Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09-13-1993 Council Packet
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 ROLL The Council met on the above date with the following members present; Mayor Edward Callahan, Councilmembers Gabriel Jabbour, J. Diann Goetten and Charles Kelley. JoEllen Hurr arrived at 9:05 p.m. The following represented staff; City Administrator Ron Moorse. Public Works Director John Gerhardson, Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth. Assistant Planning and 2^ning Administrator Michael Gaffron, City Attorney Tom Barrett, City Engineer Glenn Cook and Recorder Lin Vee. Mayor Callahan called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. (#1) CONSENT Kelley added Items #6, 0S and #10. Jabbour added Items #12, #15 and #18. Moorse removed Item #4. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Ayes 4, nays 0. Motions for all items adopted by Consent Agenda will be included in the minutes in their respective numerical order. (•2) APPROVAL or MINUTES It 's moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve the minutes of the August 23, 1993 Council meeting. Ayes 4, nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Lili McMillan was present representing the Park Commission. She explained that the proposed Friends of Park Award would be an annual award to an individual or group who has vohimecred their time and effort on behalf of Orono’s parks. She described what the plaque would look like adding that it would probably be placed in the Council Chambers hallway. Councilmembers agreed the award was a good idea. It was moved by Jabbour. seconded by Goetten. to allow the Park Board to spend $125.00 from the park dedication fund to cover the cost ol the plaque, an award ccmficalc and f<x>d for a reception to be held October 5. 1993 Ayes 4. nays 0. Mavor Ca'lahan added that the award should be a City award sponsored by the Park Board. MwMuUn agreed that the award would be presented on behalf of the City. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 (#4) #1803 WOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB. 200 WOODHILL ROAD - FINAL SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION #3318 Bob Mitchell was present representing the applicants Mabusth explained that in the preliminary plat there was no Outlot D so there was no issue raised regarding the outlot. In the final plat. Outlot D appeared. In the original resolution, it was stated that Outlot B could be legally combined with the Carpenter property or the adjacent property. Mitchell has asked that the outlot be legally combined with Lot I. Block 1. The amended resolution. Page 2. Condition 2. reads "As Outlot D is unbuildable and relates closely to Lot 1. Block 1 and is not contiguous to any other property owned by the developer. Outlot D and Lot 1. Block 1 shall be deemed combined for Orono’s subdivision and land use purposes with the execution of a special lot combination." It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour. to adopt Resolution #3318 as amended. Ayes 4. nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Charles Nolan represented the Planning Commission. There were no comments PUBUC COMMENTS I I. HMame O’Meara. 2000 Webber Hills Road, explained that while recently purchasing their they had to deal with the new septic regulations. Since their system did not comply, they were given two years to upgrade the system. Because they purchased the home under fcmlosuie. a purchase agreement was written. Fuiids were in escrow for a septic system. Once they moved in. the septic moratorium was imposed. She is asking for two things: Several neighborhoods are being considered for sewer. She would like an expedient decision on whether or not sewer will be utilized in the Webber Hills area. If septic systems arc to continue in Webber Hills, she would like to be allowed an exception to the moratorium to proceed with the upgrade of their system so the> can comply with the stipulations of their purchase agreemem. Mayor Callahan explained that the moratorium is only for preventing the City from enforcing the septic ordinance; it docs not prevent anyone from proceeding with the installation of a septic system MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 PUBLIC COMMENTS - CONT. O’Meara asked again for a decision regarding sewer in the Webber Hills area. Mayor Callahan pointed out that it will be a slow process to decide which, if any, "hot spots" will be sewered. Jabbour added that these areas will be reevaluated periodically. Orono has a very limited number of sewer units available for use. Kelley added that Mike Gaffron is knowledgeable in this area and could talk with her if she has any further questions. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#4) #1803 WOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB, 200 WOODHILL ROAD This item was discussed prior to Planning Commission Comments. (#5) #1829 DIANE SIEFF, 1080 WILDHURST TRAIL - VARIANCES The applicant, Diane Sieff, and her son Gerald were present. Mabusth explained that the applicants rebuilt the decks in 1991. They did not expand upon the deck to the lakeside or the south, but a deck that was originally about 6’ x 20 ’ was expanded an additional 8 ’ resulting in 160 s.f. of additional hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback area where excesses already exist. The structures were improved without building permits and met the required setbacks. The proposed addition to the deck at the northwest comer meets the requited 10’ side yard setback. The issue is hardcover for this variance review. The applicant hM proposed, in exchange for 160 s.f. of additiona! structural hardcover, to remove 84.4 s.f. of structural hardcover in the 0-75 ’ area and approximately 331 s.f. of non-structural hardcover consisting of rock with plastic and concrete paven within the street yard. The Planning Commission was unable to affect a decision with a 2-2 vote. This application b brought to Council for their consideration and final action. Callahan noted that when the Plaruiii^ Conunisskm suggested removal of some hardcover in the driveway, they were told the next door neighbor used the driveway so portions of the paved area could not be removed. Sieff asked if a letter had been received from the neighbor. Mayor Callahan confirmed that a copy of the letter was included with the packet information. Jabbour emphasized the philosophy of the Council not to replace non-structural hardcover with structural haidcover. He views non-structural hardcover as non-conforming, illegal structures. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 (#5) #1829 DIANNE SIEFF, 1080 WILDHURST TRAIL - CONT. Kelley asked who Roy Benson was. Sieff replied that it was her ex-husband. Kelley noted the hardship was no longer prevailing since Mr. Benson with his back problems no longer lives at the house. This makes hardship use of the deck no longer necessary. Kelley felt the deck could be moved back to what it was prior to construction and continue with the removal of the shed next to the lake. Sieff explained the hardship she was referring to was the next door neighbor using her driveway, not ^nson with his back problems. Mabusth explained that a 10’ x 8’ deck addition was constructed without application and would have required a variance review because of excesses of hardcover. Kelley reiterated that the hardship no longer exists. Jabbour stated the hardship should be tied to the land, not the applicant. Since the shed was there before the deck addition, Jabbour asked if the City could require the removal of the shed. Mabusth added that the decks were there before the ordinances in 1975. Kelley asked if Jabbour wanted to trade removal of the shed for the deck. Jabbour responded that you have to look at what is the worst of two possibilities and try to avoid it. Gerald Sieff noted that the shed and other hardcover was there before 1975, so the City could not require those removals. From his point of view, they are proposing to remove 84 s.f. of an existing shed in the 0-75’ zone plus another 391 s.f. of non-structural hardcover. That calculates out to 5.2 times the area of non-stnictural to structural removals. It would seem more beneficial to remove 468 s.f. of hardcover than to remove 160 s.f. of deck. Jabbour suted that a haidship still needs to exist. In the resolution, it should be staled that if any of the gravel/plastic that is removed reverts back to plastic/gravel, the City has the right to revoke the variance. Mayor Callahan expressed concern over the neighbor using the driveway. He asked Gerhardson for input about this driveway and suggested Gerhardson look at this situation to see what can be done about the neighbor’s driveway access. The neighbor docs not have an easement over the driveway. Goetten did not think a decision about this application should be based on the neighbor’s problems. She also felt there could be additional hardcover removals. The blacktop is an important issue. Gerald Sieff felt there were three options to be considered: 1) Tear down the neighbor’s garage. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 (#5) #1829 DIANNE SIEFF, 1080 WILDHURST TRAIL - CONT. 2) 3) Continue to use the current driveway. Remove the current driveway and build another driveway between the SiefFs and the neighbor’s driveway on the lower part. Sicff noted that many of the problems with the Planning Commission were over what the definitions of non-structural hardcover are, i.e. blacktop vs. plastic underliner for rose beds vs. gravel. Callahan stoted that the object is not to trade hardcover for equal amounts of hardcover but to reduce hardcover to the allowed levels. Sieff replied they were not proposing an equal exchange but 478 s.f. of removals for 160 s.f. hardcover. Jabbour added the City was trying to get as close to 25% as possible. Kelley asked to see what the applicant could propose if the driveway were disallowed to the south. This would reduce a substantial amount of hardcover if the lower portion of the driveway were removed. He would like to see figures as to how close to 25% these removals could obuin. If only 2*3% were gained, it wouldn’t be effective. Mabusth added that these questions were asked of the applicant at the Planning Commission meeting. The applicant noted that the doors on the garage were for maintenance vehicles. To access the garage from the other side, vehicles would have to be moved out of the garage to get to the back. Sieff noted the area being discussed is about 4’ x 6’. TIk. applicant felt nothing could be removed in the 75-250’ zone because of access to the doors. Kelley still wants to see a proposal for removals because a paved area may not be necessary for using these doors. Goetten added the City is looking for help from the Sieffs in more elimination of hardcover since they are way over the toul allowed annount. Gerald Sieff expressed his liustration with looking for more removals. They have been at three meetings and have not been able to find a better solution. They have lived on the lake for 17-18 years and are also very concerned about the environment. They are offering to give up 478 s.f. of hardcover. Jabbour agreed with Kelley that it would be difficult to get additional removals in the 75-250’ zone. This leaves the City with the option of accepting the proposed removals which may be more favorable to the City than asking for the removal of the 160 s.f. deck. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to grant the after-the-fact variance for the deck conditioned upon removal of the shed by the lake and all other proposed hardcover removals as presented in the application and discussion with the City Attorney about including a stipulation that if any of the non-structural hardcover removals reappear, the applicam would be requited to reappear before the Council and the deck would have to be removed. Ayes 3, navs 1 • Goetten was opposed. L MINUTES OF THE REGLT.AR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEITEMBER 13, 1993 (•#6) #1844 KEN HOPKINS, 65/75 FERNDALE ROAD - SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT - RESOLUTION #3319 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3319 for applicant Ken Hopkins granting a lot line rearrangement for the properties located at 65/75 Femdale Green. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#7) #1846 ALAN AND LESLEE UPIN, 740 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3320 Mr. and Mrs. Upin were present. Mabusth explained the applicants propose the removal of a 19’ X 21’ concrete patio and the replacement of a 12’ x 19 ” screen porch addition. The planning Commission agreed unanimously upon removals of a brick patio area, a former dog run and a landscape area underlain with plastic. There are drainage concerns which is why a portion of landscape area und ,rlain with plastic has remained. There will be a final reduction of hardcover in the 75-250’ zone (rom 48% to 45.2%. There is an average lakeshore setback encroachment as well as excess hardcover in the 0-75’ setback area. The lot has severe slopes with a steep lakeshore bank. Callahan asked the Upins if information in the packet was correct and the resolution satisfactory The Upins confumed the information to be correct and agreed with the resolution. Jabbour noted a garage had been added recently. Mabusth stated there was no record of the addition and the Upins were new owners. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to approve Resolution #3320 as proposed for applicants Alan and Lcslee Upin, 740 Tonkawa Road, to permit the construction of a 12’ X 19’ attached screen porch to the lakeside of the existing residence to be located 5’ in front of the average lakeshore setback line, 65’ from the shoreline requiring a 10* or 13.3% setback variance, hardcover variance in the 0-75’ setback area of 438 s.f. or 7.7% and a 2,064.7 s.f. or 20% variance in the 75-250’ setback area. Ayes 4. nays 0. Goetten expressed concern over the excessive hardcover in tlic 75-250’ zone. There is 48% hardcover where only 25% is allowed. She questioned if more could be removed since a 3% reduction is not a whole lot. Jabbour and Goetten looked at bituminous removals. Mayor Callahan noted there appears to be only a sufficient amount of bituminous to maneuver out of the garage. Mrs. Upin added that they have proposed all removals they possibly can. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 (♦#8) 1852 HOWARD EISINGER, 3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION #3321 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3321 for applicant Howard Eisinger, 3245 WayzaU Boulevard, granting a conditional use permit to permit the filling of 70,000 cubic yards of fill to be placed over a former dump site of approximately 12 acres in area. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#9) 1853 RICHARD E. AND A. JEAN ENGEBRETSON, 1180 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3322 The applicants* architect. Joe Metzler, and builder. Jim Bruce, were present Mabusth explained that the Engebretsons propose new construction. The existing structure extends far beyond the average lakeshore setback line. There is approximately 449 s.f. of blacktop used for a backout apron for a three-stall garage within the 0-75’ setback area. There has been a great attempt made in relocating the house on this property to minimize expansion toward the lake. The setback for the proposed struemre is 56’. A 21’ average lakeshore setback currently exists and is proposed at 6’. Hardcover is proposed at 9.6% in the 0-75’ zone and exists at 15.8%. In the 75-250’ zone, hardcover exists at 23% and is proposed at 27.5%. Although there is an increase in hardcover in the 75-250’ setback zone, there are major reductions in the 0-75’ zone. The Planning Commission questioned why some of the blacktop could not be removed. It was determined that, because of safety issues involving backing out onto the road, it would be necessary to maintain the blacktop area for parking so that tuniaround would not be blocked.. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Kelley, to approve Resolution #3322 granting variances for applicants Richard E. and A. Jean Engebretson, 1180 Tonkawa Road, to permit constiuctkm of a new residence measuring 43’ x 50 ’ requiring a 19’ or 25.3% lakeshore setback variance, a 6’ encroachmem of the average lakeshore setback. 9.6% hardcover variance within the 0-75’ setback area and a 2.5% hardcover variance within the 75-250’ setback area. Ayes 4, nays 0. Mayor Callahan called a recess from 8:30 p.m. - 8:40 p.m. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT This item was moved to a later time for discussion. ENGINEER REPORT This item was moved to a later time for discussion MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT (•#10) STUBBS BAY SEWER RECONSTRUCTION ON LEAF STREET - FURCHNER PROPERTY Although this item was on the Consent Agenda, Mayor Callahan commented that Mr. Furchnei had contacted him and thanked the Council and staff for their help in resolving his problems. (#11) SIX MONTH FINANCIAL REPORT Mayor Callahan suggested this matter be moved to the work session scheduled for October 4th for discussion. Kelley commented that he was pleased with the report. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to accept the report as presented. (•#12) UNDERGROUND TANK REMOVAL CONSULTANT It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to designate Braun Intertec as the consultant for the underground r mk removal for an amount of $1,950.00. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#13) RECORDER CONTRACT Moorse reported that the recorder’s contract would be for approximately $4,300.00 per year The previous recorder was paid approxinuitely $6,000.00 annually. Moorse conftimed that this is a better solution than having the City Cleric do the recording of meetings. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Jabbour. to approve the selection of the recorder per the fee schedule as outlined in the memo dated September 10. 1993. Ayes 4. nays 0. (#14) 1994 BUDGET AND PROPOSED TAX LEVY - RESOLUTION #3323 Mayor Callahan suggested tltat the budgeted amount of $1,916,637 be increased by $60,000. The levy for the 1989 sewer and water bonds of $25,000 is not sufTicienl to cover the debt service on the bonds, and the building fund should not be drawn down in principal for purpose of helping the General Fund. Each of these items is about $60,000 but he did not think the budget should be increased by $120,000. Jabbour agreed. Mayor Callahan noted that the maximum amount than can be levied is the amount determined at this meeting. Internally the levy can be reallocated but not increased. It was moved by Jabbour. seconded by Kelley, to adopt Resolution #3323 approving the proposed maximum 1993 tax levy collectible in 1994 of $1,967,637. Ayes 4, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 (•#15) AUCTION OF CONFISCATED AND EXCESS PROPERTY It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to accept the information regarding disposal of unwanted, obsolete and confiscated items. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#16) SEPTIC MORATORIUM This item will be discussed following Item #17 (#17) DAVE PETERSON - HIGHWAY 12 DISCUSSION Peterson presented additional information to the Council. He felt it is the City s and State s obligation to provide safe highways and maximum traffic flow to the best of their ability. There has been discussion about a stop light at the intersection of Willow Drive and Highway 12 for a number of years. Peterson has had conversations with Police Chief Sullivan and Police Chief Kilbo regarding this matter. Peterson indicated he had received some discouragement from Chief Sullivan despite the fact that Chief Sullivan had no facts available about the nature arid frequency of accidents at this intersection. Peterson observed that there is now inlormation in the packet regarding 1993 figures. Peterson noted, according to his report, that 8 accidents were reported at this comer in 1991 and 15 accidents in 1992. This calculates out to 1 % accidents per month indicating that accidents will continue at the rate of at least one per month. On this basis. Peterson is requesting some changes to be made as soon as possible. He expressed his frustration and disappointment with the bureaucracy involved with this issue and their loss of letters voitten to MnDOT. He pointed out in the July 21, 1993 letter from MnDOT that the proposed work would have a co(rt of $1,050,(XX) and would not to be completed until the end of 1994. He does not want to wait for another 15 accidents to occur during that time period. He also noted that MnDOT suggested the quickest, best and safest solution is to close the median. He did not feel waiting until a decision is made on the Highway 12 corridor is an appropriate answer and wants to have a response to the MnDOT letter. Peterson indicated he has presented this information to Long Lake and they were enthusiastic about signage for turn restrictions. He requests that Orono cither consider signage or the MnDOT suggestion of the "pork chop island”. Peterson noted according to sutistics that accidents (those that are turn related) could be reduced by 56% at this intersection. It is foolish not to try to reduce accidents at this iiuersection when there are possible solutions. In respond? to Mayor Callahan. Peterson added Uicic would other ramifications with mm restrictions such as an increase in traffic on Brown Road and in Long and an increase of planning for trips by people using Willow Drive. •i i I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 (#17) DAVE PETERSON - HIGHWAY 12 DISCUSSION - CONT. Mayor Callahan noted traffic near the school would be affected and there would be economic changes for the businesses on the Willow comer. He felt the City has been pressing MnDOT as hard as they can. Letters have been written, resolutions passed, meetings have been held, committees have been esublished from Long Lake and Orono. etc. Mayor Callahan is not opposed to Peterson’s suggestions but he feels Orono has done all that can be done at this time. Peterson feels the City has not been listening to the problems because he has been dealing with this issue for over two years and has seen no progress with the highway He feels others have decided a new highway will "fix" the problem and this is a long way off. If the suggestion for turn restrictions was done, it would not be irreversible if it did not work. He was told by MnDOT that physical barriers would be at MnDOT’s expense. Callahan questioned if I eterson knew how long it would take MnDOT to get authorization to write the check for these physical barriers. Peterson asked if that was a reason to do nothing. Peterson understood that thcrr w» v other upgrades being considered such as the continuation of Daniels, the fronuge road along Highway 12, that would alleviate some congestion problems. In addressing commercial concerns, Peterson felt there were other ways to reach these businesses that people would find. Since there are 20,(XX) cars driving this highway every day, Peterson feels a safe highway is owed to these users. Kelley commented he may be in favor of no left turns without the pork chop island during rush hours until a long-term solution is completed. Before pursuing this he would like to hear comments from the public and surrounding businesses. He agreed there arc many close calls for accidents at this intersection. Peterson feels that since MnDOT is suggesting the temponry solution that it should be considered. Kelley would like to see what the costs and ramifications would be of putting in "no left turn" signage. Goetten a*Med that there is a Willow Drivc/Highway 12 committee meeting with MnDOT represent es this week to see what can be done realistically by the Council. Peterson renerated that the signs could come down if they did not work. He wanted to know when he could expect an answer and does not want to sec it pigeon-holed again. Mayor Callahan replied that the issue has not been pigeon-holed. A Task Force has met in the last two months with representatives of Long Lake and MnDOT to see what is feasible for this intersection and whether Long Lake’s miffic could be moved through Orono. Another meetii^ is scheduled. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETINGHELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993(#17) DAVE PETERSON - HIGHWAY 12 DISCUSSION - CONT.Jabbour asked what the next step would be if the Council felt signage should be considered. Mayor Callahan thought they would have to speak to MnDOT at the next meeting and request that signage be put up. Jabbour also expressed his frustration with the way the cities have been dealing with MnDOT and the time needed to resolve issues. He agrees that a temporary solution should be considered. Mayor Callahan noted that there is not agreement in blocking off the left turn lane as the best temporary solution. Kelley asked for a report from Goetten on the upcoming meetings with MnDOT at the next Council meeting. Peterson requested that he placed on the Agenda for the meeting with MnDOT. Hurr arrived at 9:05 p.m. (#16) SEPTIC MORATORIUM - ORDINANCE NO. 120, SECOND SERIES Mayor Callahan explained that a draft ordinance was being presented for consideration regarding the moratorium on enforcement of the septic ordinance as it relates to tbe 3’ of unsaturated soil. He felt the ordinance was acceptable except that Seetkm 2 which refers to the Plamung Commission coixiucting a study of this matter could be eliminated since this may be better done at the Council level. City Attorney Barrett opined that the moratorium sutute i .quires that the Council either provide or request a study. Mayor Callahan suggested that it be done by Council and included in the ordinance. Kelley complimented Gaffron on the information provided regarding this issue. It was niuvci^ by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt Ordinance No. 120, Second Series, "An Ordinance establishing a Moratorium on the Enforcemeitt of City Ordinances Requiring Upgrade of Certain Nonconforming Septic Systems as Described Herein" except that Section 2 should indicate that the study will be undertaken by the Council. Ayes 5, nays 0. ENGINEER REPORT City Engineer Cook was present. There was nothing new to report. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 MAVOR/COUNCIL REPORT (A) Information on Proposal for Devel ‘'’'ment of the Southwest Comer of Willow and County Road 6 Mayor Callahan thought the memo was asking if Council would consider rezoning this area from one-acre to two-acre zoning and if they would cu< < ider the Lundgren Brothers application without any preliminary information. Kelley, Goettei;. Jabbour and Mayor Callahan responded they would not consider this request while Hurr thought she would need more background. Mayor Callahan noted there is a procedure to bring a rezoning request before the Council which was not followed. Terry Forbord, Vice President of Lundgren Brothers, aplogized for any confusion over their request. They were looking for direction as to whether the Council would con:.ider a rezoning request before they proceed with a formal application. Mayor Callahan suggested they proceed through the proper channels if they want further consideration. Forbord indicated that in discussions with staff there was a feeling that it may be appropriate to bring this concept before the Council. (B) Information from Lili McMillan Regarding a Subcommittee for the Crystal Bay Site Mayor Callahan explained that consideration of what should be done with this property and the old sewer plant property was previously referred to tlw Park Commission to sec if they thought it would be desirable to use these properties as paries. Mayor Callahan felt that the Crystal Bay site should be grassed and left as it is. Jabbour, Kelley and Goetten agreed that this property should be left undeveloped but retained by the City. Gerhardson commented that Lili McMillan would like to hear input from the Council and would be willing to discuss the Crystal Bay site with Council. Mayor Callahan responded that she would be welcome if the Park Commission felt it necessary to further discuss the site. Gerhardson stated the Park Commission was .'jIso getting information from the neighborh about what they would like to see at the site. Hurr stated she had also been contacted by some of the Crystal Bay neighbors and would prefer not to close the matter at this time. Kelley comiiKnted that this is a residemial mighborhood and te would prefer to sec this property remain as parkland. Jabbour waitts to be sure the Park Commission does not feel they have to convince the City nm to sell this property as this will not be the case. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COITVCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. (C) Hurr explained that the County Road 15 issue will be placed on the ag«,.ida for the October 11 Council meeting. Some representatives from the County will be present to answer questions. Goetten asked if there would be an overview meeting for the Council. Hurr stated that information would be available at 7:00 p.m. prior to the Council meeting if any members wanted hmher information. (D) Jabbour referred to the packet of information sent to Councilmembers regarding the possible reorganization of the LMCD. He noted that several meetings have been held regarding this issue. Recent meetings have been with Gen Olson. Mr. Oliver, VanDellan, the DNR and the Fisherman’s Congress. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT Tom Barrett was present. There was no information to be presented. {'.•IB) CDBG SUB-RECIPIENT AGREEMENT - RESOLUTION #3324 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve Resolution #3324 authorizing the mayor to execute sub-recipient agreement with Heiuiepin County for the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program for Year 19. Ayes 4, nays 0. (•#19) LICENSES It was moved by Jabbour. seconded by Goetten. to approve the following licenses Septic System Insuller - Patnode Bros. Sewer and Water Home Occupation License - Heliotrope Garden Design Ayes 4. nays 0. (•#20) BILLS It was moved by JahKnir, seconded by Goetten. to approve payment of the All Funds Account Ayes 4, nays 0. MWUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Hurr, to adjourn the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Ayes 5, nays 0. Edward J. Call / , jr. Mayor * h s: ■■1 AOBfDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY* SEPTEMBER 13* 1993* 7:30 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS* 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY* ORONO* MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL * 1. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES ♦ 2. Regular Meeting of August 23, 1993 ( PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS 3. Proposed Friends of Park Award PLANNING COMMISSION COl Charles Nolan RepresentaCTTve PUBLIC CO ' I V ITS - (Liaiit 5 Mlnutas Par Parson) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *• APPLICANTS *•Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolutions at the Recorder's desk. Applicants need not execute resolutions for subdivisions, vacations and denials ♦ 4. VIoodhill Country Club, 200 Woodhill Road - Final Subdivision - '■•cfcolut ion 5. #1829 Diane Sieff, 1080 Wildhurst Trail - Variances - Rasolution 6. #1844 Ken Hopkins, 65/75 Ferndale Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Resolution 7. #1846 Alan and Leslee Upin, 740 Tonkawa Road - Variances - Resolution 312^ - 8. #1852 Howard Eisinger, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 9. #1853 Richard E. and A. Jean Engt cretson, 1180 Tonkawa Road - Variances - Resolution NAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT --10. Stubbs Bay Sewer Reconstruction on Leaf Street - Furchner Property 11. Six Month Financial Report 12. Underground Tank Removal Consultant 13. Recorder Contract - -57 2 14. 1994 Budget and Proposed Tax Levy - Resolution ^ ? -15. Auction of Confiscated and Excess Property 16. Septic Moratorium /y <-/< / . 4^ 17. Dave Peterson - Highway 12 Discussion — 18. CDBG Sub-Recipient Agreement - Resolution 3 “3a CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 1AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1993, 7:30 P.M ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA •LICENSES (19) •BILLS (20) UPCOMING ISSUES AMD EVENTS 09/10 - Council Work Session 7:45 a.m. Council meeting 7:30 p.m. Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. Park Commission Special Meeting 7:15 p.m. Council meeting 7:30 p.m. Council Work Session 7:45 a.m. Park Commission meeting 7:00 p.m. Council meeting 7:30 p.m. Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. • Council meeting 7:30 p.m. 09/13 09/20 09/20 09/27 10/04 10/05 10/11 10/18 10/25 % ROLL MLNUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIlAlE^ftNG^ HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 O The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Edward Callahan. Councilmembers Gabriel Jabbour, J. DiannGoetten, Charles Kelley and JoEllen Hurr. The following represented staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Public Works Director John Gerhardson, Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administiator Michael Gaffron, Police Chief Stephen Sullivan. City Attorney Kevin Staunton, City Engineer Glenn Cook and Recorder Lin Vee. Mayor Callahan called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. (#1) CONSENT Kelley removed Item ^13. It was moved by Hurr. seconded by Goetten. to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Ayes 5. nays 0. Motions for aP items adopted by Consent Agenda will be included in the minutes in their respective numerical order. (•2) APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Hurr. seconded by Goetten, to approve the minutes of the August 9. 1993 Council meeting. Ayes S. nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Mayor Callahan asked Park Commission Chair Dick Flint to hold his comments until discusss of Item #11. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT There were no comments as therv - no representative. PUBLIC COMMENTS Henry Furchner of 360 Leaf Street stated that PCI. in the process of fixing an easement, tore up his bank, used his dirt that was to be used for filling septic tanks for fill and bulldozers used his property throughout construction of the sewer system. When PCI left, Furchner asked when they would repair the oank. PCI said they would send someone back to fix it. When they did not appear by 4.00 p.m. that Friday, he called City Hall and tried to talk to John Gerhardson or Harlan Olson who were unavailable. He then talked to Gerhardson on Monday and the Leaf Street culvert was taken care of but repair is still needed on the south side of his property. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 PUBLIC COMMENTS - CONT. PCI also indicated that it would be repaired when they had dry weather. Furchner felt there had been 4 days of dry weather and something should have been done. Gerhardson told Furchner that the person who said it would be repaired when there was dry weather did not have the authority to give that information. Gerhardson explained that PCI does semi-finish grading on all properties in the project and this has been done to Furchner’s property as well. PCI will then come back with pulverized dirt (topsoil) to complete the work before sod is placed. This has not been done yet in any part of the project. Gerhardson was unaware that dirt had been used from Furchner’s property. Cook thought it would lie the end of next week before PCI would be able to get in to finish the topsoil and sodding. Gtetten asked that an answer be given to Mr. Furchner as soon as possible. Callahan asked that Furchner’s property be completed and a report given to Coji.cil.»!embers by the next meeting. September 13, 1993. Hurr also asked for information as to when Stubbs Bay Road would be completed. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#3) #1780 CITY OF ORONO, 1000 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION • RESOLUTION #3315 It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt the resolution presented except that Item #3 from the findings of fact should be removed since the report by Schirmers is not pertinent to the resolution. Kelley asked where people who want to use the park would park their vehicles. Callahan there would be available parking in the southwest comer. Kelley asked at what poim the City would require this road to be paved and brought up to City standards. Mabusth stated the subdivision regulations deal only with the trigger of residential umts so if the residential lot is subdivided, it would only be at the third lot, based on residential developrrent, that would require upgrading. She felt it would be up to the City to make that determination as the pait is developed. Kelley thought the park was acting like another residential unit. It is Callahan’s understanding that if the road benefits the property owners, they could be assessed their fair portion. Mabusth asked Council to provide direction on whether the landowner will be responsible for sharing in the maintenance of the private driveway. An easement for the driveway is provided on City land. Jabbour thought the City should maintain it in the summer but the homeowner should plow in the winter. The City must maintain this drive to access the MWCC lift station. Hurr asked if this drive was currently maintained by the City. .Mabusth stated the issue of maintenance was brought up at the Planning Commission meeting and was to be resolved by staff. In discussions with the Public Worlu Depamnenl. they said they would assume maintenance of the roadway. Gerhardson added that maintenance can be whoever arrives first. ___________ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23« 1993 ZONING FILE /('1780 - CONT. Jaobour thought it would be unlikely that the landowner would want to wait for the City to plow a private easement of low priority and would want to hire his own service. He thought the Cir' could plow this road if it needed to access the lift station, otherwise the landowner should assume responsibility for accessing his property. Hurr asked if there was an agreement with the MWCC to plow this easement. Gerhardson replied that whoever is there fust takes care of it and it is just a handshake The City currently has no use for the road except where the park will be in the back. Hurr noted that the park would probably not be used in the winter so the MWCC would plow the road if it needed to access the lift station. Gerhardson agreed. Since there is no obligation on the part of the City to plow the road for the MWCC, it should be the responsibility of the landowner to plow. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to amend Page 2. Paragraph 2 of the resolution to state that the City will qqI assume the responsibility for the regular maintenance of tne private driveway and future owners shall be responsible for maintenance of the private driveway. Ayes 5. nays 0. Hurr asked if the landowner was responsible for maintenance if that removed the ability of the City to improve it in the future if Aey wished. Callahan stated the City still owns the property, only an easement exists for the landowner. Kelley asked at what point the chain gate would be removed. Gerhardson responded that a directive from the c.ity Administrator would probably be ?pprq;>riate. (•#4) #1841 WILLIAM AND LORI CORNELIUS, 940 TONKAWA ROAD • VARIANCES • RESOLUTION #3314 It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3316 for applicants William G. and Lori Cornelius, 960 Tonkawa Road, granting variances to permit a section of a former roadbed located within the lakeshore protected area to remain and to be upgraded as part of a loop driveway. The former gravel roadbed is located 50* from the lakeshore where a 75 setback would be retjuired and will result in 1200 s.t. of permanent hardcover where no hardcover is allowed. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#5) #1848 CITY OF ORONO, 1940 SHORELINE DRIVE/1000 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD - COMP PLAN AMENDMENT - TRANSMITTAL TO MET COUNCIL Callahan explained this application for the City of Orono is related to a Comp Plan Amendment and documents to be transmitted to the Met Council connected with changing the MUSA boundaries and including nvo stubs for the Melamed property and one for the Nettles property. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HE1.D AUGUST 23, 1993 ZONING FILE #1848 - CONT. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to direct staff to submit a formal request to Metropolitan Council for approval of City of Orono Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5. Ayes 5, nays 0. Kelley questioned Gaffron’s reference in previous memos to rural clustered neighborhoods that may need sewer because of soil problems and small lots. He asked if there was any impact from the current application to be considered for the fimire neighborhoods. Callahan referred to a packet of information previously received by Councilmembers regarding the area near the Nettles property. Fox Ridge, etc. (K) #1849 ESTATES OF BARBARA B. LUND AND RUSSELL T. LUND, III, 905 TONKAWA ROAD - VACATION OF SEWER EASEMENT - RESOLUTION #3317 No representatives were present Mabusth explained that this is a vacation that was required at the time of the preliminary subdivision approval of the two-lot plat of the Russell Lund and Barbara Lund estates. The serves no public purpose and was probably dedicated a*, the time of the original subdivision. Staff recommended the vacation of the easement. It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Goetten, to remove the sewer casement as noted in application #18*8. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#7) SEPTIC UPGRADES WITH BUILDING PERMITS - OPTIONS Gaffion reviewed the staff recommendation regarding septic system repairs with the application of building permits. One of the most critical issues before issuing a building permit is determining that cunent and alternate septic system sites will not be destroyed. Gaffron would recommend that projects that are emergency repairs would be given 2 full years for site evaluation and 2 full years ior a system upgrade. For projects that are normal maintenance that are not expanding the living space or footprim, such as interior remodeling, a prior site evaluation would be required before issuing a building nermit to verify that the system is functioning and then allow 2 ftill years for upgrade. For projectt that expand the living space or footprint, a site evaluation should be done prior to issuing the building permit and the system would need to be upgraded concurrently with work on the permit. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 SEPTIC UPGRADES - CONT. For properties that have a failing or illegal system, site e^‘aluat^on and system upgrade would be required before any permits are issued. When ground conditions don’t allow a site evaluation, the owner acknowledges some risk in proceeding without a site evaluation. Alternative solutions could be: 1.Site evaluator to identify probable sites for system upgrade meeting setback and slope requirements and soil conditions. Building permit app>*«ant should provide evidence of a contract with a site evaluator so tiv're is proof the upgrade will be done as soon as weather conditions permit. 3.Applicant should agree in writing to complete the septic upgrade within the appropriate time frame for his project. Applicant should agree in writing that the construction project will stop if the site evaluation finds there is no way to repair the system. If no way is found to repair a system, the City would issue no further permits until the situation is resolved (possibly holding tanks or a variance). There is concern over certain areas of the City which the 1980 Comp Plan identified as areas to monitor for future sewer. If there arc a number of systems within one of these clusters that are Bdling, perhaps a belter solution than repairing each system would be to consider sewer for that area. The time frame for repain may need to be extended. Mayor Callahan noted that this snidy has been because changes have been made to the time frame allowing repair of failing systems, two yean instead of one. Gaffron confirmed there are about 1100 septic systems in the City. Possibly half of these systems could be affected but until inspections are completed, this is a rough estiaiate. Ihis would be one-fourth of all homes in Orono. If each system cost about $3,000. it would cost residents of the City almost $2 million to repair or replace their systems. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 SEPTIC UPGRADES - CONT. According to Mayor Callahan, in the Comp Plan Amendment presented to Met Council in January of 1993, information suggested that 190 to 200 homes may require repair. Since that time it appears that 600 to 800 homes may require improvement within five years It would be possible to do a sewer project for $2 million and in cases where this has been done, the City has made considerable contributions. In failing systems where a mound system was required, the cost would be approximately $11,000. Where homes are not able to use a mound system or some other type of repair, long range effects have not been considered. Callahan asked if Orono would change its Comprehensive Plan. Council needs to further snidy the ramifications of the septic ordinance. Callahan proposed a moratorium until November 1, 1993 to discuss the cost and effect on citizens. Kelley concurred noting there have been four to five new mound systems required in his neighborhood and neighbors have discussed this with him. This whole process surted with the DNR Shoreland Regulations that required restrictions within 1000’ of the lake. Jabbour added that the 3’ separation has been in the code and observed by staff since 1978. Most of the septic systems (approximately 6(X)) since then do meet the requirements. There is a limited number of sewer units available to the City so there may not be many options. If all of the possible neighborhoods idemified as potential sewered areas were to be sewered, there would not be enough units available. Jabbour questioned if residents in these neighborhoods should be notified that they are in a potential sewered area. If half of the homes in a particular area were going to be required to install a mound system, maybe a sewer system should be considered and residents should be aware of this. Gaffron noted that all UE systems installed since 1978 have been required to meet this standard. Hurr asked if a system installed 20 years ago would require some maintenance. Since approximately half of the septic systems were installed prior to 1978, how many have required repair. Gaffron thought a significant number have been upgraded and most have been maintained by pumping. Until 1989 the Sute codes did not define an existing system that did not meet the standard as non-conforming. Orono adopted that State code in 1992. Gaffron staled the City has taken a closer look at existing systems to try to estimate how many systems may need to be replaced. This is difficult until inspections have been completed. Kelley asked for information on the results of the inspections Weekman has made this year on septic systems. This may give an indication of the number of systems that may need replacing. Kelley added that although some systems installed after 1978 met the Code at the time of instalUtion. they arc not meeting the 3’ separation today. Gaffron noted that new technologies have been developed so the information from site evaluators prior to the early 1980 s may not be accurate. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETLNG HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 SEPTIC UPGRADES - CONT. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to place a moratorium on th*; enforcement of septic regulations until November 8, 1993. Ayes 5, nays 0. Hurr asked what the answer would be to a mortgage company or purchaser of property until November 8. Gaffron replied that if the system does not meet the City code it is considered non-conforming and.it should be upgraded. The question will be when does this have to be done. It will not be required this year since the moratorium is in effect so it may be one or two years. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT A) Mayor Callahan stated there are two major contracts on the new building with Kraus- Anderson and Boarman and Associates still in dispute. The architect has about $29,000 more than the City felt he was entitled to. Kraus-Anderson billed the City approximately $20,940 more than their contract. He addeu that suff has analyzed these figures. Jabbour has worked with these two comracts and negotiated with the architect. Boarman has agreed to refund $14,000 and made some concessions such as insurance premiums that were not paid. Kraus- Anderson has also agreed to reduce their amount by $20,940. This reduction of approximately $34,000 brings tlie City as close as it can be to the budgeted amount. Jabbour added the negotiations were approached with a "win-win" attitude and the City did not have all the money coming to it accoiding to the contract. He also thanked Bruce Engelsma from Kraus-Anderson who is also an Orono citizen. Jabbour asked that the Mayor send a thank you to Kraus- Anderson and Boarman and make them feel welcome at City Hall. Mayor Callahan also reported on the Melamed contract. The areas of disagreement are: 1) Legal Deed. What kind of legal deed would the City provide? Full Warranty or Limited Warranty? Quit Claim Deed? The City Attorney has advised that the City should proceed with a Limited Warranty Deed and Mayor Callahan agreed. This would not be a hardship for the buyer since he would still want to obtain title insurance. 2.)Special assessments. Melamed proposed that the City would be responsible for any special assessments on the property. Mayor Callahan was unaware of any but ordered a Special Assessment Search to clarify this. If there were any. Callahan would suggest that the City pay for these assessments until the time of the sale and then it would become the responsibility of the buyer. k MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. Fence. Melamed wants to build a fence into the City ’s 50' corridor around the comer because it is a direct extension of the existing fence. Mayor Callahan would not object but would add that when the City needed this space, the fence would have to be removed. Hazardous waste. At this time there is no evidence of any hazardous waste but Melamed would ask that the City be responsible for the removal of any hazardous waste if there was any found. Mayor Callahan did not think the City should warranty or indemnify this matter. Jabbour did not want to see more than the purchase price of $300,000 spent at some time in the fiimre for hazardous waste clean-up. Subdivision of parcel. Melamed would like to be able to subdivide the property prior to the original agreement to wait 5 years. Mayor Callahan would prefer to suy with the original agreement. Jabbour suted that he had talked with the buyer ’s lawyer and the City is changing the agreement to limit access to the road to maintenance vehicles only. Jabbour thought this may be an issue to negotiate. Since the City wants to change the limited access agreement, they could agree to remove the 5 year restriction for subdivision. They could offer the land to the buyer subject to soil borings being done and Phase I and II being done on the Environmemal Assessmem. Council agreed to remove the 5 year restriction for subdivision. C) Mayor Callahan asked Gerhardson if the gas tanks were ready to go yet. 'jerhard confirmed that they were not. Goetten asked that three items be considered: 1) SupportoftheCouncilintheupgradeofCounty Road 15. She would like to see no increase in the speed limit from Orono Orchard Road to Highway 12. An alternative she would suggest is to have more frequent patrols. She noted tlx speed limit is 50 mph and people have passed her at 60+ mph. Hurr asked if Sullivan could provide information and enforcement of the speed limit in this area prior to the informational meeting that is scteduled. 8 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 MAYOR/COLTSCIL REPORT - CONT. 2) Situation on Highway 12 and Willow Drive. The Police Chief has provided information that accidents occur at least once a month at that intersection and the time of day does not matter. She asked what the status is for this intersection. Moorse responded that the City had received a letter from Mn/DOT indicating some alternatives. One possibility would be "no left turn" at that intersection as a temporary solution until there would be a stop light installed, probably in the spring of 1995. This brings up the problem of what traffic pattern would then be used. Would turns be done at a more dangerous place? Lx>ng-term plans for a frontage/service road should fte considered to look at circulation. This also affects Long Lake, therefore, meetings should take place with the Committee again. Goetten felt this will still take too much time and wants to sec something done more immediately for safet}' 3) Former City facilities building. The yellow storage building is still standing and unsafe. She is concerned about liability. Gerhardson responded that all the testing has been completed to determine if there is any lead in the buildings because that determines how to dispose of the buildings. The verbal report was that there was some lead in all the buildings but not enough that they cannot go to a regular demolition landfill. There will be a recommendation that they not be burned because the lead liquifies and could be released into the atmosphere. Once he gets the written report, the plans for demolition will proceed. Goetten asked if signs should be placed until that time. Gerhardson added that the old Council Chambers building has a higher lead contem and that building has been fenced off until lead abatement can be done. That will be the only building not toni down. Gerhardson expects that report this week and plans arc already made for demolition. Jabbour asked that the gas unks be removed in 1993. Gerhardson confirmed that as soon as the buildings are down they can proceed with taking the tanks out. To have a reclaimer grind up the pavement, an additional $3,000 will be required. This amount docs not include hauling the m:itcrial away. E) Hurr stated the County Road 15 public information hearing is scheduled for August 30. 1993 at 7:30 p m. Plans are available at City Hall for review prior to this meeting. She expressed her concern that someone from the Park Commission attend that meeting because there will be a proposed 8 ’ paved shoulder which would greatly benefit bikers. Supp<irt from the Park Commissi'^n would be helpful. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT • CONT. F) Hurr referred to the recent hearing for disciplinary action of a City employee. She noted that one of things not in the findings was that there be some notification in the paper that pending action was not upheld by the City Council. She asked that Goetten, who chaired the committee, review this notice. G) Jabbour stated they are very active in trying to bring in new enabling legislation for the LMCD. He talked with the DNR regarding the report of the Task Force. He wMts it noted that the City of Orono has a minority opinion included. Hurr thought it unrealistic to expect something by the end of September but probably by the end of the year. POLICE CHIEF REPORT Sullivan provided a statistical update through the end of June. It shows the activity is virtoally the same as last year. He expects July and August to be about the same as last year alw. Part 1 refers to Felonies (8 of the most serious crimes as designated by the FBI), P^ 2 incluttes other crimes (petty theft, misdemeanor, criminal danuge to property, etc.). Part 3 is traffic with the exception of DWls included in Part 2, and Parts 4 and 5 deal with service calls (medical accidents, found property, etc ). The information sheet will be provided on a monthly basis for future reference. The purpose of the report is to compare the previous year ’s activity and look at the contract cities. The report tracks ICRs. Each time the Police Department receives a call for service or they self-initiate an activity, an ICR (Initial Complaint Report) is written. Routine jobs such as delivering Council packets are not written as ICRs. State reports would give greater deuil if required. Sullivan noted most people who have things stolen from their yards do not recover them. 4 out of 3 burglaries are not solved nationally. Kelley asked how information could be supplied to the City Council on perfonnance of the officers Sullivan responded that it is difficult to evaluate but some indicators are absence of complaints and presence of letters of thank you. It is difficult to evaluate how many enmes are prevented by having patrol cars in the City. Hurr asked if there were yearly evaluations done on officers. Sullivan confirmed there were. Hurr asked if these same reports were given to contract cities. Sullivan replied that t^ received these same reports with a chronological listing of all calls. Each of the cities w'th this information a little differently. Hurr asked for more detailed information on the Orono report since it is available Jabbour noted the local papers give detailed reports. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 (#9) SCHOOL LIAISON OFnCER Jabbour suggested that a committee be formed to discuss how the community should be policed. This committee could include one or two councilmembers, someone from every contract city, someone from the North Tonka Crime Prevention Coalition and the school. Mayor Callahan noted that this type of committee is already provided for in the police contracts. Sullivan added this committee has not been utilized in the last two years partly because he has direct communication with each of the City Councils and they have not asked for a collective meeting. Mayor Callahan thought the school liaison officer issue should be discussed in relation to the budget even though that is not the only issue. Hurr thought that if the City, as a contract holder, has written something in the contract that calls for a committee, that they should meet. If you wait until there is a problem to call a committee meeting, the problem may be much bigger. It would be up to the City to initiate these meetings. Sullivan felt it was written in the contract to use if the contract cities wanted to. Mayor Callahan felt this committee should be brought together to at least discuss if they wanted to contiiaie and how to proceed. Councilmembers agreed. Kelley commented t!:cre may be other cities in addition to the contract cities that should be included in the cost of a school officer. Other cities such as Medina and Independence also have children attending the school district. ENGINEER REPORT (#10) MUNICIPAL STATE AID REVIEW Cook noted there is a booklet available for review that was published in January regarding the Municipal State Aid Review. MSA roads are classified by Council and they must meet certain criteria. Goetten asked when Femdale Road would be upgraded. Wayzata is involved with this and some issues need to be resolved. Orono would have to annex their right-of-way for about 2 blocks. Cook stated he hoped some time this winter the issues could be resolved to proceed with the upgrade. Kelley asked how roads are designated for repair or upgrading. Gerhardson replied that it depends on the road condition. Major upgrades are brought to the Council for their ^tion. There is a 5 year plan which is reviewed annually by Council. Callahan noted the two current priorities are the Old Crystal Bay Road bridge and Willow Drive. Jabbour noted that sometimes 4 or 5 years of MSA ^nds are required to do one project. Kelley asked if Council would receive a status report. Callahan requested that Gerhirdson forward the current list to Kelley. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 ENGINEER REPORT - CONT. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to accept the information in the Engineer ’s Report. Kelley asked when the work on the Old Crystal Bay Road bridge would be started. Cook replied that it would be in the spring of 1994. Bids need to be obtained. Kelley asked that this work be coordinated .with the school district because of bussing. Gerhard.son confirmed that he has already contacted the school district regarding this construction with the goal to complete as much as possible during the summer months. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#11) OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD BIKE TRAIL Moorse reported that the bike trail is a joint project between Hennepin Parks and the City wiA an agreement for each party’s responsibilities. The bids came bark above the engineer ’s estimates. Hennepin Parks has agreed that additional time should be spent to reevaluate the project and deuils of the agreement and look for additional cost savings. The Park Superintendent recommended to his Board that the bids received for the project be rejected and see if bids next winter would produce bener prices. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Callahan, to reject the current bids for the joint project with Hennepin Parks on the bike trail. Ayes 5, nays 0. Mayor Callahan noted the contract with Hennepin Parks was never signed. If it had been, the contract would lapse if bids were rejected. Moorse added that the Park Superiniendem is very supportive of the project and wants to continue to reserve funding for the bike trail. Jabbour stated the contract should be signed to recover 50% of the engineering fees. Kelley asked if these fees could be included if another contract were signed this winter. Callahan felt this would be appropriate. Hurr encouraged this project to continue immediately. She spoke with Mr. Bryant who would like to meet with some of the policy makers. She would like a report at the next meeting on the status of this committee. Mayor Callahan asked Park Chairman Flint if there were any further comments. Flint agre^ with Hurr noting that the County has allocated up to $323,CX) for the project and the City woi^ not want to lose this funding. Mayor Callahan agreed unless cost consklerations would p^^ the project. He indicated a contract should be renegotiated with the Hennepm Park Board M look for any alternative locations or standards and specifications that might change the proj^ costs. He offered his assisunce in meeting with Mr. Bryant and others to proceed with the project. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD BIKE TRAIL - CONT Mayor Callahan commented on the use of MSA hinds for this project. He wants to have written confirmation for clearance to use MSA funds from the State. Hurr questioned why the cost of the project was so much higher than original estimates. Cook replied that the project was more complicateu than originally anticipated. Jabbour noted the bid for the project was about $513,000. He felt the City should approach this with a "win-win" attitude. Some compromises may be possible. Flint replied that an alternative that has been suggested is to pave the shoulder rather than have the bike trail off of the shoulder. That will be a policy decision that should have a determination fairly early. Political opposition could be reduced. This would reduce project costs but the County may not contribute then because it wouldn’t meet the criteria for a regional trail. The flrst step should be to meet with Doug Bryant of Hennepin Parks and then discuss options with Council. Goetten added that if a shoulder bike trail were considered, safety issues are very important. Kelley expressed his concern over the project cost and asked if other possible sources of funding had been explored, i.e. federal, state or foundation grant fimds. Cook responded that federal ISTEA money does provide for trails and pathways but he thought Hennepin County did submit an application for funding and was not approved. Hurr noted that Hennepin Parks recently sem a representative to a 1 day seminar on funding and related bike trail issues. She thought that person would be willing to talk to the Park Commission about information she learned. Fliitt advised Council that there has been a committee consisting of representatives of the Paric Commission and OBA appointed to work on resolving the baseball issue. There has been slow progress because of the many variables. They have to work with the school and OBA. Only about 42% of the people involved in the program actually live iu the City of Orono. Access off of County Road 6 or Old Crystal Bay Road is a problem. (012) SIX MONTH FINANCIAL REPORT Moorse explained that the report had just been received. Logis had been working on a new format and had problems with their central processing unit. Staff has not had an opportunity to analyze the report and would like to do so and provide an analysis to the Council in the next two weeks. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 (#13) STEP INCREASE CAROLE HASEMAN Kelley pointed out that he had no problem with an increase for Haseman, he just wanted to clarify how the step increase process works. He asked if there was a probationary period for new employees. Moorse confirmed there is a one year probationary period. Kelley asked how many times during this probationary period the employee’s job performance was reviewed with a supervisor to see if it is satisfactory. Moorse stated there is not a formal process for review at a three or six month period, but there is a one year review. At that time, the employee is eligible for a step increase and must be doing satisfactory work. Although there is not a formal evaluation throughout the first year, there would be discussions with the employee about any problems. Kelley felt that with current State laws, it would be difficult to dismiss someone after one year without written evidence that they had been met with two or three times during the year regarding their perfomiance. Hurr agreed. Kelley asked if the step increase after one year was automatic. Moorse confirmed that it was if the employee was doing satisfactory work. The dollar amount is established in the Compensation Plan which moves a step at a time. Portions of the step increase have not been given. The next step increase would be after another year of employment. Employees are hired at the entry rate and then would show greater proficiency after each step increase. The immediate supervisor writes an evaluation on the employee which is then forwarded to the City Administrator for review. Moorse stated the current evaluation form and format are not very good and staff has been working on a different evaluation. Kelley thought that after 15 or 20 years there should be that many evaluation forms in the personnel file signed by the employee and supervisor. Currently the process has not been followed through so you would not find that many evaluations. Moorse noted the step process is only used for the first three years, then the general cost of living is the only salary increase. Since there are few people hired, the evaluation process has not been followed through. Moorse stated that if there were significant situations that may lead to the need for documentation of performance, a wrinen reprimand would be done. Kelley wanted to be sure that there is a way that each employee in the City is evaluated on his/her job performance once a year in writing. Goellen agreed. Kelley would like to see the department heads meet with the City Administrator to establish a better evaluation format. Jabbour asked if anyone ever went backward on the steps. Moorse replied that the compensation plan says you can. Jabbour thought a merit system could be considered. Hurr reiterated that the step process is only used for three years, then even if an employee were doing an exceptional job, only a cost of living increase would be given. She felt some further reward should be cofwidered and that maybe a step increase should not be given for "just satisfactory" work. Hurr asked to see the current evaluation. Moorse suted it would be better to look at two formats being considered. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 STEP INCREASE - CONT. Hurr asked how many employees are under a contract. Moorse replied that the police officers and lieutenants are unionized and have contracts. Moorse has an employment agreement rather than a contract because it doesn't guarantee a job. The Police Chief has a similar agreement. Hurr asked to see these. Kelley made a motion, seconded by Goetten, to approve the step increase for Carole Haseman per the City ’s Compensation Plan from Level 4, Step 2 at $11,415 per hour to level 4, Step 3 at $12,049 per hour effective September 9, 1993. Ayes 5, nays 0. Hurr questioned why there is a Step 4 if there is only three years of step increase. Moorse explained employees are hired at Step 1. (014) 1993/1994 ASSESSOR CONTRACT Mayor Callahan suggested the assessor contract amount be increased. His service to Orono has been very good and comparable to other cities. Councilmembers agreed. Hurr compared the City of Shorewood’s lakeshore properties to Orono and questioned why Orono was $4.00 more. Erickson explained that Shorewood has more homogeneous properties. She also asked about the total number of parcels. Erickson stated each parcel must be evaluated separately even if they are owned by the same person. Orono has approximately 2800 homes. A motion was made by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to approve the contract for assessing services with Rolf Erickson in the total amount of $72,168.00. The contract to run from September 1, 1993 through August 31, 1994. Ayes 5, nays 0. (•#15) TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT ORONO GOLF COURSE It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Goetten, to approve the employment of the following persons for temporary groundskeeper helpers at the Orono Golf Course: Nick Bashore @ $5.25 per our effective August 1, 1993 through September 1, 1993. Lar Brown @ $5.75 per hour effective August 30, 1993 through end of season. Ayes 5, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 23, 1993 CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT (#16) EASEMENT ACQUISITION City Attorney Staunton explained that the last easement for the Stubbs Bay project Gerhardson added this amount is in line with other easements obtained for the project. Staunton asked for a closed Executive Session regarding ongoing litigation Hurr asked if the survey had been sent out. Mabusth did not have final consents from the Planning Commission. Hurr asked that a better term be used than "not much (*#I7) LICENSES There were no licenses (*#18) BILLS K was moved by Hurr. seconded by CSoetlen, to approve payment of the All Funds Accoum. Ayes 5, nays 0. adjournment It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Jabbour, to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 p.m. Ayes 5, nays 0. Edward J. Callahan, Jr. Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M Hallin, City Clerk TO:Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembcrs Ron Moorse, City Administrator '4 FROM:Lili McMillan, Park Commission Member DATE:September 8, 1993 SUBJECT: Friends of Park Award The Park Commission would like to establish an annual award to be given to those individuals who have volunteered their time and effort on the behalf of Orono's parks. This award would be in the form of a plaque which would contain the City ’s logo and an award description with twelve plates for the names of future recipients (see attached). This plaque is intended to be displayed in the Council Chamber Building. The Park Commission would like to present this award annually in October with a brief reception and photo opportunity for the recipients. The Commission has chosen to award the Tamarack Senior Center as the 1993 recipient for their weekly program of picking up litter at Summit Beach and Hackberry Park. We would like to hold a reception on Tuesday. October 5th at 7:(X) p.m. to present this year ’s award. The Park Commission is requesting $125.00 from the park dedication ftind to cover the cost of the plaque, an award certificate and food for the reception. i 1 __________J r. S- I 4 TO:Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator % FROM: DATE: % Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator ^ September 8, 1993 a *e*% % SUBJECT: #1803 Woodhill Country Club, 200 Woodhill Road - Final Subdivision - Resolution The applicant has fulfilled all conditions of preliminary plat approval and provided all information and submittals as set forth in Resolution #3245, resolution granting preliminary af^roval of plat. Exhibit A. Staff recommends approval of the final plat of Woodhill Ridge Second Addition, subject to the findings and conditions of the resolution enclosed. JKBi ■ '•:il 4 If A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF WOODHILL RIDGE SECOND ADDITION - FILF NO. 1803 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a single lot subdivision of a plat by Woodhill Country Club, a Minnesota non-profit corporation, the subdivider; and WHEREAS, the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-IB, Zoning District, finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow its use as a single family residence to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including: 1. Completion of all the requirements of Orono Resolution No. 3245 2. Dedication on the plat of drainage and utility easements 3.Creation of a private road shown on the plat as Oulot A and creation of Outlots B. C and D as open space outlots. Concurrent with the creation of this private road the subdivider has dedicated to the City a road and utility easement graming to the City permanent access, improvemem and utility easements over said outlot; the subdivider has created non-exclusive ingress, egress, drainage and utility easemenu over said outlot in favor of all abutting and/or benefitting Ion. Declaration of certain maintenance covenants was created in 1986 that would now include the residential lot created utKkr this subdivision. Appropriate documentation shall be provided to ensure Page 1 of 3 5. 6. 7 8 that Lot 1, Block 1, Woodhill Ridge Second Addition shall be included under these covenants. Dedication to the City of a Flowage and Conservation Easement providing for limitations on the use of wetlands described therein and shown on the plat as drainage easements. Execution of a Developer ’s Agreement providing for installation of ceitain road improvements as a condition of subdivision approval. Subdivider has provided a letter of credit at 150% of the value of these improvements to msure their completion. Payment to the City of a park dedication fee in the amount of $8,000.00. Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat, easements and covenants in the amount of $375.00. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Woodhill Ridge Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesou. subject to the following conditions: No grade cuts 50 ’ downhill from septic site on Lot 1. Block 1. WoodhUl Ridge Second Addition shall be permitted; no grade cuts 20 ’ laterally at a level equal to septic site locations shall be permitted; no structures or driveway shall be located within the defmed setback areas; prior to construction septic site shall be staked off and protected. Oullot A shall fuiKtion as a private road and Outlets B, C and D arc set aside as open space areas and have not been considered or approved for residential development at the time of the subdivision. Outlet D may be sold and legally combined with existing residential properties to south and west of ouUot. 3.The aforesaid plat shall K .lied by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder’s Office and/or Regbtrar of Titles Office on or before March 13. 1994 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and executed copies of the easements and covenants noted above. Page 2 of 3 The approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 13th day of September, 1993. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr. Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrumem was acknowledged before me on this 13th day of September, 1993 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public ri Page 3 of 3 ( J CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ivn- 324 5 A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY .APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF WOODHILL RIDGE SECOND ADDITION - FILE NO. 1803 WHEREAS, Woodhill Country Club, a non-profit corporation, (hereinafter the "applicant") on January 22, 1993, filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a residential subdivision creating one residential lot. The property is legally described in Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Mirmesota Sututes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono’s Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on Febniary 16, 1993, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on March 8, 1993, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the applicant, noting the following findings of fact: 1 2. The property is located within the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of two acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. The property contains a total of approximately 17.34 acres. The proposed residential lot meets the required dry contiguous land area of 2 acres. Outlet A equals 1.49 acres and will now serve as a private road outlot. Outlet B equals 6.57 acres and has been set aside for either future residential development or use by the Woodhill Country Club. Outlot C at 6.83 acres contains approximately 3 acre wetland and is not proposed for residential use. Outlot D at 1.45 acres is unbuildable and can be sold to an adjacent property owner for legal combination. In a memo dated March 13,1990 by Michael P. Gaffron, Gaffron confums septic testmg provided by S & T Testing confums that there is suitable area for both the principal and alternate on-site septic systems on the property. Page 1 of 5 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTIOIV OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3245______ 5. 6. Lot 1 has been found to satisfy all rural standards of the RR-IB Zoning District. Outlot A has been created for the sole purpose of access and is designated as a private road. The access road shall to serve the Prudden, McNellis and Lot 1, Block 1 Woodhill Ridge Second Addition. Applicant shall develop covenants with the other benefitting property owners not included within plat for the maintenance and upkeep of the road and drainage improvements within the roadway. Outlots B and C have been created to define remaining portions of property for future use. Applicant shall be responsible for the maintenance of these areas and any future use of these outlots will require City review and approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat of Woodhill Ridge Second Addition per the survey dated Febniary 12, 1990 revised January 20, 1993 by Thomas S. Bergquist of Sathre-Bergquist, Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall install a private road within Outlot A. The City Engineer shall work with applicant to determine the best design standard for specific areas of existing roadbed. Applicant's engineer shall provide engineering plans for road improvement, such plans to be approved by the City Engineer before construction can begin. Applicant shall provide a developer ’s agreement and letter of credit to be written in an amount based on 150% of the valuation of the road improvements/constructioo. If road is not completed prior to final plat approval, the current driveway can serve as access during period of new construction on Lot 1, Block 1, Woodhill Ridge. A building permit for new construction cannot be issued by City uittil the plat has received fmal approval of the City. 2. No grade cuts 50' downhill from septic sites on Lot 1 shall be permitted; no grade cuts 20’ laterally at a level equal to septic site locations tfiall be permitted; no structures or driveways shall be located within the defmed setback areas. Prior to construction septic sites shall be staked off and protected. 3. Applicant to grant road and utility easements over private road Outlot A . Page 2 of 5 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 3245NO. 4.Applicant to grant Conservation and Flowage Easement over wetland areas to be shown as drainage easements in Outlot C. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Admimstrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: 1. Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200 ’. Drawing to include: A.Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Thomas S. Bergquist of Sathre-Bergquisi. Inc. dated February 12.1990, revised January 20,1993. B Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10’ wide along all perimeter property lines. C.Designation and dedication of a drainage easement over wetlands and drainage ways within Outlot C. 2. Legal documents required: A.Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. B The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C.Signed and executed Conservation and Flowage Easement over the wetlands/drainage ways within Outlot C. Please review sample drainage easement enclosed for use. Signed and executed developer ’s agreement and letter of credit for installation of private road (see attached forms). Applicant to provide letter of credit at 150% of actual cost of improvements. Paae 3 of 5 . > CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO 3245_______ E.Signed and executed access road and utility easement over Outlot A (sec attached). Final draft of an executed copy of private covenants suitable for filing dealing with the ownership/maintenance of road. 3. Fees to be paid: A. Final plat fee = S175.0Q B. C. Legal review and filing fees = $2Q0iQQ Park dedication. Upon preliminary approval the plat shall be referred to Rolf Erickson, the City Assessor, to determine the fair market value of 8% of the land being developed that would have been conveyed to the City for park purposes. Applicant will be advised as soon as Mr. Erickson has submitted his findings. Adopted by the City CouncU of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 8th day of March, 1993. /L // Dorothy M.Viyilin. City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayo Page 4 of 5 [ • • ••• A', . V t •.* • • . ^ . *N • • p . CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 324 5 _________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of March 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. NOTAP Y PUBLiC • MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My towwimiow fotaiy Public I -I .i .1 Page 5 of 5 RESOLUTION #32^5 f STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) CITY OF ORONO ) 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 March 8 , 1^2 • and correct copy of said resolution was duly adopted by said City Council at said meeting. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 11th , day of March_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _» 19 93 . Dorothy MT Hi 11 in,City Clerk (SEAL) » TO:Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator %• <5: V- ' / FROM: DATE: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator August 31, 1993 SUBJECT: #1829 Diane Sieff, 1080 Wildhurst Trail - Variances List of Exhibits A • Application Al- Staff Memos 7/14/93 & 8/9/93 B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D * Benson Letter 12/26/91 E - Statement of Hardship F - Neighbor’s AcknowMgment Form G - Orono Council Minutes 10/30/79 H - Building Permit Application 12/20/91 I - Vai% Letter 12/S/91 J - Oman Letter 2/28/92 K - Oman Letter 4/26/93 L - Exirting Survey M • Cross Sections N - Dettil/Floor Plan of Deck O - Floor Plan Decks P • Letter from Mr. A Mrs. John M. Prew Q - Diane Sieff Letter 8/3/93 R • Amended Site Plan Brief Review of AppUcntioii The Planning Commission reviewed the after-the-fact application at both the July and August meetings. The final amended proposal, review Exhibit R, proposes the removal of 84.4 s.f. of stnictural hardcover within the 0-75 ’ setback area and 331.5 s.f. (1.7%) of plastic underliner beneath the landscape area in the 75-250 ’ setback area and 62.6 s f. (.32%) of concrete pavement in 75-250 ’ setback area. The hardcover facts are reviewed as follows: 0-75 ’ setback area * 7,900 s.f. Allowed ■ 0 Existing ■ 84.4 s.f. of structural hardcover (76 s.f. hardcover remains of seawall and rip rap not included in hardcover cakulatioos) Proposed - 0 s.f. Zoning Memo #1829 August 31, 1993 Page 2 75-250’ setback area = 19,000 s.f. Allowed = 4,750 s.f. or 25% Existing = 7,500 s.f. or 39.5% Proposed = 7,265.9 s.f. or 38.2% (Addition of 160 s.f. of structural hardcover and removal of 394.1 s.f. of nonstiucmral hardcover) Total hardcover variance = 2,515.9 s.f. or 13.2% The applicant proposes the removal of 84.4 s.f. of structural hardcover in the 0-75’ setback area to offset the 160 s.f. of structural hardcover added in the 75-250’. In addition applicant prqx>sed 331.5 s. f. of nonstructural hardcover removals consisting of plastic underliner and 62.6 s.f. of concrete pavers. Please review Exhibit L, former deck areas shown on the survey were installed prior to 1975 and received major repair or total replacement some time in 1991. The decks at the lakeside and southwest comer of the house were not expanded on. The deck at the northwest comer was expanded from 6’x20’ to 14’x20’. All structures meet the required setbacks. Statement of Hardship Unique Findings or Practical Difficulties • please review Exhibits D, E and Q 1. Total hardcover on the property has been reduced from 28.1 to 27%. 2. 3. 4. Applicant has proposed total removal of hardcover within the 0-75’ sednek area. All structures either remodeled or expanded meet required setbacks. The only variance sought by applicam is for hardcover excesses within the 75- 250’ setback. 5. Applicant has proposed the removal of 53% or 84.4 s.f. of structural hardcover for 160 s.f. of new structural hardcover. 6. Applicam proposes the removal of 394.1 s.f. of nonstructural hardcover to offset 75.6 s.f. of new structural hardcover (84.4 - 160 = 75.6 s.f.) \pplicam was asked to consider the removal of paved hardcover areas in the street yard. Applicam noted need to retain secondary access for use of adjacem property ownm during winter months at times of severe weather. Most northern access provides greater distance to ascend hill to the south on WUdhurst Trail. Other paved walkways were questioned but applicam advised they were needed either for access to the structures in question or pievenicd erosion in heavy use areas. The Planning Commission members questxHied whether me plamers or boxes themselves could be removed as long as the plastic underliner were to be removed. Zoning Memo #1829 August 31, 1993 Page 3 This would result in in additional SO s.f. of reduction in hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback area. Planning Commission Recommendation Please review the Minutes of the August meeting of the Planning Commission. The four member conunission was unable to effect a recommendation to the Council resulting in a 2 to 2 draw. Options of Action Approval of application as proposed; or Approval subject to additional removals of hardcover; or Denial. If denied the 160 s.f. of new deck shall be removed. Council should provk^e deadline date for removal. Council Action To provide conceptual direction to staff so appropriate resolution can be brought back for Council action at their September 27th meeting. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCS APPLICATION Initial Application Fee!S175.0^ i (SSO.CO par each cddit^crmT variance! Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application f ')^ * t H > j / f ♦ • »f » f*TV'u wv'a f fc - I ^ ^1. V w \t t PROPERTY LOCATION / J ^ J •'! i r. ^ n r •Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) — Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. _ _ Name ^__ _ _ _ Phone (work) ^/ • Address: ^ City:—^ a ; - - - - 2ip.___^^i__^ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name . . ... . . . .... Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City;_Zip: Date Property Acquired (month/year) 1 (do) (do not) also own :.he adjacent parcels of land present 08E OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property L fc-! I Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQOBST Describe request in detail: Estimated Construction Cost S /J REQUZRV) Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other _ _ _ _ _ -- Lot Width front ___ Hardcover Side _ _ _ Rear) aARDSBlP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting fr 'f enforcement of zoning rec lationst Li>Tr^|^- - - nBSCRIPTION OP UNDSDAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: DIKED SUBMITTALS Completed Appli.ution Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150’ (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). /®/JO ^ Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 7^ Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8%'*xll'' for reproduction). ^5^ Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes -rin existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8h"xll'*). sicetches or plans of floor t elevation views (p^'ovide 1 copy S^^xll"). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour variance application is not complete __if the _ ifiPor —tion hae not b—n included. APPLICAMT'S SIGNATURE - •.« applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or quested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff jiQt covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses rurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct^„,tjQ^the best__^of his/her )cnowledge. /jo fvApplicant's Signature Date / i' ONMKNJ SIGHATDIIB The owner hereby acJcowledges and agrees to this application and further authorises reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Cosimission members, and Council members for ^purposes of investiga— tlon and v.rlfic.tlon ^ j ^ Owner's Signature ^ i ■ ,p ' ■ ■ ■' ■ u. Date/ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Coausission Meeting. Planning Comaiission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicamts must be present at all schedul^ aaelM ■eetiags of the Planning CosMlsslon and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorised agent attend in your place and to advise the Building 4 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. TO; FROM: DATE: V. Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator July 14, 1993 4.^1 SUBJECT: #1829 Diane E. Sieff, 1080 Wildhurst Trail - Variances - Public Hearing Applicant has. filed an after-the-fact variance application for structural improvements and additions to existing deck5 completed by her former husband, Roy E. Benson. Excesses of hardcover exist within all setback areas of the property. Additional hardcover resulted with an 8’x20’ extension of northwest deck resulting in a 160 s.f. of additional hardcover within the 75- 250’ setback area. Major structural repairs of the existing decks also would have required variance approval because of the excesses of hardcover within 75-250’ setback area. Improvement of the structures did not require setback variances. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: Section 10.22, Subd. 2 (A) - Hardcover review A. 0-75’ setback area = 7,900 s.f. Allowed = 0’ Existing = 183.2 s.f. or 2.3% Proposed = 0’ B C. 75-250’ setback area = 19,000 s.f. Allowed = 4,750 s.f. or 25% Existing = 7,500 s.f. o* 9.5% Proposed = 7,592 s.f. or 39.9% (add 160 s.f. remove 68 s.f.) Additional hardcover - 92 s.f. or .4% lotal hardcover variance = 2,842 s.f. or 14.9% 250-5(X)’ setback area = 1,600 s.f. Allowed = 480 s.f. or 30% Existing = 580 s.f. or 36.2% No change proposed List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Benson Letter 12/26/91 E - Benson Letter 3/6/92 F - Neighbors Acknowledgment Form G - Council Mimites 10/30/79 H • Building Permit Application 12/20/91 Zoning File <1^1829 July 14, 1993 Page 2 I - Vang Letter 12/5/91 J - Oman I^etter 2/28/92 K - Oman Letter 4/26/93 L - Survey Site Plan M ' Elevation/Profile N - Floor Plan O - Site Plan - Proposed P - Letter from Neighbor Description of Request Existing decks at lakeside of house and at southwest comer were structurally repaired. Deck at the northwest comer was expanded from a 6’x20’ to a 14’x20*. All structures meet the required setbacks. Excesses of hardcover exist within the 75*250 setback area. Thcnewtteck resulted in a 160 s.f. of new structural hardcover. Applicant proposes the removal of the shed within the 0-75’ setback area at 183.2 s.f. of hardcover. In addition, concrete slabs within the 75-250’ setback area shall also be removed at 68 s.f. Total hardcover on the property is reduced by .3% and there is no longer any hardcover within the 0-75’ setback area. In 1979 Grady Sieff, now deceased, obtained the required street setback variance for the construction of the accessory stmeture in the street yard, review Exhibit G. Mr. Benson completed the improvements without realizing the need for building permits or variance approvals. Diane Sieff. the applicant, has filed an application after a year and a half of delays resulting from misunderstandings and other problem.^. Statement of Hardship* Unique Findings or Practical Difficulties Please review Exhibits D and E, hardships noted by Mr. Benson in the preparation of the land use application staff would add the following; 1. Total hardcover on the property has been reduced by .3% 2. Applicant has proposed total removal of hardcover within the 0-75’ setback area, 3. 4. All structures either remodeled or expanded meet required setbacks. The only variance sought with this application is for hardcover within the 75-250’ setback area. Issum for Conside* ation Are there other areas of hardcover i*i either 75-250’ or 250-500’ setback area that could be considered for removal? 7 TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator f • FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:August 9, 1993 SUBJECT: #1829 Diane E. Sieff. 1080 Wildhurst Trail - Variance - Continuation of Public Hearing Status of AppUcation At the July 19,1993 meeting of the Planning Commission, staff requested the application be tabled to provide applicant with additional time to consider hardcover removals. It was apparent that Mrs. Sieff had not participated in the preparation of the application and was really not prepared to discuss additional removals at the meeting. Since that tune staff has met with the applicam. Applicant has presented an amended hardcover removal plan, review Exhibit D. List of Exhibits A - Original Site Plan B - Floor Plan of Expanded Deck C - Applicant ’s Amended Site Plan D - Applicant ’s Amended Hardcover Proposal E - Original Suiff Memo 7/14/93 F - Planning Commission Action Notice 7/23/93 Review of Amended Proposal In reviewing the hardcover facts with applicant, staff noted an error in determining original hardcover facts within the 0-75’ setback area. Review Exhibits A and C. in the original plan staff read the dimensions for shed in lakeshore yard at 12.9x14.2 resulting in 183.2 s.f. or 2.3% existing hardcover. The shed measures 6’2"xl4 ’2" resulting in 84 s.f. of hardcover. Additional hardcover results from sea wall at lakeshore. Staff has consistently excluded the hardcover resulting from riprap or sea wall, at shoreline. Hardcover from sea wall is approximated at 76 s.f. Hardcover within the 0-75’ setback area, is amended as follows. 0-75’ setback area = 7.900 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing =» 160 s.f. or 2.% Proposed = removal of 84.4 s.f. of shed and 76 s.f. hardcover remains for sea wall. Mrs. Sieffs proposal includes the removal of plastic underlincr beneath rose bed planters in lakeshore yard and also the concrete slabs (rose bed plantcn 331.5 s.f. and as in earlier / A"' Zoning File ^1829 August 9, 1993 Page 2 Mrs. Sieffs proposal includes the removal of plastic underliner beneath rose bed planters in lakeshore yard and also the concrete slabs (ro-e bed planters 331.5 s.f. and as in earlier application concrete slabs at 62.6 s.f.). Hardcover within the 75-250 setback is amended as follows: 75-250 ’ setback = 19.000 s.f. Allow^ = 4,750 s.f. or 25% Existing = 7,500 s.f. or 39.5% Original proposed = 7,592 s.f. or 39.9% Amended proposal * 7,265.9 s.f. or 38.2% (add a 160 s.f., remove 394.1 s.f.) Total hardcover variance = 2,515.9 s.f. or 13.2%. Total hardcover on the property has been reduced by 1.2% (existing = 7,660 s.f. proposed = 7,341.9 s.f.). Excess hardcover within the 0-75 ’ setback area will be removed except for the hardcover from wall and riprap as already stated in the earlier staff memo. All structures either remodeled or expanded meet the required setbacks. The Planning Commission is asked to consider the amended hardcover proposal. If Planning Commission members wish to discuss other hardcover removals, please advise staff prior to the meeting so ?hat accurate dimensions and hardcover percemages can be determined. The concrete walk along the south side of the residence has lieen deemed necess^ by applicant of the topography (Potential erosion along with need for access to side of garage.). Concrete aprons adjacent to existing detached garage provide side accesses for larger maintenance vehicle and for pedestrian access door. Options of Action Approval of amended application; or Approval subject to additional removals of hardcover; or Denial. If application is denied. Planning Commission should provide deadline date for removal of 8’x20 ’ extension deck. ■TI£! % W- •r f MM Mra Itm/fl M1CN MtTMMiVni■t- : I' TMMiVII TUMVOI fMMVn M tr-iir-ii II ooMMfU MMftS UNASSIONiO MMIIT L MUOtWLINURST Til IM liSM HCItCnN COUHTV MOffRTY INTOmATION SVSTfH miOKRTV OMCRS LISTM 07-U7-» t4 000* 00**4 mLOHURST TO ROMIIT L NUOf ROMIIT L MUet **• MLOMMST TR m US44M tr-llT-tl M 0*11 •IMR MIMRMST TR tI«M I MNMN •UM I MNMN mm m iti*i M RT-ur-n M toso •IMl MiMRMiT TR NKNIfl V NCRfNNIV MOMli V NC ROMY IMR NILRNURtT TRAIL m M144 M RT-Ur-n M RROt R44RR MRItT UM LANRINR •JURRM C 0 fRAMNlI R RORtRS mtm C 0 rNMCNIR R ROKRS MRR WMRT UM UNDINR m RR144 TOTM. RRTCN OOt ROOlt RIRORT NO. R141S401 RAM fM R7-117-n 74 OOlS R444R FORfST LARt LANDINR 0 I N OVIRROI Oil 0 MitN OVIRROI 4410 rORIST URI UNDlNn m 11144 M R7-117-I1 24 0040 R447R rORIST LARI LANDINR R N NALHR JR i J N NALTER RICHARD N NUTIR JR 4470 rORIST LARI LANDINR U144 IR R7-U7-24 24 0041 OllSI MLOHURST TR J A C CULLITON JOHN N I CINDY L CULLITON nil MLOHURST TR NOUNR »M SSS44 SR 07-117-2S 24 0010 OOOSO AOORISS UNASSIGMO RORfRT L NAAOl RORERT L NAAOl **0 MLOHURST TR NOUNO IM US44SR 07-117-21 24 002* OlOOf MLOHURST TR H A SCHULT2 ETAL HARVEY A SCHULTZ RON 202 MLOHUMT TRAIL HOUND IM MS44 SR 07-117-2S 24 0041 04490 PORIST LAM LANDINR J N RREN • R L RREN JOHN A RARIN RREN 44*0 RORIST LAM UNDINR HOUND MN SAS44 SO 07-I17-2S 24 0044 011S4 MLOHURST TR DAVID N RAHN DAVID H RAIM 11S4 MLOHURST TR HOUND HN SSS44 k‘ rse>•A i mi tun it/H/n •i': •iv V HEMCNN couni I 1 >'•*.«.«»» IMfOOHATlOH SVSTEN MOOCtTY OMCRS LIST RCMNIT NO. S14SS401 PAOC « X ctmrv TOST im fsers **^*>>”*n*.^^ !22rK«*2 STm WMSStHrsneN or mrmmnm ss it sm mo two osti ow wt w or fMi Nooarni county otrAimoir or roortm tmution * to tw tur or NT RNONLttat and oiLur. yl / OATf m ***■ ^ ■ .1 1 p #1I O %j> W' December 26, 1991 City of Orono Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 To Whom It May Concern: I started out replacing warped and damaged decking and the more I removed the worse it got. I continued removing damaged decking and decided to enlarge the one deck off of our bedroom. I was then informed by the building inspector in a letter from him dated December 5, 1991 that I should have gotten a building permit and variance. In my discussion with Bruce Vang and Michael Gaffron it was suggested that I offer to remove some hard surface to offset ray deck. I am purposing to eliminate the shed down by the lake and 3 cement slabs on the south side of black top driveway. Roy^oJ?son 1080 - Wildhurst Trail Mound, MN 55364 ^ __ _ _ L #1 March 06, 1992 CITY OF ORONO HARDSHIP LETTER TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I had a bad tractor accident a few years back causing a bad injury to my back leaving me with a great ^ nain because of this it is getting more and wore difficult silps. We Save a small facing lake side. There is a full flight of deck down to a large deck where we spend the evenings and the weekends enjoying the wildlife and the lake itself. We would lijce to enlarge the deck on the north east face of the house £o 14' X 20? ?t is now only 6'x 20' making it useless for relaxing and entertaining without moving long stairway. We can not build over lower de .k with major reconstruction of lower deck and ® usage area with posts to support upper deck. is elevation under proposed deck is a 3 drop away from hous ovir a 14' span. The land is not useful for any purpose because of the slope.1 Roy^E. Benson i < we; Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Fora (princ nar.e (s ) i (prin- address ] ^ 4-»,o nlans -or the proposed improvement or proposed use of the p^pem Tolled \TmJihm^------ Application No. __ _ _• n ^ ^ in <»icGcut’nc this acknowledgement, I (we) am I (we) or disapproval of the property or use (are) not as)ced to declare pp council that I (we) am (are) aware of but merely to proposed neighbor's project or usethe imprci^ement plans ana tnat une requires Council approval. 3-;lx-9:h______ Date /‘Property Owner Date I (we) PvrtVp tfV~ Cl [print name(s)) of tX' 1 (print address] ^ pro%«y"Tocated referred to as Land Uae Application No. ____.• I (we) understand that in ^'^^rr^pVrtV” ‘ rmrro^v.r.n?Vl«s'«d%\%f^L^rrrptted neighbor's project or us. I requires Council approval. - - ^ W' i -: J '2.S'_ _ _ _ _ _ pj^p»..rty Owner rate DateProperty Owner If you have any information that may assist Building * m4 ♦4*1 -I I ^ I I'M vfx . . 4^; ' i '0 •. • ' ‘ ^ v.'*» ‘m ; .?r: • •. ,V 1 ' « 4 .■ ;• ^ I- “ ..'V K;..- 'iitfe' to'*' f ‘.y INO or TNI OMMO COUNCIL, OCTOiCS 30, lf7f Alan OlMf), City riaiinar, antarad into tt»a raoord y tha raqaaat foe a vaelanoa of Oeady fiaff, lolO u Wildharat Trail, datod Ootobar 33, 1171, wliioii ^ atataai ifr. iioCf ranaaata oMtoval of a froot yard aarianoa aatback of 33* for tha oonatraetioo of a 14* I 31* datanhad farata and atoraaa boildiof• Tlia apalioaat haa floffad tha proparty atakaa and tha looatioa of tha pcapoaad aarafa for yoar inapaotioa* Tha naa atraotora aili ba plaoad 3* to 3* baloa aaiatiaa arada. Tha location in ralation to Nildhurit Trail aill net oraato virion or rrfaty preblaoa. Tha aaiating rhad aill ba raoovad, and thara la no hardoovar corrarn, Tha hardship elaload by tha applicant is tha location of tha houaa and pavad dcivaaay in ralation to aildhtust Trail. Plaaaa raviaa tha Plannina Ceaniasion minutas of October IS, If79 for raooonindation and background disouaaion. Batwaan Umi original aurvay, tha oimar'a sketch and site inapactiona, it is datantinad that tha propoaad garaga will ba at least 10* item tha straat right of way at tha oloaaat point, and tha d<»rs will open away fron tha atraat. Council Heating - Ootobar 30, 1979 iutlar aovad, Haaaangala aaoondad, to approve tha variance raqaaat of Orady tiaff, 1010 wildhurst Trail, par tha toning Adainiatrator*a nano of October 33, 1979. Ilardshipi location of houaa and paved driveway in relationship to Wildhurst Trail, notion. Ayes <5) Nays (0). lOfO^SfUdharal 9Tilfl30 dra^ tioff Alan Olaon, City Planner, antarad into tha record tha variance raquaat of Naatwood Enterprlaea, Inc., «S Stubbs Say Road North, dated October 2 3, 1979, which atataai VAAlAJfCl at stt^a bay Road ' • WItfuatwood Pnterprlaa* its *' ■•n Planning Connlssion novad to raoowwand approval of tha Waatwcod Bntarprlses* application for a front yard setback variance of SO* for a detached garage, 23* X 20*. Plaaaa review tha Planning ainutas of Ootobar IS, 1979 for tha and badiground diaouaaion. Tha application involvaa a 3.4 acre lot aubjoot to tha five acre aintmi s<minf raqairaaanta. The aaptio inspector haa approved tba propoaad location aa it doaa not intarfara with future aaptio ai^ajuiion. Tha Planning CanaUnaion did not approve of tha airaular drive aa praeaatad an site plea but raeannanda of aaiating aurb mtt shared by hone to 1 * b-' CITY OP ORONO - Total Fee: $ BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION Date Received: Date Approved: TT Entered By:Permit#: ALL INFORMATION MOST BE SUBMITTED IN FULL BEFORE PLAN REVIEW WILL BE STARTED (See Check-off List Enclosed) THE APPLICANT IS: (circle one) OWNER or CONTRACTOR JOB SITE ADDRESS: /O Vo ~ 6s/ .7 d A ~ t f I__ZIP: Y (work) 7 X / - ^ 3 / / NAME OP OWNER I a’- ‘X *\ C _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PHONE: (home) V 7 2." ys 3 o NAILING ADDRESS: ! d k u n //^A / / CITY : O fl. C ^ _ _ _ _ _ ZIP; S Y_ _ CONTRACTOR : Oc PHONE: MAILING ADDRESS:CITY:ZIP: TYPE OF WORK: Demo Hew Addition_ _ Accessory Structure__^_ Move Remodel/Alteration_ _ Renovate_ _ _ Land Alteration^ PROPOSED WORK (describe in detai 1); STORIES:SQ. FEET OF EACH FLOOR: NO. OP BEDROOMS:garage STALLS: ATT.DET. jiSTIMATBD CONSTROCTION VALUATION (excluding land): $ I hereby apply for a building permit and I acknowledge that the information «bove ia complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City and with the State Building Code; that I •inderstand this is not a permit and work is not to start without a permit; and -hat the work will be in accordshcs with the approved plan. PPL1CAHT*S SIGNATPRE DATE: o o V V* ■ ^ t ^ ‘ .y ^ ^ \ • <■ ■ CITY of ORONO Municipal OffW« Piwl (XHcc Bo* 66 Cnstai rUiv. Minnew>fa 55.V1MM)66 December 5, 1991 -f V * •• Mr. Roy Benson 1080 Wiidhurst Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear ilr. Benson: As we discussed in our telephcno conversation on December 2, 1991, you have replaced an existing deck without first getting a building permit. The 1989 survey of your property shows the deck toward the lake to bo much smaller than the new replacement. That survey also shows you have hardcov^er in the 75'-250' lake setback zene. To get a building permit for these decks oi any new construc;tion, you will need to reduce hardcover in this zone to 25% or obtain a variance for excess hardcover. This is the same problem encountered when you applied for a garage addition in 1988. I am enclosing a building permit application and also a zoning variance application. Please have the variance application completed by noon on December 27th for consideration at the January meeting of the Planning Commission. If you have questions, contact me for help with the building permit or Michael Gaffron for help with the zoning variance. Ginpercly , Ucl BRUCK VANG Field Inspector BV/ch inne. (y r o o r: T> ^ ' ‘'^. j <'' ij CITY of ORONO MunidpfU (XTWei IV>s1 OffWr Ikix 66 Cr>5^ Ba>« .MiiuicMHa 55323-^)066 m i ''a c^?Ti / *-''X \- .•) •? «i?T A'■y • Vi *^ . w^ February 28, 1992 Mr. and Mrs. Roy Benson 1000 iWildhurst Trail Mound, Minnesota ^5364 Pc; Deck Construction Dear Mr, and Mrs. Denson; On November 27, 3 991 a stop work order was posted on your property regarding decks that were rebuilt and enlarged without a building permit. Ac of this date, a permit application has not been submitted. Therefore the City must now require you to remove the decks and provide guard rails over the patio doors or provide a permit application with the required submittals for City review before March 9, 1992. If this deadline is not met, the City will issue citations and refer the matter to the City Attorney for further legal action. If you have any questions of if you have a iroblem meeting this deadline, please feel free to contact me at my oi fice. Sincerely I.yle Oman Building Official LO/ch Enc, - Permit Application cci Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building ( Zoning Adm. Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning 6 Zoning Adm. Bruce Vang, Field Inspector rtUJWMI - • rAX • 4TM«I9 // /' 11 i ( o ov\ V N V» ‘^'> >3t,. ^ ;^\\- r CITY of ORONO \\i\ .f^.• »S»js/vV ^ , • r. Cj / Municipal (XTW« Piftt OftVe «- c Cnstal Hav. MiimrviLi 5531M)OCi6 \'x^v LI^TESHOt April 26, 1993 /;r*• /»' S'I . I.• i t- Ms. Diane E. Denson 1080 Wildhurst Trail Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re; Deck Construction Dear Ms. Denson: On November 27, 1991 this office notified you of the requirement for a building permit and zonino variances required for the decks constructed on your property. Your options are to either remove the decks or apply for a variance. De advised that there is no guarantee that v.-iiantes will be granted. The City musi require you to remove the decks or submit a complete variance appi.cation before (SUT12 19^ If this deadline is not met, the City may initiate legal action. If you have any the variance application, feel free to contact Jeanne A, Mabusth or myself at the City offices. Sincerely, 0 Ml.. Lvle Oman Duilding Official LO/ch Enc. Variance Application cc:Jcatuic A. M.ibusih. Duilding & Zoning Administrator Bruce L. Vang, l ield In-spector '!> I » HM« - «*VTJ$7 • F4X • 4TWH1# O tn Di O rt m CD — 0> o D D cu n> I s cn I It C3 CaJ o aa a «#i n ^o • (I) lo ii rv IT rf •—I - ID O f t fi> O to CT r» O'*< IJ C ij} CD —C'l -1 —Cii t o cx :j -s ♦-i:i rl rr r) Oi lO i t\ • ii 3 I/I - < €■♦-1 ri •-* r>'O LJ I-?r: T;i ^ -i TC . »cr «o D. (')• ; ft o» :j • : j•1 o • -*•• *1^1.* 1.1 T * n Cl *- X-* torx cx :o a v:i Oi C3 ro rn < iA : :: 11 to 1 - c: s O CD * r ♦:i: ID t>i -b lj c i y •^1 fD X)Tj n C)(} 1 :3 “1 rt *1 O fD rt o n O C 3 t/l r* n !ir ID O • X) Y U ID (ti ► ^ ir, rj It) :) zj ID r« C)it fit rt O rl IT rf 0;n. o • ^• 2 Ot o• T3 Q n> O « • <1 •• 1%»::.i t fH • < Ji O 1^ rt f 1 •< ivt (It «♦ on► • •!, Cl I) f t n»li a O in o •l “t oo»* o A*1 fo< J a C4 1 t • —• m £ y*i 1.1 V5.W H' * \ ; "> JL '-wiy V cy CL >k \ r- v> > i*d o . y-r )i ‘ K **.-* -t' • wpiVv/. % * * » '\t .• ' *^. •. ;r^ *. • . ■•i'-’l • *•'• r •• • • . •• .■ ;■% '.'i * •%. • <' • / ^ • *5^rf«r«N»:f i/ f X ) , • '*•^ oo « i' ; .v: *.*» K m .;?■: JtS|; .. • .':i.r^*- . .* i/'/ V.: • - / • .► • • /6‘f-‘^S - -r K '••. , ;• r^*"s •' V ' - ^ '• t' -r>. v«» v. ---vC; V,.- ^;;t. ^ '.rc>v '.» .1-^- ,1-^ ' • '• r'Vj; , * • ’- . ■ • %■•?.• ‘ ’• • * ***■ • ** '•*. * ■ ^ ■■'iS'. # . . i|^ *' .. -1 . i >/“ • •.. . r • - •- • .; ■ .• • • \/:- . • •. * . >•• V V* • ■■'j ► •/;. • ■■ • * ^ ^ « . ■ * ^m- •, ‘-s,<• ' ■.*■•• '. * ' ' ' 4 4 -••**4 ^ f , • *. • 'i "'■ ^ *jf r'/.'f i • ».'•»■■ 4! - - ... . ». .- -• 4- * *»•• ^ •»-■ ’• » 4- .. , ^ . . • -^•44 *•. . -• ' »• -» • .'- - -.• ;• - - *:- '-.'‘.'•■Wj.. .«•'• X-V •'-•<■.,•,•«••—: f I ■ ■' • •», * / * . * , ., • • • ' > • ' ^ . r. .4 . . .• A • • •• » - ■ '' ^ •. * * *^4 • . . »» - • n '••fc »4? * - 4.;% v . w <4^ I • ^ i» J-VV I -JUL' 1 o '1953 • ^ • 4 ’ # ii-'i'".' • i I* -4 . » ' - / r crrrcf r ifllSEEQ'^ *. > -'Li ►* r.'fv ct'OvTjnO & I <7 n ■._________/ ecU'Ai.Kv>. r^s /oi^ I'o Hi?. ^ ::<!.£c i~ t'scIQK cars ^ cccr p rop erti areoc^joze-nt, r u,)c. , to ca // _ 'yCZ"’£' k>AV--'0«c>s^'^' ■ filoiKt affrPo*.oe. I s n ^ fT-// / iiecrt -t/.J^ <-'- 6o John ft Kaf«n Pr*w 4490hx«st(^w Lndg Oono MN 663B4 /’(2, ■ ^y-r7i2.er'tf’-/</ ^// ■ ‘ Jy.-fL- J7] «• ^ ^ t 4» * %'-«4r « « ’ *•> ft ^ '4 ^ - 4 «»- Xj .- ^ a * • - ^ • *•,.'. V* A • '• • ■ •• •■ • . ■ , % • ■ , ^ ^ ■ :|k ■ •■ • ■ • y • ^ »S. .. r?4^»y»Nittmt >^i(»ii*iWii4 ii i"^ Ifi#i lii»<i- ii r> a>ij^%piiii!iiil^pwi»ipitf^ Diane Sieft August 3.1 To equal ilie total hardcover property which was added with the deck addition we propose to remove the following existing hardcover properiv; 1. We will remove the existing shed 'total area of l5T.2 s.f.i in the 0 -75 zone reducing hardcover property in that zone to 0*;. 2. We will remove the existing concrete slabs 'total area of 62.6 s f.* in the “^5 250 zone. 3. We will remove the existing carpet from the rose bed planters ' total area of 331.5 s f.i in the 75 -250 zone. n) Total area of proposal: shed concrete slabs rose bed planters 157.2 si 62.6 si - r^i 5 si 551.3 5l This ours not only equal and exceed the total area of 160 sT. which was added on with the new deck extension but is }A times the area which was added. o o t/1 Qi n rf Ui (X* — rt> n I 8 Ul I II Ci VO eo o o 3 Ul 0> -1 o o “▼1 ITi ;o o 11 m *# o ►- (T» O fT r> ►. </i I) to O rf rr c (T> — n ^ Cl rt ►- rr 3 o» un t3 1/1 < rj‘ ^ fD *icr c ”) 0> I ) • 3 yr •— Ol r*f n t l tl n o Vj fU < 1/1 tx> ^ 13 2 C • r f *o C ‘I \3 O n r* n ‘ ll . - .0 O i f t («) I'l IT ‘< CJl * 1 m :3 I (1 I f (A - h - •< -♦i < » 0 IJ :: fii . tx» • : < f • : i 1 ‘I * - ‘.1’ t*i t/i til :o i j n. in :.! I • c/3 ’1 - c rp X ID 3 3 (P 3 3 CV o u “1 C“3 r* n ^ ^ U C I f 3 *-< 4/1 3 O Qi 3 •< O rf 11 IP 3 n *1 o (0 : Im 3 f f 4/« o *1 3 0) - 1) 3 Cl> •— ti 3 3 fP 4^ Vi r« P« « o> 3 C4 « .» Oi 3 . ♦ f » •• ^ ( \ cy V . 3 n U (i> . I .3 ::j t < I < I <t» •» u> • f CJ • • •, it 3 «• 3 O ^ % u 0 1 3 41 «» 1 ONo A •, V* ^ I f ft • V» % I s •f 1 «• •n - ™ — - '-I 1 • K « 'S« < N %'<« %i O t . 1 T|, •% V »*• % 44 K H ! )tl IsS II -.. r, I o To: From: Date: Subject: Orono Planning Commission Members Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembcrs Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator September 8. 1993 % Oa % % % /?1844 Ken Hopkins. 65/75 Fcmdale Green - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rcarraimement - Resolution Additional Kxhibit K • Sketch/Survey of Lot Line Rearrangement to be Filed at County ’ Brief Review of Application The lot line rearrangement involves two properties created at the time of the 1991 two-lot residential subdivision of the VVayzata Country Club property. The driveway outlet. Outlet A. was to provide adequate room for a benn and access drive In an attempt to save a mature tree and to meet a desired height for the berm providing the necessary sound and visual buffer from adjacent Ilichway 12. the drive had to be moved northward encroaching into Lot 2. The subdivision proposes the equal exchange ot some 800.4 s.t. of dry buildable area to be taken from Outlet A and Lot 2. Lot 2 remains with two acres ot dry contiguous land. Planning Commission RecommeiKlafion The Planning Comir>ission recommended unanimous approval of the proposed lot line rearrangement subject to the c> editions forth in the engineer’s reprirt of August 6, 1993, Exhibit 1, and other conditions set fonh by stall. The enclosed resolution has been drafted for Council ’s review and action. Isv A RESOLLTION APPROVING A METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT FOR HIE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 65/75 FERNDALE GREEN FILE NO. 1844 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municinal coi-poration organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHERF:AS. the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter "City Council") has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and sale development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision by Kenneth R. Hopkins (hereinafter "the subdivider") of properties legally dcc^ribed as tollov^s; Outlot A and Lot 2, Block I, Fairway Hills Addition, Hennepin County. Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the City for metes and bounds subdivision of a lot line rearrangement tor division and combination purposes. NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED, uhat the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the metes and bounds division of a lot line rearrangement for Kenneth R. Hopkins as shown on the C'ertificate of Survey by Raymond Prasch of Ia>t Surveys Company. Inc. dated August 27. 1993 and attached to this resolution, subject to the following conditions: 1. Fhe purpose of the lot line rearrangement is to create adequate rcM^m for an access drive and landscape berm. The City F.ngineer recommends the following guidelines for completion of project: a. The west and north side of the berm must be regraded to 3:1 slope. If slopes exceed 3:1, wihkI fiber blanket .shall be installed over tlie seeding to prevent erosion until adequate vegetation is established. Page I of 3 3. b. c. The existinc location of the driveway and toe of slope should be ,n LaLd duritm the final grading. Slope should be covered with topsoil seeded with mixture of 500 seed and covered with mulch material prior to September 20, 1993. Driveway shall be constructed with the 3% cross slope toward the berm from west to east and aloni: the north side ol the berm a lour inch sh« formed integral bituminous curb shall be constructed to control the drainage. d A silt fence or other appropriate erosion control must be installed at the low area to the east during the linal grading stages. upon approval of this subdivision by the City Council of Orono the subdivider shall apply for the following legal combmations for lax purposes. Parcel A as described on the survey noted above shall be combined with Outlot A. fairway Hills Addition. Parcel I) as described on the survey noted above shall be legally combined with Lot 2. Block 1, Fairway Hills Addition. Tlie afoiesaid division a shown on the nied by the City of Orono wuh either 'h' ^ ^ ^ ^ Registrar of Titles Office on or belore March 13. U94 togemer tiriginal copy of this rcsidution. TliesulH.iv .er IS hereby advi.d .l..ino^d^^^ additional documentation must be created by subd P title of these newly created parcels. a. b. Page 2 of 3 Thv^ approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the division has not been filed by the date «;nocified above. In that event it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Omno for subdivision review. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 13th day of September. 1993. ATTEST: Do'othy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day ol September. 1993 by Edward" J. Callahan. Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, .Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instmnient was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Ihibic Page 3 of 3 \J ro: DATE: Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator August 10, 1993 SUBJECT: /^1844 Ken Hopkins, 65/75 P'emdale Green - Subdivinon of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Public Hearing Applicant proposes a lot line rearrangement for equal exchange of land between Outlot A and Lot 2 of Fairway Hills Addition in order to complete grading plans for berm and placement of driveway as approved in the plat of Fairway Hills. Applicant was to install a berm and plantings along southeast side of Outlot A and Lot 1 providing a sound and visual buffer for the future residential development. The driveway outlot must be expanded at southwest end if drive is to reach I.x)t 1 and also allow tor a 3:1 sloped berm. Pertinent Ordinances Section 11.03, Subd. 2 - Detlnitions. Definition 66 A, Class I Subdivision. The subdivision will involve the creation of an utility and access easement over the portion of Lot 2 to be included within driveway Outlot A. Class I Subdivisions are exempt from platting and are permitted subdivision by metes and bounds description. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Resolution #2970 Approving Plat of Fairway Hills Addition E - Sun'ey of Lot Line Rearrangement F - Plat of Fairway Hills G - Development Site Plan for Lot 1 H - Site Plan of Existing Drive I - Gustafson Report 8/6/93 J - Grading/Dramage Plans for Development of Site Review of .Application Fairway Hills Addition approved in June of 1991 created two residential lots of Wayzaia Country Club property adjacent to the golf course greens I he unusual shaped lots and the proximity of Highway 12 created special sound and visual buffer needs along the southwest sides of the property. If berms at 3:1 slopes and an access drive are to lx achieved, it will be necessary to take additional area at the southwest comer ot Lot 2 to bring access to Lot 1. Zoning File #1844 August 10, 1993 Face 2 Review Exhibits E and F, Parcel A at 800.4 s.f. of dry buildable area shall be taken from Ixit 1 and combined with Outlet A. Parcel B at 1,115.5 s.f. with 800.4 s.f. of dry buildable area will be taken from Outlet A and combined with Lot 2. Lot 2 will stiil maintain 2 acres of dry contiguous buildable area as originally called for in the 1991 rural subdivision. Although properties wer>; approved for sewer and water service at the time of the subdivision, the pn)perties were developed based I'n the RR-IB Rural Residential standards. rhe City Engineer has reviewed the proposed subdivision, Exliibit I, and recommends the following conditions if the subdivision is approved: 1.The west or north side of the berm must be graded to 3:1 slopes which can be accomplished by narrowing top of the berm after the placement of trees or other types of plantings. 2.The existing location of the driveway and toe of slope should be maintained during the grading. The slopes should be covered with top soil seeded with mixture of 500 seed and covered with mulch material prior to September 20th. 3.If for some reason slopes exceed 3:1, Gustafson recommends a wood fiber blanket be installed over the seeding to prevent erosion until adequate vegetation is established. 4 The driveway should be constructed with a 3 ^ cross slope toward the berm from west to east and along the side ot the berm a 4" shoe formed integral bituminous curb should be constructed to control the drainage. 5. A silt fence should be installed at the low area to the east for erosion control durinc the final grading stages. It is also recommended that the City Engineer inspect the final grading ot the berm before any seeding takes place to confirm degree of slope and if wood fiber blanket is to be required. Staff Rccomiiu iulalioii To approve the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement involving Outlot A and Lot 2 of I-airwav Hills Addition subject to conditions set fonh in the Engineer ’s report dated August 6. 1993 aiul further to require the legal combination of Parcel A w ith Outlot A and Parcel B with Lot 2. BliKk 1, Fairway Hills Addition. Applicant’s surveyor shall provide a fiiui survey providing signature lines for the .Mavxir and Clerk, a date line ft>r the approval date at the Council meeting and lines for all persons with an interest in both pi iperties. I- k. • t ■ if .u*. il • . . • ‘J>*j Attach legal description to application. bkLijr_ _ _ _ _ _ _-“*i Fhone (home) 7 C. ^ _ _ _ i u*. APPLICANT Name ^Phone (work) (. - 0 ? ~~2 ~2 ; fr < Ck^.J/Oc /C(~? U City: l\ ^ 1Address OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _ _ _\ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND DSE Number of Tax Parcels ± Development Size Acres Dry Land Acres V7et Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check)Residential; no. of units Other (specify)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ 7-_ Present Zoning District cnv//«r7”^ OT^'O'UO PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) * Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density: Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) Units per Acres Sq Feet Dry Bulldable Land Residential Other (specify) ^ A f .L Li>‘=v*\i fh It*--''V J MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINTUIY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form 2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. 3. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350* (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 4. As an addendum to this application, rlease attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Certification by Zoning Departnent that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) $200.00 (^^^30o7oo'^ 300.00 Preliminary Review (Class III & all non-residential) 325.00 + 25.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) ♦(Plus any legal or engineering charges) Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application Renewal of Final Subdivision Application 175.00 150.00 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all addjitipnal foes established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature Date Date (/)' Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building t Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. L .1RUN DATE Oh/Z9/9lDATCH 010PROP ADDR OIMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR IIEItlEPlN COUNTY PROPERTY IfirORMATlON SYSTEM PROPERTY OEATERS LX''58 5A-U8-25 <•<•« 001700211 tIORTTTGATE RD TAN THOMPSON 111 THOMAS M A NANCY J THOMPSON 211 NORTHGATE RD MAYZATA ttl SS591 oTJ8 56-118-25 <*«* 0018 00058 ADDRESS IATASS1GT4ED NORTHGATE TIW HOMEOIINERS NORTHGATE TMO HOfttO»*»ERS ITNK.NOtAT REPORT NO. PIATB-iOl PAGE 5958 56-118-25 99 001900065 FERNOALE CREE*. KETAJETH R A LIflOA L lOPKINS KENNETH R A LIT40A I HOPKINS 17525 5TH AVC tJ PLYMOUTH T«4 55997 t PROP ADDR nTNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADDR OItJER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 38 56-118-25 99 0020 00075 FERNOALE GREEN RETMETH R A LINDA L HOPKITTS KENNETH R A LINDA L HOPKINS 17525 5TH AVE N PLYMOUTH MN 55997 5T 01-117-25 11 0029 00197 MAYZATA 8LV0 H KENNETH R A LINDA L HOPKINS KETTNCTH R A LINDA L HOPKINS 17525 5TH AVE N PLYMOUTH MN 55997 HOPKINS 58 56-118-25 99 0021 00058 ADDRESS PENDING KENNETH R A LINDA L HOPKINS KENNETH R A LINDA L 17525 5TH AVE N PLYMOUTH MN 55997 99 01-117-25 12 0001 00200 MAYZATA BLVO I MAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB MAYZATA COUTH RY CLUB POX 151 MAYZATA HN 55591 38 56-118-25 99 0022 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED MAYZATA COUtTTRY CLUB MAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB LOX 151 MAYZATA T9T 55591 >aLj I 7Z^ TOTAL BATCH 010 00026 f^'•w -\ < w IT APPEARS THIS I CERTITY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS THE HETAIEPIN CPUT4IY DTPARKTIENT/OF PROPER MY KTWtTLtOGE AfH) PELICF,. OF Of ACCURATE AND TRUE DATE ON THE RECORDS V TAXATION. TO THE>CtST OAT ‘1 ' I * f I ( i ( i \ * > i AU»i DATiBATCH 010 PROP ADDR OltICR NAME TAXPAVtR NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OTNER name TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR o»*4ER name TA.'s»*AYER NAltE/AODR PR(M> ADDR 01^ R NAME TAXPAYER HAME/ADOR PROP ADDR OI»4ER name TAXPAYER NAMC/AODR HtfAJEPlM COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0«*IERS LISTSB SA-11S-2S Al 0011 00111 CHEVY CHASE OR THOMAS L CURRY ETAL THOMAS L CURRY 111 CHEVY CHASE DR NAYZATA 111 SSS?! 30 3A-110-25 A1 0051 00220 MORTHCATE RO A A J HILDE JR AL HUOE JR PO POX BOA JACKSON HY eSOOl 3B SA-lia-2S 4A 0002 000A5 FERNOALE GREEN C BUHLER VENIURA CT AL FRANK A GRETCHEN VENIURA 45 FERHOALL GRELN HAYZATA III 553A1 SB 5A-lie-2S 4A 0006 00075 FERNOALE RO N TERRY 0 JOHNSON TERRY 0 JOHNSON 75 FERNOALE RO N NAYZATA 111 55S91 58 S6-118-2S 44 0004 00100 FCRIIDALE CRLEN P 0 FARHANO A C H FARNANO PATRICK C A CAROLYN FARIIANO 100 FERNOALE CRCCN NAYZATA HI 55341 PROP AOOR OW«R NAI« TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 58 S6-118-25 *4 0014 00055 FERNOALE CRILH N A A P 0 MUELLER MILLIAH A MUELIIR S5 FERNOALE GREEN NAYZATA MN 55341 30 36-110-23 41 0047 00217 NORTHGATE RD LAC ACM1AN LAURtSS V ACKIIAN C/0 LtNOWlST « VEinrjM 00 S OTH ST SUITE 4200 MPLS 111 55402 SO 36-110-23 41 0055 00030 ADDRESS LHASSIGNEO NtTRUIGATC TMO HOMEWnirRS NORIIIGAIE TMO HOIIEONNERS UMKNOtffI 30 36-110-25 44 0004 00030 ADDRESS UMASSIGNED STATE Of imni STAIE OF Mll«l IDNRI I LUCE LINE TRAIL I SO 36-110-25 44 0007 00070 FERNOALE GREEN W STEIIPRAUS A B MCMILLAN HALUR J STEINKRAUS AND BAPOARA MCMILLAN 70 riRNDALE GRELN HAYZATA MN 55341 30 36-110-23 44 0010 00045 EERNPALE GPEEN CHARLES A HULSE CHARLES A HULSE 45 FERNDAIE GREEN NAYZATA m 553*»I SO 36-110-25 44 0015 000<'*5 EERNOALE GREEN G BUHLER VlNtURA ET AL FRAm A GPETCMEN VENIURA 45 FERNOALE GREEN HAYZATA III 55341 REPORT NO. PI4S5401 PACE 55SO 36-110-23 41 0048 00225 NORTHGATE RO T C CULLUM JR A M A CULELH T C CULLlfll JR A 11 A CULLLH 225 NORTHGATE RO HAYZATA III 55341 50 56-110-25 41 0054 06030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO NORTHGATE THO H0ME0II4ERS HILLIAM N SITES 235 NORTHGATE RO HAYZATA MN 55341 58 36-110-23 44 0005 00005 FERNPALE RO N HUFRED 0 GAlNE A MIFE H 0 GAGNE 05 NORTH FERNOALE NAYZATA MN 55391 30 56-110-23 44 0000 00040 lERNDALE GREEN J R COLEMMI AON COIEMAN JOHN R COLEMAN «0 FERNOALE GREEN HAYZATA MN 55341 58 36-110-25 44 0011 00005 FERNOALE GREEN JAR P0HER3 JOiUI A RC:<AieiE POMERS 05 FERNPALE GREEN HAYZATA Ml 55341 50 56-110-25 44 0016 00205 NORTHGATE RO A T MORRISWI I V G MORRISON ANGUS T A VIRGINIA MORRISON 205 NORTHGATE RO NAYZATA Ml 55541 WfIT??! f'') I ::z3 . cc c 1. f i t i I o o \ ^ i“ *- I Ti** *V *' '**‘ t *v ' * -^ I ^ '^Esiip^ ' CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL X'NO.2970 •r.'- A REIJOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF FAIRWAY HILLS ADDITION PILE NO. 1615 HUERBASf the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WUEREASr the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a two lot plat by Kenneth R. Hopkins and Gary D. Mroz, hereinafter "the subdividers ; and WHEREAS, the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-ID rural residential zoning district finding tliat each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow its use as a single familV residence to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, a portion of the property has been assessed a sewer and water unit, the City Council approved sewer and water services to both Lots 1 and 2, although both lots meet the required rural standards for residential development; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including; 1. Completion of all the requirements of Resolution #2927. 2. Dedication on the plat of right-of-way for a public road shown as State Highway No. 12. 3. Creation of a new private driveway shown on the plat as Outlet A. 4. Concurrent with the creation of this the subdividers have dedicated to the City access easements granting to the City improvement and utility easements over said , subdividers have created a declaration ® and/or maintenance covenants wherein each of the benefitting lot owi.ers covenants and agrees maintain and pay the cost of maintenance for p driveway. Page 1 of 3 L ''2'» ®o o •s- . 'S'. ' '''..l■:■'■...^,o '’^bsh^ CITY of ORONO N \\ resolution of the city council 2970NO. 5. Creation of Outlot D__ _ _ _ _ - the remaining portions of the property set asiJe for future development and currently used by the Wayztita Country Club. 6. Dedication to the City of Flowage and Conservation Easements providing for limitations on the use of wetlands and drainageways described therein and shown on tlie plat as drainage easements. 7. Execution o'" a subdividers' agreement providing for the installation of certain improvements as a condition of subdivision approval and the posting of a letter of credit at 150% of actual cost of required improvements. 8. Payment to the City of a Park Dedication Fee in the amount of $10,200.00. 9. Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat easements and covenants in the amount of $150.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Fairway Hills Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota; subject to the following condition; 1. Permits for residential construction on both Lots 1 and 2 shall be i.ssued by the City of Orono. Sewer and water permits r.hal i be issued by the City for both Lots 1 and . The billing for sewer and water usage shall be the responsibi 1 i * y of the City of Orono. Lot 2 has received credit of th*' previously assessed water and sewer unit charges against the property. Based on the 1991 fee scheduled, a sewer connection charge for Lot 1 is .,7,224. / and a water connection charge is $3,531.18. 2. Buildinc permits will not be issued for new construction until utilities are installed and the access road has been approved b> the City Engineer for safe use by municipal inspection vehicles. 3. Final utility and road construction plans must be approved by the City prior to installation. 4. The subdividers and future owners are hereby *^^^**^ that any granting of access easements involving ' decrease the two acres in area of dry contiguous 1®”°* that the existing standards of the RR-IB soning distric shall bo effective even thouah municipal service has been provided to Lot 2. Page 2 of 3 o o (i *1 Ml; '!-* > r V > <'■< ' I c.■V y^v ''• ^^'.ii r>.vU. <*. / i I CITY of ORONO lV v' 2^pstt> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2970 5. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or the Registrar of Titles office on or before December 10, 1991 together with a certified original copy of this Resolution and executed copies of the easements and covenants noted above . The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on this.lOth day of June, 1991. ATTEST: lallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this // day of -CT <',<» 19^/ , by Barbara A. Peterson 6 Dorothy M. Hallln, Mayor 6 c£ty Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. LINDA 5. VEE HOThfn mjBUC • MIMHfSOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My conwTMMion «BplrM ft-U-w Page 3 of 3 i k minneapoiii, imnnetoui ddizo v.w L^viiuiv9 cievuiion ^^tunruora (Sfilinralp <p ;/\ Easement - ~s I <<V cP 'Norfherly Corner ^ '.Outlot A PARCEL A 800.4 sq.ft(0.018acres) PARCEL B 1115.5 3q.fl(0.026acrc3* 800.4 sq.ft(0.018ACRES) WITHOUT WETLAND Denotes Proposed Elevation Denotes Surface Drainage Proposed Top of Block Proposed Garage Floor Proposed Lowest Floor Type of Building . e '-'ev t : \U-'l ' pa[«:el a lliat part of Lot 2, Block 1, FAIRWAY HILLS ADDITICN, lying soutlieasterly of a line drawn from a point on the southwesterly line of said Lot 2 distant 25.00 feet nortliwesterly of the southeast comer of said Lot 2 to a point on tlie easterly line of said Lot 2 distant 66.63 feet northerly of the ' soutiieast comer of said Lot 2. • • ! ^ PARCEL B Ihat part of Outlot A, FAIKfAY HILLS ADDITION lying westerly of a line drawn northeasterly from a point on the west line of said Outlot A, distant 66.33 feet northerly frcn the soutliwest comer of said Outlot A to a point on the northwest line of said Oultot A, distant 312.82 feet soutliwesterly from the most northerly comer of said Outlot A. All according to the plat tliereof on file and of record in the offic? of the Registrar of Titles in and for Hennepin Coimty, Minnesota. buidWig hformeion twuat be chacited wiet iwipnjvd bu«idinQ •*) c >{o H if)a :d <m -<o 3D (f) C 3D <m -< C/5 O O 2 "U > 2 Z O # ,ol vN c> II aio O 03 Ir n is e if) -< I §: -< rt ►-<c*D* 3 rw ► < O r»L-n f-» fX)C/i • 3 O c r;(n o C O r*t Cj ?co o C '< C r*. f j - rt rt r-r» ^ sr D‘o Ci :i <t> rt)05 *; cw n O ft 3 ^ 3 ^ • V) O c *-•• • rt 3 O 3 ir.O 7T tJn rt no O Q £j On n O' 3 ►-*: 3 c-rt> v<05 *n : 3 n (rt TJ > Cl. rr O O K.• ?C C 3 rt ♦—• rt > '< i-: r-Cj O 0 r-* »-*• r»>O 3 3: r-o.r-* v: (/)rt f- r* c-rt 3* r * ^o »-•3* ^ Cr. C rt Cl.O n J) > T3K) r"<0 C C3 O• c 0 C c (rt rt C. rt i-i C rt 3" t-i Wi f>j =r c 0) Q C OCl3 u. ir. < (/J rt • o (rt rt rt. n rt n mo 3 r* O'a• O' Ui n o n Jt n O :3 :3o c Oo (/)oo Moo mm Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates OfTu O f'f PiUjef! 'A f*f * t'lffy'C A*y k rt i xv.jd Pt f PI » C'>. • PC T*v C » P£ ! G 'f Pf Su.ij'" V C •V' -tv C^ynotJint »;nglneers & Architects August 6, 1993 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Oltlee Bo,\ 66 Ciystal Bay, Minncsi>ta 55323 Re; Ken Hopkins U)t Rearrangement File No. 1.39-1844 Dear Jeanne, ^ SjfV':! Pf «ef»- A Pf 9 Pf A C'.*e ‘•* C^.O u pf SM--C. P,-'.sek A f A BvV^'Jcr> f t P£ V r ffjorr^srn P£ >J A f <^sj Pf f V".r'' A * CX' A*c >. Pi f Pf V.rf r'e/ Pf P Pjo PI P'* J P.nf Pf v^* V P' i A -c P *'t 'A Pr*f V Pf Pf VaA-J P6 .r-f', O Pr-T.'Sv*’ Pf • (•'’•'’er*’ P *' .l*»v.“r' Pf Vrt'k P Pc^l Pi M.»/k A Veo Pf (.•«rv A •.V '-r*'* Pf I j £ .:.4<*'ryr ►’£ A Rx i SC» Pf P^-^ J Pf V»’t p yik4i n Pf M -e* 0 Pf t P*-i^ r,rjv^ ■!> P£ *s.* c' I A • Pf G.I . P A' .r .»:y pf f Pf Kr P ''JkV PC D'Tu , J Perr t Pf SPJTAr* O GuVtyM>r' Pf Cw «r Pf * t :ku ' .ro V HA' jtf' M O vex^ AUG 1 0 1993 frnr • ‘ : jf[^ ^EyWcsll^ We have reviewed the proposed lot line rearrangement for Ken Hopkins in Lot 2 and Outlot A, Fairway Hills Addition. The site is located north of State Highway No. 12 and we.st of North Ferndale Road. Tlie rearrangement is proptised to allow adequate room to construct the private driveway and screening berm. We would recommend approval of the pri'posed lot rearrangement and site improvements contingent on the folK>wing conditiims. The westerly side of the berm must be graded to a 3:1 (ln'rizontal to vertical) slope. Tliis grading should begin by narrowing the top of the berm after the pla..ement ot trees or other types ot plantings. The existing location of the driveway and toe of slope should be maintained during the grading. The slopes should be covered with topsoil, seeded with mixture 500 seed and covered with mulch material prior to September 20th. Tliis date is the end ot the recommended planting season needed to establish vegetation prior to winter. If native grasses or wildtlowers are proposed, the recommended planting season is from May 1 to July 1. Any seeding done this year should be dormant seeding, done late in the fall. If for some reason any of the .slopes do exceed 3:1, we recommend a wood fiber blanket be installed over the seeding to prevent ero.sion until adequate vegetation is established. Slopes steeper than 3:1 will be very difficult to maintain. Ihe driveway should be constiucted with a 3 peicent ert'ss slope trwvaids the berm, fiom west to east. Along the berm, a 4 inch, shoe formed, integral bituminous curb should be constructed to control the drainage. Silt fence should be installed at the low ar'^a for erosion control. Plecusc contact me at this otfice if you have any questions regarding this m.itter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO. ROSFNF. ANDERLIK A ASSOCIAITS. INC. Shawn D. Gustafson. F.E. ^ ^ ^ I M «A*. • .«•• • ltd.r •si«! ectu • > Proposed RenrraiiRcnient ^-----Drainage T L lasement - detail Scale I" = 30 Lot 2 V^N'^vb s V/ / ! cP I ^•''Northerly Corner i yf •-Outlof A i lixistin^; Pescriptionr.; C^tlot A, I-AIR',VAY illU; Lot 2, Block 1, FAIWv ’AV I.CKnl description for p Lot 2, Block 1 (800,1 l^nt part of Lot southeasterly of line of said Lot soudieast comer lino of said Lot soutlioast conier Lcf]al description for p llmt part of Outlot A, a lino drawn northeaste (kitlot A, distant 66. of said 'Jutlot A to a p. distant 312.82 feet sou said Outlot A, All according to the pi office of the Registrar Minnesota* f utility A DroTnoafi • ^ ^ tottmtni S.C. Corner ■'i-.. c Ke hereby ce us and we ar S. W. Corner Ooflot A Panrrt — c TO:Mayor Callalian and Orono Councilnienibers Ron Moorsc, City Adminislratt)r Ca FROM: DATK: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Planning & Zoning Administrator September 7, 1993 % % ^ w’'V SUB.IECT: #1846 Alan and Ixslee Upin, 740 Tonkawa Road - Variances - Public Hearing - Resolution Additional Exhibit J - Staffs Sketch of Hardcover Removals Proposed at Planning Commission Brief Review of Application Applicants propose the removal of a 17'x2r brick patio and adjacent wall and to replace structure with a 12 ’xl9’ screen porch with new concrete foundation. Portions of the screen porch will remain located in the 0-75 ’ setback area (65’ from lakeshore) and will encroach the average lakeshore setback line by approximately 5’. Tlie existing grade level brick patio is located 60 ’ from the lakeshore and is 10 ’ in front of the average lakeshore setback line (grade level accessory structures are also subject to the average lakeshore setback ordinance). I'he reduced size of the proposed screen porch results in approximately 146 s.f. of hardcover reduction in the 0-75 ’ setback area resulting in approximately a 2.57c reduction in the 0-75 ’ hardcover. At the Planning Commission meeting members asked for the reauction of hardcover improvements within the 75-250 ’ setback area. Please refer to the staffs sketch. Exhibit J, hardcover removals are proposed at 278 s.f. Hardcover in the 75-250 ’ area is reviewed as follows: Area within 75-250 ’ setb.ick area Area = 10.181 s.f Existing = 4,888 s.t. or 48% Proposed per Planning Commission recommendation = 4.610 s.f. or 45.2% Hardcover variance “ 2,064.7 s.f. or 20.2% Hardcover reduction ” 278 s.f. or 2.73% Total hardcover on prv'perty Lot area * 15,806 s.f. Existing * 5.472 s.f. or 34.6% Proposed * 5.048 s.f. or 31.9% / r Zoning Memo #1846 September 7, 1993 Page 2 Structural coverage for the 15,806 s.f. lot is as tollows: Allowed = 2,370.9 s.f. or 15% Existing = 2,162.4 s.f. or 13.6% Proposed = 2,352.4 s.f. or 14 8% No ' ,riance required Please review the enclosed staff memo and Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting for more background and detail on this review. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the multiple variances required for the construction of a 12’xl9’ screen porch located within the lakeshore protected area based on the hardships set forth by applicants. Exhibit D, and hardcover reductions within tlie 0-75’ and 75-250’ setback area. All hardcover removals must be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction. The enclosed approval resolution i»as been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission rwcommendation. ch A RESOLUTION GRANTl^ G VARI.VNCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 (B) AND 2 FILE #IH46 WHEREAS, Alan Upin and Uslee Upin (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 740 Tonkawa Road within the City of Orono (hereinatter City ) and legally described as follows: Tlie southeasterly 1/2 of Lot 10 and the nonhwesterly 1/2 of the northwesterly 1/2 of Lot 11. Panen's Point, First Addition. Hennepin County. Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22. Subdivision 1 (B) to pennit construction of a 12’xl9 ’ attached screen porch addition to the lakeside of the eristing residence to be ItKated 65’ from the shoreline where a 75 ’ setback is required and where a grade level patio exists at 60’. said structure shall be located 5’ in front of the average lakeshore setback line where no such encroachment is allowed and where a grade level patio exists 10’ in front of the setback line. Per Section 10.22. Subdivision 2 hardcover within the 0-75’ setback area is proposed at 438 s ' or 7.7% where no.,c is allowed and where 584 s.f. or 10.3% exists and in the 75-250 setback area hardcover is proposed at 4,610 s.f. or 45.2% where 25% is allowed and where 48% exists. NOW, THEREFORE, BI-: H RFSOIA’ED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. Tliis application was reviewed as Zoning File #1846. **•Die property is located *n the LR-ID. Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring I acre in area. The property consists of total area of 15.806 s.f. or .36 acres. Page 1 of 6 3. 4. The Orono Planninu Commission reviewed ihis application on AueusI 16, UW. and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon ihe lollowing findings; A.r;:h,:re%^7xrar::^ra setback area. B The sloping elevations at the building setback line and existing mature 'ear round vegetation nunimize the visual impact of the new structure upon adjacent residences. C. The City has received no negative comments from the adjacent neighbors notified of the v;-riance request. D. The steep lakeshorc banks will minimi/.e impact of structure upon lake views from lakeshore. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this p.-operty are to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zomng cislria. tha granting the variarute would not adversely affect traflk conditions, light M »r W a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely !T“e as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to a levute a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to pres^e a right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent o. the Zoning Cixlc and Comprehensive Plan ot the City. The Citv Council lias considered this application including the findings and ^mimlendations of the l-lanning Commtsston. -rports hy Cny^sufi. co~ by the applicants and Ihe effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the cmimunit). Page 2 of 6 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER /VND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 (B) and 2 to permit construction of a I2’xl9’ screen porch to the lakeside of the existing residence to be located 5’ in front of the average lakcshore setback line. 65’ from the shoreline requiring a 10 ’ or 13.3% setback variance, hardcover variance in the 0-75 ’ setback area ol 438 s.f. or 7.7% and a 2,064.7 s.f. or 20.2% variance in the 75-250 ’ setback area. Approval was subject to the following conditions: 1. All hardcover improvements scheduled for removal shall be completed as shown on Page 5 of this resolution and shall be completed prior to the footing inspection for new construction. Authorities granted by this variance run with the propeny not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within tine year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 13. 1994). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shaii constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeantir. file undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. 2. 3. Page 3 of t) Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 13th day of September, 1993 AITEST: Dorothy M. llallin. City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day of September, 1993, by Inward 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 tlhe Citv. Notary Public Page 4 of 6 firm J___3 --------- EOAN^/FIELD & NOWAK SURVEYORS n't 41 » 74I5WAY2ATA iLVa MIHNEAPOLIS. HINMtMTA ^U.L sTr f CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY ‘W' Foe:ALLAN UPIN SCALE! 1« 50' NOTES: TOTAL LAND AI=f£A» 15,806 SQ.FT. Z TOTAL A no C0V£R AREA* ^’^'TZSO FTt//^ HARD CO^ER AREA - i4-.(,%tOR TOTAL LAND AREA OF'rfre c '^VoT I / n } /«♦ I r 1 Sk 3S >> V' *j -? v/s/ K !5.3 5*ve-^No ,7^ '^Ooo 'i?, Wi **'AtC ,V.O «tatf..4r<35g •-/ ' r ? '^/jr ^8<S ^/5 &5 ' * «N rv f V I 5CRIPTI0NJ THE SOUTHEASTERLY E-HALF OF LOT 10 AND THE NORTH- STERLY ONE-HALF OF THE N0RTH-^^^5^4//^c 5TERLY ONE-HALF OF LOT 11, ATEN’S POINT FIRST DIVISION. jVk / sk •^9.4 )■■ i^§ •reby ctrtlfy fha! this Is s true and correct ^ ^ oundarles ot th# land above described and of the location ot a I I bul dl ng^ ty, thereon, and all viaible encroachments, it any, from or on said lend. ed this 7th day of July , 1995. cinn • mcwak lueI this 16^H aay of Ju^* .1955 . ECAH, FIELD i HOViaR. lUC ------------- Ssurvi^orJk' b V /^y yf ./aA15EOoOh"2^'59- 5 Page 5 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of , 199 before me a Notary’ Public within and for said county, personally appeared knoun 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. NOT>\RY PUBUC Page 6 of 6 ro:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, Citv Administrator FROM: Jeamie A. Mabusth, Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:Aucust 9, 1993 SUBJECT: #1846 Alan and Uslee Upin, 740 Tonkawa Road - Variances - Public Hearing Applicants propose the removal of a 17’x2r brick patio and adjacent wall and replacement with a 12’xl9’ screen porch with new foundation. The majority ot the screen porch will be located in the 75’ setback area and will encroach the average lakeshore setbac.c line. Hardcover excesses exist on the propeny. The following variances will be required: Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (B) A. Average lakeshore setback Allowed = 0 Existing = 10’ Proposed = 5’ or 6.6% B. Lakeshore setback Required = 75’ Existing = 60’ Proposed = 65’ Variance = 10’ or 13.3% Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Hardcover inventories 0-75’ setback area = 5,625 s.f. Existing = 584 s.f. or 10.3% (336 s.f. brick patio/stone wall, 248 s.f. access stairs)* . . Proposed = 438 s.f. or 7.7% (190 s.f. screen porch, 248 for remaining access stair) Reduction in hardcover = 146 s.f. or 2.5% *4’ wide lakeshore access stairs allowed per Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (F) - refer to new Shoreland Regulatii>n 75-250’ setback area * 10.181 s.f. Existing * 4,888 s.f. or 48% Proposed = 4.888 s.f. or 48% No hardcover reduction.s in .setback area proposed Total existing hardcover T<ual area 15.80() s.f. Existing “ 5.472 s.f. or 34.6% Proposed = 5,282 s.f. or 33.4^c List of Exhibits A - Application U - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Addendum E - Existing Survey F - Proposed Survey G - Elevations II - 1-2 Hardcover Fact Sheets I - Floor Plan Description of Request Applicants propose the removal of an existing 17 ’x2r brick patio area located approximately 60’ from the shoreline and replacing the patio with a 12’xl9’ screen porch thit will be located 65’ from the shoreline. Construction will result in a 2.5% reduction in hardcover within the 0-75 ’ setback area. E.xcessive hardcover exists within the 75-250 ’ area at 4.880 s.f. or 43%. Applicants have not proposed removals within the 75-250 ’ setback area with the current application intormation. Existing grade level patio is located 10’ in front of the average lakeshore setback line, riie screen porch, classified as structural hardcover, is considered part of the principal struemre and will be relocated 5’ in front of the average lakeshore setback line. Statement of Hardships Review Exhibit D, hardships or unique findings are reviewed as follows; Applicant notes that the footprint of new structure will be reduced and placing hardcover fimher away from shoreline. Sloping topographies of shoreline properties will minimize impact of screen porch. Mature evergreen trees already block view of lakeshore of Upin residence from adjacent properties. Staff will also note that the City has received no comments from the property owners notified of the variance application. Issues for Consideration 1.Hardcover excesses exist at 48% in the 75-250 setback. Statt has been in ctmtact with applicants and advised of the need to consider additional hardcover removals. Staff has scheduled a meeting with applicants and a revised hardcover removal proposal will be presented for Planning Commission ’s coasideration at your meeting. Zoning File #1846 August 9, 1993 Page 3 2. Should new screen porch structure be reduced in area to minimize encroachment of lakeshore setback area? 3.Review Exhibit G, in reviewing the elevations for the proposed structure will existing mature vegetation and steep elevations at shoreline minimize visual impact of new structure upon adjacent residences? Planning Commission Recommendation If additional hardcover removals are to be required as a condition of approval, please see that removals are completed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction. /// y CITY OP C^ONO ** VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 / / ($50.00 per each additional variance) JTy Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 ^ ^ (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 0 o A* ^.tl ‘‘I »1 f’l ^ ■*^ i-l I Z .TOit. ' ;n ' w a • • u • • i CM r A w » r '• m’|»>. •». w</ - After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address ^^0 /C^D Ko^Cc)CL^ ^0(X-d • f : -» » i 'VC'* . rccA *. '? *t C C i- /’ » “ * *tI*‘ 7/ — •* c I.*- • > , .* • > O * *.• V 1. ' *' i •»V' i •' •- • J* ‘ i;.' ’ Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) 0 ^ //7 3 O Attach legal description to application if not included on required purvey. Date Property Acquired ^/3j/90 _ _ _(month/year) I (dc)(go no^ also own the adj^acent parcels of land. Present use of oroDertv: ^'residential _ _ _otherPresent use of property: Zoning District: J~.r\ — U d other(specify) APPLICANT ) Phone (home) I /Jlr^nirs ,4/un J. LLpm Phone (work) 5'V/-5~^Vy' 7^0 'Ton KcU l >cL /Id City: CdO/JO Zip: S'5~3 Name Address: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name A/ll _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ ^,OO0 3S idt.d screeo€-J porcK Ho u ned Describe request in detail:~k^ \\ou-St:,dpdcor^ O-^ r >c W W.r0 cue rC-^o)o ^ rv'p\c*.ct-* lo‘i^K ce rt\^rrt-) VARIANCES REQUIRED ___ Lot Area “ Co dvk’t 0^ ^ Cr\ C~'\o ixNoCVC K” \ s^\T\cT ^^o Cc ^V r-o u * e,. Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear /Average Lakeshore Other (specify) foi" bckcK HARDSniP/DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:- - - - - (attach additional sheets if necessary) All of the following information must be submitted—_b^j[—the—application, deadline date in order for your application to be considered cqmpletej^ 1. Completed Application Form 2. T”certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271).^. 3. I Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. • Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy eh”xll" for reproduction). ^ 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes ■ in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8^ x)l ). ^ 6. S)cetches or plans ol floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8% xll ). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. __Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete__if—Uie— inforT«'?«tion has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicaiit hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review c^^Ls application, and certifies that the information supplied is true en^cjo^e^ ftfo ^he best of his/her )cnowledge. Date 3/^'3________Applicant's Signature OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ac)cowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Cornmission members, lan^l Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of request t'vA W/3/9JOwner’s Signature T ^ Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday or each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please ma)ce arrangements to ..ave an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building i Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ao a I 3 *> 3 I 3 RUN DATE 07/08/95 BATCH 005PROP AODR ONNER NAHC TAXPAYER NAHi/AOOR PROP ADDR OI«IER NAME TAXPAYER NAHC/ADOR PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR O Q HtrirJEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INrORMATIOr4 SYSTEM PROPERTY OIDiERS LIST58 05-117-25 55 000500755 TOrtCAHA RD J t I ROGERS JOHN E I LOIS A ROGERS 755 TOIA(ANA RD LONG LAKE m 55556 56 05-117-25 5A 0001 00722 TONKAHA RD JABBOUR CORP TARGET BEN P/P STANLEY S SANOIFORD 722 TOMCAHA RD LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 05-117-25 56 0006 00760 TONKAHA RO ALAN J UPIN ALAN J UPIN 760 TONKAHA RO LCfIG LAKE m 55556 TOTAL BATCH 005 00009 RtPOPT fJO. PI655601 PACE 1158 05-117-25 55 001500712 TONKAHA RO THOMAS P GOODYEAR THOMAS P GOODYEAR 712 TONKAHA RO LONG LAKE m 55556 55 05-117-25 35 001900665 TOTACAHA RD TEMPLE ISRAEL OF Mirt4EAP0LIS TEtlPlE ISRAEL OF MHAIEAPOLIS 2526 FMERSOtl AVF S MPLS 55i05 38 05-117-25 56 0002 00720 TONKAHA RO P J MIOOLETOti ET AL P J A K J MIODLETOH 720 TONKAHA RO LONG LAKE HN 55556 58 05-117-23 36 0003 00726 TOtACAHA RO R H A L M LARSOT4 TRLTSTEES RODERT M LARSOT4 • 726 TOfACAMA RD LONG LAKE m 55556 38 05-117-25 56 0005 00766 TOtJKAHA RD E A CALOHELL AMT CALOHELL EOHARD A A MARY T CALOHELL 766 TONKAHA RO LONG LAKE m 5555b 38 05-117-25 36 0006 00750 TONK .HA RO HErmY E DENSON ETAL MEHRY E BENSIX4 750 TONKAHA RO L0L4G LAKE Mf4 55556 6 r 1 CtRtirV THAT THE FACTS REFRESENrEO ARE AN ACCURATE ANO TRUE REPRESCNTATIOII OF INtORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS or TItC HlFtttPlN COtAltV OIPARTNCNF. OF PHOPERIT TAXATIWTt TO BEST OF h' HTKlHlEObC AMU BELIEF. UATF 1 » r !. , ..v’l *iV ■ ’f. .•'. i’v . ./i- :I '■ C'*. >"f;.vr • • - -V » . Jif. i li .U •.r --m; s• Vr- •>^ -.v, . * .-vI 'a,:*r^ \ * mmmmrnS^^ • . •••• \ * “ * \ * ** ' *** : : : : '^rV ^ \ \ . : ; *. v; . : * ^ X ;•»t ■I r ‘• .■ . '^vi V:• Hi-• 'H'- !>'■f f . 4 ••‘ (»: i’fi/• . • i-.-f.•»«^ •M.• I.'-'V’vi".y.)t*;* »» •^ .*# H #( . •:•.. • ^• 4>•• #' .9 •«#' *• '.*4 * • ••^HHV HiyON fkji^nr^n/7^x n c;ir\nf\ft ^ im % » - V ^ t-: w. • • ♦ • ■•• - ^ *^ * • * » •rf ♦♦. .*■ - . . k-► •-■-'.IS-■•• •>;■• .r -,»•♦•/.. * . -• ^ • * . ^ ^ ... • .;, . .• . •••.•...-•.• • ■ . f .• ■ • W» k * - .. « . • 4 < »• • t • C «iw k . ^*V*.V|^»|^ * .-» ••• •••♦**•• •• * .. 'J.. • ■ •.'^•' ^ “'••■.«* . f ■ ' ■ . • -•■ •. •-, .• ....... . ,9 * 0 , • T*; . r: ^ V ^ . F Jfc •.'.•* I** *. „ ^ • • . •. **•. ■ -••:• •''• ■• .A>f • •% ♦ ^ <.1** *•^*4^ • rik V* i • • » ... »>• ,.•■« ‘ «.^ s- • ' * •• t»4 *•••’•< . ^’ *‘. ' A ♦ • I C^*\\ . - ...... ! ••**•.** . ^ #, » •• »•'' • *x , . '• ■• ;.-^*i'v :f r:i.A •. V 4 vs •• ■ %>*•♦ * «k Mf . ^ • i . -•^. 1^ i 7-tkLr.-s^ 5 - * " • ' * - -^ • ■•»•*’••* •»• w * t%. fc .#• «•* ' • * "^ '• .♦ . • * * •• • ^ •, # • 4 • .4* • mmdt a> .1 D '/ iu J :.( > » __J .ki.4 Hardship Description We are requesting to enliancc an already used covered surface that is Pf«emly surfaced wuh bricks. The existing patio is 17 4 x ZZ D . I hc porch wiU be shielded from the neighbors view bv rndU.i'C trees / I ( IpifA • ' *• •.. *a »• . * • * «• .< # *•...* , V- »^-. 9 0^ •« fTTTp — c EGAN, FIELD A NOWAK SURVEYOilS UINMCAPOLIS. MINNIMTA74I5WAY2ATA SLVtt ^-----------n ft CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY ALLArvJ UPIN____________ 77 0 TE^ TOTAL LAND AREA - t%eOG SQ.FT T TOTAL HARD COVER AREA* ^^TZSQFV* HAR ' COVER AREA - 34.4%tor TOTAL LAND AREA r. SCALE! 1*50’ fin^ 5 cff^ *^S.6 f t L.« :SCRIPTION? THE SOUTHEASTERLY NE-MALF of lot 10 AND THE NORTH- ^al T^ ‘eSTERLY ONE-HALF OF THE E5TERLY ONE-HALF OF LOT 11, \RTEN’S POINT FIRST DIVISION. i kl ^ Y T Y?.4 4 h#ri'by certify fhal this Is a true and correct rapresantat Ion o# 0 survey ot boundaries ot the land above described and ot th^ location ot alt bulldln^^ •ny, thereon, and all vis'ble encroachments. It any, trom or on said land, 'ied this 7th day of July , <995. ed this I6»H day ot Jur,_ _ _ _ _ _,1995 . ICAU^ FIELD 1 HOWAK, IRC. ySwrve, by• RO A15 ^Book '1959-3 1 tLu a auwnn c~ J ■N / _ -n EOAN, FIELD & NOWAK SURVgYORS_7;;^a^^^ 74I5WAY2ATA BLVa MINNEAPOLIS. MINMIMTA CERTIFICATB OF SURVEY Fof:. ALLAN UPfN N 0TE5: TOTAL LAND AREA* 1S,606 SQ.FT, r TOTAL HARO COV^CH ARSIA" ^-tTZSOFn HARD COV^E.Q AREA ■ bA-.<a‘’/otOR TCTAL LAND AREA SCALE:!* 30* t'~' i '.SCRIPTIONf THE SOUTHEASTERLY IE-HALF OF LOT 10 AND THE NORTH- ESTERLY ONE-HALF OF THE NORTH ISTERLY ONE-HALF OF LOTH, VRTEN’S POINT FIRST DIVISION. h*r#by c«rtMy fhal fhls Is a true and correct represent at Ion f boundaries of the land aoove described and of the location of all uny, thereon, and all visible encrjachaient s. It any, from or on sa d an . sad tills 7th day of July , 1905. ed this 16tH day of June 1993 t »»Q A13 tiBooa RoJ ^359-3 CCAH, FIELD I HOWAK,Hlt ,.£2jZ^7 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK TONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0“75' 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' E xisting Hardcover in Zone A. House B. Garage c. Driveway D. Sidewalk zo.^y X \?7r, ?S.F. LENGTH WIDTH ^r.75' X / r. =3 77.. S.F. ^5.?*/ X 7,/3 =■77. y S.F. ■ Vl‘7.S’7 X zc.nn)^ =■S.F. • /r.^rx .r. ^ 5 T7/: /S.F. / X 2^-L.X 2. a 7'^/. ^S.F. .zr- X vz./ <? ro S.F, i V?3 • • S.F. 3 /J-/.2 S • F • *3 ? S.F. u. s E. Patio/ Deck - <2 */ s.f. /3 3 V 7 • / y ^ 3 . ^_ _ = •_ _0 • S.F, /^.7>//Tlanoscap / AREAS / UNDERLAIN^ \ BY V PLASTIC / y V SHEETING^ (V/. r"X 2 /, ^ i^ry/jA» 2. J S.F. S.F. . / S.F. G. Other A'y^'^Ac^rs> _________X __________ S.F. S.F. Total H ardcover in Zone IVTZ^s .f. (a Total P roperty Area in Zone S / C • / 4 ' X 100 S.F.E JU._ / i 'f'«• * *'*•'» *. * ■* » \ V . • • c* % \\ .. . V ? y HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ome ) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' 5C0-I000' E xisting Hardcover in Zone A r-"4ICU3 E- (f- CTo//<'. ^Toop Ia/6 c<./ ^*^<5 Co A/C. S'TOOP C ;-DR!YgWAY 57"^0 p D.. Sidewalk F, Landscape AREAS underlain ?usric' ■ SHEETING G. Other LENGTH —- X / X r.7c r,2r^ X . X ■WIDTH' ^.1 S 9.?y 2.C.S' = 3.7/ 7. ZH r,'7 . !T Total Hardcover in Zone T otal Property Area in Zone S.F. S.F. /S.F. ^ S.F. r?S.F. o.F. S.F. S.F. S.F, S.F. ^ f. P S.F. S.F. S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F E B X 100 % I -F /. 1.-.- 'v . t A.. •*. »TTTn -Tl EGA c::•C MJM? in tn moz 74I5WAY2ATA BLVa MINNIAMLIS. MINMIMTA I Ci (i: d tt CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY ALLAN UPIN NOTES: TOTAL LANP APEA - 1%606 SQ.FT, t TOTAL HARO COVER AREA* ^4'7Z5<?Frf HARD COVER AREA - iA-.(o*/otor TOTAL LAND AREA SCALE: 1* BO* )EScriptionj the southeasterly 3NC-HALF OF LOT 10 ANO THE NORTH- westerly one -half of the NORTH WESTERLY ONE-HALF OF LOTH, ’ARTEN ’S point FIRST DIVISION. f hereby CFrf|1y that this Is a true and correct representatIon ot « survey of •t boundaries of the land above described and oi the location of a 11 buI Idlng% •ny, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on said land. vised this 7th day of July , 1995. ted this 16th day of_ _Jor#1995 EGAN, FIELD I M0WAK,^|IC te No A15 UBoOh No '1559-3 / TO:Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator IRO.M:Jeanne A. M.^^bustli, Building & Zoning Administratoi^<^ DATE:August 30, 1993 %> SUBJIXT:^\%51 Howard Eisingcr, 3245 Wayzata Blvd. Resolution - Conditional uSt % JFL'Illllt - Brief Review of Application Eisinger’s current application involves a request for the filling of 70,000 cubic yards of fill. Tlie fill material shall come from a joint project between the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and City of Way/.ata. The project is referred to as the Gleason Creek Improvement - Basic Water Management Project involving the excavation of two large ponds and sediment basins to reduce flooding in tne City of Wayzata. G. L. Contracting. Inc. of Medina will be in charge of the fill project. In Jure of 1987, the City approved a conditional use permit to permit the filling of 100.000 cubic yards of fill over the former dump site at approximately 12 acres in area. The fill was never received under the authority of the permit that eventually expired. In April of 1992. the City issued a second conditional use permit to allow filling of 10.000 cubic yards of fill which was completed. In October of 1992. the City approved a tliird conditional use pennit allowing 20,000 cubic yards of fill. The current application of *^0.000 cubic yards will result in a total of 100,0(X) cubic yards, the amount originally approved in the 1987 pennit. The Planning Commission unanimously approved the current cimditional use permit based on all appropriate conditions set forth in the fomier approval resolutions. Planning Commission members also included the recent comments included in the Engineerreport ot .August 6, 1993, Fixhibit G as follows: 1. Total fill for this property should not exceed 100.000 cubic yards unless a geotechnical study of the area is submiMed by the applicant. 2. If there is a future request for additional tiM. it is i*ecommended that the City should al>o consider the aesthetic impact upon the area as the 12 acre fill site extends well above the surrounding wetland elevations at 972 (982 approximate elevation of former dump site, 987 final elevation iipitn receipt of the 100.000 cubic vards of fill). 3 Prior to filling and grading under the current 70.CMX) cubic yards of till application, tne - ity must be in receipt of copies ot updated permits trom .Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, .Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and Hennepin County Department of Environment and Engineering. Zoning File ^1852 Auiiust 30. 1993 Page 2 The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission recommendation. ch A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISIONS 19 AND 20 FILE NO. 1852 MTIEREAS, Howard F. Eisinger (hereinafter the "applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as: lllllPID: 32-118-23 14 Section 32, Township 118, Range 23, commeticing at a point in the East line of Government Lot 1 distance 393.24 feet South along said line from the South line of State Highway No. 12 thence at right angles West from said East line 418 feet thence at right angles Nonh 393.02 feet to South line of highway thence West along said highway line to West line of said Lot 1 thence South along said West line to Northerly line of Great Northern Railroad right-of-way thence Southeasterly along said right-of-way line to East line of Lot 1 thence North to beginning (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City ot Orono for a conditional use permit to pennil the filling of 10,000 cubic yards of fill to be placed over a former dump site of approximately 12 acres in area per .Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivisions 19 and 20. NOS, THEREFORE. BE IT RES0L\T:D by the City Council cf Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. 2. I his application was reviewed as Zoning File #1852. The property is located in tlic RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3.On June 8. 1987, the Ororro Ci^uncil approved Application #1108 granting a permit to the applicant to allow the tilling ot 100,000 cubic yards of cle.in fill per Page 1 of 7 the conditions set forth in Resolution ltl\91. The applicant never received fill under this conditional use permit. On April 13. 1992. the Orono Council approved Application #1722 granting a permit to allow the filling of 10.000 cubic yards of clean fill per the same conditions of the original resolution and repeated in Resolution #3108. The 10,000 cubic yards of fill were placed on the property. 8. On October 26. 1992. the Orono Council approved Application #1766 granting a ihiru conditional use permit to allow the filling of an additional 20,000 cubic yards of clean fill, subject to the same conditions set forth in the previously approval resolutions. The applicant has met with staff, the City Engineer and a representative of the Orono Police Department to review hauling route from the fill project in Wayzata. and special conditions established by City for the hauling of fill to the site. I he 70,000 cubic yards of fill will result from a joint project between the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the City of Wayz.ata referred to as the Gleason Creek Improvements - Basic Water Management Project involving the excavation of two large ponds and sedimentation basins to reduce flooding in the City of Wayzau. Material will be hauled to the site by undem and'or truck and trailer. The haul rou e will be from Wayzata vu Highway 12 through Long Lake to the fill site. Hauling fill will commence some time in the fall of 1993. On August 16. 1993. the OroiH) Planning Commission reviewed the current appltcati«*n as proposed and recommcndcu unaninKnis approval of the conditional use permii based on the following findings; A. Current proposal resulting in a total of 100.000 cubic yards of fill will have no negative impact on the sumninding wetlands or tiKeneettng drainage ways. U Adiaccrit property i*wners have been advised of the applicant % pr<»posal Page 2 of 7 c. D. I- and none have voiced objection or submitted written opposition to the City. The current filling project shall be conducted and guided by special conditions set forth in this resolution and has been found to not present any detriment to the public health, safety, or welfare or to be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. During the reviews of the three earlier conditional use permits and the current conditional use permit, Braun Engineering’s letter of May 28, 1987 was considered by the City and in consideration of the placement of approximately 100.000 cubic yards of fill over the former dump site the report read as follows: ”. . . It is our opinion that the addition of 5’ of fill over the area presents a very slight risk of embankment failure." The previous conditional use permits and current application shall involve the filling of a total of 100,000 cubic yards of clean fill. 9. I'he Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the filling of an additional 70.000 cubic yards of clean fill as approved by the City Engineer will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pese a fire hazard or other danger to ncighbonng 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 Flan of the City. 10. The City Council has considered this application as proposed including the findings and recommendations of the Flanning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applitant and the affect of the proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the community. CONCECSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orom) City Ccxincil hereby grants a conditional use permit per .Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivisions 19 and 20 to penmt the placement of an additional 70,000 cubic yards of fill on the former dump site Page 3 of 7 that has already received 30,000 cubic yards subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant or applicant ’s agent must adhere to the following guidelines at the time of filling; 3. 5. A. Side slopes 5:1 ratio. B. C. l7o slope to be maintained within the inner fill area. Silt fence to continue to be maintained 30-35 ’ from wetland at 972 elevation - no land alterations allowed within 26 ’ of wetlands. D.Periodic seeding should be conducted during the course of the approximate two year project and that mixture number of 700 seed shall be used for seeding disturbed areas. Applicant to provide an updated Developer’s Agreement and appropriate security to ensure final grading and seeding if fill project is not completed under the current conditional use permit. It shall be applicant ’s or applicant ’s agents ’ responsibility to advise the City of the schedule of hauling activities so that the staff can arrange for the nece.ssary inspections and alert the Police Department of hauling activities. Hauling activity shall not be conducted during the following time period: 6:30 a m. to 8:30 a m. and 4:00 p m. to 6:00 p.m. Applicant is hereby advised that prior to the City considering any future request to fill above the current 100.00 cubic yards now approved for the property, applicant shall submit a geotechnical study of the area to determine if there would be a p<Heniial impact created with the additional fill. The Citv Hngineer cautions in his current report dated August 6, 1993 that the area may not acconunodaie much more fill before it begins to stand out from the existing topography. It is not clear from applicant s representations as to future plans for the property what purpose would be served by adding additional till to Pace 4 of 7 the site. 7.The applicant shall cease all hauling to the site upon evidence of shearing and/or other signs of instability created by filling over the fonner dump site. Applicant shall not proceed with hauling until the City Engineer has had adequate time to review the evidence and submit a written report to the Council for their review and action. If Council determined that it is in the public interest to cease all hauling to the site, this conditional use permit siiall be terminated immediately and the applicant shall complete the final grading and .seeding of the entire disturbed area. 8. 9. 12 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant or applicant’s agent to provide a final filling and grading plan for placement of the additional 70.000 cubic yards of fill prior to applicant hauling fill to the site unde, the current conditional use permit. Applicant or applicant’s agent is responsible for updating all previous permits issued by Minnesota Polluticn Control Agency. Hennepin County Department of Environment and Engineering and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District before the Orono staff can issue a land alteration permit unde- the current conditional use permit for 70.000 cubic yards of fill. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the propei ly not with the owner, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a land alteration permit within one year of the date of Council approval or this conditional use permit A’ill expire on September 13, 1994. Upon the issuance of a land alteration permit, said permit shall be valid through September 13, 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 agree to the terras of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the reci'rding ot this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 5 of 7 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 13th day of September. 1993. A'lTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day of September, 1993, by F-dward J. Callahan. Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayoi ind City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notars Public 4 Page 6 of 7 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF MENNEP’N ) On this day of , 199 ___, before me a Notary I^ublic within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of .199 . before me a Notary Public within and for said County , personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who e.xecuted the foregoing instrument. aiKl acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 7 of 7 To:Orono Planning Commission Members Mavor Call.ihan and Orono Conncilmembers Ron Moorse. Citv Administrator From: Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & /anting Administrator Aumist 13, 1993 #1852 Howard Eisinger, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard Conditional Use Permit - l^iblic Hearing In June of 1987, the City approved a conditional use permit to permit the filling of 100,000 cubit yards of fill over a former dump site of approximately 12 acres in area. The fill was to be placed at an average height of 5’. The conditional use permit expired as fill w'as never received under the authority of the permit. In April of 1992. the City issued a second conditional u.se permit to allow the filling of 10,000 cubic yards of fill which was completed. In October of 1992, the City approved a third conditional use permit allowing 20,000 cubic yards of fill. The current conditional use permit involves a request for 70,000 cubic yards. The fill material w ill come from a joint project between the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the Citv of Wavzata. GL Contractine. Inc. of Medina will be in charge of the fill project. The foUowing ordinances are pertinent tor this review: 1.Section 10.03, Subd. 19 and 20 - Conditional use pennit required for filling and grading activities in excess of 100 cubic yards. Section 10.55, Subd. 5 (B) - 26’ setback is required for all land alteration activities. Applicant proposes a 35’ setback. List of Exhibits A A-1 B C D E F G H I J K L M N Application Addendum Plat Map Property Owners I ist Current MCWD Permit Current Letter of Credit for Current CUP DNR Uiici for Current CUP Gustafson Report 8'6/93 Site Plan Cross Section North/South (applicable for 2(X).000 cubic yard proposal) Cross Section East/West (applicable for 2(X).0(X) cubic yard proposal) Braun Engineering Letter 5/28/87 Cook ’s Sketch-Typical Section of Filling Project at 100,000 Cubic Yards Resolution No. 2192. Approved 6/87 First CUP Resolution No 3192. Approved 10/92 Current CUP MUM Zoninp File #1852 August 13, 1993 Page 2 Additional Inforniatlon to Assist Members in Their Review of the Application A. 10 cubic yards = 1 dump truck load B. 20.000 cubic yards of fill placed in a 12-acre area produces 1’ of vertical rise. Total 100,000 cubic yards would result in 5' vertical rise. History of Property Mr. Eisinger purchased the property in 1955 and in 1958 through 1970 operated a .sanitary landfill (received garbage and refuse). The applicant obtained an annual license from the City each year of operation. In 1974 the applicant applied for a demolition landfill license from the City but was denied. Applicant estimates that there was anywhere from 6" - 8" to appro.ximately 2’ of fill over the former dump prior to recent filling projects. It was applicant ’s former practice when operating dump to place 6" - 8" of clean fill over new dump areas. Review of Application Applicant received approval for a total of 100.000 cubic yards in the original conditional use pennit. A major concern during that review was the potential impact on adjacent wetlands. The Engineer was concerned that the additional load on the site could force organic materials to move out causing a rise in the marsh area outside the till site. Review E.xhibit K. Braun Engineering provided a report during the first review noting tliat there would be slight risk of shear failure if 5’ of soil would be placed above the top of the existing landfill. This report was based on fill being limited to l(X),(XX) cubic yards. The current proposal seeks approval of an additional 70.(XX) cubic yards as 30.000 cubic yards have already l>een either received or will be received within the ne.xt few nionllis. Review E.xhibit G. Gustafson's report notes that it additional fill over the total 100.000 cubic yards is to be requested by applicant in the future that a geotechnical study of the area be submitted w ith application. Please note that the original CUP of 1987 sought approval of 200.000 cubic yards and w as held to 100.(XK) cubic yards based on the technical facts provided for that review. Applicant must provide updated juTuiits lor the tilling ol an additional 70.000 cubic yards. It should be noted that the DNR and Hennepin County Conservation District will not require review or permits as applicant will not be tilling wetlands. Applicant will have to provide updated review and approvals trom the .Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Hennepin County Department of Environment and Engineering, and the Minnehaha ( reek Watershed District. Staff nt)ted in the Minneh.iha Creek Watershed District’s review of the most current CUP that a gt,iding plan and erosion control detail were submitted in May of 93. The City would request copies of the plans. Zoning l-ilc #1852 August 13, 1993 Page 3 Please review Exhibits M and N, the resolutions that granted approval of the first and most current CUP. As Gustafson’s report notes, many of the conditions set forth in the previous approvals will hold true for the final 70,000 cubic yard permit. Please review Exhibit A-1. The applicant seeks approval of a two-year deadline for filling. Applicant advises the materials to complete the current CUP will be from a project called Gleason Creek Improvements. This is a Joint project of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the City of Wayzata involving the excavation ot two large ponds and sedimentation basins to reduce flooding in the City of Wayzata. Ha.sed on applicant’s approximations, it would appear that 40,000 cubic yards of current 70,000 cubic yard permit be completed in the fall or winter of this year and that in the second or final year, 30,000 cubic yards of fill would be placed. Staff (Public Works Director, Police Department, Building Staff and Consultants) have met with GL Contracting representatives and the applicant to discuss the hauling route and time frame. Filling has already taken place under the current CUP and has proceeded without any incident except for one inspection completed by the Building staff where it was found that trees, fuel tanks and other construction debris were being filled over. A Stop Work Order was posted by the Orono stall'. The contractor has advised that the illegal debris has been removed. Applicant should be cautioned that only clean fill shall be alh)wed and that site cannot lunction as a sanitary landfill and should not be receiving materials as obserxed by the Building staff. Applicant should be asked to respond to this matier. Please note the older plans submitted for the 1987 review 'Exhibits H. I and J) were developed for an earlier application before the City and were accepted for the ’87 review. The cross sections show fill at a 200.000 cubic yards with a 10’ venical height. Review E/hibit L. This sketch was drafted by Glenn Cook depicting a typical section for a fill project at 100,000 cubic yards limited to a 5’ verti al rise. Applicant should be asked to comment on his future plans for this site. The property is zoned RR-IB and could never be used for residential development nor do the various rev iew ing acencies rec»'mmend that the area be ever used lor the planting of crops. I he F.ngineer s current report suugests that we view the aesthetics of allowing more fill at some futuit time. The higher elcvati(»ns would not be consistent with the surrounding wetlands. Please remember this was a former wetland area that w'as filled many years ago and was contiguous with the surrounding wetland. Staff Recommendation As City has already found im issue or problem with approving 1(X).(X)0 cubic yards for this site in 1987, staff would suggest that the additional 70,()00 cubic yards be approved for placement and filling on the site subject to the appiopriate conditions of the original Resolution No. 2192 and the more recent conditions as set lorth in Resolution No. 3192. As already noted in the menu) above, stall requests copies of a grading plan and crosuin control detail .submitted Zoning l ile ^1852 Aucusl 13, 1993 W Page 4 to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District in May of 1993. Prior to any filling or grading approved under the 70,tXX) cubic yard permit, staff must be in receipt of a final filling and grading plan. Krosion control shall continue to be maintained until ground cover is restored. Staff shall ask that appropriate plates be placed in strategic areas of the fill site for e.xamination by Orono staff and agents of applicant. Isv / < \ Phone (home)_^ phone (wertV ' _ ^ sip_J2^ Phone (home) phone -- - Zip. City ClTi v/f *" property application if no • w t^aal description' _______________— Please “^e|'survey. .............—.......................phone (home)_i^Zli^ j^pLlCW^')^ name ^ OWNt» ________ -----------—^ city __________ ____ ________________________' (month/yeat) Address - --—■ — - -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ „rtv Acquit®'^ ^^‘-ja33^ent par_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ > aiso_c_,^.!!;!- - - - - - - - __ _ _ _ _ _ __ PERMITS " yp aoplio^^^®’^;;;r- cohox^ohm. ^se „,.h - , ,0.00 yor eaoh ,p2h.00 Besiden ,oo.l ,nf.00 institutional < ,P,0.00 ouest House/cuest . 1..X Credit/Bldq . - i> 5150.00 Duplex C 5250.00 Commerci . S200.00 land . d„iqnated -etland^or «loo P oradlnq and . lOl -• jji Within 7V of L ----- « fee schedule PRO/PID - S'® ’ 1 w •- \’. t t V • ——■"* *fi (no chan9® _ Aopli^^^^- $100.Ou vno current ^PVRenewal Tee ,,tant After-the peview (^ consult Its riS Siif -"■• $100.00 echedule Other " ••• • • «, • • • • • ^ ^ • * .»«. * • > . * -opert3 ......................— request i. , ------------------ n L i --^ • «ic„., and f?'-°Pertv ‘V* ^PPJI. Ippij:------5.®‘Pr* ,, _ " °f this ►“"'"■‘J: ‘^•‘ty s'^P «rd , m„---------- ^®guesf cn« 'viev'^°"<»ay^//ton " aubmit^ n ‘ fc>, Of fj "’onth .^■‘'*«nin/> Ci«.. --------- ""’9* PticV/'-ar V"J. Pii.7/ Ocu?^i7*"t at o* ■”• ---r ^ * *onj I* % « • ' tk •♦ • •U *1 f'.f' ^‘i G. L. Contracting, Inc 4300 WiUow Dr., Medina, MN 55340 Phone (612) 478-9529 • Fax (612)478-9592 , 1 - / lulv 22. 1W3 Jeanne Mabusth Citv of Orono RE: Application for Conditional Use Permit at 3245 U'ayzata IJIvd. for Howard hisingcr, to place 70,000 cubic yards at an existing till site. L)ear Ms. Mabu«<th; This request is for a permit to receive conditional approval for the placement of additional fill material at the existing site. The new material will be coming from a joint project between the Minnehaha Creek VVSD and the Citv of VVay/ata. The project is called the Gleason Creek Improvements - Basic Water Management Project. The vvork includes the excavation of two large ponding and edimentation baiiin;; to reduce flooding in the city. The existing conditional permit for 20,000 cubic yards expires in October of 1**^, and has a balance of 17,000 yard remaining from previous work. .Approximately 7000 cubic yards of material will be placed in late luly and early August under the existing permit. I his material will be coming from the ■-mailer. Lakeside pond. The larger pond will be constructed through the fall and winter, resulting in approximately 50.000 cubic yards of fill material. 10,00 yards of this material will apply to the completion of the existing permit The material will be hauled to the site by' tandem and/or truck and trailer. The haul route will be from Wayzata via Hwy. 12 through Long Lake to the fill '-ite. We are requesting the citv approve the application for a period of two years, commencing at the time of approval. Either the owner or the contractor will provide the oty with a letter of credit for the project. Should you have any que-^tions please contact me at your convenience K«pectlully Submitted, Clifford Reep G.L. Contracting, Inc Equal Opportunity Employer is!* I V m&a A4*« fti^««yAV . •. IMl »m ll/if/«7 iATCH tilnop Aooi MitV KAr« tAXfATII MAM/AOOt mr Aoet CMC! lU/K lAXfAVIl A«*1L/A0M i. f»r^ ADOi 9 JM IU.*« TAXf>Attt IUAlt/A£Oa nor wot CttOt IUI« iwptni MUK/WOI mh\ 4. • . k^v'v. ■l•V •. * ‘ * U II cool• lift WAUATA blvv ■QOttr I (KttAS IIAl CO!:CRT f OltUI AIS OtO UlfSTAl CAT POAO ICIO lATC m SSSSA M i:*iis-n n coos •CAM IliAOS OAT PO H MALTCf i UlilPOP ITAl MALICl i UliC^OP AaO ST\£0l CAY B3 IQII3 UAf rti ai^SA u 3T-iia-;s 1% coot CltAI UAUAIA MVD M r IlSliCIfl ITAl;^ NrAACo r cnncia • 3:AS UAItATA OlVD • iota UPC ffi &S1S4 M 3t COCI CUM MATtCTCMl po N J PAlCISrA TTAt . UP HATOIP J ftlAnCA C7I 8QUTHDAU m ULDG iDita m ismsLV; ; • V .ft «I •• * .». 'li . f • •• ••. ■ ■■ ,;!i.. I *. ri, ' P}*'! 'I :•••,••> . KvA I4' *■ 'V .'1 it "• ■ • ' liriftTPiii tcufiT rBortBft iiiroarATinM sitUH IVOriPTT 0 51105 115T35 3t-110t3 It cool CISdQ U\17ATA Civo It MiiilAH luniQii II imiiAit luaiO'i SSOl l:a:iUM ClKItB OR hPlS rti S3«3/ 35 3t-we tl 13 OOOC eOAAO 5T\fCnS CAT PO II TBtOtPfC P Pltc!l iRtotcic P Piiori P 0 DOT I3A lOI^ itrl ICI SST'^A 35 32-115 t3 At 0001 PAUL A SUJl'.OS in.oa*i siu'.os 153 010 CRT51A1 6A| PU lOtC tAM »3I S3 3*>6 i •- t • lOfA*. DAICM 003 OOOlO ^ V i;: v^. :t' i-T •'■' ■ ■''I* J . ' ' *T.» ^ ' VPirtJIT lO. P1A33A0I PAGE S35 3t-tl6-.*3 13 00010!307 UJTtAlA riVO 0 5 C fUiniR 0 rPIAJI rULMlR 53D7 MAftAU OlV© icif. ^AIC It! SS3SC 35 32-lie-23 lA 5001 052A5 WATtAIA OlV© N 7 tlSltlCtR ITAl iio rioo f tmic.CB PT 2 COX ASA U«rG IAKC m SS3SA 35 33-115 23 23 0002 0302$ UAIZAIA eiVD Pct:tRf c A rADtaiM oitus PCAIRI I I PAII.RIM onus 3o:s matiata olvo io n; lA/c rti SG3S6 1 CfPlIM TKAI nii TACTS CtlPlSt»niO A9f ACCliaAlt *11) TPlP PlIBISf ilfAllCJII Of IIBO'^IUTU^I AS IT ArifARS THIS OAIC ftfl Dlf BfCmOS tp Tllf lllurtPIM CCMflT OirABIlUfll (if IHOPCBIT TcKATlUl. TO fl«( OtST o- rw At;D-.iitocc All) oiiUf. / / ^ ^ y ^ / -^ I — A • y/ o»'» ir.fr.-ifi'# .i : »Z\: I \ m 1x1 V A-^ 4 «J .i 1 ^ g Pa« « 4» t % • « ii Cfi r* >.1 •« • . *. % MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT / 14600 Minnetonka Boulevard Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345-1597 office: (612) 939-8320 fax: (612) 939-8244 OISTHICT COOROINATOH: Enen B Klandemian BOARD OF MANAGERS: C. Woodrow Love • John E. Thomas • Clartuon Uooley Thomas Maple. Jr. • Thomas W, LaBoorty • Martha S. Hartfiel • Pamela G Bl.*t u. 14 I/. •. ;WITtH$HfOlOti**wA^T A y V" J ' -aj—^ / < ■ URC MlNMrrOMRA D PERMIT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103D, and on the basis of statements and information contained in the permit application, correspondence, plans, maps, and *11 other supporting data submitted by the applicant, all of which are made a part hereof by reference, PERMISSIOM IS HEREBY ORAMTED to the applic^t named below for use and development of land in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 1 Issued to: Howard Eisincer Permit No. 93-74 I ijocatloni City of Orono* T118# R23# Sec. 32 Purposei Stormwate*. management plan involving placement of 20,000 cubic yards of fill on former landfill site. 1 Date of Issuance! 1 5/27/93 Date of Expiration: S/27/94 By Order of the Board of Managers A- Ellen B. Klanderman District Coordinator This permit is not transferable, and is valid to the date ^ activity is authorized beyond the expiration date ^ If the more time to complete the project, and application *or re.newal of the permi i required. (Statement concerning fees for inspections, violations, etc. on back of permit.) r STATE BANK OF LONG LAKE 1964 W WAYZATABLVD •PO BOX 656 LOrJG LAKE MINNESOTA 553564:656 • 61Z'473.7347 July 21, 1993 To: City of Orono P.O. Box 66 . Crystal Bay, I-GJ 33323 % \le open irrevocable standby Letter of Credit No. C72193 in the a.-.cunt of N'.S. dollars 35.0C0. in favor of yourselves, for the account of Hc:;ard nisinger; expires .<’uly 21st, 199U, at our counters. Available against drafts dravm at sight on State Bank of Long Lake, Howard .Hisinger's project, bearing the clause, "Drawn under Standby Letter of Credit No. 072193 at the State Bank of Long Lake " Accompanied by: 1. A beneficiary's signed statement stating: "Howard Hisinger has failed to make certain payments required to be made for improvements or to complete the improvements to the satisfaction of the city, pursuant to the City Permit, concerning Howard Eisi.nger's project, between the City of Orono and Howard Hisinger. 2. This original Letter of Credit for endorser.e.nt. Special Conditicn(a): 1. This Letter of Credit is automatically renewable without amendment for an additional six-month period from the present e.xpiry date or any future expiry date, unless si.xty (60) days prior to said expiry date, we shall notify you in writing, by registered nail, that we have elected not to renew this Letter of Credit, but in no event shall the expiry date extend beyond July 21, 199^* Payment will be made at the counter of the State Bank of Long Lake, Long Lake, Minnesota. This credit is subject to the uniform custom^ a.nd practice for dccu.mentary. Unless otherwise stated, all documents are to be forwarded to u_ by mail or hand delivered to our counters. Docu.rn.ent3 to be directed to: State cank of Long Lake, 196a Jest Wayzat:-. Boulevard, Long Lake, !dN 55356. We hereby engage with drawers and/or bcna fide holders that drafts drawn and negotiated in conformity with the terms of this credit will be duly honored upon presentation. FDIi Ml |f^ STATE OF phone no. METRO 772-7910 .DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RES RO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, fW(b5106 FjLENO. 1932. March 31, 1992 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE: HOWARD EISINGER, C.U.P., WETLAND #27-841W, CITY OF ORONO, HENNEPIN COUNTY (NE 1/4, S.32, T.118N, R.23W) Dear Ms. Mabusth: Based on discussion with Mr. Howard Eisinger, I understand interest has been renewed in a proposal originally discussed in 1987. In Judy Boudreau's March 13, 1°87 letter (copy attached), we indicated the DNR would ha'^e no objection to this proposal if the fill is at least 26 feet from the wetland edge. In May of 1987 a concern with detrimental impacts to the wetland due to additional loads was raised (copy of your May 5, 1987 letter enclosed). It was our understanding the applicant would be required to do necessary analysis to address this potential concern. No DNR permit is required if the fill will be setbaclc at least 26 feet from the wetland, as proposed. As long as the following points have been addressed we have no objection to this proposal: 1. The fill is at least 26 feet from the wetland edge, 2. The questions regarding impacts of the ”add.Ttional load** on the wetland have been addressed. The proposal is consistent with the city's current floodplain and shoreland management regulations, and The proposal meets applicable provisions of the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you require any additional input on this matter. Sincerely, 3. 4. Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist cc: Howard Eisinger Ron Quanbec)c, Minnehaha Creek WSD Tim Fell, USCOE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER u G — 9* — 3 M C» 1 ^ ^ i Bonestroo Rosene Anderlfk & |\J| Associates Engineers & Architects August 6.1$93 £* B Cl M E S T F: O O ::5= S Ct C I T E Si F - . O C*'» C ft 1 laf^.^t A *4.If-TJri r igu f r Mart ft vv Pi ^ Pf •A pg ; pyt pv iJmy 0 P' A-vn<i ( Pi ctr*» y Pf tSPX: M All 1 K^. f §> M 1 ^1 V/ M.Pi I VlAr^ni P# 1 kaiiM P»lam«r 11 i.i«a^| f C P^\k4C Lf'tM r|O t/rv^^ ¥P # ua# PY •igjwj 1 A1 \S»VA f iMLant P\t trtf h^ri Pi 1 I'l y A JkasriLn u PI rrt A » ff (• f‘v M.irS A PC ina^ 1 |^<tai pf 1itw«i kA 1 tar*In f p A t Uur*jnr\9bt\ pp va#Ar • t( fPr r Pt U#% A Iraa PP A »v>nar\ AIA C«7 ^ Mdri^ Pf / t^iT'. A r «• 1«• • iVaufet I ff M 1 M f fNx e«v i Pi fwat Wftr«0 n tuAk»t M ( IV«i fwt^! Attficari p|P*W\i J PI lA'*#** » t Ms. Jcunnc A. MaJbusth, BuilOing and Zoning Adnjinistrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crysinl Bay, Minnesota 55323 Rc; Eisingcr Conditional Use Pernm File No. 130-1852 ' Dear Jeanne. We have reviewed the rct^uest to place 70,000 cubic yards of Sil material on the former dump site located soutn State Highway No. 12 and west of Old Crystal Bay Road The request appears to be in confcrmance v^'th the original application which granted a permit to allow Ailing of 100,000 cubic yards of clean fill. Wc recommend approval of the application contingent on the following ccndliions. The fill placement should meet all conditions set forth in Resolution No. 3103 which Include; • preparation of a filling and grading plan for our review; • side slopes 5:1 ratio; • 1% slope to be maintained within inner HU area: • silt fence installed along the wetland; • no land alterations allowed within 26 feet of the wetland; • periodic .deeding during the course of the project. Wc rcaimmcnd that the icta! fill placed on this property should net exceed the ICO.O-OO cubic yards previously approved. In this regard no future permits should be issued u.niess a geotechnical study of the area Is submitted by the appliciini. Also, the aesthetics of future fill in the area should be scrudniied. Please amtact me at thU office if you have any ^ut'.siiens rcgarcing this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERUK & /XSiOCATES. INC. Shawn D. OuJtaftcn, P.E. • . %• »r •»• ‘ j* vv ' • ^ .. .#• .Sn*« .'»•».#*. * *•;• *. V *' • ' ' ' * ' ' A, '• • •♦v ##' ' » > •», i. •» . «. ^>'1 V:;riv»' •• ■:> ... V. J»,’ /{; • • ^ \• • s K S'c f* 0 ' \ »n r> “t 6 >35 •V <• ? sf^ ^' S .•■■•1 ■ • ••. I' . N., 'A -. ' : r './"• . •L/:r ^..1 / %i »•7;. #. • ■. ■*•■•'/rv -% , x0 ». .V'J ** * • iCii-Vr- T*ter- * ^V v. • i /V p i # *«• - * ' ■ • { “ • ' v« • - .• *• A— *A ' rm li u^. V *' ♦'• \ -V*>‘i- ' J-*T jv /w^ ^ ^*1^4.1 “ I - A * f ♦ ■S‘i ■It* '•T i\ ri' Hi • -f £ •jt li#i fl ^ •. . m 7> •Jt ,ri A 1*' (V\'Uv I* >: y» pfiS«8l-#V"% -i^jF P'M r ^ ifiIHi ■\s •>' 14 ■.•'• • I • I'/ t4, •r, . . ‘=U »• . . . ; tn.; my ■>'•;.V ’^'Wv' i%>N"^ * ,1 V */ 0 tufii T10, lla'L - • ; 4N.^ V. • mmmm.-* ^'' i: i «^*^u it L v^ •' -"M 'V>\e{^2 • ■■•••■ ‘■V'X'ttf.i' *. •.* f • . ,/w;^*• .‘ C f a ST IN*', • '..?/ri;il • <’-v.,:?| s • « • p4 ?V:;;.V •W.'.V'l’’'.p**-* >.V '^.rw‘v*', > t*I 'P' ■I-i^f* a; fj; •■ ^v‘v'4 -.i;; -VI ■' ' vr^>Tcl^, v>- < I’J ••■•.•• .»'■. 4iC!C =1^ ■ * >r ‘ 2f' •' •• ^' • ’• w ' M •?,'*(': 9. *. . 1 fc 4* > ^ m; t;M ' • • ‘ » :• fv t?. ... V ^ •"%- , N ;i-*' i . ‘f. I <»•< . ^ % -. • »- .4 .%*• ♦ • • • •*<»^“ *' * *'*•*♦• V.#* r • *,. * . . f..- •.: * • V*^ • v^', •>*••» • •>;* ? * «i • - • V:*, «; ^ .' ‘v.* .,1, ■; ■'.vr*•'*(.- • ' •• •»., < V^.f- )»• / *1 ■.;,r;A.* •. , ,% •• / . ... / * «• !•' f ' - » S. • .* ^ V »*/* •• *' • fc* ♦ • . ^ . •'.’••'Sr''-:.] •"«• -*7 s ' •* /Vi • r%Ai i/.. ‘U l I t • ♦ />*r- ■ - JvM- '^‘Va • * * .' I.*- . •’ ’* '• -. . »-r^* • *A .*-./ r ‘'V Jf 4 •* ' ,* .• w‘* V* VK 4.VU 1.4 , • -...-... V, .. ^. .-.•i.'/;-*-iV'■ c • ^ u,».%.*, ««............... * *.4 • • A S \v MM--. :T4^rZ.-'- y.Ay :«, P.c. ?.ox 3S.103 .y?l3., VN 5S435 ('ill') ^'I.'.-SOCO r /•. C r *! *: • • i r p •}**": •'^'. .’C'n Ct'-.-c-i ■* •C’.’ L*.r**»»': V ^ ^ ^ *?*•*'”' PIT: -r, >:.5? nNCTNTmNG o?in:w Addition o'? ?i?.l to :'xi3t.tc T.^ndflli Dcutn rf T7-12 at Clanapp Lake Orono, Xinr.<»rota 'Ae uit'-prly-.r.j o-r^ric‘so:Is? ^•''^•---y «f'd oossiblo failure ir.to f* • 4 s • . f**. »' • >a;> ••K Pf‘»''io«s borings *aXen in th* proposed land- 'Jopthn'running £rcn ’7:°''-cot 'to ”*?*4^- ”“S" Ancfili w.n nor nxt.ndc;i c4r t!ho ^roco.ed ••'•csu ;e -“iA nr A, «.•' if *. ► -an-.i save been assurced similar ■X; ,?r,7^V-‘"'’r’v-'--- nro, »,. flr,t ni’cd in to ,*«, AV. indicated y,„r deSi;: existing landfill area which •» Cfc t\ unliom S**?oot <"ao ^^ wurjAoi^ ^l^vAtiona in tho tre-iont landfill aro^a. .»•* S d rMQAi.rws •• soas ANO V4»rA.AL.«; •• f t »w »or»*S«n«al M . 1 ■ I ^ ^ ^ / k a” •■ ••,. i» * ite; vs I ’ ct*’ I* V . i*-’ 1 y \ You ir.dicatcc tr.ac tctto.x .;r tr...* .... ij at dOwJt «Co*. T-.o t; ^ ^.r. acc v. *va ..or. . t.'MJ una.sturood wotl.'ifid af-*a iS .it jccat •.•.cvat ;cr. T.-.ia 4-i’oot diiferon.-.? in e'.•••.•.» t ;sn i.-'rDoaoly r'pT^amzi '..•.ut would expect to bo t.~.o le-xant that roiu-.oO trom tne wei^nt of t.ie ex:ati.-.cj laia:.!! rjtor.a. organic suoaoila below. Vou ;-.o;cat.>a t.“.at tnv ex.ati.-.g .ano.i.. naterial i* aoout !■* fi*»»t » »• -1 ^ • « -a • * • I oo-»n no reviOus ut-o.lity prcblo-a, ;t is our cpi.-..cn ...a. ...c tailuro. Cur experience Wit.i projects wr.ere au-.t-cna. .... .o placod above exiatir..; landfill r..iter;al.i above swa.-p ^..positw ^.is reJultod i.n addittona* sett lex.ont, c-t no L. oar .ai.-.v.. ^ ccnooaition of t.te exist.ng l.inafill .T-ateria. ' prooaoly possesses a ritber higt .nt’rnal m rather high anoar >trer.gt.n. T.v sett.e:nent t..a. has uc . over t.ie p*-t iO yo..r< iia .i.io .ncrea .e-.. t.ie s..ea. .... .gth .. tno upper sone o: organic .-.cil.- -i.c.i .esuaio t.-.e r.s.. or punching fa.lur-' as a rjsu.t o. p.aci.-.-i an acu.-xo..a. aafc.l.ir.jo load. Tiaa. bo-eu ;n t‘... : ;cr-.^t ion. .*- men tnat t.io aacitiai of b :ox*t o. :... over t..e area p ..e. .. v«ry rijsA oi t'r.jir.orer.t Iz tnould nCiZosl• ^ ______r.cil ;:or.r.qs prwr .not been taxon in the exist irg l..nof i. 1 area to poiitlon and strength of tne exist.ng .an..:*., ca .. . ■> strengths and depths cf the underlying oraanic sci.s. .r assumptions we have made are in.iccurai.», our evalua.ion o. t.he potential risx may need 'o be re-ev.aluat-d. Additional bor.r.us and teats at this ti-- >*..•» ret x.'pe.xr wxrra.nted .or the cr.i i*o planr.i^J, rtow«*v*»r, plsicv.^.^ ^ry r; jr <• < ^a a A s « A • A .r 4 r. I r ^ c * ^ ^ «!*»vor.'i* c. •. 1 " w ."c.* i 1 1 r . 1 :a -V Ar^jr.v* c. l.lA.iraal as.'itt, ‘i*- ;>la4:*?a I A two Of 1 ron 4 tor i .* 0 pi a* •» 1 1 1, a : • •• t > /•« ^ t - ^ o n • - «• to 1 1** 1 1 i r t acy! • ».*t t aorj^A t of ono to fAtO O A p->r fill i%ppl ACat AonA to a;1c« nr>r« C.IU’.lfxS i.'^V A . ia-. !ojr wr*c "i c!• 1 .i f<• . *• •• f r -• fc-A • « *ro*«• a • -.e*. sn.de b-twee-i stll-d -,'-.'.sr;ng ti* plat-s. • #.. th.H additional ■n;-er.«. ; .• .-x-e^lx ar-a* t*e» »en»*v Viraln wetland, tne r.aa -t e-va---e-t fa..-re 1% S1..1..- llJ-riy M^Ur ..J » -.c. - - C.—..-.I-. ...................... OA AppropriAt#. aiSL^jajjr ... vs, 5. I'-.f-t v> . r:vd,risv ■-*.vy4^r>. . , v w. ' •*. a e ^4►‘iVxhV . ;*V < V'* V . i"*" ^4 ^e • a ^ . m p * I. V s - •* % «r w» a ►a*, a W ,,S ♦, fw hiOT-'-Jt :.^N.ri4 /.. V / ^ *r. . p .'41 m > *m ■ 'hX Me .ea » ' *'** ^ --- ^ -■ - f -e .**** f . ^ V '-V*C^^**» **^2 j •v,iiTt-v»y.v.'i7* *Jv'*l*'*^ ^ 7i-lJ7 Coobtruction '•*17 laCvlc^s perform'd by th«* - .*»*•/« b««n conducted in i fv»--** • r«f« and ordinarily • currently practicing in un;.' *<■-• ;#atrain«. So warranty, Cl .*o.n !t ^ pleasure perior.t»ift-i ns •• a^^y questiOMS rcq.^rJin j ' ♦ . •IS your convenience# vou • net v>>* ► , ^ r 51 « «• 4 * # 4»> • % • WMC/JJC;goc Atcaenmant: Sketch mm, I ..V . VsL.- .aw ,***^ - •;* ^ »-» >;r ' a^*-. ^ •V# • ,•■ ii. .V:? v\ »V . . r - -».V • ^ ' »« .# * *.;<K ltvO“mt? ..'■ Ws^i. r- , Vr |»* ^> ♦*< • I. Vn- * 1-'v’i^VVv--^iVJy. '^7 •, • i." . • »c '^a' V ’ ,.1Fi 2 S? *• f 'sr># •'■a %. •' r i ,.'■4?:-, •......y' mi it'V-, '.«^' ' mm » A ^ ^ !?;«■.-; ■ - '\:f • V J • - -♦ - • •t--J • - //o^}['TT- • (.----------,- .//j >.'Arc/ C tS,f^,// 5'/^ 7 >‘ro'r:<i v..,,,i,La^f^^./,, s\ /--------............................._v o,i ■ ■''\ ................ • -'V —. ■ .■ .. . r--------------------------'— —t-r-i •- i.t >•■•>1 f-H f:'-,) \ _ ““ •'T -----...______f V.5 1 ' • ^ I j -t-rr—n •'>" t - |~* -“ — «. .O' JJA'C * (j f—r- t* - ......................................................... r r«-:> i, . 4 1 » % 4| f J Pj^r % . A. , 4^ ■wrwv. m ■4 •« •:/r\v, *':.v'?i ‘'a •>%*. l/i rv; f- ‘ • .'> ► ' T » 4 n:a!l,'Vm \V •'V : •»;4 • ,W. ««k y ■'V-* li ^ I s?-t\ .i>.^ « A ■ii -•if >« • w is- V,%H;y;^V^Va 5305190 C5tv o2‘ OH.ONO > 7 K- \m k0*^ * nCSOL'JTlON OF The CITY COU\CiL NO ^192 _ A RKS0I.UT10N CHANTING A CONDTIOJIAL U5K 1‘KUMIT PKR MUNICIPAI. ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISIONS 19 kill; 11103 k 20 WOERBAS, Howard K. Eisinqer (hereinafter 'the applicant") ia The owner of properties located at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard within the City of Orono (hereinafter “City") and legally described as follows; (P.I.O. 32-18-23 14 0002) Section 32, I'ownship 118, Range 23, Commencing at a point in the East line of Government Lot 1 distance 393.24 feet South along said line from the South line of State Highway No. 12 thence at right angles West from said East lino 418 foot thence at right angles North 393.02 feet to South line of highway thence Wrot along said highway line to West line of said Lot 1 thence South along said West line to Northerly line of Great Northern Railroad right-of-way thence Southeasterly along said right-of-way line to East line of Lot 1 thence North to beginning. WDUSAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a Conditional Use Permit to peimit filling of 100,000 cubic yards of clean fill over a former dump site of approximately 12 acres in per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 s 20. ,«hall be placed such that the average height of fill is maintained at five foet. Pilling shall ta)ce place 35 feet In from the adjacent wetlands at the 972 elevation. NOW, TIIERBKORK, BK IT RESOLVED by the City Council Of Orono, '4 .Xn i * \h If. '•,i Iff . s-.' W' . 31 f‘<1H*"-'--' ‘-ti 1* fa ^ - K V - *'• m- “^9 ► # ‘ -a. ^tLi- . ,• ■* .4• -r >9 rt► .-r ' £■^mrVC ' ■ b %f« * L* ,>*Vi'»’ s® its m fr *'•*' I* V ',' ,» .40 5 a ■ ■> h ■:r«- ? '*n.* '»♦•/-» \ • -4^ ui* \ CJtv < «/ RESOLUTION OF THE CITV COUNCIL NO 1'*- V^'KivV’ 1. Prior to the hdvilin<j of fill to the site the applicant or applicant's agent must stiUit.it the following: a) Six cross sections of existing topography. b) Final grading and Frosion Control plan designating the following: ^ 1) Side slopes "i: 1. 2) One percent : lope to be :naintained within inner fill d rcd • 3) Silt fence inbtalled 3 0 to 3 5 feet from wetland at 972 elevation - no land alterations allowed within 26 feet of wetland. 4) Average height of fill to be maintained at 5 feet. 5) Monitoring plates to be installed as required bv the City Engineer. c) Executed Developer's Agreement and appropriate security to insure final grading and seeding if fill project is not completed. Letter of Credit must be written for 150 percent of the estimated cost of the improvement. 2. Fill shall not exceed allowed amount of 100,000 cubic yards. Side slopes shall be seeded ?s soon as 5:1 slope ratio has boen realized. 3. P.'tk Construction shall be responsible for advising the City of monthly schedule of hauling activities so that staff can arrange an approximate inspection schedule for each month. Prior to hauling any fill to the site Park Construction must arrange for a preconstruction meeting with the Orono staff to review all final submittals and tentati/e hauling schedule. 4. Park Construct'on shall cease all hauling to the site upon evidence of shearing and/or other signs of instability created by Tilling over the former dump site. Applicant shall not proceed with hauling until the City Engineer has had adequate time to review the evidence and submit a written report to the Council for their review and action. If Council determinea that it is in the public interest to cease all hauling to the site, this conditional use permit shall be terminated insnedlately and the applicant ahall complete the final grading and seeding of the entire disturbed area. 5. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owner, but are permissive only and muat be ''oeqileted within one year of the date of Council approval or the spocial conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (Juno S. 198S). ^ Page 3 of 5 ’aTSuu'IS -.ic" n► • f i TL« <« •*ii C»TiV City of OFtOINO RESOLUTION OF THE CIT> COUNCIL NO 2 i -i . V The Department of i ^ontro ’ /nnrsr-.j U •^•JTural Poscurtes. Minnesota Pollution proposo'^d lYf 1'■‘ha v^e nV m-a J • ''"i PP1 ica t ion as Wetlands or intersoctino dr a inaV'Vway^'*'^'^ c) The application as modified bv j improvements tn the vicinity. ^ Properties or 4. Draun Engineering in a letter dated Kay 28 1987 n;.. ««<« • yards® of mV ot or I ^■ormo®r®X'n7 si^e 100,000 cubic th* Council has considered this application includlnr the find..ngs and recommendations of the Planning 6. The City Council finds that granting a Conditional Use Pr.rm<». to allow the filling of 100.000 cubic yards of c^n fiM IVtTil tho area as defined by the Orono staff wi 1 1 not be detriment* the health, safety or general welfare of th^pubne ^culS not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire haV/r'd ar otSiJ dancer to neighboring properties, nor will it deoreei*t» surreunoing property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will bu in keeping wi»h the ir.tlnt and o' the 4.ufiing Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. ^ CONCLUSIONS, OkOKK AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findinqs nor^H Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit Imr Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivisions 19 s 20 to oermlt IhI of 100.000 cubic yards of fill within an area apJ?o?J5 ^5 the Orono ^taff, subject to the following condit^oni: ^ Page 2 of 5 •’1*1 .• » **•»' r Uv;vyf)»n^ ‘■m ■^1^4 '"ni.»K\* 1 C:3l> of OflOINO MLSOLUTtON OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO ■ •- • »<« «i i «• JIU/. ^BiPPra.• * /* : ' V V fi, Vinlitt inn o! nr nc;r.-comp 11 anrt? %»ith any of the terms and i(iiiit 11 l«)ii ‘i ol ihlb rcM.olutioii ahall constitute a violation of the ‘/.cintr*f Coli‘, lili.i 1 1 «iut on'at i ca \ 1 y icrninate any authority granted hnitMnt .inn !i1m I 1 e»i* pun i :ih.il> 1 e a:, a ni *>^!omoanor . /. The uMife r s I g.iei! owner h*is read, understood and hereby agrees In the ft* mill nf thiH i o nn 1 u t i »’>n and cn behalf of himself, his hulls, iiui:i;esnors ar.il as-^ign:,, hi*reby agrees *‘o the recording of Mill* teiiuluiion in the iIwiut of title of the property. Adoptocl by the Oron<i (*ity Council on thia 8th day of June, \ I I I ' ^ ' » < / / ^ James U. CrabeV, Mayor / ^04^ X 5996693 CITYoTORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A RBSOLOTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT PBR MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISIONS 19 ft 20 FILE #1766 WHEREAS, Howard P. Eisinger (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: PID: 32-118-23 14 0002 Section 32, Township 110, Range 23, conunencing at a point in the East line of Government Lot 1 distance 393.24 feet South along said line from the South line of State Highway No. 12 thence at right angles West from said East line 418 feet thence at right angles North 393.02 feet to South line of highway thence West along said highway line to West line of said Lot 1 thence South along said West line to Northerly line of Great Northern Railroad right-of-way thence Southeasterly along said right-of-way line to East line of Lot 1 thence North to beginning (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a conditional use permit to permit the filling of 20,000 cubic yards of clean fill to be placed over a former dump site of approximately 12 acres per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivisions 19 and 20. All filling activities shall take place 35' from the adjacent wetlands at the 972 elevation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1766. 2. The property is located in the RR—IB Single Family TftANSmi ^ Residential Zoning District. Of MOfCffY TAX I fUWic arrMfig NOV IE 1992 Page 1 of 6 ___OCPl/TV f/O.K 0\\ H CITYofOROXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3192_________ 3. On June 8, 1987, the Orono Council approved Application #1103 granting a permit to the applicant to allow the filling of 100,000 cubic yards of clean fill per the conditions set forth in Resolution #2197. The applicant never received fill under this conditional use permit. 4. On April 13, 1992, the Orono Council approved Application #1722 granting a permit to allow the filling of 10,000 cubic yards of clean fill per the same conditions repeated in Resolution #3108. The 10,000 cubic yards of fill have been received by applicant. 5. On October 19, 1992, the Orono Planning Commission ]>0Yiewed the application and recommended unanimous approval of the application as amended based on the following findings: A. The current proposal will have no negative impact on the surrounding wetlands or Intersecting drainageway. B. The adjacent property owners have been advised of t:he applicant's proposal and none have voiced objection or submitted written opposition to the City. C. The application as modified by the Planning Commission will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vacinity. D. During the review of the two earlier conditional use permits, Braun Engineering, in a letter dated May 28, 1987, has opined as follows regarding the placement of approximately 100,000 cubic yards of fill over a former dump site. "...it is our opinion that the addition of 5* of fill over the area presents a very slight risk of embankment failure." Page 2 of 6 GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.3192 \ ! \ E. The current application (#1766) shall involve the filling of an additional 20,000 cubic yards of clean fill. 6. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the filling of 20,000 cubic yards of clean fill as approved by the City Engineer, will not be 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* 7. The City Council has considered this application as amended including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the affect of the proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the community. C0HCL08I0H8, ORDBR AMD COHDITIOII8 Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivisions 19 and 20 to permit the placing of 20,000 cubic yards of fill as approved by the City Engineer, subject to the following conditions! 1. The applicant or applicant's agent must adhere to the following guidelines at the time of filling: A. Side slopes 5tl ratio; B. 1% slope to be maintained within inner fill area; C. Silt fence to continue to be maintained 30-35' from wetland at 972 elevation - no land alterations allowed within 26' of wetland. 2, Provide an updated Developer's Agreement and appropriate security to ensure final grading and seeding if fill project is not completed. ^ Page 3 of 6 /O. o// oV ' y '’y CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3192 _____ 3. Fill shall not exceed allowed amount of 20,000 cubic yards. Per City Engineer’s report of October 14, 1992, fill area edges along the marsh and adjacent upland area should be dressed up, finish grading (5:1 ratio) and seeded by November 15th. Additional fill material should be placed in the center of the fill area to allow re-vegetation of the edge. Mn/DOT mixture number 700 seed shall be used for seeding disturbed areas. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for advising the City of the schedule of hauling activities so that staff can arrange for the necessary inspections. Prior to hauling any fill to the site, the applicant must arrange for a pre-construction meeting with the Orono staff to review all final submittals and tentative hauling schedule. The City will ask that a representative of its Police Department be present at the pre-construction meeting to advise of any special traffic/safety concerns during the hauling process. 5. Hauling activities shall not be conducted during the following time periods: 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. 6. Any future requests for filling on the applicant's property shall be evaluated by both applicant ’s consultants and Orono staff and consultants. The City Engineer cautions that the area may not accommodate much more fill before it begins to stand out from the existing topography. 7. The applicant shall cease all hauling to the site upon evidence of shearing and/or other signs of instability created by filling over the former dump site. Applicant shall not proceed with hauling until the City Engineer has had adequate time to review the evidence and submit a written report to the Council for their review and action. If Council determines that it is in the public interest to cease all hauling to the site, this conditional use permit shall be terminated immediately and the applicant shall complete the final grading: and seeding of the entire disturbed area. Page 4 of 6 'M / ' / CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3192 N 8. Applicant is responsible for updating all previous permits issued by the Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Hennepin County Department of Environment and Engineering, and M.C.W.D, before the Orono staff can issue a land alteration permit. 9. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owner, but are permissive only. This land alteration permit shall be valid for a two year period (October 26, 1994). 10. 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. 11. The undersigned owner 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 26th day of October, 1992. ATTERT t 4frothy city Clerk Barbara A. Pet.rson, Mayor I ^ Page 5 of 6 X wOw CITY«rORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3192 STATE OP MINNESOTA ) )88. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing inetrument wae acknowledged before me on this 26th day of October, 1992 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. JAMELBOSMA N0iMIVMUC4IIMia HDWWiCOUWY M|rOQiMLEipMl1MF«7 ---------------ISSSS ^ 4 Nota;^ Public ^ / 7<—' STATE OP MINNESOTA ) > 88. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On this is6 day of C'f'C 1: 1... . . . _ „ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _199_2. bafore me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally A/tTf c f'^ j known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed theappeared foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. HfyttJipSiui'- MmNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My expire: il-12-W * .'•// l/.c^ NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OP MINNESO'^A ) ) 8S. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On ^his ^____________ «cij WA* ^ T- • ^ before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally .^7 til day of C' C h h 199 X, «PP««»‘ad —pe'rsonis) described'in and who executea the fS?^^o\°ng* nst^ment,^nTaVknwlV^^^^^ that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. J L UNDA S. VEE IV PUtUC • MMN MENWtPSi couwrv_ WbtAftY tbbLlc Page € of 6 K f / > / RESOLUTION l?3192 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNT! OF HENNEPIN CITY OF ORONO 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 C,.ty 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 pn October 26 , 19 92_, and that the same is a true and correct copy of said resolution was duly adopted by said City Council at said meeting. M27 th Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set day of ctober . .ir. my hand and seal this . 19 92 _ _. allin. City Clerk • iV ■5 y ' ,y(SEAL) ■V\ / »• M 1. .1 •1 t < I QJ w ■ •% 0^- # • i--hi > TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor Callahan and Orono Coundlniembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator September 1, 1993 % V S\ % #1853 Richard E. and A. Jean Engebretson, 1180 Tonkawa Road - Variances - Resolution Brief Review of Application The Planning Commission reviewed an earlier variance application for the current owner, Ron Lauer, at the June meeting of the Planning Commission. In the earlier application the existing structure was to be retained and a second level installed above. The existing structure is located 50’7" from the shoreline. The current applicants propose the removal of the existing residence and the construction of a 43 ’x50* residence. The new structure will be located 56 ’ from the shoreline and no access decks or patios are proposed within the lakeshore yard. The existing patio is located 34 ’3" from the shoreline. Review Exhibit L. the existing strucmre is located 21’ in front of the average lakeshore setback line. The applicants propose a 6 ’ encroachment and only at the southern comer of the structure. Hardcover in the 0-75’ setback area has been reduced by u 2%. The 75-250’ setback area has been increased to 27.5% with a 2.5% excess. Total hardcovei under both applications is maintained at approximately 19.7 to 19.8%. The applicants reviewed die obvious hardships found with the lot: lack of depth, location of mature trees, higher topographies at west side providing visual and sound buffer to County Road (review Exhibit I). The 6 ’ encroachment of the average lakeshore setback line will have a negligible impact on the property to the north as the encroachment involves only the south comer of the proposed residence. The topography and the privacy fencing along the shared north lot line will minimize any impact on views of residence to north of proposed structure. The applicants hav«.* attempted to min ’mi/e the size of structure by including covered porch within the building envelope and by providing a three stall tuck under garage. Applicants argue that the additional backout paving serving side tuck under garage would eliminate cars parking in turnaround and forcing visitors to back out onto County Road when exiting site. (449 s.f. of paved area proposed within 0-75’ setback area.) Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the application as propo.sed and accepted the hardships set forth by applicants in the addendum to the application. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission rKommendation. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 (B) AND 2; AND SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE #1853 WHEREAS, Richard E. and A. Jean Engebrelson (hereinafter "the applicants") have an interest in the property located at 1180 Tonkawa Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows; That part of Lot 9, Auditor ’s Subdivision No. 217, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East right of way line of Hennepin County Road No. 135 distant 1141.25 feet Southeasterly, measured along said right of way line, from the intersection of the North line of Lot 10, Auditor ’s Subdivision No. 217, and said right of way line; thence Northeasterly a distance of 143.2 feet to a point which is distant 1004.29 feet perpendicularly distance from the North line of said Lot 10, said Auditor ’s Subdivision and continuing on said line a distance of 36.2 feet, fT?orc or less to the shoreline of Maxwell Bay; thence Northwesterly along the shoreline of Maxwell Bay to a point which is distant 125 feet perpendicularly distance from the above described line; thence Southwesterly parallel to the above described line a distance of 205.3 feet more or less to the East right of way line of County Road No. 135; thence Southeasterly along said right of way line a disunce of 125.04 feet to the point of beginning, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) to permit construv.ion of a new residence to be located 56* from the shoreline where a 75’ setback is required and where the existing structure is located 50’7", and an average lakeshore setback variance for the residence structure that will encroach 6’ where no such encroachment is allowed and where the existing structure is 21 . Per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 hardcover within the 0-75’ setback is proposed at 9.6% where 15.8% exists and where none is allowed and in the 75-250’ setback 4,086.5 s.f. or 27.5% is proposed where only 25% is allowed and wtere 23% exists. Per Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) the redevelopment of the property will require approval of an area variance as property equals 26,132 s.f. or .59 acres wtere 1 acre is required. Page 1 of 5 Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, 1. 2. 3. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1853. The property is located in the LR-IB, Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1 acre in area. The subject property consists of 26,132 s.f. or .59 acres. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 16, 1993, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings and hardships: A. The lot lacks depth. B. Steeper topography and higher bluff to the west side of the lot provides a visual and sound barrier to the adjacent County Road. If the house was to be placed further out of the average lakeshore setback, the hill would have to be altered requiring major excavation. The existing house has existed for over forty years was placed closer to the lake so as to take advantage of the existing topography. C. Turnaround is needed on site to provide safe access to busy County Road. D. Several mature trees exist on the property and the proposed redevelopment of the site will conserve and attempt to save several of these trees. E. Property to the north has extensive fencing and vegetation and is located at higher elevations. F. Only a comer of the proposed residence on the south side will encroach the average lakeshore setback line of 6*. Page 2 of 5 G. Hardcover within the 0-75’ setback has been reduced by 6.2% and total . hardcover on the property is maintained at 19.8%. H. Hardcover within the 0-75’ setback area shall be maintained at 1,089 s.f. or 9.6% and in the 75-250’ setback area hardcover shall be maintained at 4,086.5 s.f. or 27.5%. 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Plaiming Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Core Sections 10.22, Subdivisions 1 (B) and 2 and Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a residence measuring 43 ’x50 ’ requiring a 19’ or 25.3% lakeshore setback variance, a 6’ encroachment of the average lakeshore setback, 9.6% hardcover variance within the 0-75’ setback area and a 2.5% hardcover variance within the 75-250’ setback area. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Authorities granted by this variance rtm with the property not with the applicants, but arc permissive only and must be exercised by application for a buildup permit within one year of the date of CouncU approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 13, 1994). Page 3 of 5 ■■M 3. 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 applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 13th day of September, 1993. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Cleric Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day of September, 1993, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared_______________________________ _______________________known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 t^ore me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared_______________________________ _______________________known to me to be the pcrson(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 5 of 5 [ //. TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc. City Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:August 13, 1993 SUBJECT: /'1853 Richard i:. and A. Jean Engebretson, 1180 Tonkawa Road - Variances Public Hearing Planning Commission members reviewed an earlier variance application for the current owner. Ron Lauer, at your June meeting. The application involved hardcover and setback variances for the installation of a second level above the existing structure. An existing patio was to be rebuilt at half the size in the 0-75’ setback area. The applicants have entered into a contingency purchase agreement with current owner. Mr. Lauer. The current plan is for the complete development of the property. The proposed structure will require approval of an average lakcshore setback and lakeshore setback variances in addition to hardcover variances within the 0-75’ and 75-250’ setback area. The following ordinances are peninent for this review: Section 10.22. Subdivision 1 (B) Required = 75’ Proposed = 56’ (existing structure is 50'7") V'ariance = 19’ or 25.3% Average lakeshore setback review Exhibit L. Allowed = 0 Existing = 21^ Proposed = 6^ A.0-75’ setback area = 11.294 s.f. Existing = 1.791 s.f. or 15.8% Proposed = 1,089 s.f. or 9.6% (original proposal 15.8% no change was proposed within 0-75’) B.75-250 setback area = 14.838 s.f. Existing = 3.370 s.f. or 23% Proposed = 4.086.5 s.f. or 27.5% (original proposal or 23%) 3.370 s.f. Total hardcover Total area = 26,132 s.t. Total hardcover with original proposal = 5.161 s.f. or 19.7% Current proposal = 5.175 5 s.f. or 19.8% Zoning I'ilc ^1853 August 13, 1993 Page 2 Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) • An area variance is required as property is to be redeveloped Required = 1 acre Existing = 26,132 s.f. or .59 acres Variance = 17,428 s.f. or .4 acres Lot measures 124’ in width exceeding the 80% requirement. Lot width variance need not be addressed. List of Exhibit.s A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Hardship Statement E - Applicants’ Survey Plus Photos F - Photos of Model G - Floor Plans I! - Elevations 1 - Hardcover Fact Sheets J - Existing Suivey K - Proposed Sur\ey L - Average Lakeshore Setback Line as it Relates to New Structure Description of Request Applicants propose the removal of the existing structure and replacing it with a 43’x50’ residence. In an attempt to conserve hardcover and minimize setback variances, applicants propose a tuck under garage and no decks. Review Exhibits G and H, as applicants note they are not attempting to create a mega-in;'P.sion on the severely lunited site but a design similar to a lake cottage of old. 'Hie cotnprehensivc planning of the site has been guided and designed to meet the special conslr.iints of this limited property. The structure meets all other setback standards except for the average lakeshore and lakeshore setback as noted above. Hardcover has been reduced by 702 s.f. or 6.2% in the 0-75’ setback area. Hardcover in the 75-250’ setback area has been increased by 716.5 s.f. or 4.8%. Haidcover is at an excess of 2.5% in the 75-250 setback area. Applicants have attempted to preserv e the hill to the street side of the residence maituaining the visual and sound buffer and still reduce hardcover and intensity of setback variances in lakeshore protected area. Lot coverage is held at 8.5% where 15% would have been allowed. The side loading garage results in 449 s.f. of paving within the 0-75’ setback area. In an attempt to save the hill and the inability to install a three stall garage to the street side of the residence, it was necessarv to design garage to the side. Applicants are owners ot at least tour Zoning File ffiS53 August 13, 1993 Page 3 cars. The majority of the lower level will be for storage and garage use As noted in the earlier review in June, the average lakeshore setback will have negligible impact on the property to the north such as the extensive fencing, vegetation and higher elevations of subject property. The encroachment of the average lakeshore setback line has been reduced from 21’ to 6’. Based on .scale of large scale plan, the structure will be 23 ’ + from the north side lot line. Statement of fl^'^dshlp Please review E.xiiibits D and E. Applicants have provided a very complete statement of hardship and need not be reworded or repeated by staff. Issiics for Consideration 1.Do you find that applicants have attempted to design a home based on the limitations of this property and have attempted to minimize the impact on lake, the e.xisting land and adjacent properties? Is this house loo ambitious for the property? 3.Is the cul-de-sac drive the most efficient way to provide off .street parking and efficient traffic flow? Review Exhibit K. it would appear that parking and drive areas of both the existing and propo.sed are almost equal in area. The City has received no comments from any of the neighbors notified of the variance review. ch ■ ff vr\ »• CITY OF ORONO ” VARIANCE APPLICATION • •• * "'f >•• 3 m I > “'I ^ Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 Aftei—the-Fact ^ees (Double application fee) ]\ PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 1180 Tonkawa - // 7" ^ 'b ccoL' Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) On fi Ip (I.niinr npnlica tion) Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired (Jndor contract ________(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: x residential _____other(specify) Zoning District:_________________________ APPLICANT Phone (home) 475-0322 Name Richard E. and A. Joan Enepbrerson Phone (work) 933-3^^0 Address: 3140 Manlevood Road City: Deephaven Zip: 553^1 OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) 471-7526 Name Ronald D. Laucr (seller)Phone (work) Address: 3155 North Shorn Drive City: Orono Zip: 55391 DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 320 ,000 Describe request in detail: Re<juost lor lakn setback ,6 fent —and hardc;o>g^ variances 0-75 0 9.6 and 75-250 27.6 _______________________________—-------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback;Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSniP/DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:------ see aUachy-d ik i(attach additional^f'eets ‘if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS ^ ^ • All of the folleaving information must he sobmitted —apul.i.cat-iqp deadline date in order for your applicaSon to be considered carole ^te^ ) ; ) !■ $ « /" 1. l/completed Application Form ^ • 2. i/^Certified Property Ovmers List of owners within 150 (you musv obtain this list f^rr rTrnmrrin of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). file P-on Laueg; 3. W^Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). <^0n file 4. “pCertificate of survey (signed by a licensed sT3T^or) .o^inciu _ hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 3% xix to- 5. l^opographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) xf any chan,es in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8. xll ). 6. k^Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy^8J? xi^ ). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate xxst o- any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as nay be requested by City staff. m M, _he Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not conualete —if—-------ove information has not bean tncloded- APPLICAHT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information requ^red^ or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees is-a-- time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses in review of this application, and certifies that the in-ormat-cn to the best of his/her )cr.cwledce. incurred supplied is true emd c Applicant's Signature . Date OWNERS SIGNATURE ^ The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and authorises reasonable entry onto the property by City st?£f. consul-anwS, agents, Commiasion ner,bere> and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification pf/^his^equ^t. Owner's Signature Date Applicant oust have all .ubnittals into the City office. 25 day. be ore .he Planning CCBBl.»ior. Meeting. Planning Coimi»»icn Meetings are held o.. .he third Monday of each aor.th. Applicants siust be present at all schedolad review neeting. of the Planning Connle.ion and Counrll. if an applican is u.nable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make ' Lf5 authorized agent attend in yeux place and to advise t..o Buij.d.n, — 9 Office of this change prior to the meeting. L.-.. m4 DATE 05/20/95 OATCH 009PROP ADDR Olt4CR NAMC TAXPAYtR HAflC/ADDR PROP AOOR OlINtR NAME 1AXPAYER flAltC/ADDR PROP AOPR 0I9^R IU!1E TA vPAYtR ^lAltE/ADDR 50 00-117-25 15 OOOS01200 tOfA<AHA RD MIirREO PtR?CR A MIFE MUFRED PCRPtR UOO 10NKAUA RO LOMO LAKE MTI 55556 50 00-117-25 15 0000 Oimo lOtJKAUA RO R A K KYLE RICMARO A KAtliUEN KYLE ll<iO TONKAUA ROAD LOflG LAKE m 55556 50 00-117-25 62 0001 01220 T(>fJKAIIA RO STUART I PURUIECE SlUARf L OURNIECE 1220 TOTJKAHA RO L0t4G LAKE m 55556 HtfJTJtPIN COin^rV PROPERTY INfORtlAlION 5YSTLM PROPERTY OlAiERS LIST RCPORT W. P1655601 PAGE 2050 00-117-25 15 0006OUOO TOriKAUA RD ROMAID 0 LAt»» RONALD LAUI u 1100 TOfft-lAIIA ;io lO»4G lAKt ItN 55556 ^0 00-117-25 15 OOO;01160 lONKAUA RD A S A E G OTAMONO A SUPMCN A ILMA G Oi'.MOtJO 1160 TO»»KAIIA RO LONG LAKE MM 55S56 30 00-117-25 15 0017 01105 Ic'tJKAMA RO ft T RCNARO AOS REtlARO M T RENARD ADS RENARD 1105 lONKAIIA RD lOtfG LAKE tUI 55556 30 00-117-25 15 0010 01205 U>NKAUA Rii THOMAS H SftlTH ^ HITE THOMAS H SMTIH 1205 TCNKAIIA RD LCtfG LAKE f’N 55556 TOTAL PATCH 009 00007 o\ OD 1 ctnnrv tiinr tut rAcir. nrrRrr'tfitFO are ah accurate aho true Rtl'RL:>THI ATIOH OT till ORtlAT ](UI AS IT APPEARO THIS DAU OH lllC ftCCOPOS or THE iirjRitPiH cf«'»itv PiPARtntHt or proptriv taxaiioh , to the eisr o» ny M.onutK.t aho orutf . PA1C <>l'l ms „ tiulLi 1 7 s. ? s. # V ’CS:^ JJ » 'I / ''5 •; •• . < ^ j ,•*- . *>' ’ * i"'- IIAKDSHIP/I^HSCRIITION OF UNUSUAL PROPFRTY C:ONUmONS AttadiiiKMU TIic subject lot has a vcr> acceptable amount of lake shore--125 feet-but the lot is oUicrwise unusually "short” for having such good frontage on the lake. Applying tfie full lake setback to this lot, with its lack of depth, pushes potential house footprints unusually close to the front of the lot. As the house slides away from the lake and approaches the front third of the lot, two things happen: 1) The house gets shoved against, and into, a lovely hill that occupies much of the .front (road or west side) of the lot. This is a funher unusual condition for such a lot. We want to be able to look at this hill, and don't woiit to be in this hill. The hill serves as a good buffer between the hc'se and busy Tonkawa Road. 2) Tlie full application of the lake setback puts the home surprisingly close to Tonkawa Road, which is busy and carries fairly high traffic-including school bu.ses and trucks--at certain times of the day. There is a reason that the present home, built decades ago, sits so close to the lake. That reason is that the lot is abnormally "short” and somewhat small for such a nice lot, and the house was built to give it adequate separation from the hill so as to assure egress to the structure. 3) The area of the lot not in the lake setback ts limited. Since the land in the lake setback cannot be counted in hard cover calculations, the 25 percent must totally apply to what is left, forcing a smaller home and a significant compromise on our garage and driveway oprions. 4) Finally, the busy traffic on Tonkawa Road suggests we have a modest turn around such that neither guests, delivery vehicles or our cars necessitate backing out onto this arterial roadway. 1180 Tonkawa Orono, Minnesota Dick & Jean Engebretson A short sunimaiy of our variance request... m^r •' ii <• •*•'' . '• •»tX f.,_. • • . . . .• , « * - * • . * A.' -^-v ♦»:/•-..■• ^ * ■^ '♦-•• « • lir • • «rV. 4 A. ’-'v V 4 . ■-fe* ife- ,'i m ► '.'*'.4^-1 ~H ^■r - -■ ^ / ’-■ . 0# •*f' ■' * ‘:*f' ^ ‘ ,■ •/ ' I ‘ Lit -J* v'*'’*'^' ■ ■ - -,• ■ ' Js”? i-^ i* *‘. r>; ^ - V* ** v n - L i«.?V 'V ,■ i', _v V 40 w"* ^iJ ^■i- .• rf WIIAT CAN WE DO TO MEET ORONO’S REQUIREMENTS? ... v\*UII wi' r;ui hnild the lu-w Iviuu- liopi* to hiiild. \vc will Ik' thrilU-il to tear ort llu- iiL>,ly iianl('o\i r roprcsrntt'd by lias old patio. 'riii.-> p.i’io is hiW(‘. and rc'prt'si nts .. si^nil'icant piTCfiilai:;;. ()l 7f>' laki* setback coN'craiu* H I have takrn this pictiirt* (‘orri‘('tly. tlic portion ol the* house tiiat is in the j)hoto is in tlie lake* setbaek. We have trieei to move- enir new home as lar bae k as possible-. stneOnU 12 mode-!s ere*at(-d by the* are hiteet (10 eiuiek mode-Is and two se*rif)us heime* mejek-nps), we tind it iiiijiossible to mo\e* the home* totally out ol the- lake* setbaek anel wind up with any kinei ol home, elriveway anel ^araiie. I’le-a'^e- note* tliat out ne-iyhbor's home to the* senith .i mue h nie t-r home* than the* house* e urre-ntly on our lot -IS probalilv a little* rlost-r te) the* lake- lb.in we aie S UM: : - ri /f **n* - r .« * ^ «• IT Vv^*-^ \"r.:% . r^v^^n; ft .■'■:i.. J ;-- •/• •"-'•*.• ' ■ . A . •' ■ ■•^.> ^ •I*’' • t > *. rs. ‘ .-.• A/i&i'5 • ■ - ....•-•' vVn.v. ^\-,r":-r»i^' . i/ , • . m * < ^ - ^->.-, /■ •• whmsSt: •:v ^ ;■ 'n, ■ .* V;-v WHAT \VE WANT TO preserve:... \Vf want to j)rfstT\a* tlu* sliiihly ciin'inti. "rcvcalinii" nature ol the driveway. T!u ‘ house "hules ” a little troin Tonk.iwa Rd. Rail as the luMisi* moves hack troiii the lake, the driveway starts u;ets short(‘r and “stubhier" -- and it becomes more* ditlicuh to incorporate a turn-.iround. We want to pri'seiA'c the little hill whic h is pretty much uricpie just to our little lot . 'I'his hill looks a little b«*at-up riyht now because the seller has removed a lot of stone and plant material, but it is a \.'onderful litUe hill which separates the house trom the nejise of the road We want to lie able to look .it the hill, and not have to biii!d the house in Uie hill We want to preserve .is mut h seji.it.ition as we c ,in between our new home .ind biis\ I'onk.iw.i l<d ''■‘"«*'.'Si|^v''fe ':'5/ - • nikit^.: I' ^ >,.j* « > .«* ’• '*, "f' ■ .> •• I V -<- » •• • - . *5 ' • •* 1*1 \ tr- >%’■• v>. -|F7 -• ^ N • • V ' ‘I-? f»~- V'v M <4^ ■If*'* ^ V ■" -i */*' .^by- - ~x-v ’*' ..'■■<;(./** »<-■*•• f. .. •* ‘ ' ., ' By ac'cidfiit ot nature and road desiiin. die lot we are pureliasine is rather sliort ami sipiare ish tor a lake lot. We .ire at tJie southeast end ot M.ixvv’t 11 Bay, in a little dishetl-ftut are.i ol shoreline, wliieh is peril.ips the (dose‘st MiLXwell B.iy L^ets to Tonk.iwa Ro.id. The existinti house sits wi'll into the lake setliaek. yet tlie ilriveway still doesn't ItMve much room. As you ^o non . on Tonkawa Kd . the tlrivcw.ays to homes on Ma\"well Bav aet lonaer .ind 1' luaer WHAT ELSE HAVE WE DONE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS? 1. NO DECK. Alter many meetings with Jirchitccts (Mulfinger & Susanka) and our builder (James W. Bruce), we have realized that there is no way to incorporate a deck into the front (lake side) of the home. We love sitting on a deck, and entertaining on a deck-* as we do now at our little lake home on North Arm--bu<^ designing a deck at the front of the home, and trying to keep it out of the lake .setback, pushes the house way too far back, and escalates the amount of hardcover to levels I doubt w’e would get approved. So, no deck. 2. NO A'lTACHED GARAGE. We have always had attached garages, which are the most desired in nicer homes. Homes in tlie price range weil wind up in often have big three-car attached garages. But several of the models the architects built showed us that an attached two -car garage would keep the new house almost in the same footprint that the existing home now occupies --very much Into the lake setback. Also, even a modest garage starts to get buried into tlie hill and requires the cutting dowm of too many trees. Although our architect, builder, and Realtor a]l pointed out that tuck-under garages tend to slightly diminish tlie val;*' of nicer homes, anything but a tuck-under garage on this particular lot is pretty rough on lake setback and hardcover requirements. In an attempt to request as little variance as possible, we have agreed witli the architect ’s conclusion that we need to stick the garage under tlie house. 3. Finally, we don ’t w'ant to build one of the big, impressive “ego- homes" that seem to be popping up all over Lake Minnetonka, even on small lots. My wife and I have no children, and w'e can be happy with most of tlie building size restrictions that this lot presents, especially with the little hill being such an obvious amenity to prev ^^rve . and not dig into. We have designed a small, compact, efficient, two-story home which minimizes lot coverage the best we can. 1 would imagine tliat virtually aHi: other buyer of this lot would be trying to build a much larger home, and would be coming to Orono for much greater variances, than what we aie asking for. TTiank you for your consideration of our request. - V.;4iV .1»‘i ^ IIf ‘ ^ ;■ • ^l\v.. >'. v r' *1 ;v?<* .A*wWc-:4i • I M .. " fMi|S . 7 'SIX’*( I ‘ .'tj/' ]3B* I ^I V \-III;»'•• T‘idb* i Mtw I /A-^Ak -v i»"'.i‘/V'., . /.. > .;' ' * •• ‘ -'t /?i.-'r-- ' .7 »’>4V i I ,-^w. V . • 4f’*il Al , .. ,;y , ? - i 1 — t # ----------- «— • ,1 fg^fV \\ • Js m©sT'^' ;:iS 4 • i ... . ‘ ri A V 'V f \ ^ K '■■ y' IT • »1 y \ touen i»«wet 1t*I J JJ, a tf { « fuexi Jtf«i'-«* JtL •A V I i/ ' ■ ■•f«• 9 * ’V /.f !. I I •V 1 \u.O t>^Kc»tPe K^/*#*’ HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) Co^^ ZS-! Existing H ardcover in Zone 1 A. H ouse length WIDTH /3 oV s.F. S.F. z' ■ y Vv ■ ^•T* ' V Af <) Garage c. Driveway T" D. Sidewalk •V!f’ I E. Patic / Deck 3^S‘//in. s.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F, S.F. S.F. _ S.F, S.F. 3.P. F,Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN BY , , PLASTIC SHEETING _ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other Total H ardcover in Zone Total Property A rea in Zone s.F. 7TcTftnT*’ v7?r s.F. // 2^^S.F. or ST. Hi- I] 1 A /. 79/T m X 100 • ’'•o^riCC HARDCOVER CALCUU\TION WORKSHEET ^ SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE one ) 0-75' (^75-250' 250-300' 500-1000' Existing H ardcover in Zone r \ ’ ) ki 4 ••—; I, A. H ouse XS' LENGTH B. Garage c. D riveway pe/i D. Sidewalk E. Patio / D eck F.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN PLASTIC SHEETING y/o Vga^Other Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property A rea in Zone ) X /5‘= ■■ WIDTH X X X • B X X a X - »2,y/^ X 2,1^11) X a X . ( ? ' y ) X s X X /o a ■ / €’0 X X . X X - '2.^5" S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ^ • r 0 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ' ?? i» 5 ) ' S.F. • S.F. 5 / ■>. 'i.'Td -i — X 100 4, ^ ^(27.^-) % ev<6T^ti> House Lryai Description Thai part of Lot '3, AuUltor's Subdivision No. 217, described as follows; Commencing at a point on the East right of way line of Hennepin County Road No. distant 1141.25 feet Southeasterly, measured along said right of way line, fron th6 intf*rsocIion of the North line of Lot 10, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 217 and Sdjd right of way line; thence Northeasterly a distance of 143.2 feet to a pom* which is distant 1004.29 feet perpendicularly distance from the North lino 0^ said Lot 10, said Auditor's Subdivision and continuing on said line a distance o' 36.2 feet, more or less to the shoreline of Maxwell Bay; thence Northwesterly ilonq the shoreline of Maxwell Bay to a point which is distant 125 feet perpendicularly d!Stance from the above described line; thence Southwesterly parallel to the above lli'iribed line a distance of 205.3 feet more or less to the East right of way line Of County Road No. 135; thence Southeasterly along said right of way line a distance of 125.04 feet to the point of beginning. This survey shows the existing topography on the boundary survey supplied by the Owner. It does not purport to show any other improvteents or encroachments. : FxIttIng contour OatusiMeert sea level Ho. RC.. zu ;o • I lift# SttRCO ittrl jr rptfiHicylarlf aHovt IJF lift# a HitttAct %9m vjT* r^ar*** v^*‘-, • ^ ^ - A. «•#••»•«»•«•■• •- •■ •• «rr* ■ • ..• .»„•«✓.’•.■? i I- •',-**‘4!: I * ^ f t ** W ^ I ,, , ^ It------------------♦••*•• • •• • C? C P it" ■' ’ V'** • —*-• _____, - ,, I LI ■ ^ —ml* ** »%>——•» • "^ ■ - - ' ‘i* ‘ 7- IW'' ‘V - * •• *• * - •• . ‘ K‘ t.J***y.**.?**<'*''*'^^ LC'^!:-;i::«i"v;>r;'V^^ hmmm: »ip• X'v'* VV ^ r .u •-• ; ^ ^ r. f ^ - • _ 4v ■* -. ^ -rr.i,i;^sj^-.;il> t.:<-'p:vir j;-^,. •'t. •* r *.'.*■ ♦.■; I TO: FROM: DATE: Ron Moorse City Administrator John Gerhardson, Public Works Director September 10, 1993 SUBJECT: Stubbs Bay Sewer - Contractor Perfonnance Complaint 10 % During the Public Comments section of the August 23, 1993 Council meeting. Mr. Hcnr>' Furcluier, 360 Leaf Street, complained of unsatisfactory restoration to his property by PCI. the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project contractor. Tlie contractor had entered the property to the .south of I-urchners to grade the lawn over the sewer main. The contractor encountered a wet area and used I-urchners driveway to get to the other side of the wet area. (Photographs will be available at the meeting.) For the use of Furchner's driveway, the contractor did some grading on his property, added crushed rock and graded his driveway. The contractor and Furchner agreed on what was to be done and Furchner w,.s observing the activities at all times. When the contractor left, he stated that someone would rctuin later to add additional topsoil and complete the restoration. Mr. Furchner thought that they would return that same day. I have talked with the project '•••pervisor, the project foreman and the equipment operator from PCI and they are very' apologetic for any misunderstandings, and will do whatever is :iecessar>' to correct any problems. I have notified the contractor that they are not to enter Furchner ’s property without permission from a representative of the City or the City ’s engineer. t TO: FROM: r> f // Mayor and City Council Ron Moorsc, City Administrator September 10, 1993 SUBJECT: Year-to-Date Expenditure Report Through June of 1993 % V DATE;% Attachment: Year-to-Date Expenditure Report Through June of 1993 A review of expenditures versus year-to-date budget amounts through June of 1993 shows the City's General Fund budget to be at 89.5% of the projected total expenditures for the period. Although total expenditures are below projections for the period, there are a number of expenditure items that are over budget for the period. The following is an explanation of these year-to-date budget overages. Several expenditure overages simply reflect expenditures which are incurred early in the year ratner than throughout the year. These include the following: 1.City Council Professional Services (audit and financial) . The audit is co.mpleted early in the year and the audit costs are paid in the first half of the year. 2.Liability and Property Insurance. These expenses are included in a number of departmental budgeis. The total premiums for these insurances are paid in the first half of the year. 3.Assessing Professional Services. This overage reflects a July payment made in June. Legal Prosecution Fees. This overage reflects the third quarter payment for the prosecution contract made in June. 5 .Police - Other Consulting. Several major items in this account are paid in the first half of the year. These include the* Labor Relations consult inq service fee and the Minnesota Police Recruitment System membership fee. Police Automotive Equipment. The overage reflects the purchase of all budgeted squads in the spring of the year. An exp*»nditure item which is reflected as an overage in some departments and underage in other departments is Public Works maintenance salaries. This is due to the salaries being allocated among several departments based on the type of projects the staff are actually working on. The Public Works maintenance salaries are allocated to six different departments? Government Buildings. Recycling, Sewer and Water. An example of an overage'is salaries in government buildings are over $15,034. At the same time salaries in the streets department are under by $13,223. Year-to-Date Expenditure Report Through June of 1993 September 10, 1993 page 2 To determine whether there is an actual overage it is necessary to analyze expenditures in all the departments in combination. analysis shows that the salary expenditures in all public works departments is at 100.6% of the year-to-date budgeted amount. The year-to-date budg ied amount is $166,867.00 the actual year-to-date expenditures are 7,922.00. There are several yea. to year-end overages. -to-date expenditure overages which do point These are as follows: 1. 2 . Government Buildings a.) Maintenance - Buildings and Grounds. This account is over $2,638 due to a number of items needed for the new facilities, such as floor mats and a sprinkler alarm monitoring service. b. )Utilities. The cost of utilities for heating^ and lighting is budgeted in the government buildings department and the police deoartment. The year-to-date budget amount in both departments is $16,000. The actual expenditure amount through June was $23,682 for an overage of $7,682.00 or 48%. Projecting this to the end of the year, the overage will be approximately $15,000. It is expected the actual overage will be less because the buildings were being heated in January and February without final insulation and caulking and without the HVAC system being balanced. Both the buildings and the HVAC system should be significantly more efficient this winte; . However, there will be a significant overage :n this account for the year. Fire Protection. This account is over $12,650 or 13%. This ia I’.e to two causes. First, the third quarter payments to both Mound and Long Lake were made in June. Secondly, the budgets for Mound and Wayzata increased more than was anticipated when the 1993 budget was developed. These increases were not reflected in the adopted budget. The projected year-end overage for the total fire department budget is $7,500.00. 3. Street Department ) Contractual Maintenance and Repair. This account is over $4,113 or 64.5%. This is mainly due to a substantial overage in the automotive repair account. There have been seven repairs with a cost of over $500 each. These repairs are difficult to predict from year to year. The total actual contractual maintenance and repair aonount for 1992 was $14,865. The 1993 budget is $12,750. The proposed 1994 budget is $14,500. r h Object Code & Oecrlptlon001 - GENERAL FUND 11 CITY COUNCILpersonal services^^i;^'^lES-REGULAR EMPLOYEE fICA/MDCR-CITY CON I RIB 4153 WORnMANS COMP INSURANCE PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL 411 SUPPLIES 4210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 4240 BOOKS & PERIODICALS SUPPLIES TOTAL professional SERVICES 1300 AUDITING & FINANCIAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL 422 communications4321 POSTAGE COMMUNICATIONS TOTAL ,,, <23 PPINT/PUB/ADVER4322 PRINTINO A PUOLiSfJINQ 4323 ADVERTISING PRINT/PUB/AOVER TOTAL CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR 4340 MAIN! OFFICE EQUIPMENT CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR TOTAL OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE 4356 MEETINGS-CONF-SCHOOLS OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE TOTAL 430 OTHER CHARGES 4310 MEMBERSHIPS 4312! MEUING EXPENSES CITY OF ORONOC H y Counc11 Report Expenditures by Division within FuhdA* Of 06/30/93 P*g* 1aletBudget Year to Date Actual Year to Date■•■■•■■■aaaa-aaam ActualOver/(UnderJ Budge t■ aaeaaaaaasaiaaaaaaa $15,200 $1,170 $350 $7,600 $585 $175 $7,600 $470 $2C5 so $1115) $90 100.0 • 0.3 151.4$16,720 $8,360 $8,335 $125)99.7 $300 $200 $150 $100 $158 t ? 7 $8 105.3 $500 ^ 4. /$173)27.0 $250 $185 $(65)74.0 $10,365 $5,183 $10,365 $5,182 200.0$10,365 $5,183 $10,365 $5,112 200.0 $100 $50 $25 $(2S|50.0$100 $50 $25 $(25)$0.0 $500 $100 $250 $50 $51 $0 $1199) $(S0)20.4 0.0$600 $300 $51 $(249)17.0 $1S3 $52 $24 $(2I)46.2$103 $52 $24 $(28)4i.2 $1,200 $600 $405 1(195)•7.5 $1,200 $600 $4Q5 $1195)67.5 $21,530 $500 $14,265 $250 $7,404 $232 $(6,861) i(18)51.9 92.1 I CITY OF ORONOCity Council Report CKpendltures by Division within Fund Pag* 2As Of 00/30/93Object Cod* & DecrlptlonDivision Code & Description 4393 SPEC Eu IIP REPLACEMENT 4399 OTHER CHARGES AnnualBudget«9KflaBsa=S8SS«BS99 $0 $Q Budge t Year to DateaKaaaaaesasBssasss SO $0 Actual Year to Date■■■■•asvsaaaraass SO $26 ActualOve r/(Und* r) Budget 5 SO $26 OTHER CHARGES TOTAL TOTAL CITY COUNCIL 0.0 0.0 $29,030 SS8,618 $14,515 $29,310 $7,662 $27,052 8,8531 2.258)52.• 82.3 r.CITY OF OROHOr ... Council ReportExpenditures by Division within Fund Object Code i Decrlptlon Division Code & Description •••••••OQl - GENERAL FUND 12 ADMINSTRATION Annual Budget As Of OG/30/93 Budge I Year to Date Actual Year to Date *BBBBaaaa8a«r«BB8 4100 4111 414! 4142 4151 4152 4153 401 PERSONAL SERVICES SALARIES-REQULAR EMPLOYEE OVERTIME-REGULAR EMPLOYEE PERA-CITY CONTRIBUTION FICA/MDCR-CITY CONTRIO HOSPITALIZATION INSURANCE LIFE INSURANCE WORKMANS COMP INSURANCE PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL 411 SUPPLIES 4210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 4240 BOOKS & PERIODICALS SUPPLIES TOTAL SERVICES4306 OTHER CONSULTING SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL 422 COMMUNICATIONS 4320 TELEPHONE 4321 POSTAGE COMMUNICATIONS TOTAL 4322 PRINTING & PUOLISHINQ 4323 ADVERTISING PRINT/PUB/ADVER TOTAL CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR 4340 MAINT OFFICE EQUIPMENT CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR TOIAL ,,.,427 DATA PROCESSING 4352 LOOIS-ADMIN SFRVICE 4355 DATA PROCESSING $125,150 $200 $5,475 $9,348 $12,840 $205 $1,510 $62,575 $100 $2,738 $4,674 $6,420 $103 $755 $58.57!) $39 $2,592 $-1.386 $7,724 $104 $i .121 $154,728 $77,365 $74,545 $3,550 $500 $1,775 1250 $1,624 $104 $4,050 $2,025 $1,721 $3,965 $1,983 $1,605 $3,965 $1,983 $1,605 $920 $2,600 $460 $1,300 $617 $656 $3,520 $1,760 $1,273 $3,500 $288 $1,750 $144 $142 $164 S3./88 $1,894 $306 $3,090 SI.S45 $451 $3,090 $1.545 $451 $260 $1,370 $130 $685 $41 $416 Actual Over/jUnder) Budget asaaaaaaaaassaaaaa 1(3,996 i|61 S 146 t 2M $1,304 $1 $366 $(2,820) 151) 146) $(297) $(371) $(378) 1157 $1644) $(487) 8(1.608) $20 $(1,581) S(1.094) $11,094) .n:;i f ' ^Ppge 3 i.j. ■•■•■■■■■■■■a 93.0 39.0 94.7 93.1 120.3 101.0 141.S 86.4 91.5 41.9 •5.3 10.9 10.0 134.1 50.5 72.3 8.1 113.8 If.2 21.2 28.2 31.5 80.7 I • •CITY or ORONOr City Council ReportExpenditures by Division within FundAs Of 06/30/93Object Code & DecriptionDivision Code & DescriptionDATA PROCESSING TOTAL AnnualBudget*’t>**BBazssBscas«ss$1,630OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE TOI.M429 INSURANCE 4375 BONOS INSURANCE ItU INIURANCE4379 INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD INSURANCE TOTAL 430 OTHER CHARGES 4380 MEMBERSHIPS*3U travel-mileage-parkinq4382 MEETING EXPENSES 4313 LICENSES & TAXES 4393 SPEC EQUIP REPLACEMENT OTHER CHARGES TOTAL TOTAL ADMINSTRATlON Budget Year to Dateaassaasasaasasccaa$815 Actual Year to Dal e ActualOver/(UnderI Budget$2,800$2,800$1,309 $187 $33 $1,661 $17G $3,306 $2,150 $3,600 $200SO $1,330 $7,280 $188,217 $1,400$1,400$655 $94 $17 $831 $88 $1,685 $1,075 $1,800 $100SO $665 $3,640 $94,112 $457 $(358)$980 $(414)$98G $(414| $1.409 $754$300 $206$30 $13$1,543 $712$C $(88) $3,282 $1,597 $1,238 $163$216 $(1,584$80 S26 ‘US$390 »ur5i $1,950 $‘l,690)$811,583 ${7:529| Page 4Exp.I 56.170.470.4 219.1 319.1 176.5 185.7 0.0 194.1 115.2 12.0 80.0 0.0 51.6 53.6 92.0 ? I • ■CITY OF OROfJOCity Council Report EKpeiidiluret by Division within FundAs Of 06/30/91Object Code & OecrlptionDivision Code & Description001 - GENERAL FUND13 ELECTIONS 4100 4111 4120 4141 4142 41S4 401 PERSONAL SERVICES SALARIES-REQULAR EMPLOYEE OVERTIME-REGULAR EMPLOYEE SALARIES-TEMP EMPLOYEES PERA-CITY CONTRIOUTION FICA/MDCR-CITY CONTRIB UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL 411 SUPPLIES 4210 OFFICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES TOTAL 422 COMMUNICATIONS 4321 POSTAGE COMMUNICATIONS TOTAL 423 PRINT/PUB/ADVr.R 4322 PRINTING 4 PUBLISHING PRINT/PUB/ADVER TOTAL 426 CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR 4340 MAINT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 4342 MAINT MISC EQUIPMENT CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR TOTAL 421 OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE 4356 MEETINGS-CONF-SCHOOLS OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE TOML 430 OTHER CHARGES 4311 TRAVEL-MILEAGE-PARKINU 4312 MEETING EXPENSES 4393 SPEC EQUIP REPLACEMENT OTHER CHARGES TOTAL AnnualBudget Budge t Year to DatefSBBBSBSS Actual Year to Dat eiBsaaaaa-ActualOver/(Under)Budget Page SEnp. X $1.C50 $0 SO $80 $130 $0 $825 $0 $0 $40 $65 $0 $1CG SO SO $7 S12 $0 S(659| $0 SO $ 33 $ 53 SO 20.1 0.0 0.0 17.5 18.5 0.0 $1,860 -930 $185 $(7451 19.9 $100 $50 $0 S(50J 0.0 $100 $50 $0 $(50)0.0 $220 $110 S17C $68 160.0 $220 $110 $176 $66 160.0 SO $0 SO $0 0.0 $0 $0 so 10 0.0 $1,360 $0 $680 SO $950 SO $270 $0 139.7 0.0 $1,360 $680 $950 $270 139.7 $50 $25 SO $(25J 0.0 $50 $25 SO $125)0.0 $50 $20 $0 $25 $10 $0 scsoso $ 19) $ 10) $0 24.0 0.0 0.0 $70 $35 $6 $(29)17.1 i:.t f .*CITY OF ORONOCity Council Report Expenditures by Division within FundObject Code & DecrlptlonDivision Code & Description AnnualBudgetTOTAL ELECTIONS « ■ ■ 8 « 9S3.660 As Of 00/30/93Budget Year to pate■•■«88arsS8888S*8S$1,830 Actual Year to Date•■■■■•■888Ser*888$1,317 • • CITY OF ORONOCity Council Report expenditures by Division within Fund P»9t 7 As Of 08/30/93 Object Code & Decriptlon Division Code & Description Annual Budget Budget Year to Date Actual Year to Date Actual Ove r/ l Ufi Je r ) Budget E.J. 001 - GENERAL FUND asaeaaaKssaBscssaa •■■■■■■sxasezBsas aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaa 14 ASSESSING 401 PERSONAL SERVICES 4100 SALARIES-REGULAR EMPLOYEE 4141 PERA-CITY CONTRIBUTION 4142 FICA/MDCR-CITY CONTRIB $1,130 SCO $100 $565 $30 $50 $493 $24 $33 $t72 j .ll?l 87.3 80.0 66,0 PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL $1,290 $645 $550 $(951 15.3 411 SUPPLIES 4210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 4240 BOOKS 4. PERIODICALS $1,463 $52 $732 $26 $1,123 $0 $391 $1261 153.4 0.0 SUPPLIES TOTAL $1,515 $758 $1,123 $365 141.2 421 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4307 ASSESSING SERVICES T70,735 $35,368 $40,880 $5,512 ii^.i PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL $70,735 $35,368 $40,880 $5,512 IIS.O 422 COMMUNICATIONS 4320 TELEPHONE4321 POSTAGE $1,030$1,339 $515 $670 $573 $783 $58 $113 111.3 116.1 CCWMUNICATIONS TOTAL $2,3C9 $1,185 $1,356 $171 114.4 423 PRINT/PUB/ADVER 4322 PRINTING & PUBLISHING $773 1317 $45 $(342)11.1 PRINT/PUB/ADVER TOTAL •$773 $387 $45 $1342)11.6 425 RENTALS 4331 EQUIPMENT & MAC RENTAL $52 $26 $0 $126)0.0 RENTALS TOTAL $52 $26 $0 $(26)0.0 424 CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR 4340 MAIN! OFFICE EQUIPMENT $361 $111 $177 $(6)«7.l CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR TOTAL $361 $181 $ 17 7 $14)•7.6 430 OTHER CHARGES 4393 SPEC EQUIP REPLACEMENT $103 $52 $10 $142)It.2 oIfIJ,CITY OF ORONO r„ ... City Council Report tHpendi tures by Division within Fund p«9« i As Of 06/30/93 Object Code & Decription Olvlilon Code & Description OTHER CHARGES TOTAL DISTRIBUTIONS 4900 SPECIAL PROJECTS-CONTINGENCY OTHER DISTRIBUTIONS TOTAL TOTAL ASSESSING Annual Budget ^ 1 r% ^ Budget Year to Pate Actual Year to Date Actual Ove r/|Under1 Budget e,j. >103 $52 SIO 8(42)18.2 $0 $0 $77,198 $0 $0 $38,602 $80 $80 $44,221 $80 110 SS.619 0.0 0.0lu.e I , .V ^4 •'1 - «' v'CITY OF OROHOCity Council Report CKpenditures by Division within Fund Pt'il 9Object Code & Decrlptlon'.vision Code & Description s a AnnualBudget aaasaasasasBaaaas 001 - GENERAL FUND IS FINANCE 401 personal services 4100 SALARIES-REGULAR EMPLOYEE 4111 OVERTIME-REGULAR EMPLOYEE 4141 PERA-CITY CONTRIOUTION 4142 FICA/MOCR-CITY CONTRIB 4151 HOSPITALIZATION INSURANCE 4152 LIFE INSURANCE 4153 WORKMANS COMP INSURANCE PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL 411 SUPPLIES As Of 06/30/93Budget YeBf to Date aaaaaaaanaaaaaaaa Actual Year to Date •■aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Actual Ove r/(Unde r J Budge t aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa '■E- aaaaaaaaaaaa S101.710 SO $4.SCO $7,780 S8.240 S385 $523 $123,198 $50,855 $0 $2,280 $3,890 $4,120 $193 $262 $01,600 $45,542 fl5,,313)$19 $19 $2,U4*.I t 231$3,300 $584 $4,822 $702$207 114 $347 SIS $56,292 $(5,308) 89.S 0.0 19.» 8S.0 117.0 107.3 132.4 91.4 4210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 4240 BOOKS & PERIODICALS $1,100 $250 $550 $125 $533 $49 $ $[781 96 9 39.2 SUPPLIES TOTAL $1,350 $675 $582 $193)18.2 421 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 43C0 AUDITING & FINANCIAL $3,914 $1,957 $350 $(1,607)17.9 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL $3,914 $1,957 $350 $(1,607)17.9 422 COMMUNICATIONS 4320 TELEPHONE 4321 POSTAGE $550 $1,030 $275 $515 $287 $683 $12 $161 104.4 132.9 COMMUNICATIONS TOTAL $1,580 $790 $970 $180 122.1 423 PRIHT/PUB/ADVER 4322 PRINTING 4 PUBLISHING $600 $300 <221 $(79j 73.1 PRINT/PUB/ADVER TOTAL $600 $300 $22i $(79)73.7 426 CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR 4340 MAINT OFFICE tOUIPMLNT $1,030 $515 $270 $(245)52.4 CONTRACT MAINVREPAIR TOTAL $1,030 $515 $270 $(245)52.4 427 DATA PROCESSING 4352 lOGIS-ADMIN SERVICE 4353 COURIER-DATA PROCESSING 4354 LOGIS-CLASS 2 ASSLSSMLNT $14,450 $30 $5,400 $7,225 $15 12,700 $3,609 $0 15.400 $2. 616) (15) 700 50.0 0.0 200.0 CITY OF ORONO City Councl I Report Expenditures by Division within Fund As Of OG/30/93 Object Code & Oecription Division Cod# & Description 4355 DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING TOTAL OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE 4355 MEETINQS-CONF-SCIIOOLS OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE TOTAL INSURANCE 4373 INSURANCE4373 EQUIPMENT FLOATERS INSURANrr IVlt SOT^TIVE INSURANCE4375 BONOS INSURANCE 4376 MONEYS & SECRUITY 4370 INSURANCE4379 INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD INSURANCE TOTAL ^^.^430 OTHEP CHARGES 4310 MEMBERSHIPS inSi ■^^'■^^OE-PARMHQ Inoa •replacement4399 OTHER CItARGES OTHER CHARGES TOTAL total FINANCE Annual Year^toBudget Site $1,165$2,330 $22,210 1920 1920 $1,300 $0 $20 $1,290 $50 $1,670 iloo $4,430 $100 $920 $360$70 $1,450 $160,682 $11,105 MGO S4C0 $650 $0 $10 $645 $25 $835 $50 $2,215 $50 $460 $180 $35 $725 $80,342 Actual Year to Date $965 $9,974 $0 SC II ,399 $125 SO $1,168 $59 $1,552 $0 $4,303 f 15 $407 $159 $0 $561 $71,543 Actual Over/(ljnder J Budget •■■asaBBBBBsasBvaaa S(200| $U.131) 1(460) $(460) $749 $125 {US’ $34 $717 $(50) $2,011 35 53 21 35 Page 10 t 82.9 19.1 0.0 0.0 215.3 0.0 0.0 181.1 236.0 ItS.t 0.0 194.3 30.0 88.5 81.3 0.0 8(1441 8(6,799)• 0 »1 1 S CITY or ORONOCity Council Report CMpenditurei by Divltion within Fund As Of 00/30/93 Object Code & Decription Division Code & Description OOi - GENERAL FUND Budget ActualAnnual Year to Year to Budget pate Date • vvaavxsnssravrBcs aaaaaveasaaaaaaeaa mmmuuumttmnumrmmun Actual Ove r/1 Undo r) Budget 16 LEGAL 421 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4301 LEGAL-RETAINER 4302 LEGAL -PROSECUTIONS 4303 LEGAL-CONSULTING SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL 421 OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE 4351 JAIL CHARGES OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE TOTAL TOTAL LEGAL • 4 Page 11 i $16,000 $8,000 $3,685 SI4.31SI 46.1$31,200 $15,600 $27,520 116.920 144.4$19,000 $9,500 $995 S(«.505)10.5 $66,200 $33,100 $2/ ,200 $(5,900)12.2 $20,000 $10,000 $8,147 $U.I53)1 11.S $20,000 $10,000 $8,147 $1.853]11.5$16,200 $43,100 $35,347 $7,753 12.0 •VObjtct Cod* & DecrlptlonOi'^ltlon Code & Description 001 - GENERAL FUND 17 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS 401 PERSONAL SERVICES 4100 SALARIES-REGULAR EMPLOYEE 4120 SALARIFS-TEMP EMPLOYEES 4141 PERA-CITY CONTRIBUTION 4142 FICA/MDCR-CITY CONTRID PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL 411 SUPPLIES 4231 BLDG & GROUNDS MiR SUPPLY 4232 EQUIPMENT PARTS & ACCES 4242 MISC MAINT SUPPLIES SUPPLIES TOTAL 424 UTILITIES 4324 UTILITIES UTILITIES TOTAL 425 RENTALS 4331 EQUIPMENT & MAC RENTAL 4332 OFFICE OR BUILDING RENTAL RENTALS TOTAL 426 CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR 4340 MAINT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 4342 MAINT MISC EQUIPMENT 4343 MAINT BLDGS & GROUNDS 434t JANITORIAL SERVICE CONTRACT MAI.TT/REPAIR TOTAL 429 INSURANCE 4371 PROPERTY INSURANCE 4372 BOILER & MACHlNERt' INSURANCE INSURANCE TOTAL 430 OTHER CHARGES 4156 INTEREST ON SPEC ASStSSMNIS CITY OF OnONOCl 1y Counc11 Repor t Expenditures by Division wlttiln FundAs Of 00/30/93BudgetAnnuel Ye»r toBudget DeteI a B 8 S S ■ « S ■ « ■ ■ ■ 8 8 8 8 8 » r C 8 a 8 8 n a e ■ B 8BB8 Pege 12Actual Year to Date ActualOve r/iUnde r) BudgettS88S8B8Ba88a tio.713 S5.357 $20,391 $15,034 310.8$0 to $0 $0 0.0S4801240$917 $S77 312.1$820 $410 $i.5i:$1,101 381.5 112.013 $6,007 $22,819 $16,812 379.9 SI.545 $773 SI .541 $768 199.4$155 $7$$122 $44 156.4$0 $0 $63 $63 0.0 $1,700 $851 $1,726 $175 202.1 $26,500 $13,250 $21,019 $9,769 173.7* $28,500 $13,250 $23,019 $9,789 173.7 SO $0 $0 $0 0.0$0 $0 SO $0 0.0 SO $0 SO 10 0.0 $0 $0 $401 $401 0.0S515$258 $431 $173 187.1S5.150 $2,575 $5,213 $2,638 202.4S 7,725 $3,163 $5,713 $1,850 147.8 S13.390 $6,606 $11,757 $5,062 17S.8 S7.490 $3,745 $8,275 $4,530 221.0S247$124 $194 $70 158.5 S7.737 $3,169 $8,469 $4,600 211.0 S2.270 $1,135 $0 $11.1351 0.0 CITY Of ORONOf ... City Council Report Expendllurft by Divliion within FundAs Of 00/30/93 P«9« 13Object Code & Decrlptlon* DescriptionOTHER CHARGES TOTALCAPITAL OUTLAY4533 SPECIAL ASMNIS ON LAND CAPITAL OUTLAY TOTAL TOTAL GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS Annual Budge t Budget Year to Dat e Actual Year to DateIZ,270$3,080 $1,540 $0 $3,080 $66,690 $1,540 $33,348 $0 $6f,79i ActualOver/iunder) Budget SU.13S) »U.540J *11.-'.0) S34.443 0.0 0.0 0.0 203.3 Code & Decription Diviiion Code & DescriptionOOi - GENERAL FUND •»»««• 21 HUMAN SERVICES OTHER CHARGES 4385 HUMAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS OJHER CHARGES TOTAL TOTAL HUMAN SERVICES CITY or ORONOr . City Council ReportExpenditures by Division within FundAs Of 08/30/93Annual Year^toBudget oite■ •SBaesaaz.xraasaaa aaaaeaaaaa 9 s a 3 s s $14,670 $14,670 $14,670 $7,335 $7,335 $7,335 Actual Year to Date’ a a a a 3 a 8 $8,158 $8,158 $8,158 Page UActualOver/(Under) Budget I $823 $823 $823 111.2 111.2 111.2 C'.1■ • •CITY OF OROMOCity Council Report Expenditures by Division within FundObject Code Pecrlptlon Division Code & Descriptior) 001 - GENERAL FUND 31 POLICE PROTECTION 401 PERSONAL SERVICES 4100 SALARIES-REGULAR EMPLOYEE 4111 OVERTIME-REGULAR EMPLOYEE 4115 SALARIES PT EMPl 4120 SALARIES-TEMP EMPLOYEES 4132 HOLIDAY PAY-LELS 4136 OTHER PAY 4141 PERA-CITY CONTRIOUTION 4142 FICA/MOCR-CITY CONTRIO 4151 HOSPITALIZATION INSURANCE 4152 LIFE INSURANCE 4153 WORKMANS COMP INSURANCE PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL Annual Budget r«saanaaaaa«BaBmas As Of 00/30/93Oudge t Yen r to pate ■•■VBaBrsasaeaaaaa Actual Year to Date BBaBBBKBsaaasBBas Actual Over/iUnder) Budge t LUBRICANTS 411 SUPPLIES 4210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 4220 MOTOR FUELS & 4221 CLOTHING & PERSONAL EQUIP 4231 BLDG & GROUNDS tttR SUPPLY4232 EQUIPMENT PARTS A ACCES 4240 BOOKS & PERIODICALS 4241 TRAINING SUPPLIES 4243 DARE PROGRAM 4244 K-9 DOO PROGRAM SUPPLIES TOTAL 421 PROFESSIONAI SERVICES 4303 LEGAL-CONSULTING SERVICES 4308 OTHER CONSULTING SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL 422 COMMUNICATIONS 4320 TELEPHONE 4321 POSTAGE COF2-rjNlCATIONS TOTAL 423 PRINT/PUB/APVER 4322 PRINTING L PUBLISHING $657 $16 $18 $5 $21$4 $82 $0 $50 S3 $36 . 150 ,000 .000 ,850 .960 . 120 .990 .950 .380 .245 ,180 $902,825 $328 $8 $9 $2 $10 $2 $41 $3 $25 $1 $18 .575 .000 .000 .925 .980 .060 .495 .475 . 190 .623 .090 $451,413 $314,023 $9.30S $0 $0 $0 $0 $37,520 $ J . 19? $27,219 $2,143 $27,211 $ 120.627 1(14.552) $1,305 $ 9,000 $ 2.925 $(10,980 $(2,060 $(3,866 $(213 $2,029 $525 $9,121 $130,716) Page 15 X- 65.6 116.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 80.4 91.8108.1 132.3 150.4 S3.2 $7,000 $3,500 $5,085 .585 145.3$28,000 $14,000 $9,739 1(4.t26i)69.6$8.000 $4,000 $8,752 752 218.9$500 $250 $146 I 104 51.4$5,000 $2,500 $1,613 $as;64.5$1,200 $600 $460 S 140 76.7$2,000 $1,000 $303 S 697 30.3$1,800 $900 $1,356 {(456 150.7$1.800 $900 $318 $(5821 1 35.3 $55,300 $27,650 $27,772 $122 100.4 $1,000 $500 $365 $(1351 73.0$7,000 $3,500 S5.091 $1,591 145.5 11,000 $4,000 $5,456 $1 .456 136.4 $7,700 $1,850 $2,420 $11 .430 W 62.S$2,100 $1,050 $590 1(460 56.2 $9,800 $4,900 $3,010 $(i .890) 11.4 $4,500 $2,250 $545 $(i .705) 24.2 CITY OF ORONOr Counc11 ReportExpenditures by Division within Fund As Of 06/30/93 Object Code & Oecription Division Code & Description 4323 AOVERTISINQ PRINT/PUB/ADVER TOTAL 424 UTILITIES 4324 UTILITIES UTILITIES TOTAL 425 RENTALS 4330 RADIO RENTAL 4332 OFFICE OR BUILDING RENTAL 4340 4341 4342 4343 4349 RENTALS TOTAL 426 w*Int^office^equ[|>S^ MAINT AUTO EQUIPMENT MAINT MISC EQUIPMENT MAINT BLDGS & GROUNDS janitorial service CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR TOTAL 427 DATA PROCESSING 4352 LOQIS-ADMIN SERVICE 4354 LOGIS-CLASS 2 ASSESSMENT 4355 DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING TOTAL 4356^^MEETINGS*CONF-SCHOOLS*'^^^^ 43704371 4373 4374 4377 4379 OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE TOTAL 429 INSURANCE GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE PROPERTY INSURANCE EQUIPMENT FLOATERS INSURANCE AUTOMOTIVE INSURANCE UMBRELLA LIABILITY INSURANCE INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD INSURANCE TOTAL P*g« 16 Annual Budget • ^•3 * = »a 2BBBBaBa bb Budget Veer to Dale Actual Year to Date Actual Over/(UnderI Budget $100 S50 $1C $(34J 32.0 $4,600 $2,300 $561 $11.7391 24.4 $5,500 $2,750 $CG3 $12,087)24.1 $5,500 $2,750 $663 $(2,017)24.1 $17,500 $U $8,750 $0 $0 $1,041 *18.750) $1.94J 0.0 0.0$17,500 $8,750 $1,941 $(6,809)22.2 $3,600 $16,000 $1,500 $5on $6,000 $1,800 $9,000 $750 $250 $3,000 $1,1'>9 $7,679 $1,075 5974 $250 $(631) $(1,321$325 $724 *(2.750) 64.9 IS.3 143.3 319.6 1.3 $29,600 $14,800 $*1,147 $(3,653)75.3 tC,950 $4,040 $3,475 $2,020 $5,810 $1,758 $4,040 $4,870 SO.B $11,620 $2,020 $(940)200.0 13.i $22,610 $11,305 $10,668 $(937)•4.4 $11,000 $5,500 $4,507 $(993)11.9 $11,000 $5,500 $4,507 $(B93)11.9 $9,160 $2,650 $600 $4,370 $8,930 $1,170 $4,580 $1,325 $300 $2.185 $4,465 $585 $9,960 $3,211 $576 $3,662 $8,293 $0 $5,380 $1,886 $276 $1,477 $3,833 *(585) 217.5242.3 192.0 167.6 185.1 0.0 $26,180 $13,440 $25,707 $12,267 191.3 9f*% ..CITY OF ORONOCity Council Report Expenditures by Division within Fund Pige 17As Of 06/30/93Object Code & DecriptionDivision Code & DescriptionliBCBflSBavaaBaaBSBBassasaxvvsassaBaea430 OTHER CHARGES4380 MEMBERSHIPS4381 TRAVEL-MILEAQE-PARKINQ 4382 MEETING EXPENSES 4383 LICENSES & TAXES 4393 SPEC EQUIP REPLACEMENT 4399 OTHER CHARGES Annual OudyeIeaaaaaaaeaaaaaaaaa OudqeI Ye e r to DateBaaaaaeaaaaaaaaaaa Actual Year to Dat eaaaaaaaacaaaaaaaa ActualOve r/(Unde r1 Budge t■eaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaa OTHER CHARGES TOTAL 441 CAPITAL OUTLAY 4520 BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 4540 OFFICE FURN-fI XT-fQUIP 4550 AUTOMOTIVE EQUIPMENT 4560 OTHER EQUIPMENT CAPITAL OUTLAY TOTAL TOTAL POLICE PROTECTION $1,230 $615 $1,030$650 $325 $65$350 $175 $514 $180 $90 $191 $50 $25 $55 $50 $25 $0 $2,510 $1,255 51,855 $500 $250 $0$ 1.500 $750 $1,230$40,000 $20,000 $33,290 $4,780 $2,390 $0 $46,780 $23,390 $34,526 $1,142,905 $571,453 $548,440 $415$(260) $339 $101 $30 *(25) $600 $(250) $480$13,296 $(2,390) $11,136 $(23,013) 167.520.0 293.7 212.2 220.0 0.0 147.1 0.0 164.0 160.S 0.0 147 6 88.0 r •'V * • ! .• *1CITY OF ORONOCity Council Report txpenJitures by Division within Fund Pag* IIAs Of 08/30/93Object Code & DecriptionDivision Code A DescriptionOOi - GENERAL FUND AnnualBudget*B*B«aBBasa«nassBe Budget Year to Dateaaaaaaareaaaaaaaaa32 FIRE PROTECTION 4317 FIRE SERVICE MOUND 4311 FIRE SERVICE WAY2ATA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL .,..*28 OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE 4358 MEETINGS-CONF“SCHOOLS OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE TOTAL TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION • • < Actual Year to DateBBBBaaaac8883tsae ActualOve r/iUnde r ) Budget8888888888888888888 E.J.■BB8B8888888 $106,192 $18,080 $53,096 $9,040 $57,1.14 $0SGI.131 $7,025 $30,566 $3,513 $49,236 $2,610 $192,428 $96,215 $108,990 $250 $125 $0 $250 $192,678 $125 $96,340 $0 $108,990 S4.048 $(9,040)sis-.670 $(903) $12,775 $1125) $(125) $12,650 107.6 0.0161.1 74.3 113.3 0.0 0.0113.1 • « CITY OF ORONOCily Council Rfport Expondliuret by Dlwiiion within Fund As Of 08/30/93 Object Code & Decrlption Division Code & Description 001 - GENERAL FUND Annual Budget ■ ■s$i«$)aaa«aBSBBBaa Budge t Year to Pate aeaBasaaBssaaaaaaa Actual Year to Date ■■■aaaaaaaBBaaBas 33 PLANNING i ZONING 401 PERSONAL SERVICES 4100 SALARIES-REQULAR EMPLOYEE 4111 OVERTIME-REGULAR EMPLOYEE 4141 PERA-CITY CONTRIBUTION 4142 FICA/MDCR-CITY CONTRIB 4151 HOSPITALIZATION INSURANCE 4152 LIFE INSURANCE 4153 WORKMANS COMP INSURANCE $222,140 $200 $9,950 $17,000 $13,920 $85 $3,700 $111,070 $100 $4,975 $8,500 $6,960 $43 $1,850 $100,138 $101 $1,547 $7,431 $7,875 $42 $2,851 PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL $266,995 $133,498 $123,048 411 SUPPLIES 4210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 4220 MOTOR FUELS & LUBRICANTS 4221 CLOTHING 4 PERSONAL EQUIP 4232 EQUIPMENT PARTS A ACCES 4240 BOOKS 4 PERIODICALS $4,000 $700 $250 $300 $570 $2,000 $350 $125 $150 $285 $2,333 $314 SO $19 $422 SUPPLIES TOTAL $5,820 $2,910 $3,088 421 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4303 LEGAL-CONSULTING SERVICES 4305 ENGINEERING CONSULTING 4306 OTHER CONSULTING SERVICES $620 $320 $4,000 $310 $160 $2,000 »0 $0 $740 professional SERVICES TOTAL $4,940 $2,470 $740 422 COMMUNICATIONS 4320 TELEPHONE 4321 POSTAGE $1,100 $2,700 $550 $1,350 $578 $1,380 COMMUNICATIONL TOTAL $3,800 $1,900 $1,956 423 PRINT/PUB/AOVER 4322 PRINTING 4 PUBLISHING 4323 ADVERTISING $1,750 $400 $875 $200 $632 $156 PRINT/PUB/AOVER TOTAL $2,150 $1,075 $781 425 RENTALS 4331 EQUIPMENT 4 MAC RENTAL $500 $250 $0 Actual Ove r/(Unde r) Budget $110,93?) $61 $(4?S $(1,066 $915 $1,001 $(10,450) $333 $(36 125 131 $137 $171 310 160 $(1,260 $(1,730) $21 $30 $51 $(243 $(44 $(217) $(250) P$9« 16 Ea|. 90.2 161.0 91.4 • 7.5 113.1 97.7 154.1 92.2 116.7 19.7 0.012.7 141.1 106.1 0.0 0.0 37.0 30.0 105.1 102.2 103.1 72.2 71.0 73.3 0.0 Object Code & Dccription Olvlticn Code S, Description RENTALS TOTAL -_,.426 CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR 4340 MAINT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 4341 MAINT AUTO EQUIPMENT 4342 MAINT MISC EQUIPMENT CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR TOTAL PROCESSING 4352 LOQIS-ADMIN SERVICE 2 ASSESSMENT4355 DATA PROCESSING data PROCESSING TOTAL 428 OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE 4356 MEETINGS-CONF-SCHOOLS OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE TOTAL 429 INSURANCE Gf'^ERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE floaters insuranceAUTOMOTIVE INSURANCE UMBRELLA LIABILITY INSURANCE INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD 4370 4373 4374 4377 4379 INSURANCE TOTAL 430 OTHER CHARGES4380 MEMBERSHIPS 4381 TRAVEL-MILEAGE-PARKINQ 43l> MEETING EXPENSES 4383 LICENSES & TAXES 4393 SPEC EQUIP REPLACEMENT OTHER CHARGES TOTAL TOTAL PLANNING A ZONING CITY OF ORONOf. ... City Council ReportExpenditures by Division within F und Page 20As Of 08/30/93 , , Budget Ye*r toBudget paje • ■■aBaocaxcas.a:, *500 1250 Actual Year to Date SO Actual Over/tUnder) Budge t •*■■■*■* *1250) E,|. 0.0 *3,090 *1,100 *470 $1,545 *550 S235 *1,207 $574 8330 *(338) 824 89S 78.1 104.4 140.4 S4,660 82,330 82,111 8(219)90.6 *9,377 *l,c40 *620 84,689 *620 $310 *7.343 81.240 $248 8(2,346) 8620 8(62) 50.0 200.0 80.0*11,237 $5,619 8T.831 8(1.788)68.2 *2,200 11,100 85C3 8(537)51.2*2,200 81,100 $563 8(537)51.2 SI.340 *120 *650 *1.670 *165 *670 *60 *325 *835 *83 81.442 *90 8554 81,552 80 8772 830 8229 8717 8(83) 215.2 150.0 170.5 185.9 0.0 S3.945 SI.973 *3.638 81,665 114.4 S520 S2.200 S300 SO SI,650 *260 81,100 il50 SO 8825 $485 8606 8115 88 $797 8225 8(494 8(35 SI 8(21) 186.5 55.1 76.7 0.0 96.1 S4.670 8310,917 *2,335 *155,460 82,011 *141,776 8(324) 8(13,684 14.1 91.2 ‘: ■'CITY OF ORONOCity Council Report Ek: ndituret by Division within Fund Pag* 21 As Of 05/30/93 Object Code & Decrlption Division Code & Description 001 - GENERAL FUND 34 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 411 SUPPLIES 4210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 4232 EQUIPMENT PARTS i ACCES SUPPLIES TOTAL 422 COMMUNICATIONS 4320 TELEPHONE 4321 POSTAGE COMMUNICATIONS TOTAL 423 PRINT/PUB/ADVER 4322 PRINTING & PUBLISHING PRINT/PUB/ADVER TOTAL 424 UTILITIES 4324 UTILITIES UTILITIES TOTAL 425 RENTALS 4332 OFFICE OR BUILDING RENTAL RENTALS TOTAL 426 CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR • 4340 MAlNT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 4342 MAlNT MISC EQUIPMENT CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR TOTAL 428 OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE 4358 MCETINQS-CONF-SCHOOLS OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE TOTAL . 430 OTHER CHARGES 4310 MEMBERSHIPS 4311 TRAVEL-MILEAGE-PARKING Annual Oudget ssssaaiaxBjsBsaasafli Budget Year to Dat e aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Actual Year to Date ■■■■aasssassaaaaa Actual Over/(Under) Budget >B««Baaaaaaaaaaaaaa '■5- ■ •aaa aa8aaaaV $200 $600 $100 $300 $0$u $ 100 $(300 0.0 Q.O $800 $400 $0 $(400)0.0 $1,100 $50 $550 $25 $613 $0 $63 $(251 lll.S 0.0 $1,150 $575 $613 $38 108.0 S200 $100 $0 suool 0.0 $200 $100 $0 $(100)0.0 $100 $50 $13 $on 28.0 $100 $50 $13 8(37)28.0 $0 $0 $3 $3 0.0 $0 $0 $3 $3 0.0 $200 $600 $100 $300 $0 $824 $|100)jO.O 274.7 $800 $400 $824 $424 208.0 $100 $400 $149 $(251)37.3 $800 $400 $149 f(2Sl)37.3 $100 $0 $50 $0 fiO $7 $40 $7 180.0 0.0 CITY OF ORONO Page 22 Object Codv. A Decription * Description OTHER’cHARQErTOTAL**"’*""”'"*' TOTAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS As Of OG/30/93 asasBse Annual Budge t asaassasas $100 $3,950 Budget Year to Date a a Actual Year to Date $50 $i.975 : ■ r » B a s $97 $1,69S > B B a Actual Over,(Under] Budget Emp.e $47 SI276)194.0 16.0 4 i. • n .»'•* .CITf or ORONO # « / » ♦ • i- f?.* • 1* It • * f CityExpenditures Council Report by Division within Fund Pag*24 ji«1 As Of OG/30/93Obitct Code & DecriptlonDivision Code & Detcriptlon BudgetAnnual Year toBudget Datef! S s B ■ B B a 8 S 8 9 ■ ■■ ■■■ 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 r 3 8 8 a a 8 8 a 8 8 Actual Year to DateaaaaaaaBaaaaraaBB ActualOve r/(Unde r) Budget888S88888'I8aa88888B '“E-■ ■■888 8888888OQl - OtNCeAL FUND41 CNQINCERINQ421 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES4304 EHQINtERINQ RETAINER4305 ENGINEERING CONSULTING J1,130 $3,000 $565$1,500 $350$2,520 $1215)$1,020 61.0let.QPROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL TOTAL ENGINEERING $4,130$4,130 $2,065$2,065 $2,870$2,870 $805$805 139.0130.0 1 ■! \ Object Code & Decrlplion Division Code & Description 001 - GENERAL FUND 42 STREET MAINT 4100 4111 4120 4141 4142 4151 4152 4153 401 PERSONAL SERVICES SALARIES-REGULAR EMPLOYEE overtime-regular EMPLOYEE SALARIES-TEMP EMPLOYEES PERA-CITY CONTRIBUTION FICA/MOCR-CITY CONTRIB HOSPITALIZATION INSURANCE LIFE INSURANCE WORKMANS COMP INSURANCE PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL 411 SUPPLIES 4210 OFFICE SUPPLIES MOTOR FUELS A LUBRICANTS CLOTHING A PERSONAL EQUIP BLDG A GROUNDS MAR SUPPLY EQUIPMENT PARTS A ACCES STREET MAINT MAT A SUPPLY BOOKS A PERIODICALS 4220 4221 4231 4232 4233 4240 SUPPLIES TOTAL 421 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4303 legal-consulting SERVICES 4305 ENGINEERING CONSULTING 4306 OTHER CONSULTING SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL 422 COPWUNICATIONS 4320 TELEPHONE 4321 POSTAGE CWMUNICATIONS TOTAL 423 PRINT/PUn/ADVER 4322 PRINTING A PUBLISHING PRINT/PUB/ADVER TOTAL 424 UTILITIES CITY OF ORONOCity Council Report EKpendituros by Division within Fund Page 25 As Of 00/30/93 Annual Budget laasasaasaattB Budget Year to Date aaaaasara^aaaaaBa Actual Year to Date aaaaaaaafisaaaaasa Actual Ove r/(Unde r)Budget aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaai £• $147,795 $8,240 $5,800 $0,990 $12,020 $21,240 $240 $12,620 $214,945 $800 $13,000 $1,700 $0 $10,300 $160,000 SO $186,800 $500 $8,000 $0 $1,500 $1,200 $20U 11,400 $73,898 $4,120 $60,675 $113.22'')12.1 $5,070 $1,550 137.6$2,900 $0 $12,900 0.0$3,495 $2,954 l(S41 64.5$6,010 $4,954 $11,056 12.4$10,620 $11,868 $1,248 111.8$120 $124 $4 103.3$6,310 $7,861 $1,551 124.6 $107,473 $94,106 $(13,367)17.6 $400 $701 $301 175.3$6,500 $1,350 $5,670 $1,314 $(830) $(36) 17.2 • 7.3$0 XU 110 0.0$5. ISO $5,7P'$630 112.2$80,000 $11 ?1(67,781)15.3SO$49 $49 0.0 $93,400 $25,743 1(67,657)27.6 $250 so $(250 )0.0$4,000 $2,518 $(1,482 i 63.0SO$20 $20 0.0 $4,250 $2,538 $(1,712 1«56.7 S600 S793 $193 132.2 SlUO $165 $65 165.0 $700 $95 8 $251 116.• $300 $300 $150 $150 $141 $141 $(•) S(B) •4.0 •4.0 1 fI'• «•CITY OF ORONOCity Council Report Expenditures by Division within FundAs Of 00/30/93 Object Code & Decription Division Code & Description 4324 4325 UTILITIES STREET LIGHTING UTILITIES TOTAL 425 RENTALS 4331 EQUIPMENT 4. MAC RENTAL RENTALS TOTAL 4341 MAINT AUTO EQUIPMENT 4342 MAINT MISC EQUIPMENT 4349 JANITORIAL SERVICE CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR TOTAL . _ 421 OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE 4356 MEETINGS-CONF-SCHOOLS OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE TOTAL 4370 4373 4374 4377 4379 429 INSURANCE GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE EQUIPMENT FLOATERS INSURANCE AUTOMOTIVE INSURANCE UMORELLA LIABILITY INSURANCE INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD INSURANCE TOTAL 430 OTHER CHARGES 43S0 MEMBERSHIPS TRAVEL-MILEAGE-PARKING MEETING EXPENSES LICENSES & TAXES CONTRACT TREE REMOVAL TREE DISPOSAL CHARGES SPEC EQUIP REPLACEMENT 4311 4312 4383 4390 43-11 4393 OTHER CHARGES TOTAL 441 CAPITAL OUTLAY 4^i40 OFFICE FURN-FIXT-EQUIP Page 26 Annual Budge t Budget Year to Date samaaavBsasasaaas* Actual Year to Date ■ « a ■ ■ a a a e a a a r a s s s a Actual Over/(Under) Budget 83.500 $13,000 $1,750 $6,500 $1,374 $5,740 $(376) $(760) 78.5 88.3 $10,500 $8,250 $7,114 $U.130I 86.2 $15,000 $7,500 $6,722 1(778)18.8 $15,000 $7,500 $6,722 $(778)19.8 $250 $4,000 $8,500 $0 $125 $2,000 $4,250 $0 $210 $7,828 $2,450 $0 $85 $5,828 $U,800)to 168.0 391.4 57.8 0.0 $12,750 $6,375 510.488 $4,113 164.S $500 $250 $130 $(120)52.0 $500 $250 $130 $(120)52.0 $9,680 $1,430 $2,800 $11,450 $220 $4,840 $715 $1,400 $5,725 $110 $10,570 $1.376 $2,725 $10,639 $0 $5,730 $661 $1,325 $4,914$ill0) 211.4 192.4 194.8 185.8 0.0 $25,580 $12,790 $25,310 $12,520 187.8 $50 $3,000 $350 $0 $2,000 $1,500 $0 $25 $1,500 $175 $0 $1,000 $750 $0 $0 $29 $0 $51 $0 $0 $42 $(25 1(1,471 $(175 $51 $(1,000) $(750 $42 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $6,900 $3,450 $122 $(3,328)3.5 $0 $0 $480 8480 0.0 Object Code & DecrlptlonDivision Code & Description CITY OF OROHOCity Council Report Expenditures by Division within FundAs Of 00/30/93 •BudgetAnnual YearloBudget DateCAPITAL OUTLAY TOTAL TOTAL STREET MAINT $0$489,175 $0$244,588 Actual Year to Datel««J»*SBSrB3CS$480$173,852 P«9t 27ActualOve r/iUnde r)BudgetaassasaaasasBssasvs aaaaaaaaaaaaatnp.I$480$(70,7361 0.071.1 »»^ /• « » I . - ‘t/'' I- .• 4 t -r • CITY OF ORONO City Council Report Expenditures by Division within Fund As Of 06/30/93 Object Code & Decription Division Code & Description QOl - GENERAL FUND Annual Budget ■ ■aBCBBSBSStlttaCBBB Budget Year to Pate ■aaaasaaxssBssBaaB Actual Year to Date ■■■««Baaasasraaa& Actual Ove r/iUnder) Budget 3 :! a 2 a S 45 PARKS & RECREATION 41004111 4120 4141 4142 4153 401 PERSONAL SERVICES SALARIES-REGULAR EMPLOYEE OVERTIME-REGULAR EMPLOYEE SALARIES-TEMP EMPLOYEES PERA-CITY CONTRIBUTION FICA/MDCR-CITY CONTRIB WORKMANS COMP INSURANCE PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL 411 SUPPLIES 4210 OFFICE SUPPLIES MOTOR FUELS & LUBRICANTS BLDG & GROUNDS M&R SUPPLY EQUIPMENT PARTS & ACCES 4220 4231 4232 SUPPLIES TOTAL 421 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4308 OTHER CONSULTING SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL COMMUNICATIONS TOTAL 423 PRIHT/PUB/ADVERnil PRINT/PUU/ADVER TOTAL t 424 UTILITIES 4324 UTILITIES UTILITIES TOTAL 42S RENTALS 4331 EQUIPMENT A MAC RENTAL Page 28 s S21.785 $50 $10,770 $980 $1,830 $550 $10,893 $25 $5,385 $490 $915 $275 $12,811 $21 $2,010 $581 $993 $411 81,918 8(41 8(3,375 891 878 8136 117.t 84.0 37.3 118.6 108.5 149.5 $35,965 $17,983 $16,827 8(1,156)93.6 $13U $600 $1.100 $800 $65 $300 $550 $400 $33 $34C $J .345 $939 ‘US' 8795 8539 SO.I 113.3 244.5 234.1 $2,630 $1,315 $2,657 $1,342 202.1 $500 $250 $575 $325 230.0 $500 8250 $575 $325 230.0 $40 $20 $79 859 395.0 $40 $20 $79 859 39S.0 $50 $30 $25 $15 $0 $227 1}?!’0.0 1513.3 $80 $40 $227 8187 587.S $250 $125 $126 81 100.1 8250 8125 8126 81 100.8 82,500 $1,250 5663 8(587)53.0 'j a ,v«-CITY OF ORONOCity Council Report Expenditures by Division within Fund As 0( 06/30/93 Object Code & Decrlptlon Division Code & Description Annual RENTALS TOTAL 426 CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR 4340 MAINT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 4341 MAINT AUTO EQUIPMENT 4342 MAINT MISC EQUIPMENT 4343 MAINT BLDGS & GROUNDS CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR TOTAL 42# OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE 4357 JOINT RECREATION PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACT SERIVICE TOTAL 4370 4371 43734374 4377 4379 429 INSURANCE GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE PROPERTY INSURANCE EQUIPMENT FLOATERS INSURANCE AUTOMOTIVE INSURANCE UMBRELLA LIABILITY INSURANCE INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD INSURANCE TOTAL 430 OTHER CHARGES 4381 TRAVEL-MILEAGE-PARKINQ 4383 LICENSES & TAXES 4393 SPEC EQUIP REPLACEMENT OTHER CHARGES TOTAL TOTAL PARRS A RECREATION Peg* 29 Oudqel Actual ActualYear to Year to Over/lUnder)Eap.Dat e Dat e Budget % $2,500 $1,250 $663 $(587}53.0 $0 $0 $18 $18 0.0$500 $250 Sl£7 $(63)74.1$500 $250 $26 $2 24 10.4$2,000 $1,000 $393 $605)39.5 $3,000 $1,500 $626 $(8741 41.7 $2,500 $1,250 $0 $(1 .2501 0.0 $2,500 $1,250 $0 $(l.250I 0.0 $3,320 $165 $1,660 $3,522 $1 .862 212.2$83 $200 $117 241.0$270 $135 $260 $125 192.9$325 $163 $285 $122 174.1$1,670 $835 $1,512 $677 111.1$31 $16 $0 $118J 0.0 $5,781 $2,892 $5,773 $2 .887 199.1 $50 $25 $0 $[25 0.0$100 $50 $0 $50 0.0$0 $0 $31 $31 o.o $150 $53,396 $75 $26,700 $31 $27,590 $(44) 41.3 $890 103.3 *1 t rI* ^ • Object Code & Decripiion Dlvlilon Code & Description 001 - GENERAL FUND 46 RECYCLING PICKUP PROGRAM 401 PERSONAL SERVICES 4100 SALARIES-REGULAR EMPLOYEE 4111 OVERTIME-REGULAR EMPLOYEE 4141 PERA-CITY CONTRIBUTION 4142 FICA/MDCR-CITY CONTRIB PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL 411 SUPPLIES 4210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 4232 EQUIPMENT PARTS & ACCES SUPPLIES TOTAL 421 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4306 OTHER CONSULTING SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL 422 COMMUNICATIONS 4321 POSTAGE COMMUNICATIONS TOTAL 423 PRINT/PUB/ADVER 4322 PRINTING & PUBLISHING PRINT/PUB/ADVER TOTAL 426 CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR 4340 MAINT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 4341 SFRING-FALL-XMAS CLEAN UP CONTRACT MAINT/REPAIR TOTAL 427 DATA PROCESSING 43SS DATA PROCESSING DATA processing TOTAL 430 OTHER CHARGES 4311 TRAVEL-MILEAGE-PARKINQ CITY OF ORONOCity Council Report Expenditures by Division within Fund As Of 00/30/93 Annual Budget essasaatissssaaaBBa Oudge t Year to Date Actual Year to Date $0 $1,500 $225 $380 $0 $750 $113 $190 $1,3CD $2,252 $1GS $270 $2,105 $1,053 $4,065 $200 $350 $100 $175 $0 $620 $550 $275 $620 $2,500 $2,500 $1,250 $1,250 $0 $0 $800 $600 $400 $400 $0 $0 $200 $200 $100 SiGO $0 $0 $0 $21,000 $0$io,5or $0 $6,065 $21,000 $10,500 $6,065 $140 $140 $70 $70 $u $0 $16 • •- e Ptge 30 Actual Ove r/(Under) Budget lassaBaaaaaaa £.5. asaaaaAiaiiAa $1,369 $1,502 $55 $66 0.0 300.3 141.7 145.3 $3,012 316.0 $(100) $445 0.0 354.3 $345 225.5 $(1,250)0.0 $11,250)0.0 $(400)1 0.0 $(400)0.0 $(100)0.0 * $(100)0.0 10 $(4,415) 0.0 51.0 $14.U5)SI.O $1701 0.0 $(70)0.0 1 $(16) s 0.0 •4 u 1 V Object Code & Decripilon Division Code & Description 4392 CONTRACT RECYCLING PICKUP 4393 SPEC EQUIP REPLACtMENT OTHER CHARGES TOTAL TOTAL RECYCLING PICKUP PROGRAM CITY or ORONOCity Council Report EKpendltures by Division within Fund As Of 06/30/93 Budget ActualAnnual year to year to Budget pate pate S64.000 $134 $64,165 $91,460 $32,000 $67 $32,083 $45,731 $26,325 $0 $26,325 $37,095 Page 31 Actual Over/(Under) lap.Budget x. ■aaaasaassaaasasaca •aaaaaaaaaaas M5.875| 12.3 *167) 0.0 5.7581 8,6361 12.1 11.1 CITY or ORONO4 •001 - GENERAL FUND51 SPEC SERV-CONSULT/POLICE 401 PERSONAL SERVICES 41 1 t^'^OVERTlME-REGULAR EMPLOYEE Jlii °E«»-CI1« coNiRiemioM PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL A7\ PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4303 ^legal-consulriNQ SERVICES engineering CONSULTING 4306 OTHER CONSULTING SERVICES City Council rExpenditures by Division within FunAs 01 00/30/93Annual Date. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ActualOwer/tUnder)Budgettt««0«««************ ”t8T*rs?tJSIlv-C0HluLI/*pbuCE $7,500 $989 $3,750 $495 $-190 $0 $8,489 $4,245 $-190 $5,000 S6.000 $1,000 $2,500 $3,000 $500 $1,181 $4,031 $0 $12,000 $20,489 $B .000 $10,245 $5,212 $5,022 $14,435)-6.3 * ,031 $lS00) 47.2 134.4 0.0 $15 I'i551 16.9 49.0 « % • (•'•1 ••1CITYOF ORONOCity Council Report Expendituret by Division within Fund Page 33As Of 00/30/93Object Code & DecriptionDivision Code & Descriotion AnnualBudget Budget Year to Date Actual Year to Date ActualOve r/(Unde r) Budget Exp. %OQi - GENERAL FUND52 SPECIAL PROJECTS-CONTING401 PERSONAL SERVICES 4100 SALARIES-REGULAR EMPLOYEE S5, ISO 52,575 SO $12.5751 0.0 PERSONAL SERVICES TOTAL $5,150 $2,575 su M2.5751 0.0 421 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4303 LEGAL-CONSULTING SERVICES 4306 OTHER CONSULTING SERVICES SO $17,500 $0 $8,750 S53 S3,032 $53 $(5,718) 0.0 34.7 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL $17,500 $8,750 $3,085 $(5,665)35.3 430 OTHER CHARGES 4399 OTHER CHARGES $0 SO SO $0 0.0 OTHER CHARGES TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 0.0 431 OTHER DISTRIBUTIONS 4710 OPERATING TRANSFER OUT 4900 SPECIAL PROJECTS-CONTINGENCY $64,900 $64,008 $32,450 $32,004 e 50 $3,151 $(32,450) $128,853) 0.0 0.1 OTHER DISTRIBUTIONS TOTAL $128,908 $64,45$$3,151 $(61,303)4.0 441 CAPITAL OUTLAY 4S33 SPECIAL ASMNTS ON LAND $1,734 $867 $0 8(8671 0.0 CAPITAL OUTLAY TOTAL TOTAL SPECIAL PROJECTS-CONTING $1,734 $153,292 $867 $78,646 $0 $6,236 $(8671 8(70.410) 0.0 1.1 r 'VO.*"%j • *.t CITY OF ORONOFvn*n<4ii ^y. Count 11 Report Expenditures by Division within FundObject Code 4 Decrlption . . . . . .fund 001 Totjl As Of 00/30/93AnnualBudget ^ nitl®n .00 Actual Year to Date■ ■ ■ a ■ ■ a * > s . . . . . , ,*1.402,012«y-Pige 34ActualOver/(Under) c„Budgetttttll lilt•1**4,294) 19.S • : ‘ *♦ t , i « - • : » i ♦ # • »# t % TO: FROM: DATE: Ron Moorse, City Administrator John Gcrhardson, Public Works Director September 9, 1993 SUBJECT: Consultant Selection I 'I'Jerground Tank Removal 5T;. / % Now that the new fueling system is in operation and all of tlie buildings in Crystal Bay have been removed, we can begin the underground fuel tank removal. A requirement of the Federal Regulations is to contract with a consultant to direct the actual tank removal and soil testing. We have received proposals from three firms as follows: Schoell Madsen $2,647.00 Northern Environmental $2,500.00 Braun Intertec $1,950.00 All of the above firms have performed this t>pe of service in the past and are knowledgeable in this field. Braun Intenec provided the soil testing for the new facility site. Theretbre, il is recommended to designate Braun Intertec as the consultant for the underground tank removal for an ar*.ount of $1,950.00 Isv /v TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator September 10, 1993 //f % %j C//y %A SUBJECT: Recorder Contract % % Staff has completed a process of reviewing applications for a City Recorder who will providt- recordinf e_/ices to the City as an independent contractor. The person relected is Marva Hurst, who has considerable experience in composing and recording minutes and has some background related to City activities and business. Ms. Hurst has agreed to a one year contract to provide recording services to the City. The contract calls for a fee of $80.00 per three hour meeting. $90.00 for a four hour meeting and $100.00 for a five hour meeting. During the past two months the city's clerical staff have shared the responsibility for the recording tasks. These tasks have caused a significant disruption to the normal daily casks of the clerical staff. Assuming the meetings would average 4 hours in length the total annual cost for a Recorder would be $4,320.00. It is recommended that preventing the disruption chat would occur if the recording tasks were to be done by the clerical staff is worth this cost. Council Action Requested: Motion Co approve the selection of the recorder, and to approve the fee schedule c tlined above. TO; FROM; DATE; / ? Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator September 9, 1993 SUBJECT; 1994 Budget and Proposed Tax Levy % % ’ Attachment:A. Memo Outlining the Proposed 1994 Budget B. Proposed Resolution - Tax Levy Col-ectible in 1994 ISSUES ^ . 1. Establish a maximum proposed 1994 Tax Levy for the truth in taxation budget hearing(s). 2. Establish a preliminary budget for the truth in taxation hearing(s'. DISCUSSION , . ^ The Council has established the truth in taxation public hearing for Wednesday, December 1st at 7:00 p.m., and .'he subsequent hearing for Monday, December 13th at 7:00 p.m. As required by state law the City must adopt a proposed maximum tax levy by September 15th and certify it to the county auditor. The City must also adopt a proposed budget amount. Tne proposed levy- adopted can be reduced duriiig the public hearings but cannot be increased. For the proposed tax levy collectible in 1994 the City is required to subtract HACA (homestead and agricultural credit aid) before certifying the levy to the county auditor. The attached proposed resolution reflects that change in the certified amounts. Requested Action: That Council adopt the proposed maximum tax levy for 1994 and the pioposed 1994 General Fund expenditure budget as presented. seconded by to adopt ResolutionPROPOSED MOTION - Moved by - - - - - - -_ _ _. -- - -- - - - - # approving the proposed maximum 199.) tax levy collectible in 1^4 of $l,916,b37, and to establish the proposed 1994 General Find expenditure budget in the amount of $3,215,090. Ayes _, Nays A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PROPOSED 1993 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 1994 County of Hennepin, i’u.mic&'-iL.ci, unai. ouiuo, oa io- HACA, be levied for the current year, collectible in 1994 upon the taxable property in the City of Orono, for the following purposes: BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono. Hennepin, Minnesota, that the following sums; as reduced oy General Fund $1,588,242 Special Assessments against City property for the City's share of 1985 sanitary project (G.O. Sewer Imp Bend 1985) 4,358 Lost Tax Receipts Due to Abatements - 1992 10,847 TOTAL GENERAL FUND LEVY $1,603,447 G.O. SEWER IMPROVEMENT BOND 1992 G.O. Sewer Improvement Bond 198S G.O. Sewer Improvement Bond 1980 14,210 43,059 13,176 G.O. Sewer, Water, Street Improvement Bond 1982 G.O. Water & Sewer Revenue Bond 19.‘, 4,736 85,000 Bonds of Other Government Units - H.R.A. Building Bond 213,OOP TOTAL SPECIAL LEVIES 373,190 TOTAL ALL LEVIES $1,976,637 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 September 13, 1993. ATTEST: Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor Callahan and Orono CounciImembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator f\J / September 9, 1993 SUBJECT: 1994 Proposed Budget The 1994 Budget proposal reflects an effort to control costs through a number of cost reduction initiatives with the 9oal of limiting the expenditure increase in the General Fund to a minimum emou: t. This is a difficult task given that there are a number of expenditure items that are not discretionary for the City that have increased substantially. The exoenditures in the general fund have increased from $3,132,572.00 to $3,215,090.00 for an increase of $82,518,000 or 2.63% over 1993. The tax levy required to fund the overall budget including the general fund, sere and water fund deot and the building bond debt has increased from $1,779,222.00 to $1,867,703.00 for an increase of $88,481.00 or 5% over 1993. The major expenditure and revenue items reflected in the 1994 proposed budget are as follows: 1. General fund budget A. General fund expenditures (1) Fire equipment fund funding level Historically Orono has been setting aside approximately $22,000.00 per year in a fire equipment fund. In 1993 this amount was increased to $30,000.00 due to the significant reduction int he Long Lake fire service operating budget. The 1994 fire budget reflects a $20,000.00 contribution to the fire equipment fund. This amount reflects an offor I to somewhat l imit the increase in the tire budget while absorbing a significant increase in the Long Laxe fire service operating budget. (2)Elimination of the K-9 program. The elimination of the K-9 program enables an expenditure reduction of $18,000 from the 1993 budget. In addition, the $11,500 expense of training a new K-9 officer and a new dog is avoided. Also, because the City would no longer be required to pay 1/2 hour of comp time per day to the K-9 officer for care of the dog, an additional 22 eight-hour shifts of patrol officer time becomes available to the departmen 1994 Proposed Budget September 9, 1993 page 2 (3) The K-9 program has been used most extensively as a community relations program. The need for a K-9 unit in an enforcement capacity in Orono is not substantial. For those times when a K-9 unit is needed there are several units available from police departments in adjacent cities. It is staff's recommendation that the staff and dollar resources of the police department are better used in other areas rather than for a K-9 unit. The major expenditure increases reflected in the proposed General Fund budget are as follows: 1. 2. 3 . 4 . 5. 6 . 7. 8 . 9. 10 . 11. 12 . 13 . LMCD dues - $7,000. LOGIS charges - $6,000. Liability and property insurance $7,800. Elections - $6,490. (This amount reflects the election in 1994 versus no election in 1993. it also reflects the costs related to changing the polling location from the old Council Chambers to the Minnetonka Art Center.) Assessor fee - $2,000. Legal fees - $2,300. Utilities for the city buildings - $11,245. Building maintenance - $2,550. Fire service contracts - $14,780. Street equipment, parts and maintenance $4,600. Street lighting (utilities) - $1,500. Legal and Engineering fees charged to developers - $6,800. (These fees are recouped by ’■he city from the developers.) Wages and Insurance a. ) Police - $24,180. (This reflects the 2.75% wage increase and $20 per monirh insurance increase in the second year of the two-year contract.) b. ) Non-union staff - $27,386. (This reflects a 2% wage increase and a 0% insurance increase.) B. General fund revenues (1) Transfer of interest earnings from the building fund. Since the creation of the building fund, a significant ar-unt of interest earnings has been 1994 Proposed Budget September 9, 1993 page 3 2 . transferred to the general fund. The amount of this transfer has been reduced in recent years to enable the interest earnings to be used to pay the debt service on the HRA bonds. The 1994 budget reflects a further reduction in this transfer from $84,000.00 to $65,000.00. Debt Service A.HRA bonds As directed by Council, the levied amount for the HRA bonds has been set at 1.75%. n. '89 sewer and water bonds The proposed budget reflects an increase in levy for the '89 bonds of $25,000.00 to provide a total levy of $40,000.00 for the '99 bonds. The 1993 proposed budget provides for controlling costs and maintaining existing service levels while providing a foundation for sounc? fiscal nanagcinent. / rO: FROM: DA'l'E: SUB,IFCT: Ron Moorsc, City Administrator John Gerhardson, Public Works Director September 10. 1993 Disposal of Unwanted, Obsolete, and Confiscated Items \ »A ” % As a result of moving to the new facility, we have now collected enough iicms to warrant having a sale to dispose of used furniture, obsolete items and confiscated items The following is a list of items that have been determined to be surolus items or confiscated items; Saddle tanks - 3 Federal Beacon Ray Warning Lights Exhaust fan Old pump kerosene Hanging fu.naces Air compressors - 2 Law Bov mower Malsburg steamer Gas hose Differential lubster Redwood shutters 1 twin product fuel pump 1 single product fuel pump Florcscent lights Chain saw Shelving Plow shoes Coffee makers Two way radii's - tube type Cabincis (oak) Fire extinguishers Pick up tool boxes Pintle hitches B & S gas engine - 3 HP Folding chairs Electrical - Misc. Tractor seat PC printer cabinets Bathroom vanity 950 X 16 tires - 4 Paddle pump Metal lo-:ator Window insert air conditioner AC unit for forced air Barnyard lights Door Stretches Card files Air cleaner 2 drawer file cabinets - 4 Refrigerator Radiators - hot water heater Bucket for backhoe Pick-up topper Pup-up trailer Hiehwav sanders - 3 Two wheel trailers - 3 One v.a> piew 4 wheel trai.er FeRoi compressor Wobble Wheel Packer FOR AUCTION File cabinet - 2 drawer Smaller drawer cabinets - 3 18" X 38" single storage cabinet Small blackboard Bulletin board - 2 White grease board - 2 Fesch machine Telephone system Miscellaneous property for sale from garage-llorescent bulbs, chairs, auto pn«> Metal cabinet Tables - 2 - typewriter & computer Several wood clothing cabinets 4-munth reminder grease board Bikes - 30 OKI scale Desk Table L FOR AUCTION File cabinet - 2 drawer Smaller drawer cabinets - 3 18" X 38" single storage cabinet Small blackboard Tables - 2 - typewriter & computer Several wood clothing cabinets 4-month reminder grease board Bikes - 30 Bulletin board - 2 White crease board - 2 Old scale Desk Fesch machine Table Telephone system Miscellaneous property for sale from garage-florescent bulbs, chairs, auto parts Metal cabinet ’t 5-3-93 LT. CHESWICK, THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE LOCATED IN THE PROPERTY ROOM AND ARE READY TO BE AUCTIONED WITH OTHER CITY ITEMS. I AM UNAWARE UF THE LOCATION OF BICYCLES WE HAVE AT THIS TIMF , I WILL NEED TO GET TOGETHER WITH YOU ON THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. ITEMS TO BE AUCTIONED 8 1 50 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 COOLERS GOLF BAG WITH UMBRELLA TENNIS BALLS TENNIS RACKET TACKLE BOX TENT SLEEPING BAG helmet FLASHLIGHT BACK PACK FRAME NIKE GYM BAG LONG SWORD PURSES VEHICLE LIGHTS 2 0 1 3 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 CAMERA EQUIPMENT CARRYING CASES 35mm CAMERAS POLAROID FILM C3 RADIOS AM/FM CASSETTE PLAYERS SCANNERS MARINE RADIO AND POWERVERTER equalizer KODAK INSTAMATIC CAMERAS SEARS 1500W HEATER 4 CUP COFFEE MAKER STEEL SUIT CASE GAS LEAF BLOWER VIDEO ITEMS: 1 1 1 4 2 2 1 10 2 6 4 * PANASONIC VIDEO CAMERA PANASONIC POTABLE VIDEO RECORDER VIDEO MASTER CONTROL BLANK VIDEO TAPES INSTRUCTIONAL VCR TAPES VIDEO CLEANING KITS VIDEO BOOSTER BOX MISC. VIDEO LIGHTING SYSTEMS AC/DC ADAPTORS MISC. FILTERING SYSTEMS FOR VIDEO CAMER.\S BATTERY PACKS OTHER MISC. VIDEO ITEMS TTF.MS TO BE TRANSFERED TO CITY OF ORONO 1 I 1 1 35mm CAMERA CARRYING CASE FOR LONG GUNS SPOTLIGHT PORTABLE OUTLET CENTER HOTEt BICYCLES AND SOME OTHER ITEMS WILL BE ADDED TO THESE LISTS OFFICER IJ^RRY TOMCHECK #511 -_ FOR AUC riox File cabinet - 2 drawer Smaller drawer cabinets - 3 Tables - 2 - typewriter tS: computer Several wood clothine cabinets 18" ,\ 38" single storage cabinet Small blackboard 4-month reminder grease board Bikes - 30 Bulletin board - 2 Old scale White grease board - 2 Fesch machine Desk Table Telephone system Miscellaneous property for sale from garage-florcscent bulbs, chairs, auto pans Metal cabinet f TO; FROM: DATK: SUBJECT; Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator September 9, 1993 S % % ft■; ''h % Moratorium on the Required Upgrade Conforming Septic Systems of Certain Non- At ius August 23rd i..eeting the City Council established a moratorium on the enforcement of City ordinances requiring the upgrade of septic systems that are non-conforming due to the "3' separation' requirement. I have attached an ordinance establishing the mc*-atorium for Council approval. The moratorium extends to March 13, 1994 to provide a six month period to address a number of complex issues related to the impact of the current septic regulations. I have also attached a report providing information on a preliminary analysis of current septic systems and potential areas where the provision of sewer may be preferable to upgrading the septic systems. Potential issues to be addressed during the six month moratorium are as follows: 1.Review whether the provision of sewer may be preferable to upgrading septic systems in areas where it appears a large percentage of systems will need to be upgraded. Review i*ow the provision of sewer to some ruial areas may impact the City's Comprehensive Plan. 3 .Determine the magnitude of the total cost of upgrading the number of septic systems it appears will be found to be non-conforming. 4 .Review whether the City should provide any type of fiiitUicial assistance in relation to the septic upgrades. Review whether to revise the septic code as it relates to requirements for systems that do not meet the 3 separation requirement. ORDINANCE NO., SECOND SERFES W AN ORDINANCE ESTABUSIIIN(i A MORATORIUM ON THE ENFORCI' .MENT OF CITY ORDINANCES REOI^'IR*Nfi UrCJRADE OF CERTAIN NONCONFORMING SEmC SYSTEMS AS DESCRIBED HEREIN. THE CITY OF ORONO ORDAINS: The Municipal Code of the City of Orono is amended by adding Ordinance No. , Second Series. SECTIO.N 1. Statement of Policy. The City Council finds that the City is presently faced with the potential of numerous applications for building permits for properties which rely on on-site sewage treatment systems for sewage disposal. Prior to February 10. 1992, such existing on-site sewage treatment systems with less than 3 ’ of unsamrated soil or sand between the distribution device and the limiting soil characteristics, were considered by definition as "substandard systems". Such "substandard systems" were not required by code to be upgraded when a request for a building permit for any purpose was requested. On February 10. 1992. however, the Council adopted revisions to Section 12.30. the On-site Sewage Treatment Ordinance. This new ordinance defined as "nonconforming systems ”, any system w ith less than 3 ’ of unsaturated soil or sand between the distribution device and the limiting soil characteristics. Further, the ordinance retained language appearing in the code since 1978 which required that systems found to be nonconforming shall be brought up to conforming status within one calendar year. On February' 24. 1992, the Council adopted a new Shoreland Ordinance. The new Shoreland Ordinance required that a nonconforming sewage treatment system as defined in Section 12.30 and Uxated within the Shoreland Overlay District must be upgraded and made conforming, at a minimum, at any time a pcnnil or variance of any type is required lor any improvement on, or use of. a property Enforcement of this ordinance requires that the conformity status of an on site sewage treatment system within the Shorelaiul Overlay District be determined and found noncvuifonning before issuance of a building p< rinit The Orono Community Management Plan, or "Comprehensive Plan", identifies a number of areas in the City which are currently not provided with municipal sewer, but which because of liKation near a water body or existing density of development, must be monitored carefully to ensure continued satisfactory use of ‘'n site sewage treatment systems Hicse areas might be severely impacted by enforcement of tlie ordinances requirmg system upgrade Rie pocential desirability of providing municipal sewer sersice to these areas as an ah.nutivc. has not been studied It appears to the CiHincil that the consequences of requiring upgrade of nonconlonning septic .. .r. iK« ch.^n.ijn.1 Ovfriav DiMrici at aiiv time a huitding, permit 0 reqt»sted, may be undesirable in some respects or at some locations. Hie Council, theretore, finds that it is necessary to study the impact of such requirements on the underlyini ’ purposes of the City’s land use and /oninj: provisions, on the provisions of the City’s comprehensive planning, and on the citizens of Orono. riie Council further finds that if. as a result of this study, the land use controls and zoning provisions contained in the City Code or the provisions of the Community Management Plan need to be revised, such revision is a process that cannot be accomplished until a study has been completed and a hearing held. During this period, it is desirable that the Council establish guidelines for the benefit of those who wish to improve their property and for the benefit of those who have or \mI1 be found to have nonconforming systems, in order to bring about savings of public and private expenditures and to provide the public guides to future City action. Since enactment of an amendment to the code would undoubtedly nutdify existing regulatioas concerning the retiuired upgrade of septic systems which are noncontorminc solely due to the lack of 3’ separation as noted above, the further enforcement of requirements to upgrade such systems would be contrary to the purpose of the Zoning Enabling Act. Minnesota Statutes 462.351, et. seq. riie Council further finds that it would be unwise, improper, and unjust to enforce the requirement for such upgrades to occur during this study. 1 heretore, the City stalf s authority to enforce the requirement for upgrade of such nonconforming systems shall not be exercised during the limited terms of this ordinance, as provided in Section 5. SHCnON 2. Study. The Cttuncil hereby refers this matter to the Planning Commission to initiate a study regarding the implications ot requiring upgrade ot nonconforming sewaee treatment systems as a condition of building pennit approval, and lurther regarding the implications of requiring such upgrades in areas that might be served with mumcipal sewer in the future, and the potential need for amendments to the City Code and Comprehensive Plan to implement the results of tliat study. SECTION 3 Restrictions Enforcement of the Regu.remen t for Upgrade_Qt Nonconforming On-site Sewage Treatment Systems. For all properties ItKated within the Shorcland Overlay District and which request a building permit or variance for any purpo.se. the City Inspector shall detennine ihe conformity status of any on-site sewage treatment system in use on the property. however, if such sewage treatment system is determined to be nonconfonning due M>lely to the lack of 3’ separation noted .'l-ove. such noncontorming suitus shall not be cause to denv the building permit l urther. f*»r al! areas of the City, either within or not within the Shotel.md Overlay District, enforcement of the requirement to upgrade septic systems which are noncontorming «)lely due to tlte lack of 3‘ separation, shall be suspended for the duration of this interim ordinance. SEC HON 4 Du ration This ordinance shall expire on March 13. 1994. without r,.un.il ..clion! or It may be repealed earlier if die Council determines dial the requisiie snidies have bsen eompicted and adopied and dial appiopiiale cvalualion and aelion, invluding ^ neeessarv revisions of the Zoning Cinle, or Comprehensive Plan, have Iwn linaliacd The duiaiion of this ordnance may be exieiided by adoption of a subsequeni ordinance lor a total of m>t more than 18 additional momhs SUCTION 5. Variances. The Council may grant a variance to this ordinance if the Council finds alter careful review of all the facts that a proposal is not contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Community Management Plan, that it is compatible with the zoning and official control amendments being considered by the City, and that it does not adversely impact the health, safety or welfare of the citizens. SliCflON 6. Separability. Every section, provision, or pan of this Ordinance is declared separable from every’ other section, provision, or part; and if any section, provision, or part thereof or action taken hereunder shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision, or part. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be published in the Pioneer and the Uiker and shall be effective immediately upon publication. y^ dopted by the City Council of the City of Ororn^ on the 13th day of September, 1993, by k. vote of____ayes and____nays. Pldward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor ATIESI': Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk L lo:Mayor CaUahan and Oroiio Countilmcmbcrs Ron Moorsc, Citv Administrator From:Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administraior Date:September 9, 1993 Subject: Review of Rural Housing Clusters List of Kxhibits A - Review of Septic Data - 9 Housing Clusters B - Map C - Review of City-wide Non-conformity Potential D - Historv of Unsewered Residential Development 1977 - 1992 (Charts) The attached information has been prepared to assist Council in discussions regarding whether (and where) sewer might be provided to currently unsewered areas of the City. Nine significant housing clusters identified in the Comprehensive Plan as needing :lose monitoring have been described in F.xhibit A. While a complete "Alternative Waste Management Study" has not been aitenipied for any ot these areas, data regarding lot sizes, e.xisting system conditions, and potential for connection to sewer, have been provided. The data suggests that there exist within the City appro.ximately 630 existing trench systems constructed prior to 1983 with a p*uential lev not meeting the 3 separation requirement. Sewering all nine of these rural clusters or "hot spots" would eliminate approximately 130 of these potential non-contorming systems, leavng 500 potential system replacements. Sewering all nine rural clu.stcrs would still leave some low density Minnetonka shoreline unsewered. Also, not all of the rural clusters are within the Shoreland Overlay District. Outside of the rural clu.stcrs. Council may wish to review unsewtred areas ot the City which are lelatiuly near existing municipal sewer lities and'or are lower density lakcshore properties. L I. 2. A REVIEW OF RURAL CLUSTERS Hay Ridge • 8 homes - subdivision created in 1953 • I vacant common ownership lot (1.1 acre) • Developed lot size range; 0.6 acre-1.0 acre • Developed lot size average; 0.8 acre • All are lakeshore lots. System Conditions; • All are trench systems constructed from 1958-1967. • No recorded incidents of failure or surfacing. • None have been repaired or replaced. Most arc substandard in drainfield and tank sizes. • Conformity inspections have not been performed yet; however, testing tor the vacant lot (preparatory to a request for common ownership buildability variance) indicated that lot would need a mound due to high seasonal water table. It is likely that many of the existing trench systems will be found non-conforming. Potential for Connection to Sewer; • 5 of 8 systems are on County Road 15 side of houses. • Bay Ridge Road is private. • l.ioo feet of pipe along County Road 15 could provide a lateral serving all 8, discharging directly to the lift station at Spates and County Road 15. • Connection to existing pipe in Railroad Avenue might be a shorter run. but likely is not deep enough to serve south end homes on Bay Ridge. Fox imi 14 residences - 2 vacant substandard lots Sulxlivision created in 1965. De\eloped lot size range; 0.9 acre - 1.1 acre Developed lot size average; 1.0 acre Nor are lakeshore lots. Anticipate 9 adjacent developed lots (tu’i including Nettles) and 1 vacant lot would also be served by sewer if a project were designed. These 10 lots average more than two acres in area. Systcm Condit.iojns; A Foxhill • Original systems constructed 1965-1974 • 2 of 14 have had trench drainfield additions (1982, 1984) • 13 of 14 arc trench systems. 1 of 14 is (will be) new mound in conjunction with replacement of home destrtiyed by tire. • None arc currently failing, but 2 (of 2 inspected) have been determined to be non- conforming due to lack ot separation; others likely. • Majority of systems luve substandard sized draintidds and/or tanks. H. Adjacent Lots • 2 of 9 have receni mound systems (1985. 1987) • 7 of 9 have trench systems ranging from 5 years to 30+ years in age. • 5 or 6 of these potentially are in)n-conforming due to lack of 3* separation. • None are currently failing. Potential for Connecti(m to .Sewer • Laterals to serve Heritage Drive and Heritage l^ne would likely be located in the roadway, with a connecting lateral (possibly requiring a lift station) to the Crystal Bay lift station, or by connection under the railroad to e.xisting laterals in Brown Road.. • Total length of laterals to serve all areas di.scussed above is 3,600-4,000 feet (see connection concepts A and B). 3.Webber Hills • 34 e.xisting homes, nv) vacant lots. • Subdivision created in 1964. • Developed lot size range: 0.9 acre - LI acre e.xcluding wetlands ** Developed lot size average: 1.0 acre • Majority are within l.OOO feet of OHWL of Tanager Lake or French Uke North Basin. System Conditions: m m # # Original systems constructed 1965-1977. 1 system currently failing. 14 of 34 have had major repairs or replacement during period 1978-1992. Of 34 systems. 4 are mounds, 30 are trenches. Of 34. the 25 built/replaced prior to 1983 potentially do not meet 3’ separation. So far, all properties with systems needing repair have had a site available. How'ever, this tray not be the case for all properties in the future. Potential for Connection to Sewer: . r k • Webber Hills at its closest point is heated approximately 0.4 miles n(*rth of the Crystal Bay sewer lateral where connection might be made. • Due to variable elevations, bringing all id Webber Hills sewage to a single location will likely require one lift station. A second lilt station would likely be required to feed a force main in either Willow Drive or Brown Road. • 1 he Willow Drive route might serve as many as 42 total units requiring as much as 5 800 lineal feet of piping I he Brown Road route would likely serve 45 um*^ via 7!o OO lineal feet of pipe. Father route has a minor capability to serve umts outside the Webber Hills subdivision 4. Fox Kidgc • 7 homes - subdivision created in 1963. • Lot sizes average appro.ximately 1 acre. • Wetlands have an impact on 3 of the lots. » 3 of 7 are within or partially within the Shoreland Overlay District. System Conditions: • All are trench or bed systems originally constructed from 1964 to 1968. « 5 of 7 have had significant drainfield repairs or additions during the period 1970- 1982. • 1 of 7 is failing as of 1992. with 1 other showing signs of pending failure. • Confomiity inspections have not been perfonned yet, but all are potentially non- conforming based on the separation requirement. • Lot sizes, slopes, and wetlands make system replacement questionable on some lots. potential for Con nection to Sewer: • This cluster of houses is Vo mile north of Webber Hills, and '.4 mile south ot the Orono/Long Lake boundary. • The nearest Orono sewer line is at Hackberry Hill, approximately mile distant. The most efficient way to sewer Fox Ridge would be a connection up Brown Road into the Long Lake sewer system. This would, of course, require a prior agreement between the two cities. 5. Brackett's Point • Area includes 26 existing residences on 22 separate properties, all of which abut Smith’s Bay, Brown ’s Bay or Tanager Lake. .Ml are within Shoreland Overlay District. Average developed lot size: 3 acres approximately. • Range in lot sizes: 0.5 acres - 22 acres approximately. • Area is identified as a rural cluster due to some existing development on very low land and general area proximity to lakeshore. System Conditions' Of 26 systems, none are currently failing. Systems range widely in age and construction. 2 i>f 26 are mound systems, remainder include trenches and Ived.s. 16 of 2(> have been constructed or had major repair since 1978. Generally sandv conditions exist throughout the aiea. which has limited the incidence of failure. ^ n ^ i • 1 of 2 mounds has had chronic intennittent seepage, other is adjacent to H ikh I plain and potentially affected by drainage problems. Perhaps 10 to'l5 of 26 are potentially non-conforming systems To date, one system (believed to be serving 3 residential units) has been inspected for conformity and was found to be non-conformiini. No others have been inspected tor conformity. Approximately 5 of 26 lots may be too small to contain a site for replacement system. 7. Potential for Connccti(^n to Sewer: • MWCC forccmain in County Road 15 bisects the area. An injector lift station would be needed to make use of the forccmain. and might be installed at the intersection of County Road 15 and Brackett ’s Point Road. laterals would be needed to serve Brackett ’s Point Road. Shoreline Drive. Greentrees Road and Millston Road (the latter two being private roads). 6. Orono Orchards • I'his is a neighborhood located just northeast of the Orono Golf Course on Orono Orchard Road, Smith Avenue and Lyman Avenue • 15 e.xisting residences on small lots, plus an additional 7 homes in close proximity on 2-acre lots. Averatie lot size of 15: 0.9 acre 'W' Ranee and lot sizes of 15: 0.40 acre - 1.75 acre This area is not in the Shoreland Overlay District. Subdivision was created in 1924. System Conditions: • Of 22, 1 system currently failing, 1 other is .showing signs of pending failure. • I mound, 21 trench systems. • 5 systems built in 1983 or later, 17 built prior to 198’’. • 9 of 22 built in 1960 ’s or earlier. • None have been inspected tor 3’ separation conlormity as of yet, but potential for 17 of 22 to be non-conforming. • Possibly half the lots have little or no replacement possibility. Potential for Connection to Sewer; • MWCC forccmain in Orono Orchard Road abuts this area. An injector lift station would be required, as would laterals in Orono Orchard Road, Smith Avenue and possibly a short distance up Lyman Avenue. Fast Long Lake Road • Area includes 4 homes across frimi Oroiu> s Summit Park Beach on Last Long l.ake Ro.id. • Average lot size: acre. Range in lot sizes: 0.5 acre - 1.1 acre. • All 4 arc in Shoreland Overlay District. System Condition s; •"^Systems of varying ages, nu)st recent had drainfield addition in 1978. • All 4 arc trench systems pttientially not meeting 3’ separation. • 2 of 4 had minor surface discharge in 1992. • Alternate site availability has not been investigated. 9. PntfMiti.il for Ctmncction to Sewcr^• Nearest existing municipal sewer is that ot City ot Long Lake. 500-1,000 feet wes . No Orono sewer lines nearby. North Long l.ake (Dakota Ave/Long I.ake Blvd) • 29 homes - subdivisions created in 1926 and 1948. • Developed lot sizes average: 0.6 acre • Developed lot size range: 0.15 acre - 2.7 acres • 8 of 29 are lakeshore lots. • All 29 are within Shoreland Overlay District. System Conditions,;, • 2 of 29 are mounds, 27 are trench or bed systems. • Current systems range from 5 years to 35 years plus in age. . 2 of 29 failing as ofl992 inspections. , a .f Inve been • None have had conformity inspections, but only 6 o _ construcled/recomirucled since 1983. so a potential e.xists lor 23 ot 29 to be m>n . Many lots are small and likely do not have an alternate draintield site. • Of the 9 areas, this area is anticipated to potentially be the most critical due to size , slopes and age of systems. Potential for Connection to Sewerj. • This area is approximately '/• mile from the nearest Orono sewer mes as c flies but about 1'.4 miles o-er City roads. . M tnv ■’•acre lots wiili contomiing systems and alternate sites lie between this area aid the e“^ing sewer system, as does the l ong Uke Country Club Add,non (Area 9). Long Lake Country Club Addition • 20 homes - subdivision created in 1961. • 2 vacant lots in common ownership with adjacent ° . 1070’s • Original systems were trenches mainly built from mid- 1 s o t; , • Average developed lot size: LO acre • Ranee in developed lot sizes: 0,9 acre - 1.8 acre ,, , , . 5 of 20 are within or partially within the .Shoreland Oserlay 1),strict, ?^'^of^*^'edlscharging to the surface during 1992 inspections. . 8 of M hase‘^u„t*crU- substantial repair or replacement since original sy.tem . r»f"20 have been built since 1983 leaving 16 with potemial for being non- cimfoiming. • 3 of 20 are m»>und systems. 1^. Potential for Connection to Sewer: • Nearest munieipal sewers are 2,(XX) feet south at Sugar Woods. • Most adjacent and nearby development is at 2-acre density, the e.xception being Area 8, 'A mile to the east. SUMMARY 1. 3. 5 Bav Ridge: • 2 homes, no currently failing systems. • Potential for high percentage of non-conformities. • In Shoreland Overlay District. • Gravity sewer lateral verv feasible. Foxbill: • No currently failing systems. • Fntire area is in Shoreland Overlay District. • Of 23 existing systems. 60-70% potentially don't meet 3’ separation. .Sewer laterals feasible, elevations might require an additional lift station Webber Hills: • 1 of 34 currently failing. • 14 of 34 have had major repairs. • 75% have potential for not meeting 3’ separation. • Repair capability is questionable. •' lixistinc sewer to which a lateral systetn could connect is almost mile distant • Likelihood that 2 lift stations would be needed. Fox Ridce: • 7 systems. 1*2 current failures. 9 • Potential for majority being non-conforming. • Replacement capability limited on .some lots. • Potential sewer connecti»>n point *4 mile di.stant in neighboring city. Brackett's Point. • 26 systems, many types, minimal failures. • potenti:il for |H.'rhaps 50% to be non-conforming. • All 26 on lakcshore lots and in Shoreland Overlap District. • Replacement potential questionable on 1 out of 5. • .Sewer lateral :onstruction and connection to adjacent MWCC forcemain is feasible Onmo Orchards; • 22 homes. 1-2 tailing systems currently. • Siune have poor replacement capabilities • Sewer connection is feasible nearby • Piitemially 73% of svsiems could be non-conforming i I • 7.Hast Long Lake Road: • 4 homes. 2 with failing or near failing systems. • Lot sizes limit replacement capability. • All 4 potentially non-conforming. • Only feasible sewer connection is to City of Long Lake system. 8. 9. North Long Lake: • 29 homes, 2 systems currently failing. • Small lot sizes, steep slopes severely limit replacement capability. • 80% Dotenti-Jliy non-conforming. • Municipal sewer not readily available for connection. • Most critical of 9 areas. Long Lake Countr>- Club Addition: • 20 homes. 2 current failures. • Lot sizes and slopes limit replacemeiu capability. • 80% potentially non-conforming. • Nearest sewer connection point is nearly mile distant. A. B. C. D. E. F. G. f'xhibit C 0.» 3 ANALYSIS OF CITY-WIDE NON-CONFORMHA POTENTIAL (DATA AS OF 1-1-93) H Existing Mounds: ff Existim: Trenches: 234 964 Total Existing Systems: 1198 (81%) (100%) Of existing trenches, number that have been installed within period 1983-1992 and presumably meet 3’ separation (tst. based on permit record review): 200 Of existing trenches, number that are in Stubbs Bay Sewer Area and likely non- conforming but will be connected to municipal >ewer shortly: 100 Of existing trenches, number that were installed prior to 1983 and do not have sewer available (964-200-100): 664 Of 664. number that might not meet 3’ separation requirement (based on 18 of 19 or 95% of older trench systems failing conformity inspection so far in 1993: 630 % of all existing systems in City (excluding Stubbs Bay) that may need to be upgraded (630 + 0198 -125)): 59% Of 630. number that are in identified "rural clusters” which may be considered for future municipal sewer: 1. 3. (Est.) 175 homes in or near "rural clusters" (Est.) ^22 mounds in or near "rural clusters" (Est.) 155 trenches in or near "rural clusters" (Est.) 139 pre-’S3 trenches (x 95% = 132) (Fsi.) of 630 could be eliminated by sewering all the "rural clusters" H. I caving approximately 500 p(»tcniial n 'li confonning systems needing upgrade I. Conclusions . Excluding those systems in Stubbs Bay which will uxm be phased (Xit. as many as 630 remaining systems may be non conformmg due to lack of 3' separatum . Sewering afi of the 9 "rural clusters" identified in the 2 acre lonc will at best fv-ducc this to around 500 remaining potential m>n-conforming .ystems. These 500 arc n attered throughout the rural area ! . i SEPTIC SYSTEM•'paj;r/rei '1,acement: I I 1977-1992 . I ___ PERMITS n*>so :^\ '9s «3C^ '^*7,9?* I Bi <701 Vt-*/?. I IaJ m \o XT I 4 ^ L^. TO: FROM; DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator September 10, 1993 \" % SUBJECT;% ^Highway 12 and Willow Intersection Safety Impro^^^nts Attachments:1. 2. Accident Information at Willow and Highway 12. Letter From MnDOT Regarding the Safety Improvement Project The cities of Long Lake and Orono have been working with MnDOT for a number of years to provide safety improvements to the Willow and Highway 12 intersection. The optimum solution is a traffic light and lane channelization. When this solution was delayed, both cities worked toward obtaining a temporary traffic signal. This has been found to be unfeasible. The cities have not identified a new alternative because any alternative other chan a traffic signal and lane channelization would have many side effects in terms of safety of other accesses, circulation, traffic levels on other roadways, and viability of businesses. The attached letter from MnDOT is in response to a request from the city to review the potential for restricting left hand turns as an interim safety measure. The letter indicates the easiest and safest solution specifically for the Willow Drive intersection would be to place a median across the intersection to restrict all left hand turns and all crossings of Highway 12 at Willow. In following up with the MnDOT staff person who provided this response, he indicated that because of concerns regarding moving left hand turns from Willow to other minor roadway intersections to the east it may work better to look at other less restrictive measures. I have invited the MnDOT staff person to meet with the Highway 12 and Willow safety committee to review alternative solutions. The MnDOT staff person indicated that as part of any solution selected, there should be an effort to reduce the amount of traffic at the Willow and Highway 12 intersection by encouraging local traffic to use local streets for access to the Willow Drive commercial area rather than using Highway 12. The proposed solutions need to address the types of accidents that are happening at the intersection. I have attached information regarding the accidents that have occurred at Willow and 12 in 1991, 1992 and during the first month of 1993. This information indicates that 56.5% of the accidents at the intersection were caused by people trying to make a left hand turn. The information also indicates the incidence of accidents has been reduced substantially in 1993 compared to 1992. 1^ UPDATED INFORMATION ACCIDENT INFORMATION AT WILLOW AND HIGHWAY 12 (Two year period of time: 1991 - 1992 and first 8 months of 1993) Total Accidents by Month Total Accidents by Day of the Week 1991 1992 1993 1991 1992 1993 January C 1 0 1 Monday 0 1 0 February C 1 1 0 Tuesday 1 2 1 March C 1 1 0 Wednesday 2 6 0 April C 1 1 0 Thursday 0 2 0 May C 1 1 0 Friday 4 2 1 June 1 2 0 Saturday 1 0 0 July C 1 ■ 1 0 Sunday 0 2 1 August 2 ! 2 2 September C1 2 TOTAL 8 15 3 October 4 1 November 1 1 December 0 1 2 TOTAL 8 1 15 3 Total Accidents by Hour of the Day (7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.) 1991 1992 1993 0700 - 0759 3 (2)1 (1)0 0800 - 0859 0 1 (1)0 0900 - 0959 1 (1)0 0 1000 • 1059 1 0)1 (1)0 1100 • 1159 0 0 0 1200 - 1259 1 0 0 1300 - 1359 0 0 1 1400 - 1459 2 (1)4 (1)0 1500 - 1559 0 2 (1)1 (1) 1600 - 1659 0 2 (2)0 1700 - 1759 0 3 (1)0 1800 - 1859 0 0 1 (1) 1900 - 1959 0 1 0 The numbers in parentheses () are accidents caused by cars stopping to make a left- hand turn, from either east or west bound Highway 1 2 onto Willow Drive. Of the 23 accident that happened at this intersection in 1991 - 1992, 56.5% (13) of those were caused by people trying to make the left-hand turn. Of the 15 accidents in 1992, 4 accidents caused personal injuries. Of the 3 accidents so far in 1993, one accident caused personal injuries. formtVaoctnfo i .y»heso>, Of Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Eilgc Building 1500 West 0)unty Road B2 Roseville. Minnesrna 55113 Reply to Telephone No. (612) 582-1361 July 21, 1993 Mr. Ronald J. Moorse • \ » i i 1kCA44i«All Jii UiOA City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MinncoOtu 55323-0066 Dear Mr. Moorse: Chuck Siggeru'J has asked me to respond to your letter ot June 10, 1993, regarding delay to the Trunk Highway (T.Ii.) 12 project between Orono and Long Lake. This delay has been caused by a number of project related issues. This project was submitted in the Safety Improvement Program and was ranked number 44 on a statewide ranking by bencfit/cost (B/C). Based on the B/C ratio the project was scheduled for 1989 construction. Tlie project that was originally programmed was a two-way continuous left turn lane from Willow Drive to County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 146 in Long Lake and Orono at a cost of $500,000. Through the preliminary design process, however, there were several changes to the scope of the project including the addition of a signal at Willow Drive. These project additions changed the project from a simple two-way left turn lane to a fuii channelization anu signal installat'on project at a cost of $1,050,000 requiring more time for dc. gn and the purcha'^e of right-of-way. The final design process for the project started in the spring of 1990. During final design there were problems obtaining survey and utility data for the area, and there were additional design changes. There was also difficulty resolving cost participation and funding splits with the cities. Once the survey data was obtained and the design issues were resolved the construction limits for the project were set. Our records show thul this information was complete in the spring of 1992. It was necessary to set construction limits before acquiring right-of-way. The right-of-way acquisition process is a two to three year process and sometimes longer if there are any special problems with individual properties. Due to the time required for acquiring right-of-way it was again necessary to adjust the project letting date (currently 10-28-94). An Equal Oppormnirv Employer Mr. Ronald J. Moorse July 21, 1993 Page l\vo A temporary signal at the intersection of T.M. 12 and Willow Drive was discussed with our traffic section. A temporary signal at this location would still require a considerable amount of temporary roadwork and the city was not willing to pay for the additional cost. Also, to complete the required geometric changes for the temporary signal, acquisition of right-of-way is necessary. By the time right-of-way could be acquired and the temporary signal constructed it would only be in place for six to twelve months before the permanent signal would be installed. Much of the temporary work would be reconstructed with the channelization project. 'ITie request to establish a left turn restriction at Willow Drive was also reviewed. Historically left turn restrictions have not been effective without physical barriers and a high level of enforcement. Also it appears that a left turn restriction would have negative mipacts on the commercial area for which Willow' Drive is the primary access. Our recommendation is that if a restriction is desired, the median should be completely closed, restricting all traffic to right-in, right-out movements at Willow Drive and encouraging higher use of the sigi»,.lized intersections at Brown Road and Old Crystal Bav Road. We feel that technically, closing the median is the quickest, best, and safest solution until a permanent solution is built with the scheduled safety improvement project. However, this action is really a city decision. The cities must weigh the economic impacts on the local commercial area that would be affected. We will be happy to continue discussion of this alternative with both Long Lake and Orono if they feel it is a feasible short-term solution. TTiank you for taking the time to write and express your concerns. If you have any further questions regarding the signals or traffic questions, please contact Bob Vasek, Traffic Studies Lngineer, at 779-1128. If you have specific questions regarding the status of the safety improvement projc t, please contact Glui Lllis, Final Design Lngineer, at 593-S502. Other comments or questions regardin g the T.H. 12 corridor can be directed to Valeric Reinaas, Pre-De.sign I’loject Manager, at 582-1293. Sincerely, Richard A. Stehr Director, Office of Planning. Development and Traffic cc: Tod Olson, Mayor-City of Long Lake Dave Peterson J May 16.1993 Mr. Ron Morris City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Orono. MN. 55356 Subject: Intersection of Willow Drive and U S. Hwy. 12 Dear Mr. Morris: With much ongoing concern of the danger of this intersection 1 have discussed options and problems with many people. I feel strongly that congestion and accident risk could be dramatically reduced by simply installing signs restricting left turns durring times of heavy congestion. I suggest posting both East and West bound lanes "No Left Turn 7 to 9 a.m. and 5 to 7 We certianly don't need more stop lights on highway 12. Neighbors, local business, many Police officers and your Public Works Director have been supportive of pursuing this further. Chief Sullivan could only suggest rhetorical excuses to squelch the idea. Chief Sullivan had no facts reguarding times or natures of the many accidents occuring at this corner and did not research the accident history. I was only informed how busy his officers were and that trying something like this would only make things worse. Without facts this appears to be a beaurocratic put off. My request is for a report of the accidents, their nature, and their time as relating to turn restrictions. In addition I request this suggestion be passed on to MINNDOT as a suggestion and that I receive a copy of the request and their report. My family has experienced two significant accidents at this comer and take this problem seriously. Your immediate reply is appreciated. Sincerely, Dave Peterson 2625 Fox Street Wayzata, MN. 55391 cc; John Gerhardson, Orono The Editor of The Pioneer Phone (h) 473-2783 (o) 541-0150 ACCIDENT INFORMATION AT WILLOW AND HIGHWAY 12 (Two year period of time: 1991 - 1992) Total Accidents by Month Total Accidents by Day of the Week 1991 January 0 February 0 March 0 April 0 May 0 June 1 July 0 August 2 September 0 October 4 November 1 December 0 1222 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1991 Monday 0 T uesday 1 Wednesday 2 Thursday 0 Friday 4 Saturday 1 Sunday 0 TOTAL ”8 1222 1 2 6 2 2 0 2 TOTAL 8 * 15 Total Accidents by Hour of the Day (7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.) 0700 - 0759 0800 - 0859 0900 - 0959 1000 - 1059 1100 - 1159 1200 - 1259 1300 - 1359 1400 • 1459 1500 - 1559 1600 • 1659 1700 - 1759 1800 - 1859 1900 - 1959 1991 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 (1) 0) 1992 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 4 • y 2 3 0 1 (1) (1) (1) (1) (2) (1) The numbers in parentheses are accidents caused by cars stopping to make a left-harxl turn, from either east or west bound Highway 12 onto Willow Drive. Of the 23 accidents that happened at this intersection in 1991 -1992, 56.5% (13) of those were caused by people trying to make a left-hand turn. Of those 13 accidents, 5 of those happened during the two times suggested by Mr. Peterson for the prohibited left turn signs. That represents 21.7% of total accidents or 38.4% of those accidents caused by a driver stopping to make a left-hand turn. o o \ \ /•' : I ’ I •. \\ > ^- A ,V- • * 'i’V ■•J^esHot • t, *'"r fr *v CITY of ORONO Municipal Oftic« P(Kl cxnct Box 66 CnsUl Ba\. Minnevtu 55323-^Ji^Ni June 10, 1993 Chuck Siggerud Metro Distr'-ct Engineer MnDOT 1500 West County Road 5-2 Roseville, Minnesota 55113-3105 Dear Mr. Siggerud, Upon meeting you at the Highway 12 Alliance meeting in Willmar, I was impressed with your willingness to be of assistance to cities regarding problems or concerns related to Highway 1^. I am sure I will be calling on you for assistance related to the «iqhway 12 Corridor Study. In the meantime, there is another issue related to Highway 12 that has been of continuing concern to the City of Orono. The concern is with the delays in moving ahead the Hichway 12 safety improvement project planned for Orono and Long Lake, and the lack of cooperation from MnDOT in providing an interim solution to the dangerous traffic conditions on Hignway 12, esoeciallv at the Willow Drive intersection. The safety improvement project was to be constructed in 1993. In 1992 the City was advised the project would be delayed until 1994 in ^993 the City was advised the project will be delayed until 1--^- City has not been provided with an expiration for the delays or iny assurances that the 1995 date is a firm date. To help the City to understand your process of scheduling and pri■^ritizing these projects, please provide the City with a listing of tr- projects with which the Highway 12 safety improvements project is competing, a list of the criteria used for prioritizing or ranking the projects, and an explanation o,. why the Highway ^ project 18 ranked lower than those projects tnat are schedulea for ronst-uction in '93 and '94. Please also provide a listing o. the projects that will receive funding in 1993 and 1994. -^he Cities of Long Lake and Orono have agreed to participate in the cost of installing a temporary traffic signal at the Wixxow orive intersection. MnDOT has indicated the signalizaticn ^n not proceed without roadway widening and channelization. MnDOT has *1*0 'id'cated it is not willing to use cooperative agreement funds teT^'lrily widen and channelize the inceraecticn bec.uae it i. not co»t effective to do thia tenporary work and then replace i. T¥1 rPHONH 4-^.VW • »4.\ 4rV»SI0 Chuck Siggerud Metro District Engineer MnDOT June 10, 1993 page 2 with permanent construction. MnDCT first took this position in Noven±ier of 1991 when the project was planned for 1993. The project has now been delayed by two years. This temporary solution needs to be revisited to clarify the actual amount of the project that would have to be replaced by the permanent construction, and to clarify the actual timing of the safety improvement project. If there is uncertainty remaining about whether the safety improvements will be constructed even in 1995 we need to look much more closely at installing the temporary signal and channelitation lanes. While the safety improvement project and temporary signal project are being reviewed, the cities are left with a dangerous high traffic intersection. A near term interim solution needs to be identified as soon as possible. One suggestion made by a resident whose family has experienced several accidents at that intersection is to restrict left turns during the morning and evening rush hour periods. Left turns are a cause of “ portion of the accidents at the intersection. Please review this option in terms of its feasibility and effectiveness from a traffic movement and traffic safety standpoint. The real solution to these safety problems is to move up the safety imcrovement project to a fixec date.Now that Che Lecislative session is completed and the biennial budget has bee adopted MnDOT should be able to firm up the schedule for these types of projects. Please provide a response to the following items at your earliest convenience: 1. 2 . ety i.morovement project has tion of why the project can 1995 . ng and p ation of the pro]ects' with which the safety improvement cotnoetinc. 18 3. A clarification of which pcrticns of the termpcrary wideni.ng and c.han*neli2ation improvements would need to be "re done'' as part of the permanent project and an estimate of the dollar value of the duplicated work. 4. A firm schedule for the construction of the safety improvement pro]ect. chuck Sigcerud Metro District Er.gineer MnDOT June 10, 1993 page 3 help. 5. Review of ‘.he left turn restriction at V7illow and 12. Xf you have any cuefltions please call me. Thc.nks «or you— Ted Olson, Mayor City of Lc.ng Lake L ,VrtNESo>. \ op Tt' Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Edge Building 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville. Minncsou 55113 iL Reply to Telephone No. (61-) 582-1361 July 21, 1993 Mr. Ronald J. Moorse Cirv Administrator Cir\' of Orono Post Office Box 66 Cr>'Stal Bay, Minnesota 55323-0066 Dear Mr. Moorse: Chuck Siggerud has asked me to respond to your letter of June 10, 1993, regarding delay to the Trunk Highway (T.H.) 12 project between Orono and Long Lake. This delay has been caused by a number of project related issues. This project was submitted in the Safety Improvement Program and was ranked number 44 on a statewide ranking by benefit/cost (B/C). Based on the B/C ratio the project w-as scheduled for 1989 construction. The project th?* was originally programmed was a two-way continuous left turn lane from Willow Drive to County State .Aid Highway (CSAH) 146 in Long Lake and Orono at a cost of $500,000. Through the preliminary design process, however, there were several changes to the scope of the project including the addition of a signal at Willow Drive. These project additions changed the project from a simple two-way left turn lane to a full channelization and signal installation project at a cost of $1,0.^0.000 requiring more time for design and the purchase of right-of-way. The final design process for the project started in the spring of 1990. During final design there were problems obtaining survey and utility data for the area, and ’here were additional design changes. There was also difficulty resolving cost participation and funding splits with the cities. Once the survey data was obtained and the design issues were resolved the construction limits for the project were set Our records show that this information was complete in the spring of 1992. It was necessary to set construction limits before acquiring right-of-way. The right-of-way acquisition process is a two to three year process and sometimes longer if there are any special problems with individual properties. Due to the time required for acquiring right-of-way it was again necessary to adjust the project letting date (currently 10-28-94). Ah Equal Opportuniry Employer f Mr. Ronald J. Moorse July 21. 1993 Page Two A lemporar) signal at the intersection of T.H. 12 and Willow Drive was discussed with our traffic section. .A temporar>- signal at this location would still require a considerable amount of temporary roadwork and the city was not willing to pay for the additional cost. Also, to complete the required geometric changes for the temporary signal, acquisition of right-of-way is necessary. By the time right-of-way could be acquired and the temporary signal constructed it would only be in place for six to twelve months before the permanent signal would be installed. Much of the temporary work would be reconstructed with the channelization project. The request to establish a left turn restriction at Willow Drive was also review-ed. Historically left turn restrictions have not been effective without physical barriers and a high level of enforcement. Also it appears that a left turn restriction would have negative impacts on the commercial area for which Willow Drive is the primary access. Our recommendation is that -f a restriction is desi.ed, the median should be completely closed, restricting all traffic to right-in, right-out movements at Willow Drive and encouraging higher use of the signalized intersections at Brown Road and Old Crvstal Bav Road.# We feel that technically, closing the median is the quickest, best, and safest solution until a permanent solution is built with the scheduled safety improvement project. However, this action is really a city decision. The cities must weigh the economic impacts on the local commercial area that would be affected. We will be happy to continue discussion of this alternative with both Long Lake and Orono if they feel it is a feasible short-term solution. Thank you for taking the time to write and express your concerns. If vou have any further questions regarding the signals or traffic questions, please contact Bob Vasek, Traffic Studies Engineer, a: 779-1128. If you have specific questions regarding the status of the safety improvement project, please contact Glen Ellis, Final Design Engineer, at 593-850^. Other cornments or questions regarding the T.H. 12 corridor can be directed tc Valerie Reinaas, Pre-Design Project Manager, at 582-1293, Sincerely, Richard Stehr Director, Office of Planning, Development and Traffic cc: Tod Olson, Mayor-City of Long Lake Dave Peterson r DAVE PETERSON JOB: JOB NO.: 2625 Fox St SUBJECT: Wayzata. MN BY: CHECKED: 55391 DATE: PAGE OF L / 7 TO: FROM: Ron Moorsc. City Administrator ^ '/ * / John Gerha-dson, Public Works Director A’ / DATK:September 1, 1993 Ojc^ ij. % SUBJKCT: Community Development Block Grant - Subrecipient Agreement - Resolution Recently as a matter of procedure the City of Orono approved a subrecipient agreement with Hennepin County Planning and Development to allow Hennepin County to administer several programs funded through Community Develoment Block Grant (CDBG). As a matter of procedure, there must be an enabling resolution. This was not done at the time of the agreement, therefore I have prepared the appropriate resolution for Council approval. j RESOLUTION AUTHORIZINt; THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPLN COLWY FOR THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COiVLMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM FOR YE/VR 19 WHEREAS, the City of Orono has executed a Joint Cooperation Apreeinent with Hennepin County for the purpose of participating in the 1993 (Year 19) Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program; and WHEREAS. Hennepin County is the recipient of an annual grant from the U.S. Depanment of housing and Urban Development for purposes of the program, and the City is a recipient under the program and receives a share of tlie grant; and WHEREAS, program regulations require that the City and County execute a Subrecipient Agreement which sets fonh eh specific implementation processes for activities to be undertaken with program funds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor to e.xecute the Subrecipient Agreement on behalf of the City on this___day of_______________, 1993. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 1 dward J. Callahan. Jr,, Mayor STATE OI- MINNESOI A ) ) ss. COUNl’Y 01- HENNEPIN ) 1 he foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of , 1993, by Edward J. Callahan. Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Noury Page 1 of 1 J r, O LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAI % \ /9 ^ ^ % FOR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 % Septic System Installer -Patnode Bros Sewer u Water 23200 - 109th Avenue Rogers Home Occupation License -Heliotrope Garden Design 4625 West Branch Road c ch-vofo«<.No , <^”37 ' SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTAIiLEES LICENSE APPLICATION(612) 473-7357 Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay» MN 55323 J L ■'7 33 A1 1 nuGstions must be answered. License fee, bond, certificate of 1. •7 • 3. 4H • 5. 6. 7. Business or Business address tra'®'’ name ^ A'l >‘^^0 r 3 rt- <r ■Business phone Residence phone Name of apolicant or company reore_sentative holding .'!JCA certification -To,.. *-T:^ ■•'OO’-’' — Type of certification held; Certificate expiration date Installer Pumoer ~72T /:?// ■?!> Have you ever hel^^a Septic System installer license r*. Orono before? Most recent year / . Have you ever had a license revoked? A^O ._ ^'^hen? Where? 8. Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes 9, Do you pump out septic tanks? Yes - --No SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: r I^Si0?00^\“\%l'=iidTr-i3ro;d naaang City of 0r<^ ^ obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be acs_^ted.£'/r> \y $50-100-300,000 minimum Certificate of xnsu ranc Q. Copy of current MPCA Certificate. LICENSES WII.L NOT BE PHOCESSED UNTIL ALL ITf>1S ARE SUBMITTED List persons other than applicant who are authorize^ be^you to appl^ for permits under your license J) --------{■ ' The undersianed hereby makes application to Minnesota, for a license to install =73.1^ Vtatrof and/or pump out septic tanks, subject to Minnesota and the Ordinances of the Ci^y^^ ■'•'^7 . /• • Date CITY USE ONLY 3 Applicant's Signature Staff recommendation Approval Reason for denial; _ ___ _ _ _ Denial Date City Council Action Date Date license mailed _ _ _ Approved Denied .j^TY OF ORONO .C. Box 66, 1335 So Brown Hd rvstal Bay, 5 5323 ^______ ;^ppiicat,ion Date : V ULV ^ Z 1 9 / Date License Appro’."ed:_______ Date License Z;-n3ires: rvstal Bay, TTr^S"^ Ir' *' a''* Rex’iew Fee - S5C.00PPilCATIOK FOR WnrOM DOME OCCnPATIOK LICEHS- _ C30.0O res 8SS xs =iar s s cs: undersigned hereby agreel/fo the conditrens quoted aoo -* cipal Code and any addit^icnal orhcr^-cnj ^ne • > - ss sr S5 =s S S S SSB as s; I SS 33 S3 33 the Creno ature of Applicant:ate: ^ sr^ sr sss » » » s-a^' reccr.nends tneCITY DSE OKLY: Aftel^ rev^ijg^ of ip<?- -a--.on, owing: X Approval Denra- cr-----e..se KtU. rturo cf Fire inspecrer:D a t e: 'JUC ^ 9 1993 1 Sl^ Ci 00/30/03 PR: 184CM PRREGOR 08/29/93 PR CB PRREGOR 183EMP • NAME DPT460111026 CALLAHAN. EDWARD J 11 18324677 GOETTEN. J.DIANN 11470366069 HURR. JOEILEN L II473646272 JABBOUR. GABRIEL 11 476527186 KELLEY, CHARLES ll YTDGROSS2700.00 2175.03 2r#S 03 2175 03 2175.03 CURRENTGROSS300241241241 241 0067676/ 67 1.266 68 EMP I NAME DPT YTDGROSS CURRENTGROSS471688060ANDERSON. BRUCE L 31 30527.52 1S68.40474563339BOBZIEN. SUE A 31 18457.68 1052.69476921819BORIS. SCOTT W 31 3900.52 244.43471840871BOSMA. JAMIE L 12 11202 18 656.89475443862BRINKHAUS, JOHN F 42 2S971.42 1611.69 472503991 CHESWICK. GARY B 31 31274.68 1727.20 469526026 CORNICK. JAMES L 31 31396.65 1948.53 475989721 DEMBOUSKI JAY C 31 26742.58 1465.77 468821018 ENGLISH III, IRVINQ 31 30726.97 1842.04 472529007 ERICKSON. KURT R 31 28416.77 1607.61 468701868 FISCHENICH. DAN T 31 30605.70 1987.22 507585424 FRITZLER. JOHN M 31 J0424.11 1692.24 469686562 GAFFRON. MICHAEL P 33 26486.34 1473.43 468420832 GERHARDSON. JOHN R 42 36942.08 2172.42 469087884 GOMAN. DAVID J 35 3915.44 214.92 474667812 GREGORY. JAMES D 42 24119 98 1163.04 475380151 HALLIN. DOROTHY M 12 22816.46 1269.29477500668HANSEN. STEVEN C 42 21431.01 1377.80 475444249 HANSING. CAROL J 31 X06S3.61 544.44477463877HASEMAN, CAROLE 12 16735.36 1127.23 475069821 HULTMANN, TIMOTHY J 61 2724.00 346.00 388625358 JENSEN. RODNEY W 93 1493.53 396.56 471569863 JOHNSON. 8RADLE'' P 31 30214.86 1671.33 473141624 JOSTROM. FOREST J 93 2015.75 222.75475604753KENNEN, JANICE M 31 4464 26 277.94 504260307 KNUTSON. CHARLOTTE A 15 18258.07 1014.64472500574KUEHN. THOMAS M 15 38964.63 2167.60 469820293 KVAM, DANA J 93 643.50 82.50 121262417 MABUSTH. JEANNE A 33 33169.37 1845.20469723373MAY. DAVID E 61 2851.50 441.00 475344512 MCINTYRE, WILLIAM E 93 1138.50 244.75 480843542 MCNICHOLS. DAVID L 31 25236 64 1566.55476018974MILLS JR, WALTER H 93 1911.89 143.75 477700023 HOORSE,^ RONALD J 12 43357 38 2511.84 334506281 MOROWCiYNSKI. JAMES 31 29898.71 1798.76 477028779 NELSON, DAVID D 35 2495.90 162.01 468909535 OBERAIGNER. SCOTT G 42 20921.63 1029.12476783251OBRIEN. RANDY L 92 22384.15 1286.40 470700901 OMAN. LYLE E 33 26486.31 1473.44 469848107 PALMER. GREGORY A 42 20936.97 1194.99 475382983 OUAST. WAYNE A 92 25969.60 1366.32 473746173 RATHBUN^ BARRY J 92 21604.51 1083.28473609629ROSS, j6mn a 93 1949 75 184.25 470566529 SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B 31 8654 94 340.06 469629194 SKREEN. DALE S 4?21338 27 1083.294755691»7 STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD 93 22816.43 1299.27 267460042 SULLIVAN. STEPHEN X 31 37015.91 2059.20 472563051 THOMTON. MARK R 31 27429 84 1509 77474663296TOMCHfCK. LAWRENCE F 31 27978 82 1679 614707043C4TOMCZYK MARK W 31 28627 34 1686 03475505292VANG. BRUCE L 33 22816 45 1269 28468629488VEE LirOA S 12 18134 05 1157,32500403192WALTERS. LINDA G 15 16934 47 1176 80477881539WECAMAN. STEPHEN J 33 20099.63 1117.82 •3.608.81 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Tue Aug 31 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT 1993 22:44:13VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT •INVOICE PO NUM.Page 1 MANUALCITY COUNTY CREDIT UNI W/H A TRANSFERRED 9999-2030 000447 IPCOLONIAL LIFE INS INS W/H 9999-2030 000443 IPCOMMERCIAL LIFE INS INS W/H 9999-2030 000450 IP FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF WITHHELD FEDERAL/MED 0999-2030 000448 IP FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CITY SHARE FICA/MEDC 9999-2030 000437 IP FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF NET PAYROL TRANSFER 9999-2030 000430 iP GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURA DEF COMP W/H 9999-2030 000451 IP HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPOR MARK THOMTON IC02687 9999-2030 000434 IP HZNNEPIN COUNTY SUPPOR DALE SKREEN •^'026231 9999-2030 000446 IP ICHA RETIREMENT TRUST*W/H DEF COMP 9999-2030 000449 IP LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR W/H UNION DUES 9999-203',000433 IP MINNESOTA BENEFIT INS W/H 0999-2030 000442 IP MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVE STATE TAX WITHHELD 0999-2030 000438 IP MN STATE RETIREMENT-DE W/H DEF COMP 9999-2030 000453 IP PEBSCO/OBRA W/H DEF COMP 9999-2030 000452 IP PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYO W/H DEF COMP 9999-2030 000443 IP PERA LIFE INS INS W/H 9999-2030 000444 IP PERA PERA W/H 9999-2030 000445 IP 028880 1003/00/01 $4,361.00$4,361.00*028881 1993/09/01 $137.18$137.18*028182 1993/09/01 $67.77$67.77* 021183 1993/09/01 $9,314.60 $9,314.60* 028884 1993/09/01 $2,733.58 $2,733.58* 02888S 1993/09/01 $37,788.58 $37 768 58* 02M86 1993/09/01 $1,153 00 $1,153.00* 028887 1993/09/01 $146.50 $146.50* 028888 1993/09/01 $164.00 $164.00* 028889 1993/09/01 $30.00 $30.00* Q28880 1993/09/01 $350.00 $350.00* 028891 1993/09/01 $5.09 $5 09* 028892 1993/09/01 $2,873.08 $2,873.08* 021193 1993/09/01 $100 00 $100 00* 021894 1993/09/01 $176 22 $176 22* 02119$ 1993/09/01 $763.46 $763.46* 029119 1993/09/01 554 00 $54 00* 028197 1993/09/01 $3,570.94 $3,570.94* #m invoice000439 PO NUM.COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Aug 20 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT$4,361$4,361$137$137$9,238$9,238$2,763$2,763$39,795$39,795$1,153$1,153$146$146$164$164$30$30$2,839 $2,839$100$100 $269 $269 $763 $763 $54 $54 .00.00*. 18 .18*.39 . 39*. 90 .90*.71.71*.00.00*.50.50*.00.00*.00.00*.98.98*.00.00* .07 .07* .46 .46* .00 .00* 1993 12:57:07vendor DESCRIPTIONCITY COUNTY CREDIT UNI W/H & TRANSFERRED ACCOUNT • 6999-2030 INVOICE000430 PO NUM.COLONIAL LIFE INS INS W/HFIRST NATIONAL BANK OF W/H FED TAX-MEDCR-FIFIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CITY SHARE FICA & MEFIRST NATIONAL BANK OF NET PAYROLL TRANSFERGREAT WEST LIFE ASSURA DEF COMP W/HHENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPOR MARK THOMTON iC02667HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPOR DALE SKREENICO262310ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST- W/H DEF COMPMINNESOTA DEPf OF REVE STATE TAX W/HMN STATE RETIREMENT-DE W/H DEF COMP PEBSCO/OBRA W/H DEF COMP PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYO W/H DEF COMP PERA LIFE INS INS W/H 9999-20309999-20309999-20309999-20309999-20309999-20309999-20309999-20308999-20309999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 000419000429000427000428000425000432000431000426000421000422 000424 000423 000417 •TIE Ml X •)COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY Fri Aug 20 1993 12:57:10Fund • 000 payroll clearing $65,470.70$65,470,79 U CITY OF ORONO 00/03/03FRI. SEP 3. 1993 10:21 AM —req. LOGIS loc: OR-FiNCE----tob •''zelf IJ470 CHECK REGISTER . ^<i.07>-report id: CKREu—prog; CK200Chick P.y.. ID. P.y. Him. . . . . . .0.1. .Ch.ck Amoujl Typ. Subs R.l_To Not.. . . . . . ......................................nnom lo.oo hw i» m,.u w-ih..SUB TOTALS. Total Void Machine Written Total Void Hand Written Total Machine Written Total Hand Written Total Reversals Total Cancelled Checks SUB TOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.147.48 0.00 0.00 17. .47.48 Number of Checks Processed: Number of Checks Processed; Number of Checks Processed: Number of Checks Processed; Number of Checks Processed; Number of Checks Processed; D CITY Of FRI. SIChecks■•■■■IOR 027: OR 027: OR 027: OR 027: OR 027: OR 027: OR?027: OR 027: OR 0273 OR 0273 OR 0273 OR 0273 OR 0273 OR 0273 OR 0273 OR 0273 OR 0273 OR 0273 OR 0273 OR 02731 08 02731 OR 02731 OR 02731 Chick Piyii ID. OR 027363 T30O OR 027364 T242 OR 027365 T391 OR 027366 T392 OR 027367 143 OR 027361 49SOR,027389 T142OR027370T142OR027371T006OR027372T390 OR 027373 T314 OR 027374 629 OR 027375 038 OR 027376 TlOl OR 027377 T006 OR 027371 T213 OR 027378 467 OR 027360 279 OR 027311 T393 OR 027312 676 OR 027313 T242 OR 027314 621 OR 027365 621 09/03/9321 AM —req: LOGIS- - - -1P«y«« NameRED APRON CATERINGCITY OF ORONOMN/S.C.I.ABREEZY POINT RESORTCOMMERCIAL LIFE/GRPMN BENEFIT ASSNMN CHIEF OF POLICE ASSOCMN CHIEF OF POLICE ASSOCMN DEPT OF REVENUE RED APRON CATERING ERICKSON BAKERY POSTMASTER ANDERSON-BRUCE GOLDEN VALLEY COUNTRY CLUB mn dept of revenue MENARD CASHWAY LUMBER MED CTR HEALTH CARE ^ROUP HEALTH INC WUERT2 TODD SAFE BENEFITS CITY OF ORONO MEDICA CHOICE MEDICA CHOICE VOIO TYPED & REVERSED A/P : OR-FiNCE---.job; 2654 IJ470--CHECK REGISTERDate■■ ■BasaBBa08/02/93 Check AmountaBBaaasassBaa150.00 Type5 s a XHW Subsa s a aTR Rel To Noteaazaas xcaaHand sasaBsaasWritten08/11/93 200.00 HW TR Hand Written08/11/93 50 00 HW TR Hand Written08/11/93 220.46 ^IW TR Hand Written08/11/93 67.77 HW TR Hand Writ ten08/11/93 5 59 HU TR Hand Written08/11/93 48.00 HW TR Hand Written08/12/93 195.00 HW TR Hand Written08/13/93 19.51 ny TR Hand W. itten 08/13/93 253.00 HW TR Hand Written 08/13/93 28.70 HW TR Hand Written 08/13/93 900.00 HW TR Hand Written 08/16/93 101.47 HW TR Hand Writ ten 08/17/93 10.00 ttw TR Hand Writ ten 08/23/93 1.933.00 tiw TR Hand Written 08/23/93 105.22 HW TR Hand Written 08/24/93 498.72 HW TR Hand Written 08/24/93 1 1,011.84 KW TR Hand Written 08/24/93 150.00 HW TR Hand Written 08/29/93 1.117.28 HW TR Hand Written 08/27/93 200.00 HW TR Hand Written 08/30/93 2.558 72 HW TR Hand Written 08/30/93 7.313 20 IfW TR Hand Written 1993/09/13 $34 141993/09/13 $462.071993/09/13 S2.631 .541993/09/13 $3,130.561903/09/13 $475.051993/09/13 $144.001993/09/13 $360.001993/09/13 $481.50 1993/09/13 $1,418.25 1993/09/13 $107.00 1993/09/13 $100.00 1993/09/13 $1,342.46 1993/09/13 $1.108.50 1093/09/13 $688.00 1993/09/13 $1,361.07 1993/09/13 $27,127.64 1993/09/13 $337 .50 1993/09/13 1993/09/13 i470.47 - V 1993/09/13 $100.00 K 1993/09/13 $1.093 50 1993/09/13 $24 00 02i908 $44,159.20 1993/09/13 $17.92 028907 $ 17.92 1993/09/13 $241.37 0289QI $241.37 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT 1 INVOICE PO NUM.MANUAL0289091993/09/13 $23.55$23.55*BUDGET PRINTING POSTAGE 0129-4321 000928 OH0289101993/09/13 $10.92$10.92*CELLULARONE TELEPHONE 0249-4320 000929 OH1993/09/13 $72.61 CITY OF LONG LAKE L.S.0569-4324 000961 OH0289111993/09/13 $17.79$90.40*CITY OF LONG LAKE FLASHER 0249-4324 000961 OH0289121993/09/13 $209.75$209.75*COCA COLA VENDING POP 0591-4815 01002799409 OH0289131993/09/13 $189.87$189.87*COPY DUP PR INC COPY MACHINE 0129-4210 1782663 OH0289141993/09/13 $40.00$40.00*DAY DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 0591-4815 12567 OH0289151993/09/13 $504.00$504.00*DETERMAN WELDING & TAN EMTY TANKS 0099-4342 227015 OH0289161993/09/13 $203.30 $203.30*DISCOUNT STEEL INC STEEL 0099-4342 3825 OH 028917 1993/09/13 $5,265.00 $5,265.00* E-Z RECYCLING AUG RECYCLING 0295-4392 000726 OH 028918 1993/09/13 $1,512.75 $1,512.75* ELMER J PETERSON CO W FERNOALE G STAT 0569-4344 000942 OH 028919 1993/09/13 $120.00 $120.00* ENGFER AUTOMOTIVE SPEEOO TESTS 0129-4342 43188 OH 021920 1993/09/13 $116.50 $116 50* FIRST CHOICE UNIFORMS UNIFORM 0129-4221 2464 OH 1993/09/13 $239.34 GOLF CAR MIDWEST REPAIR CART 0590-4342 931872 OH 028921 1993/09/13 $1,000.00 $1,239.34* GOLF CAR MIDWEST CARTS 0590-4331 000955 OH 1993/09/13 $15.40 GRAINGER-W W PARTS 0549-4232 495-269621-1 OH 028922 1993/09/13 $15.40 $30.80* GRAINGER-W W PARTS 0569-4232 495-269621-1 OH 021923 1993/09/13 $27.05 $27.05* HALLIN/DOROTHY MILEAGE 0039-4381 000956 OH 1993/09/13 $14.36 HAPPYS POTATO CHIP CHIPS 0591-4802 248270 OH 028924 1993/09/13 $4.44 $18.80* HAPPYS POTATO CHIP CHIPS 0591-4802 246591 OH 1993/09/13 $260.96 HENN CTY FIN DIV 3ULY ROOM A BOARD 0080-4358 0. *5 >'8 OH OM OH OR COUNCI'. CHECK REGISTER Frl Sep 10 1993 00:07:26NFCK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNTni. V02.1925 $260.96"028926 1993/09/13 $101.13 $101.13*HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED0289271993/09/13 $13.35$13.35*KEAVENYS DRUG0289281993/09/131993/09/131993/f.9/l3 $37.64$6.27$12.54$56.45*KUEHN, THOMAS KUEHN, THOMAS KUEHN. THOMAS0289291993/09/131993/09/13 $245.00$125.00$370.00*LAKE COUNTRY CHAPTER LAKE COUNTRY CHAPTER0289301993/09/13 $42.60$42.80*LAMBERT SOO0289311993/09/13 $30.00$30.00*LEAGUE OF MN CITIESl933/09/'31993/09/131993/09/131993/09/131993/09/131993/09/13 1993/09/13 1993/09/13 1993/09/13 1993/09/13 1993/09/13 1993/09/13 $13.88 $45.12 $832.57 $212.89 $28.68 $75.00 $58.09 $781.00 $220.00 $579.00 $1,203.00 $39.00 $409.00 LOQISLOGISLOG ISLOGISLOQISLOGIS LOGIS LOGIS LOGIS LOGIS LOGIS LOGIS LOGIS - SUITE 300- SUITE 300- SUITE 300- SUITE 300- SUITE 300- SUITE 300 - SUITE 300 - SUITE 300 - SUITE 300 - SUITE 300 - SUITE 300 - SUITE 300 - SUITE 300 028932 $4,497.23* 028933 1993/09/13 1993/09/13 $39.67 $30.33 $70.00* LONG LK LONG L*< FORD TRACTOR FORD TRACTOR 028934 1993/09/13 $584.25 $584.25* LUBTECH 028935 1993/09/13 1993/09/13 1993/09/13 $5,438.65 $437.34 $11,752.86 $17.62$.85* MIDWEST midwest MIDWEST ASPHALT ASPHALT ASPHALT 1993/09/13 1993/09/13 1993/09/13 $11.07 $14.59 $210.54 MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST BSNS PROD BSNS PROD BSNS PROD DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT •INVOICE PO NUM.Page 3 MANUALGRASS SEEDSUPPLIESMILEAGEMILEAGEMILEAGECONE VANG/OMAN CONE-VANGSOOSUBSCRIPTIONDATADATADATADATADATAJULY DATA JULY JULY JULY JULY JULY JULY PROC/DISCPROC/DISCPROC/DISCPROC/DISCPROC/DISCSERVICES PROC/DISC SERVICES SERVICES SERVICES SERVICES SERVICES SERVICES SPACESPACESPACESPACESPACE SPACE PART PARTS MOTOR OIL asphalt ASPHALT ASPHALT OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES 0590-43430099-42100069-43810174-43810569-43810174-43560174-43560590-43430249-42400549-0174-0129-0069-0039-0039-0569- 0174 0549 0129 0069 0039 0569 4355•4355■4355■4355-4355-4355-4355 -4352 -4352 -4352 -4352 -4352 -4352 0249-4232 0590-4232 0249-4220 0249-4233 0249-4233 0249-4233 0039-4210 0129-4210 0129-4210 5824300095700095800095800095800093500095900093311998AR0793AR0793AR0793AR0793AR0793AR0793AR0793 AR0793 AR0793 AR0793 AR0793 AR0793 AR0793 174458 173549 108360 000968 000967 000966 595311 589190 595311 OHOHOH OH OH COUNCIL Cl CHECK NO I028943028944 b CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT I INVOICE PO NUM.MANUAL1993/09/13 811.07 MIDWEST BSNS PRCX)OFFICE SUPPLIES 0249-4210 595311 OH1993/09/13 $11.06 MIDWEST BSNS PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES 0174-4210 595311 OH1993/09/13 811.06 MIDWEST BSNS PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES 0059-4210 595311 OH1993/09/13 811.06 MIDWEST BSNS PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES 0069-4210 595311 OH0289388280.45*1993/09/13 836.22 MINN COMM TEELEPHONE 0249-4320 000965 OH021937836.22*028938 1993/09/13 810.00810.00*MINNEAPOLIS,CITY OF LEGAL FEE 0080-4303 000964 OH1993/09/13 810 97 MINNEGASCO UTILITIES 0569-4324 000937 OH0289391993/09/13 8128.298139.26*MINNEGASCO UTILITIES 009S-4324 000937 OH1993/09/13 8103.49 MINNESOTA CONWAY REPAIR 0129-4342 192713 OH0289408103.49*1993/09/13 84,191.00 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVE MN WTR CONNCTN FEE 9672-2222 000962 OH02894184,191.00*1993/09/13 860.00 MN CITY/COUNTY MGMT AS MEMBERSHIP 0039-4380 000936 OH028942860.00*1993/09/13 810.50 MOORSE RON PARKING 0039-4381 000963 OH1993/09/13 881.39 MOORSE RON MTQS 0039-4356 000963 OH028943891.89*1993/09/13 815.00 NATL RIFLE ASSOC SUBSCRIPTION 0129-4240 000951 OH028944815.00* 1993/09/13 87.40 NSP UTILITIES 0290-4324 000971 OH1.k 1993/09/13 83.31 NSP UTILITIES 0175-4324 000971 OH 1993/09/13 81,948.32 NSP UTILITIES 0549-4324 000971 OH 1993/09/13 8261.60 NSP UTILITIES 0549-4324 000938 OH 1993/09/13 8222.22 NSP UTILITIES 0569-4324 000970 OH 1993/09/13 810.38 NSP UTILITIES 0249-4324 000970 OHi'1993/09/13 825.57 NSP UTILITIES 0290-4324 000370 OH 1993/09/13 8187.95 NSP UTILITIES 0249-4324 000938 OH 1993/09/13 8167.57 NSP UTILITIES 0590-4324 000971 OH 1993/09/13 814.03 NSP UTILITIES 0569-4324 000938 OH 1993/09/13 81,696.41 NSP UTILITIES 0099-4324 000938 OH 1993/09/13 844.28 NSP UTILITIES 0099-4324 000971 OH 1993/09/13 8533.91 NbK UTILITIES 0569-4324 000971 OH 028945 85,122.95* 028946 1993/09/13 81,145.46 81,145.46* NSP STREET LIGHTS 0249-4325 000939 OH 1993/09/13 811.95 O'SULLIVANS NAVARRE AU REPAIR 0530-4341 000940 OH 028947 811.95* HECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT i INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL0289481993/09/n $36.12 $36.12*OMAN/LYLE MILEAGE 0174-4381 000972 OH1993/09/13 >2.041.80 POPHAM HAIK i ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT APRIL-0080-4303 373591 OH1993/09/13 $387.00 POPHAM HAIK & ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT APRIL- 0408-4303 373591 OH1993/09/13 $5,465.30 POPHAM HAIK & ASSOC LEGAL APPLIC APRIL-M 0840-4303 373591 OH1993/09/13 $143.50 POPHAM HAIK & ASSOC LEGAL ARCHITECT REIM 0480-4303 373591 OHJ1993/09/13 $1,175.00$2,212.82 POPHAM HAIK A ASSOC LEGAL-HUMAN RIGHTS C 0080-4303 373591 OH1993/09/13 POPHAM HAIK & ASSOC LEGAL RETAINER APRIL 0080-4301 373591 OH028949$12,425.42*•1993/09/13 $122.44 PRAIRIE OFFSET INSPECTION FORMS 0174-4322 100773 OH028950$122.44*02I9S1 1993/09/13 $4,712.95$4,712.95*PUBLIC EMPL RET ASSN PERA 8/16-8/29 9999-2031 000973 OH0289521993/09/13 $76.80$76.80*REED VENDING CANDY & ROLLS 0591-4802 10213 OH1993/09/13 $53.13 RITZ CAMERA FILM A LAMP 0129-4210 3767231 OH0289531993/09/13 $21.93 RITZ CAMERA FILM PROC 0129-4210 3767749 OH$75.06*028954 1993/09/13 $139.99 $139 99*ROLLINS OIL CO SUPPLIES 0249-4232 58219 OH0^8955 1993/09/13 $30.00$30.00*SCOTT OBERAIQNFR WATER CERTIFICATE C549-4383 000941 OH 021956 1993/09/13 $405.00 $405.00* SPAULDING GOLF BALLS 0591-4800 GH3931 OH 1993/09/13 $317.84 STERLING FENCE INC ROLLERS 0099-4342 12487 OH 028957 1993/09/13 $120.95 $438.79* STERLING FENCE INC ROLLERS 0099-4342 12501 OH 1993/00/13 $375.00 SUBN RATE AUTHORITY 2ND HALF 93 DUES 0039-4380 000944 OH028958$375.00* 1993/09/13 $421.91 THE LAKER ADV 0174-4323 000960 OH 028959 1993/09/13 $26.90 $448.81* THE LAKER RECORDER AD 0039-4332 000960 OH 028960 1903/09/13 $170.25 $170.25* THORPE DIST CO BEER 0591-4815 16806 OH 1993/09/13 $12.75 TOMCHECK, LARRY SUPPLIES 0129-4232 000945 Oil021961$12.75* 021962 1993/09/13 $51.15 US POSTAL SERVICE REFUND CB POST OFFIC 9673-3750 000947 OH •$51.15* WiW!] HECK SUW4ARY Fri Sep 10 1993 00:07:3001GENERAL FUND $54,437.6134482 IMP BD 0/S FD $50.0034S92 IMP BD D/S FO $176.45423MUN ST AID CO/FD $31,992.7142591 PUB FAC CONST $143.5042692 STUBBS SWR FD $6.755.17672WTR OPERATING FD $6,788.12673SWR OPERATING FD $4,385.106740/C OPERATING FD $2,946.61999PAYROLL CLEARING $4,712.95$112,388.22 i.1 . i'? & k r—» - -I Vf ; '*-* jj .>y T.^ '*■' /u L> l * • »»•r^3 « t’tj" MM ei '4 2l i*' ' pi f.v. j-, r iw s> '■’ M9j t r^.:ii/ & ^1 fS n fLi i s f I #-fflritfLS X COUNCILMSnNG ''p ’ 3 1993 CriYOFORONO \ MINUTES OF THE ORONO rEANMNG COMMISSION MKEFINX; HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present; Chair Charles Schroeder, Stephen Peterson. Sandra Smith, and Charles Nolan. Jr. Janice Berg and Candace Rowlepe were absent. The following represented the City Staff: Building & Zoning Administrator Jeamie Mabusth. and Recorder Carole Haseman. Mayor Edward Callahan and Councilmembers J. Diann Goetten from 7:15 to 9:10 p.m. and JoF.llen Huir from 9:10 to 10:51 were present. Chair Schroeder called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. (#11) #1853 RICHARD E. .VND A. JEAN ENGEBRETSON 1180 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 7:03 - 7:30 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. .Mr. and Mrs. Engcbrelson and Dale Mulfinger. their consultant, were present. Mabusth e.xplained that in June the property had been reviewed as a variance application for the current owner. Ron Lauer. The Engebretsons are in the process of buying the property and have presented an application for the removal of the existing structure and propose a replacement residence which would be angled further west partially out of the 0-75' setback area and approximately 6’ in front of the average lakeshore setback and about 57 ’ back from the shoreline. The majority of the structure has been removed out of the 0-75'. Ihere are hardcover excesses. Engebretsoii thanked the Planning Commission for reviewing his application early as he has an obligation in the City of Deephaven. Applicant stated this will be their retirement home on Maxwei; Bay. Three hardships exist with the lot: lot is short a'.d square in shape, scalloped eflect of the shoreline adds to the shortness of the lot, and a hill is located on the propcny which they V ac.t to prc ervc as a berm between the proposeil hi'use and lonkawa Road, He proposes to tear down the old house and build a two ^tory squ.uc design home with a tuck under garage and no deck. The home will be located back from the lake, fhey plan to remove existing hardcover improvement closer to lake 1 he proposed plan minimizes every possible square foot of hardcover and lake setback intrusion The driveway design allows tor a turnaround eliminatine the need to back out onto fonkawa Koad. Smith questioned die need for a three car garage and the possibility of more hardcover reduction. MIS’UTES OF THE ORONO FLANMNC; COMMISSION MEETING HEED AU(;UST 16, 1993 ZONING FILE ;i^l853 - COM . Engcbrctson added that the three car tuck under garage serves as the foundation for the proposed structure and is needed to fit in with the value of homes being constructed in the area. Smith inquired about Jhe driveway and turnaround in that area to eliminate hardcover in the circle drive. Mulfiniier answered that the design eliminates the view of the tuck under garage thus the primary view is the front door and by not always parking in the garage, the turnaround would not be blocked. Smith asked if the evergreen and other trees would be saved. Ihieebretson said the majority of trees will stay especially those on the hill which will act as a sound and visual shield from Tonkawa Road. Nolan questioned the reasons for turning the house which creates a 6 encroachment in the average lakeshore setback and an e.xcess of hardcover in the 0-75’ setback area. Mulfinger explained that the design takes into consideration all the constraints on the property and significant gains were made under this format rather than to deal with trying to be behind the setWk lines. The view is better to the northeast. In trying to pull the house back, they did not consider the line as the absolute most important thing and tried to achieve a balance between taking as few trees as possible, saving as much of the hill, creating the cul-de-sac to enable peopfe to leave safely - ’ provide a view. This house shows a porch in lieu of a deck so the aggregate volume of hardcover is inclusive of what others might call a deck. Chair Schroeder felt there was a good compromise with the plan and a gain in the reduction of hardci'ver within the 0-75’ area. Mabusth stated it would be a 6.2% reduction. Chair Schrccdct stated with respeet to the three ear garage the Planning Commission d,«s not consider the salability but cares about hardcover and appropriateness. The proposed house seems to fit the lot well. It was moved bv Peterson. sect)ndcd by Schroeder to recommend approval of Application #1853 for Richard E. 'and A. Jean Engebretson, 1180 Tonkawa Road, for the variance as proposed and accepted the hardships stated by applicants. Vote: Ayes 4. nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 (#1) /i'lTSO CITY OF ORONO 1000 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDI\TSION PUBLIC HEARINC; 7:32 TO 7:50 P.M. Tlie Affidavii of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mabusth explained the property is served by a private drive and a 4 1/2 acre residential lot is proposed and a large outlot for future park development. A MWCC lift station has existed there for years. Sewer Is available to this property. There is one septic site which could support a four bedroom home with no alternate site. It is recommended that the pre^perty be sewered which necessitates the comp plan amendment to be addressed later in the meeting. No change will be made in the driveway status. We are still at one residential unit and even though the property could be subdivided into two residential units, it will not trigger any road upgrade. The upgrade of the road depends upon the actual use for the proposed park. Nolan asked how the park would be accessed. Mabusth responded there will be a 50 ’ corridor to allow access, parking areas for vehicles and an access path. Two beautiful trees will be saved. V/e will have adequate width access for maintenance vehicles to enter northern parts of proptpy. Chair Schroeder inquired about sigi'jge for the park and if the park and lot share a common driveway. Mabusth explained that signage will be developed at the time the park is to be developed. One issue will be who is to provide maintenance. Currently the City provides access to the MWCC facility but now the City no longer has an active use in the property. Smith asked :»bout easements and felt that the trees should not be touched nor the creation of new roads. Mabusth said there is an existing casement that already serves the .MWCC lilt station area. Ihe City will have to grant an access easement to the residential lot owner as C ity will retain ownership of tnitlot. The drainage way will be at a minimum 15 width easement which will be defined within the residential lot. The wetlands at southwest comer will be established and designated on the tmal plat. Chair Schroeder asked if the future owner intends to subdivide the property into two lots. MINUTES OF THE ORONO FrANMNG COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 ZONING FILE /'1780 - CONT. Mabusth answered that there is enough dry huildable land for the property to be subdivided. It is the tulure owner’s intent to apply for a conditional use permit to construct a guest house lor his mother leaving it as one lot. A covenant will be filed on the property limiting development to five years. Mayor Callahan e.xplained that the future owner is in the process of negotiating for the lot to be subdivided which the Council is not willing to do. Council has proposed a five year restriction for subdivision to occur. There is not a signed contract between the parties. Chair Schroeder stated that he has no problem with the issues - trees will be preserved, easements will be in order and the matter of park dedication has been addres.sed It was moved by Schroeder, seconded by Peterson to recommend approval of Application #1780, City of Orono, 1000 Old Crystal Bay Road for a preliminaiy subdivision subject to conditions 1-7 as listed in memo dated August 12, 1993. Ayes 4. nays 0. (#3) #1844 KEN HOPKINS, 65/75 FERNDALE GREEN SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT PUBLIC HEARING 7:52 to 7:57 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Ken Hopkins was present. Mabusth explained that Fairway Hills Addition was a two lot subdivision derived from land adjacent to the greens of the Wayzata Countiy Club. It is an (xldly configured subdivision which is impacted by Highway 12 at the southwest corner. Major concerns had been raised in developing residential lots close to the highway areas because of noise and visual impact so a berm was proposed along outer edges ot road outlot. 'Hie property is served with sewer and water, riiere was no claim to seek credit of the drainage areas or wetland areas and was based on 2 acres dry contiguous land. By the time the property was developed, there was not enough room for berms and driveway at the western end ot the outlot. The driveway must be within an outlot so a lot line rearrangement has been proposed involving Lot 2 and the outlot. The engineer had definite recommendations for berm and a curb will be defined along the south side of the berms for drainage purposes. Before ground cover is restevred, hay bales and silt fencing will be used to protect the adjacent wetlands. The existing berms will be trimmed down to 3;1 slope. p MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 ZONING FILE /^I844 - CON i. Hopkins .;aid that lot line rearrangement will help save a large tree that would otherwise have been in the middle of a driveway. L:e is in agreement with the engineer’s report. It was moved by Nolan, seconded by Smith, to recommend approval of Application #1844 for Ken Hopkins. o.S/75 pemdalc Green, subject to five conditions as outlined by the City Engineer and further recommendation regarding the slope, seeding and the use of a fiber blanket. Vote: Ayes 4. nays 0. Hopkins reported there is a dangerous situation in pulling out of Ferndale Green onto Femdale Road because of low' trees hanging onto the road. (#4) #1847 MICHAEL yVND DANA BARRETT AND .JAMES AND MOLLY WHEELER, 2912/2918 CASCO POLNT ROAD - SUBDIVISION OF A LCT LINE REARRANGEMENT - PUBLIC HEARING 7:58 TO 8:13 P.M. The Affidavit of I^iblication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Michael Barrett and Mark Greene, an attorney repre.senting Universal Title Insurance, were present. Mabusth e.xplained that in 1983 the property owners completed a lot rearrangement w ithout the approval of tlie City which provided for an 8’4" setback to the new division line. The City did not have an opportunity to review' it. The City would have asked for a 10 setback from the comer of tlie residence. Tlie ow ners are asked to consider the issue at this time. Universal Title Insurance Company has hired Mark Green to complete the lot line rearrangements. Greene stated this is to remedy a discrepancy between the legal descriptions that appear on the Certificates of Title for the propeiiies, tax records and City records. A fence has existed between the pn>perties for some time. The purpo.^ is not to create any new lot but just to change the configuratiuiis to coincide at the City and County. Ihe paicel was split ot. betorc the City actually approved it. Chair Sclm’cder suggested 10 ’ problem be corrected. He had spoken to Wheeler who had seemed supportive ot altering the line. Greene said Wheeler was rather reticent to granting the additional change. 5 p MINUTKS or IIIK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MKETIM; HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 ZONING FILE #1847 - CONT. Barrett explained tl?at he has always lived at 2912. His father owned both tracts of land, erected a fence and later discovered the fence at the back edge encroached upon the adjoining lot by at least 15’. In the early '70s, an attorney was hired to correct the legal descriptions by adding the 15’ piece of land to Parcel C. Parcel A, where the Wheelers are now living, was first sold in 1976. His father passed away in 1980 and nothing has been done with the fence. It seemed apparent that the City did not rev«uire approval bacK in 1971. He does not have a problem with the either the present proposal or the addition of 1 1/2’ to the line. Smith questioned if the two mature o,^k trees would he affected. Barrett stated Uiat the trees would not be impactcu Chair Scliroeder said without Mr. Wheeler present the 10’ setback issue cannot be addressed. It was moved by Chair Schroeder. seconded by Peterson, to recommend approval of Application #1847 for Michael and Dana Barrett and James and .Molly Wheeler, 2912 and 2918 Casco Point Road, for subdivision < i a lot Iiol rearrangement and that Parcel B legally combine with Parcel C so that tax records and the county plat maps can be corrected and grant the setback variance as proposed. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#5) #1849 ESTATES OF BARBARA B. LUND AND RUSSELL T. LUND, III, 905 TONKAWA ROAD - VACATION OF SEWER EASEMENT - rUBLIC HEARING 8:14 TO 8:17 P.M. The Affidavit of l^iblication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Tres Lund was present. Mabusth explained that applicants were fulfilling a condition of preliminary subdivision approval by completing the vacatit»n of a 20' sewer utility eascmuit. The future iCiidence w ill be serxed by a sewer line located in the County Road. The existing residence is served by a line at southeast lot line. Smitli inquired if the shed had been removed. Lund answered ves. i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIN( HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 ZONING KILE #1849 - CONT. Mabuslh added that a staff inspection would be done before final subdivision appnwal to see if all the conditions had been met. It was moved by Smith, seconded by Nolan, to recommend approval of Application #1849 for the Estates of Barbara B. Lund and Russell T. Lund, 111, 905 Tonkawa Road, as proposed and allows for vacation of the sewer easement as indicated. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#7) #1829 DIANE SIEFF, 1080 WILDHURST TRAIL - VARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - 8:21 TO 8:50 Diane Sieff and Gerald Sieff, her .son, were present. Mabustli e.xplained the application had been tabled at the July 19th meetintj to provide Mrs. Sieff time to consider additional hardcover removals. An amended application has been received indicating the removal of 84 s.f. from th** ^^-75 ’. Sea walls or rip rap remain at 76 s.f. which are not counted as hardcover in the 0-75 setback area*. Based on policy, there is 0 s.f. of hardcover within the 0-75' area. In the 75-250 ’ setback area, the applicant proposes the removal of plastic underliner beneath the rose bed planters in the lakeshore yard and cement pads. The 8 ’x20’ new structure results in 160 s.f. of strucmral hardcover and applicant proposes removal of nonstructural hardcover at 391.4 s.f. Chair Schroeder asked applicant if additional hardcover could be removed in the driveway area? Mrs. Sieff replied that pan of the driveway is shared by her neighbor during bad weather. Chair Schroeder questioned the possibility of driveway reduction in the area closv*- to the attached earage Mabusth asked if it could be reduce ’ where the do meet? Mrs. Sieff did not agree Chair Schroeder stated the removal i)f plastic underliner is a good step but is difficult to count as a reduction. Mrs. Sieff asked if nonstructural hardcover is counted against her in the hardcover study, why can ’t it be counted as a removal'.’ .MINUTKS OF TUK ORONO PI.ANMNG COMMISSION .MKKTINGHELD AUGUST 16, 1993ZONING FILE #1829 - CONT. Chair Scliroedcr said tliat was a good question but plastic has a way of returning. Mabustlt explained tliat structural hardcover is more pennanent. Mrs. Sieff said she uiiderstood but that City lists all iiiiprovements as credited against hardcover. Nolan questioned removal of the driveway portion past the detached garage. Mrs. Sieff e.xplained in bad weather her neighbor comes down and around in her driveway and up the hill. Nolan said he noticed vegetation across the driveway indicating that nobody ever uses it. Gerald Sieff replied the overgrowth had recently been trimmed. Nolan added that the lower driveway is clearly the safer of the two driveways and asked Mrs. Sieff if she is able to use the other driveway in the winter time. Mrs. Sieff said that she does not attempt it but occasionally comes down it. Nolan suggested a plan to decrease a portion of the driveway thus reducing hardcover by 750- 1,000 s.f. He asked if the concrete pad that provides access to the side of the garage could be eliminated. Mrs. Sieff replied Uie little ramp is for the lawn tractor and snow blower. Nolan said lie noticed an overhead door out the front and inquired if ihere was a water problem because of the ramp. Mrs. Sieff answered that heavy rains cause water to run down m top of the fron» and in the garage. Gerald Sieff stated that all hardcover with the exception of the added deck area was constructed before 1975 which was prior to the ordinance being in effect. To keep the added area, their proposal is to give up double hardcover removals with structural hardcover being the shed, plastic and concrete slabs. Schroeder questioned when the e.xpanded deck was built? 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MKETINC; HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 ZONING FILE - CONT. Mabustli explained sometime in 1991 cxisiinc decks were repaired and (he 160 s.t. of deck expansion was completed. Gerald Sieff reiterated that within the 0-75 ’ zone, which seems to be of most concern, they propose U) reduce hardcover to 0% plus the rose beds and the concrete slabs which arc over 3 limes the area. Chair Schroeder asked if the driveway could be a viable reduction. Gerald Sieff replied there is no way to change the driveway because the neighbor uses it. If we take out the driveway, the neighbor won’t gel out unless she puts more hardcover in between our two driveways at a lower place. He tell they are being victimized because the deck was put up without his mother’s consent or notice by her fonner hu.>band. Chair Schri>eder explained it has nothing to do with personal relationships but is an attempt to reduce hardcover at the margin. We think you have made a good start. The shed is an important removal in the 0-75 ’ setback and the plastic is something the City supports. Smith suggested if applicants feel strongly about having two driveways, perhaps there are some opportunities to make tradeoffs in tenns of the deck or ponions ol it instead of simply removing plastic. Chair Schrocdei stated the excess is considerable in the 75-250 ’ setback area and we are trv ing to suceest a few alternatives to remove more. Gerald Sieff felt that the impression he is getting is they liave a choice to either remove 160 ot deck or over 500 ’ of other hardcover. Mabusth clarified in cases where excesses in hardcover exist on a propeily, the improvements would have required variance approval for structural repairs to existing decks not just tor the expanded deck area A problem for applicant is that you credit all hardcover the same. Does he want a letter from (he neichbor claiming a hardship if they remove that section of driveway? Smitli offered suggestions to remove the planters altogether and have the deck stop at that point Mrs. Sieff asked if you are just talking alumt removing the timbers MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION .MEETING HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 /.ONIN(J FILE - CONT. Gerald Sieff said that would give an additional 15 s.f. He added that plans had been looked at many times and are reduced as much as possible. He reiterated the problem they have with counting structural hardcover and lack of categorization between blacktop or fabric underliner, gravel driveways or stone walkways. Schroeder noted that was a fair point. M.ibusth suggested an ordinance amendment may be needed, or an official policy defining structural and nonstructural improvements wliere e.xcesses of hardcover e.xist on a property. It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Chair Schroeder, to recommend approval of Application /^1829 for Diane E. Sieff, 1080 Wildhurst Trail, for the hardcover variances proposed with the understandinu there will be a removals in the 0-75‘ of the shed and in tlic 75-250 of the concrete pads and plastic. Ayes 2, nays 2. Motion was voted against by Smith and Nolan. Chair Schroeder stated the motion d(>es not carry it and goes to Council as a draw on September 13th. m) /^I85l ORONO WOODLANDS, INC/PAUL PHILLIPS, 2100/2140 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT - PUBLIC HEARING 8:52 TO 9:05 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Paul Phillips was present. Mabusih explained that Orono WtK>dlands, Inc. has a failed septic system because it was undersi/cd and trenches were too deep. The alternate site was destroyed during construction. Applicant weks areas outside of the current boundaries of the property to the southwest which meets the 20 •'ctjuircd setback. At tins point, there is no alternate site on the pri>periv. An equal exchan^ie of land is proposed with this sulnlivision. The shed located on the new lot line must be reliiatcd. Ther- are no records of permits being issued. Drainage and utility easements must be vacated and new casements dedicated. Because of the complexity of the metes and bounds description, the Cuy is recommending that wc proceed wi»h a plat. \.s there is an emergenev need for installation of the septic system, staff rt :ommends that after vr 'ation easements arc filed, applicant be allowed to proceed with coastruction of the septic. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIM HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 ZONING FILE ^1851 - CONT. ^ PctcrstMi asked how the discharge ot the water softener through an independent separate facility MiJd.be accomplished. Mabusth stated it would be an outlet to the rear of property. Water softeners create a burden for rural properties. Although the soft water is clean, it does have an impact on a septic system especially one that is under heavy usage. Nolan asked about the relocation of the two buildings as the back drops oti significantly. Phillips stated that one is all right and the other one can be pushed back 10‘ if necessary. The front one which is too close to the line is used for tool storage and v. ill not be on Woodlands property. He w'ill give permission for use on his property. The one further back is okay where it is and has a primary use for storage of the lawn mower. Smith asked .vhy the property line wasn ’t even when there was an even exchange of property Phillips explained that he is giving up 6,000 s.f. in the .southern comer near County Road 6 It is needed f> accommodate a future 2-acre lot in the front half ot his 4 1/2 acre lot. Mabusth stated tlie recent survey suggests the existing structure is not 30 from the west side lot line. This would be an attempt to bring it into conlormity along the west lot line. Smith inquired what precautions can be made to ensure that similar septic problems don’t arise in the future. Mabusth said meters arc used in rural areas. TTie site evaluator has also provided procedures to protect and define septic areas where questionable uses exist. Phillips emumented he thought he had a secondary site w ith a ginnl primary septic but instead found it to be poorly designed and constructed and al.so inspected by the City poorly . The City should ha\e detected that it was undersized. Mabusth replied it would appear that the water use was not anticipated. Pliillips said the ar lntecl. builder and everybody knew precisely what the home was to he used for. He is not a wate' expert so was not aware ot the problems. 1 MIMJTKS OF I UK OKONO I'KANMNG COMMISSION MFi: i iNG HKLI) AUGUST 16, 1993 ZONING FILE #1851 - CONT. Il was moved by I’ctcrson, seconded by Smith to recomme d approval of Application #1851 lor Orono Woodlands. Inc./Paul Phillips, 2100/2140 Si.xth Avenue North for a lot line rearrangement as proposed. Smith added that some of the recommendations by the testing company also be incoip<>rated specifically the recommendation to install low water u.se toilets. Ayes 4. nays 0. Chair Schroeder called for a recess from 9;(X) to 9;07 p.m. (#8) #1846 ALAN AM) LESLKK UPIN 740 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 9:08 TO 9:36 P.M. Alan Upin and U*slee Upin were present. Mabusth explained applicants propose the removal of a 17’x2U brick patio and replacement with a 12 ’xl9' screen porch requiring a lakeshorc setback variance in the 0-75’ setback area. Applicants have been advised of the hardcover exec .>es. In the 0-75 setback area there exists 584 s.f. and applicant proposes 394 s.f. which '■w.'»ults in a reduction in hardcover o! 190 s.f. or 3.3%. In the 75-250’ setback area hardco' cr remains at 48%. Total hardcover on the site exists at 34.6% and is proposed at 33.4%. There is an encroachment ol the average lakesh(»re setback line by the existing structure ot 10 ’. The new structure will be 5 in front of that average lakeshore setback line. The existing concrete or brick patio is 60 ’ from the lakcshore. The screened structure will be located at 65 ’ requiring a 10 or 13.3% setback variance. Upin stated they would be w illing to give up the rest of the existing brick patio that extends east and also give up the concrete pad that was originally a dog run adjacent to detached garage in street yard Chair Schr«K*der asked lor those dimensions. Mabusth figmvd for brick patio aiKl 5’x7 ’ for the concrete pad. Upin felt it was a little larger than that and di>cs not see any additional area. There are fc>mc areas af'ng the side of the ht^usc but because of water problems did not suggest it. Mabusth stated that was not shown in the hardcover calculations 12 MLNUTES OF THE ORONO TEANNING COMMISSION MEETING HEM) At(;UST 16, 1993 ZONINC; FILE #1846 - CONT. Nolan added he saw a steep slope with hosta plants with mulch with fabric underneath the mulch which was not part of the calculations. Upiii said that wasn’t part of his property and was right-of-way of County Road. Chair Schroeder suggested removals in the driveway and asked if that could help drainage problems? Mrs. Upin said they have tried ever> thing and that is why they recently repaired the driveway because it buckles undemeatli from all the water. Chair Schroeder asked if there is a way to remove comers by walkway. Mabusrh asked about tlie hndscape areas. Mrs. Upin stated there is .some in the front but there is no plastic near the house. It was done strictly to prevent additional water damage. Chair Schroeder stated there are possibly reductions of some additional 200’. Mabusth asked the impact of removing concrete. She said already there is a reduction in the 0- 75 ’ of 3.3% and applicants did not propose any reductions in the 75-250*. You are asking for tulditional removals and probably have 250 s.f. ot additional removals now. C’.air Schri»eder said he felt it was a decent effort and because of the lot topography and special draii’*‘?e concerns there is not a lot more to do. It was mov 3 bv Schroeder, seconded by Peterson to approve Application #1846 for Alan and l eslee Upin, . l onkawa Road, for the following variances - average lakeshore setback of 5 , lakeshore setba.V variance at 65’ for a 10 ’ variance, hardcover in the 0-75 ’ reduced by 200 s.f to 394 s f., 75-2: ” reductions as indicated with a total hardcover somewhere closer to 5.tXX). Removals need to aunpleted prior to the beginning of the new construction. Aves 4. navs 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLiVNNING COMMISSION MEEl INC HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 (#9) #1850 JAMES SPINNER. 940 NORTH ARM DRIVE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 9:31 TO 9:55 P.M. James Spinner was present. Mahusth explained that applicant proposes a 12’x22’ garage stall addition to the e/istmg attached garage. It will be placed over existing hardcover. ITie impact will be minima, on lakeshore views of adjacent residences. Applicants’ contractor did not provide complete hardcover facts. Nolan pointed out a concrete patio about 6 or 8’ which runs along the length ot the addition which was not shown on the hardcover fact sheet. Spinner answered there would be a water problem in the basement if removed Mabuslh stated that would be about 222 s.f. added to the 75-250’. Chair Schroeder asked if he tliought about the pool area or any other areas that can be removed. Spinner said the pool area has crushed rock and a small slab is tilted out against the crushed rock which is needed for drainage. Mabuslh explained if the crushed rock is placed on existing grade, it isn’t counted as hardcover. Nolan asked if the sidewalk could be narrowed to be the width of a traditional sidewalk and be kept almost under your overhang. Would you consider removing sidewalk up to the garage. Spinner said he could do that but the problem is the pad at grade. There is some debris on the stairs right now and p.ul of it is crushed rock and when you get back up it becomes level. Nolan iiujuired if it could be removed without substantial erosion Spinner said he isn’t sure what is under there Chair Schroeder asked what is suppi>ning that pad now. Spinner an.swered it is timbers which were present when he bought the house 15 years ago and the asphalt driveway has been there since the house was built approximately 25 years. MLNUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINC; HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 ZONING KILE /S'1850 - CONT. Mabusih inquired if the contractor mentioned the hardcover issues and the fact that he was asked to come back with a proposal showing needed hardcover removals in the 75-250' setback. Spinner said he was willing to narrow sidewalk but somewhat concerned about the pad. Ilurr suggested an updated survey be done before it goes to Council. Nolan asked if a traditional 2 1/2’ or I 1/2’ overhang would be considered. Spinner said he would ceriainJy consider it but wants to consult with his builder. He said all the more reason to leave hardcover for wash purposes. We are talking about approximately 7 of hardcover from the proposed garage to east. Chair Schroeder asked if anything can be done tonight. Mabusth stated she cannot recommend anything without an updated plan as a pad and access stairs had not been added in. Nolan added that applicant’s builder should consider the overhang on the proposed new roof which would cut down on stmctural hardcover and consider removing hardcover to the east of the proposed addition. It was moved by Schroeder, seconded by Smith, to tabic Application #1850 for James Spinner, 940 North Arm Drive, to allow the applicant time to reconsider additional hardcover removals and provide the City with an updated survey. Ayes 4. nays 0. (#10) #1852 HOWARD ELSINGER 3245 WAV/A PA BOULEVARD - (ONDM lONAI. USE I'KRMIT - PUBLIC HEARING - 9:55 10 10:02 P.M. 1 he Affidavit of Public and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Howard Eisingcr and Cliff Reep was present. MINLTKS OF TIIK ORONO Pl.ANNING CO.VLMISSION .MKKTING HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 ZONl (G FILE ^1852 - CONT. Mabusl^ explained that this is a 12 acre former dump site that was closed in the early 70s. The City limited applicant’s first pemiit to 100,000 cubic yards but fill was never received under the first pennit. The second application came in for 10,000 cubic yards and the conditional use permit in effect currently is for 20,000 cubic yards, bill has been received from Stubbs Bay sewer project and also from City ol Wayzata and Watershed District for a recent lake improvement project in Wayzata. Mr. Eisinger is represented by Cliff Reep of GL Contracting, Inc. Mabusth asked when the final cubic yardage would be reached? Reep replied he is not sure when they will complete the total 20,000. Mabusth stated that all of the conditions of the original application will be held Peterson asked if he has always met every prior condition and if there were any problems. Mabusth reported a recent problem a week ago regarding filling of tires but the matter was cleared up. Nolan asked why all the filling. Eisineer explained that he is bringing it up to a usable piece of property in some ways and fixing the drainage. He said a driving range, storage area or playground are some of the possibilities for use. It was moved by Peteisc.i, seconded b> Smith to recommend approval of AppE ation #1852 for Howard Eisinger, 3245 Wayzata Blvd . for the conditional use permit he has requested as long as he continues to meet ail of the conditions met in the p;ist and complies with the City requirements. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#12) #1845 ERNEST I.EMMERMAN 1297 VVILDHI R.ST I RAH. SKETCH PLAN Ol A PROI*OSED LOT LINE REARRANCiE.MEN I AND LOT AREA VARIANCE - 10:02 l O 10:21 P.M. Mr. and Mrs. Ernest Lemmcrman were present. MLNUTES OF TllE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MLETING HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 ZONING FII.E ^1845 - CONT. Mabusth explained applicant seeks direction concerning approval of a proposed lot line rearrangement and variance for the development ot a vacant lot. The access to Mr. I>eminernian s pro ’ erty is on Wildhurst Trail. lie has purchased tax forfeited property and has about 33.000 s.f. in area. The proposed lot lire rearrangement will reduce the vacant lot to 19,600 s.f. Mr. Lemmerman’s homestead lot uould be increased to 26.150 s.f. l.emmerman explained that the undeveloped lot has an unusual shape and a steep hill. He has propo.sed to exchange part of the property with a neighbor and sell part to another but nobody is interested. He has been there for 36 years and has cleaned up that area. It has a nice view of Forest Lake. Chair Schroeder asked if it is a buildable lot. Mabusth answered the lot needs variance approval as it is in a I acre zone. It is sewer approved. Nolan asked whether it would be a benefit to realign the lot for better balance. Your wall is only a couple of feet behind your garage. The line could actually be moved further down to balance. Lcmmennan said that would not be a problem and noted the hill being useless. He explained several years ago the residence had burned down on the vacant land. Chair Schroeder stated that the issue here would be a lot area variance. Mabusth explained a lot area variance would be needed if he was to build on this parcel. A lot width variance would not be necessary because he meets 80% of that but he doesn ’t meet 80% for the required lot areas. l.emmerman stated that he would have no problem dropping the lot line down, Mabusth asked if members kK)k favorably at the current proposal for a lot line rearrangement. It was reviewed favorably in 1985 and the Planning Commission gave a recommendation of positive direction - formal action on a sketch plan is not required and members need only give direction to the applicant. It would also help to determine lot lines by examining a topographic map but we d*' not have any topt) information. f MINUTES OF THE ORONO FLANMNr* COMMISSION MEETINO HEED AUGUST 16, 1993 ZONING FILE #1845 - CONT. Peterson stated he had no problem with what l.emincrman is trying to do and it seems to fit into the rest of the neighborhood. It is an unusual piece of property. He would like to take a look at the topography. Lemmerman said he.has been working with it since 1986 to make it a workable situation. Mabusth relayed information that she received a phone call trom a lady who was an interested buyer. Lemmennan stated he had not been contacted. Peterson said he felt Ix*mmerman was on the right track and to keep working with her. Schroeder said it makes sense and is consistent widi the neighborhood. (#2) #1848 CITY OF ORONO, 1940 SHORELINE DRIVE - 1000 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 5 - MUSA BOUNDARY AMEND.MENT - PUBLIC HEARING - 10:21 TO 10:32 The Affidavit of I^blication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mabusth explained that both properties are outside the MUSA boundary' lines. The septic system at 1940 Shoreline Drive has .a failing septic system. The applicant seeks approval of a connection to an existing sewer line at the southwest comer. The property is approximately 2 acres in area. The adjacent propeny o\sner. Mr. Morse, and the railroad do not have a problem with the amendment as proposed. Peterson commentei! that we .should encourage these hookups to eliminate septic system. MabusUi said they should be encouraged in the shoreland areas and this is a property' that is located within a 100’. Callahan said you can’t be connected to the sewer unless you get the approval of Metropolitan Council. Ihe other connection involved here is the Melamed property so you arc being asked to approve those two MUSA lines. MINUTES OF THE ORONO FLANMNC; COMMISSION MEETING HEED AUGUST 16, 1993 /OMN(; FILE ^1848 - CONT. Pcicrson stated that it is in the City’s long-term best interest to get people hooked up to sewer if at all possible. Callahan .said he is not at all .sure if Metropolitan Council feels it is in their best iniucit. Nolan asked because of the additional capacity they don’t feel t’;ey have it. Mabusth explained in connection with the Orono sewer property, we are asking ^Ci a portion of the property to be included in the MUSA. We have received conceptual approval from the Park Board to take 5 acres of land from Norerenberg Park located in MUSA in exchange for a 4 1/2 acre parcel of City land. Peterson inquired if a tiade is necessarx'? Mabusth explained that is how it is kept as a simple Comp Plan Amendment. They will give us no problem with Mr. Nettles’ shoreland property but interior undeveloped rural areas are looked upon differently altliough we could certainly claim shoreland area as it is on a Natural Environmen* Lake. We will check on this matter. Peterson asked if the homeowner pays for all corts. Mabusth said the owner pays approximately $17,000 for sewer connection to City and a hookup fee to create new stub. Peterson asked if the park status would change in the fumre and may want to be tied into MUSA. Hurr commented it is stipulated to not even have walking paths. Mabusth noted the area is a pcniasula and based on setbacks would not be buildablc. It was moved by Smith, seconded by Schroeder. to recommend approval of Application #1848 City of Orono. 1940 Shoreline Drive - 1000 Old Crystal Bay Road. Comprehensive Plan Ainendment No. 5 with the stipulation that the) are going to l<H)k into possibly not having an exchange of property if Environmental Take area could be considered. Ayes 4. nays 0. MINLTKS <)I niK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MI KTINX; IIKLI) AU(;UST 16, 1993 (#13) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE Smith reported the application for Jim Taylor at 1343 Rest Point Circle, was approved but Mayor Callahan made the point that if physical disability is to be considered as a hardship, there needs to be a better understanding of hardships. The Cornelius application was approved subject to amendments with the amended resolution to be brought back to Council tor the August 23rd meeting. The application for l om Brown at 760 South Brown Road was approved. They did want an e.xtra 15 s.f. Mabusth explained the major change by Council was to allow the concrete pad to stay and be able to be repaired as the lot had safety concerns and limitations on play areas for children. Smidi reported that Murr felt the Planning Commission might he inconsistent with requests that im:.jact the 0-75 ’ .setback area. t (#14) OTHER ISSUES Chair .Schroeder stated that Smith developed a .:urvey for hand out purposes to applicants. He has read and approved it. Smith suggested that all applicants receive copies of the green Community Development Philosophy llycr. Chair Schroeder notified everyone tlial a meeting to discuss flag lots was scheduled for Wednesday at 6:30 p.m. Callahan added the meeting would help the Planning Commission understand Council’s views about B-2 ordinances regarding marinas and flag lots. Schrtteder stated tliat the storm water management and flotvdplain issues has been rescheduled to an unspecified d.ite. (#15) APPROVAI. OE iMINXTES It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Peterson, to approve the minutes of the July 19, 1993 PLmning Ctmnnission meeting. Ayes 4. nays 0. 20 [ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PEANMNC; COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 16. 1993 (#16) REPRESENTATIVE TO THE COUNCIL MEETING Nolan volunteered to attend the meeting September 13. 1993 Council meeting. Peterson reminded everyone of the upcoming public hearing August 30, 1993 meeting regarding County Road 15. ADJOURNMENT Chair Schroeder adjourned the regular Planning Commission meeting at 10:51 p.m. Charles Schroeder, Chair Person 21 TO! FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorae, City Administrator September 10, 1993 SUBJECT: Proposal Regarding Residential Development on Southwest Corner of Willow and County Road 6 * \ I have had informal discussions with the CounciImembers about a proposal by Lundgren Brothers Construction for a residential development on‘ approximately 60 acres on the southwest corner of Wxllow and County 6. The proposal is to develop the property at 1 acre per unit. The property is currently zoned for 2 acre per unit development. I recently received a preliminary layout giving a general sense of how they would plan to develop the area. This layout is attached for Council review. Several Councilmet bers have indicated their initial reaction to rezoning of the property as a negative one, other members indicated they would be willing to consider a proposal. I would like to discuss this specific preliminary layout with the CounciImembers to determine whether their reaction is positive or negative. OVERSIZE DOCUMENT(S) I •% ■ W ;.f #«««•> <* *4l*«WM*«M>«M m -m d *m m ■* •i im, ^1- WUO» OW»t IWTH %~v « ' ? ■ f \ ^’TC ^ / C ' e ^ <7 ^- v5/2S -r- 7 :' A .K ■ ! 1 . -—— •> ! - '^ w$ ^ * OMtUMkCt "»iv'Trt?. : .1»- %•' rr. ;^V\\' •' i^7- V^x-C - i n i:tr/7; ^..-Va-:^ ^ > « -4 «»M» « <1M ^ \ ' - ij . _______ _______ .;'/7r/ £ ::u=:=:;*« ♦•0-v —- ^ ■i ^■C'-' V- -i ! - n ^—zr. < m y> > M ^ m *• < % . '.: A A A J\i - - :/V tCNOILL « MAOtON. INC. \ ««*•• <•••#«•• 9^9% -•••i »•« »••• ••• 9— ••«« UMDQROI CONtTIKICnQN 7v « M> pm-\/t :.'' ••