis requesr. DateOwner’s Sigiucure AppUcanr must have ah submitnals mto the City^offices ^ days be^e p^=raU=ed^er;:w fhtj^ change prior to the EnCwdng. . . ^ J± -1if I :1 ' V.».C. ^McDonald IHomes Inc. I> l. > I <. \ I K ^ • HI I 1 I) I R " Jean Mabusth City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 815 Orono. Minnesota 55356-0815 July 18. 1994 Dear Jean. I am writing to request placement on the agenda of the August 22.1994 Orono City Council Meeting. As you know a variance was issued to Christine Freeman back in February 1994. which was contingent on a spring hardcover inspection. The spring inspection revealed a gravel "Driveway", which exceeded Orono hardcover requirements. I would like to request an amended variance from the City Council and Planning Commission for the following reasons; • Because there is little parking area in the driveway, the gravel provides a safe area for guests to park to keep their cars off the street. Overnight guests occasionally park on the gravel since there is little room elsewhere. The road curves quite a bit in this area and it seems reasonable to keep cars off the street as much as possible. Any large utility vehicle will hang out into the street if parked in the space in front of the garage door, and this gravel area provides safer off street parking if necessary. The homeowner had to replace her garage door recently due to a boat falling off its trailer and sliding into it. Frankly. Ms. Freeman is concerned that a similar incident might occur w hile there is a car parked in front of the garage. • Because of the steep slope from the street to yard level, replacing the gravel with grass or other landscaping would make it impossible to access the yard. The driveway provides access to .service vehicles that occasionally need to access the yard and hou.se. Since the distance from the street is so great, it is common for mechanical contractors to have closer access to the house. • Another factor that must be considered is the area itself. The driveway is surrounded and overhung with large shade trees, which do not provide adequate natural light. Grow ing grass on a shaded, north facing slope would be very difficult and prone to erosion. I realise the concern that the City has of the runoff rainfall reaching the lake, but I believe that the water which does not soak through the gravel would be ab.sorbed by the flat grass area at the bottom of the slope. • This situation is a common one in the surrounding homesites. Many of the homes have p <ved or crushed rock driveways going from the street down to the house. In this case, the gravel stops about 20 feet to the rear ot the garage, instead of continuing down to the hou.se. r believe that these reasons show that there is sufficient reason to grant an amended variance in this situation, and that by granting a variance there will be no negative impact to the lake. 1 you have any questions or comments, plea.;, call me at 455-5142. Sincerely, Blake Slranz. Renuxleling Managei McDonald Homes Inc. ■i()20 Seventv-l ifth Street Hast Inver (irove Heights. .Minnesota 550“6 6l2-lS5-St i2 • F.\X 012 isS 229’ I DATE 10/iVn rCH Ml (3S« 17*117-21 A2 0001 )0 AOOR 022A0 SHAOYMOOO AD«K NMC CHRISTINE ARKO TREEHAN<RAVER CHRISTINE ARKO TREEHAN«HC/AMm 22AO SHAOVNOOO ROHAYZATA l« 55391 30 17-117-23 02 0000 OR AMR 02210 SNAOYNOOO RO NER NANI JANES 6 eOTHMAMI ETAi. XRAYER ' ^ANES 6 GOTHNAMI •AHE/AODR 2210 SNAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA NN 55391 NErMEPXN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORNATION SYSTEH PROPERTY CAMERS LIST30 17-117-23 02 000202232 SHADYHOOO RO RICHARO LEE KOKESH RICHARO L KOKESH 2232 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA m 55391 30 17-117-23 02 0005 02200 SNAOYNOOO RO 0 L BENNETT A H E BErMETT ^ BARRY L A NARY ELLEN BENNETT 2200 SNAOYNOOO RO HAYZATA m 55391 REPORT NO. PX03S001 PAGE 130 17-117-23 02 000302220 SHAOYNOOO RO MICHAEL PIRICH TRUSTEE ^.^NXCHAEL PIRICH 2229 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA (M 55|91 30 17-117-23 03 0120 02200 SHAOYNOOO RO /EVELYN S TRUTNAU EVELYN S TRUTNAU 2200 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA rtl 55391 top AOOR MER NAME XXPAYER UHE/AOOR HOP AOOR -OCR NAME AXPAYER NAHE/AOM 30 17-117-23 03 0125 02250 SHAOYNOOO RO H H HEY JR A J R MEY NILLIAH H HEY JR 2250 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA m 55391 ' 30 17-117-23 03 0120 02205 SHAOYNOM RO J 6 GATHER A K F SATHER JOHN A KATHLEEN SATHER 2205 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA HN 55391 30 17-117-23 03 0120 02200 SHAOYNOOO RO OAK ONEN OAVIO S OMEN 2248 SHAOYNOOO RO HAYZATA m 55391 30 17-117-23 03 0129 02237 SHAOYNOOO RO 0 L SCHUOER ASH SCHUOER DANIEL L A SUSAN N SCHUOER 1111 HAKNELL APT 237 BOULOER CO 00300 30 17-117-23 03 0127 02259 SHADYHOOO RO M 0 SCHAFER ACE SCHAFER MICHAEL A CHRISTINA SCHAFER 2259 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA Ml 55391 30 17-117-23 03 0100 02229 SHAOYNOOO RO JAY PIEPER SUSAN A TODD PIEPER 2229 SHAOYNOOO RO HAYZATA m 55391 ROP AOOR »OCR NAME AXPAYER NANE/AOOR TOTAL BATCH 001 00012 MM MTt 10/14/n tATCN OQi • ••P ’ I ‘ ‘ - ‘1*1 / .‘-4 k W ^ \1• • /A t.V f ^. /• * ' .Tt ‘ ^ r .■ ' • 4i *<•■•• ■•• ;■•« ■«. ^ . t'•;*■-•, s i/ ■■:. . x-, ’ •.■ >5".. *k •' ■;■' • *■' ■.'»i<4.* /•V.\♦ ’ ■ •» « r. ‘ A, V . / •• 0\; ' I I 4 i tt •1*1 ♦«' • IT . t .. ♦ •. A, ., H ♦ * *■ • 4 •i-v. (,•• •'. » » ’ V. . % •• • '. 'I • * 9^ :■ «*• . . ♦•#..#« ( . «» ' i f 4. / • ' * i- • •• * .:•. r 1.- i**. »• *' ■ . • 4 # > . ‘i • « :fY'^ * I > •. i I HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY If^ORHATJON SYSTEM PRCH’ERTY CMCRS LIST REPORT NO. PI^55401 PAGE Z t,r %<■ iC.'O*. 'i ^ • *^}^yV • ■ ‘ ■}• *4. Lv• • 4 ‘■V ' •Vv /i'.'.'i?;. ■ S'.C r . •I.'rr} '4-» f' '■ *' ' I i• .•■:7.* ft V•< viw• • •• I :. • \ X 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 HY KNOMLEOGE AND BELIEF. ■ : -''O ; 1 <• ••'0 A > . V V »■ M DATE ■ IV;' ; 'v.r • * :r‘ ^ \ • V 4 # V . • .•* . . : . j • O' ■ r - 4 CITY of ORONO i resolution of the city COtTNCIL NO. 8 3 8 8_____: A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #1893 WHEREAS, Christine Arko Freeman Giereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 2240 Shady wood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City ) an 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 W Zonine Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a 10 .x - S^ton mte no^iwest side of the existing residence to be located 6’T from side lot line instead of the required 10’. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FUNDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1893. The property is located in the LR-IC, Ukeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1/2 acre or 21.7''1 s.f. in area. The property consists of 16,-03 s.f. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this applicaUon on and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following hardships and unique findings; Page 1 of 5 r««MQ9 CITY of ORONO Manidpttl OfSoes Pott OfScB Box 66 Crysal B«t . .NCnoesoc* 5532M066 *1 3X1 C rQliD2^C* il^xIClDS TTARDCOVE^ 0RDI>\ANC^- In 1975. yie Oro^^ surface^ ("hardcover ’) such as me percencagc of lot area mac can cc . l.OCO feet of a lake. Sradies have roofs, driveways, sidewalks, etc. i^v^c from higaly urbanized areas nave shown that sediments, oils, ana aeon v.- intent of Orono’s ordinance is to before entenng the lake. Hardcover Zones - .-Ulowed Percentage-. 0-75 75-250’ 250-500’ fOO-lOCO’ -i< cr mmmf tO 30 f-0 c C* jD iC Hardcover includes: . Roofs - Sidewalks Paved or zravei driveways - Patios i: decks (Lnciudes slatted cec.<s) - Toos of recauung wails Si roc.< wa s 5iie-tin<^ or fabric the groundtnc gt'juu'.i E s-STRUCTIONS for COMPLETD.G H.^COVER C.U.CULATION WORKSHEET • fr>r 1. /n -<• ^tc.) the calculation Is ror.Circle which setbac.v: zone (0-/d . ^ » w - — . . i_ „ le^ath and width, and multiply toFor 02chi of hardcover w.mn ttac zoao. =r.t., -e 1=-.-Ji sau3xe roocagc (s.r.)* j. Add up zll *= squdrc footdg« to g<t totdl square footogo of hardcover. Divide by the total area of properry within ±e aoce and muiiiply by 100 .o ge. oercenuge of hardcover m tne loce. * 5.ESSSHSSF”*““ telephone -• E\X--rn-^0 I 1^ ~ IIAl’’ JS3K: ^ CALCULATIONSETBACK ZOiVE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’75-250’iN ’/lUK-bobm:.!!!25-500’ F.YT9TTNG hardcover IN ZONE House SI- ’5S iO. 1 Length 8-X X X Waifii t. o_ B. Garage C. Driveway ' 3 ^ •> ^ W - - /O X X X -) -T C f ♦ D. Sidewalk '^3 X X J 3 ______ E. Pado/Dcck ^0 7 X X X: /± - <s ^ F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic / yf X X X G. Other TOT.\L H.ARDCOVTR IN ZONE total property .area in zone ^ ^ , 1 w y •— > ponpo^rFD FLARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House r? "S*-' ? .c: . Leagcii t5 W\dCi 2i*‘ u X X X 3. c. Garage Driveway / 3 1 cy . ^ ^.. X X •L I • ' / D. Sidewalk /SI ' O X X -?> E. Patio/Deck Zo.*7 •X X L± - c s p. Landscape Underlain By Plasdc X X X G- Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE^ total property .^A in zone ^ ^ ,00 13 £00-1000’i / O 9 L> S.F. /•? 6»S.F. S.F. S.F. 2lr S.F. T- 1- -S.F. S.F. Vi")S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 1-75 S.F, S.F. /O t£u4. r 5.F. A B /O^l. 6 y7 . d. S.F. S.F. ■j 90 S.F. S.F. ? 01.9 S.F. •• a o S.F. S.F. hi. 3‘t'6 • S.F. S.F. S.F. s ^w • A • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. Z '/// S.F. t.yy. 5* S.F. A B ?S 3>I7 t rkn ^avt. -ft*:• Bail &• I ■ — r > ■ ii 1: 5 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CFTY COUNCIL NO. ^ ^ --------- STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) f U k ________.• before me a Notary Sjjo^ the foregoing instrument act and deed. ny c OUMISSON £XPIBE9 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) « On this day of 199 __before me a Notary Public wi.hinandforsaidcoumy.p«sonanyW«^^^^^ dldcnowlcdged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) freethe foregoing instrument, an act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Pag*^ 5 of 5 » i CITY of ORONO resolution COLTNCIL NO. 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 10.25. Subdivisions 6 (B) to Permit the instruction 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 tollowmg 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 Uus resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assig^, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of e property. Page 3 of 5 r CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.338 o Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of February, 1994 ATTES orottiy M. Halfin, 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 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. CAPOLE A. HASEMAN NOTARY PUBLO-MINNESOTA HENNEPIN CCXINTY WY CX^IMtSSON EXPIRES , /7. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 fmn vn M k CITY of ORONO RESOLLTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 3 8 g_____ 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 10.25. Subdivisions 6 (B) to permit the construction of 10 ’ x 28’6" entrv addition to the northwest side of the existmg 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 tWs resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigr^, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the cham of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Mas 1 > I mTi iMI II CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITl' COUNCIL NO. 3 3 8 8_____: A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARLVNCE 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 ’ 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 ’. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. 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. 3.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 findings: Page 1 of 5 r CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE Cm' COUNCIL NO. .8 3 8..S--------- 4. 5. A.The house has been placed to the middle of the 50 and any addition to east or west sides would require a variance. B. c.The proposed addition will be a single stoo' addition minimizing impact on substandard side yard. ^JitlTnC— Trr apptvinl ^lurpo'clTe Top-d improvement. E. F. The proposed addition will not encroach the average lakeshote 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 '*o“"rty°"n'lh!s^^^^^ du'tkt; that to it and do not app y ^ ^gjy affect traffic conditions, light, air nor — m m __ Jm welfare of the community. Page 2 of 5 ' I \ A " W^VER CALCLXATION WORKSffiET f’--"' ’’'^..1___ 75-050’ 05-500^ ACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75 ;EXISTING TTfVRDCQVER IN ZONE A- House_______________ Ltofih Widen X X X B. Garage C. Driveway zs*..iio i 2.4^X X '' (,zo'= D. Sidewalk '2-7..'?'X X *4 l-L< ^ 3 — E. ?atio/Deck X X F. Lucdscape Underlain By Plastic z- <r _X X X G. Other total hardcover in zone total property .-^rea in zone 3 X 100 ppnPDSED A. House _Wldm Leogth X X X 3. Garage C. Driveway 2 X X /O L- ^ ^ 0 D. Sidewalk ■z <-X X 3_______ E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Undcriain By Plasdc 0 X X X G. Other total hardcover in zone- total PROPBip'^ARE^. IN ZONE ^ ^ ^ ^ V ^ ^ ° - - - - - - 13 25-500^SOO-IOCO’ S.F. 4 ■• • S.F. S.F. 'SSt S.F. S.F. »Z:/C S.F. "■ /<r/. -s>S.F. ^ i:/ 7. 'T*S.F. S.F. S.F. 33 S.F. / 0^. Cf S.F.T7 ts S.F. ss S.F. S.F. tn ^7. . n-*S.F. / 7 / _S.F. s * S.F. cs S.F. S.F. =s S.F. dio. ^S.F. S.F. “7 S8 t -7D '/S.F.^ SS S.F. A B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. A B 5.5. ?<x/« ) i I [- \ ! r>I i' .\ ] ) ■) 1 I— i " ‘i Ifc SURVEY FOR;Chris Freeman DESCRIPTION: Lot 8, Block 1 WILEY'S PARK, City of Orono, Hennepin, County, Minnesota o Denotes Iron Monuments X Denotes Concrete Nail set in Blacktop. Total Lot Area = l'),203>- Sq. Ft. 1 hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly Registered Professional Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 3rd day of May,, 1993. • 3(4. <,5 “ , l3 Ir T» ^ r* I s> Oour^/^j /Vo. ' • • •• m. IMIlt Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator REQt^ST FOR COUNCIL ACTION -? ?og^ DATE: Augus/^l9/?^®J^ ITEM NO: 7 'Nq Administrator xveviewed: Agenda Section: , City Administrators Item Description: 1995 Assessor Contract on. r u,ith Rolf Erickson (dba Southwest Assessing) runs from September 1 throjJSh in 1993. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; MoUon .0 approve .he renewal of .he assessmen. con.rac. wiU. Rolf Erlcl^on dha SouUrwes. Assessing for the 1994/1995 year at a cost of $74,333. MM REQUEST FOR COLTS'CIL ACTION COUNCIL MEETING '"C " 1301 '“"’’■'POoOf.tq DATE: August 17, 1994 ITEM NO: / J Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name Dorothy Hallin City Administrators Title City Clerk Report Item Description: Step Adjustment - Carole Haseman As of September 9 Carole Haseman wil! have completed three years of employment with the City of Orono as a member of the clerical support staff. In June of this year Carole received a superior performance evaluation. Under the city ’s Personnel Policy, Carole is eligible for a step adjustment from Level 4, Step III at $12,380 per hour to Level 4, Step IV at $13,032 per hour effective September 9, 1994. COUNCIL ACTION 'UESTED: Motion to approve step adjustment for Carole Haseman from Level 4, Step III at $12,380 per hour to level 4, Step IV at $13,032 per hour effective September 9, 1994. *11 REQUEST FOR COLHS'CIL ACTION ^I^CILUmiG DATE: AueusU^. ?9^ fORQNQ iimst litrry ITEM NO: Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name Ron Moorse i ' City Administrators Title City Administrator ///'; Report Item Description: Adoption of 1995 Budget and Tax Levy Background State law requires cities to adopt a preliminary budget and tax levy by September 15 of each year. The levy approved as of this date will be reflected in the Truth In Taxation information provided to all property owners. However, this levy can be reduced prior to final budget adoption after the Truth In Taxation hearings in December. The budget itself can also be changed during this same time period. Budget Overview The proposed 1995 Budget holds the line on funding for current services while positioning the city to address a number of long term issues with substantial fiscal impacts. The proposed tax levy to fund the budget is $2,016,170. This is an increase of $39,534 or 2.0% over the 1994 levy. The General Fund budget which has the most significant impact on the tax levy is proposed at $3,276,890. This is an increase of $124,222 or 3.9% over 1994. The most significant change in the General Fund budget is the addition of a sixteenth patrol officer in the Police Department. i COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the 1995 collectible tax levy at $2,016,170 and to establish the proposed 1995 General Fund Expenditure Budget at $3,276,890. A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PROPOSED 1994 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 1995 BE V\ RESOLVED, by the City council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the following sums; as reduced by HACA, be levied for the current year, collectible in the 1995 upon the taxable property in the City of Orono, for the following purposes: General $1,647,940 G.O. SEWER IMPROVEMENT BOND 1992 G.O. Sewer Improvement Bond 1985 18,000 42,945 G.O. Sewer, Water, Street Improvement Bond 1982 G.O. Water & Sewer Revenue Bond 1989 5,500 80,000 Bonds of Other Government Units H.R.A. Building Bond 1991 221,785 TOTAL SPECIAL LEVIES 368,230 TOTAL ALL LEVIES $2,016,170 The City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held August 22, 1994. ATTEST; Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk • C. .___I___.. %M<r A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED 1995 BUDGET BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the proposed 1995 General Fund budget is determined to be as follows: FSTIMATED REVENUES Taxes - General Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Services Fines and Forfeits Interest Income Miscellaneous Transfers From Other Funds Use of Fund Balance TOTAL $1,647,940 130,000 440,535 865,140 66,000 41.000 35.000 -0- 51.275 S3.276.890 PROPOSED EXPENDITURES General Government Public Safety Street Maintenance Parks and Recreation Recycling Program Engineering - Unallocated Reimbursable Expenditures Special Projects and Contingency Transfers To Other Funds TOTAL $ 688,781 1,761,505 503,720 57,073 81,560 13,460 28,741 77,150 64.900 53.276.890 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held August 22, 1994. ATTEST:Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ____ DATE: August iC* ? ? 7994 CITY L^n NS FTEM NO.: IJ Department Approval: Name Tom Kuchn Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed: 1.0 Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Request to Forgive Sewer Assessment on Tax Forfeit Lot Released for Sale to Adjacent Property Owner Attachments: Letter from Daniel and Barbara Fleischman Discussion* In July 1985 the parcel identified as PIN 02-117-23 31 0026 became tax forfeit due to nonpayment of the sewer assessment levied in 1980, for collection from 1981 through 1995. The parcel in question and an adjoining parcel at 500 Hanlon Avenue were each charged wit a one-half unit for the sewer assessment because neither was considered buildable individually. Tlie owner of both parcels made payments on only the one-half sewer assessment levied on the occupied parcel. No payments were made on the adjoining parcel’s one-half sewer assessment. The property at 500 Hanlon is now occupied by the Fleischman’s, who were not the owners at the time of the original levy and subsequent forfeiture. The original levy on the forfeit parcel was $3,350.00 and is now approximately $5,731.32. excluding penalties. The assessment has one more year to run, through 1995. The bonds were called and paid off earlier this year. The Fleischman’s wish to purchase the forfeit lot in order to build a garage and are requesting that the City waive the outstanding assessments. Tlie Citv' has generally forgiven assessments when the unit that was assessed is not being used. The City generally has nm'forgiven an assessment when the unit is being used. This request is somewtat unique in iha- although the sewer unit is being used, the assessment for that unit was split between two separate parcels. The assessment on the parcel wi* the home has been paid. The portion of the assessment on the vacant parcel has not been paid. In the absence of a specific use for the ixx forfeit parcel, the requirement to pay the outstanding assessment is a signtoant obsucle to getting the parcel mto pnv^e^^^^ the tax roles. The Fleischmans intend to acquire the property to enable them t^mW ^ gar ^ The purchase price of the parcel is $500.00 plus the outstanding assessme^. The value of this parce'l is sicnificantlv greater than $500.00. It is not unreasonable lor the City to collect at least a ponion 5f the as«Wnt and still enable the Fleischmans to obtain the property at a very reasonable cost. r Request for Council Action continued Page 2 of 2 August 19, 1994 Request to Forgive Sewer Assessment on Tax Forfeit Lot Released for Sale to Adjacent Property Owner COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; Options for Council action are as follows; A. Require the full assessment to be paid. B. Require a portion of the assessment to be paid. C. Forgive the total assessment. Orono City Council P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Mn. 55323 City Council Members, We are interested in purchasing a tax forfeited lot that is adjacent to our ® purchase would be made from Hennepin County, although we understand that there are still sewer assessments due to the City of Orono. r- u • We are requesting that the assessments be waived, with the benefit to Orono bemg that taxes would once again be paid on the property. Related to this issue is a council meeting we attended a few years back when we needed a variance to replace our deck. It was noted at that time that we had pushed our hard cover to ifs limit, consequently if we ever wanted a garage we would need to purchase the adjoining property. When the question of paying the assessments was raised the council stated the assessments cou d possibly be waived. We are now considering building a garage and therefore would like to purchase the lot adjacent to us. We appreciate your consideration in this matter and wait for your response. Thank you. Sincerely Daniel and Barbara Flcischman 500 Hanlon Avenue Wayzata, Mn 55391 i*ii iiiFTi III ■ I ‘ request for council action City 1994 '^OHOfJo DATE: August 17, 1994 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Ron Moorsc Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrators Report Item Descnption: . Request for Unpaid Uave of Absence - Jamie Bosma be approved. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: of Jamie Bosma ’s leave of absence to September 5, 1994.Motion to approve the extension I ilfj - REQUEST FOR COtlNClL ACTION p p ,, S: ■: 1994 .// DATE ITEM NO Department Approval: Name John R. Gerhardson Title Public Works Director Administrator Reviewed: t/p-i Agenda Section: Public Works Item Description: Yard Waste Program 1994 As we are all aware, funding for the yard waste program was discontinued at the end of 1993. The City continued on with the program because there was not an alternative disposal site for leaves or brush. Leaves and grass clippings were accepted with no charge. Brush was accepted with a fee of $3.00 per cubic yard. The leaves were transported to a compost site in Medina and the brush was transported to the tree and brush disposal site in Brooklyn Center. During the time the program was in effect this spring, we were able to dispose of one roll off container of brush at Maple Grove. Three roll off containers were rejected and returned because of unacceptable items contaminating the load. Therefore it is recommended to accept leaves and grass only during the 1994 fall yard waste program and have the residents haul their brush to the Maple Grove site. The cost to the residents at the Maple Grove site is approximately $1.50 per cubic yard. ®®U«C/lMEETT«e AUC 2 2 JQQ42 2 IQQREQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ CITY OPDATE: August 18, 191994 ITEM NO:/r Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrators Report Item Description: Replacement of Full Time Sworn Officer Position The Police Deoartment has had a hill time sworn officer position unfilled since the retirement Fritzler.^ It has been staffs recommendation that the position be filled r - a patrol otficer pLworve^s a Licmenant position, both to put ntoro officers on the su. e and as part of Staffs plan to promote supervisors from within. Th.. nosition has been left unfilled pending the renewal of the police services contract with the Citv of Spring Park for 1995. The contract with Spring Park has now been approved. At *is tinw it is recommended that the vacant full time position be filled by increasing the of wL Boris (currently a part time officer) to the full time level, and incteasing his pay rate to the one-year contract rate of $15,061 per hour. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to increase the number of hours of Officer Scott Boris to *e level to fill the vacant full time officer position, and increase his pay rate to S15.061 per hour. I ♦ ■» r I, COUNCIL MEETING request for council action AUG ? ? ’<394 CITY OF c: :crjo DATE: August 15, 1994 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name John Gerhardson Title Public Works Direaor Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Rcpon Item Description: Resolution - During discussions determining the width of Brown Road North, it was decided to construct the road at a 28 ’ width and restrict parking on both sides of the road. Attached for review and approval is a resolution restricting parking on Brown Road Nonh, COLTS’CIL ACTION REQUESTED: It is recommended that Council adopt Resolution No Road North. restricting parking on Brown ^MUl M request for council action DATE=AugusTl??lPW«0 ITEM NO:/ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrators Report Meeting to Review the Results of the Park Survey The nark survey has now been completed. The survey consultant will provide an executive summary of the^survey results by Friday. August 26. The survey consultant is available at any “fl^rthe survey results with the Council and the Park Commission. It is staffs recommendation that the consultant present this information ^ Council and Park Commission. One option for this joint work session would he ^ the evening of the regular Park Commission meeting of September, which will he Tuesday, sVember^6. The consultant can also be available at other times convement to the Council and Park Commission. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to schedule a joint Council/Park Commission work session to teview the results of the % park survey. I Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Item Description: Post Office Parking Lot request for council action DATE: August ITEM NO: / ^ COUNCIL MEFiirQ Administrator Reviewed: //V Agenda Section: City Administrators Report At a recent Council meeting, staff req. ,sted Council to refer a setback variate related to the construction of a parking lot for the Crysul Bay Post Office to the Planning Commissi^ At that time the CouiKil tequested staff to provide a map showing the approximate size and Ration rtl^artogTot in relation to the property to the south. The map is attached for Council review.^ Tte soulhem edge of the proposed parking lot would be approximately 34 feet from the property line of the residential property to the south. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to refer the application for a setback variance, to enable the construction of a parking lot for the Crystal Bay Post Office, to the Planning Commission. r . < c REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION M£p7,vg cnyof DATE: August 18. 1994 ITEM NO:J I Department Approval: Name Dorothy HaJIin Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrators Report Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval Club Firearms Permit Annual License Park Gun Club 3660 Sixth Avenue North Special Events Permit Charles Tatro/FTC Homes Model Home at 1050 Cox Farm Road Sept 10 - 25th from 3:00 to 8:00 p.m. One Day Liquor License Smith Days/Minnetonka Center for the Arts 2240 North Shore Drive September 10, 1994 Septic System Installer Sewerman Inc. Elk River Larry ’s Onsite Septic Chaska COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to a approve licenses as presented. Date: To: From: Subject: August 11# 1994 1 have reviewed the ^tfre^ordsIroS the"pas?"^' ye«*ind h^vr™ objection to the issuance of this permit. iTlIlllll 4 APPLICATION FOR FIREARM USE PERMIT CITY OF ORONO DATE:mt APPLICANT’S NAME: _ APPLICANT’S ADDRESS: rj r l/iu. ('M^ (^Axpiu street O city y PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: /fPfl'L/Sr ----- -T S¥2 f zip PROPERTY OWNER'S ADDRESS: DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: type of permit : «^s.b*^annoal _^ $25.00 GAME ANIMALS (Limited Use) DATE STARTING: PURPOSE: DATE ENDING: / V /‘if5 r 7 T V *• r “ " * ‘il I I Jl WMUttC* *• * 1 i* A .,■«■* * rc fc. * < ^ ------Ttr** Ci < X%mkm-rr i3iS400000 jU^ 25.iC CniCn Ji . '~2L ‘P'- ..mint ■ " Ml} i . r }i I j I tJ'Aa—W'V CW'V'A fix* ’ 0 ! i / RESTRICTIONS: I agree that this permit doesn't allow the grated ?! ’tr. =i^".o°Lrdrby“'’A^=%P%Ticable Aderal, V*W‘/ J. X . State and local laws. Fee Paid; Date: Ai. / Slgnatu^ ot RECOMMENDED: app1icant YES NO Check: Cash:Public Satety D1 rector Initials:nnon^/rn •yes _^NO /A ir t ^ ^ ^ City Administrator REMARKS; TO:Orono Police Department FROM: Dorothy Halim. City Clerk DATE:August 9, 1994 SUBJECT: Special Events P» at Please review the attached special events permit for a "Parade of Horn's" event at 1050 Cox Farm Road. Please make your recommendation in writing. This item will be on the August 22nd Council agenda. Thanks for your help. 1)/^^ I • n /yO A3r--r ^"3 Permit #: PARADES fi SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Fee: $50.00 rhone Number: ^53- l^iO_____________ •Jame : LLS TAr/iO ■ Z___FT.C =.ddre3Si Hu?y U>9_ City# State, Zip; Pi v me^urH_ _ _ location of Parade or Eventgo 5^ C.^X-AQ. Person (3) and/or OrganizationC s ) Handling the Events—f. I T ft^< :.t. o£ P'>.nf, C.OT 1^ - tL Hours of Event!, j- f, .■Reason or Purpose: ^ thpCi.1,----— Insurance Company;■ f^icatiorT Copy of insurance certificates to be submitted with this application. : am .ware of all applicable State and other laws f soecial events and will abide by same. x also a<jree to hold Crono harmless from all liabilities that may arise this oernYt from the parade or special event approved by the granting of this permi . J.fJ' ignatura Date Approved:Denied:By: Remarks: "V*V !**fr !*f*v!~!**0ill* i!< Pir^AKCE uFFIuE 131:^4? ^000 ..ikT.W-I . _ gi ^ t-’i i-tii t UL! \ *! k.*V»VV dlioso CSOl ROl^T^, vw/ V / / PS 09079 (S^3)Minnesota Department of Public Sa'ety LIQUOR CONTROL DIVISION 190 5tn St. E.. St. Paul. MN 551 Ot (612)296-6430 TOD (612) 297-2100 application and permit for a 1 to 3 DAY TEMPORARY ON-SALE LIQUOP. LICENSE NO. ORMCM8E.RS HCO NAME OE PERSON MAKING APPLICATION <?• L • ^ V A % A CITY rv\ \ vi ^o\ b ivie orren»wni r^r. w—. P- aa Vt DATES LIQUOR WILL 8E S0L0» O TO 3 DAYS) •USINESS PHoi^E ii5:iZ I ^31 - TAX EXIM*T NUMSER STATE riPCODE r>\K) STHol home PHONE ^71 Se pA< r*^ ^ P ‘ \*7°ljj~ ----------------- DOSyiROANIZATION HAVE A CHARTER GENERAL PURPOSE OP ORGANIZATION ORGANliATION OPPICER'S NAME la.vvx. ~ (^TesiJtewVT ORGANIZATION OPPICER'S NAME CV<;^V\ Lay S4»y\ ~-Tfca^o«.^ ORGANIZATION OPPICER'S NAME ADDRESS /2g* (<Jg.vVyo;A-V CA. 7^ »\V.A ^<*-«->. ^5*33i V ADDRESSAUUHb^lS . ^ , Sleep tYl«xv\g^ <!y*(Acv\ V/o-t^. organization opriuen «ft il_ 16>^U yn ■g>v^rV>r.AS- f 470H l4USU.v U Location wh«r* licpnta will b« usod. If «n outdoor area, describe M non wrwre ------- ......L,.«V., O-^VV. v^A<. - 22HO f.v.-VW wrj.ggg:ii -- ' — -------------------------------------------------——----------------------------------- Will the loot) the services icant contract for intoxicating liquor services? If so. give the name and addrass of the Uqoor licensee providing 0®V ^ WV <SLvO-0-^ €_ Will the applicant carry liquor liability insurance? If so. the carrier s name end amount of coverage. (Note;Insurance is not mandaioryi CITY OP CITY PEE AMOUNT 6L^ DATE FEE PAID___^ DATE APPfiOVEO LICENSE DATES APPROVED LIQUOR CONTROL DIRECTOR NOTE; TOTAL P.Ol CITY OF ORONO (612) 473-7357 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 HHCE ’iV ED SEPTIC SYSTEM INST/VLLERS . ^ LICENSE APPLICATIONAOC 1 6 199^ (jlfYCF ORONO All auestions must be answered. License fee, bond, Certificate of Insurance and evidence of MPCA cLmcatL must be attached. All applications are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. 1. Business or trade name Xfu'c. 3. Business address Business phone f,!.:; gtjl-______Residence phone------------------------------------- 4.Name of appiicant or company .epresentative(s) holding MPCA certification A- 1-^ /O 5.Type of certification held: _ Installer V Pumper Expiration date: /J-.3I-9L-. 6.Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license in Orono before? N'O-hda j?H/^^^ZiLV • Most recent year ^13 ________ / 7.Have you ever had a license revoked? When? Where? 8.Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes No 9. Do you pump out septic tanks? Yes _2^ SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: Cijy OF CFO^iQ office 1311500000ni rrv VI crt.li rV W'C' • VV r,i />.* W*v • V'CiiiEK Ji i.cr c f »:• r_ ru A»?y yni » yC 1. S50.00 License application fee. . ' . m- T13 ’ Y, 2. $2,000.00 license and permit bond naming City of Orono as obligee. «- > 03/16- Bond will nm be accepted _ _ _ _ ^ __& Bond will nm oe accepieuaf*.^ ^ 3. $50-100-300.000 minimum Cenificate of Insurancel^p.>-fti Y 4. Copy of current MPCA Certificate. LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTU. rVLL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED List persons other than applicant who are auAorize^by you to apply for permits unuer your license Alflt y <7rg/g-e>4-nJQ__Joh “ The undersigned hereby makes application to the City of Orono. Mi"'J”: M°ni«ota and repair septic systems, and/or pump out septic tanks, subject to e and the Ordinances of the City of Orono. £Date ___Applicant’sSignature^^>L^r; CITY Staff recommendation: Approval Denial------- Date-------/ 7% USE Reason for denial: _____ ONLY City Council Action: Date Date license mailed f\pproved Denied r L CITY OF ORONO (612) 413-7351 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 SEin iC SYSTEM INSTALLERS LICENSE APPLICATION 1.Business or trade name k j___(?n “?t ix-----^ Business address t-318- 3. (Street) Business phone ^17^._____Residence phone------- (lip) 4.Name of applicant or company rcpresentative(s) holding MPCA certification A A>» ✓ V //«.«v —v<?y -r.^------------—----------------------------- 5.Type of cenification held: /insuller _ Pumper E.xpiraiion dale: . 6.Have you ever heid a Septic System Installer license in Orono before? Most recent year_____________ 1.Have you ever had a license revoked? t^o _ hen? Where? __________________________________ 8. 9. Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? ^es Do you pump out septic tanks? Yes ____ No CITr OF iji<OSO: vpf.Viu r .jLcjrcr xf fnnL L, A Ji A VvV •’mk < rs*iV'A L’.Y A TiI L, SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: bond naming City of Orono as obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be accepted. 6<p. ^ jy/3. S50-100-300.000 minimum Certificate of Insurance, 6'OU“'7S^ i/^4. Copy of current MPCA Certificate. w'V'* ^» » w* V' • VLIIU.-.. -------- RFCEIFT-lHf^K YOU i;311250 iOOl ROi U4 /TC /• f I' VW.V•/ A A LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED List persons other than applicanl who are authorized by you to apply for permits under your license ^ II n . ---------------------------- The undersigned hereby makes application to the City of Orono. | and repair septic systems, and/or pump out septic tanks, subject to the law and the Ordinances of the City of Orono. Date %/ ? V Staff recommendation; Approval Denial------- Date----Q I -----------CITY USE ONLY Reason for denial; City Council Action: Date Date license mailed_____ Approved Denied 1 5? & ^ 'V) ^ .■5 ^ ^'U O A? “ .-Y . #O CITY u.- ORCNO PAYROLL REGISTER EMP # NAME 171638060 174563339 176921819 I71840o71 175443862 ;5S113870 468843008 472503991 169526026 1'’5989721 168821018 168622840 172529007 468701868 469636562 468420832 469087884 474667812 175380151 477500666 475444249 477463877 471569863 473141624 477647279 476020397 471848180 472500574 121262417 475344512 480843542 470987727 477700023 334506281 468909535 476783251 476866274 4707C0901 469848107 474167795 475382983 473746173 473609629 470566529 469629194 475569177 267460042 172563051 174663296 170704904 175505292 468629488 477331539 ANDERSCN, BRUCE L BOB2IEN, SUE A BORIS, SCOTT W BOSMA, JAiMIE L BRINKHAHS, JOHN F CALLAGHAN, JEREMIAH CARLSON, MICHAEL B CHESWICK, GARY B CORNICK, JAMES L DEMBOUSKI, JAY C ENGLISH III. IRVING ERICKSON, DOUGLAS J ERICKSON, KURT R FISCHENICH, DAN T GAFFRON. MICHAEL P GERHARDSCN, JOHN R GOMAN, DAVID J GREGORY, JAMES D HALLIN. DOROTHY M HANSEN, STEVEN C HANSING. CAROL J HAS EM All, CAROLE JOHNSON, BRADLEY P JOSTROM, FOREST J KARNITZ. RICKY D KING, ANITA D KNOLLENBERG, KRISTIN KUEHN, THOMAS M MABUSTH, JEANNE A MCINTYRE, WILLIAM E MCNICHOLS, DAVID L MILLER, CHRISTOPHER MOORSE, RONALD J MCROWCZYNSKI, JAMES OBERAIGNER, SCOTT G OBRIEN, RANDY L OLSON, JOHN C. OMAN, LYLE E PALMER, GREGORY A PETERSON, JACK W QUAST, WAYNE A RATHBUN, BARRY J ROSS, JOHN A SCHOENHOFF, JOHN B SKREEN, DALE S STEFFENHAGEN, RONALD SULLIVAN, STEPHEN X THOMTCN, MARK R TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F TCMC2YK, MARK W VANG, BRUCE L VES, LINDA S WECKf4AN, STEPHEN J YTD CURRENT fPT GROSS GROSS 1 31 31465.52 2211.03 31 17849.90 1042.56 31 4220.25 117.39 12 9933.49 192.03 42 28107.73 1656.00 93 2503 .00 375.00 31 3961.23 210.21 : 31 30169.29 1774.56 1 31 34319.52 2204.03 •. 31 31096.83 1570.67 1 1994.61 ’31 30981.72 93 349.26 73.03 31 27805.95 1772.67 . 31 29091.39 1706.32 : 33 25696.25 1513.91 ; 42 43170.56 2180.31 35 5569.19 343.16 ; 42 22728.21 1163.02 12 22135.85 1304.16 42 21166.68 1113.05 31 10319.99 564.93 12 19232.06 1115.75 31 29256.28 1611.52 93 1774.12 186.45 31 3263.5„174.72 35 1017.11 43.82 31 3005.25 194.17 • 15 37802.82 2227.20 33 32179.93 1895.93 93 2166.79 248.60 31 27729.59 1651.98 15 7689.09 1109.64 12 41530.55 2449. 31 29367.80 1868.35 42 21281.41 1123.47 92 21091.95 1113.04 15 5066.93 938.32 33 25497.81 1513.92 42 20618.33 1321.73 93 1748.25 233.75 92 26154.95 1693.46 92 20926 63 1113.03 93 3084.93 389.85 31 8847.77 603.33 42 20686.69 1113.04 93 22135.87 1304.16 31 35703.29 2177.29 31 27351.64 1581.36 31 28375.89 1937.17 31 27703.79 1611.52 33 22135.87 1304.16 12 19347.40 1179.41 ' 33 20465.16 1209.20 1 63,300.42 I COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Tue Aug 16 1994 22:52:S)6 Pag* 1CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT M INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL0313071994/08/17 $4,586.00$4,586.00*CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNI SAVINGS W/H i TRSFRD 9999-2030 001053 IP0313081994/08/17 $9,199.10$9,199.10*FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF W/H FIT,FICA,MEDCR 9999-2030 001054 IP0313091994/08/17 $2,743.78$2,743.78*FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CITY SHR-FICA.MEDCR 9999-2032 001055 IP0313101994/08/17 $37,582.54$37,582.54*FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF NET P/R TRANSFER 9999-2030 001052 IP0313111994/08/17 $2,781.56$2,781.56*MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVE ST TAX W/H 9999-2030 001056 IP$56,892.98 « CIT- OF OROW) POSTHON, AUG 15, 1994, 2:44 PH ACCOUNT NUMSCR 474-4802-0591-84 001-4221-0129-31 001-4343-0290-45 001-4210-0129-31 001-4210-0129-31 001-4343-0099-17 001-4221-0129-31 001-4221-0129-31 001-4151-0069-15 001-4151-0129-31 001-4151-0174-33 001-4151-0249-42 999-2030-9999-00 001-4356-0129-31 001-4233-0249-42 001-4341-0129-31 001-4341-0129-31 001-2226-9001-00 001-4233-0249-42 001-4232-0249-42 001-4341-0129-31 001-4341-0129-31 001-4341-0129-31 001-4341-0129-31 001-4343-0099-17 001-4233-0249-42 001-4341-0129-31 001-4340-0129-31 999-2030-9999-00 001-4152-0129-31 674-4341-0590-83 001-4342-0249-42 001-4320-0249-42 674-4343-0590-83 001-4380-0174-33 001-4343-0099-17 001-4340-0129-31 001-4340-0129-31 001-4210-0039-12 001-4221-0129-31 674-4802-0591-84 001-4210-0129-31 674-4802-0591-84 674-4802-0591-84 OPEN A/P BATCH PROOF (Short) Vendor 10 Date Invoice Hiflber sssssssszsss SSSXSZSS BSSSSSSZSSZSSSSS 037 08/09/94 31255 T58S 08/09/94 17734 634 07/17/94 001793 669 08/05/94 3768983 555 08/10/94 5113 272 08/11/94 264761 740 28/12/94 92555.1 740 08/09/94 92167.1 467 08/15/94 001794 467 08/15/94 001794 467 08/15/94 001794 467 08/15/94 001794 467 08/15/94 001794 T137 08/15/94 001795 20S 08/08/94 9708 T274 08/09/94 4796R T274 08/10/94 4800E 474 08/10/94 001796 T345 08/08/94 169 712 08/05/94 SI22022 1124 08/04/94 2978 1124 08/09/94 3028 1124 08/04/94 2858 1124 08/05/94 2851 014 98/03/94 9334-5 T586 07/27/94 001797 T366 08/05/94 10271 308 08/03/94 001798 1043 08/15/94 001799 130 08/17/94 0807940001727 114 08/01/94 16777 T336 08/05/94 4033 500 08/01/94 70':60008940 150 07/31/94 001800 T343 07/29/94 M732507 272 06/16/94 235917 509 06/20/94 9402214 509 06/20/94 9402213 555 08/05/94 4834 796 06/28/94 453140 037 08/01/94 30618 669 07/12/94 3766096 662 08/03/94 24215 284 08/02/94 265697 Description Batch File: APON0815 P.O. Pape 1 xsssssssxsmszssssxxx xxxxxxxx SANDWICHES BULLETS WEED CONTROL FILM PROCESSING MINI CASSETTES FLOOR MATS SHOES-SCHOENHOFF SH0ES-C(MN1CK HEALTH INSURANCE HEALTH INSURANCE HEALTH INSTANCE HEALTH INSURANCE HEALTH INSURANCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE INS CATCH BASIN COVERS REPLACE BACKUP BULB- REPAIR TO i169 JULY SAC CHARGES BUCK DIRT CYLINDER REPAIR KIT FLAT TIRE REPAIR #16 OIL CHANCE #170 OIL CHANGE #169 ALIGNMENT #166 REPUCE FAN SWITCH DRIVEWAY REPAIRS-THO LETTERING FOR #166 SPEAKER REPAIR OEF. COMP DISABILITY INS. REPAIR MENS TOILET REPAIR FLAIL MOWER PAGERS-AUG WATER SOFTENING MEMBERSHIP-OHAN FLOOR MATS COMPUTER CHARGES CONNECTION CHARGES MINI CASSETTES TROUSERS-ERICKSON SANDWICHES FILM t PROCESSING CANDY 4 ROLLS CHIPS Anoiett Rec. XXXXXXxxxxxxxx zzzs 51.08 1 933.50 2 915.00 3 12.75 4 187.71 5 132.49 6 59.95 7 59.95 8 160.71 9 160.71 10 582.02 11 451.72 12? 562.02 13 1,170.00 14 191.70 15 12.26 16 31.73 17 1,584.00 18 139.52 19 30.09 20 10.50 21 19.53 22 19.53 23 39.95 24 42.80 25 450.00 26 99.05 27 19.29 28 100.00 29 610.32 30 88.34 31 154.94 32 36.22 33 13.00 34 95.00 35 132.49 36 360.00 37 150.00 38 187.71 39 162.76 40 54.82 41 95.92 42 58.20 43 7.40 44 cm Of onoiioi«N, MJ6 15, 1994,POST 2:44 PM 0 P E M A /P BATCi PROOF (Short) Batch File: APOH0815 Page 2account MMER Vendor 10 Date Invoice lh»ter Oeacriptioo P.O.001-4210-0129-31 001-4343-0290-45 674-4343-0590-83 001-4343-0099-17 001-4341-0129-31 001-4356-0129-31 001-4232-0129-31 001-4341-0129-31 001-4233-0249-42 673- 43U-0569-82 001-4341-0129-31 674- 4331-0590-83 001-4151-0069-15 001-4151-0129-31 001-4151-0174-33 001-4151-0249-42 674-4151-0590-83 999-2030-9999-00 674-4802-0591-84 asamsssssss* aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaasrs-===* i*«aaaaaaaiaaaaarsa*»»-«* aaaaa»»»U2 08/01/94 1970065 Esssssrs: 065 065 065 T473 269 T568 T459 008 788 752 267 275 275 275 275 275 275 037 07/30/94 147142 07/30/94 147172 07/30/94 147115 07/14/94 001801 08/04/94 2729 08/15/94 001802 07/24/94 3481 07/21/94 1949 08/03/94 11091 07/18/94 053112 07/31/94 001803 08/15/94 001804 08/15/94 001804 08/15/94 001804 08/15/94 001804 08/15/94 001804 08/15/94 001804 08/01/94 20163 LEASE-AUG CONT. BT LAKE GOLF COURSE CITY HALL, PU CHARGES-JULY PTAC TRAINING LOCK FOR BIKE EQUIPMENT FOR SOiJAO APRONS SERVICE i INSPECTION '.IRES LEASE-AUG HEALTH INS.-SEPT HEALTH INS.-SEPT HEALTH INS. - SEP HEALTH INS. health ins. HEALTH INS. COFFEE KIT SEP SEP SEP 189.87279.86 67.34 161.57 187.50 35.00 15.92 1,965.14 1,076.72 1,137.17 393.96 1,000.00 158.13 1,480.26 158.13 582.00 291.00 983.08 36.00 ■.tchlD. MOOOIM SHM. User Tot.l! 20,635.33 TOTALS MATCH Distribution Total: 20,635.33 net Total:20,635.33 4546 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 CITY Of WOK) POST TNU, tm 18, 1W. 11:34 AM ACCOUIT NUMBfR SSSSSBSSSSSSSSSXSSSSSSSSZSSSZXaXS 001-4324-0175-34 001-4324-0249-42 001-4324-0290-45 673- 4324-0569-82 674- 4324-0590-83 672-4320-0549-81 001-4355-0069-15 001-4355-0129-31 :01-4355-0174-33 672- 4355-0549-81 673- 4355-0569-82 001-4346-0249-42 001-4232-0249-42 001-4342-0249-42 001-4232-0249-42 001-4322-0039-12 001-4322-0069-15 001-4322-0129-31 31-4322-0174-33 >72-4322-0549-81 673- 4322-0569-82 001-4210-0069-15 001-4210-0039-12 001-4323-0C40-13 674- 4815-0591-84 001-4343-0290-45 001-4343-0099-17 999-2031-9999-00 999-2030-9999-00 674-4342-0590-83 001-4306-0039-12 301-4232-0129-31 101-4232-0249-42 72-4234-0549-81 674-4234-0590-83 001-4231-0290-45 673-4234-0569-82 001-4233-0249-4: 999-2030-9999-00 673- 4344-0569-82 674- 4221-0590-83 674-4221-0590-83 001-4221-0249-42 001-4221-0249-42 OPEN A/P BATCH PROOF (Short)Batch Fite: APOK0817 Paoe 1 Vendor ID Date Invoice Nunber Description P.O.Amount Rec. ssss 562 08/18/94 001806 NSP COSTS 3.14 1 562 08/18/94 001806 NSP COSTS 106.03 2 562 08/18/94 001806 NSP COSTS 67.09 3 562 08/18/94 001806 NSP COSTS 1,027.40 4 562 08/18/94 001806 NSP COSTS 29.32 5 815 08/18/94 001807 US WEST COSTS 54.31 6 815 08/18/94 001807 US WEST COSTS 44.37 7 815 08/18/94 001807 US WEST COSTS 44.37 8 815 08/18/94 001807 US WEST COSTS U.38 9 815 08/18/94 001807 US WEST COSTS 17.75 10 815 08/18/94 001807 US WEST COSTS 26.63 11 T455 07/21/94 001808 TREE REMOVAL 1,200.00 12 T099 08/05/94 42872 GAUGE STICIC 13.44 13 T587 08/15/94 6026 RESHARPEN CHIPPER 6L 75.00 14 039 08/15/94 135090 PARK HERE SIGNS 79.57 15 638 08/05/94 103234 LETTERHEAD 8 ENVELOP 88.99 16 638 08/05/94 103234 LETTERHl./* 8 ENVELOP 88.99 17 638 08/05/94 103234 LETTER .cAO 8 ENVELOP 88.99 18 638 08/05/94 103234 LET1ERHEA0 8 ENVELOP 88.99 19 638 08/05/103234 LETTERHEAD 8 ENVELOP 88.99 20 638 08/05/94 103234 LETTERHEAD 8 ENVELOP 88.99 21 TS88 08/10/94 23287 TONER CARTRIDGE 133.13 22 T588 08/10/94 23287 TONER CARTRIDGE 174.40 23 618 08/15/94 1027 FILING OF CANDIDATES 9.24 24 187 08/12/94 402834 10 CASES GEN. DRAFT 114.00 25 T554 08/03/94 1096 PARK LAUN NAINT. • J 2,048.85 26 114 08/03/94 17003 WATER PIPES-COUNCIL 369.00 27 598 08/18/94 001809 PERA 8/01 - 8/14 4,610.11 28 598 08/18/94 001C09 PERA 8/01 • 8/14 3,505.94 29 562 08/03/94 001810 TIRE REPAIR 10.00 30 T589 08/12/94 3765 CONTRACT LABOR-OZIUK 160.88 31 1155 08/18/94 001811 MI SC CHARGES 24.12 32 1155 08/18/94 001811 Ml SC CHARGES 29.94 33 1155 08/18/94 001811 MIS CHARGES 35.25 34 1155 08/18/94 001811 Ml SC CHARGES 76.93 35 1155 08/18/94 001811 MI SC CHARGES 15.63 36 1155 08/18/94 001811 MISC CHARGES 6.68 37 T532 08/15/94 001812 AS3MAIT 538.01 38 495 08/15/94 001813 SEPT INSURANCE 10.18 39 826 07/31/94 30323 REPAIR L.S. P17 1,852.08 40 272 08/04/94 261179 STEFFENHAGEN 2.56 41 272 08/11/94 264762 STEFFENHAGEN 2.56 42 272 08/’1/9C 264763 STREET EMPLOYEES 45.80 43 272 08/('4/94 261180 STREET EMPLOYEES 66.36 44 r ITT OF ORONO POSTHO, MM 18, 1994, 11:34 AM OPEN A/P BATCH PROOF (Shorts Batch File: APOH0817 Pa«e 2CCOUNT NUMBERSSSSSSSSSSS373-4221-0569-82 72-4221-0549-81 .72-1500-9672-00 .73-1500-9673-00 .72-4234-0549-81 ,72-4234-0549-81 101-4232-0249-42 ,73-4232-0569-82 101-4232-0249-42 Kn-4232-0249-42 K)1-4341-0129-31 )01-434i-0129-31 >01-4381-0174-33 >01-4356-0129-31 »74-4323-0590-83 >01-4346-0249-42 >72-4306-0549-81 ^73-4306-0569-82 >01-4331-0249-42 W-2030-9999-00 W-2030-9999-00 W-2030-9999-00 W-2030-9999-00 W-2030-9999-00 W-2030-9999-00 W-2030-9999-00 301-4356-0069-15 301-4356-0069-15 301-4366-0129-31 301-4356-0129-31 544-4620-0907-00 5U-4630-0907-00 }01-4399-0299-52 Vendor 10 Date Invoice Nijnber Description P.O.Amount Rec.9SXZSSSSSSSS 9 M «B ^B ^B ^B * « « «» ^B .B ^B « V « ^ « ^B SSSSSSS33SSSSSXS3SSS SSSS8SSS S8SSSSSS3SSSS8 888827208/04/9^ ^^1181 RATHBUN, OUAST 16.11 4527208/11/94 264764 RATNBUN, OUAST 15.10 46 148 05/23/94 27649 EOUIPHENT FOR NEW TR 3,680.31 47 148 05/23/94 27649 EQUIPMENT FOR NEW TR 3,680.30 48 T537 07/31/94 001055004 CYLINDER RENTAL 12.00 49 220 07/29/94 18390 DEMUR. CHARGES 5.00 50 439 08/01/94 190215 FILTER FOR BACKHOE 18.32 51 439 07/28/94 190064 AIR CLEANER 17.11 52 439 07/12/94 189164 SHOP CHAIN 4.19 53 697 07/15/94 102031 SKID SHOE 82.41 54 T274 08/12/94 4805R DIAGNOSTIC #170 20.80 55 740 08/16/94 92716.1 HANDCUFFS 150.80 56 845 08/15/94 001814 MILEAGE REIMBURS - U 28.00 57 T590 07/13/94 001815 POST COURSE-BORIS 150.00 58 618 04/04/94 647 GOLF FEES 45.50 59 T549 08/15/94 4781 ASPHALT DUMPINGS 120.00 60 278 07/31/94 4070524 JULY SERVICE 84.00 61 278 07/31/94 4070524 JULY SERVICE 56.00 62 835 07/31/94 60353 BARRICADE LIu:!^*?145.27 63 1058 08/17/94 001816 SKREEt: #€0262510 146,50 64 1057 08/17/94 001817 THOMTON #€0266780 174.50 65 1051 08/17/94 001818 LEF COMP U/H 1,134.00 66 1043 08/17/94 001819 OEF COMP U/H 100.00 67 1052 08/17/94 001820 OE- COMP U/H 100.00 68 1053 08/17/94 001821 DE' COMP U/H 1,313.46 69 1054 08/17/94 001822 OFF COMP U/H 122.09 70 450 08/01/94 001823 GFOA CONFERENCE-KUEH 175.00 71 T372 08/01/94 001824 GFOA CONFERENCE-KUEH 94.78 72 454 08/12/94 001825 TUITION REIMBURSE -314.00 73 206 08/12/94 001826 TUITION REIMBURSE.-E 355.60 74 020 08/01/94 AN882-2 BONO INO DUE 9/1/94 3,693.75 75 020 08/15/94 ANB82-3 PAYING ASEN FEE 8/15 50.00 76 T420 08/18/94 001827 CPV ANNUAL MEMBERSHI 350.00 77 latch ID: OHQ00162 System Coinputed Total: 33,663.29 User Computed Total: 33,663.29 TOTALS HATCH Distribution total: 33,663.29 Net Total: 33,663.29 INFORMATION ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING COUNCiLMEEnNG AUG 2 2 1994 GtlYOFORONO OF I’ i > i r. To; From: Date: Subject: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator h/.P ,'If I August 19, 1994 Reconveyance of MWCC Interceptor to the City I have attached a copy of a memo provided to the Council for discussion at its August 8 meeting concerning the reconveyance of an MWCC interceptor to the City. At the August 8 Council meeting, the Council indicated it needed more time to review the information regarding the reconveyance before providing direction to staff regarding the City’s response to the MWCC’s proposal. As indicated in the August 8 memo, the general concept behind the MWCC’s proposal seems reasonable. There are two items the City may want to pursue regarding the proposal: 1. 2. The MWCC proposal would reduce principal payments to the City retroactive back to 1990. A counterproposal would be to make the reduction in principal payments effective in 1994. Portions of this reconveyed interceptor continue to carry flows from properties in other cities. This could have some impact on the calculation of the portion of the pipe capacity that is needed to serve Orono. If the Council has other questions or concerns regarding the MWCC proposal, these can be discussed at the August 22 Council meeting. r TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator DATE: August 8, 1994 SUBJECT: Reconveyance of MWCC Interceptor to the City Background nf Interceptor and Reconveyanc e In 1976 the MWCC purchased a city sewer line to be used as an interceptor to serve other cities as well as to serve properties in Orono. The MWCC agreed to pay the city for the sewer line over a period of 30 years. These payments have been received as credits toward the MWCC sewer treatment charges. In 1989 the MWCC constructed a new interceptor to take the place of the former interceptor. As part of this project the MWCC wanted to reconvey the former interceptor back to the city of Orono since the majority of the line now served only Orono. Orono agreed to accept the line and to accept responsibility for the maintenance of the line. However, the city indicated it would not pay the MWCC for the line. Payment for Reconveved Interceptor Subsequent to this agreement the MWCC and Metropolitan Council adopted a policy that required those cities receiving reconveyed interceptors to pay the MWCC for the reconveyed lines. Based on this policy the MWCC calculated that the city was responsible for paying $131,000 for the reconveyed sewer line. The city’s response was that the agreement regarding the new interceptor indicated the city would not pay for the reconveyed interceptor. The Metropolitan Council and MWCC have now reevaluated their position regarding payment for the reconveyed interceptor. They have indicated the city does not need to pay for the reconveyed interceptor. New MWCC Proposal The MWCC has principal and interest payments remaining for the initial purchase of the former interceptor. These payments run through 2006. The MWCC believes it is not reasonable that they should continue to pay the full principal and interest payment when they are no longer usi^ the interceptor. The MWCC has proposed that the remaining payment to the city be reduced by the portion of the pipe capacity that is needed to serve Orono (53.79%). I have attached a spreadsheet that shows the amount by which these payments would teredu^ effective back to 1990. The annual reduction in principal payments ranges from $4,346 m lVW to $8,145 in 2006. The total principal payment reduction over a 17 year penod would be $103,006. The spreadsheet also shows that even with the proposed adjustment the MWCC would pay the city a total of principal and interest payments of $3^,386 between the years 1990 and 2006. Although it would be preferable to contmue to receive the full principal and interest payments from the MWCC, the fact that ^e sewer me reconveyed to the city and is currently being used by the city as part of its oca sewer n makes the MWCC’s position a reasonable one. r •' '-'t-'.... rr t.-’; ■ ■ ■■ ^ •v' s ir •n f: Principal Balance Year Jan 1 1990 $357,604 1991 342,514 1992 326,821 1993 310,500 1994 293,526 1995 275,873 1996 257,514 1997 238,421 1998 218,564 1999 197,913 2000 176,436 2001 154,099 2002 130,869. 2003 106,710 2004 81,584 2005 55,453 2006 28,277 TOTALS rawcc-cvc\76amend Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Current Value Credits for 1976 Purchases Revised 1994 Princi^l Reduction Adjustment ($4,347) (4,520) (4,701) (4,889) (5,085) (5,288) (5,500) (5,720) (5,948) (6,186) (6,434) (6,691) (6,959) (7,237) (7,527) (7,828) (8,145) ($103,005) Adjusted Princ Bal Jan 1 $353,257 337,994 322.120 305,611 288,441 270,585 252,014 232,701 212,616 191,727 170,002 147,408 123,910 99.473 74,057 47,625 20,132 Principal Interest Payment Payment 9 4.00% $10,743 11,173 11,620 12,085 12,568 13,071 13,593 14,137 14,703 15,291 15,903 16,539 17,200 17,889 18,604 19,348 20,132 $254,599 $14,130 13,520 12,88.5 12,224 11,538 10,823 10,081 9,308 8,505 7,669 6,800 5,896 4,956 3,979 2,962 1,905 805 $137,987 Total Payment $24,873 24,693 24,505 24,309 24,106 23,894 23,674 23,445 23,208 22,960 22,703 22,435 22,156 21,868 21,566 21,253 20,937 $392,586 Principal Balance Dec 31 $342,514 326,821 310,500 293,526 275,873 257,514 238,421 218,564 197,913 176,436 154,099 130,869 106,710 81,584 55,453 28,277 0 1 August 15, 199^ fi^CElVBD1« 19M Ci I { CF OPO^{Q Public Roads Departirent Cities of Plymouth, Orono, Way^ata I am writing regarding a column that appeared in the Star Tribune Motoring section on July 30, 1994 in reference to your common road, Ferndale Avenue North. Not favorable public relations for any of you. I concur with everything that Mr. Callagher stated i n Ferndale as **best of worst** road. We moved to Plymouth h ? ■=5 nomination of in 19"^9 and as far back as I can remember, this road has been in rough shape. Tn the last five or so years, I have called your respective cities each summer to see if, and when, something was going to be done. But each year, all I see is the perennial patch job. A year or two ago I was told by the Plymouth offices that both Plymouth and Orono are ready to re-do the road, but that Wayzata was dragging its reason. feet and holding up construction for whatever the The road is too narrov; for the heavy traffic that travels it. It has no center line dividing the lanes of traffic. Tt definitely has the bump at the 394 bridge. What bothers me most about the road is the fact that it is accident waiting to happen. On any given day and with the mentioned conditions, the road also i«as mote than Its sliare of walkers, bikers, runners, kids on .skateboards, and even mothers pushing baby carriages, in addition to the motorized traffic. I would like to know just when the three cities can get together on the badly needed reconstruction of Ferndale. T would also hope that when you do, you incorporate bike lanes on both sides of the road to accommodate all the other users of the road. T would hop»=* ^hat this all be dene in the very near future. Will it take a death on the road to get it accomplished?? Hoping to receive a reply from each city. Kathy ^tadley O 16220 25th Ave M Plymouth MN 55447 473-8817 i . i . ! ; THU, fvuoje.- 19J4, 'M.l III FAGI' IALL CITY FxF.rora JUl> , 179-1KKI-TH l\f I b«T f 'Kinf^KV “Uf rtNbL-Lt GC iBr STKm "niirr’L 1 \ 1 ■KrrT^DFT\i\Tp-94-000000410194/07 /Ol 2:45 DWI-MIGD LVFIC; /GHADVWaOD 0 525ir^ —7 Sr 4/ V// 1 71 5 »mL» if\l ' i So J FEK. iDOLE □511If<-94-0000004209 94/07 /Ol 2:45 JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFF LVh 1C /SH.IL'/UOQC U f./5Ir-94-0000004210 94/07 /ul *20: 20 EQUIP VIDL-WARH 3T«.'0 £H0Rl.l.It4t 0 517-94-0000004212 94/07 -94-0000004213 94/07 ^-94^00000042194/07 /03[-94-0000004210 94/07 /Ol [-94-0000004219 94/07 /Ol 94*0000004720 99rar /Ol H-94-0000004221 94/07 ^/Ol 1-94-0000004222 94/07 /OlTcn------19!24----—err■ T RAI~“VTOl.2400 —rrrrrnt.ncHEN sr -^17 • - t ii/Ol 23:03 OT TRAP VIOL 2700 SHADYWOOD 0 519 • j ’/02 14: 16 OT TRAP VIOL 4600 SHORELINE SP 51720ST-T oTOt' SIGn/SCnririlGRIT’0:44 DEFT AGG15T9:57 AL AFxh'3lint-------ACTnnt:------------------------------12814 ' DAS/DAR/DAC135 24 CAr<ELESS/r<ECKLE5S 1275nzo— GnrnET73rtnnTtnao----LAFAVeTTE DAV LINDAWQGD-^mraxitvmw----------------HWY 12 /WATERTOWNHWY 12/CTY 14A 3T-MELIu—LLLL -^17GIG—3tr 510 51 I Sc F\ - 9 4 - 00»,#000 4 ^'? •» / V //O 1 1T t ^5 SUSP IC10» 1 -----------1733 --tt. '52-2 R-94-000000422494/ 7 /Ol 16:07 LOST FEFC'SONS 4317 CHANNEL sr 527 R-94-000000422594/07 /Ol 17:T8 LOCt OUT 1 LAKES IDE MAR IN. 4 0 56 7 r*94*0000004226 94/07 R-94-0000004227 94/07 -94-0000004228 94/07 ^-94-0000004227 94/07 4-94-0000004230 94/07 R-94-0000004231 94/07 —44—lKK>0\/u4232 94/0/ t-94-0000004233 94/07 R-94-0000004234 94/07 n-94-0000004233 R-94-0000004236 94/07 R-94-0000004237 94/07 l*^V4-000000423B 94/07 R-94-0000004239 94/07 1-94-0000004240 94/07 R-94-uu«.'u00424 i R-94-0000004242 R-94-0000004243 17!3? 19:51 20:34 ■rorrrr 23:26 23:36 23133 11 40 2:00 rrT3- 3:05 3: 12 OT msc rat^----------------3t»74- SPEED 3600 SPEED 1000 TO:nRrT3------------------------4T«^c SUSr-ICIOM 250 ALAKHS 795 ■P T STUTv p- -pEACg=MS=rtAfC-yr25 “ JUVENILE-CURFEW 43 11 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NQ 511 St OcetrtNE --------------- SHORELINE DROWN -err 6 ---------------- CYOMET OLD CRYSTAL BA/ Trrtct-------------------- 35 39 4: 12 4:12 4! 53 5:24 5:26 7:06 9i 19 9:25 Til 25 12: 16 12:22 mnTrrTEr^^cuRTEtr- DISTURBANCE or MI sc FUB ■ATTtmtrxorirrnTNTS TTOv 2U56 disturbance : TRAFFIC -VERBAL WARN 3900 “unsruARTtme------------- ALARMS SPEED-WARN DEPT ASSTST SHORELINE DEXTER 'SltOREtrtNR------------------------ GRAND CTi 6 /HUNTER DR ------W2t3r~AKM -------------------------- 2056 GRAND SUNSET 0 0 -n- □ o 'Gr— SP LL -C7-“ LL 0 -5t»- LL SP 0 O 519 519 —522' 519 517 —519- 525 519 —319 51 I 511 —5'25- 511 525 -525- 511 525 .•;V:•r;0:V ; ( t : < • > Ka [f ill ;j ■ - f• ! V c c 94/07 /uJ 94/07 /02 94/07 /02 4509 1 4-:»o |R-^4 h)06000424S 4-0000004246 94“00uuu0424b R-94-0000004249 94/07 94/ru 94/07 /02 94/07 /02 947U7 T472’ 4105 1410 7TT /02 R-94-0000004250 94/07 /02 ALARMS PI-MVA irrrrTAc-ronrcR t nrt:-------------- ALARMS 43/)0 BUt.G-UNt DEG-UMOCC N 1825 5H0RCLTITE----------------- BRACt ETTS F T BLAINE /SHORELINE HONTCR- - - - - - - - - - BAYS IDE SHORELINE ' HlU-r* 12/MARTMA-------------- CTY 6 CONCORDIA MCPltirr o 0 -tt::--------- G O 5ie 5ie ■5tc 510 519 Rt94-90000042S2 94 /f07 Rr94-00ObO04253 94/07 r y /02 •, /02 - 12!4&~- 12:59 I4t28 ALARMS FIRES-ALL OTHERS OT MISC PUB -----ISOCT - 1965 -" BRACKETTS PT------------------ COUNTRY CLUB 1ONI,AWA /NORT H BHO -t)-------------- 0 0 -------------5T9 51B 519 rc-Y^—uO»-pwuNy4/0//02 1 b: ^'V tit-ttU WATERTOWN/ OLD CR i^ST ^--------------519 R-94-0000004255 94/07 /02 15:40 OT M15C PUB 3805 NORTH SHORE 0 519 R-94-0000004256 94/07 /02 16:00 OT MISC PUB 242u SHADYWOOD 0 519L L L.| I t ^ . 16:0U b94-<«>00<K)4S5a •94/07,•>V02 ' 17i4B 1-94-0000004259:94/07 702 : I’ 1B»T5 v4/0/ R-94-0000004261 94/07 R-94-0000004262 94/07 lt-V4“UUUUUU42«»J V4/0/ 1-94-^0000004264 94/07 7xrr /02 /02 /o;i /02 lu: 30 IB:36 19:54 IV: 59 20: 10 7BUKG-UWF, iJUti-fU FKC ALARMS I ALARMS inSTUKFAnCH SPEED ALARMS bPEtU OTHER MOVING VIOL -SPRING- - - - - -:— DANIELS DANIELS GRAND- - - - - - - - - - CTY 125/BLACF LAt E DANIELS "SHOREUT NE 2:.T5 4600 SHOFxELlNE 519 4 C THU» AUG IG, 1974, fv.ALL Cl Tv' r<tFOiUUASC^ROTOCTT JULY, I;;4I - Tfj r-iJrtY kK I - \ iHL PKii*iMf\ i ~ur ^ rniTE~TjrijC"TTtjrfror^TrrT\crT'n'37TnE‘t-94-0000004265 94/07 /02 21: ntU-Y^-OwWUH7:6o V'l/U/ R-94-0000004267 94/07 iR-94-0«X>000426n 94/07 F4-Ii0u0004AV V4/U/ J-94-0000004270 94/07 t-94-000000427l 94/07 /u^/OS/03 THLFT-LEG5 200-CM-GG 1916 MWV 12- ot r Vrr'rmr -Trrr l*W-V4^l>^l JlJOi.1'4 J 7 2 94/0//1.' .•7:16 H r -94-0C'00004273 94/07 /u;.0:49 If R-94-0«70000427 4 94/07 /«.»:10: 0*/ ilLIf—Y^—.Y»l/U//U V 12s 44 CTR 94-0000004277 94/07 /03 13:53 (7R-94-0000004270 94/07 */03 14:47 V4/07 /U V : 4 : «» i H r -94-OOOOiX 42B0 94/07 70 ;15:42 H:R-94-00000«. 4201 94/07 703 15:53 Tnnr’i'. lUfiIFxAFFIC -VEKE.IL WA6H 5:UGP ICION Ul~HIGL F'lJU MENIAL CAGESanimal COMFLAINTS ^u sTTCinrr------------------ ALARMS TRAFFIC -VtRLAL HARM / ?->1‘.NORTH SMU/f.HOUt L INL CREE» SIDE uOLI. If—y4-00u W0 ‘¥4/0/ ~ /0G^ -94-0000004283 94/07 /05 -94-00000042b4 94/07 /03 ,i^-94-0l^wu0^2dG V^/O/ TTJT R-94-0000004206 94/0/ /OZ R-94-OOOO«X4207 94/07 /04 n —WWW^XOU T*t/u/ /Us R-94-OOOOOO4209 94/07 /OS R-94-0000004290 94/07 /OS lOJ UY 17iS9 IB:2S 20:0^ 23:00 1:56 4:20 0:43 0:09 LOST FERSOMS GICI CARED FOR ALrtKMS FAR! IMG VIOL ALAr<HS ALARMS "T93T—raiT“ir 3.400 521 n----- SP EED-W.'NRN I GOO ANIMAL COMPLAINTS 440«» “smrtnTTiRn-----------------------4 rorr- CRIM AGNSr ADMM JUST 4511 DISTURBANCE luOG TRAP Vine LAST LAI E MOIVIH STREAM 'NCLSorr'TnRtr- SHADYWOOD T40RTM SHORE snnRELTNtr------ SHOKELINE LINDEN -CTTSr“ R-94-0000004272 94/07 /OS R-94-0000004293 94/07 703 JR-^4—0000004^94 V4/07 /uC R-94-0000004293 94/07 /03 -94-0000004296 94/07 /04 u: yj 15:06 13:06 Id: 4b 22:53 7:44 (JI TRAP Vine CTT 51 /CTY i ASLT 2-INFLICTS BODI 4177 SHORELINE SF LIQUOR - F05SEGS1NG 3701 SUNSET SP --------—----------prnT “icr—/luce ltnc: 4400 WEST ARM xxr o 0 ttr U 0 XT- SF O tr- Ui lb / L*mK / DAC OT MI SC F Ut: VEH THEFT-EE-OVEF a 72 4 400 BUT \N V1UL A T1 OTIS K-Y4-UW0U04 27 /94/0//M4 9: .‘.o R-94-0000004298 94/07 704 10:31 :R-94-0000<j04299 94/07 704 10:44 lf^4-0OWW4;5W V4/AJ/ /04 -94-0000004301 *,94/07 /04 »R-94-0000004302 94/07 704 12:49 13:04 13:09 MVA FFn OP damage SICK CARED FUrv "SI ' CAREb V(jIn “ LOCI OUT DISrUF<BAMCE SPEED or MISC FUR SICi: CARED FOR WEST ARM "4 7T2 WEST ARM STUBBS BA/HWY 12 3065 SUNSET dli> lrtstal ” bat BROCJI G FAGERNES5 FT 42o 3120 1991 1400 Hwv rr 2532 LAFAYETTE 1200 BRACKETTS FT u SF SF O SF ■n*“ MB O LL MB O ;k -Y4-uuQooo4yo i 94/0//04 13: 3o WARRAiir Ar RC ‘3I ■^1 lORri: IFIITTI bOTOTT ;R-94-0000004304 94/07 /04 14:50 or MISC PUB 2227 SHADYWOOD :R-94-000CM»4303 94/U7 /04 15: 11 SF-CED-WARN 2 HWV 12 ST* O Q tif—V4-o000uu4,506 94/o7 . --^-94-0000004307 94/07 ^*^•4-94-6000004300 94/07 Cl #i-94-0000064312 9470V i ~ 7 . ^4r<Oio60004313i94/07i /os ; . R-94-0000004314 '94/07 ' /OS ' '' 4:40 L. c r-94-0000004So9 94/67 R-94-0000004310 94/07 R-94-0000004311 94/07 1:2b 4:12 R-94-D000004315 94/07 7u5 R-94-0000004316 94/07 /05 R-94-00000<^43I7 94/07 /05 R-94-60<Kk3043i0 94/07 7ub t-94-0000004319 94/07 /06 b: -.6 11 : C»0 15:34 D1S T URbANCE WELFARE CHECK ALARMS □T HIsL PUB ■37m bUNSL I SHADYWOOO SHORELINE 17: 2:33 ORDER PROTECT/RtSTR CRIM AGNSr GOVN-GM-E 3900 CKih wGrJbl fiDnN jUSl PROP DAMAGE-MS-FRIVA 2420 4400 ■^rJO-----SHURECrME* 1516 LONG LAI E s v3.'V tor O SF SHORELINE to! o SF TTl llS I UN /SHukLu 1NL U ARCOLA /SHORELINE MB 4 ^ • ici F I -Ur r 520j. i>bJ55.:e200n47542725-"TinrrrFfVTrw WEST AFxM RAINEY MrSF0 525514525 43-^9 st!onrt.TMtr~SI 3510 2465 WEST IMl'USTMAL LL 51S HWi' ir/cr»' 146 LL •^11 —IJOIn TTF SI tURC---------------Q 11 1 LUCt LINE TRAIL O 5ie 2705 SHADYWOOO 0 510 ■ -' ‘H »V.- L! •5tS- - 519 5Cfi 522 519 5?8 '519* — 519 525 "523 515 514 “^25— 527 527 527 527 521 "I -• '■? . - V* b'** V*' 6 ‘ "5T0 510 510 519 510 519 52T 529 519 - •: 7'. • ''■y y.' /o4 /04 /04 16:13 18:45 THCTT-RS-SHuPLiri IHG OT TRAP VIOL DEPT ASSIST 3335 1600 3746 StIORP L 1 FlF HWY 12 SUNSET . b 0 SP 519 518 /o4 19: 2*6 Dr HlbC PUu ^TT76E SUNSET SF 52/ 704 19:57 THEFT-MS-BICtCLE-NO 3167 LAFAYETTE MB 529 704 23:32 LOST PERSONS 2020 GRAND LL 525 firV-' 31^ S14 514 1 c I rSU T" S70 519 TSTT- 525 * V THU, Aug iq/ 1994, 3:41 rn FAGCALL CITY rvEFOfU JULY, l^-'MAti t* PIUH^LRItR-94-0000004320 94/07 /OG.h-V4-0U<J».*0043 aI V4/U/ /*.•.>R-94-0000004322 94/07 /OG 19 :R-94-0000004323 94/07 /OJT\P1 ^ PI I “UW t Kh' I - I 1 ML F'K i r’A^K v - U» TFiTjcT‘T7EIjC“Tn37TrcTr ‘GTnE t I ‘fiArTETff—,Tf WVUV^^ ^R-94-^000000432S 94/07 R-94-0000004326 94/07 K-V4-UU0UU04 y4/0/ :R-94-000000432B 94/07 R-94-0000004329 94/07 fR"j94*O000v0433v 94/0/ t-94r000000433l 94/07 -94-0000004332 94/07 9 —94-00000»-»4 T-3 3 94/07 /T;j/05/OG 9; 30 VEHICLE AOANDOrJEDI'/. UI i.I HJE 22T010:50 LOCr O'JT G24U:26 911 HANG UP CALL 1749lit 3G r- KUN bf^nM(.iE.-rio-FlM VA 476G/OG /OG '703 /OG /05 TCG" tR-94-0000004334 94/07 /O!. R-94-000000433G 94/07 /0*.> R*94*0000004336 94/07 /vU jR-^4-0000004337 94/07 /OO «-94-OOOOOO4330 94/07 /05 J.R—94^00^>^J0043i9 94/07 /OtT R-94-0*>Xj004340 94/07 /OG J:R-94~000000434l 94/07 /OG -94-v00vvO4342 11x4011:43UtG9 13: 13 13:41 1 3 X3 3- 14:02 14:24 '14: rr IG; IG 15:21 X3i 2-V 16:00 16:10 TTIO'r 17:46 19:25 ANIMAL IMPOUND SUSPICION AN 1 MAL rni QUMD TMEF T -M5-taCYCLt-N0 ALARMS TRATtrr TTtOt- 135546014026 2701 Cft 15 /CTV 19 TTtrnr Tr:rrro:; tt IMNHALL rjGR I H F Al xM TonrnvTFTr^MGKTH ARM SHQfvF.LlNE SI IGREinriT^*SUNSr T » ELLY xrmr oIX-'LL O■tT“O SP STOP SIGN/SEMAPHORE ALARMS “ACARnS---------------------- I 151^ or MIGC FUD or MI Si: ruD THrrr=rts=r rcrtxr *7.17“ -t ANIMAL CGHPLAINIS 9G5 5PEED-WARN TRAP -VTOL—------ ------------- MVA PROF DANAGE SPEED 17 4* uSP O titn—12 ■O” OLD CRYST/HWV 12 0 la*"ayetie mb •ntiMT tMCTON*^rT-----------------r LAI C MIMr^nON* A O LOMG LAI E 0 SMADYWOUir-------------------------tr lUMI AHA U fOX /IROWN RU 0 riMa/pATTcrG------------------cr Ml A 1? CASCO rr /bhopelinl LL 0 /'Jii /06 /06 1^—94 —0000004340 94/07 -94-0000004349 94/07 -94-0000004350 94/07 R-94-0<^^0w4o5i 94/0/ ~ /*. 6 R-94-0000004352 94/07 /C>6 R-94-0000004353 94/07 /Od> L.- ▼4/u// u3 19136 —FRATF ic -vcRrAtn»i:4Rrr CASCO PT /GFlURELtrit.“tJ— 94/07 /05 21:17 LOST PERSONS 2020 GRAND LL 94/07 /06 3:00 ALARMS 2165 WATERTOWN LL 94/07 7T35 13! 00 FEKPt (1 1 0 E-J1 GUM RUGttELL LI. 94/07 /OG 13:29 THEFT-LESb 200-GM-Se 1010 MW/ 12 LL 94/07 /03 I9i30 COUNCIL. MCEnMG l'?61 r-ARI LL 71 72---------DTSTUrTFANCn---------- 8:5B MENTAL CASES 9il8 OT MISC PUB 9: :-0 ALARMS 11:36 SUSPICION 12:05 MVA PROP DAMAGE ;H®94*D00000435¥" -94-0000004355 -94-0000004356 -V4-0000«^U435 / R-94-0000004350 R-94-0000004359 11^94*00000043511 i-;94-*000000436l -9420000004362 ▼4707" 94/07 94/07 94/L»7 94/07 94/07 / uo /06 /06 /06 /06 - -4379“ 4601 900 2C20' 900 2066 131U0 MEtil lNU Af ILNOt.D 4T?30' 13:05 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVA 2U00 13:42 SUSPICION 1960 T4TTT7 --------■nTTTTSrmJE-----------------------43IT? 14:24 OT MISC FUD 4 700 14:57 OT MISC PUD 509 trrTorrctrtNir SHORELINE PEF-:NDALE SP 0 FARVIEn ---------- HE SI FL FxNDALE SMAUGiNESBY EHORELlTiE NUR'THVIEW CENIRAL -STi-CTTELtrrr-------- MWV 12 FEFNDALE O LL "ST UB LL .94/0/ 94/07 94/07 Cl c K-V4-‘UuUWU436 i V4/u/ R-94-0<X*0O04364 94/67 R-94-0000004365 94/07 ,,^y4*0000IKJ4355T947O7 . ^______ R-«4 tO<>6O0!O43A7 .94/07.: 707 'O' V . Ii03 "-^4-0000004348-94/07 /07 4t27 /uo /06 706 16: 19 . 19: 15 • •• 19:55 1 KEbPASS-HS-PR P3319' MVA PROP DAMAGE WAFxRANT ARREST "4509 “' 216 —SHORCLTNE------------------------ BROWN AFxCOLA DR/GHORELINE 7'06 20:16 ELL SUNSET/PmU /06 21:34 DISTUFaDANCE 5«;»o DEXTER /06 21:46 ALARMS 3159 LArA/ETlE RIDGE /UCJ L: R-V4-uuOOUo4369 vq/o/ R-94-0000004371 94/07 R-94-0000004372 94/07 7if4-w00«>0v^3/3 94/0/------------ /o/ /07 /07 9:19 11:00 15:21 g^|j^y>o.o4»,4 TUT /07 Ti: ^3 1B:20 ■SOSFTCTUR 431 1 DEPT ASSIST ^^46 1 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HAR* 24 70 DUMbS FTCS “MF 2400 OT MISC FUD 4G27 PROFERTY FOUND 3701 UWII-MISD 4300 “ HIT 6 FvUN PROP DAM SHURLLINE COMMERCE ISLAND *T7TrERLACflEn SHORELINE SUNSE r TTETT'nrr521GIO 510 "SlXi"567521 ■GETG2l 510 501 510 522 515 ■Gejp 501 515 -519- •4P T7 r ■•« .;> iv ' 522 513 515 — 515 514 '530 — 510 501 "52t- 521 SIO ' ' *• * t , • 4 . > ^rtr MO 510 “5t7T“ 510 510 - i • 1 V '• ' W< 0 0 -Cf- - LL O -SF- - LL ME ’MOUND SF 510 517 -5T9- 517 517 “STS' 517 517 TTPr 514 514 ., rv- «aip ■ * *■ '« . T'!*' M . f * liT* SP SP LIT t> HWY 12 /CTY 6 u Q urr 530 525 T5T7" 519 IHU, AUG tU, 1^91, 3:4 1 MlACL CITY REFORr JULY, 1974““"“T'\PT^*TfTTvFn'^TJnY'T7PT^TTTTc ”'“TTTTTTMnT'TjrT'ETJ^tT*njr’EC PITiTiL l R HTRl L r^NnHc r Hr,r 4c * i\ii'TriTT«-94-0000004375 94/07 /07,k-V^-UUL^vCU4V4/u>17i2G.R-94-0000004377 94/07 :R-94-OOOO<X^4370 94/07 / yj » /Vl>/OZ 2:4G5:01.nVA FRUF- DAMAGE XtJJIDErr A*:.3i ‘7T or hiGi: FiiD i/U'w»^•94-0000004380 94/07 /06H94-0000004381 94/07 /07 o:li567i00 ^4/«.«/■;o7 ■V: 15 94/07 /o/10:07 94/07 /07 10: 35 .94/07 /07 —xcr40 ” 94/07 /07 11:00 94/07 /07 12:55 Ur H1L»L FUD OT MISC FUD OT MISC FUD rrncTXor TFLT* T NTS OT MI sc rUD DEFT ASSIST TERm Ttr/n: t-s---------- T^rnjrU31375 MIBC fUS MI SC f UP 2636 .It—V4—OOOvOOA^bV 94/C*/ :R-94-0000004390 94/07 :R-94-0000004391 94/07 1T*94*00000D4397T947XI7" :Rr94?0000004393 94/07 :R-94-0000004394 94/07 ,k-Y4-00v0w4^.V5 V4/U/ :R-94-OOOOC»04396 94/07 t-94-0000004397 94 /u7 ▼4 ‘^00000v4^V8 ■V4/0/' t-94-0000004399 94/07 ;R-94-0000004400 94/07 Ilk—V4 —OvOOOU4401 94/u/ :R-94-0000004402 94/07 ^SIR-94-0000004 403 94/07 4*94TCMtHk/04404 .94 / u / :R794 t0000004405 94/07 :R-5T4-0000004406 ‘94/07 K-V4-U00UUU44U/ R-94-0000004409 94/07 R-94-00000044 U 94/07 R*94rlKIDTO044T2r"947TT7 ‘ r^4-OOQ0004413 94/07 -94-0000004414 94/07 -V#-OOuOu044 lr> v470/ 70/—rrrT/—DErT-r,.orrr /07 15: 15 PARI ING VIOL /07 15: la SrLE-.0-WARH A5s 43 bl- rxD /07 15:43 OT MISC PUD /07 16:03 LlTTER-UNLAliTUL OLD CFxVST/MWY 12GTTTTID-------------------------------WAVZAfA FO rHLASAMT /SMADV'.'JOOD XArAVETTE HEAfHLR CHERRY“PARIVSUMSrr----------------- CTY 6 MAR IMA fart Ino LOT NURIH ijMOIrg---------------------- CTY 6 O LYUIARD a - CTT-15------rc ---------rr GMORLLI^’' A* ME NORTH SHU. sHAuVWOCD 0 tTJcr “trrwTrrtJRoricrt?rxT —o— HOLDROllK.E FAim LL SHORELINE 0 TTrrTXDrrZil'f527w.ii :atm 0 52 J 525TTF525LL5250502 ^ — • ..w . 1 A.sr ------/ 0 56/ bP ■ti •^51 1 *— Si./ •. • • •c 53»:» SiC •511- 517 525 ■5t7~ 519 517 •. J- V /V'* • Vv-r;i ] t; ^ fi O / U/ /07 /07 ANiriALS o fv/ /07 /07 /07 /07 /07 TETTO rOOTID' I 7: OB FI - MVA 17:17 ALARMS 1/k1Q ALARMS 17*30 PASSING ON SHOULDER 10*42 OT TRAP VIOL 19:34 SUSPICIOTI 22:02 22: 15 rv/ /OS /OG TUT /OO /09 23*23 3:04 '15:0 T 16: 10 2: 15 /lO /09 u: JO 1: 10 23: 15 SFEED DOMESTICS-NP DAS/DAK/DAL DEPT ASSIST OT MlSC PUB UT msc riTF PROPERTV FOUND DWI-GM DAS/uAK/DAC TRAFFIC -VERBAL WARM ;R-94-0000004417 94/07 VIU /lO :R-94-0000004410 94/07 /lO T3TX5 DWi-HI5D 14:3« OT MISC PUD 19:00 CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST TCOl TOGD ■ •*“sr -523- cry 15 /CTY 51 0 517 2509 1 ELLV 0 517 7ntr rERNDALE o 319 “ SHORELINE/BAYVIEW SF tr •^c" 4300 SHORELINE SF f “.cr ^OTT “ERGO! S MR 3900 SUMSE T sr*519 513 DEXTER LL 525 3700 SUNSET 5P 519 CTY 29/CTY 19 MEDINA 525 345 DROWN LL 516 TT7?■ OKOna XJRCHAKD 0 502 2600 LYDIARD 0 565 HER I T AGE / SHOT EL I TiE 0 52C TTOT.iTT”SUTISET 511 SHADYWOOD/SUNSE T SP 517 3746 SUNSET SP 517 MW >■ “12 lL 5l7 NORTH SrlO/SHORELlNE 0 521 EAYVIEW/DELOTERO SP 527 T:;pyww^^iv ym/vf [♦iPQppd^ 1.94/07, !94rOM6664421 '^4/07 ik-y4-0000004422 94/u/ :R-94-0000004423 94/07 t-94-0000004424 94/07 1?14^25^4707, /OB 4426V?4/07: /08 420‘94/07• 700 11 i OO .... lus:^ ‘ I5j li, «-94-OWOW442V 94/V//OQ ----15T32 R-94-0000004430 94/07 /OO 15:30 :R-94-0000004431 94/07 /O0 15:45 lf^4^DuDoD04437^947u/ >?^.Ti60P^4433 ,94/07 T5r3TT 10:07 Til STl/TTT'V EACE-MS-H mK ALA-:TrS 'HLF r-LESS 20O-GM MA ALAT.HS SUSPICION OT MISC PUD DUb HITL PI-MVA 3ZT2G ETEEEN 240 WATsEFIELD 3444 LIVINGSTON 264 5 ARDJLA 3120 E<ROO» S 2725 MWY 12 T3H4 MWY 12/WATERTOWN u 0 O TTIT MD 0 u LL ' * 7* 'M- /v/ •V*OD WTTTOU'XOFirCATTrrS 66 V MIn NEIUNI A HI uitl A nu S u 56/ /07 i.1Z:09 ALARMS 425 OXFORD Q 521 /07 13*00 ALARMS 501 NORTH STREAM O 521 /ua B: 13 bPEtU OCD' CRV5T7NiJt< 1H btin u 521 /OO 10: 19 OT TRAP VIOL BHi-^Dy WOOD/SUNbE T 0 502 /OB 10:3'*‘OT MISC fUD CKYSTAl. F/LVRIC 0 530 DZl 521 521 C t C c c f'r TTra; 521 521 529 565 • fc •ti' •»v ; V • X •* ■ L. THO, AUG IH, 199'J, rtlALU CITV RtrOiU JULY, 1994VRBC’^NOnDER'? l^-94•0000004434 94/07 /OOV4/UV /Ob ; A-94-0000004436 94/07 /OCJ •tR-94-0000004437 94/07 /OO 94*0W)Ci^0443O —997T7T• IR-94r0000004439 94/07 ; M-94*0000004440 94/07 .H“V4-uOuuij<j'»‘>41 94/0/r R-94-0000004442 94/07 /09 0:44 ALARMS 265 ORCJNG ORCHARD 0 520;; ;r-94>oooooo4443 94/07 /09 1:16 DOMESTICS-MP 4353 SHORELINE SP , 516) Y^ T WWWH ^ ^ ^fV'f us 1 ^r kur tu 1 I r uUrJD •vFLL'i /GMURLLIWL ““O----------------------------'502- XRr94-000000444S 94/07 : /09 9:15 DISTURB FEACE-MS-Hr'^R 2661 ARCOLA MB 521 ;»^-94-0000004446 94/07 /09 9:20 SICK CARED FOR 1700 BOLLUM LL 521 Y^-// 7 9 J 4U OT nrsc FUE 1 HWr-T2—'■n.t:----------32t ilR-94-0000004440 94/07 /07 10:12 or MI sc TUB WOUDHILL /ORONO ORC 0 521 ;; :R-94-0000004449 94/07 /U?11:44 ALARMS 1400 BRACKETTS PT 0 502 II Iff—Y^—TY/” V/^707"13s 34 SPEED CTY“5---------/STtClNir-m ~tJ-------------------------52"r 1 Jl-94-0000004451 94/07 /09 13:45 SPEED CTY 6 /SPRING HI 0 521 r J1-94-00000044S2 94/07 /09 17:37 OT MISC PUB 2450 ISLAND SP 521 l; .f%“T»'“WWW^^3v y4/«,f/■" /r-7 rm*8 SPEED riwY-“t 2/*"WATErrrnwfr ttr 525 ; :R-94-0000004454 94/07 /09 19:42 SPEED MCCULLY /LUCE LINE 0 525 1 :R-94-00000044S3 94/07 /09 17:56 SPEED-WARM NORTH SHO/MAPLE 0 525 o f*94*lW0Lpw^^a6” 94/07 «r94-00000044S7 94/07 nfR-94-00000044Se 94/07 H“'#4 “w>^j 00044IJ9 74/U/ c u T?PT^TTTTf?PT^TjnTn^inr=TTnirTTnTiMR7^^DrFrT3n^T;Fsn"TJUTirETrirrnECT^^nnfiE'TZTTT10il4LOCK OUTf\Ju/oe/OO I /: ‘.*;j20: 17 20: 2?"ZTT3T22:0623:42U;XUCF OOl 510 cared for DQMESr ICS-fiP TiLARhtj SUSPICION SUSPICIONTTTStmjE------3/46 suNsc r SP7ST7TOGO'ol-3 74 6 GUNGE 1 GP1756WATERTOWNLLO'fJ395 TonrAwnNORTH ARN/NORTH SHO FERNDALCUT tro0a 1-94-0000004460 94/07 R-94-0000004462 94/07 ^4^i^94;^0U0vW4463 94/v/ /uv El^-94r;006d604464 94/07 /lO 94 t0P0000446S 94/07 /lO ^1K-V4-000 v^Xfh^o& / lO 5fR-94-0000004467 94/07 /iO -94-0000004468 94/07 /lO "/lU 4 / VY /09 '21:06 /09 21:22 /07 “2TT3C /09 21:45 /09 23:03 "23TT3" 0:37 10:41 "TTCnr 3:05 3:34 4^ lU tycrp------------------------------------- ALARMS 900 TRAFFIC -VERRAL WARN 3700 LIQUOR - MIBREFRE5EN 37-16 TRAFFIC -VERBAL WAI-.N “TRnrntT” SUSPICION OT TRAF VIOL T7 rSTDRFnnCET” 80 li—94-TJ000DCnnr72‘~Y^r7O7" R-94-0000004473 94/07 R-94-0000004474 94/07 /lO et09 /TU /lO /lO 11: 5w 12:44 15:29 /lu * JI3 J I .K-V4-0w0wu44/'w y4/0/ /lU r lR-94-0000004479 94/07 /lO ; :R-94-0000004480 94/07 /lO lYlUH 22:00 22:22 OT TRAF VIOL DEPf ASSIST UI I f\hF V1OL SPEED ALARMS ALARMS ALARMS OT TRAP VIOL SFLLD-WAivN LOCK OUT PI-MVA D i STDRB nrzcE SPEED or TRAF VIOL ALHhnS TSOO 420 “No-^ -iRF^/mrcr- - -o— PARTENWOOD O SUNSET SP —SOrtSET- - - - - - - - - - -ST- 5UNSC T GF NORTH SHO/SHORELINE 0 SMOREtrtNT/SftADYWOOD—CT“ HACKBERRY HILL 0 HWY 12/SYMES LL CASCO F' r NORTH SHO/SCOTCH PI TURNHAM /LUCE LINE 955 ■3091- 101«:» 2400 TKXT- 3746 '3746 4600 264CT •fnrr"i2/BR0wrj HWY 12 ton »:aua Frinv^EPr—— OLD long LATE INIERLACHEN “BROWN-------------------------------O— SUNSET SP OLD CRYSt/NORTH SHO 0 -sur IGF,—:----------------------------SP" TT- 0 0 TIT O o 3T" LL SP i .K-V4-UUOwuH4tt<» YH/0/ " 711 R-94-00000044B5 94/07 /II ^R-94-0000004486 94/07 /II |§^:t»V4:^y!u^0y94gy j,V4/u/ 13: 18 I OT MI3C PUB Ills TRAFFIC -VERBAL WARN T r34 5FTE iniJAKN 1:51 ALARMS 8:00 INSURANCE VIOL HWY 12/MARTHA SHORELINE NORTH SHORE ARCOLA BRIDGE OLD CRYST/ITWY 12 T^WV'"1T“ LL SP ■0“ MB 0 1 260 c J v:uu nEETTNGHTTENDtu 12:30 MEETING ATTENDED 2730 6B5 /C « I 43 FRENCH CREEl HWY 12/MILL TTErxo- - - --- - OlL crystal BAY iJ 0 LL TT- T Ar,c c"RCPT-DFr527trr751; 3?tcr 515 528 578 525 517 523 -52t- 521 523 325- 525 525 ■2525' 525 525 525 511 -5T1' 511 519 “5T9- 519 519 “32T 517 519 •52T 525 525 .-y-•<•V.'M rc 5■■;e ‘S^ ► >-; m 7% vT^v «•i, 525 517 "SOI" 501 * • V.- c c c c f « iGE 6THU, AUU 10, 19V'l, ?:4-1 I .1ALL CUT r<Cr0liT JULY, 1994f5pRrT^TJ7T7"T?FT^TiTTETTrrFT?^T7r^^urnj'jrrT5FtJirTO^rEXTri^TrTrT^^Tii^irivAbt-NUriutH•_-94-0000004489 94/07-94-00u 00u 4^vU V4/u 7 ■CTTT:R-94-000000449| 94/07 /il TIT /W /I I *R*94*",0000004499, 94/07 1^4-^0000004300 .94/07 t-94-000000450l 94/07 .W-94—0^^000«,*4302 94/07 ‘^.94-0000004303 94/07 ;r-94-0000004304 94/07 i—’t4—0000\»^4303 94/07 ■9¥7F7^94/0794/07 /11 /ll /ll B: 14 8x34“947TT7"/! t 0: 4S94/07 /ll 9:00 94/07 /11 9; 4018:41 n-MVA—7: 'jij ■ n 1 nrsrrmB'7:43 5PGED0:04 SPEEDbf’tLD OLD CF.YST/NORTH SHO‘ 1 3 IT,—EoncT rnrrNCCULLY 4*>‘X‘ CIV ft "4300 CTV uO0 -TTt- /II /ll “Ttr /i 1 /I i -rtr /ll :R-94-0000004507 94/07 /ll »R'-94"0 ‘.»00Qv43u8 94/0/ /I T ;|^.94-0000004309 94/07 /I I :R-94-0000004510 94/07 /11 t«94-0000004306 94/07 9inflr 10:00 10:14 TO: 30“ 10: 3G 11: * X* 7100“ 11:00 11:00 “1 11 26 12:51 14:20 OT MISC PUB BFEED"5FEET5 4~00MEETING ATTENDED ALARMS 4600 -rTtOI‘~t>AMAOE'*M3-fTTlV»t-?06^ /LUCE LIME PERMIT TO BUY GUN OTHER MOVING VIOL ■wrttnnL coMrcATri or MI5C PUD ORDER PROTECT/RESTR -AntMAL eOl'ITLAINTS- 2730 T-OO' 263 :• THEFT-501-2500-FE-WA PERMIT TO BUY GUN 960 ■SPEED "5HMV 12 CTY tCTT -S- - - - - - --MEDINAL FULICE DEPT. r.REE« HOOD OF?CHARD- - - - - - - - - KELLEY OLD CRYST/NORTH SHO CTcYS TAtr-DAT-------------------- GHORELINE/SMADN WOOD WOUDDF.IDGE -tSREENMItt----------------------- WEST ARM BAY FOREST ARMS u00TT- - -MEDINAO -tt- - - O o -V- - - - a ME “iit- - - SP 0 - - - ■ncri -or P519 3529 511 51 I*5rr V' *‘t;* , 94/07 . 94/07 -m— /ll /ll 16iS7 17:10 94/U7 /II 1 b: 20 94/07 /n 19:00 94/07 /ll 19x02 DRUG paraphernallA-r OT Ml sc PUE: RLARMS--------------------------- LRX94—wvOw431 / 94/07 /IT 1-94-00000043IB 94/07 /ll rT94-60O0OO45l9 94/07 /11 ,rk—V4—v.»wvOu452o 94/0/ /ITv4/0/ R-94-0000004521 94/07 -94-OOOOCM>4322 94/07 !994^TDOUDOO4333'"‘9970T 20! 19 20:26 20:35 "2TT5T PARKING VIOL PASSING ON SHOULDER SIDr CARCirTOR- - - - COUNCIL MEETING MEDICAL - HEART ALARMS’ OT MISC PUB ALARMS msc Fuir -975" 1 1260 » r-w i—ww—' —— — - t-^94^^>000004S24 94/07 •94>b000004525 94/07 V4—/ U / ^P-94-0000004527 94/07 ^-94-CH>o0004528 94/07 pS94^D00000432V*J9J47U/ /12 /12 TTT O: 14 0:36 "313T TJT BPEED-WARN SUSPICION SPEED---------- 700 2300 —ToriTAwn----------------- SUMMIT BEACH FRENCH CREEK ““ sFtoKEirr ReTWEsnaootr crv 6 OLIVE /UHLHAR'Un 0 0 "MF 0 0 /12 #T2 / IJ /13 /12 TTix - 6f 13 10:50 T3TT5" 1:20 7:44 /"HTTST OPEN DOOR 3745 PERMIT TO BUY BUN 2730 □ BU^bUl'iPtKm I 1 DWl-GN SPEED 4300 f-’RUP Df^MRUt-^MS—PK 1VA 3BUO^ irmr SHORELINE KELLEY URCH h PD SYMES/NELSON PARI CTY 6 bHUKLLINt U O O LL LL O TT- H~V4-'DuwO«.»4aiwJ 94/0/ R-94-0000004533 94/07 ;R-94-0000004334 94/07 . i^foopooo.^ ___ [i94T0000004337»^94/07 7T2 /12 /12 WU/<r7r2 10:50 TOTSU TRAFFIC -VERBAL WARN OT TRAF VIOL 1 MV A PRUP‘ DAMfibE 11:40 13:52 r 13:'3V el-712 •‘:felS»44 ; -V • SUSPICION SUSPICION SPEED- - - SHOKELIME/SfRING NORTH ARM LANDING 1500 FERriDALt 2060 CTY 6 2700 PHEASANT "SHAUTWOOD " SP o /12 16:08 |R-94-Ul/uoU0^D>itt yh /0/ r-94-0000004539 94/07 R-94-0000004540 94/07 K-y4“UWouv^D41 947VA :-94-:0000004542 94/07 7T2 /12 /12 /12 ^30:19 21:04 2U17 "TZTTO’ ALARMS LOST PERSONS MlbL FUP“ ■<tUUU 125 2020 UT DEPT ASSIST ANIMAL COMPLAINTS LDSI PRur ttv I t CHEVY CHASE GRAND T[r,o TJROriU UKCTTiKlT 1 ARCOLA BRIDGE 2 ‘.'50 SliOFELlNE “775 ULi» LKvSIA l TT O 0 “O^ 0 LL .22:33 OT MISC PUD FAT--------- Ni^RROWS D/SHADY WOOD u O o u 529 511 on" 501 ,511 -529- 530 502 51 I 531 -567 • 531 531 311 rrccrcc ,'.»• -» #« 1 1 SUI-IMIT P6RI. CTY 6 /WILLOW 0 0 502 502 ~2^t5- - —TOMTfiWA u %,# 1 T 4300 WAPI^EN SP 527 SHORELINE/WESTWOOD MB 501 SnOKELINC SI*^ / 2945 WESTWOOD MB 501 345Q NORTH SHORE 0 527 H * Y* - . 32T 522 527 3325“ 525 525 • -9'“" ^525" 525 531 "5T1^ 525 511 5l I 510 502"5rr 511 51 I “5TCT 519 522 "^2T 527 527 M'- V* . N 527 ALL CITY i;;E^Oi;rJIIA&m -Nuni^bK10, r.:4l f i!JULY, l'W4r\r I in Kf I —line, i-1\i( I LNbt." L't.l3L- r-iLiHi. 1. L I Ht.t I -NAHL TrrTT7 R-94-000000454S 94/07j44 V4/I.'7 ;R-94-0000004545 94/07 :A-94-0000004546 94/07 7 A-V^-0UUWU4S4/ V4/U/ S IR-94-000000434B 94/07 7 :R-94-0000004S49 94/07 ,«-■»»-0uw«J04jiU 94/f.’7 ;R-94-0000004551 94/07 13 IR-94-0000004SS2 94/07 IR*94*0000009333“"94Tn7' ;; ;r-94-oooooo4 ss4 94/07 M IR-94-0000004555 94/07 IR-94-'jui.'w/4!i 94/0/ R-94-0000004557 94/07 l3tR-94-000<)00435a 94/07 /I 5 1.. L [fR-94-0000004560 94/07 f :R-94-0000004561 94/07 I IR^'94^00000U t J&2 94/07 I :R-94-0000004563 94/07 I :R-94-0000004564 94/07 I ►R*^94 “‘’0000004S63 94/07 :R-94-00000045A6 94/07 :R-94-0000004567 94/07 li IR-94 -0000*»4S&a 94/07 I :R-94-0000004569 94/07 ^R-94-0000004570 94/07 R^V4 —ww004I j/ ‘94/07 [tR-94-00<X>004S72 94/07 ; tR-94-0000004573 94/07 I ,K-V4-www4ii/^> y470V :R-94-0000004575 94/07 afR-94~0000004576 94/07 V4--ww00*f fvj/ /iZ i :R-94-0000004578 94/07 I :R-94-0000004579 94/07 w04Sb0 947 1.' 7 R-94-00000045BI 94/07 ntR~94-00000045a2 94/07 i#R-V^~UuuuvU4l:»Y^ 94/0/ .R-94-0000004596 94/07 2: 19TuTTT/ 13: 5G 9:10: wI0i42 11: OBl l: J J 12: 10 12: I I16:20 16:30 17: uO 17:17 17: 4B T3g46 17:41 22:20 -Tzrno0: ZO 1:50 2l 00 5:02 5:46 -S! 15 9:30 1 3:00 1:47 2:03 wwuw^oO'i XR-94>00000045B4 :«R-94-0000004505 7947177 ” 94/07 94/07 "7T4 ------ /14 /14 Di76 9:36 9:47 94/u/”7n —12: 12 jJR-94-00000045B7 94/07 /14 12:50 a^R-94-0000004588 94/07 /14 13: 27 1 "747X77 “/ 1 4 13:36 ;; iR-f94-oooooo409o 94/07 /14 14:49 n Rr94*000000459l 94/07 /14 15:05 u .w—rH-uuyuyOA'jV—94 /u // 1 4 T5T5G j4R-94 “00C»0C'0457J 94/07 /14 17:55 iR-94-00000iJ4594 94/07 /14 18:07 TDTT5' 0:34 TREbF AGB-MS-PR F3319CT M’!."♦< rmc5FXCDriLARli,^TI-ftF I '201-500 -G>h-i<JnT DIKE ACCIDENT ALARMSriN 1 Nj' cunpc 20fj« • 10B<*rrn sDISTURL. FEACE-M5 MAR or TRAF VIOLTCARMTl---------------------------------TRAKFIC SURVEY SPEED-STETD-------------------------------SIEEDALARMS•srcEtr^wnKfT—------------or TRAP VIOL JUVENI LE-RUr4AWAY"srrcr^vmrtrr--------------JUVENILE-CURPEW PARI ING VIOL T23-6651400513 LEAP 0—r^tKTTT' r;r I r • l Atnnna-----cr“SHADVWOOD 0FERNDAlE 0PIEST ARM PAY ^ 5F"LAKEVIEW LLFRENCH CREEK 0ARCOLFT hb’5HADVW00D 0FOX /BROWN RD 0CHEvr-cmsc- - - - - -a~WATERTOWN/HARRINGFON LL WATERTOWN/HARRINQTON LL -UATTRTOWri/HARRtMGTOrrt.t.- WATERTOWN/HARRINGTON LL OLD CRYSTAL BAY O—OtrtrttlNG-rMWY 12- - -HWY 12 LLDEXTER LL-r^T«rr-tr/CTT-’i46- - - -ttr2865 24 70 MEDICAL - HEART 4527 SICK CARED POR 3065 -rrtsc orriCER ------------ DISTURB FEACE-NS-MAR 505 FERMITS/APRS 200 XKTn-nGNST’ 60VN-GM-E----------- THEFT-MS-MI5USE CRED 2420 BPCED-WARN ■TirunM —conrLmnxs ’ ■—tttg SUSPICION 4 7./, 7. TRAFFIC -VERBAL WARN NORTH SHORE ISLAND ■TICCULLY-----/tUCC LlNg- SHORELINE SUNSET —nrcHwooD- WILLOW WAYZATA “OnOTT^CRC/SMOREL ! Mg SHADYWOOD WILLOW /BNRP RR ------TOGO-------------------------- - SHORELINE HWY 12/WATERTOWN TT-Mx ---------- ALARr_ OT MISC PUB TP nrm vroc DISTURt< PFACE-MS-MAR ANIMAL IMPOUND TTCAKnS SPEED OT TRAP VIOL X^TKES-ALL OIHERS BUBFICION DISTURB PEACE-MS-M.'iFv 7TMIMAL I np’UUND SPEED “tnnr- 2605 4435 2700 2470 35/2 VtiCG” TJ ORTH' ARM--------------------------O-------- KELLY D NORTH SHORE O Tiwr^tx*:-------------------o —“ ISLAND SP SHORELINE 0 Eox ; ;■“ » r. ‘0 LYDIARD /SHADYWOOD .0 • \ SHORELINE “ SP TTERTTAGIT----------------------------C------- r-AGE 7TvLT■DTF510510 -K, vttxanv*;-I*. . . r510“"^3TXr519 cc TTZ------4100 —m—I K Ah VlUL ShIDKELlNErOLD BEACH HB 525 / 15 5:11 SPEED CTY 6 /DEBORAH 0 525 /15 5:20 or TRAP VIOL CTV 6 /WATERTOWN 0 525 / i j 6: 4^^5PELI?■ CT*/ 6-----'TDEFCRArr “0--------------------“*525“ /I 3 0x56 F D MV VS DEEFi 2»>0 OLD CRYSTAL EAY 0 510 / 1 3 17: u2 DISl'JKbAMCE 245 FERNDALE 0 521 - .-:V • i; V. ; ■ k ■ ■ V- ■ 519 r> f *■ > A 'f f f t 245 FERNDALE 3273 CASCO 2T3T MARFriNDTUTT 2100 SHADYWOOD Sv. ^ • vr 1^%' 517 C , M r i ff i f i *. ':V,5\j£SVv: ■ —WATCRTOWTJ- - - - -: TO- - - - -■- - -367- OLD CRYSTAL BAY 0 • ^ 517 DEXTER LL 517 1^ /"Lfi —O'3TT CRESTVIEW MOUriD 514 SHORELINE SP 516 nuNTHVIEW fin ■516 FOX 0 619 vori T49G MWV 12 NURTH rjlORE 1 - 9'0 ■rox 24 75 COUNIRySIDE 203 ur*i LVILW ■ iNTErirnrTTrn *■ y -1 h f l iMGt J *7 *♦ / // -'j 1^-: - d n :R-94-00iXh;'04753 94/1.17 /I‘0 J5;41 ii :R-94-0000004754 94/07 / 20 18: 10 II .K-V^-UOOuw<i/aa V4>0//-X»1'/1 ^ ii :R-94-00000047S6 94/07 /20 I9i37 r :R-94 “0000004737 94/07 /20 20:42 m\}[1'im i ■ 11'• l‘ i.T.V *,1• * .*:! 1;!x:-; i“ .1i" j 1 1 • * c J [ ii 1' - 1 ij ij ii V ■ - ■ ' ri 1 1 I 1 V»> *: ■'■ '1 V f{ 1 “i >1 ’■ - [_ 1 Ol ■y } J »THU, AUG Id, 1994, ?.:44 FHALL CITY r<EFOr<T F .^GE J 1JULY, 19947 ft-94-000000476Sncci•rT*T^^\PT^Dflnr" nr" I —lint it\iriHiM-u^ i tNE'E-ELLL EIUL11 Nant.riTT Rcrr urraR-94-0000«X>476S tt^-94-00000)4766 *99*^DWKWP4TB7T 94/07^ 4 / V //21t-94-0000004769 ^-94^0000004770 F91T 94/07 94/07 94^ VA 94/0* 94/Ck<H rri:-94-0C h X>004772[-94-0000004773J*^9"00000047T4';:r-94-0000004773 94-0000004776 9^V 4 > u / 94/07 94/07^707,94/0794/07;:r-=0000004777 94-0000004770 94-<X/00004779 94*001WU04 / ovr 94-0000004781 94-0000004782 7‘»/U/94/0794/07R-99^000000T7HT94-000000478494-000000478399 94/0794/0794/0/74/« 94/07“TJ00UUU4 y 86 -94-0000004787 94-00000047D8 =94-0000004 / b V94-0000004790 94-0000004791 9490000009792' 94/07 94/07 94/07 99T -94-0000004793 •94-0000004794 V/94/0794/07 9470T • TH-vUVUvUhTvq 94-0000004796 •94-0000004797 94/07 94/07 '94/tv 94/07 74/07 ”y^vwWv4/VU -94-0000004799 ■94-00OOCI04800 VH/U/ 94/07 94/07 R=^- WPUMU04UT7T 94-0000004002 94-0000004803 94-0wU0U4UU4' iii R— 94-0000004805 94-00C»0OO4806 94-wvOUU4WU / 94-0<X»000400B 94-0000004809 V H / U / 94/07 94/07 94/0/ 94/07 94/07 T#7 VWWV^ W1 u 94-0000004811 94-0000004812 OwutJUHUi 94/!.»/ *^4/07 94/07 94/v/ 94/07 94/07 T ^ O 1 5 94-0000004814 94-0000004813 94-vu0UU04tii c> 94/07 94/07 J-94-0000004817 v^/u/ 94/07 5FEEDinlOiOO19i03fr\AF VIOL BFEED-WAn-N SPEEDDAHAoL-riij HWV 12/E:R0WN TnTISgT/rAiN'K 516^zoo SKDCELltJEt’L AIKE / SHOfxEL INE 0I'Kur UK,riHol_--rib FRl VA MEETING ATTENDED DWl-niSDX'Wl - ill t>L?SPEEDDEPT »"4SSIST 1220 4050 TEXTEITCONCORDGMDRCLINEXIV i fibb 1 U/ SHADVkOLu PAUL '-r ■9:2710:43 SF t E b"WARN SPEEDDISTURBANCEsrcED 4B9343CTt»IJWY 12 /lAMAPACl PKOAD»iOUr>C T V 6CUPPEE PR/5MADYW00D V1P>BIN1A trrrrut:i^fTvw17:3518:48-mzr OT I1IGC SPEEDIIECTlNb nTTCNOetr SPEEDWARIvANTor nircr ARRESTran-----/ .•'.p 1000 1R55 n -----FHuRCLlNE OLD LEACHrrLtfi-----drown , “r . ' ■ .18:00 21:25 22t 16 SICK8:00 8:00 S: 00 r.ARP.D r DR HCU0F’< - POSSESSING30SrTCTON----------------------DURG-UNK DEG-UNOCC N BURG-UNK DEG-UNDCC N T215323516:00 16:31 15s 45 "OT MTSC rtT?CHECI S 18:35 19:58 TllZT 23:43 17:00 HOUSE CSC 3-PRC OR “PRS/^DAR/ LHC OT TPVAF VIOL DISTURE*A^4CE ThEF I C L3373 SHAL^ WOOD^NORTtr Torst TmrtrTt^IDlv'l AWA H E :< 1 ER- nto vur\n ACT P:rr------CRYSTAL DAY CRYSTAL EAY"CivrrjTnt-tTAY-------------------CASCO Vir>GINI A “tTTXTER------------------------------- 517 ‘ ’■» '*r . » »*519 p-rj-uTT-ciT-trrnB' DISTURBANCE 1756 TT60- SHORELINE/OLD E-EACH WATER!OWN 3nTcnrE-Trnr--------------- "i -■ 0:35 23:40 xrrsr iwsupvancp: viol H7TTER MUVIT^B* 2770 17:25 10:30 "371331 VIDE DAS/DAR/DAC DlSTUPcB PEACE-MS-DIS "T NEUf\ANCE~ VIOE INSURAHtE VIOL MEETING ATTENDED HEFT fVA 1 NE / N0« DHILL /SHuRL'L JfiE CIT mD Y WOOD / sen 4SE T HIGHWQUO /NORTH SHO SUNSET CHPrnr.n------------------- TAMp^LnEL /DA»4IPL5 S tr 1 EL 10:00 11:03 TZTTT* "AEBlin------------------- MISC OPPICLR PRUr* DAMAGE- NS-PRIVA ‘“SEJSFTCIOn ^— 13:00 1 4: 11:> T4T3T 17:07 17:20 TTT^TT ANIMAL rUMTLAINrS ALAPCMS VEITTCL"E----------TTHE SICK CARED FOR •MvilMAL IMPOUND p-»L ak ’ttS ~ GUt.DEN VALLE f COUNTR GOLDEN V,U Lt^ Mp'^VrATA------------------------------WHTTATA------- HIGMWOOD O LYRIC O CTCTJET-----------------------------0 ----------------- ETMLL O I JX 13 4 ^ 18:55 17: 1 I T.Ol 11 22:23 tC’Uir VIOL WARN ALAr^M•3 TTvOP i3AnAi:F3XT5""rRrvn “ EUUIP VIUL-WARN OLD CRT5T7MWS’ CARTJLINE LUEVV CPIASE rr.rrirrnonoD ---- TT 52Q ' ■ y- ?• 45«.*0 I A(T I.NI <*.R/ H MADVWOOD UM.NO ORLMAM) TTOGTi irmr-^---------------------- i:» lUREL I \ IE SF* : >\THU« AUl ^ ALL CIT'llV7 .HM-NUI:R-94-(H«^ 7•,K->4-0«:R-94-0<:R-94-0«?77•a»«»-94-0<:r -94-cm-W-v4-ei<:R-94-C k:R-94-0i7:R-94-C mUR-94-<H»!7'■•mmr :R-94-0i:R-94-0t:R-94-0< i: :R-74-0C:R-94-CC-94-OC94-OC 94-C m:i 94-00 99* :r-* i: m 94-00 rjR-94-00 94-UO 94-00 74-00}< I] ^4-W -94-00 •94-00 R-74-00 R-94-00 V4-UV 94-00 94-00 f-V4-ou J-94-00 ;tR-94-00 f-W-VU L-94-0O •lR-94-00 n ^r - >4-00 94-00 94-00 tl .K->4-00- S IR-94-00 11 n :R-74-0000004B!34 n :R-94-00(»0004BS5 v^#/u/ 94/07 94/07 / /24 /24 20: 18 21:09 i; -ri-*^<i“wwuO^TU;^6 r :R*-94--OOOOOO^B!v7 7i ^R-94-0000004G58 ”V4/u/ 94/07 94/07 /-i4 /24 /24 4.1«i 21:27 21: 31 —trc ------------- TAT TOGO 0 Til? 1 TLLEY 0 570 LJuoL1 GF — LHOKTL H4E GF-510 i L 518 S» TUFTCCT NC;77r BROWN 51? HHUfctL INE HP 510 T’.-Y------------“H- '........5TO l.'l Jf:LHibirvl/M 1 L 57* ‘ 01 D r;r:m:H MD 571 wicixim riEDiT^n 51T^ II IGLf WOOD LL 521 [J :!lft-74-^^00o00047/J v^/o//•-»J 21: 1G M :R-94-0000004773 94/07 /1*G 21:39 7i :R-94-0000004975 94/07 /C9 0: 20 II ,K—V4-0ouuuu‘»*/ /&/0: 41> u :R-94-0000004977 94/07 /29 1:50 n :R-94-0000004970 94/07 /29 4:29 u -R-94 -l.‘uC»000497 9“94 / U// -- 7 n :R-94-000<»0049GO 94/07 / 29 22; 17 pt :R-94-00c:»00049GI 94/07 /2: 4T> 0 !R-V4-ou000049B2 94/0// /•«.»11:40 ^ :R-94-0000004983 94/07 / :o 10: 42 . . f> vj •C-X'MV^*.V *t* z • .' .•* ‘,vv-v •>'• ;■ ■;,•.■O; o\ o o •V' 'i ' ' I J a j THU, AUe l6, 1994, 7t45 Ml TAGE 15) ALL CIXY REPORT JULY, 1994’;fft-94r00000M984 -.94/07.rK“%4“OwOOv4fu3 V4/07 / -•*>*?R-94-00000049G6 94/07 /ZO Sl-94-0000004987 94/07 /ZO 'yM4»€4WWU499U^94/,.U7^ , /SUrR*94^0000004999;; :r-94-oooooo5 ooo 94/07 ; :R-94-0000005001 94/07 IR*9'4*00000030II2, 94/07) :: ir-94-4 ) t ;-.v./30 .?,»••* >- iisii21; O g 22i30 23r56 3i 43 PI-MVA■“DtTr^TrrsTT HWY 12 WESTWOOD / Ltr<ow?>j / SHOTvEL I U£;R«r94-0000004989; 94/07^ IR-94-0000004990' 94/07.MARRANT ARREST 7746 DISTURB FEACE-MS-DIS 3746 DWI—HI5D17t 15 DEPT ASSIST HVA FFxOP DAMAGE 1 SUNSET .SUNSETSH0r<ELlNE/WE5T AF^TIBIG ISLANDDAW IEW / GHDRELI HE.n—T^-WWW^’V> 4r R-94-0000004992 94/07 ;iJr-94-0000004994 94/07lt'99990000004996' .94/07; J^t.94HK>00004997; 94/07n R-94-0000004998 94/07 ■2TT33" 22i 14 0:43914110i2216:05 DAS/DAR/DAC ' ' ‘DISTURB FEACE-MS-HAR 2400 OT MIBC PUB 3746OAS/DAH/DAC ' ' 39^*Tl>nn.LSTON /SHonE LiTirINTERLACHEN SUNGE rSICK CARED FOR SPEED 3614300 DEXTER CTY 6r »-94-0000005003 94/07 r :R-94-0000005004 94/07.ft-94-0Ow005003 94/07R-94-0000005006 94/Og ^R-94-0000005007 94/07 R—94—00i/0u05008 V4/07 ; :R-94-0000005009 94/07 »-94-0000005010 94/07 IR—94—vvvOOOSO11 94/07 n :R-94-0000005012 94/07 r; ;r-94-oooooo5 oi3 94/07 r JR*99^*00D0005Or4T^97OT* TO-94-0000005015 94/07 ^R-94r000b005016 94/07 iXR*“94-0vw0050i7 *»4/u/ :R-94-0000005018 94/07 ^ :R-94-0C m:>0005019 94/07 W 94—OwOOOSuiv ^-94-0000005021 94/07 n «-94-0000005022 94/07 n .R-94-OOuvOulSu^i* v4/u/ r :R-94-0000005024 74/07 I :R-94-0000005025 94/07 i: .R—V4—0ww05U26 94/07 Z Jl-94-0000005027 94/07 Z ;R-94-000000502B 94/07 Z ^k-V4-0«^uwu5029 V4 / v > r ;R -94-0000005030 94/07 M :R-94-0000005031 94/07 I! v^/u/ a.R-94-0000005033 94/07 n :R-94-o600005O34 94/07 n .w*^'rH-u00uuu::>03b 74/0/ I" R-94-00000OS036 74/07 r :R-94-0000005037 94/07 ►H-V^-VWUUUD«.»Oti V*^/U/ M :R-94-0000005039 94/07 16: TO 17:00 17:30irrsir ■oTEEO--------------------------SPEEDOTHER MOVING VIOLOT msc TUB- - - -'400-1100 TONI AWASHORELINE/SUNSF.r CYGNET- - - - - - - -10i02 19:36 17! 55 SUSPICION OT MISC PUB -STEED- - - -4445234020:05 20:05 201 10 OT TRAP VIOL SPEED “SrEED- - - - - 3700400 FOREST LAKE LANDING DANIELSNOERENDER/NORTtrsna-SUNSETBROWN 20:48 21:10 21! 30 SUSPICION GPEED-WARN TCARRANT 765 21:48 23:40 2 5145 ATTEST------------------------ ALARMS 250 THEFT“LESS 200-GM-MO 4032 trcco- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nom 11 GHorscoTtriT EDGEWOOD HILLS FOX /PROWW RD -STATES-^tr ot 00 0:16 1:02 SUSPICION ALARMS -TTAmC 9B0 3420 - VERBAL iCmRM ANIMAL CDHPLAINTS 1730 SUSPICION 1/56 HOLLANDER SHORELINE HWT NORTH SHORE SHORELINE 519 ■TTDtATD-rSHADVNOGD WATERTOWN WATERTOWN SrEED 9:59 12:00 1T2T Tcm NC----rCHoiTCtnrrtr ir- 17:21 17:00 i9r4u SPEED ANIMAL COMPLAINTS 3STEE0-------------------------- BLAINE WESTWOOD surncT— /SHORELINE DISTURBANCE 111 SC OPFICER DTSTUTFANCEr- II vRTLEWODD SUNSET DAITTm- - - 19:53 21:12 z 1: 1 21:35 22:49 ALARMS ALARMS T3T rnsu^Tuu 1 103 2204 23:40 23:50 WELFARE CHECK DEPT ASSIST TTTT TrKurrrKOT^nTT SPEED-WARN -2204* 2420 IOGO 3T74Zr TONFAWA HUNTINGTON PT TnjNTrNGTON’TT- CMADVWOfJD NEWr*ORT r-i -j^_V - rT n, /• y\. V ' V ’ •O : ,f f. ^ h/\rLF. I LAIN TRAFFIC -VLRBAL WARN 1:05 1:05 SFLtU 1 TxAF F 1 C Vt RL-Al. WARIvf TRAFFIC VLREAL WARN TI3TlFrTC^ATnrAL""TTArTr-IOr'rr DISTUREANCE ISC5 SUNSm----------------------------- E^LAINE /SHORELINE NQfx’TH EHO/SHADYWOUD T:r«VArrnE “ rsncrnrintr tlV )5 CIV 19 c^v IS /(;v» 19 SITAD M‘JOO D--------------------- LSRIC • . , ‘r ■' 523 • O F"THU, <)ALL C•Mbc*rrcw-7yR-94-Cn-94-; »-94' ; «-»4-lii .K~yn- :R-94- ;i :r-943 3«-94. 3 »-94- ;r-94- » »-94* rfR-94- K=79= ;r-94- 3:r-94- )5 a»-94- VI ;R-94- S;r-V4- ■ :v ■ Ai mmV mr-^M**. ./ . \,-y-nr . r •■',';4^>- V . V > ., / .•V''.t;>..!»'••- V. •>* • ^'or-.,. .- *v. O J THU, AUG 10, 1V‘>4, 7;.15 fllI ALL ciTv Rt:For<r J uly, 1 i743SBE~nDroBRr“"“>RrT-TnKPTTJn7T?FT^TTKE~rRTniTRT^^UFTEnS^E^TJir^irTTOnrEK' tlR-94-0000005040 94/07 /314W*.'WUSi'JH 1 / . 1 Li:t ;R-94-000000504294/07 /:i 10:72•:R-94-OOOOOOS043 74/07 /:i 11:17y^/v/n»-94-0000005043 94/07 R-94-OOOOOOS046 94/07 H-v^“Wwuuu»U4/ V4/I.'/1.1118:S1 LOST PERSONS TTThTTTrUF'415 DEXTER{*-94“0000005040 94/07 5-94-00«Xi005049 94/07 94^OCiOOOv5l.* 94/07 lit JU/T1 i3i2a/31 14:03/ 51 rSTTT/71 16:09/7l 16: 13 SF CED* WARN SUSPICION “nibc F ub IvUUU'IULL UUUNIKi CLU OUTALARHS SPEED TXJST SUNSET/SHADYWOOD 5POLD CRYSTAL DAY 0wuUUniLL 7SH0RLL1Nt u1209AninAL'S'FRENCH CREEKOLD CRYST/FARVIEW L----------------------------------------:R-94-0000005051 94/07ll-94-0O0a005052 94/07^rrrryr^R-94~«'Xi00005uui R-94-00«:»0005054 94/07 R-94-0000005055 94/07 R»94-CHX'00u5056 94/07 TCTTir 17r 10 10:06“I Si 55 Four JDS ANIMALS OT TRAP VIOL ALARMS 14001020-SUSPICIONSUSPICIONxnnrLrssrnrciTr^s CTV 6 0HWY 12 /GLEENHILL LL-Otrt^^TSTAL- L AV------------O-LYRIC ODROWN LL19:4420:08 20t 2T ALARMSALAI>ilS•AtARTISIR-94-0000005037 94/07 R-94-0000005058 74/07 »R-94-*OOOOOOSOS4'74/07 1670 745roo~20 J ZQ 2 5:22 T2TW R-94-0000005065 94/W R-94-0000005126 94/07 k~V^“VUUWV5150 94/u/ or TRAP VIOL TRAFFIC - VF-RDAL WARM n T rm^rr i crrn-------------P!—trSMADYWOi;D □ILRMDALE 0Wt'^YZATA------------------------------rr 12:00 11:7 ‘ .» «-94-0O00«!i0Sl59 94/07 R-94-0000009003 74/07 K-94-0‘.*uG13 V4 / 0 // ^ V -------------4 4t*J ------- Mice Lii riCrR* 44 25 OT 11 ISC riJD 27 :o -TtirrT^or*^250t?^rE^> ka^-^oco THEFT-MORE 2500*-FE“W 4520 DlSrURPANCE 1 “SDSFTCTCN--------------------- OLD CRYST/MWY 12 SHADVWOOr/SUNSET DR n^CtCN- - - - - - - - - - - NORTH CHORE \ LLLEY -S1TADYWOOD- WEbT ARM AhT SEDERWOOD PARK Tcnrnvina- - - - FAGC 16KL.P I “Uf r '-y525 -1 \ M: C • "**- ♦ V ' f - f- ' *) o J rf^Why sWho d Whod Whod Whodi WhodiYou dcWhat’s ha|Several tof:FMaralOfU.S. Senati U.S. Repre:toomci State Repn __cHfitrt Governor & Secretary o: State Auditc State Treasi Attorney Qe State judges Local Offict County Corr County Count! Other! There will al ment to vote gardlng the formation. When are th The state prir 13. The state November 8. Who can vot You can vote • 18 or oil • a U.S. c _________o_Su4>jnjouA * Who decides what taxes you must pay? * Who decides what your children learn at school? * Who decides how criminals are punished? * Who decides what public services you receive? * Who decides when to use the armed forces? You decide... but only if you vote! What ’S happening in ’94? Several top offices are up for election this fall. Federal Offices U.S. Senator U.S. Representative (all districts) Slate Offices State Representative Governor & Lt. Governor Secretary of State State Auditor State Treasurer Attorney General State judges (selected seats) Locai Offices County Commissioner (1/2 of all districts) • County Sheriff • County Attorney • Other County Offices There will also be a proposed constitutional amend ment to vote on in November. See the section: Re- garding the Conetitutfonal Amendment for more in formation. When are the elections? The state primary will be held on Tuesday, September 13. The state general election will be held on Tuesday, November 8. Who can vote? You can vote if you are: • 18 or older • a U.S. citizen • a Minnesota resident for at least 20 days be fore the election not a convicted felon without civil rights not under guardianship of the person not legally incompetent So how do I vote? Voting’s incredibly easy for something so powerful. Here ’s how it works. 1) Register. See the section More about voter reg istration. 2) On election day, go to your polling place. You will be asked for your name, address and birthdate. If you’re on the list of voters, you will be asked to sign. You ’ll then get a Voter ’s Receipt. 3) Trade the Voter ’s Receipt for a ballot. An election judge will show you how to mark your choices on the ballot. You can ask for help with reading or marking the ballot if you like. After you vote, take your ballot to the ballot box. 4) Remember, while you’re in or near the polling place, you should not do any campaigning and not talk to anyone about who to vote for. Your choice is private! But I have to work... Minnesota law allows you to take time off from work to vote during the morning of the state primary and state general election. The idea is to encourage people to vote early in the day. When can I vote on election day? Most polling places will be open from 7:00a.m. to 8:00p.m. A few township polling places will open at 10:00a.m. Check with your town clerk for details. More about voter registration... You need to be on the official list of voters before you n ■t rWA> d felon without civil rights rdianship of the person ompetent ^asy for something so powerful. e section More about votar go to your polling place. You will name, address and birthdate. If voters, you will be asked to sign, er’s Receipt. 5 Receipt for a ballot. An election how to mark your choices on the or help with reading or marking the er you vote, take your ballot to the \ you’re in or near the polling place, any campaigning and not talk to o vote for. Your choice is private! fe-l can vote. If you are not already registered, you can add your name to the list by filling out a Voter Registration Card When you fill out the card, you must give the address where you are living at the time of the election. If you are a student living at school, you can register either at home or at school (but not both!) depending on your residence. You can get a Voter Registration Card: • at state, county, or city offices or libraries . when you apply for, renew or change your Minnesota Driver ’s License or ID card • in state income tax booklets . from the registrar ’s office at most colleges, universities and technical schools in Minne sota • at many businesses, stores, and community organizations Mail in or drop off the completed card at your city clerk, county auditor or the secretary of state ’s office. You can register on election day too... If you miss registering before the election, you can still vote by registering on election day at your polling place. All you need is one of the documents listed below that shows your current address In the precinct where you live: • Minnesota Driver ’s License, learner permit or identification card (or receipt for a new one) . A Notice of Ineffective Registration card mailed to you by your county auditor • The oath of someone who Is registered in the same precinct who knows you live in the precinct and who can go to the polling place with you If you are a college student, you can use: . a student fee statement showing your ad dress In the precinct and photo ID card . a student identification card or registration card containing your current address • a student photo ID If a college student hous- If you can ’t easily leave your car, you can ask for the ballots to be brought out to you in your car. If you are confined due to illness or disability, you can vote by absentee ballot. Call your county auditor or city clerk for details. If you have limited vision, you may ask your county auditor for voter registration and absentee ballot in structions in large print or on cassette tape. And if you are hearing impaired, every county and most cities will have a TDD device for questions. Absentee voting... You can vote by absentee ballot if on election day you are: • away from your precinct . ill or disabled • prevented from going to the polling place by a religious holiday or beliefs • an election judge serving in another precinct Check with your county auditor or municipal clerk to find out how and where to apply. In person: Apply and vote during normal office hours beforo the election. You can also do it on the Saturday afternoon (from 1 pm to 3pm) or on the Monday evening (from 5pm to 7pm) before the election. By mail: Apply early so you can mall back or deliver your absentee ballot before election day. Apply early. Call, write or fax for an application. In some places you can return your application by fax.■f' '1. In the military or outside the U.S.: Vote based on where you last lived in Minnesota. You or your parent, spouse, brother, sister, or child who are at least 18 years of age can apply for a ballot for you. Some useful dates: August 23 Last day to preregister to vote in the primary election September 10 Absentee voting is open from 1:00 pm to 3:00 pm at county auditor ’s offices September 12 Absentee voting is open from 5:00 pm November 8 General Election - vote 7:00 am to 8:00 pm in most areas Some plain talk... Absentee voting means getting your ballot and voting in person or by mail before election day. See the Absentee voting section. Ballot is the official paper or card list of who or what you can vote for in the election and on which you mark your choices. You receive the ballot at your polling place or when you vote absentee. DFL means the Democratic- Farmer-Labor Party, one of the two major political parties currently active in Minnesota. General Election is the election that picks the final winners! Decides who will actually fill the offices - on November 8. IR means the Independent-Republicans of Minnesota, one of the two major political parties currently active in Minnesota. Office means a specific job to which people seek election. Each office has unique powers and respon sibilities. Polling place is where you go to vote on election day (polling means voting). You can also register to vote there. Call your county auditor or city clerk’s office to get the address. See the section For more informa tion for county phone numbers. Primary Election is an election to reduce the field candidates. The winners go on to the general election. All people running as DFL and IR candidates will be in the primary election and also many (but not all) local candidates. For the DFL and IR candidates, you will need to decide which party's candidates you will vote for; you cannot vote for people in both parties. To be held on September 13. Voter registration means having your name on the official list of voters. You must be registered for the address where you live before you can vote. Voter registration card is the little card or form you fill out with your name and address and turn in to become amendment will pass. This means that not voting on the amendment has tne same effect as voting NO. OFF-TRACK WAGERING ON HORSE RACES: TO AUTHORIZE: [ 1 yes 1 NO "Shall the Minnesota Consti tution be amended to permit off-track wagering on horse racing in a manner prescribed by law?" The Attorney General has this to say regarding the proposed amendment: In Chapter 626, the legislature also adopted statutory provisions that will be efiective only if the people ratify the proposed amendment. The statutory provisions would require the director of pari-mutuel racing to sub mit a report to the legislature by February 1, 1995, containing the director ’s recommendations on legisla tion to authorize and regulate off-track pari-mutuel bet ting on horse racing. The report would be required to contain draft legislation that embodies the director's recommendations. The draft legislation would be re quired to provide that: (1) off-track pari-mutuel betting be conducted primarily to support on-track horse racing and not supplant it; (2) a separate license be required to operate each off-track betting location; (3) off-track betting locations be limited to facilities with television displays of live horse racing, adequate seat ing and dining and beverage service; and (4) a limited number of off-track betting locations be licensed, with a reasonable geographic distribution of locations around the state. If the amendment is adopted, article X, section 8 of the Minnesota Constitution will read as follows (deletions indicated by strikeouts): Sec. 8. The legislature may authorize on track pari mutuel betting on horse racing in a manner prescribed by law. For more information... To find out where \o vote to got a voter registratKX> card or to got an absentee votir>g appticatior.. call your county auditor or election department 1 ' 1 i 1 M CD/ Date: To: Froa: Subject: August 19, 1994 Mayor and City Council Members Steve Sullivan, Chief of Police Nice Letters Received • w r great! Her letter ^ recently assisted the North Tonka Crime SHi^ion iS puiting on a Safety Camp. It was, in l«t*“DiSl “<* i*M »i is rttached for your inforiMtion. aecond l.tt.r>s fro« the Church^of^S^^ «rhrr4srr?fs^"’ our police reserve m all 13 of our 14 reserve really did do a very reserve officer was scheduled at SlirjorU SeSM ?-nty^ail. An excellent turn oi? iSd quality work done by our reserves. ^h6lAe It', great-to get nice letters; 1 thought you all should see r • *r: i ;•'< 'li NORTH TONKA CRIME PREVENTION COALITION (a Minnesota non-profit corporation) SERVING THE COMMUNITIES OF LONG LAKE. MINNETONKA BEACH, ORONO AND SPRING PARK » ^ 1 \ August 15, 1994 Chief Steve Sullivan Orono Police Department p.O. Box 86 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Safety cam> Dear Chief Sullivan: We held our Safety camp on August 11, 1994, and it appears to have been a big success. This was in large part because of help from neabers of your Department. Gary Cheswick and Don Smith served on the planning committee, and spent the entire day with us doing vfbatever needed to be done to coordinate activities. Scott Boris served as a counselor for the kids; D. J. Goman directed traffic and helped wherever he could; and John schoenhoff took and processed exceptionally good photographs. Thanks so much to you and the members of your Department for being part of the team which made this event a reality. We think the kids had a great time while learning a little about safety. We plan to make this an annual event and hope that your Department will help us again. Sincerely, Oesyd/L. Peterson Safety Camp Coordinator CRIME WATCH 2730 Kelley Parkway • P.O. Box 267 • Long Lake. MN 55356 • (612) 473-7710 PUBLIC EDUCATION il IB THE CHURCH OF ST. GEORGE 199 SOUTH BROWN ROAD • LONG LAKE. MINNESOTA 55956 • i6l2) 479.1247 August 16, 1994 Reserve Officers Attn: Chief Sullivan P.O. Box 86 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Chief Sullivan, Thank you for the generous support of The Church of St. George and Long LakeOprn Days Festival on the weekend of August 6th and 7th. We appreciate all the volunteer hours your reserve units donated to our community festival. Your visibility insures a safe environment for all who come to enjoy our festivities. Wo also appreciate the on site protection on Saturday evening. This festival brings out the many gifts we share. Thank you! Rev. Richard J Mahoney Pastor Mary Leintz Chair-person 1994 / -V PEFMTTS ISSUED/FEZS COLLECTED YEAR-TODATERBPOftT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DRTB OP RUN 08/03/94IIT TYPEBulldlna•GL PRMILY-NBNOUPLIX-NBW8P-A0D/RBM0DBL8P-AOC 8TRUCTUREMNO/MtlNCIPALOOM-AOO/RBMODBL OTYXN8T-AD0/REM0DEL XN8T-RCC 8TRUCT XN8T-LMI0 ALT PLAN RBVXBN ONLY DBN0-ACCB88ORY ACC/OARAOBS 8ub>total Nechanical HBATXNO SYSTEMS AXR CONDXTIONING WOOD STOVE/FLUE PXRBPLACB VBNTXLATION PUBL STORAGE OAS LXNB INSPECT DUCT WORK ONLY RBNOVB OIL TANK UHDBPXHBD 1 1 6 3 7 0 Sion PBRMANBNT/POSTED PBR./PREB STANDG TEMPORARY Sub-total Fire LAWN SPRINKLER 2 1 2 5* PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO-- CURRENT RANGE - 01/01/94 - 07/31/94BASE FEE VALUATION1925.300.00 5,689.720.00115.00 500.00116‘ 16.452.00 1,706.690.8011939.00 76,300.007410.00 0.005477.00 37.300.0000.00 0.003025.50 93.840.0000.00 0.0000.00 0.0000.00 0.00 1 30.00 0.00 13 1.607.00 175,620.00 176*46.135.50*7.859,970.00* 47 4.336.11 329.167.04 6 230.00 13.061.00 3 151.25 10.200.00 20 1.210.00 00,009.16 35.00 35.00 210.00 132.50 245.00 0.00 70.00 39.00 60.00 169.00* 0.00 1,150 2,000 5,400 7,000 5,400 0 .00 .00 .00 . 00 .00 .00 Sub-total 94*6,504.94*454.260.00* Pluwbina FXXTO^72 5,202.92 361.203.06 WATER METER 10 1,617.50 6.500.00 REPLACE METER 0 0.00 0,00 UNDEFINED 0 0.00 0.00 Sub-total 02*6,900.42*367,703.86* Sawar & Water SBNBR CONNECTION 16 560.00 0.00 WATER CONNECTION 6 210.00 0.00 NEW SEPTIC SYSTE 10 1,000.00 0.00 DRNFLD a/OR TANK 2 150.00 0.00 SAC ONLY 14 9.600.00 0.00 SBNBR a WATER 3 210.00 0.00 Sub-total 51*11,730.00*0.00* 0.00 1,200.00 0.00 1,200.00* 0.00 PAGE: 1REQUESTER: CAROLSPLAN REVIEW QTY . . . . . . PREVIC01/01/93BASE FEE )US RANGE. . . . .- 07/31/93VALUATION PLAN REVIEW16,497.06 17 19,076.50 4,118,624.00 12.399.780.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.008,360.36 123 23,353.50 2,040,100.44 11.692.59553.80 15 2,180.50 221,470.00 1.386.790.00 3 150.00 0.00 0.0081.90 3 171.00 9.000.00 111.150.00 1 30.00 0.00 0.00322.08 3 2,677.00 520.600.00 1.368.260.00 A 330.00 37,000.00 214.500.00 1 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 1 0.00 0.00 984.430.00 0 245.00 0.00 0.00 1,184.95 6 1,689.00 277,900.00 1.097.85 27,000.15*102*49,902.50*8,032.694.44*29,255.35* 0.00 41 3,912.55 220,659.00 0.00 0.00 9 439.31 30,165.00 0.00 0.00 1 30.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 29 1,380.29 77.712.16 0.00 0.00 2 70.00 3,000.00 0.00 0.00 1 639.11 51,129.00 0.00 0.00 5 165.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 7 242.50 6,952.00 0.00 0.00 3 302.50 27,350.00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 1,900.00 0.00 0.00*99*7.296.26*420,067.16*0.00* 0.00 00 0,527.60 564,050.30 0.00 0.00 6 1,356.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 250.00 0.00 0.00*08*9.9J0.6O*564,308.30*0.00* 0,00 40 1,309.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 70.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 36 23,250.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00*89*25,509.50*0.00*0.00* 0.00 1 35.00 1,200.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 60.00 0.00 0.00 0.00*3*95.00*1,200.00*0.00* 0.00 5 175.00 0.00 0.00 r t';:I; f L- I icmns ISSUED/FIES OOLIBCTEDRIPORT MBR.'^PRMTISS-lOATS OP RUN 08/03/94 YEAR-TO-DATEPERMIT ISSUED REPORT *****CITY OF ORONO Vs^PAGE; 2REQUESTER: CMtOLI-- CURRENT RANGE - 01/01/94 - 07/31/94 -- PREVIOUS RANGE - 01/01/93 - 07/31/93PERMIT TYPESub-total%OTY0^BASE FEE 0.00*VALUATIONO.OO*PLAN REVIEW0.00*QTY5*BASE FEE 175.00*VALUATION0.00*PLAN REVXEN0.00*Uaar Dafined LAND ALTERATION TREE REMOVAL 52 300.00€0.00 0.00 0 00 0.00 f) nn 69 325.00 0.00 0.00RETAINING NALLS LANS SPRINKLER I 9 35.00 315.00 1.500.00 0.00 0.00 0 00 11n 30.00 117.00 0.009,700.00 0.000.00 Sub-total !?♦710.00*1,500.00* • yjv 0.00* u 8* 0.00 472.00*0.00 9,700.00* 0.00 0.00* Grand-total 425**72,229.86**0.684,642.66**27,000.15**474**93,440.86**9,028,769.90**29.2SS.3S** If’' I R9HITS ISSIXD/FTES COUfCTQ)YEAR-TO-DATERIMItT HBR. BPEERPT2-1 DATE OP RUN 08/09/94 *• PERMIT FEE REPORT •* CITY OF ORONO FROM 01/01/94 TO 07/31/94 PAGE: 1.REQUESTER: CAROLIBUILDINGMECHANICALPLUMBINGSEWER k WATER USER SIGN PIREBASE PEE 46,135.50 6,584.94 6,900.42 11,730.00 710.00 169.00 0.00PLAN REVIEW 27,000.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00SURCHAR(ffi 3,924.06 229.61 186.52 18.500 5.25 0.00 0.00Lie. SEARCH PEE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SAC 2,400.00 0.00 0.00 4,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 1,592.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MAIL IN 69.25 34.50 1.50 187.25 120.00 1.50 ENGINEERIMG FEES STAFF PEES MAIL IN PEE 1.50 PERMIT TOTAL 81,051.71 6«883.B0 7, 122.94 16,057.25 716.75 169.00 0.00 REPORT HBR. BPBBRPT2-1 DATE OP RUN 08/03/94 ** PERMIT FEE REPORT *• CITY OF ORONO FRCW 01/01/94 TO 07/31/94 PAGE: 2 REQUESTER: CAROLE BASE PEE PLAN REVIEW SURCHARGE Lie. SEARCH PEE BAC INVESTIGATION DEPOSIT REPORT TOTAL 72,229.86 27,000.15 4,363.94 0.00 6.400.00 1.592.00 0.00 MAIL IN ENOINESRING PEES STAFF PEES MAIL IN PEE 106.75 107.25 120.00 1.50 PERMIT TOTAL 112,001.45 ___ ^w'RIPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 ORTI OP RUN OB/03/94ZGHING PEIMTIS ISSVQ3/FEES COlA£CrED YEAR-TO-DATE'* PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO PM»: 1RBQUSSm: CMkOLBPBRNXT TYPEUMr Defined SUBDIVISION VARIANCE CUP8RBTCH PLAN VARIAMCE/CUP VACATION COMP PLAN AMEND Sub-totalOrand-total 01/01/94 -RANGE . . . .07/31/94 01/01/93 -RANGE - - - -07/31/93QTYBASE FEB VALUATION PLAN REVIEW QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVXEN08,075.00 0.00 0.00 11 3,155.00 0.00 0.00326,275.00 0.00 0.00 33 6,175.00 0.00 0.0091,425.00 0.00 0.00 8 1,625.00 0.00 0.002400.00 0.00 0.00 2 650.00 0.00 0.004600.00 0.00 0.00 1 250.00 0.00 0.0000.00 0.00 0.00 2 400.00 0.00 0.00w00.00 0.00 0.00 1 250.00 0.00 0.00V55*16,775.00*0.00*0.00*50*12,505.00*0.00*0.00*55**16,775.00**0.00**0.00**50**12,505.00**0.00**0.00** REPORT NBR. BPBI»PT2-1 DATE OF RUN 08/03/94 •* PERMIT FEE REPORT •*** CITY OF ORONOFROM 01/01/94 TO 07/31/94 . BASE FEE USER 16,775.00 REPORT TOTAL 16,775.00 PLAN REVIEW 0.00 0.00 SURCHARGE 0.00 0.00 Lie. SEARCH FEB 0.00 0.00 SAC 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 16,775.00 16,775.00 PAOEi 1 REQUESTER: CAROLE I r ’ fy ' ■ 1991 MCAP OF CONTRACT CITIESJanuaryfe^uiry March AprU Nay June July August Septaeber October Noveaber Occcnbar T1D TatalaSprinf Park Rian fttvitw 0.00 0.00 46.80 0.00 332.80 1U.95 277.25 801.80Inapactlana 165.00 165.00 30.00 105.00 75.00 90.00 165.00 730.00tatainar25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 179.00TOTM.i90.cr 190.00 101.80 130.00 432.80 259.95 467.25 1.771.80Na. Plan Ravlana 0 0 1 0 2 2 2 7No. Inapactlana 11 11 2 7 5 6 11 93Rinnatanka laacli Plan Ravicw 327.91 0.00 176.48 873.91 351.00 0.00 276.25 2.005.99■••>•Inapactlana 165.00 0.00 90.00 240.00 165.00 ^'*1.00 165.00 979.00Retainer25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 179.00rOTAl517.91 25.00 291.48 1.138.93 541.00 175.00 466.25 3.199.991No. Plan Revlewa 1 0 1 3 3 0 4 12V: \'•i' ■a. Inapactlana 11 0 6 16 11 10 11 49If^.OO i93.28 1,266.95 ^75.60 4I4.95 955.50 i CEPMnS ISSUB>/FEES COU£CTES JULY 1994RBP(MtT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OF RUN 00/03/MPERMIT TYPEBuildllM SOL PAMILY-NENSP-AOD/REMODEL SP-ACC STRUCTURE DBNO/PRXNCIPAL COM-AOD/REMODEL IMST-AW/REMODEL DEMO-ACCESSORY ACC/OARAGES Sub-total Mechanical HBATINO SYSTEMS AIR OOHOITX(»I1NG WOOD STOVE/FLUE PXRBPLACE VBRTXLATICXl DUCT WORK ONLY REMOVE OIL TANK Sub-total Plunbino FIXTURES WATER METER UNDEFINED Sub-total Sewer a Water SEWER CONNECTION NEW SEPTIC SYSTE SAC ONLY SEWER a WATER Sub-total pbSianent/posted TEMPORARY Sub-total Fire LAMM SPRINKLER Sub-total Uaer Defined LAND ALTERATION RETAINING WALLS LAWN SPRINKLER Sub-total Grand-total . .V. c ^ QTY120020204 29^ 7 1 1 2 0 1 2 14* 7 0 10* 2 1 1 26* 0 0 0* 0 0* 0 1 2 3* 62* PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO PAGB: IREQUESTER: CAROL!-- CURRENT RANGE - 07/01/94 - 07/31/94BASE FEE1.028.00 1.737.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 762.SO O.OJ 459.00 4.086.50* -- PREVIOUS RANGE - 07/01/93 - 07/31/93VALUATIONPLAN REVIEW QTY BASE FEB VALUATION PLAN REVIEIf211.000 136.483 0 0 090.340.00 0.0044.280.00 482.103.00* 0000000000 6687760002810339 2076000000130030 2.065.39* 42220122 35* 5.907.504.327.50 2100 63 1.617 65 261 000000500000 12,451.50* 1.357.000.00513.580.00 17.700,000.003.500.00300.600.00 0.0023.000.00 2.215.380.00* 3.839.8I2.547.49136.500.0040.95679.580.00169.65 7.414.25* 553,11 40,617.84 0.00 9 888.40 69,672.00 0.00 35.00 1.160.00 0.00 2 80.56 5,410.00 0.00 35.00 1,100.00 0,00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 70.00 2,500.00 0.00 5 192.28 10,687.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 1,500.00 0.00 35.00 1,000.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 70.00 2.450.00 0.00 2 347.50 26,150.00 0.00 798.11*48,827.84*0.00*19*1,543.74*113,419.It*0.00* 701.19 50.748.00 0,00 14 3,543.38 277,020.00 0.00 332.50 6,500.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 250.00 0.00 1.033.69*57.248.00*0.00*15*3,578 38*277.270.00*0.00* 70.00 0.00 0.00 7 245.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 800.OC 0.00 0.00 4 3,000.00 0.00 0.00 140.OC 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.110.0» ♦0.00*0.00*11*3,245.00*0.00*0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 1,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 30.00 0.00 0.00 0.00*0.00*0.00*2*65.00*1,200.00*0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 0.00 0.00 0.00*0.00*0.00*1*35.00*0.00*0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 100.00 0.00 0.00 35.00 1,500.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 70.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 105.00*1.500.00*0.00*2*100.00*0.00*0.00* 7.133.30**509,678.84**2,065.39**85**21,010.62**2.607,269.16**7.414.2S* m <REPORT NBR. BPBERPTl-1 DATE OF RUN 08/03/94BASE FEE PLAN REVIEW SURCHARGE Lie. SEARCH FEB SAC INVESTIGATION DEPOSIT MAIL IN PERMIT TOTAL REPORT NBR. BFEERPTl-1 DATE OF RUN OS/03/94 REPORT TOTAL BASE FEE PLAN REVIEW SURCHARGE Lie. SEARCH FEE SAC XHVBSTIQATION DEPOSIT * MAIL IN PERMIT TOTAL 7,133.30 2,065.39 290.75 0.00 0.00 1,439.00 0.00 13.50 10,949.94 ISSUED/FEES OOU^XTTEX)JULY 1994 PAGE: 2'CITY OF ' FROM 07/01/94 REPORTORONOTO 07/31/94 REQUESTER:CAROLEBUILDINGMECHANICALPLUMBINGSEWER 6 WATER USER SIGN FIRE4,066.50 790.11 1,033.69 #1,110.00 105.00 0.00 o.co2,065.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00240.46 24.69 29.35 2.50 1.75 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.OC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,439.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.50 1.50 1.50 7,031.35 033.30 1,064.54 1,114.00 106.75 0.00 0.00 CITY OF FROM 07/01/94 REPORT ORONO TO 07/31/94 —' PAGE: REQUESTER: CAROLE i lfBO« AUG 3. 1994, 9:56 AMPBRMITS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF JULY 1994 PERMIT WORK ADDR NBR STREET PAGE 1ISSUEDPERMIT NBR :u NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATION94/07/21 OR-006260 155M810 F fc T CONSTRUCTION IN 211.000.0094/07/13 OR-006240 00000000 BEUTLER IS.000.CO94/07/07 OR-006232 14792495 DONALD AHLSTROM SHINKLE 9.700.ro94/07/19 OR-006218 14783147 GORCO BUILDERS WACKER 7,400.0094/07/20 OR-006258 00000000 GIESE 15.300.0094/07/27 OR-006279 00000000 VALERIUS 11,860.0094/07/07 OR-006121 00000000 MCFADDEN 3.500.0094/07/15 OR-006207 00000000 GEFFRE 8,500.0094/07/01 OR-006209 00000000 HOLM 1,000.0094/07/20 OR-006254 15590251 ElDEN CONSTRUCTION INC EIDEN 30,000.00 94/07/01 OR-006225 00000000 ORTENBLAD 3,500.00 94/07/05 OR-006229 00000000 EIDE 2.100.00 94/07/12 OR-006239 00000000 KLOHN 1.000.00 94/07/15 OR-006248 15935325 ALLSTAR CONSTRUCTION INC JENTILUCCI 3.342.00 94/07/20 OR-006252 17294420 ED SHERIDAN ENTERPRISES PETERS 4.000.00 94/07/21 OR-006259 18238046 SELA ROOFING CUTSHALL 1.800.00 94/07/27 OR-006278 14843130 OMNI ROOFS, INC.37.000.00 94/07/28 OR-006282 17246276 SCHMITZ CONSTRUCTION WHITE 5.341.00 94/07/29 OR-006285 00000000 PEkSONlUS 1.600.00 94/07/28 OR-005983 00000000 STICKNBY .00 94/07/26 OR-006269 00000000 OLSON .00 94/07/07 OR-006233 15351670 SULLIVAN HAULING 6 EXC LEECH 5.000.00 94/07/01 OR-006222 00000000 KELLY 1,000.00 94/07/05 OR-006223 00000000 SMITH 25.300.00 94/07/07 OR-006230 00000000 JENTILUCCI 1,000.00 94/07/11 OR-006238 19337673 NIEGHBORHOOD BLDG k REMDL KRETCHMAN 7,000.00 94/07/15 OR-006244 00000000 53,340.00 94/07/29 OR-006245 15594004 DUNDEE LANDSCAPE NURSERY FORSYTHE 1,500.00 94/07/19 OR-006251 14750918 BRUCE BREN HOMES MELROSE 15.000.00 94/07/08 OR-006236 39296767 VOGT FRED k CO WOOD 1,160.00 94/07/08 OR-006237 34820444 GRIGGS CONTRACTING MARVIN 1,500.00 94/07/13 OR-006241 35872779 TEK MECHANICAL SERVICES REGNIBR 5,000.00 94/07/15 OR-006249 35453797 M H SEIFERT CONST HOLM 1,500.00 94/07/20 OR-006257 35595900 MIDWEST FIREPLACE CO PRAUS 1,000.00 94/07/25 OR-006265 24972290 b k D PLUMBING k HEATING 14,445.00 94/07/25 OR-006266 34739558 DITTER INC SHANNON 500.00 94/07/26 OR-006267 35 '78491 SUPERIOR CONTR INC SAKLAD 3,000.00 94/07/27 OR-006274 34 ;82452 SCHERBER k SONS INC WUJEK 950.00 94/07/27 OR 006280 34789558 DITTER INC KING 8,950.00 94/07/28 OR-006283 36332561 FIRESIDE CORNER 1,100.00 94/07/29 OR-006284 34792000 LAKE-AIR HTG RUSCH 7,275.00 94/07/01 OR-006226 34461047 ST BONI REFPIG ft A/C FRANK 1,447.84 94/07/22 OR-006262 38548647 DIVERSIFIED MECHANICAL SER KRETCHMAN 1,000.00 94/07/01 OP 006227 258'/2779 TLK MECHANICAL SERVICES REGNIER 5,000.00 94/07/05 OR 006228 OuOCOOOO SMITH 1,500.00 94/07/15 OR-006247 34972290 B D PLUMBING k HEATING 13,695.00 94/07/18 OR-006250 00000000 ROOD .00 94/07/25 OR-006264 24248455 MACK PLUMBING THOMPSON 3.000.00 94/07/26 OR-006272 253J4357 PLYMOUTH PLUMBING 11.000.00 94/07/27 OR-006276 2^332521 THOMPSON PI.BG 20.000.00 29C MB 14C PL 01020?04040406060609 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 16 16 27 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29C 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 24 29 14C 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 96013052425111524003750117046655252240 2799 4146 1990 1295 3554 1271 770 3516 2265 1025 537 720 2056 4240 1295 2450 795 3405 50 1230 1620 1205 4030 1200 4675 2760 2496 119 142 1225 1920 1233 2450 1205 4240 4075 3280 90 50 2006 COX FARM RD NORTH ARM DR MAPLE LA BROWN RD S WATERTOWN RD BAYSIDE RD LYMAN AVE BAYSIDE RD TONKAWA RD ABINGDON WAY CASCO POINT RD HIGHWOOD RD SHADYWOOD RD BRIAR ST LIVINGSTON AVE ARBOR ST OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N IVY PL WEBBER HILLS RD TONKAWA RD PARK LA NORTH ARM DR SHADYWOOD RD NORTH SHORE DR BRIAR ST COUNTRYSIDE DR OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N 6TH AVE N CRISTOFORI CIR WOODHILL AVE FOX ST ELMWOOD AVE ELM ST PHILLIPS DR CREEKWOOD TR WHITE OAK CIR OLD BEACH RD CHEVY CHASE DR CHEVY CHASE DR ORONO OAKS DR SHORELINE DR BRIAR ST COUNTRYSIDE DR ELMWOOD AVE NORTH SHORE DR CREEKWOOD TR NAVARRE LA MYRTLEWOOD RD LANDMARK DR SUGARWOOD DR WBO, AUG 3, 1994. 9:58 AMPBRMIT8 ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OP 1994 PAGE 3PERMITNORKADORNBR STREET ISSUED PERMIT NBR ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATIC»(PL 20 795 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N 94/07/07 OR-006234 24738793 CITYVIEW PLBG & HTG 400.0024885FERNDALE RD W 94/07/01 OR-006224 29337200 CULLIGAN OLSON 153.00IOC24IOC27258HADYWOOO RD 94/07/06 OR-006231 29332836 DOUGS PLUMBING MEEK 2s500.00r8N01715FERNDALE RD N 94/07/08 OR-006235 54734361 JOHNSON JERRY EXC LYMAN .00[01 2S77 CASCO POINT RD 94/07/13 OR-006242 24484763 WAYNE DAUWALTER PLUMBING BUCEY .00f013770BAYSIDE RD 94/07/20 OR*006256 00000000 GARDINER .00t’01 3770 BAYSIDE RD 94/07/25 OR-006263 54734300 SULLIVAN'S SERVICES INC GARDINER .00013310BAYSIDE RD 94/07/27 OR-006275 24461495 WIDMBR INC WOJCIK .00 [ €C 01 6C 2006 SUGARWOOD DR 94/07/27 OR-006277 29332521 THOMPSON PLBG .00 > uo 01 4105 BAYSIDE RD 94/07/15 OR-006243 85460436 GREENKBEPER INC MAHONEY .00t012695CASCO POINT RD 91/07/20 OR-006253 85911475 NATURAL ENVIRONMENTS REDMOND .00 ! .24 1910 SHADYWOOD RD 94/07/15 OR-006246 00000000 MCMANUS 1«500.00k 3C 3C i <2C 589,C78.84« ■* 01 Residence 24 02 Addition 25 03 Garage/Attached 26 04 Garage/Detached 27 05 Porch 28 06 Deck 29 07 Fence 30 08 Gazebo 31 09 Pool 32 10 Re>side 33 11 Re-roof 34 12 Tennis Court 13 Sign 14 Dock 15 Shed 16 Demo-Principal Structure 17 Demo-Accessory Structure 18 Hove 19 Commercial 20 Institutional 21 Storm Damage Repair 22 1-100 Cubic Yards 23 101 Cubic Yards or More 99 Undefined Replacing Existing Lifting Principal Residence Well Abandonnent Foundation Only Temporary Trailer Renovate/Renode1 Accessory Structure Stairway to Lake Retaining Wall Entrance Monuments Tree Removal S,,,y. V local USB CODBS 9999 Undefined \WED, AUG 3, 1994. NUMERICAL LISTING 9:5a AMJULY 1994 PAGE 1PERMIT NBR ISSUED CANCEL ADDR NBR STREET WORK ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATIONSTICKNEY .00MCFADDBN3.500.00GEFFRE0.500.00HOLM1.000.00WACKER7.400.00KELLY1.000.00SMITH25.300.00OLSON153.00ORTENBLAD3.500.00FRANK1.447.04REGNIER5.000.00 SMITH 1.500.00 EIDB 2.100.00 JENTILUCCI 1.000.00 MEEK 2.500.00 SHINKLB 9.700.00 LEECH 5.000.00 400.00 LYMAN .00 WOOD 1.160.00 MARVIN 1.500.00 KRBTCHMAN 7.000.00 KLOHN . 1.000.00 BBUTLBR 15.000.00 RBGNI6R 5.000.00 BUCBY .00 MAHONBY .00 53.340.00 FORSYTHE 1.500.00 MCMANUS 1.500.00 13.695.00 JENTILUCCI 3.342.00 HOLM 1.500.00 ROOD .00 MELROSE 15.000.00 PETERS 4.000.00 REDMOND .00 EIDEN 30.000.00 GARDINER .00 PRAUS 1.000.00 GIESB 15.300.00 CUTSHALL 1.800.00 211.000.00 KRETCHMAN 1.000.00 GARDINER .00 THOMPSON 3.000.00 14.445.00 SHANNON 500.00 SAKLAD 3.000.00 OLSON .00 11.000.00 WUJEK 950.00 WOJCIK .00 20.000.00 OR-0059S3OR-006121OR-004207OR-006209OR-006218OR-OOC222OR-004223OR-008224OR-006225OR*008226OR-006227 OR-006220 OR-006229 OR-006230 OR-006231 OR-008232 OR-006233 OR-008234 OR-006235 OR-008236 OR-008237 OR-006230 OR-006239 OR-006240 OR-OOS241 OR-000242 OR-000243 OR-006244 OR-006245 OR-006240 OR-006247 OR-000240 OR-006249 OR-OOS2SO OR-006251 OR-006252 OR-006253 OR-006254 OR-000256 OR-006257 OR-000250 OR-000259 OR-006260 OR-006262 OR-006263 OR-000264 OR-000265 OR-006266 OR-000267 OR-006269 OR-000272 OR-006274 OR-006275 OR-006276 94/07/20 N 94/07/07 N 94/07/15 N 94/07/01 N 94/07/19 N 94/07/01 N 94/07/05 N 94/07/01 N 94/07/01 N 94/07/01 N 94/07/01 N 94/07/05 N 94/07/05 N 94/07/07 N 94/07/06 N 94/07/07 N 94/07/07 N 94/07/07 N 94/07/00 N 94/07/00 N 94/07/00 N 94/07/11 N 94/07/12 N 94/07/13 N 94/07/13 N 94/07/13 N 94/07/15 N 94/07/15 N 94/07/29 N 94/07/15 N 94/07/15 N 94/07/15 N 94/07/15 N 94/07/10 N 94/07/19 N 94/07/20 N 94/07/20 N 94/07/20 N 94/07/20 N 94/07/20 N 94/07/20 N 94/07/21 N 94/07/21 N 94/07/22 N 94/07/25 N 94/07/25 N 94/07/25 N 94/07/25 N 94/07/26 N 94/07/26 N 94/07/26 N 94/07/27 N 94/07/27 N 94/07/27 N 102511704665525111520564240685279912331205 4240 4148 1295 2725 2425 720 795 715 1230 1620 2450 1990 1305 1205 2677 4105 795 3405 1910 4675 1295 4030 3280 50 3554 2695 2240 3770 1200 2400 1271 980 2450 3770 90 4675 2760 2496 537 50 119 3310 2006 TONKAWA RD LYMAN AVE BAYSIDE RD TONKAWA RD BROWN RD S SHADYWOOD RD NORTH SHORE DR FERNDALE RD W CASCO POINT RD BRIAR ST ELMWOOD AVE NORTH SHORE DR HIGHWOOD RD BRIAR ST SHADYWOOD RD MAPLE LA NORTH ARM DR OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N FERNDALE RD N WOODHILL AVE FOX ST COUNTRYSIDE DR SHADYWOOD RD NORTH ARM DR ELMWOOD AVE CASCO POINT RD BAYSIDE RD OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N 6TH AVE N SHADYWOOD RD CRBEKWOOD TR BRIAR ST ELM ST NAVARRE LA CRISTOFORI CIR LIVINGSTON AVE CASCO POINT RD ABINGDON WAY BAYSIDE RD PHILLIPS DR WATERTOWN RD ARBOR ST COX FARM RD COUNTRYSIDE DH BAYSIDE RD MYRTLEWOOD RD CREEKWOOD TR WHITE OAK CIR OLD BEACH RD PARK LA LANDMARK DR CHEVY CHASE DR BAYSIDE RD SUGARWOOD DR 16 00000000 06 OOOOOCOO 06 00000000 06 00000000 04 1470314729 0000000029 0000000024 2933720011 00000000 24 34461047 01 25072779 01 OOOOCOOO 11 OCOOOOOO 29 00000000 24 29332836 03 14792495 27 15351670 2C 24730793 01 54734361 01 39296767 01 34020444 29 19337673 11 00000000 02 00000000 01 35072779 01 24404763 01 05460436 29 00000000 29 15594004 24 00000000 01 34972290 11 15935325 01 35453797 01 00000000 29 14750910 11 17294420 01 85911475 09 15590251 01 00000000 01 35595900 04 00000000 11 10238046 01 15531010 29 38548647 01 54734300 01 24248455 01 24972290 01 34789558 01 35378491 16 00000000 01 25334357 01 34702452 01 24461495 01 29332521 GORCO BUILDERSCULLIGANST BONI REFRIG k A/C TEK MECHANICAL SERVICES DOUGS PLUMBING DONALD AHLSTROM SULLIVAN HAULING k EXC CITYVIEW PLBG k HTG JOHNSON JERRY EXC VOGT FRED k CO GRIGGS CONTRACTING NIEGHBORHOOD BLDG k REMDL TEK MECHANICAL SERVICES WAYNE DAUWALTER PLUMBING GREENKEEPER INC DUNDEE LANDSCAPE NURSERY B & D PLUMBING k HEATING ALLSTAR CONSTRUCTION INC M H SEIFERT CONST BRUCE BREN HOMES ED SHERIDAN ENTERPRISES NATURAL ENVIRONMENTS EIDEN CONSTRUCTION INC MIDWEST FIREPLACE CO SELA ROOFING F 6 T CONSTRUCTION IN DIVERSIFIED MECHANICAL SER SULLIVAN'S SERVICES INC MACK PLUMBING B 6 D PLUMBING k HEATING DITTER INC SUPERIOR CONTR INC PLYMOUTH PLUMBING SCHERBER k SONS INC WIDMER INC THOMPSON PLBG • -y«?NED, AUG 3, 1994, 9:58 AMmmBRlCAL LISTING JUUf 1994PERMIT NBR ISSUED CANCEL ADDR NBR STREET PAGE 2WORKID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATIONOR-OOS277 OR-006278 OR-006279 OR-P06280 OR-006282 OR-006283 OR-006284 (MI-00628S 62C 94/07/2794/07/2794/07/2794/07/2794/07/2894/07/2894/07/2994/07/29NNNNNNNN 200677037501423516122519202265 SUGARWOOD DR OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD BAYSIDE RD CHEVY CHASE DR IVY PLORONO OAKS DR SHORELINE DR WEBBER HILLS RD 0111040111010111 29332521148431300000000034789558172482763633256134792000 THOMPSON PLBG OMNI ROOFS, INC.DITTER INC SCHMITZ CONSTRUCTION FIRESIDE CORNER LAKE-AIR HTG VALERIUSKINGWHITE00000000RUSCHPBRSONIUS .0037,000.00 11,800.008.950.005.341.001.100.007.275.001.600.00 I*:'' t--' : >■ r r-t ?. ZONING rOMITS ISSUED/FEES COIifCTES JULY 1994UEPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 ORTB or RUN 08/03/94 • PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO PAGE: 1REQUESTER: CAROLI-- CURRENT RANGE - 07/01/94 - 07/31/94 -- PREVIOUS RANGE - 07/01/93 - 07/31/93PERMIT TYPE QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN RBVIENUMr Dvfined . ..SUBDIVISION 2 400.00 0.00 0.00 3 900.00 0.00 0.00VARIANCE61,200.00 0.00 0.00 3 575.00 0.00 0 )0CUP00.00 0.00 0.00 1 200.00 0.00 0.008RITCH PLAN 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 200.00 0.00 0.00VARIANCE/CUP 1 175.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00VACATION00.00 0.00 0.00 1 250.00 0.00 0.00OQNP PLAN AMEND 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 250.00 0.00 0.00Sub*total 9*1,775.00*0.00*0.00*10*2,375.00*0.00*0.00*Orand*total 9«#1,775.00**0.00**0.00**10**2,375.00**0.00**•0.00** RBPORT MRR. BPBBRPT2-1 DATS OP RUN 08/03/94 ** PERMIT FEE REPORT *• CITY OF ORONOFROM 07/01/94 TO 07/31/94 BASE PIE USER 1,775.00 REPORT TOTAL 1,775.00 PLAN RIVIIN 0.00 0.00 SURCHAROB 0.00 0.00 Lie. SEARCH PEE 0.00 0.00 SAC 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 1,775.00 1,775.00 PAGE t 1 REQUESTER: CAROLI Y 1994*•••* 3TY 3 3 1 1 0 1 1 10* 10** PAGE:07/0?/arange - 07/01/93 - 07/31/93 requester; CAROLS base fee 900.00 575.00 200.00 200.00 0.00 250.00 250.00 2,375.00* 2,375.00** VALUATION plan RBVIBN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0.00** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0.00** PAGE REQUESTER; CAROLE /o^ o mi cmr of ORONO Municipal Offices Stritt Address: 2750 Kelley Partway Orono. MN 55356 Mailini Address.- P 0 Boi 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 August 12, 1994 Valerie Reinaas Minoesota Department of Transportation Metro Division Waters Edge 1500 County Road B2 Roseville, Miiuiesota 55113 Dear Valerie, The City of Orono has now completed its review of the population and employment ^ata provided in relation to the traffic modeling process. The population numbers appear to be reasonably accurate. The employment numbers were reasonably accurate with the exceptions of two sub-zones among which the employmem numbers needed to be reallocated. This has been accomplished through a discussion with Greg Gaides of Barton Ashman. Because the City is not familiar with the assumptions underlying the traffic model, the city’s approval of the population and employment numben is not to be considered as an approval of the traffic modeling process or the results of the process. Sincerely, Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator ' ^ Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510