Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-24-1992 Council Packetf4 ' -': tfe'i' ■ f’^Sp- feflls- i:!®^>v ■MS; i /..^0m gP ■&l ■i'iP'< '•.•■ P %r i#'S??y; f? ■ tP; ■M".' ■>r: ■/ £-;^'. p m.. 0m A'i '■ '■ < MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 ROLl Tha Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson, CounciImembers Gabriel Jabbour, Edward Callahan, and J. Diann Goetten. Mary Butler was absent. Tha following represented the City staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Building & Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, City Attorney Tom Barrett, City Engineer Glenn Cook and City Recorder Terl Naab. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. (•1) CONSENT AGENDA It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda. 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 OF MINUTES It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Orono Council held on February 10, 1992. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#3) PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEWS Mayor Peterson welcomed the applicants and asked them to step forward as they were called and briefly tell the Council about themseIves. Robert P. Hare. V. 1600 Long Lake Blvd Hare stated he has been a resident of Orono frr the last 4 years, and also In the late 1970s lived on Casco Point. He noted he has three children, one of which Is in the Oror.o school system. He and his family Intend to make their permanent residence in Orono. He added he is a real estate agent with a Wayzata firm, and therefore has had extensive experience in now construction and land development. He stated he has no past experience in civic service. Goetten noted that his appiication states he has experience in land use and planning. Hare reiterated that experience has been job related, ranging from simple subdivisions and variance requests to major subdivisions. He explained he has had experience in conceptually diviJing land for proposed divisions. i ) .i i ■=:- Z--i' '4.f *.H4:Ul' »■ ' fe® ■f ¥ •vV 5i '-■■'''■■■ '.60^ ^ ps#fff' ii^ffc- -’J ;f|cc.V'^ ^<vk.‘5W' r-'r;4; i':#: ^rii .J4'-SL- y' •V.*» i,. Bi&M' iUii?;-?-: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETINGHELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEWS - CONT. Goetten asked If his professional Interest has prompted him apply for this position. Hare explained land use and development are an interest of his. Goetten announced that Orono is quite conservative In Its development and land use and asked Hare how he felt about that posItion. Hare stated he Is in favor of having a strict control development and he Is not necessarily pro-develupment. over Jabbour asked If he had attended any of the Planning Commission meetings and realized the type of commitment this position raquI res. Hare noted he has attended some of the meetings in Orono, and some meetings of other cities, and realizes the type of commitment required for the position. He asked what the length of time the appointment was for. Goetten noted It currently was a one year positior, but may revert back to a three year position. Hare noted Mabusth had encouraged him to apply fo>' the position. Mayor Peterson asked If he had reviewed the Comprehensive Plan. Hare stated he had not. William F. Miller. 2691 Casco Point Road Miller explained he Is a CPA working for a real estate management company. He relocated to Orono last June from the Los Angles area. He noted he is Interested In gett.ng involved with the community, and r ’ so after having the experience of trying to obtain a variance for hi 8 property, felt he is aware o.‘ the ordinances and wanted to get Involved further. Mayor Peterson noted that on his application he made reference to that fact that In the LA area development ran rampant. She asked what he felt f'rono could do to avoid the same type of scenario. .'i-. AiJ h^4rif'^••y,” , L-Xi*Sfvyr^ills#*' :rSi& *?;» Jt" i': ’^{>h- ^'mi . . .J^ - '.f'• :r'' SI' V Bi'ateife'S ^< ■***:• mm Ifv ISSj'"'' SiSSilM:- 'i--:ipt. Si,S% imm . MINUTES OF the REGULAR ORCNO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEWS - CONT. Miller fe't that LA maue too many exceptions to its v^eneral plan. He stated that at one point he lived in an apartment, where the land owner purchased 8 apartments on a two block radius and asked to be allowed to convert to a high-r'se. He noted he fought against approval of the plan, but the City approved it even though It was against their general plan. He felt that government should plan a role In growth of development within the Community. Steve Peterson. 1065 Tamarack Drive Peterson explained he has been a life-time resident of the area and has two children. He works within the electrical distributing business and Is involved with construction. He emphasized that he Is aware of the quality of life in this area and wishes to work towards maintaining that for his children. He explained he can read blue prints, road layouts and elevations and felt that would be an asset. He noted he has had no civic service experience, but has bean the chairman of the administrative board for his church. Qoetten asked If he had reviewed the Comprehensive Plan. Paterson stated he had not. Qoetten asked if he felt Orono’s conservative position for the area. was good Peterson noted that he felt the but felt the conser\at Iveness of that proper planning is good and future Is bound to mean change, the past has been good. He felt yet there has to be some growth. Callahan noted his application LMCO's requirements. states he Is familiar with the Peterson noted he was a member of the Wayzata Yacht Club for years. Jabbour asked If he was position would involve. aware of the commitment of time this Peterson felt it was an obvious commitment Goetten asked why he had decided to apply for the position. sSi: ... fe-P%, l^j: . ’• ft "i'' ppfe: '^' ■>'r■'"'Ik'. asEtc'. - '•■>! Pi,' ip ,,ill%> 11^6. fc®.. ■" gasS"' fiSf:'pp'" Sip. i»p l^k r:-'v>^-‘pr %P. ■ ffiwlilf..a Eils, i fc--, W’^Is :;vs - -pVs .= - : laip^isl If'ft: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEWS - CONT. Peterson commented this is his home for many years to wanted to Insure the quaiity of his children’s future. come and Mayor Peterson announced that the decision Council meeting of March 9th. I be made at the Jabbour noted there is only one vacancy and urged all applicants who are not chosen at this time to reapply in the future. (#4) ADMINISTRATION OF OATH Moorse explained that they had approximately 80 candidates for the part'^time police officer positions and they had interviewed approximately 20 of those candidates. Moorse administered the oath of off Schoenhoff. ce to Scott Boris and John (#5) »1682 CHRISTINE BRICKLEY. 3262 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE • REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION Moorse explained that this Is a variance request that the Council has reviewed In the past. He noted whe. the applicant was last before the Council, the applicant had .ntended to request the application be tabled, but failed to do sc. Upon request that she sign the adopted resolution, she indicated that she wished to reappear before the Council with her attorney. Craig Mertz, applicant’s attorney, noted that his client Is asking the Council to reconsider part of the action approved at the last meeting. He explained that his client wanted to replace all the old structures on her property with the new garage, to allow adequate storage on the property. He noted that the CounciI directed that Brickley remove the westerly portion of the garage, but explained that her contractor will not guarantee the work on the pre-engineored trusses, which meanc she would have to hire a structural engineer to oversee the project. He noted the resolution states that one reason for denial of the setback variance is open space and stated that the neighbor to the west Is not opposed to the proposal. He stated Brickley is requesting the Council to either grant the side yard setback variance or to allow her to move the garage eastward 7’, outside of the 10’ required setback. He noted that the move would be costly and would cut Into the shared driveway area. <<«<>■. r. I .';w'v:''•:fe/tfe" W- t ■•:’ i"..-.i '■•I ’■' ■ Wm::r ‘pM:'.W: ■'■T- >, i-a'. •Vt ■ Sp’> 'IS' %ii': prt ?^Sr mp- - liiil rsstff- Sim* el-K'Ste Pp-!#*' S'.. ax'^' |5 yK-g.: ,:i ;l|7" Px-mmx X- ■''< ■y, .■ ::> . w r if ',' mII" m f#a- i'- MINUTES OF THE REGUl.AR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 ZONING FILE #1682 - CONT. Callartan asked how the trusses got there in the first place. Mertz noted Brickley ordered them ahead of time, and due to a mis­ interpretation of the Planning Commission action, went ahead with the project. He agreed there was no ' xcuse for not getting a permit. He asked If the Council would lave agreed to the proposal If Brickley had required the removal of the ugly sheds to be replaced with a new garage in the correct sequence. Jabbour stated that he did not believe there was such a thing as ugly buildings. He stated the issue is excessive hardcover and structural encroachment. Mayor Peterson asked Barrett if the past decision could be changed. Barrett stated that they did have the authority to change their past decision, but a motion would have to be made by a person who voted for the prevailing side. Mayor Peterson reiterated that Brickley did not stay through the motion at the last Council meeting when this was discussed, and noted she did not mention tabling the application at that meeting. Brickley stated that she had everything written out and that was the first sentence. Jabbour felt that all issues regarding this application have been a misunderstanding. He noted that the project was not done in the proper sequence, and felt that Counci I has tried to work with the applicant. He reminded her that they are not in the business of redesigning her lifestyle, buildings or land, and that is why the issue was voted on at the last meeting. Qaffron stated that the resolution allows underpinning of the slab to move the westerly walI, but to allow the excess slab to remain. Mertz announced that Brickley would agree to removal of the southern excess portion of the slab if the garage was allowed to remain In Its present location. Callahan noted that the Planning Commission suggested that removal at the first review of this application. pSj'? -ilV « *■ h-> m.-.m ift. - t' "* ' • *■' ;> •>■ € r %> ^,. W • ^v?fv '• -‘Jt'm '* ■ >. -t '■tiSt !, MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 ZONING FILE #1682 - CONT. Jabbour reminded them that they are still not sure the garage wiI I meet building code standards. Callahan stated he does not feel responsible for the trusses. Qaffron asked If the garage was to be moved over 7’, how the garage would function. Brickley noted the door would be cnanged to the south side, but reminded them that there are four other neighbors that use the drive and It would be greatly reduced by the garage encroachment. She reiterated that she would be willing to remove the ll’x32’ excess slab on t^e south and put up gutters on the west side if the garage was allowed to remain. Qaffron asked about easements that the neighbors may have over tne Shared drive. Brickley stated the neighbors do not ha^« an easement. Gaffron asked if the garage was moved over , and the door moved to the southern end, would the door be centered, and if so, would the driveway need to be added onto to allow accessibiIity to the garage. Callahan reiterated that the Planning Commission reviewed this istue on December 16th, and felt that Council should not waste time on planning. Jabbour suggested they relay their concerns to staff. There was no motion to reconsider the application. (#6) 8HORELAND REGULATION ORDINANCE ~ ORDINANCE #101, 2ND SERIES Moorse explained this is the ordinance drafted by the Lake Use Committee and has been recommended for adoption by the Plann’ng Ccmmission. Qoetten asked If they would be moving too fast if they removed the subdivision moratt-rlum prior to the DNR approval of the ordinance. Callahan stated tnat the DNR regulations did not need to be In effect until fall of 1992. 6 - .V'm}^r%-mi- »SR3*sr' I ^ '>1,^' tfc- •-:{'* T‘*> t •'- uX'-.- rjs^; . ' 9>if ';-a:' ■■ k.:? k'' »••, ‘X v;ir;vi^.:'^'rrV' W-mm'- *' : '.. ^•* ‘■'?x/ : • 1 t'; X '"XVmm-:-te, te'x: ■■; ^*i:' M% k: i\ ' . %L“ ■?■•’ „ ,, /'■ 11 *■ K-v, - ■k- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 8H0RELAND REGULATION ORDINANCE - CONT. Jabbour felt that the DNR would approve the ordinance without a probIem. Callahan recognized Michael Gaffron for ail his efforts with regards to this document. He noted the ordinance will seriously Impact various citizens because it expands the areas which the shoreland regulations will affect. He noted that the Planning Commission suggested some sort of publicity of the new ordinance to make the citizens aware of the impact. Goetten stated that a newsletter on Highway 12 would soon be going out tc residents and perhaps this issue could be incorporated within that Ietter . Jabbour noted that the ordinance encompasses approximateIy three- fourths of the dry bulldable land within Orono. Callahan reminded everyone that the DNR designated the lakes and streams to be governed by the ordinance. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to aciopt Ordinance ♦101, Second Series, entitled, "An Ordinance Establishing Regulations for the Mr-nagement of Shore I ands", and further to approve the “ording and publication of the sur^mary ordinance. Ayes 4, nays 0. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to direct staff to give proper notice and hold a public hearing at the March Planning Commission meeting regarding repeal of the moratorium ordinance. Ayes 4, nays 0. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to direct staff to submit the Shoreland Management Ordinance to the Department of Natural Resources and to all neighboring and Minnetonka lakeshore cities for review. Ayes 4, nays 0. Gaffron requested Council members to contact him with any changes they have to the wording of the letters to be sent *< the DNR ard neighboring cities. (•♦7) PARK COMMISSION RE-APPOINTMENTS It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to re-appoint Alexander Vongries and Phi I Ip Bradley to the Park Commission. Ayes 4, nays 0. i4r-T«Mi •>• ••■ [^v':ii;.:>:'''^' Jr. i;'-;;.\ ■ff'-- ’i5|. mm'r.^Vo>r^:la# ■ r .i: *; ' W ;-‘.^^- MM-: attfe ’. iiffil '*'t \ •*' <- »!«* '^*#l'iir ■ ■lip' ft|-: t^f --- '•siilli. '■■ \ r’"fv i# iMl Si#. a5^? ' :?.;a;r. • pa N- a: :Vi E -■ r w^.ft '^1 - P""' M':i MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 (•a) PARK COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS Mayor Peterson explained since the interviews, another vacancy on the Park Commission occurred, so they would be appointing two members at this time. She requested the individuals not selected to continue to show Interest In their community. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Callahan, to appoint McMillan to the Park Commission. Ayes 4, nays 0. Li I i It was moved by Callahan, to appoint Tim Pattrin to the Commission. There was not a second to the motion. Park Callahan noted that Pattrin has been an asset to the City as a member on the Cable Commission, but t^'e City should not hold him back from future appointments oecause ot this commitment. Mayor Peterson agreed and noted she appreciates the work he has done on the Cable Commission. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded Robert Howells. Ayes 4, nays 0. by Mayor Peterson, to appoint Qoetten stated that It was selfish for the Council tc .ish to retain Pattrin on the Cable Commission, but reminded the Council that there were so many qualified applicants for the vacancy on the Park Commission and felt it was appropriate to appoint someone else. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT A) Mayor Peterson asked If a staff member would be attending the Metropolitan Council’s meeting on rural policies. Qaffron noted they Just received notice of the meeting., but someone would attend the meeting. He noted that Orono does meet most, if not ail, of the conditions for exclusions to the policies. Callahan stated he would either like to review the issue at a work session or get a written report after the meeting. B) Mayor Peterson asked what happened at the light rail transit meeting. Jabbour state there was a presentation on light rail, but that he felt that most in attendance were more interested in the Highway 12 issue. He stated that Steve Hay would be changing positions. He indicated to MnDot that it was crucial that they pick a preferred corridor for Highway 12 as soon as possible. 8 V. 'V ?V.'''^i'i.4'-- fr .^T*: .' -r- .;. * ^.. A /t llr^^ h\ ^ ^5c,:' •■?-: SfW ■■- ••V M iS' 'lii- .- «j.. II ■ -VAVr^-" MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. Qoettan stated that both she and Moc se drafted a letter to MnDot expressing that same position. She noted that Mr. Hay would be around through the Scoping Document process. Jabbour noted that the Mayor of Independence was trere and Jabbour indicated to him his discomfort with the joint powers agreement between Maple Plain and Long Lake. C) Jabbour stated not much is getting done at the Facility Committee meetings and noted he is confused about the size of the Committee and the necessity of all to be in attendance before a decision can be made. Callahan stated that the last meeting was called at the request of the architect to approve the detailed plans so they could be sent out for bid. He noted the architect did not attend the meeting, and currently ^hey do not have approved plans to be sent out. He stated that last fall a very strict time table was established, which stated this was to be done by March 1st. He stated that the architect was responsible for gett'ng the Job done, and before he would approve any progress payments to the architect, he wanted to see progress on the project. Goetten felt the meetings have become too casual and tnere is a need for a Council member to be in charge of being the liaison between the Committee and the Council. Callahan pointed out at the last meeting it was brought up that large amounts of money would need to be spent, but no one seemed to realize what the expenditures were for. Goetten reiterated that the total cost of the project would not exceed $4,000,000 as originally established, and tie contingency fund would not be spent for the new facilities. Jabbour noted the criteria for additional items would be "must have and cannot li^e without*. Mayor Peterson noted It was distressing to hear of problems with the project with no solutions. Moorse agreed with Callahan that plans were t^ be reviewed at the February I8th meeting of the Committee, but they were not sjppiled. He noted they intended *o inform the Commtttee at that time of a possibIe soils correction probiem, but the Committee was not asked to make a decision on such problem. i-:': . 11 I 'W'C*r - «r —<r^ 'ij'Sdp-w'. •' V. |i%#-' .V hM. ®'i': ;. :. » ;>TiF-;;K'r?}5;- rr•'-=*"•• '''^ *?, i^# ■ ,T,-v-:.;-:. F.-r ■ ' ISl: m. .' '''m. Tv T,.- ,;iV ?;.:■ ^llf ;■'' . ''^'i1iVi»-if%y. V i :;' V V,:, ii;.A*sar)SS& ■ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCl- .‘.EETINGHELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. Mayor Peterson noted it was Implied at that meeting that there was a major problem with only one alternative for a solution. Callahan noted that the Committee was promised at the beginning that they would be the deciding body on such decisions. Jabbour asked that a specific agenda be sent to Committee members a week prior to the meeting to lI low those wi»o wished to attend to make necessary arrangements to attend the meeting. Callahan noted that Bellows Committee meeting. was never Informed of the last Qoetten asked If the last meeting was so important, why were they waiting three more weeks to get together. Moorse explained that the lack of a decision by the Committee would not delay the plans for bid. Jabbour understood that the public works building was out on hold until the elevation was decided for the other buildings. Moorse explained that after the meeting with the architect and construction manager, the deadline for plans for bid were to be ready by March 16th and bids wouId arrive back at City Hall by mid- April. He stated that Boarman would be sending him conceptual plana for the audlo/visual equipment to be incorporated within the detailed pi ana. Qoetten reminded Moorse to contact the City of Minnetrlsta for comments on their audio/visual system. Cook explained that the soils expert felt it necessary to lift the entire project In order to compensate for poor soils. He noted he had explained to public works a way to maintain elevation and control drainage. He noted the original design allowed for a low spot In tha middle of the driving lane for drainage, but that had been changei to allow drainage In the gutter I nes. Jabbour asked whv additional fill would be added elevation rather thtn remove the poor soils. to raise the Cook explained they were concerned with drainage under the parking ! ot. y v¥,' i- ^:¥^r. :■ ■ ,.■ i-=-^ i'-”' ■■^ 1^#.. ■ s' 14R-.'S I % \ Sf ■®; H*"IS.::: . iili ■•■>■' ^ life ;■■ ■ . i^-'i c ■■ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETINGHELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. Goetten recommended Jabbour be nominated as liaison between the Committee and the Council. Hayor Peterson suggested both Jabbour and Callahan be responsible for this position. (*#9) FINAL PAY REQUEST PUMP HOUSE NO. 3 It was mov. by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve the final pay request for the pump house no. 3 project to Richmar Construction in the amount of $11,320.85. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#9A) TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING OF NORTHERN THIRD OF CITY Moorse explained that this is the first phase of a ihree year project to gather topographical information for the entire City. Cook explained they have requested quotes and have reviewed those and Interviewed the lowest of three submitted. Mayor Peterson asked if they could exp'^ct the remainder of the City to cost the same. Cook stated that generally the same company will submit lowest quote for the additional work, and felt this was a fair price. Callahan noted that this is a good section of the City to begin with considering the recent ordinance amendment. He noted he was told the MCWO has topographic maps of the entire City. Qaffron noted he has contacted the MCWD and they do not have the same type of topographic information requestt It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to approve proceeding with topographic mapping of the northern third of the City and to approve the hiring of Horizons to do the work for an amount not to exceed $43,265.00. Ayes 4, nays 0. (•10) ADOPT A STREET/HIGHWAY/PARK Moorse explained this Is a proposal similar to MnDot’s “Adopt a Highway Program”. He explained Gerhardson has contacted organizations in the area that expressed a desire to ixpand upon that proposal and perhaps to improve some of the p?rks and add gardens at the new facilities. 0' -, . .. 'V ■ V V-' •■', V ??- ■:H ' ■ W*-. ■!•, ■ - MINUTES OF THE REGULAR OPONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 ADOPT A STREET/HIGHWAY/PARK - CONT. Goetten sug^ascea they work with the Park Commission on this issue. Mayor Peterson directed Moorse to go ahead and adopt a program. (#11) LMCD LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE MEETING Moorse reminded the Council that the first meeting of the Lake Access Task Force was scheduled for We’nesday, March 11th, and he would be participating with this task force. He noted that the LMCD has requested an elected official to also be a part of this task force. Jabbour and Mayor Peterson volunteered to be a part of the task force. (#12) LAKE USE COMMITTEE UPDATE Moorse updated the Council on the upcoming Lake Use Committee meeting to be held on March 5th and noted the memo provides an update on the City’s authority and options for regulating marinas. Goetten felt that incentives should be given to encourage marina compliance to curtail possible litigation. Callahan asked what was paying the license fee. involved with marina licensing othe^ than Qaffron noted marinb •■e required to comply with Section 5.42 of the code, and revit are done on al I marinas applying for a license. He stated a staff memo would be prepared for the meeting of March 5th describing tne past and present compliance of all marinas. He expla ned the code may need to be amended to allow the Council the authority they wish in licensing marinas. (#13) ENTRANCE SIGNS - NAVARRE BUSINESS DISTRICT Moorse explained these are sketches of possible entrance signs to the Navarre busir *ss district. Mayor Peterson noted these signs are being proposed because of an agreement between members of the County Road 15 Beautification Committee. She noted the other cities have already complied with that agreement. She felt the signs proposed were too large for the residential areas along County Road 19 and suggested the regular City sign for those areas. 1 KV.- ^ ‘‘Iv- ■ fe.- •r-# 'X " plfc'-- * ■ >4^- '.>-f I- -■■• *• ■' mm ‘fhU'ih.. ic&', 1-^ 1#r“ ■ ^^i§i vim. V' mmv m- %y MifS.' -i. Vl0m- ,;3": <r^mmVPv MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 ENTRANCE SIGNS - CONT. Jabbour and Goetten agreed with Mayor Peterson. It was moved by Callahan, to approve the installation of two signs to the entrance of the Navarre Business District. There was no second. Mayor Peterson asked why City staff was not proposing the installation of such signs. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to direct Gerhardson to explain to the CounciI a method how City stafv could possibly make the cedar signs and instal l such signs. Ayes 4, nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT Barrett explained he has discussed the amendment to the covenants with Long Lake’s A*’torney, Chr stopher Dietson, and noted Diatson has agreed with the number of persons to be Involved with the waiving of the covenarts. He explained he has canceled the meeting with the Municipal Board to be held the following day. He noted once the City has approved the final plat and it has been filed, the property can be transferred as set far^h. PRESENTATION BY STEPHEN JOHNSTON Mr. Johnston noted on behalf of the Park Commission, he was there to review the proposed plans b> the Hockey Association and Orono Baseball Association for a sports complex to be located on school property. He noted this would alleviate the need to use the Bederwood ball field for Little League games. Johnston reviewed the master plan for the property, which was drawn up by the firm he works for. He noted the plan requires the acquisition of additional property from the property to t‘,e east through park dedication. He also commented on the traiI system to be incorporated wIthin the plan to connect to the bike trail proposed along Old Crystal Bay Road and along County Road 6 to connect with the recent subdivision to the east. Johnston noted this proposal is actually beyond what the school’s needs are at this time. Jabbour thanked Johnston fcr his efforts plan. in developing the master Goetten noted the plan looks very tight. U i- iP?--te pife/r idP iif^R- i' ^ V '= - ill-m*'ife. m MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 PRESENTATION BY STEPHEN JOHNSTON - CONT. Johnston noted the plan is quite feasible, but more room could be made by eliminating the fencing proposed. He stated this plan allows for the maximum development of the property. Mabusth noted the City does have the right to take land for park dedication. Based on the City’s adopting a development plan of ihe school property, this would be feasible. Johnston “>olnted out if the plan is approved and continues to show the encroachment to the east, it would be best for the City to notify the land owner to the east of the potential land request. Mabusth asked If approval has been acquired for access onto County Read 6. Johnston noted they currently do not have approval for the accesses, but noted it may be necessary for only one access. Goetten reminded Johnston that the possible Highway 12 corridor selection process should be kept in mind when planning for this property. » » « « Callahan asked about the presidential primary. Moorse explained that some Legislators had tried to overturn the pending presidential primary, but to no avail. He noted the City Is expecting a low turn out for the primary and is therefore requesting the consolidation of all precincts into one. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #3085 to allow the consolidation of all four precincts within Orono Into one precinct at Schumann Elementary School for the presidential primary. Ayes 4, nays 0. Jabbour noted at the LMCD’s Save the Lake" meeting, a member of the Hennepin Parks Informed him that she has recommended that Hennepin Parks purchase the portion of the sewer plant property currently being considered for two residential lots by the City of Orono. («i14) LICENSES There were no licenses. '-h-.A Jr-.-.-. i j . .• • • ♦ ^■'- .V — •' ?•'■* '• •.:sl«%mm 1- .'11* MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETINGHELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 r sa f (MIS) BILLS It was moved by Goetton, seconded by Mayor Peterson, payment of the All Funds Account. Ayes 4, nays 0. to approve iteiii'- mm ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adjourn the regular Council meeting at 9:30 p.m. Ayes 4, nays 0 / DaaJ^ f ^ Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Hal I in, City Clerk P?i|* •' ■ ' & ^'m i’i: f- t x'i, -. .1’ ViV,'* t'... .-‘•yY- ; ' 'vv'. •- ■ ■ ■ ' I A i i V*- "i* -1^ .f.%^£::..^....J rm^^m:■A' i'AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1992, 7:00 P.M. (*)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. Discussion will be held uoon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may b^/|jpj:^a i ned upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL 1. CONSENT AGENDA* APPibVAL OF MINUTES ;♦ 2. Regular Meeting of February 10, 1992 Planning Commission Applicant Interviews ^4 i99t fim. 3. 4.Administration of Oath of Office to the Newly Hired Part Time Police Officers LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT - JoEllen Hurt Representative PDBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ^|(v||klOHING ADMINISTRATOR *S REPORT **j|PPLlCANTS** Inmediately after the Council has reviewed life... v\ 5. 6. your application please sign the three ( i) original resolutions at the Recorder's desk. Applicants need not execute resolutions for subdivisions, vacations and denials. #1682 Christine Brickley, 3262 North Shore Drive - Variance - Request for Additional Consideration Shoreland Regulation Ordinance MATOR/COONCIL REPORT * 7. Park Commission Re-Appointments 8. Park Commission Appointments ift **^^**®®** REPORT9. Pinal Pay Request Pump House No. 3 9A, Proceeding with Topographic Mapping of Northern Third of .5,, , City - Selection of Firm E|^v CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 10. Adopt a Street/Highway/Park li' 11. LMCD Lake Access Task Force Meeting 12. Lake Use Committee Update 13. Entrance Signs - Navarre Business District CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LXCSMSK8 (14*) 8IU»8 (15*) M WNMENTIV;:^, i 1 V^-fe&^'"AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1992, 7:00 P.M( W-- r?.'* ‘ * ,s^. OPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 02/24 - douncil ^Meeting p.iT'. Council Chambers 03/03 - Preoinct Caucus 7:30 No Meetings After 6:00 p.m. 03/05 - LaSe Use Committee Meeting 7:45 a.m. Council Chambers 03/09 - Council Meeting 7 p.m. 03/16 - Planning Commission 7 p.m. Council Chambers 03/23 - Council Meeting 7 p.m. Council Chambers 03/25 - Stubbs Bay Sewer Public Hearing 7 p.m. Orono High School Cafeteria -1 i' > w ■i Y •i mi m: •C / ► ‘ U.* I I'-ivi' I T: • y-C.: ■ ' ■ Hv ■ .yg.AAiV eM-': ^:a ,i\K ■>?a •'? ^ r !>■ -i. *■ ‘ ' N'V if. \-!fy'M :!#fc ki-t" k «■ 1 i-i ■ 'r'■ "■ ' ■fe:4v.sill-"' r .is •i' ':>■ ii- '.''ti.-’V MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 1C, 1992 ROLL merfflBL present: Mayor Barbara Peterson, CounciI members Gabriel Jabbour^jy The Council met on the above date with the following Edward Callahan, and J. Diann Goetten. Mary Butler was absent. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Public Works Director John Gerhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, Septic Manager Stephen Weckman, City Attorney Tom Barrett, City Engineer Glenn Cook and City Recorder Terl Naab. Mayor Peterson cal led the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. (»1) CONSENT AGENDA Goetten removed Item #11. Mayor Peterson added Item #9. Callahan removed Items #5 and 13. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to aporove the Consent Agenda, with the exception of Items #5, 11 and 13, and with the addition of Item #9. 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 OF MINUTES It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Orono Counci I held on January 27, 1992. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#3) PARK COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEWS Mayor Peterson announced that Les Kelley had passed away that week, and on behalf of the City Council, the Planning Commission and the Park Commission wished extended their sincere condolences to the Kelley family. Mark Johnson. 1025 Heritage Lane Johnson explained that he is interested in the baseball situation In Orono an'" the need for a facility. He noted he has lived in the City for 4 1/2 yea**s and would like to get more involved with City issues. He felt that the City could be spending more on park-type improvements. ■Ei''' J *■. ■ • Sr.v;.hI U ' V^r,r^v t I. ■¥- !■;r-'ir m ■ l^>:-1'^ \Sv. r: > , . !■; ri-' ' '•■ t^:u ■ ■ m.rn^-i;: •: C'. . • -M h t i :, ■I. Mi,W' ' ♦' s ’- V %5«' MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING ^-y HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 >\PARK COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEWS - CONT. Bfe-il.: 5»v >"■■■■’ ' . i-V'^ ■ ■ T ■ '■' :' .S-' , Mayor Peterson asked if Johnson was familiar with \)*6ommlssI on ’ s current projects. the Park Johnson noted that he was familiar with the bike/hike trail, and stated he had not attended any of the Park Commission meetings. LI I I Tod McMillan. 1275 Lvman Avenue McMII I an noted that she had reviewed the minutes from the I99i Park Commission meetings and realized the Commission is dealing with many issues. Mayor Peterson asked if she was aware that the Commission is looking to develop a master park plan for the City. McMillan asked if that would bn an update of the current plan. Mayor Peterson asked what McMiUan felt was the most important issue before the Commission. McMillan felt that the Crystal Bay site was the most pressing issue. She also felt the Commission should look to the citizens for input In the development of the comprehensive park plan. Goetten asked her opinion of the bike/hike trail opportunity. McMII I an felt and felt it organizations it was an important part of the City’s park system, was a more complex issue because of the many involved with the development jf the trail. Dana Mock. 80 Hackberrv Hill Mock noted she has lived in Orono for 5 years and has a 1 year old child. She felt that the safety of children using the park equipment was very important. Mayor Peterson asked if she had attended any of the Park Commission meetings, and asked what she felt was the most Important issue the Commission was currently dealing with. Mock noted she had not attended any of the meetings, but felt that safety of those using the parks was very important. She noted the park system could use more organization, such as Hackberry Hi I I has a basketball hoop with grass under it, which is unusable. She felt that neighborhood watches should be organized. Emm %-mm 1 •• • iS' ,.'.> "•'./■•A*':' ;i?V '^\iy ^v; r’r . rW- ,, ,.. »:■/ r-,:,v ill-:;'' f : f- ' t2 ■ . k0:. Bf'1(4 h^.i h'* ■■-- |i;v:-, ft ^4' ( •' ':> • P-i'^" Mm^<i.-r ;v ••P ‘-V • ••, • 1p; .4.’^ ■• ■•■" MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 PARK COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEWS Robert Howells. 1423 Park Drive Howells noted he has been a resident of Orono since age 2. He is a retired school teacher, football and baseball coach, and has worked for Hennepin County Parks. He noted since he is retired he has more time to dedicate to civic duties. He felt the nature park near him could be upgraded. He noted he had not attended any of tne meetings of the Park Commission. Catherine E. Miller. 1635 Shadvwood Road Miller stated she has lived in Orono for the past 25 years and has come to appreciate the park system even more with her grandchildren. She noted she has not attended any current Park Commission meetings, but went to the meeting where the Commission decided that a dock would not be installed at Sandy Beach. She noted that she had not been notified of that meeting and felt that there should be a dock provided. Miller stated that she has more time to get involved with issues of the City. Mayor Peterson announced that the Council will decide who will be appointed to the Park Commissicn at their February 24th meeting. Goetten noted that many of the applicants had noted comments or suggestions on their application about the park system, and urged them to contact either Gerhardson or Dick Flint to relay those thoughts. Tim Pattrin. 1360 Railroad Avenue - Unable to attend the meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - MAUREEN BELLOWS, REPRESENTATIVE Mayor Peterson asked Bellows to confirm the Planning Commission’s position regarding the sewer plant property. Be I Iows noted that the CommissI on felt it was inappropriate to sell off 2 lots for residential development, and felt the entire area should Lc retained as a nature area. PUBLIC COMMENTS Skip Madge. 8iS Forest Arms Lane Madge asked the Council to compare Orono’s ordinance on loose dogs with Mound’s ordinance. V ^ 4, •< k MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, -!992 I r v: r ■> r I - PUBLIC COMMENTS - CONT. Mayor Pederson asked Moorse to have the Police Chief contact Mr. Madge regarding his concerns. Goetten reminded them that Orono is a rjral area, and agreed that the Council should address Madge’s problem but did ’'ct feel a need to change the ordinance. (#4) #1470 & #1706 WILLIAM & EVELYN KNAPP, 4300 BAYSIDE ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION/PRD - RESOLUTION #3069 William and Evelyn Knapp were present for this application. Moorse explaim"^ *his is an application for conditional use permit approval for a t for a three lot subdivision which has received conceptual approval from the Council. He noted the PRD Incorporates the conditions and special setbacks for the property. Mabusth explained the resolution does not yet incorporate the special setbacks for accessory structures. She explained that because of the covenant that would restrict building within areas In excess of 18% slope, two of the lots will be greatly impacted and therefore it is being suggested that speciai consideration be given In placing accessory structures in front of the front line of the principal structure. Knapp stated that the existing residence on the property would need to be expanded to be in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood propertIes. Mabusth noted that the current code does not allow a credit for dry bulldable of areas in excess of 18% slopes. The code does not stated that you cannot build in such areas. She explained that this condition was imposed to minimize the impact on the trees on the property. She felt that a detailed survey would show areas where the existing residence could be expanded wh'ch would be out of the 18% slope limitation area. Goetten asked why they should cirant a variance for accessory structures In advance. Mabusth Indicated that they were creating restricted building setbacks. She noted that with a PRO is It common to create special setbacks, we had already In approving 2 acre standards for the proposed 2 to 3 acre pads. It should be the goal of a PRD to minimize future variances. lx ' . *V m MINUTcS OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 ZONING FILE 4M470 & #1706 - CONT. Mayor Peterson asked how the Planning Commission tele on this issue. Mabusth indicated there Planning Commission. was no discussion on this issue by the Bellows stated that the issue was not clear to the Commission. She felt that when creating a PRD, parameters for development should be established at the beginning. Mabusth noted that In addition to the 50’ setback from the front lot line for an accessory structure, she is recommending a setback from the private drive bo established. 50’ It was moved by Mavor Peterson, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3069 to be amended to include special setbacks for accessory structures for AppI ication #1470 and #1 706 WiI Iiam and Evelyn Knapp, 4300 Bayside Road, granting preliminary approval of a Class III subdivision and conceptually approving a conditional use permit for a PRD of 3 residential units. Ayes 4, nays 0. Knapp thanked staff for all the hard work they have done with regards to this application. (#5) #1661 S. MCCLOUD. RECORD LOTS 16 AND 22, BIG ISLAND - SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT - RESOLUTION #3070 Moorse explained that this appiication is a lot Iine rearrangement, which prevides legal lake access for a parcel. Gaffron noted that in 1983 when the City designated record lots on Big Island, Record Lot 22 retained a strip along the 'akeshore adjacent to another parcel. That strip will now be combir.ad with the adjacent parcel. He noted once that has been completed, the City will grant the automatic lot area variance to both parcels. He noted that the application had received preliminary approval from the Planning Commission prior to the adoption of the subdivision morator i ur.i. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #3070 for Application #1661 for S. McCloud, Record Lots 16 and 22, Big Is and, for a subdivision of a lot Iine rearrangement. Ayes 4, nays ). 'A mi m-' mj-v , •l'.,, , '^.v. S:.Aj lift, ag: :. ■- *s • '• • ,-^t .,>‘-v./ *& ■nV .■;.:? V-ilj 1::^- .V. . ' W'■ fi'-- '■ %.y’‘^r. Ifm:A--' i life;' - • MINUTES OF THE REGUL/^R ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 (#6) #1700 DALE MCCURDY. 4041 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE Moorse explained this application is a request for a variance to allow the construction of a second story deck onto an existing structure. He noted there is a difference of opinion about whether this deck was ever previously approved. He noted that with any variance application, an updated survey would be required, but the applicant has indicated that he does not wish to supply the City with an updated survey because of the cos^. Mabusth stated that when McCurdy filed the after-the-fact variance application, he appealed the request for an updated survey. At that time, staff noted discrepancies with the original survey, noting excesses of hardcover within the 0-75' area and changes in the driveway. Mabusth noted that the applicant has indicated he will allow the partially built deck to remain on the property without approval and hold the City liable for any accidents the partial deck may cause. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Goetten, to deny Dale McCurdy’s request for special acception to the requirement of an updated survey be provided, and that he has 60 days to submit an updated survey, and If that deadline is not met, directs the City to proceed with whatever penalties are appropriate. Ayes 4, na>s 0. Jabbour asked If a survey was required of all applicants regarding issues such as this. Mabusth Indicated In the affirmative, and stated the staff has acted consistently with this application as with other similar appiicat ions. (#7) #1704 C. ARNOLD CARLSON/DARLOW MADGE, 855/875 FOREST ARMS LANE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3071 Mr. & Mrs. Darlow Madge and C. Arnold Carlson were present. Moorse explained that applicants are requesting approval of alterations to a drainage ditch, which have been completed, and for realignment of a drainage area so t functions better. Goetten stated that these properties handle the drainage for the surrounding area. Xk i -. t-ft 4 fej^?c>’: I- : i^'%'fe jj.if,v.sV y, ■ ■- •,- K;-, *^'-- fe?g5S®:’" ^;v.^'';y*.>''?'/-. \-:.< ■ - ■*■ - ■■■ ^ ^fes ■'r» 'r’y?; ^::r.,„. '.V :.'S . ;■ *'i yitei: ■ 'T'" ;. V . . "ify' ■' '. ' |#y:‘ 5|iP; .-f.:-., ^ ■ 'iPJ:MW:V ^ 'A-VV- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 ZONING FILE «1704 - CONT. Mayor Peterson asked If this solution would be In place of a storm sewer system. Cook Indicated that if installed and maintained properly, it would replace a storm sewer system. Callahan asked who would bear the cost of installation and maintenance. Gerhardson noted the property owners would Install the system, and If there was a public easement over the property, It would be the City’s responsibility to maintain the system. Mabusth noted that there is a public easement. Richard Lee, property owners’ designer, hidicated he felt there should be very little maintenance. Madge requested that a screen be added to the manhole at the street to eliminate some of the sediment build up. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3071 for Application #1704 for C. Arnold Carlson and Darlow Madge of 865 and 875 Forest Arms Lane, approving a conditional use permit and variance to the realignment and Installation of a drainage ditch. Ayes 4, nays 0. Car I son fees in cost of asked the Council to consider the waiving of the permit (leu of the fact that the property owners were bearing the InstaiI at I on. Mayor Peterson noted that they would consider the request. («8) #1708 a #1709 JUOSON DAYTON, 825 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD SOUTH - VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION #3072 Judson Dayton was present for this application. Moorse explained that this is a variance to allow an addition to an oversized accessory structure and a conditional use permit to renovate a former caretaker apartment. Goetten stated the Planning Commission requested the applicant to apply for a conditional use permit for the existing caretaker’s residence on the property. •v ■ ¥- . V-v‘:vV >,■ i“' P ??. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 "l^f- %W- ' ^ p>-' '■ ■■■ ZONING FILE §1708 A §1709 - CONT Mabusth explained there was no record of conditional use approval for that structure, but noted Improvements for that residence are not currently being proposed. - - Dayton noted that the existing caretaker structure had been added onto about 5-8 years ago. Mabusth noted she found no record of a building permit for the addition. /‘‘ti; Barrett felt that although the structure Is not directly tied to these applications, It would be wise to require conditional use approval at this time. &riKr/ ■'Mx- ’• ‘ t' • It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution §3072 for AppIications §1708 and §1709 for Judson Dayton for property at 825 Old Crystal Bay Road south for a variance and conditional use permit, and requesting the applicant to apply for a conditional use permit for the exist*ng caretaker’s residence. Ayes 4, nays 0. W\ • !i ■ f •.* \(«»9) §1710 RICHARD BLOOMQUIST. 3333 SHORELINE DRIVE - |t Pfc., % . I VARIANCE - RESOLUTION §3073 It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetter, to adopt Resolutioti §3073 for Application §1710 for Richard Bloomquist of 3333 Shoreline Drive, approving a variance for a calt storage shed. Ayes 4, nays 0. (§10) SEPTIC ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - ORDINANCE §100, SECOND SERIES Mayor Peterson asked if the amendment had anything to do with the fact that the Siate is currently issuing well permits. Goetten asked if the City would ever hope to regain the authority to oversee well installations. Weckman noted he has monitored the State inspectors to see what they are concerned with in the installation of wells. He noted he is working with the State to receive welI information on a regular basis. He noted some well drillers still check with the City for well sites. Callahan asked about the licensing provision In the amendment. -if Weckman explained they would license site evaluators, which would ensure they have passed the MPCA septic course. S&M ■ ;? • m&MW-. 8 U- mm^. ■MM i& mm ■ 0'^ 'i ;• ' • '^wmu ■ -V;^ - ,-:'i- ■ mmMmm,-iMM*^. ij^is ■-' ►' ’■■ .-> I^pf^. ■■ ■ fe>»%S’i>r'-,IP m SvV ' W^‘ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 8EPTIC ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - CONT. It was movad by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Ordinance #100, Second Series, septic ordinance amendment proposed. Ayes 4, nays 0. k -:*rr (#11) MARINA LICENSE APPLICATION UPDATE Qoetten expressed concern that the Lake Use Committee was not scheduied to meet for another month, and felt that with spring fast approaching this issue should be addressed immediately. She suggested the Committee also look at the B-2 zoning district. She asked Barrett how far the City could push marina owners to comply with the ordinances. Barrett noted the City has a right to focus licensing authority on issues that relate to the shore-side Impacts created by these marinas. He cautioned them that water-side issues are out of the City’s jurisdiction. Moorse reviewed that when the marina ordinances were adopted they were quite restrictive and therefore variances wers granted to existing marinas. He suggested they review exactly what has been approved for each marina. Jabbour noted that reslaents of Orono are concerned how Orono is treating mar I na owners. He questioned Orono’s IiabiI Ity in letting certain marinas to have financial advantage by not making them pay for an annual license. I!1 Barrett felt the City would not be liable for such actions, but felt the City would be best served by consistent enforcement of the ordinances.i JoEllen Hurr felt It was advantageous for the City and the LMCD to Jointly look at these issues and she encouraged the City to issue licenses to marinas. Callahan reviewed that it has become very expensive for the City to enforce Its marina ordinance in relation to the benefit and noted in the past the LMCD has been considered by the City to be regulator of the marinas. He pointed out the event at a marina on Brown’s Bay when the LMCD Just went ahead and reacted to the probiem. He stated that the marinas are having some financial difficulty, and noted that they do perform a service to the public and the removal of the marinas to be replaced by fishing boats Is not a desireable move. He pointed out that many residential lots In Orono are guilty of storing junk. Just as the marlnas are guilty of such storage. V k0m- ' ■■§Mf' J'' '..*■. piiv' Sk ^3^ Al^' f"' ^mh;: ' ii^- M’" ^ IS?" .'■ P'r ^■rr'^yr^. , ^r- .Viil'^mm .< I* -M*rtm £■ i-m. ft t",- ■• ::; MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 MARINA LICENSE APPLICATION UPDATE - CONT. Jabbour noted that no one on the Council Is advocating that the marinas be replaced with boat launches. He stated that the Council requires residents to uphold the ordinances and felt they should do the same with marina owners. He noted that if the Council is going to allow marinas to have excessive density on their property, It should be acknowledged and monitored, and conditions of such should be incorporated within the license. Callahan noted that the Lake Use Committee was established to review this situation and decide whether to make changes or enforce the current code. Hurr stated that Gayle’s Marina was required to replace trees many years ago, and they have never completed with such requirement. She felt the City should force the marinas to fcI low the ordinances the same as they do the residents. Jabbour suggested tt t licenses approved reviewed by staff fo conditions set for Committee should establish whether reasonabIe. In the past should be each marina, and, the those conditions are Mayor Peterson established the next Lake Use Committee meeting for Thursday, Fepruary 27, 1992 at 7:45 a.m. in the Council Chambers. (*♦12) JOINT USE DOCK LICENSES - RESOLUTIONS #3074, 3076, 3076, 3077, 3078, 3079, 3080 & 3081 It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to adopt following resolution approving a 1992 Joint Use Dock License: Resolution ♦ the FoxhIII Homeowners’ Association 3074 Minnetonka Power Squadron 3075 Walter’s Port 3076 Sandy Beach 3077 Victoria Estates 3078 Rhode/En1ow/Lindah1 3079 Forest Arms 3080 Navarre Cove 3081 4, nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT A. Mayor Peterson noted that So « Moos has indicated she no longer wishes to serve on the Planning Commission or the Facility Design Committee. ^:r‘ .f -J i S’."•■• X‘m r^'s ' ■'. 4.-.., v:< iPr.. §1^7^ ■ fe^lf !-#-t .fcSr" |r¥' ftSwifetes?' pgift-' |p^#f?.' Wm-: «|l > >>k ■ - ^'*#'^i;‘■■ 'P m0M ;v fe?'V i-®W.M. 5p^|v; ■ •’ . r ■'.- -1-- '^"-0in. ^V- 'W :-‘Vt.^- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. B. Mayor Paterson reminded the Council of the AMM reception, which is to be held the dinner. same evening as the LMCD’s 25th aniversary C. Mayor Peterson reminded the Council scoping document comments by February 11, to return their draft 1992. 0. Mayor Peterson reviewed Long Lake's watercraft from the east end of the lake. desire to ban personal Qerhardson stated that the DNR passed legislation regarding type of watercraft, and there was an understanding between Lake and Orono that they would wait and see what effect legislation would have, and if needed, an addition to ordinance would be added. this Long that that E. Mayor Peterson requested the Council be sent the Commission agendas. Park F. Goetten advised the Councii that Les Keiiey had served on the Park Commission for approximately 20 years. She suggested the City dedicate a memorial site or garden at the new City facility site. Callahan suggested that they name a new park after Kelley. G. Jabbour added that he had received many calls requesting the City to reconsider their position on Highway 12, and change that position to a "no-build" option. H. Jabbour noted that residents have called him regarding the fire truck which was out of service. Moorse noted that the one tanker with a problem, is operational In the event of a fire, but a small pump used for miscellaneous services is in need of repair. (#13) FEASIBILITY STUDY - WILLOW DRIVE - RESOLUTION #3082 Callahan reviewed that this Is e. proposed Improvement to Willow Drive between Highway 12 and County Road 6, and asked if that was the area that the County was willing to help Improve. Qerhardson no'., d that the County has removed that project from Its capital improv«^ment plan. 11 *1 .•i i * j pr - .wiil- 'ill-..PT'-ii- |4tf'■ t&' .'V ,'■. ■';* f. . iliii/'''' M&-- gfL:«®,- ^f:-. fej“ Vi?'-.' IV-',.#V:issi,:.te«^:if' is&,. iSfc •Ws Ms Vi"-: :,r '» .?■ . :- ".-»f S-. IfSSs*'iff'': ■■V'c- '.•’ »r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10. 1992 FFASIBILITY STUDY WILLOW DRIVE - CONT. Qoetten stated she thought that was a part of the improvement scheduled for 1993. Gerhardson noted that is only for the signal Iight at Willow Drive. He noted they are working with MnDot to coordinate both the upgrade to Willow Drive and the installation of the signal light. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #3082 directing the City Engineer to prepare a feasibility study for the upgrade of Willow Drive from Highway 12 to County Road 6. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#14) BID AWARD - WATER TOWER Moorse explained this is a tabulation of bids received for the installation of a hydropillar designed water tower. Jabbour asked how the bid could be approximately one-quarter of a million over estimate. Cook explained that the price depends on how busy they are. He stated that they have worked with this company before and did not have any problems with them. It was moved by Miyor Peterson, seconded by Goetten, to award the elevated water storage tank project to Pittsburgh-Des Moines, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $595,150.00. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#15) STREET LIGHTING - FRONTAGE ROAD - NEW CITY FACILITY Moorse asked if the Counci I would like to install ornamental street lights along the frontage road for the new City facilities. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Goetten, to direct staff to accept bids on street lighting for the frontage road to the new City facilities. Ayes 4, nays 0. (^#15) POLICE CHIEF PAY ADJUSTMENT It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to adjust the Pol ice Chief Sullivan'^ salary by 3% effective on his sixth month anniversary date. Ayes 4, nays 0. 1 2 - v i Sifi' mm i, ■■ w*'vf* i* '• - •*• ■ c'V • Silt#/ ste'> '•^■m ; % '■ Is' ilfS' f-i’-Vj-; ||t'- |f•-:^. Bit-, ;v yj*«' WM ml-m: 'm' ■ 'it' "'•■-V ». V * ■ " ?*•:; g; Wt: ‘'i-: - ■'^. - «>■ V;.r -'■. >& * "v.;-v y><‘-’ ■ r. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 (♦#17) SALARY ADJUSTMENT PATROL OFFICER KURT ERICKSON It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to Increase Officer Kurt Erickson’s salary from $18,178 per hour to $18,524 per hour as of January 15, 1992, as per the 1991 LELS contract currently In effect. Ayes 4, nays 0. (♦#18) HIRING OF PART TIME POLICE OFFICERS It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to authorize the hiring of John Schoenhoff and Scott Boris as part-time officers for Orono to begin on Tuesday, February 11, 1992, at a pay rate of $10.30 per hour. Ayes 4, nays 0. (♦#19) 1991 WAYZATA FIRE CONTRACT It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to approve the 1992 fire service contract with the Wayzata Fire Department. Ayes 4, nays 0. (♦#20) ESTABLISH PUBLIC HEARING DATE YEAR XVZII CDBG PROGRAM It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to conduct a public hearing at 7:00 p.m. on March 9, 1992 to receive citizen Input for the Community Development Block Grant Proaram for year XVIII. Ayes 4, nays 0. (♦#21) WEST HENNEPIN RECYCLING COMMISSION JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - RESOLUTION #3084 It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3084 approving the extension of the current West Hennepin Recycling Commission Agreement until December 31, 1992. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#21A) BID AWARD - DUMP TRUCK Moorse explained this Is a bid for a replacement of a 1980 truck. He noted the cost Is $45,400 and has been budgeted for. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Jabbour, to purchase a new dump truck from Lakeland Ford Truck Sales at a cost of $38,340.37 and the hyrdrauiic system and dump box from McQueen Equipment at a cost of $7,062.00 for a total cost of $45,402.37. Ayes 4, nays 0. 1 3 • . >rr i ■A I I*.,-' ' ■>;v-:T. I ,u.'-.* :y V- &S;i *■ - »a:;:X^:'. . y.^>yV' •' ■p-.; ,;f- r X .i' '" z- r .-^ 2 .^aA -P.;v pA. hd'S!?-/ "> ^rJ- , ; ■■:. fisi' ■' 'lA A ■■ ■ py . . ■ p ■Hrp' K f-Sfv..W'r life < -V,-. SK’ . r.fPP" - i^it- MM-•<■' ^KwV«>S A?,' :iA'/s^S PI- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 («21B) SCHEDULING A COUNCIL WORK SESSION & ASSESSMENT HEARING CONCERNING THE STUBBS BAY SEWER PROJECT Moorse noted that this is a request to schedule a work session with the Council prior to the assessment hearing. Dennis Shaw, 405 Oxford Road, requested that prior to the work session, a date be set to review the alternatives for the Oxford Road area with the residents of that street, as suggested by Cook in his letter to the Council dated December 1991. Cook stated they still plan to meet with the homeowners, but are currently taking bids and want to wait until those bids have been rev Iewed. Mayor Peterson reiterated that a defined n'*ea for the sewer project has not yet been approved. Cook requested an extension of the date to accept bids for the project to February 28th. He noted the project has been bid In sections, so ths city will have the right to accept or reject any portion of the bid. Jabbour requested that costs be sent to homeowners prior to the assessment hearing. Cook noted they will be sent out in accordance with State Statute. "if and when the project isJabbour suggested the letter state, realized, here is the cost_ _". Shaw asked how the potential shortfall resulting from appeals Is to be funded. Jabbour noted It would be funded by the entire City, not by raising the assessment of the non~apeI I ants. Moorse noted the hearing has been scheduled for March 25, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. at the Orono Education Link. Mayor Peterson directed Members to contact Moorse to establish a work session date. (#21C) COUNCIL CHAMBERS AUDIO/VISUAL SYSTEM Moorse explained his memo outlines various alternatives aucl I o/v I sua 1 system for the new Council Chambe's. to the Qoetten pointed out that Tim Pattrin is very knowledgeable in this area and suggested Moorse contact him for his Input. 1 4 5 jSfwwmy ISsf-.^'; \mWm5p£, |fer Jiifvmm-^- 0y i" pP ■■-|l&«.. 'P.- ttpl'-wat'' pr: ISiiilS^s; WM"--- *■*5':':fesp"'' . : \teiiii-- ‘SSfs:-; "• isssji'S'* |fS m: fe' K,. te’ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 COUNCIL CHAMBERS AUDIO/VISUAL SYSTEM - CONT. Jabbour stated that the job could be spec’d out and ask the vendors to design the system. He noted that each vendor would submit a proposal of how the Job could be done and would have to guarantee the project. Caiiahan felt there was no reason to spend excessive amounts on the audio/visual system. Moorse explained that Jack Boarn an has been asked to have his construction documents ready to go out by the end of the month, and the electrical and the audio/visual system needs to be incorporated within those documents. Jabbour felt that it is more Important to spend some money up front by hiring a consult than to jus*" give i t to a vendor to decide what to purchase. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Goetten, to authorize $_ _ for the audio/visual system, to retain a consultant to design CaI Iahan voteda system for the City facilitiss. Ayes 3, nays 1 nay. ♦ Moorse handed out an evaluation form sent from Biermeyer to be completed for his 6 month performance review. He stated Biermeyer has offered to facilitate the review at no cost. Moorse asked that the form be completed and returned to Biermeyer by next week. * Moorse asked the Council if they had a preference where the podium for the public to use should be placed In the new Council Chambers. The Council members noted they did not care. Moorse asked how the Council felt about monitors mounted flush in the Council dI as to allow viewing of the visual aides. Jabbour suggested a iarge screen be placed behind the pod I urn off to the side of the room. Goetten suggested he contact the City of Minnetrista as they are not happy with the way they installed their system. (»#22) LICENSES It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to approve the following Iicense: Or.-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor - Orono Golf Course Ayes 4, nays 0. 1 5 . -svr> •’ : \W"'i .,’K- '■f>; ■' i>- ^it; if' ft ■p. •: W‘^ ■\A0f.y- 'jfe: :V'f- ^ V"-;:vv|»-:ig:v:• ■kih^X:.. 'IM t*. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 («»23) BILLS It was moved by Callahan, seconded of the All Funds Account. Ayes 4, CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT by Goetten, to approve payment nays 0. Barrett explained he has reviewed regarding the sewer plant property, requested 2 changes, as follows: the covenants with Long Lake He noted that DIetson has ^liPp - fll" ■ S'te't... flslpf ■ . mm 1. Current covenants require that all land owners agree to changes prior o being reviewed by either City Council. They ''•ave requesteo the language be changed to the majority of the land owners. Barrett recommended to change the covenant to reflect this request. 2. The procedure for change is currently established through a letter, and they are suggesting this procedure be Incorporated within the covenants. All Council members agreed. Callahan felt that a majority of 13 lots was too few and suggested a two-thirds consensus or 9 lots. All agreed. ACJOURNMENT It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Petersen, to adjourn the regular Council meeting at 9:50 p.m. Ayes 4, nays 0. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hal I in. City Clerk 1 6 pr •a%i'»*.-; \t^0M TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator February 18, 1992 ‘^^UriQ FEB 24 1992 '^Of 0,01,0 sp€-^. SUBJECT: Planning Commission Candidate Interviews Si»;5«V>r.;mx-'- Planning Commission applicant interviews are scheduled to be held at the February 24 Council meeting beginning at 7:00 p.m. The applications are attached. teess,. . .. mm _ ' V ; feV ; - •'‘i’' “■ ■ W'&V‘‘PP'.? iiSfi./!; WP'"' ' ”. • , li/: •!,K5-/-:' ■. ■■ ■r^'4 . ........ toy-^ ■1, »• -v* ■' f, I, iftrtiifrihifi I A, - ’ 6''c o ‘-5 ■> j 1 j4 ilteK' fe-ip:,-' r Please state your reasons for wanting to serve on this Commission (Please be as specific as possible. Dse additional sheet if necessary.) Having lived in Minneapolis and Edina, we realized we wanted to live in a Com­ munity such as Orono and in 1987 we purchased a home across from Wolsfeld Woods. The natural beauty, t'le people and the envirament have exceeded our exoectations. I would like to help preserve what Orono has to offer. It is apoarcm that Orono is and will continue ' be attractive to developers. I believe Orono can take a strong stand to protect its uniqueness through proper olanninq. I have knowledae and experience in land use and land planning and great concern for the community. Ipgii' tihat is your view of the role of the Commission? My view of the Planning Commission role is to advise and assist the City Council - “v:'or in establishing the policies necessary to protect Orono while allowinq inevitable growth. With completion of 1-394 and the future expansion of Highway I have whi" ■ seen a tremendous inoreaseof interest, on the part of people looking to move to Orono. I feel this will be also one or uie reasons that more land owners will irii fi:, - .te#' attempt to develop vacant land. Other Comments: (Dse this space to include any further infQrmation you would like the City Council to consider, or that you feel is relevant to the appointment you are seeking. You may also attach other materials you would like the Council to consider.) f: r>- *^v u-'*'r-5> I understand this appointment may be discussed at a public meeting. mi Signature a te ■t a (t;- * ;■■ -■•■ M - ;■ --V-■■ jr*“P-'V.' iV %■ ife, ^ ■, CITY of ORONO 7 •» •■: • ' . II * ijr . ** ^ j Municipal Ofllces Pw Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota £S323-( r telephone - 47^ / jS7 • F\X • 473-0510 SHOj I-application for citizen advisory commissions JAN 1992 piCommissioi) Applying For: r** Parks Commission ^ Planning Commission O Community Task Force (Name) Ilifce . ^ rAddress r:/y^^ X f "■ ^ PdSt Office & Zip Code i~/T, z- , ^JT19 I Telephone (H) y7' - -7-fi9 (W)i' a. s' - 90 / V *^ ‘= ' ' ✓»7 Resident of Orono ^-------^fea*s^ itork Experience: 6^.- .{<A^y r.4>, M-r /JsT^u^cYTP^yZ. - -. Scy^ST^' M ^ -T - -***" # y \ C^oaJ tacatlon ^sr- ^ Cieio and volunteer activities (past and present): Please state your reasons for wanting to serve on this Commission IPXease be as specific as possible. Ose additional sheet if necessary.) ■■ m"Wi. mm- m-C'-fet:- •-■ I What is your view of the role of the Commission? -__________________________________________________________________ ’ -: ■ v '3 iwm i:«g: tiM. mmmmT p/sii' ' ' V'r ■ ' ‘ 5 '.- "S ■' other Comments: (Ose this space to include any further information you would like the City Council to consider, or that you feel is relevant to the appointment you are seeking. You may also attach other materials you would like the Council to consider.) MiMie': & ■t: ’iM ■’ 'Wm ■I.,' ■ mm-I understand this appointment may be discussed at a public II meeting. Iftv' •■ ■ :Siqnature Da te mr'w ■li>' iim H->- • P-j.'-: : v; <..j ■ .••' «f' Mv Reasons for wanting to s&rve on the Planning Commission: I moved to Orono in June of 1991 from Los Angeles, California. I think that after living in Los Angeles for the last 9 years I can offer a different perspective then most applying for this position. In coming from a big city I know what the hazards of uncontrolled growth are. I have experienced them first hand. Out of all the lakeside communities, I chose O'^ono to relocate too because of its beauty and country charm. I get the feeling I live out in the country every time I drive home. I do not want to lose that feeling. I have a very strong sense of community and want to get involved. I want the opportunity to help protect the beauty that first attracted me to this cit>. I have the time this position requires, a great deal of energy and would consider it an honor to serve on the commission. Mv view of the role of the Planning Commission: ;‘r. I see the role of the planning commission as that of an independent oody that not only represents the interests of those seeking variances but the interests of the community at large. The planning commission is responsible for analyzing requests of property owners which are by their na*’ure not in accordance with the city's current ordinances. The commission being made up of residents of the community acts to ^'nsure that those seeking variances are treated fairly and consistently in their requests while at the same time protecting the community's intersts as well. r' ■ : V The Planning Commission has a really tough job. They have to treat each case separately while at the same be consistent. The commission members act as the eyes and ears of the city council in performing their duties. There duties then culminate into a recommendation to the city council as to each individual variance request. Mv other comments: I relocated to Minnesota as a result of a job transfer. The company I work for develops, manages, and operates regional shopping malls throughout the country. In California I was the controller of the development company, t am a CPA and am very well versed In all as.'ects of the construction Industry. I moved to Minnesota to become the Corporate Controller of the management company. The company's headquarters are in Saint Louis Park. Here in the Minneapolis area we manage Southdale, Rosedale, Brookdale and Knoll wood. I think that my knowledge of the construction industry would be an asset in performing the duties of this position. Nm- • • mm 0- ir.ipm. O 'O CITY of ORONO \\ ^-4 X '. N ' V rv I /•V - ^ 1 >f.'r> ^ %e-^<d" MunidpaJ OfRcts Post Office Box 66 CrystaJ Say, Minnesota 55323-0066 TLLEPHONE-473-7357 • FA.K - 473-0510 f?b..APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMISSIONS ■^' e 1992 'iC %y Commission Applying For; Parks Commission ^ Planning Commission Community Task Force (Na.:.e) Name ^g>|£iC&oW Address fo^S'fir^ prPost Office & Zip Code - Ifr Telephone (H)V7J- ong (W) Resident of Orono years V??-Work Experience: 3: fe; <iiSr\ Edacation (L Ls/£k/<0d dj^ It K 4rr(L 7 • • Civic and volunteer Activities (^st and present) : //rWife</£^Sr ' 1.^ i-fM^'^ ¥ ‘i-i Please state your reasons for wanting to serve on this Commission (Please be as specific as possible. Ose additional sheet if necessary.) , /) /! / /tA/ r(er^ \ HZiAiJr 520*1^5^ Wa-/ lOi Ui- ^ * • :n,. ‘ c' ■ mf 'Mi- -I*- •« v(' : . .' >■ * ' ■ * • ■•• ^HjSrr4j^(L^rr(>Kw \hi(^ . vCf) . ^ /f/^v ImJ txSJi (^juurU^ • What is your view of the role of the Commission? >>y/g(0 AL^^tiejfyvKMj- /‘P^\f\c7^ I » >^ /HCg- 'iy / Irk^s4vi & f :-fe- ■ - -'Xl,- :*:>.r- ■ V '. s-;- t‘0:^W7-" i Other Comments: (Ose this space to include any further information you would like the City Council to consider, or that you feel is relevant to the appointment you are seeking. You may also attach other materials you would like the Council to consider.) cOi 4-^^. Z-MC^h T^Sc^ ■p-; -'■ CLgyv^,iwx*.^ Ojsn^-T^:^ri</ j TO/L J?c<^ 1_________________________ r> •' .'• /•‘•f /.'• F|?-• ■:j;-' '■ .*: :■' •- ■. Wi r’u Z 7 I understand this appointment meeting may be discussed at a public WM Signature / Date - • -*■ / sAiefe.'-* £i " ■■ ■ .■.' ■■ '■ ■■5; ^^; ' . v:4j^ -Q. pl:i»" fhom: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator February 18, 1992 %, Administration of Oath of Part-Time Police Officers'1: te'■'® Schoenhoff and Scott Boris has been completed, officers will attend the February 24 Council Office to the Newly Hired The h’ring process for the two part-time officers, John The two new meeting for administration of their oaths of office. m: ^ s«%^ 1;it- * >-0' -V ;.i fi> J’ M t' . ^ :'r 1 I ■K 1 4 :f'“'y'-V'< Tos Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Proa: Dates Subject: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Ad February 20, 1992 9). -<? #1682 - Christine Brickley, 3262 North Shore Drive ^ Request fo^ Additional ReviewVariance List of Bxhiblts Exhibit A - Notice of Council Action 1/28/92 Exhibit B - Memo/Exhibits Resolution, 1/22/92 Exhibit C - Council Minutes 1/27/92 i ■ ' Discussion At your January 27th meeting. Council voted 4 to 0 to adopt the attached resolution which approves hardcover and lot coverage variances, and denies a setback variance for the garage built without permits.m Applicant claims she requested Council to table final action on that resolution until her legal counsel could be present. The Minutes do not reflect such a request as part of her discussion. At any rate. S'- F”- 0^ •v,■'00 y > ■ &..■ Council adopted the resolution. Applicant upon receiving notice that the resolution had been adopted indicated she would not sign the resolution copies and requested that she be granted an additional opportunity to have her attorney address the City Council. I m’i staff would note that until applicant agrees to and signs the resolutions, there is an outstanding violation on the property. Assuming that Council does not alter its position on this matter, If applicant does not execute the resolution and perform accordingly, staff will proceed through legal channels to remedy the outstanding violations . .JJ:Staff Recoatendation r-- k: After allowing presentation by applicant s attorney, direct staff as to how to proceed on this matter. ch ^':v ■; kyMk-: y-' l'\r' ,vl ‘ .V: Wik'0 > <? *-t-. "'N___- ^ •it I Hi r«HtT* •)«r«i •14 till / I X' -*.g|jy»j:,'V . To:>X *. ■a.-Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Proa: Date: Subject: Michael P, Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator January 22, 1992 #1682 Christine Brickley, 3262 North Shore Drive - Variance - Resolution List of Exhibits MS... A - Notice of Council Action 1/16/92 B - Resolution fe. ^1* At your January 13 meeting» Council voted 4 to 0 to grant har< *ver and lot coverage variances and deny a setbc ^ variance, pel option 5 of the January 7 memo. Council dire* _ed staff to draft a resolution reflecting that action. Such a resolution is attached. i •* ‘Wii The resolution grants applicant what amounts to a 4 month period in which to make the required changes to the structure. staff Re datlon w ,(S;staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution. Mr' — - ,1^.' .-.i7^' ' Proposed Motion; Moved by , 2nd by ____, to adopt Resolution #_____ granting after-the-fact hardcover and lot coverage variances and denying a setback .vaiiance for a garage constructed at 3262 North Shore Drive. ^ Ayes, Nays. Isv V'KifM' ■tor' • .rt'. i;--’ ■I*: S? ■W-SH.v wmt ■1 . _ir;»7ilK' . >_ ■■■%■> ■■ t-'■T:-t APPLICATION NO 1682V'-e-i'ir C2TY OP OROHO P.O. Bo^ 66 Crystal Bay, MN 473-7357 NOTICE OP COUNCIL ACTION 55323 Date of Notice: 01/16/92 tv" m. TOs Christine Brickley 3262 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: m m TZPB OP APPLICATION: Variance ii - - - - - - - - - - - ^ DATS OP TING: 01/13/92 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against ti t I IHCIL ACTION - MOTION: Council conceptually granted a hardcover variance and denied a setback il; variance per "Option 5" as indicated in the January 7, 1992 staf^ memo, and ■directed staff to draft the appropriate resolution for the January 27 Council meeting (meeting starts at 7:00 p.m.). Please contact City staff regarding how to proceed m If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council • :diA'\W >- 3'm: ■' • V*'- to .M -m-x. s. ■.V b'i'-l'f. ' V. -! ''■ A'*?w'' ' ■' fv'''" Y > ■ ■' 5t' .V^ ‘-K ^ '•v‘, i >; «<'■' ?-s.yam-M. :p. it'.' ■V >;* W., it. *f :v.?y- •i- yr. tit' vV y 'IA>- ■Y'.'* r' Ltr. fe. k ;■ I. I h- ■’1' • if * r.*" U : A RBSOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SBCTIC S 10.03r SUBDIVISION 14 (C), AND 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2; AND DENYING A V.. ANCB TO SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 15 (F) FILE #1682 WHEREAS, Christine Brickley (hereinafter "the applicant”) : 8 owner of the property located a*" 326T North Shore Drive within the City of Orcno (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property")? and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for an after-the-fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (F) to alJow a prop' sed detached garage of 672 s.f. to be constructed 3.3' from the west side lot line where a setback of 10' is normally required from a side lot line; and a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to allow lot coverage in excess of the 15% lot coverage normally allowed; and a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone in excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. Th.^s application was reviewed as Zoning File #1682. :e property is located in the LR-lC-1, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, requiring a minimum lot size of one-half acre. m The Orono Planning Commission originally reviewed this application on September 16, 199a., at which time a 1,056 s. f. garage was proposed to be located 3.3' from the west lot line and 2.5' from the south lot line, such proposal requiring variances to hardcover, lot coverage, and side and rear setbacks. The Planning Commisoion inoj.cated to applicant the likelihood of a recommendation for denial, a d tabled the request to allow the applicant to submit a revised plan. Page 1 of 9 r M'vll. 4. ;iv ■. On October 21, 1991 the Planning Commission reviewed a revised proposal for construction of a 24' x 32' (768 a.f.) garage located 3.3' froin the west lot line and 10.5' from the south lot line, requiring side and rear setback variances, a lot coverage variance, anu a hardcover variance. The Planning Commission voted 6 to 0 to reccmraend approval, based on the followinq findings: A.The proposed 768 s.f. detached garago replaces a pre-existing !80 s.f. garage, 200 s.f. barn, and 80 s.f. storage shed with a single structure of approximately the same square footage as the 3 pre-existing buildings. B.The pre-existing 75-250' hardcover was 50.6%. If an 8' X 32' portion of the concrete garage slab which was poured without prior approvals is removed, hardcover on the property would be reduced to 46.^ in the 75-250' zone. C.Lot coverage by structures would remain a\. the pre-existing level of 17.5%. The omall lot size of 0.28 acre constitutes a hardship to the property. Consolidation of 3 storage bui1 ings on the property into a single building will reduce the visual density and clutter in the neighborhood. D.Locating the garage 10,5' from the soutt lot line is justified from the standpoint that if the garage was 18 s.f. smaller, only a 10* setback would be required rather than 15' for any accessory building of area 75O-1000 s.f. '’’he 3.3' setback from the west lot line is justified by the need to maintain the full 32' depth of the garage without encroaching on the loop driveway which serves the immediate neighborhood. 5.The revised garage proposal showed a roof peak running east/west, which would discharge stormwater run-off to applicant's yard rather than the neighboring property. Page 2 of 9 liaife v.rr;<!ir' mWi’.ki'^7W-.* - W ’■y’ V: j“- ^ i: :l ffe-. .,l»'" utejteiifcs;fe'-= :iip ^7- -. . "V. M'^■Wk>:-- :Vg> U... tes-|1^'IpfIIS*- . :.7! ■ ■ r . ’ ;■•'■ m: ■■• . \ • -■■ '♦-'i * l' • 6. 7. 8. 9. After the Planning Commission meeting, applicant proceeded to construct a garage without final Council approval or the necessary building permit. During that construction, the roof line was reversed so that run~ off will be directed towards the westerly neighboring property which is only 3' from the garage wall and less than 2* from the roof overhang. The garage as constructed is 21' x 32', or 672 s.f. in footprint area, requiring 10' setbacks from both the south and west lot lines. The garage was constructed 14* from the south lot line and 3.3* from the west lot line. The site plan with the garage as constructed yields 75-250' hardcover of 50.6%, with lot coverage by structures of 16.7%. The City Council reviewed the "as-built" site plan at the November 12, 1991 Council meeting, and voted 5 to 0 to table the request, directing applicant to meet with staff to consider other options. At the January 13, 1992 Council meeting, Council reviewed a number of alternative proposals resulting in various degrees of variance to the performance standards of hardcover, lot coverage, and setback. On a vote of 4 to 0, Council conceptually granted a hardcover variance to allow 50.6% hardcover in the 75- 250* zone, 16.3% lot coverage by structures, and denying the requested west side setback variance, based on the following findings: A. No suitable hardship is der«onstrated for allowing the substandard side setback for this illegally constructed garage. B. If the west end of the garage is removed to the 10' setback line, the remaining 21' x 25' garage results in a final lot coverage of 16.3%, a decrease of 1.2% from the pre-existing 17,5% lot coverage by structures. Pag^ 3 of 9 in. 11. c.Even if the portions of slab outside the footprint of the garage are allowed to remain, hardcover will still be at 50.6% in the 75-250' zone, no change from the pre-existing hardcover conditions on the property. D.Allowing the illegally constructed garage to remain at a location less than 10' from the west side lot line creates an unwarranted encroachment of open space enjoyed by the neighboring adjacent property, such open space being critical to maintain in this neighborhood of generally substandard sized lots. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generalli' 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 dangsr to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; a ’^d would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLDSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the aoove findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants an after-the-fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow hardcover in the 75- 250* lakeshore setback zone to remain at 50.6% where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed; and grants an after-the-fact variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to allow lot coverage of 16.3% where only 15% lot coverage is normally required; and denies ar. after-the-fact variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (F), hereby disallowing construction of the garage at a location closer tian the required 10' setback from the west side lot line, subject to the following conditions: Page 4 of 9 ■' -.i- * -•^ .1iv . ii j*;*' m~,.' iSe. S^?i!'i=W= i»-W • si "t,' *- .'•V^ > ?'■■■•,■. ?i, ■ K^’: P-m. 1. 2. 3. 4. Hardcover in the 75-250' zone is approved at a level of 50.6%. All existing and proposed hardcover approved with this variance approval is recorded in the calculation worksheet and diagram enclosed with the resolution as Page 6. The current property owner and all future owners of the property are placed on notice that hardcover shall not be increased above the currently approved level, and any proposed improvements over the property that would result in additional hardcover in either the 0-75' or 75-250' zone must be approved by the City. Such approval may result in requirement for concurrent equivalent or greater removals of existing hardcover. Any existing hardcover not shown on the approved hardcover diagram and calculation worksheet shall be removed no later than June 1, 1992. The garage shall be reconstructed to meet the required 10' west side setback. The west and south walls of said garage shall then be retrofitted with proper slab reinforcements subject to review and approval by the Building Inspector. Further, if the garage is reconstructed such that the roof li* e continues to discharge in a westerly direction, applicant shall provide a roof gutter system to direct such drainage to the nortli of the garage, away from the remaining portions of slab adjacent to the west and south lot lines. Prior to commencement of reconstruction or completion of the garage- applicant shall provide the building inspectoi with suitable construction plans conform: -'"j to the conditions of this resolution, and shall obtain the appropriate permit for such construction. In addition to the nornnal building permit fee, applicant shall pay the after-the-fact investigation fee for the building permit because construction was commenced prior to issuance of the building permit. Applicant shall pay the aft€r-the-fact investigation fee for the zoning application because construction was commenced without the proper variance approvals being obtained. Page 5 of 9 C3.00' 0 ■ • ^1^^726iC»._ Jr//^Oco\/ai,.- .-^or-Aoez_______ __________________________ o~~fsri. .7S['ZVT)'_,_ roT^ i i4. STPoe Ao 4r^Q I &.^.i/Hs^.Z,S.'k3L'... ?o Cm /f0“56 Ajokk ysc^3(^C 12.^^ taiwDct*:/s V io’3t»0 —'ilaO 1 B- St^3‘xs-'- : ^ c.H(p^o<?y y.xd /SL / 2. A»o*^-/psn:. .._/OST._____ /\ f>F (2sy\l ^ tiAiz^o CDVe^ ^ieMitX. >u^e Ajoi^ __S'>J/^_______°l._ Nz^ /y is /3 ^ 2-2. /^javv-©ves::> f'Zj^Viou^u'i' 9-x‘ sHen:i» 2o>e::V /o 2jo gzD 3V'77^c.- i.C.— r Sisto -r u9C-E /AppCEve-l- I'h-^t^crvr^ 1^ TO f^>e - t.'/r.7 //^-'C- ^A/ i:>rOy\’^ OF 60. L- •^■■' ''i^-/ ^ . /•^ ST^.LX Page 6 of 9 f"4' :•■■' ^ . Vi’''^ • ^1#.' fe^t ■vv'r,v:: • ;'^viMm-M m ' vf.*: &SS;’'Ca- v>;' r' V- vt* ti:/ - -•'■"jt; ii'Vf'--r ;V V -■- V.V'W'' I .Vi fvf /-■■ffe- i?;vt- tV' I' >■;'?-. i'■i?a: 5. 6. 7. 8. Removal of the encroaching portions of the garage structure shall be completed no later than June 1/ 1992. The proper permits as noted above shall be obtained b^ the applicant no later than June 1, 1992 , or the continued existence of said garage shall be considered as in violation of the conditions of this resolution. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (January 27, 1993). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 7 of 9 f pa-fefeS'’* p' "f r^ps-" ■'• C:---;"- ''. ■:. Adopted by the City Council of the City of urono, Minnesotii at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of January, 1992. attest: Dorothy M, Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OP MINNESOTA ) } ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 27th day of January 1992, by Barbara A, Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & city Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota muni>sipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Pubiic Page 0 of 9 1’--^ •Mr felfiiVi:.n< Ik ■I- i‘» '\'j .: ^ v:' '■■■ : 3 i%. • ¥ • . . .. ■-:? . if# #’•. ■ Ivi ‘ V' ■'* ' I ’j'. # p|='r fi'l- 1^. ii-r' P t»’ k-~ IMifemf'^r. IL p.:. m rh. & rv ' I 1^. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JANUARY 27, 1992 ROLL The Council met on the aoove date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson, Counc i I members Gabriel Jabbou*", Edward Callahan, and J. Diann Goetten. Mary Butler was absent. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Building & Zoning AdminIstra:or Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, Septic Manager Stephen Weckman, City Attorney Tom Barrett, and City Recorder Teri Naab. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. (#1) CONSENT AGENDA Jabbour removed I “'em »6. Callahan added Items ff3 and 4, and removed Item «12. Gaffron requested that Item P3 be left off the consent agenda. Mayor Petersen removed Item P2 and the home occupation license request of William Dickey from the I i cense.approve Is. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve the Consent Agenda, with the exception of Items 46 and 12, and with the addition of Item 44. Ayes 4, na>s 0. Motions for alt Items adopted by consent agenda will be included In the minutes In their respective numerical order. (1$2) APPROVAL OF MINUTES ^ * Mavor Peterson noted on Page 13, second paragraph from the bottom. It' should read “Mayor Peterson noted an article was in the Sun newspaper ..." It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded oy Callahan, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Orono Council held on January 13, 1992. Ayes 4, nays 0. (^3) #1682 CHRISTINE BRICKLEY. J262 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3064 Christine Brickley was present for this application. Moorse explained the Council conceptually approved a hardcover variance, but voted to deny a setback variance for the garage which was built prior to approval. te'' : r.' fe.*-;'S'- HIWJTES Of THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JANUARY 27, 1992 ZONING FILE #1682 - CONT. Gaffrofi not#d th« applicant r«au«st«d to ?o«ak to Council regarding this issu#. Brlcklay not#d ih# had contacted the truss company and they did not recowmand altering the trusses used in the garage. She stated she had a bid to complete the changes to comply with Council s raouast, which Indicated the cost wouid be more than the original garafla coat. She stated that she is seeking legal counsel. BrIcMay suggested .he Council has treated her unf a i r l y and she d I d not appreciate comments made in the past regarding her situation, and the fact that her property is next to the proposed bo-t launch and that maybe the ONR would be interested in purchasing ner property. Jabbour apologized and stated rude. no one on the Counci I meant to be Callahan felt the cor.ments about the boat launch were made pointing out that If her property were to be next to. a boat launch, perhaps they Mould not need to bf as str;ct about enforcing the ordinances. Ha noted no one meant v. be d'srespectfui and apologized if she fait that comments were ntended that way. Brlcklay ralterated thar »he understood the Planning Commission to have given her authorit; to construct the garage, and thought the only reason to appear before tpe Council was to fight for o\ raga In hardcover fro" the excess slab. Mayor Paterso pointed out that City staff, on two times, piaci J Stop work Oruars on the project. She suggested that after tr.e first t na Brickley should have made certz n she was followin* the pfop<^r Channels. Jabbour axp alned ha had attended all the • tings of the Planning COIMII a s i on and Counci I at which this Issue - discussed. He noted tha aatback ordinance was establlsh*»d to ensure access by emergency vahiclas and to protect nelghborir . properties from encroachment. Ha noted that every small property In Orono Is Just as Important as tha larger properties. Mayor Pataraon reviewed that the notice sent tc Brickley after v Planning Coaunlsslon meeting states that the next meeting at tha application would ba reviewed would be the next Council meeting. She pointed out that the Planning Commission Is on'y an advisory board. She commented that there still has not been a building permit Issued for this garage. "' !>tv-fe S'- '•*f- K'. f ; ''f ti.s#;-- 1." p-frv i»!r V'- m- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JANUARY 27. 1992 ZONING FILE fieSZ - CONT Jabbour r*lt«rat«d tnat the garage has not beer aooroved by the Building Department yet. 1^ was moved by CaMahan, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution •30e4 for Application #1682, Christine Brickley, 3-?62 North Shore approving a hardcover variance for the construction of a garage. Ayes 4, nays 0. (••4) #1705 CHRISTOPHER SMITH, 3B50 CASCC AVENUE VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3065 It was iHOved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adoot Reso*ucion #3085 tor Application S1705, Christopher Sr'ith, 3650 Casco Avenue, an average lakeshore setback variance to construct a new residence. Ayes 4, nays 0. (••5) #1707 JACK RHODE, 1890 8HADYW00C ROAD, RENEWAL VARIANCE « RESOLUTION #3066 S m-..'ed by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adoot Resolution *3068, AppilCetion #1707 for Jack Rhode of 1630 Shadywcod Road aPiOrov i ng a renewa I variance* 'c* The reconstructiono^ the exist'ng rejiasrce. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#8) COMPREHENSIVE FLAN AMENPMwNT #3 Uabboi * suggested adding to tne amenoment the City’s overali pla'i for Big Island. Cd : than felt that if Big Island were added to this amendment, it delay the approval by the Metropolitan Council of this an ;'dment. Saffron noted it v/ould be inappropr I ats to Include planning for Big Island within this amendment as this amendment strictly deals w'th the City’s sewe- policy plan. Hoorse noted the Park Commission Is requestir, an update to the comorehensive park plan for the City. He suggested that Big Island be Incorporated within that amendment. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Paterson, prelimlrary approval for Comprenens I ve Plan Amendment #3 arid direct staff tc submit the plan to adjacent cities for review and to the Metropolitan Council for approval. Ayes 4, nays 0. i'-’.. *■ r:^<- ir'i f;' ■ v' ,-i. i^-W": ill t- :fo • S ; •.C-_v. ^'K\ ■ Wh '. ■- H'fe ■::-i ■’.■• ■ ; ff' -m ■■■■"■ I#' t-'4J-i..: y.j: ■'.• •■ ^ :i .r % ?■- i •; • - ’.- ir m i '■ ;-■! 4'i'- j-4- I i- li ^4 mm Tot Mayor Pet -son and Orono City Council Ron Moors«« City Administrator Frais Dates Subjects Michael P. Gaffron, . sst Planning & Zoni February 20, 1992 Zoning Code Amendment - Fhoreland Manaaement / ML % List of Bxhibits Exhibit A - Proposed Ordinance k ^'imnary Ordinance Exhibit B - Memo fc Exhibits of 2/10/“yr Exhibit C - Draft Letter to DNR Exhibit D - Draft Letter to Cities Discussion P3 ase review the memo and exhibits of February 10. their February 18 meeting. Flaming Commission voted 4 to 0 recosamend adoption of the amendment as rooosed. At to Exhibit C is a draft letter to the Department of Natural Resources regarding adoption of the ordinance and the reasons for our proceeding without their input. Exhibit D is a similar letter to neighboring cities. The l4ike Use Committee has recommended immediate adoption of the ordinance and lifting of tht, moratorium based on the potential for an extended DNR review, which would create a hardship for Orono residents hoping to develop thei” properties In 1992. The Planning Conunisrton concurred with this concern. Because the moratorium was established by ordinance, and v'as written to be effective until August 26, 1992, an ordinance will be required to repeal the moratorium. This requires notification and a public hearing, which will be scheduled before the March Planning Commission meeting, with final action to repeal the moratorium by the Council on March 23. In the meartime, staff would recommend that applicants be allowed to proceeo with applications, except that no preliminary plat approval could be granted ‘y the Council until the moratorium is repealed. Staff Recowendat ion Itaff recommends adop^ ion of :he Shoreland Ordinance, Statf i^^'^ommends that Council direct chat a public hearing be held at the March 16 Planning Commission meeting ▼■egarding repeal o* the moratorium. Staff further requests that Council provide staff with direction regarding the content of the letters to the DNR and affected cities, as well as approval of the conteiit of the susonary ordinance to be published. 1 I ___.. . i.' * «>4:, * •*■ * V» * toning Code teendnent Fgi^mnry 20, 1992 tnfe 2 V» ^ *• ■'*' %* V ' 9< »> I ■,, e l»h Hoyed by 2nd by to adopt Ordinance No. ^‘'■‘.s V * Hi ''> S econ d Series, entitled "An Ordinance Establishing Regulations for the Management of Shorelands", and further to appro\^e the wording and publication of the sunonary ordinance. _____ Ayes, _____ Nays. ■■ ** r Moved by !. - f*;. fcf r,;,* 4 ^ __________, 2nd by ___________ to direct staff to give proper notice and hold a public hearing at the March Planning ^OBliission meeting regarding repeal of the moratorium ordinance. ______ Ayes, ______ Nays. Moved by 2nd by to direct staff to submit the «*. Shoreland Management Ordinance to the Department of Natural 'Resources and to all neighboring and Minnetonka lakeshore cities for review. _ _ _ Ayes, _ _ _ Mays. V.^ '-r-'V, • t Isv ^\r m-- te?- r, ......................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ^ ■'^P*. -■^:y^ r*--r- I i SUNNART ORDINANCB A SUMMARY OF ORDIMAHCB MO SECOND SERlESr s?#. r ■ ■ I^ABLISHIMG RBGULATIORS FOR THE MAHAGBMBNT OF SRORSLANDS The Council of the City of Orono ordains; iSfS" lolloping form: A summary text of the above cited ordinance is approved in the ■ ili %■!..,■Iw'- lilil This ordinance adds Section 10,56, Shoreland Management, to the Municipal Zoning Code. Tne area within 1,000 feet of the Ordinary High Water Level of designated lakes and within 300 feet of designated tributary streams is established as the Shoreland Overlay District. Designated lakes are classified as General Development (GD), Recreational Development (RD), or Natural Environment CNE). Regulations for development and use of lands within the Shoreland Overlay District are established. The ordinance establishes procedures and standards for review of permits, variances, and conditional use permits for land use activities within the Shoreland Overlay Dist'^ict. The ordinance establishes regulations and standards in regards to the following: A. B. C. D. E. P. G, R. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. P. Q. R. S. Minimum Lot Area/Lot Width Standards. Lakeshore Access Lots. Placement of Structures on Lots. Minimum Lowest Floor Llevations. Water-Oriented Acct'isory Structures. Stairways, Lifts and Landings. Steep Slopes. Height of Structures. Vegetation Alterations. T<^ographlc Alterations/Grading and Filling. Storm Water Management. Hardcover Limitations. Standards for Commercial, Public, and Semi-Public Uses. Agricultural Use Standards. Forest Management Standards. Extractive Use Standards. Water Supply. Sewage Treatment. Significant Historic Sites. The ordinance establishes standards in regards to existing non-conformities. The ordinance establishes specific provisions for subdivisions and Planned Residential Developments within the Shoreland Overlay District. Certain definitions within the Zoning Code and Subdivision Code are revised for clarity and consistency. ••-VT;r^-^iy7 ",yf.*; This ordlnsncs shall be available in full printed text for r, inspsction by any interested party during regular office hours at ths effics of the Or<mo City Clerk. This ordinance shall be effective upon cdoption and publication . Dated this 24th day of February, 1992. ‘ V'J mR" ■ ePIem, miemf Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ...... ' ^. jflMf 5i; ______ i| l&orothy^. hallin, City ClerkMm: I ' , V ■iV m A 'r fcV;..- ■ ■ -•'J' »3- •V- ..V IP" s; P iijfr PPi iW*,... ^•v: \ '"i ■“• ••' ' VX‘’ A^ V -.. - ■ 4 PS"©|e:;#‘ i j : ^Z :i d P#- FS?J •.■* A'. ' % -fit-l H?^:V ,: -W “t!» SM?sr..M'-"ii %«• ^i‘ " OKDIHMICB MO.SBCOHD S1SRIBS AS OKDIIIAHCS BSTABLISHIHG RBGULATIOilS FOR TBB NAKAGEMBHT OP SHORKLAHD6 Th« City Council of the City of Orono ordains as follows: The ■unlcipal c^e of the City of Orono is amended bv adding Ordinance , Second Series: Section 1. Section 10.56 is hereby added to the Municipal Zoning Code as follows: SBCnOH 10.S€. SBCHlKLMiD MiUlAGI w. Subd. 1. Statement of Purpose. The purpose of this section is to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by providing for the wise subdivision, use and development of shorelands abutting public waters that exist within the (City's corporate boundaries. The City recognizes that the uncontrolled use and development of shorelands has a negative Impact on not only the quality of surface waters, but on the economic, recreational, and natural environmental values of shorelands and the waters they surround. The specific intent of this section is to: A. Protect the water quality of Lake Minnetonka and other lakes within the City by allowing development of uses in the shoroland areas which are compatible with Orono's Comprehensive Land Use Management Plan. B. Provide appropriate standards for development which will minimize the impact of shoreland development on the water quality and the economic, aesthetic, and natural environment values of Orono's lakes. Subd. 2. Statutory Authorization. This shoreland ordinance is adopted pursuant to the authorization and policies contained in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 105, Minnesota Regulations, Parts 6120.2500-6120.3900, and the planning and zoning enabling legislation in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462. Subd. 3. Definitions. Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases used in this section shall be interpreted as defined elsewhere in this chapter. All other words or phrases shall be interpreted so as to give them the same meaning as they have in common usage and so as to give this ordinance its most reasonable application. For the purpose of this section, the words "must” and "shall" are mandatory and not permissive. All distances, unless otherwise specified, shall be measured horizontally. r" fe A. rS--' ■ 1. "Animal Feedlot" - A lot or building or combination of lots and buildings intended for the confined feeding, breeding, raising or holding of animals and specifically designed as a confinement area in which manure may accumulate, or where the concentration of animals is such that a vegetative cover cannot be maintained within the enclosure. For purpose of this ii.' JWp;,,;, iiL Cod«r open lots used for the feeding and rearing of poultry tt (j^oltry ranges) shall be considered as animal feed lots. Pastures AlUSll rot be considered as animal feedlots when the area enclosedSfes-,.,.as pasture is equal to or greater than 1.0 acre per animal unit. ■iP.; ■ ■ ip% ;.Si> ill- til.. ..If ■' V.iX;--, P v:S^, ■■'■tpt.. fer IIPW: ym 'Hiyy mi mt W'r Msf, ^ : . vi:, m-'3>-^ 2. "Bluff* - A topographic feature such as a hill, cliff# or embanJciaent having the following characteristics (an area with an average slope of less than 18% over a distance of 50' or SK>re shall not be considered part of the bluff): A.Part or all of the feature is located in a a^oreland area; B. The slope rises at least 25' above the Ordinary High Water Level of the water body; C. The grade of the slope from the toe of the bluff to a point 25* or more above the Ordinary High Water Level averages 30% or greater; and body. D.The slope must d*-ain toward the water "Toe of the bluff" means the lower point of a 50' segment with an average slope exceeding 18%. "Top of the bluff" means the higher point of a 50* segment with an average slope exceeding 18%. 3. "Bluff Impact Zone" - A bluff and land located within 20* from the top of a bluff. 4, "Commercial Use" - The principal use of the land and/or buildings for the sale, lease, rental or trade of prcducts, goods# and services. 5. "Deck" - A horizontal, unenclosed platform with or without attached railings# seats# trellises# or other features# attached or functionally related to a principal use or site. 6. "Duplex# Triplex, Quad" - A dwelling structure on a single lot# having two# three# and four units# respectively# being attached by common walls and each unit equipped with separate sleeping# cooking# eating# living and sanitation facilities. 7. "Dwelling Site# Transient" - A designated location for temporary or transient residential use by one or more persons using temporary or movable shelter# including camping and recreational vehicle sites. 8. "Dwelling Site" - A designated location where a dwelling unit is intended to be constructed. 9. "Dwelling Unit" - A building or a portion of a building designed or intended to be occupied exclusively for residential purposes# including provisions for sleeping# eating# cooking and sanitation for not more than one family# but not ■ly 1 l.’-^.^ V- :■• .t'-* =’^' mi ■<• v>- # frr including rooms in motels, hotels, nursing homes, boarding houses, nor trailers, tents, cabins, recreational vehicles, nor lodging rooms. 10. "Extractive Use" - The use of land for surface or subsurface removal of sand, travel, rock, industrial minerals, Obher nonaetallic minerals, and peat not regulated under Minnesota Statutes Sections 93.44 - 93.51. 11. "Forest Land Conversion" - The clear cutting of forested lands to prepare for a new land use other than re • establishment of a subsequent forest stand. 12. for the production, of goods, products. "Industrial Use" - The use of land or buildings manufacture, warehousing, storage, or transfer commodities, or other wholesale items. 13."Intensive Vegetation Clearing" - The complete removal of trees or shrubs in a contiguous patch, strip, row, or block• 14, "Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL)" - The boundary of public waters and wetlands, and shall be an elevation delineating the highest water level which has been maintained for a sufficient period of time to leave evidence upon the landscape, commonly that point where the natural vegetation changes from predominantly aquatic to predominantly terrestrial. For watercourses, the ordinary high water level is the elevation of the top of the bank of the channel. For reservoirs and flowages, the ordinary high water level is the operating elevation of the normal summer pool. The designated OHWL has been determined by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for certain water bodies as shown in Subdivision 7 of this section. 15. "Planned Unit Development (PUD)" - A type of development characterized by a unified site design for a number of residential dwelling units or non^residential sites on a parcel, whether for sale, rent, or lease, often involving clustering of units or sites to provide areas of common open space or a mixture of structure types and land uses. Two types of PUD are provided for in the zoning code: A. "Planned Residential Development (PRD)" - The nature of allowed uses is non-transient residential, including attached and detached single family or multiple faunily dwellings, subject to the limitations provided for in each zoning district. B. "Planned Unit Development (PUD) - Highway 12 Corridor" - The nature of allowed uses may include residential, commercial, institutional, public and semi-public uses as set forth in Orono's Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2, and it is limited to areas within the Highway 12 Corridor as defined in said amendment. The Highway 12 PUD offers a mixture of land uses, housing types and densities. Note: No properties which could be developed via the Highway 12 PUD are within the Shoreland Overlay District. a. ^ (k‘ 4^m P--IS (i:;»-V . ■ ,* ^'AAs. « ■ ■ ■ " w^ 111®* ‘'as-s' ■ ■ r- . '^.1m.tev.••t F^'-V^vf- ^ v ■■•p r'' ® '■•f; s* .: ‘ ..•■V ¥1, ': I ^S." ; i ■"- *'Ss.:'tr®: JSf'\ ' ‘?#', ■f-V' . .-A-*;.- -’ kr- 16, "Public Use* - The use \-f land by the aeneral public or by a public agency on behalf of the general public, for «ny purpose. iHr-- 17. "Public Waters" - Any waters as defined Minnesota Statutes Section 105.37, Subdivisions 14 and 15. 18. "Semi~pub1ic Use" - The use of land by a private* nonprofit organization to provide a public service that is ordinaril'’ open to some persons outside their regular constituency of the o anization. 19. "Sensitive Resource Management" - The preservation and management of areas unsuitable for development in their natural state due to constraints such as shallow soils over groundwater or bedrock* highly erosive or expansive soils, steep slopes* susceptibility to flooding* or occurence of flora or fauna in need of special protection. 20. "Sewage Treatment System" - Septic tanks and a soil absorption system or other type of on-site sewage treatment system as described in Section 12.30 of the municipal code. 21. "Sewer System" - Pipelines or conduits, pumping stations and force main* and all other construction, devi es* appliances* or appurtenances used for conducting sewage or idiindustrial waste or other wastes to a point of ultimate disposal. 22. "Shore Impact Zore" - Land located between the Ordinary High Water level of a public water and a lineparallel to it at a setback of 50% of the structure setback. 23. "Shore Setback Zone" - Land located between the Ordinary High Water Level of a Public Water and a line parallel to it at the structure setback. 2«. "Shoreland" - Land located within the following distances from public waters: 1*000* from the Ordinary High Water level of a lake* pond* or flowage; and 300* from a river or stream* or the landward extent of a flood plain designated by ordinance on a river or stream, whichever is greater. Where topographic divides occur at lesser distances from the involved water* the limits of shoreland have been modified per the official map entitled Shoreland Overlay District on file at the City offices. 25. "Significant Historic Site" - Any archaeological site* standing structure* or other property that meets the criteria for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places or is listed in the State Register of Historic Sites* or is determined to be an unplatted cemetery that falls under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes* Section 307.08. A historic site meets these criteria if it is presently listed on either register or if it is determined to meet the qualifications for listing after review by the Minnesota State Archaeologist or the Director of the Minnesota r !' •V rf,- t: p,is*ter-' U’i«/ '•H; . tsp: S’S;# E# 'ff;;S'sft'It: ' t. - m: ' •S'V ' ■: .■'* i|S j>ai' It 'Mi%' - -.. I -It- :in >:f'‘ II wu,t.v Bistorical Society. All unplatted cemeteries are automatically considered to be significant historic sites. 26. "Steep Slope" - Lands having averaae slopes of 18% or greater as measured over horizontal distances of 50’ or nore» that are not bluffs. 27. "Surface Water-Oriented Commercial Use" - The ose of land for commercial purposes, where access to and use of a surface water feature is an integral part of the normal conductance of business. 28. "Variance" - Variance shall mean the same as that term is defined or described in Minnerota Statutes Chapter 482. 24. "Water-Oriented Accessory Structure or Facility* “ A small# above ground building or other improvement, •xcept stairways, fences, docks, and retaining walls, which, because of the relationship of its use to a surface water feature, reasonably needs to be located closer to public waters than the normal structure setback. Examples of such structures and facilities include boathouses, gazebos, screen houses, fish houses, pump houses, and detached decks. 25. "Wetland" - Shall have the same meaning as defined in Section 10.55 of the zoning code. SuLd. 4. Jurisdiction. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply to the shorelands of the oublic water bodies as classified in Subdivision 7 of this ordinance. Subd. 5. Compliance. The use of any shoreland of public waters; the size and shape of lots? the use, size, type and location of structures on lots; the installation and maintenance of water supply and waste treatment systems, the grading and filling of any shoreland areas; the cutting of shoreland vegetation? and the subdivision of land shall be in full compliance with the terms of this section and other applicable regulations. Subd. 6. Enforcement. The Zoning Administrator is responsible for the administration and enforcement of this ordinance* Any violation of the provisions of this ordinance or failure to comply with any of its requirements (including violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with grants of variances or conditional uses) shall constitute a misdemeanor and shall be punishable as defined by law. violations of thia ordinance ca Dccur regardless of whether or not a permit is required for a regulated activity pursuant to Subdivision 10 of this section. Subd. 7. Classification of Public Waters. The public waters of the City of Orono have been classified below consistent with the criteria found in Minnesota Regulations, Part 6120.3300, and the Protected Waters Inventory Map for Hennepin County, itte:.,-. ■ . Jifrf''^*' i':W#f^y^:m>‘- ^n: .m V‘V' yp. p’p-V;; :s"M ■ »;■m ■,Pm -: ■ :P v= -ir?. ml - • r-’E > liiv:-:M‘ ‘•FIS'^- ■ ■ >.iy-' ■ ri<?5te'. «■ -•-irr' ■P> • r^, i’ ■ p;i#s ‘’ .1' it te' Wki.- flinneaota: A* Natural Environment (NE) Lakes Lake Classen Dickey Lake French Lake North Bacin: Se%«age Lagoon: South Basin: Lydiard Lake Lake Katrina WOlsfeld Lake (Medina) B.Recreational Development (RD) Lakes Long LaEe Mooney Lake Tanager Lake Hadley Lake (Plymouth) C.General Oevel forest take ele};,ent (GD) Lakes Lake Minnetonka OHWL Protected Waters Inventory I.D. ♦ 974.5'162-P 985.5'161-W 140-P 930.5' 934.3' 930.0' 970.9 159-P --154-P —157-P Protected Waters OHWL Inventory I.D. # ^44.3'160-P 908.0'134-P 929.4'141-P 961.4'109-P Protected Waters OHWL Inventory I.D. # 929.4’139-P 929.4'133-P D.Tributary Streams Painters dreek ’ Stubbs Bay Creek Long Lake Creek Nolsfeld Creek Dickey Lake Creek Subd. 8. Establishment of Shoreland Overlay District, The Shoreland Overlay District is hereby defined and established to include the following lands within the City of Orono: A, All lands within 1000' of the Ordinary High Water level of the lakes classified Natural Environmentr Recreational Development, and General Development in Subdivision 7 of this section. The Shoreland Overlay District includes lands within Orono that are located within 1000' of lakes loca*-ed in adjacent cities# namely Hadley Lake in the city of Plymouth and Wolsfeld Lake in the city of Medina. B.All lands within 300' of the Ordinary High Water level of the watercourses classified as tributary streams Subdivision 7 of this section. Where the flood plain of said tributary streams as defined in Section 10.55 or as defined elsewhere in the Orono Zoning Code extends further than 30C from the Ordinary High Water level# the boundary of the Shoreland Overlay District shall be extended to include those areas designated as flood plain. Ji/ ■ ; Subd. 9. Interpretation of District Boundaries. In their interpretation and application, the provisions of this ■1*' ; MM-- v‘,f i’’: -' ,-,T •- V. ‘A-'' ■ ■ ••otiOB shall be held to be minimum requirements and shall be liberally construed in favor of the City and shall not be deemed a limitation or repeal of any other powers granted by State Statutes. The boundaries of the Shoreland Overlay District shall be determined by scaling distances on che official map. Where interpretaticm is needc»d as to the exact location of the boundaries of the district as shown on the official map, the City Engineer shall make necessary interpretat’’<~n based on the Ordinary High Water level. The person contesting the location of the district boundary shall be given a reasonable opportunity to present his case to tha City and to submit technical evidence if he so desires. Subd. 10. Land Alteration and Building Permits Required. A permit is required for the construction of buildings, builiing additions# related work such as construction of decks and signs, installation or alteration of sewage treatment systems, gracing and filling activities, and other activities as regulated elsewhere in the City of Orono Municipal Code. Subd. 11. Certificate of Zoning Compliance. The Zoning jMbalnistrator shall issue a Certificate of Zoning Compliance for each activity requiring a permit as specified in Subdivision 10 of this section. This Certificate will specify that the use of land conforms to the requirements of this ordinance. Any use, arrangement, or construction at variance with that authorized by permit shall be deoned e violation of this ordinance and shall be punishable as provided in Subdivision 6 of this section. - 'i .. 12. Variances. Variances may only be granted in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462 and as otherwise regulated in the rcning chapter, when a variance is approved after the Department of Natural Resources has formally reccxnmended denial In the hearing record, the notification of the approved variance required elsewhere in this section shall also include the Planning Commission and City Council's summary of the public record/testimony and the findings of facts and conclusions which supported the issuance of the variance. Subd. 13. Conditional Uses. Conditional uses allowable within shoreland areas shall be subject to the review and approval procedures, and criteria and conditions for review of conditional uses established in the zoning chapter. Th«- following additional evaluation criteria and conditions apply within the Shoreland Overl?y District: A. Evaluation Criteria. A thorough evaluation of the water body and the topographic, vegetation, and soils conditions on the site must be made to ensure: 1. The prevention of soil erosion or the possible pollution of public waters, both during and after construction; 2. The visibility of structures and other facilities as viewed from public waters is limited; iii&: mf --kl- 't' m^p ft, W|S: ■^T.m' “"a ta *'l:_/ ■■ ■ m. !f Jf'-a§“i>? & 3, The site is adequate for water supply and fill’-aite sewage treatment; and 4, The types, uses and numbers of watercraft %hat 1:he project will generate are compatible in relation to the suitability of public waters to safelv accomodate these watercraft. B. Conditions Attached to Conditional Dse Permits. The City Council upon consideration of the criteria listed above and the purposes of this ordinance, shall attach such conditions to the issuance of the conditional use permits as it deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of this ordinance. Such conditions may include but are not limited to the following: 1. Water Level; Increasec setbacks frc»n the Ordinary High be removed planted; ?. Limitations on the natural vegetation to the requirement that additional vegetation be 3. Special provisions for the locations, design, and use of structures, sewage treati.ent systems, watercraft launching and docking areas, and vehicle parking areas. Subd. 14. Notifications to the Department of Natural Resources. Copies of all notices of any public hearings to consider variances, amendments, or conditional uues under this section must be sent to the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources and postmarked at leat^t 10 days before the hearings. Notices of hearing t .» consider proposed subdivisions/pla*'s must Include copies of the subdivision/plat. Upon final action by the City Council, a copy of approved amendsients and subdivisions/plats, and final decisions granting variances or conditional uses under this section roust be sent to the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources and postmarked within 10 days of final action. Subd. 15. Zoning District Compliance with Minimum Requirements. The zoning district standards of chapter 10 of the Orono Municipal Code currently comply with the lot size, lot width, permitted use and conditional use standards set forth by the Department of Natural Resources Shoreland Management Regulations, MR 6120.2500 - 6120.3900. The following City of Orono zoning districts are partially or fully located within the Shoreland Overlay District; LR-IA RR-IA B-1 LR-IB RR-IB B-2 LR-IC RR-lB-l B-3 LR-lC-1 RS B-4 B-5 The following Orono zoning districts are also potentially 8 i 'i Wm -t i ii m ^ ■■■:M:' ;1 '' %■ A- v ^’3" eiK '#9^., ,,f available for use within the shoreland areas: B-6 PUD R-IB R-IA Any future changes within the zoning districts listed above shall meet the DNP regulations effective ?-3-09. Subd. 16. Shoreland Overlay District Standards. The Shoreland Overlay District Standards are in addition to the requirements set forth in Chapter 10 for the various zoning districts. In case of conflict, the most restrictive provision allies. A. Minimum Lot Area '*ot Width Standards. Minimum lot area and lot width standards of underlying zoning district Shall apply, with following exceptions: . No lot within 1000 feet of a General Development Lake and approved for duplex use per Section 10.20, Subd. 3 (5) shall be less than 135 feet in width nor less than 26,000 square feet in area if riparian, nor less than 17,500 square feet in area if non-riparian. 2. No lot within 300' of a tributary and approved for duplex use per Section 10.20, Subd. 3 (I) shall be less than 150 feet in width when no sewer is available, nor less than 115 feet in width when sewer is aval lable. B. Lakeshore Access Lots. Lots intended as accesses to public waters or as recreation areas for use by owners of non-riparian lots within subdivisions are permissible and must meet the following minimum standards: 1. Any such lakeshore access lot shall be designated as an outlet, and shall not be considered as a buildable residential lot. 2. Such an outlet shall not be subject to minimum lot area or width standards, except that the number of inland non-riparian lots which may gain access via such outlet shall not exceed the number obtained by dividing the out lot width measured at the shoreline by the required zoning district lot width, rounded down to the nearest whole number. 3. Such outlet shall be jointly owned by all owners of non-riparian lots in the subdivision who are provided riparian access rights on the access outlet. 4. No such access outlet shall be created as part of a subdivision plat except when the building lots within the subdivision are separated by an existing public or private roadway from the lakeshore, and the land on either side of the roadway was in common ownership as of the effective date of this ordinance. S:*#; ■ -X :■»! .m♦ ►A'!!*;;:* |‘%,v ;: t-; ■-:•■'hm-'-teafE"’mmh-.Wm^ir P". ::->-;.:rvr mm'fm' • /. bff lift liS"pi* iS#»' ISSf'-..iliii mmmPft » pAr ife:Pfev*: pW i-M% M-rv 5. Covenants or other equally effective legal instrusients must be developed that specify which lot owners have euthoirity to use the access lot and what activities are allowed. *Sh^ activities may include watercraft launching, loading, storage, iMMchingf mooring, or docking. They can also include other outdoor recreational activities that do not significantly conflict with g^eral public use of the public water or the enjoyment of normal property rights by adjacent property owners. Examples of the non- si^ificant conflict activities include swimming, sunbathing, or pienicing. The covenants roust limit the total number of vehicles allowed to be parked and the total number of watercraft allowed to be continuously moored, docked, or stored over water, and must require centralization of all coannon facilities and activities in the most suitable locations on the lot to minimize topographic and vegetaticm alterations. They must also require all parking areas, Storage buildings, and other facilities to b^ screened by vegetation or topography as much as practical from view from the public water, assuming summer, leaf~on conditions. Such covenants ,are subject to City approval. C. Placement of Structures on Lots. When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet all setbacks. Structures shall be located as followst 1. structure and On-site Sewage System Setbacks (in feet) frcan Ordinary High Water Level: Setbacks Public Water Classification ME RD 6D Tributary Structures Unsewered Sewered 100 75 100 150 75 75 75 Sewage Treatment System 150 75 75 75 2.Additional structure setbacks. The following additional structure setbacks apply, regardless of the classification of the water bod\: Setback from; Top ot biuif Unplatted cemetery Right-of-way line of federal, state or county highway and local ptiblic and private roads Setback (in feet) 3T5 30* Except for detached garages on lakeshore lots as regulated in Section 10.03, Subd. 9 (D) and except for structuj.es subject to less restrictive "side yard adjacent to street” setbacks as regulated in the various zoning districts. 3. Bluff impact zones. Structures and •n- accessory facilities, except stairways, landings, and lock boxes, sust not be placed within bluff impact zcnes. 4. ’-ses without water-oriented needs. Uses without water-oriented needs must be located on lots or parcels without public waters frontage, or, if located on lots or parcels with public waters frontage, must either be set back double the Bomal Ordinary High Water level setback or be substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation or topography, sssuming summer, leaf-on conditions. S. Fences, docks, retaining walls. No fence Shall be placed within the shore setback zone. Portions of dock located landward of the OHWL shall be considered as a landing, subject to the regulations for landings per Subdivision 16 (F) of this section. Retaining walls shall not be placed within the shore setback sone. 6. Average lakeshore setback. No principal or accessory structure shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots, except that this does not apply to stairways, lifts, landings, and lockboxes. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply onxy to classified lakes, and shall hot apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore set-back line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the resJ^dence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. - L D.Minimum Lowest Floor Elevations.All •/•S: structures located within the Shoreland Overlay District which are subject to the flood plain regulations of Section 10.55 ' this ordinance shall be placed at an elevation consistent with tne [- ‘ requirements of that section. The regulatory flood protection elevation shall be established as set forth in Section 10.55, Subd. 7 of this code. All structures constructed within the Shoreland Overlay District shall have their lowest floor, including basement, placed at an elevation no lower than the regulatory flood protection elevation. Where the regulatory flood plain elevation csanot reasonably be determined, the minimum elevation at which the lowest floor, including basement, nay be placed shall be determined as follows: mt : . 1. For lakes, by placing the lowest floor at a level at least 3 feet above the highest known water level, or 3 feet above the Ordinary High water Level, whichever is higher. X' t 2. For rivers and streams, by placing lowest floor at least 3 feet above the flood of record. the ^ -y SSI E. Water-oriented Accessory Structures. The only water-oriented accessory structure allowed to be located nearer the Ordinary High Hater Level than the normal structure setback as specified in this section shall be a lock box no greater than 20 square fast in area and no higher than 48 inches in height. Such a structure requires a building permit from the City. . . . If 4 V ^‘*^’ ' ’ ’■ «8ei'' tr; ":'^- sf-., •*.;■ ■ yr . n ‘i tesi«r ’ .■> 'i ‘0-: -T , f ;¥,:':b “»v.. m ||ei, :'f M. ft?■'V- Hi m * i 'n-;.)k*. v» W0€: #« ^■ m:/ tel' F. Stairways, Lifts and Landings. Stairways and lifts ara the preferred alternative to major topographic alterations for achieving access up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore allowed in the shore design requirementst Stairways, lifts and landings shall be setback rone and must meet the following in width. 1. Stairways and lifts must not exceed 4 feet exceed 32 square 2. feet Landings for stairways and lifts shall not area. Canopies or roofs are not allowed on ■tairwaysr lifts* or landings. 4. Stairways* lifts and landings may be either ccmstructed above the ground on posts or pilings or placed into the ground* provided they are designed and built in a manner that ensures cxmtrol of soil erosion. 5. Stairways, lifts and landings must be located in the most visually inconspicuous portions of lots, as viewed from the surface of the public water assuming summer, leaf- on cofiditions* whenever practical. 6. Facilities necessary to provide shore area access to physically handicapped persons shall be allowed provided that the dimensional and performance standards of subitems 1-5 are completed in addition to the requirements of the Minnesota Regulations* Chapter 1340. 7. A building permit shall be obtained for construction of stairways* lifts and laMdings regardless of whether such isiprovements are constructed abov'i, at or below grade. G. Steep Slopes. Any applicant requesting a permit for construction of sewage treatment systems* roads* driveways* structures* or other improvonents on steep slopes* shall provide adequate information to allow the City to evaluate possible soil erosion impacts and development of visibility from public waters before such permit may be issued. when determined necessary* conditions shall be attached to issued permits to prevent erosion and preserve existing vegetation screening of structures* vehicles* and other facilities as viewed from the surface of public waters* assuming summer* leaf-on vegetation. H. Height of Structures. No structure within the Shoreland Overlay District shall exceed tie height limitations set forth in the standards for the underlying zoning district. Vegetation Alterations. No live tree within 75 feet of the I ’ vS. - y ■.**“• ■i shoreline with a diaaeter of 6 inches cr more {or 19 Inches in circimierence or greater) measured 3 leot above the cround may be jp^imoved without first obtaining a p®rn*it from the Cxty staff provided thet at least the equivalent n unl er of replacement trees 0f ^ sise and nature found acceptable to ♦he staff are planted at the aa*e setback from the shoreline as those removed. Appeals Ct staff determinations as to type, size and quality of the trees to be replaced will be to the Council. Removal of trees that are dead not require a permit but such trees must be inspected by’ City staff prior to their removal. I 2. Intensive vegetation clearing within 75 feet of the shoreline and on steep slopes within the Shoreland 0^H^2,ay District is prohibited. Limited clearing of shrubs trees less than 6 inches in diameter and cutting, pruning and trlming of trees of any size is allowed tc provide a view to the vatar from the principal dwelling site and to accomodate the placement of permitted stairways and landings, picnic areas, access pn^hs# beach and watercraft access areas, and permitted lock boxes, provided that the screening of structures, vehicles or other futilities as viewed from the water, assuming summer, leaf-on Cooditione, is not substantially reduced. r ’ J. Topographic Alterations/Grading and Filling. • T-'- ; r, ;T^C 1. Grading and filling and excavations aecessary for the construction of structures, sewage treatment And driveways undar validly issued construction permits for these facilities do not require the issuance of a separate gradiag and filling permit. However, all grading and filling activity approved permits for construction of rtructures, sewage treatmant aystams, and driveways shall adhere to the grading and filling standards of this section. iMh: 2. Grading, filling and excavating is prohibited within 75’ of the Ordinary High Water Level of the pigpXic waters enumerated in Subdivision 7 of this section. »r'v -V y.: 3. Public and private roads, driveways, parking areas, and public or private watercraft access ramps shall not be constructed within 75' of the Ordinary High Water Level of public waters enumerated in Subdivision 7 of this section. If no alternatives exist, such improvements shall be subject to the standard zoning variance review procedure, and such review shall take into account the following considerations: a. Such improvements shall be designed to take advantage of natural vegetation and topography to achieve imitn screening from view from public waters. ■4/ b. All roads and parking areas shall be designed and constructed to minimize and control erosion to public waters consistent with the requirements of all agencies with jurisdiction. r ' m: y w: ,1 S. "■my i A' ' /i--i » *■ ’ -iin. v|> ^ ’M'^: 10% m0r 4. Except for those projects requiring p^islts for construction of structures# sewage treatment systems# and driveways# a land alteration permit will be required as follows t ifiA;'; a. For movement of 1-100 cubic yards of ■aterial anywhere within the Shoreland Overlay District# a staff laaued land alteration permit shall be required. b. For movement of more than 100 cubic yards of siaterial anywhere within the Shoreland Overlay District# oonditicmal use permit approval by the City Council is required in addlti<m to the required land alteration permit. 5. The following considerations and conditions must be adhered to duri.rg the issuance of construction g^OrmitSf grading and filling permits# conditional use permits, variances and subdivision approvals: a. Grading or filling in any Type 2, 3# 4# 5# 6f 7 or 8 wetland must be evaluated to determine how aatensively the proposed activity would affect the following functional qualities of the wetland: (1) and retention} *" '"J:^*i'iprovent or reduce flood damage; (?) Sediment and pollutant trapping Storage of surface run-off to I'l: Wii ii;. pilift'. (3) (4) (5) (6) Fish and wildlife habicat; Recreational use; Shoreline or bank stabilization; Noteworthiness# including spe­ cial qualities such as historic significance# critical habitat for liiil■ endangered plants and animals# or others ro-. miSi »' This evaluation must also include a datermination of whether the wetland alteration being proposed requires permits# reviews# or approvals by other local State or Federal agencies including but not limited to watershed districts# Minnesota Department of Natural Resources# or the United States lUmy Corps of Engineers. b. Alterations must be designed and conducted in a manner that ensures only the smallest amount of bare ground is exposed for the shortest time possible; • -r ■fe. c. Mulches or similar materials must be used# where necessary# for temporary bare soil coverage# and a peroianent vegetation cover must be established as soon as possible; d. Methods to minimize soil erosion and to trap sediments before they reach any surface water feature must be used; e. Altered areas must be stabilized to acceptable erosion control standards consistent with the field office technical guides of the local soil and water conservation districts and the United States Soil Consen-’ation Service; f. Fill or excavated material must not be placed in a manner that creates an unstable slope; q. Plans to place fill or excavated material on steep slopes must be reviewed by the City l.ngineer for continued slope stability and must not create finished slopes of 30% or greater; 17 h. Fill or excavated material roust not be placed in bluff impact zones; i. Any alterations below the Ordinary High Mater X«evel of public waters must first be authorized by the Comedaeioner of the Department of Natural Resources under Minnesota Statutesf Seciton 105.42; J. Alterations of topography must only be allowed if they are accessory to permitted or conditional uses and do not adversely affect adjacent or nearby property; k. Placement of natural rock rip rap, ineinding associated grading of the shoreline and placement of a filter blanket# is permitted if the finished slope does not exceed 3 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical# the landward extent of the rip rap is within 10 feet of the Ordinary High Water Level, and the iMi&ght of the rip rap above the Ordinary High Water Level does not exceed 3 feet. A rip rap permit shall be obtained per the requirements of Section 10.03, Subdivisions 22, 23 and 24 of this soiling code. 6. Connections to Public Waters. Excavations where the intended purpose is connection to a public water, such as boet slips# canals# lagoons# and harbors, are prohibited above the Ordinary High Water Level. Such excavations below the elevation or the Ordinary High Water Level are subject to approval of the Oepartnient of Natural Resources and other agencies with (xmcurrent jurisdiction. s:-K. Storm Water Management. The following general and specific standards shall apply in addition to those standards found in Sections 10.55 and 11.41 of the Orono Municipal Code: 1. When possible, existing natural drainageways# wetlands# and vegetated soil surfaces must be used to convey# store# filter and retain storm water run-off before discharge to public waters. w t 2. A development must be planned and conducted in a manner that will minimize the extent of disturbed areas# run-off velocities# erosion potential, and reduce and delay i:i ... _ FV: rutr^off volumes. Disturbed areas must be stabilized and protected as soon ss possible and facilities or methods used to retain sediment on the site. 3. When development density# topoqraphic festureSf and soil and vegetation conditions are not sufficient to adequately handle storm water run-off using natural features and vegetation# various types of constructed facilities such as diversions# settling basins# skimming devices, dikes, waterways, and ponds may be used. Preference must be given to designs using surface drainage, vegetation, and infiltration rather than buried pipes and manmade suiterials and facilities. m 4, When constructed facilities are used to perform water management, documentation must be provided by a registered professional civil engineer that they are designed and installed consistent with the field office technical guide of the local soil and water conservation district. fe-v ■ :-^w'•'m ’■ — ■ 5. New constructed storm water outfalls to public traters must provide for filtering or settling of suspended solids and skimming of surface debris before discharge. L. Hardcover Limitations. 1. No hardcover or Impervious surface shall ba plaead# located, or constructed within 75 feet of the Ordinary ■i^ Water Level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways. rm I’-m ■■ "'ii' lifts, landings, and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in the Municipal Code. 2. Between 75 feet and 750 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 25% hardcover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30% hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35% hardcover. '^"■■''^■''"'■BWblic uaaa. M.Standards for Commercial, Public, and Semi- mm/1. Surface water-oriented commercial uses and public or s<ni-public uses with similar needs to have access to and use of public waters may be located on parcels or lots with frontage on public waters, if permitted by the underlying zoning district standards. Those uses with water-oriented needs must meet the following standards: a. In addition to meeting Impervious coverage (hardcover) limits, setbacks# and other zoning standards in this ordinance# the uses must be designed to incorporate topographic and vegetative screening of parking a^eas and structures. * p:... b. Uses that require short-term watercraft mooring for patrons must centralize these facilities and . .. ; rV design thaia to avoid obstructions of navigation and to be the ■iaimai site necessary to c^eet the need. c. Uses that depend on patrons arriving by watercraft aay use the r.iniaium amount of signage and lighting aaeassary to convey needed information to the public, subject to tbe following general standards: (1) No advertising signs or •apporting facilities for signs may be placed in or upon public Itatera* Signs conveying information or safety messages may be placed in or on public waters by a public authority or under a paSBlt issued by the County Sheriff. (2) Signs may be placed, when aeceaaary# within the shore setback sone if they are designed in else to be the mlniaum necessary to convey needed information. Ybey Boat only convey the location and name of the establishment aad the general types of goods or services available. The signs BBSt BOt contain other detailck3 information such as product brands aad prlcea# must not be located higher than 10 feet above the greOBdr and must not exceed 32 square feet in size. If illuminated by artificial lights, the lights must be shielded or directed to prevent illumination out across public waters. (3) The aggregate square footage of sign apace per property shall not exceed the limitations on sign sqtiara footage as regulatc»d in Section 10.61. m (4) Non-sign related outside lighting suiy be located within the lakeshore setback zone or over public waters only if It is used primarily to illuminate potential •afaty hasards and is shielded or otherwise directed to prevent direct illumination out across public waters. This does not preclude use of navigational lights. wff 2. Uses without water-oriented needs must be lOGStad on lots or parcels without public waters frontage, or, if located on lots or parcels with public waters frontage, must either be set back double the normal Ordinary High Water Level setback or be substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation or topography, assuming suasMr, leaf-on conditions. it e Agricultural Use Standards. 1. When permitted in the underlying zoning district, general cultivation farming, grazing, nurseries, horticulture, truck farming, and wild crop harvesting shall be allowed in the Shoreland Overlay District except that no such activity shall occur within the shore setback zone nor on steep alopas or bluff Impact zones, steep slopes, shore setback zone and bluff iapact zones shall be maintained in permanent vegetation. standards: 2. Animal feedlots must meet the following W l^'S^ ¥ ‘M. a. New feedlots, if permitted, must not h% located in the shoreland of watercourses or in bluff impact SOMS and must meet a minimun setback of 3 00 feet from the Ordinary Hater Level of all public waters basins; and 1®^ b. Modifications or expansions to exxstln9 feedlots that are located within 300 feet of the Ordinary High Hater Level or within a bluff impact zone are allowed if they do not further encroach into the existing Ordinary High Water Level aetback or encroach on bluff impact zones. O. Forest Managwaent Standards. The harvesting of timber and associated reforestation must be conducted consistent with the provisions of the Minnesota Non-Point Source Pollution AssesaBent-Forestry and the provisions of Water Quality in Forest llaiia9OTent "Beat Management Practices in Minnesota*. P. Extractive Use Standards. 1, Site Development and Restoration Plan. An extractive use site development and restoration plan must be iifc' «is:' developed# Sf^roved# and folltwed over the course of operation of the site. The plan must addrejs dust# noise# possible pollutant discharges# hours and duration of operation, and anticipated vegetation end topographic alterations. It must also identify motions to be taken during operation to mitigate adverse environmental impacts# particularly erosion# and must clearly explain how the site will be rehabilitated after extractive activities end. 2. Setbacks for Processing Machinery. Processing machinery must be located consistent with setback standards for structures from ordinary High water Levels of public waters and from bluffs. i;- MV" isV t, Q. Water Supply. Any public or priva'^e supply of water for donestic purposes must meet or exceed standards for water quality of the Minnesota Department of Health and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. wm. R. Sewage Treatment. Any premises used for human occupancy must be provided with an adequate method of sewage treatment per Municipal Code Section 12.30. On-site sewage treatment systems must be setback from the Ordinary High Water Level in accordance with the setbacks contained in Section 10.56# Subdivision 16 (C). Non-conforming sewage treatment systems shall be regulated and upgraded in accordance with Subd. 17 of this ordinance. |V:'S. Significant historic sites. No structure may be placed on a significant historic site in a manner that affects the values of the site unless adequate information about the site has been removed and dociomented in a public repository. _ f ■ : ■ ■■ i- i"m Subd. 17. Nonconformities. All legally established nonconformities as of the date of this ordinance may continue nnbject to a^^Iicable State Statutes and as regulated elsewhere in the Orono Municipal Code. In shoreland areas, the followina standards shall also apply: > Ik?' [S:# A. Construction on Nonconforming Lots of Record, ftevelopment or use of existing lots of record shall be regulated as set forth In Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 of the Orono Zoning Code. p.- k;.:- v-'/ B, Add itions/Expan 8ions to Nonconforming Structures. All additions or expansions to the outside dimensions of an existing nonconforming structure must meet the setback, height# and other requirements set forth in the Orono Zoning Code. Any deviation from these requirements must be authorired by a variance pursuant to provisions of the zoning chapter. r isf, C. Nonconforming Sewage Treatment Systems. A nonconforming sewage treatment system as defined in Section 12.30 and located within the Shoreland Overlay District must be upgraded and SMda conforming, at a minimuun, at any time a permit or varian's of any type is required for any improvement on, or use of, the property. Further, the nonconforming sewage treatment system provisicms of Section 12.30 shall apply to all shoreland areas. Ite. ■■IS. ll- Subd. 18. Subdivision/Platting Provisions. IT' A. Land Suitability. Each lot created through aubdiviaion, including Planned Unit Deve 1 opmerit s or Planned Raaidcntial Developments authorized elsewhere in the Zoning and flatting Codes, must be suitable in its natural state for the proposed use with minimal alteration. In analyzing the suitability of land for a specific use, the City shall consider susceptibility to flooding, existence of wetlands, soil and rock formations with severe lisd^tations for development, severe erosion potential, steep topography, inadequate water supply or sewage treatment capabilities, near*-shore aquatic conditions unsuitable for water- based recreaticm, important fish and wildlife habitat, presence of significant historic sites, or any other feature of the natural land likely to be harmful to the health, safety or welfare of future residents of the proposed subdivision or of the community. B. Consistency with Other Controls. Subdivisions shall conform to all official controls of the City of Orono. Subdivision will not be approved where a later variance from one or BU>re standards in the official controls would be needed to use the lots for their intended purpose. In areas not served by publicly owned sewer and water systems, a subdivision will not be approved unless adequate and conforming water supply and sewage treatment systems can be provided for each lot in conformance with Section 12.30 of the Municipal Code. Each lot shall meet the minimum lot sise and dimensional requirements set forth elsewhere in the Code, including at least a minimum contiguous lavm area, that is free of limiting factors sufficient for the construction of two standard soil treatment systems. Lots that would require use of holding li *s Ibf- 1. P% * -T V ; e;1'’’ ■•, -v '. .. -■ *Wr''m ',10: miM:r^m :.#:Si t::*^ W0\'M/0' % 1^11 llpf' rllf -:• '*.A ■. .*•/ -Tv-, I «■ . ■, M ' ■ -. 0':' ' >■ ’i" lUUks must not be approved. C. Information Requirements. Sufficient inforMtlon must be subadtted by the applicant for the City to make m determination o£ land suitability, in addition to information [ulred by other provisions of the Zoning and Platting Codes» thereq followiag infonaation shall also be submitted: 1, Topographic contours at 2 shotring limiting site characteristics. foot intervals 2. The surface water features required in Minaeaota Statutes Section 505.02, Subdivision 1, to be shown on plate» obtained from United States Geological Survey quadrangle topographic maps or more accurate sources. 3.Adeauate soils information to determine suitability for building and o"-site sewage treatment capabilities for every lot frrai the most v snt existing sources or from field investigations such as soil borings, percolation tests, or other methods. 4. Information regarding adequacy of domestic water supply; extent of anticipated vegetation and topographic alterations; neat-*shore aquatic conditions, including depths, types of bottom sediments, and aquatic vegetation; and proposed methods for controlling storm water run-off and erosion, both during and after construction activities. 5. Location of 100 year flood plain areas and fioodway districts from existing adopted maps or data. 6. A line or contour representing the Ordinary High Water Level, the toe and the top of bluffs, and the minimum building setback distances from the top of the bluff and the lake or stream. D. Dedications. When a land or easeme .c dedication is a condition of subdivision approval, the approval must provide easements over natural drainage or ponding areas for BUUiagement of storm water and significant wetlands, as regulated in Section 10.55 of the zoning code. E. Lakeshore Access Lots. Lots intended as accesses to public waters or as recreational areas for use by oimers of non-riparian lots within a subdivision must meet or exceed the minimum standards set forth in Subdivision 16 of this section. Subd. 19. PRD/PUD Standards. A. Types of Allowed Planned Developments. Residential Planned Unit Developments ("Planned Residential Developments* or "PRDs") are allowed in the Shoreland Overlay District for new projects on undeveloped land, redevelopment of >■ 'M"-t' -•'t. 1A A- ihfi ' -r. * previously built sites, or conversions of existing buildings and land. Land use districts in which they are an allowable use are identified in the individual zoning district description's in the SMin9 chapter. The following exclusion applies: 1. Rezoning to M-6 and development via the M- 4 PRD shall not be allowed within the Shoreland Overlay District. B. Commercial PUDs. Commercial Planned Unit Developments are limited to land within the Highway 12 corridor as set forth in the City of Orono Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 1% adopted May 23, 1988, The following further restriction shall ®llapply s 11... . &-.i Pis? 1, No land located within the Shoreland Overlay District shall be developed via a commercial PUD. Any proposed amendment to the zoning code which would allow commercial PUD development within the Shoreland Overlay District shall be subject to review by the Department of Natural Resources to ensure ccaiaiatency with DNR requirements for shoreland areas. C, Prccessing of Residential Planned Unit Dovelopaients. Residential Planned Unit Developments (PRDs) sna' I be processed as a conditional use permit as required by the individual zoning district standards. K » 10.32r prior to final action being taken on the application D. Application for a Planned Residential Development. The applicant for a PRD must submit the following documents, in adr*ition to the information required in Secti request: MM' ' ? "• 'p.-mm- ... 1. A site plan and/or plat foi the project showing locations of pr<^erty boundaries, surface water features, existing and proposed structures and other facilities, land alterations, sewage treatment and water supply systems (where public systems will not be provided), and topographic contours at 2 foot intervals. f# 2. Property o%mers association agreement with mandatory membership, in accordance with the requirements of this ordinance. 3. Deed restrictions, covenants, permanent easements or other instruments that: a) Properly address future vegetative and topographic alterations, construction of additional buildings, and beaching of watercraft; b) Ensure the long-term preservation and maintenance of open space in accordance with the criteria and analysis specified in this ordinance. 4. Those additional documents as requested by WM ■V|i*r » th« City of Orono that mr^ necessary to explain how the PRr will be designed and will function. E. Site "Suitable Area* Evaluation. Proposed new , or expansions to existing PRDs must he evaluated using the ^following procedures and standards to determine the suitable area for the dwelling unit/dwelling site density evaluation. m 0 1. The project parcel must be divided Into tiers by locating one or more lines approximately panllel to a line that idantifies the Ordinary High Water Leve.. at th-2 following in^tereals, proceeding landward: Shoreland Tier Dimensions ■.-.p f'... »; v' - W'- ■ ■ Unsewered Sewered (feet)(feet) General development lakes- first tier 200 200 General development lakes - second and additional tiers 267 200 Recreational development lakes 267 267 Natural environment lakes 400 320 Tributaries 300 300 2. The suitable area wlthin each tier is next calculated by excluding frcan the tier area all wetlands# bluffs or land below the Ordinary High Water Level of public waters. This suitable area and the proposed project are then subjected to the PRD density evaluation steps to arrive at an allowable number of ‘ dwelling u its or sites. t..‘P V-.•>_ P. PRD 'Allowable Density* Evaluation. The procedures for determining the allowable density of a prd is as fellows t :V'. 4%. ■’ 1. The suitable area within each tier is divided by the single residential lot size standard of the underlyirg zoning district# yielding the allowable number of dwelling units or sites for each tier (Fractions shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number# but may be transferred as noted below). h'- i ■ 2. Allowable densities or numbers of units or excess fractions of units may be transferred from any tier to any other cler further from the water b'dy# but must not be transferred to any other tier closer. setbacks 3. No density increases based on increased or other factors will be allowed. I \ 4a G. V-:- »■ -y Maintenance and Administration Requirements. 1. Before final approval of a PRD# adequate ■ ik r-Bf'-: *.■ i® i"I^Sv-K- provisions roust be developed for preservation and maintenance in perpetuity of open spaces and for the continued existence and functioning of the development. 0•Se-'* si ilm, 2. Open Space Preservation. Deed restrictions* covenants* permanent easements, public dedication a-'d acceptance or other equally effective and permanent means must be provided to ensure long-term preservation and maintenance of open space. The instruments must include all of the following protections: a . ‘ alteratioiie other than routine maintenance prohibited. b . Commercial uses prohibited. Vegetation and topographic ifipSmk. c. Construction of additional buildings or storage of vehicles and other materials prohibited. wm ■m. ‘f y ■ prohibited. d. Uncontrolled beaching of watercraft I .■■il'.-.'"; i-.. 3. Development, organization and functioning. DnXess an equally effective alternative community framework is established, when applicable, all PRD's must use an owners association with the following features: m. a. Membership must be mandatory for each dweiJling unit or site purchaser and any successive purchasers. b. Each member must pay a pro rata share of the Association's expenses, and unpaid assessments can become liens on units or sites. aecQBodate changing conditions. c. Assessments must be adjustable to d. The Association must be responsible for insurance, taxes, and maintenance of all commonly owned property and facilities. .--i:H. Open Space Requirements. PRD's must contain ^open space meeting all of the following criteria:m 1. At least 50% of the total project area t^P^--;v#lUit be preserved as open space. 2. The following items shall not be included in the computation of minimum open space: 11^^.a • b. ■0 Ce Dwelling units or sites. Road rights-of-way. Land covered by road surfaces. r - jii|^% 1®^.. ■Parking areas.Structures. Co«renercial facilities or uses. 3, The following items shall be included in coBputation of miniaun open space: iP®a Wetlands . |»|/ B»;“ Significant historic sites. Unplatted cemeteries. Other areas with physical j^^^^ cluiracteristies unsuitable for development in their natural state. fey- |||:^ iy e. The lakeshore scvoack zone, based on normal raquired structure setbacks, must be included as open space. For PROBr the entire lakeshore setback zone must be preserved in its natural or existing state, except for those improvements necessary to provide reasonable pedestrian access to the water body as regulated elsewhere j.n the zoning cooe. 4. Open space may include subsurface sewage treatment systems if the use of the space is restricted to avoid edverse impacts on the systems. 5. The appearance of open space areas, including topography, vegetation, and allowable usos, must be preserved by use of restrictive deed covenants, permanent easements, public dedication and acceptance, or other equally affective and permanent means. S>-'- my' 1'^ I. Erosion Control and Stormwater Management. Erosion control and stormwater management plans must be developed and the PRD must: r M fii ^ 1. Be designed and the construction managed to minimize the likelihood of serious erosion occurring either during or after construction. This must be accomplished by limiting the amount and leitgth of time of bare ground exposure. Tesiporary ground covers, sediment entrapment facilities, vegetated buffered strips, or other appropriate techniques must be used to minimize erosion impacts on surface water featu ’-es. Erosion control plans approved by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District may be required if project size and site physical characteristics warrant; and 2. Be designed and constructed to effectively manage reasonably expected quantities and qualities of storm water run-*off. Impervious surface coverage within any tier must not exceed 25% of the tier area except that credit for unused hardcover Hr::4 rIf'*I-:^y'-' ^^v’’' vvV.P^i-tb aIlowanc« in tiers near the lake may be used tba lake. in tiers further from ' •iJ*: P- k~ c-' f; J. Centra I ixat1 on a*d Design of Facilities. Centralization and design of facilities «.nd structures must be done according to the following standards: t' P ■r 1. PRD's must be connected to publicly owned water aiq»ply and sewer systems, if available. On-site water supply and sowage treataient systems must be centralized and designed and iaatalled to oeet or exceed applicable standards or rules of the Minnesota Department of Health, the Minnesota Pollution Control A^oncy« and as regulated elsewhere in this ordinance. On-site sewage treatment systems must be located on the most suitable areas o£ the development, and sufficient lawn area free of limiting factors must be provided for a replacement soil treatment system for each sewage system. 2. Dwelling units or sites must be clustered into ono or more groups and located on suitable areas of the dovelopsient. They must be designed and located to meet or excec 1 tlio following dimensional standards for the relevant shoreland classification: Setback from the Ordinary High Watera. Iiovel. features. b.Elevation above the surface water imy:m c.Maximum height. C:::S 3. Shore recreation facilities including but not limited to swimming areas, docks and watercraft mooring areas, must be centralized and located in an area suitable for them. Ivaluation of suitability must include consideration of land slope, water depth# vegetation, soils, depth to ground water and bedrock or other relevant factors. The number of dwelling units or sites which may be granted lake access shall not exceed the number of riparian dwelling units or sites which could be created under a standard subdivision. The allowable number of dock slips or moorings and the designation of which dwelling units or sites shall have the right to use those slips or moorings shall be subject to Council approval and shall be defined in the covenants governing the PRD. In no case shall the numoer of slips or moorings exceed the number allowed under the official controls of the Lake Minnetcmka Conservation District. All docks serving three or more dwelling units shall be subject to the Joint Use Dock Licensing requirements in Chapter 5 of the Orono Municipal Code. 4. Structures. Parking areas and other facilities must be treated to reduce visibility as viewed from public waters and adjacent shorelands by vegetation, topography, increased setbacks# color# or other means acceptable to the City, assuming summer# leaf-'on conditions. Vegetative and topographic screening must preserved# if existing, or may be required to be pKfc,. provide . P':: I-:- r ,fi;c'"^‘¥vm* 5. Accessory structures and facilities must ■••t the required principal structure setback and must be c#atralixed» except for those pedestrian access and equipment storage structures allosred elsewhere in this code. K. Conversion. Existing resorts or other land UMiS and «ay be converted to Planned Residential Developments if ail of the following standards are met; r>. H--;- ‘.'Sulfc. % I'.:' - r j « r 1W4^t r ‘ '■ &iar;;ii' 5-^,- mi:- - ; ’v-', , iSy'y', h'^mi '.y.i >-1, ;*;■ /• A‘ ti'r ■A ftA. ■ ! tm4'' V4. ''"‘m, "■ '' 1. Proposed conversions must be initially •valuated using the same procedures for PRD's involving all new etemstruction. Inconsistencies between existing features of the developaMtnt and these standards must be identified. 2. Deficiencies involving water supply and smwage treataient, impervious coverage, open space, and shore rocroati<»n facilities must be corrected as part of the conversion or as specified in the conditional use permit. 3. Shore setback tone and bluff impact zone deficiencies must be evaluated and reasonable improvements be made as part of the conversion. These improvements must include where applicable the following: a. Removal of extraneous buildings, docks, or other facilities that no longer need to be located in shore setback seme or Huff impact zone. b. Remedial measures to correct erosion sites and improve vegetative cover and screening of buildings and other facilities as viewed from the water. c. If existing dwelling units are located in the shore setback zone or bluff impact zone, conditions shall be attached to approvals of conversions that preclude exterior expansions in any dimension or substantial alterations. The conditions must also provide for future relocation of dwelling units, where feasible, to other locations, meeting all setback and alteration requir«nents when they are rebuilt or replaced. 4. Existing dwelling unit or dwelling site densities that exceed the standards in Subdivision 19(F) may be allowed to continue but must not be allowed to be increased, either at the time of conversion or in the future. Efforts must be made during the conversion to limit impacts of high densities by requiring seasonal use, improving vegetative screening, centralizing shore recreation facilities, installing new sewage treatx.ent systems, or other means. Subd. 20. Riparian Acce:.. Rights. For properties which as a result of the designation of the OHWL are found to abut the boundary of a lake, stream, or tributary, no section of this Code shall be construed as obligating the city of Orono to approve Ilf►i:u'’»' : r-: #1 variances to provisions of the Code prohibiting physical laproveaentsf structures or land alteration within protected wetlands* flood plain areas or shorelands. Nothing in the Code shall be considered as establishing or increasino riparian rights. This section of the Code is intended to regulate land use and establish building and zoning restrictions only. I,, w Silbd* 21. Anendaents. All aaendaents to this section, ifiClodiog aMndSMnts to the official ouips* must be subaitted to the CoMiisaioner of the Department of Natural Resources prior to adoption. Further* aaendaents to underlying zoning district ■tandards which may be in conflict with this section must also be aubaitted to the Commissioner of the Department of Natural INisources prior to adoption. • ■■•V'ir--- ii her^>F revised as follows: Soctioai 2. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.02* Definitions* A, Definition 13, "Building Height", is hereby deleted and a defiaition of "Building Height" inserted in its place* as'im folidirei 13. "Building Height" - The vertical distance hafifian the highest adjoining ground level at the building or ten feet elMVe the lowest ground level* whichever is lower and the top of the cornice of a flat roof, or the deck line of a mansard roof, or the uppemost point on a round or other arch type roof* or the average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof. Topographic changes which elevate the adjoining ground level above the exieting terrain shall not be considered in determining ^ i boi Iding height. B. Definition 43, "Lot width", is hereby repealed and the following definition inserted in its place: li'li 43. "Lot Width" - The horizontal distance between Bide lot lines measured at the following locations: a. For lots which do not abut a lake or tributary, at the rear of the required front yard, measured parallel to the front lot line. b. For lots which abut a lake or tributary, at the shoreline measured in a straight line between the points at which the side lot lines intersect the OHWL, and at the required Structure setback from the . 'WL, measured in a straight line between the points of interseccion of the side lot lines with the structure setback line. V*vv p'W.. C. Definition 69, •Structure", is hereby repealed and the following definition inserted in Its place: i'5-fS'^- - 69. “Structure* - Anything, or part thereof, which is built, constructed or erected, an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in sone definite manner, which requires a location on, below, or above the ground, land, or water, or attached to sosiething having a location on the ground, land, or water. v-v;. teetion 3. Municipal loning Code Section 10.55, Flood Plain and llatlands Management, is hereby amended as follows: A. Section 10.55, Subdivision 3, Definitio’^ 10. "Ordinary High Water Mark*, is hereby repealed and the following definition inserted in its place: V-'.feiilimmI*::.. ipr-v*- " 10, "Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL)" - The boundary of public waters and wetlands, and shall be an elevation delineating the highest water level which has been maintained for a •nffleient period of time to leave evidence upon the landscape, nnwfinl J that point where the natural vegetation changes from predOBinantly aquatic to predominantly terrestrial. For water OTturMB, the ordinary high water level is the elevation of the top of the bank of the channel. For reservoirs and flowages, the ordinary high water Xevrl is the operating elevation of the normal ■A sUnser pool* The defignated OHWL has been determined by the Minnesota Oapartment of Natural Resources for certain water bodies aa ladicated in Section 10.56 of the Orono Muncipal Code. iiP^ Section 4* Section 11.03, Subdivision Regulation Definitions, is hereby raviaed as follows: A. Section 11.03, Definition 28 "Lot, Width" is hereby deleted and the following definition inserted in its place: ‘•VlV j?-- p---. V 28. "Lot Width" - The horizontal distance between side lot lines measured at the following locations: *Sp*' a. For lots which do not abut a lake or tributary, at the rear of the required front yard, measured parallel to the front lot line. ft ff- b. For lots which abut a lake or tributary, at the shoreline measured in a straight line between the points at which the side lot lines intersect the OHWL, and at the required structure setback from the OHWL, measured in a straight line between the points of intersection of the side lot lines with the structure setback line. , VI li’- liliW' pvvSiV r iTTnMl i nt,____ i i B* Section 11.03» Definition 55 "Setback" is hereby deleted «ndl the following definition inserted in its place: 55. "Setback" - The minimum horizontal distance between a etructure, system, or facility and a natural feature, property line, right-of-way line, OHWL, structure, system, cr other facility. if jpi; C. Section 11.03, Definition 62 "Structure" is hereby i^eieted and the following definition inserted in its place: ff 62. "Structure" - Anything, or part thereof, which is built, constructed or erected, an edifice or building of any kind# or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in acme definite manner, which requires a location on# below, or above the ground, land, or water, or attached to something having a location on the ground, land, or water. Sep Soetion 5. Adoption and Publication. This ordinance shall taka affect and shall be enforced from and after the date of its passage and publication. ' Adopted by the City Council of Orono on this 2 4th day of *^"-pfSbru«ry; 1992, by a vote of _ _ ayes and nays. ill Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Ipif^ " borothy M. Haliin, City Cl^k 'MK-vifeii:- ifp? F¥s' • .. . .. "vir ' i&ipf/;k riS:. b’ ;*s:;’: Vos Chairman Kalley and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse# City Administrator Michael P, Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Dotos February 10» 1992 Sidijocts Zoning Code Amendment - Shore land Management Xdot of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C - DHR Mandate - Proposed Section 10.56-Shoreland Management ' Concurrently Proposed Revisions to Chapters 1C 11-Definitlons Exhibit D - Plat/Shoreland PPD Comparison Diagrams Bscfcgrooiid The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources on February 5, 1590 notified the City of Orono and many other Minnesota cities that local land use controls and shoreland ordinances must be brought Into corapliance with -he revised "Statewide Standards for Nsnsgenent of Shorelard Areas" rules# which became effective on July 3# 1989. Orono was offered the opt: :>n of working with the 13 other Lake Minnetonka municipalities# but chose to independently develop a comprehensive shoreland ordinance. In May 1991 the City Council appointed a Lake Use Committee# one goal of which was to work with staff in developing a shoreland ordinance. The Lake Use Committee began meeting in June 1991# and met on a regular basis through January 1992# resulting in the draft ordinance attached as Exhibits B and C. A grant agrsement providing up to $5#000 in dnr funding for the ordinance revision process initially gave Orono a February 5# 1992 deadline for ordinance adoption. That deadline date has subsequently been extended to December 10# 1992. At the recommendation of the Lake Use Committee# on August 26r 1991 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 96# Second Series# establishing an interim moratorium on the granting of lend subdivisions that had not received preliminary approval from the City. This subdivision moratorium applies to all properties located within 1#000 feet of the Ordinary High Water Mark of ^ecified lakes and within 300 feet of certain tributaries. While the moratorium as adopted is effective for a period of one year# it is anticipated that once the shoreland management ordinance is adopted# the moratorium will be lifted by the Council. . .. I K* J -s ■ i»-'► tJii t;r::>' •itfc: . 5--. SSc; MSlttN Zoning Code Amendment February XO, 1992 Fage 2 Mioraland Witiegemant Ordiaaiice Highlights The Shoreland Management Ordinance will constitute an entirely new section. Section 10.56, within the zoning code. A number of definitions not appearing elsewhere in the zoning code are added for clarity, and existing definitions within various sechl<sia of the sonlng code and subdivision code are revised as necessary to elimi.iate inconsistencies. A number of new concepts# such as "bluff*# "bluff impact zone", "shore impact sone*» and ■water-oriented accessory structure or facility", are introduced for the sake of co^llance with DNP regulations. Because Orono has defined lakeshore zoning districts and a number of restrictive controls already in place, it was determined that creation of a Shoreland Overlay District was the most appropriate method to effectuate the necessary ordinances without comprosising the integrity of the current code structure. The lakes which define the extent of the Shoreland Overlay District are classified either as General Development (GO), Hecraational Development (RD) or Natural Environment (NE). The District includas lands within 1,000 feet of the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWD of these defined Ia)ces# as well as lands within 300 feet of designated tributary streams. The Cif' contracted with Barr Engineering to provide supportive data to assist the ONR in determining the OHWL for Lake Classen, Dic)cey Laks# and Lydiard Lake, for which no OHWL had previously been dafinad. Additionally# the DNR defined the OHVr, for French La)ce. Three tributary streams within Orono were initially daaignated as protacted waters by the DNR. These include kalntars Cretdc# Wolsfeld Creek (entering the north side of Long Laks from sources in Medina) and Long Lake Creek (between Long Lake and Tanagar Lake). The Lake Use Committee has recommended adding Stubbs Bay Creek (between Lake Classen and Stubbs Bay) and Dickey Lake Creek (between Dickey Lake and Long Lake) as protected waters subject to Shoreland Regulations. The ordinance provides for notification of the DNR whenever variances# conditional use permits or amendment'^ are being considarad that affect the Shoreland Overlay District. Perhaps the most significant portion of the Shoreland Management Ordinance is Subdivision 16# The Shoreland Overlay District Standards. These standards apply to the use and development of all property in the District# and are summarized as follows: - Minimum lot area and width standards generally exhibit no change from existing codes. ^ /■ ■ f: ■S-<■•fr ..!/ vr.; Soiling Code Amendment February 10, 1992 Page 3 L-^r .-* luJv"- The use of la'^^^^ore access lots for non~riparian owners is strictly limited. k- -lS?t Fleceise&t of structures on lots will in many situations l>o Bore restricted than per current codes, especially for the newly den’gnated Natural Environment lakes, where 150 foot OHWL setbacks for structures and septic systens will significantly limit development. Xtisitetions on development of bluff impact sones, average lakeshore setback and hardcover restrictions will also have a significant impact on rural properties not previously sub^j'jct to lakeshore regulations. Stairways, lifts, landings, and lockboxes will be the only structures allowed within the shore setback zone. - Lakeshore vegetation alterations are more strictly limited. kfe-- it#,iiiP- Grading, filling and excavating within 75 feet of the OHWL of all p ilic waters will continue to be prohibited and strict review procedures adopted for all grading work within the overlay district. All development in the overlay district shall be subject to strict storm water management standards. w Commercial, public, semi-public, agricultural and extractive uses will be subject to specxfic regulations. Water supply and sewage treatment systems shall be subject to rlnimum standards. Nonconforming sewage treatment systems will be required to upgrade based on more restrictiv' standards than previously in effect. Subdivisions will continue to be regulated based on suitability of the land for development. Planned Residential Developments (PRD's) within shorelands become more strictly regulated, with development densities consistent with or more restrictive than the standards of underlying zoning district. Open space requirements, and maintenance and administration requirements are more specifically defined, and centralization of facilities is mandated. Conversion of resorts or other land uses to Planned Residential OQvalopments is subject to strict standards with the goal of reducing or eliminating existing nonconformities. iiPr- ■. mm,:.fa* I It toning Code Amendment February 10, 1992 Page 4 Exhibit D depicts an example of how the proposed PPD "shoreland tier* system (page 376-23) required by the DNR, would actually yield a more restrictive setback configuration than per our current subdivision requirements. This is a 1.99 acre parcel on Casco Point Road (half acre zone). Pour plat options shown as A, B and C, each show how a 3-lot plat with a cul-de-sac might be configured. Sketch D shows a 3-iot plat without a cul-de-sac road which might yield building sites with better lake views. In each of A through D, only one of the three lots would be allowed lake access based on only 115 feet of shoreline. In the PRD option, the property is divided into Tier 1 (200 feet deep), and Tier 2 (200 feet). After wetlands and bluffs are subtracted, the area of Tier 1 is divided by the zoning district area requirement, yielding the number of units allowed within that tier. Rounding down. Tier 1 is allowed one unit. The excess can be credited to Tier 2. Looking at the diagram labeled PRD Step 2, a total of three building pads could be allowed on the property, but only one pad wou Id be all owed in the 0-200 foot setback. Plats A, B and C would each allow portions of a second bouse in the 0-200 foot tier, and plat D would potentially allow all three houses in the 0-200 foot tier. te': It is expected that the Shoreland Management Ordinance will generally have relatively n ‘ or impacts on properties currently abutting or near Lake Minnetonka which have been subject to XiSikashore Residential zoning district standards since 1975. The graatast impact will be on those Rural Pesidential zoned properties in northern Orono which to date have not been subject- to the LR standards. litaff RccoBBienrtation Planning Commission is requested to review the proposed jrdluance and ask any questions or make any comments you may have. The February 18 meeting includes a public hearing on this ordinance, and staff will be happy to attempt to answer any questions brought forth by the public. Please feel free to recommend to the City Council ary revisions which you feel are appropriate. If your recommendation for approval is forthcoming with few revisions, this ordinance at the request of the Lake bse Committee will be placed on the Council's February 24 agenda for adoption. The Lake Use Committee suggested that the ordinance be adopted as soon as possible, then submitted to the DNR and neighboring cities for review. This recommendation is due partly to concern that the DNR review process may take an extended period of time, causing hardship for Orono property owners who have already been held up for nearly 6 months by the moratorium. It was the Committee's intent that the ordinance be adopted, the Boratorium lifted, and if the DNR requires specific changes after their review, these would be dealt with as later amendments. e f #;•• fe- It"’- ■ .fr M IK)STATE OF M2S017A |» DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES OmWFORUATKIN SOO LAFAYETTE BOAD • ST PiUL MINNESOTl . 55155 40 ?sbr»?^ir'fi90 A j'|V«4 jj?:' !| "V J ; j, The IfcMiorible Juies Grabek tlayor» City of Orono lok 66 Cryftal B«y. MN 55323 FEB-8!(I itr Mayor Grabek; >tlC£ TO ADOPT REVISED STATEWIDE SHORELAND MANAGD^ENT RULES On July 3s 1989, the revised Statewide Standards for "Managenient of Shoreland Areas" rules bteaet effective (Minnesota Rules Part 6120.2500 - 6120.3900). Under the authority of Minnesota Rules Part 6120.2800, Subp. 2. you are hereby notified that your isutt Upgrade its land use controls or shoreland ordinance by February 5, 1992, to comply with the new rules, r. The rules were developed through a consensus process by 23 groups representing diverse Interests from agriculture and envlrorvnent to local and state governmental agencies Including the Department of Natural Resources. A series of ten hearings before an Administrative Law Judge in the fall of 1988 completed the public review process. The Legislature has pro'*ined grant monies to assist l0s.al units of government in ftdoptInQ the nevi^ shoreland rules. A grant application form Is enclosed. Please return the completed form by March 5, 1990, to the Shoreland Hydrologist serving your region (see attached map): .#■ ' Regions 1, 2. 3 Regions 4, 5, 6 Russ Schultz, Shoreland.Hydrologist DNR-Oiv. of Waters 1601 Minnesota Drive Bralnerd, MN 56401 (218) 828-2605 DNR-Oiv. of Waters Shoreland Hydrologist 1200 Warner Road St. Paul. MN 55106 (612) 296-7523 The Shoreland Hydrologist is your primary contact for the grant application, contract. The Area Hydrologist serving your city/countyt eligible expenses, and related questions, n.^ w.wy. F tsee attached map) will be your primary contact when it comes to the actual work or revising your zoning ordinance. Please feel free to call upon them for assistance. Slncet ely. I'^Ron Nargang, Dlr^tor ^ Enclosure John Stine, Regional Hydrologist Cell Strauss, Area Hydrologist cc: Vi" ;, •Dorothy Zoning AdmlnUtrator^m^ • ..in,... \ V:i, t: iii- jif ;K- n' fK Section 10.56 Subd. 'll ' W ■ Ssfe:- 3§k^ y^- ,v r-"iv^ ,4}3^' iit:" liift i;W|., . .16* ;S^ m rwm. W?»¥ L## 1r-4-?' ••-. &r4". ^sS 4 l£^- ■> If'ORONO CC 0$ ,|it^ . - ‘ ■ ^ W^- ’ Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Title 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Subd. \ 16 17 18 19 20 21 Shoreland Management. . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Statwent of Purpose. . . . . . . . . Statutory Authorisation . . . . . . Definitions ................................................ Jurisdiction ................................................ Coaipliance..................................................... Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Classification of Public Waters . Establishment of Shore!and Overlay District. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interpretation of District Boundaries Land Alteration and Building Permits Required. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Certificate of Zoning Compliance. . . Variances .............................................................. Conditional Uses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Notifications to the Department of Natural Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zoning District C<Mipliance with Minimum Requirements......................................................... J^horeland Overlay District Standards. Nonconformities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subdivision/Flatting Provisions . . . PRD/PUD Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . Riparian Access and Rights. . . . . . . Amendments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 3^6-1 376-1 376-1 376-1 376-5 376-6 376-6 376-6 376-7 376-7 376-7 376-7 376-8 376-8 376-9 376-9 376-9 376-20 376-20 376-22 376-28 376-28 (DATS) y 2 te'lit !y' r ■ ;^ -' 1^' 5'••!'•: itmh:: ltlxin«sota Departiaent of Natural Resources Division of Waters ShorsXsnd Management Program 1200 Warner Load St« Paul, KH 55106 Mttnt Ed Pick Dear Mr. Pick: If Attached is a copy of the shore land Management Ordinance adopted by t;he City of Orono on February 24, 1992. Enclosed with the ordinance is a completed copy of the Shoreland ordinance Review Checklist to assist you in reviewing our ordinance for compliance with statutes and Minnesota rules. We understand that adoption of the ordinance absent preliminary DNR jp^view and approval might be construed as putting the cart before the horse. However, after what we feel is a thorough review by our I^ke Use Coaoslttee comprised of 3 Council members, 2 Planning Comsieeioners end our LMCD representative, the Planning Commission and Council feel that the ordinance as drafted and adopted substantially meets the requirements of the Department of Natural Hesources while maintaining the integrity and principles of shoreland management which have long been a part of our current ordinance structure. Furtherr in August 1991 the City Counci 1 adopted a moratorium on subdivisions within the defined shoreland areas in order that no nsw subdivisions be approved under what would shortly become an outmoded set of regulations. Council felt that such a moratorium would protect both the developer and the City from having to change the rules in mid-stream. The Council also recognized that while Orono is confident that the general DNR requirements are substantially met with the adopted ordinance, DNR review could extsnd over an additional period of months which would penalize Orono developers who wish to proceed with their projects. Ths City Council is preparing to lift the subdivision moratorium im March 1992. We respectfully request that the DNR review the adopted ordinance as expeditiously as possible, and if revisions are necessary to comply with minimum DNR standards, we will work with you to resolve these issues, and amend our code as necessary. Flease feel free to contact Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Mike Gaffron, City Administrator Ron Moorse, or me if you have any questions. Sincerely, l^rabara A. Peterson Mayor BAP/1sv Enclosure ___ P#- mr:-" City of f Dear Mayor I' # ,#1 BncXoaad pXaase find th« Shoreland Management Ordinance adopted by tha City of Orono on February 24, 1992, pursuant to Minnesota Da|»ari3i«!it of natural Resources regulations. while this ordinance baa baaa adopted by the city Council, it has not yet been reviewed and ai^roTed by the Departnent of Natural Resources. iPXaase direct any questions or comments tc me or City Administrator Mon Noorse# or address comments to the Minnesota Department of Naturai Resources, Division of Waters, Shoreland Management Pfoqraia, X200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 to the attention of Bd Pick, ShcreXand Hydrologist. .j'V nSy - k SincereXy, MichaaX P. Gaffron Assistant PXanning ( Zoning Administrator MPG/Xsv X&ncXosure m"'' -p«#- PS .■■ -i ii. mm 1M. Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse* City n ; strator February 18, 1992 : Park ComiBission Re-Aopcintments ««% rent Park Commisaionera whose terms expired on December >1, have indicated an interest in serving an additional These are; Alexander Vongries and Philip Bradley. The ‘ filly »ake these re-appointments at the February 24th mm 1 ■mmr:if:.'W^mi '■"fa . -r'-J r. ■ i: " ■' - IT'. ^ Ki#' tot Fion: mm Mayor and City Council Ron Moors®, City Administrator February 19, 1992 !o ^Vi SCTJCCt: Park Cosiinission Appo i nt-nent.? «fe. The Council at its February I0 meeting interviewed applicants for a vacancy on the Park Commission. Since tnat time, Bruce *^okal has resigned from the Commission creatino an additional vara cy. The Council may at this time make two appointments *■ o the Park Cmnission. , , . ,.ljl: 'f ’ ■-*> ■ J iliSS » feip^. : iljifi--. V ^ if ■; : if-., K ■» .-.0% ,. m- ,K%t ■■ ■¥|- ■:4* A • ,.f ■ i» fe0-;;r' !f*‘ .., lli. |s?'';' #*; *■ :# V- ilf., X',.’^ -i- .'■. ,;W^' . 'i SI?' >v m- % im Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik& ^ I Associates En^ncers A Arctiltects C> ii>f^'r»n»^ »f JOrntr C Ar*i?pr*>* »f M«r’>ir' k^r-^.*4 • Cix* “’t c Ni>r». -► tne>^ :.' *-»Hjf ’«'« ^ vi jiana •€ 4^ * ^V^ifTnr- * f V^jrm •atx^ »f ’’■**K'«rsa»?■ 40^4*. 3a^«e t ^'VRCvs .*?a* ♦■'f«39P*«r- «xe-* ♦ •»6 «4riwwa*^ A •’f 4StfvW* »lf vf*- V4ar« c ■*f ^exm^ « *»*»«■»‘ <»f "A >iO'- *f V»4T ‘ 3 Ms<*"ar C III A 4 •vjr^ M A V. ' C' ^ZK*^- ;.?«• t'«r A \%>^ ^ « 'IWli •«- M-i-^AT » f*. M •^*r%ar Vi Ohi'tr Febnuuy 11, 1902 City erf Ooflo Bax 66 Ciyttal Bay, V > Attn: Rc; Mr. John Gerhardson iSS!f % 'OC'O Pumphouse No. 3 Final Pay Request Fite No. 13950 pr3 \ e ---- Dear Mr. Gerhardson: Attached is the Final Pay Request for the Pumphouse No. 3 project. Also attached are the IC- 134 Fomts from Richmar Construction and his subcontractors. The City has previously received record plans, shi>p drawings and operation and maintenance ipianuals for this project. Thb project has been completed according to the project plans and specifications. We fccommcnd the City accept this project and pay the contractor the final amount due. If you have any qi^tiom about this project, please call me at 636-4(>(X). Yours vciy truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERUK &, ASSOCIATES, INC. Daryl K. Kirschenman DKK:Ii ur- § End. 't:'T .:W ■M :l I3950.cor -- ■ 2J3S West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 : i *y REQUEST FOR PAYMENT EUlTtt r^bnmrr U, 1991 fuatt Orono. Miniffott yaOUCTi fMmtshoutt Ho. 3 nOJICT m,t FILE HO.! 13950 COOTlACTQRt llctMMr Conitruction AlMWaSSi 7776 kldti W«T FOR PERIOD! Fro«i JulT 1. 1991 Tot F«b. 10. 1992 SPECIFIED CONTRACT COMPLETION DATE; MaT 15. 91 » Sub Jun 15. 91 - Final FridlaT. MW 53»3I tt FOR PAYmHT »0.i_9 & FINAL 1 »J . , * fSMi fc'ife il'%: 0^, 11 1. Original Contract Anount 2. Changa Ordar - ADDITION 3. Qumga Ordar > DEDUCTION A. taviaad Contract Anount Yaltia C«iplated to Date Matarial on Hand Anotmt tamed Late latainage 0 I Sttb>Total $ $ $ 8,077.00 5. • . 7. I. 9. 10.Laaa Anount Paid Pravioualy AMOUHT due this request Fqj||PAyMENT NO. ! 9 i F wV? m $ $ $ $ s s $ $ I ’ »» 'iJ iL. Reconmendad for Approval byi > 'll yiii BOKESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK 4 ASSOCIATES. INC. By!IL^ # OVHER APPROVALt % ■' ■*; :■ .• j 'r'i, ■'•r »Y. v’^l^'V/lNitat : 'V-r ■ 13950PR I'i-i • 211.3*0.00 219,^*17.00 218.817.00 0.00 218.817.00 0.00 218.817.00 207.*96.13 11.320.83 _ JdLiki MM'- ■ rr- 'j- fA' -‘ M t- ■'u fMJBCTi PwiDbout* No. 3 PAYMENT Nf •9 & Pinal tLACtt Orooo. Minnesota FILE NO. i 13950 eOVtlACTOt: lictaur Construction DATE February 11. 1992 'ar ; ::•STATEMENT OP WORK 1' ■*a. Unit Est d Quantity Aaount Contract Itm Unit Price QuantltT To Date To Date 14tl BID - PUMPHOUSE WO. 3 Ipbillse i Bond L.S.S*.000.00 L S 1001 $4,000.00 •Ito Piping L.S.9,500.00 L S lOOZ 9,500.00 Dcnin Maniwle & Piping L.S.2.500.00 L S lOOX 2,500.00 lit# eroding (initial)L.S.2.500.00 L S 1001 2.500.00 Bit* Orading (finish)L.S.1,500.00 L S lOOZ 1.500.00 ttrivovoy L.S.5,500.00 L S lOOZ 5,500.00 Coneroto S Masonry L.S.33,890.00 L S lOOZ 33.890.00 Door. Yindov i Hard.are L.S.3,200.00 L S lOOZ 3.200.00 Cofpontry L.S.2.900.00 L S lOOZ 2,900.00 ipofing 4 P'.eet Metal L.S.6,500.00 L S lOOZ 6,500.00 t|^f Match L.S.1,400.00 L S 1001 1,400.00 ffacoat Roof Plank L.S.4,100.00 L S lOOZ 4,100.00 Loh Cobinets 4 Sink L.S.3,800.00 L S lOOZ 3,900.00 Pointing L.S.4,300.00 L S loot 4,300.00 JbPdro-Pneuaatic Tanks L.S.19,500.00 L S lOOZ 19,500.00 Air Coaoiressor Asa'y L.S.6,100.00 L S lOOT 6,100.00 • Proceaa Piping L.S.8,500.00 L S lOOZ 8.500.00 ■iac. Pluabing 4 Air Piping L.S.4,800.00 L S lOOZ 4,800.00 Pttiy> 4 Motor L.S.18,500.00 L S 1002 18,500.00 S-. 'I'--: a 1S950P1 Page 1 3 4 •r. "y tii nojicft fUCli_ iWiPhwnt Wo. 3 OrCTtto. Miimttof %v%OlWTlACTOtt Kictwr Coattruction llUl:. lite' STATEMENT OF WORK yy»g^ai„.Contract XtM ,V;s.1^1 IIP. COIIT‘D Hi tor Vnlv* r-;.. :■•.“■■' ■■ ^t:yy ■■food Cqulpt. :r-;-i• 4ir Cond. k Vontilatlon tel-*-.' ■ ISFtloctrical (rough*In)FR«F>«, ace t Control a iioe. Pixturot li Finish FAg#: Inttail 4* topsoii, teed. "‘* 'fortili*or 4 »ttlch W IASI BID WORK ,y^y- S:- 4tmil*Tl wo. 1 Suhstituto prsforaod wall 4 roof panels MfciM in lieu of wood shakes on the nansard I ioof TOTAL ALTESflATE NO. 1 y "-.'-vy :*:';- - p 'll-. i ORDER HO. 1 ...FAJ^T A » SOFT START TYPE STARTER towiso aotor starting equip, to a •iso 3 Allon Bradley soft start TOTAL FART A • ADD 'Mrft- 13950PR 1 -I L.S.$3,360.00 Page 2 PAYMENT NO.t 9 4 Filial FILE MO.j________y^50 ___ *^4TE I FebruarT 11, 1993 Unit Est *d Quantity Amount Unit Price Quantity To Pate To Date L.S.2.100.00 L S LOOT 2.100.00 L.S.2.600.00 L S 100:2.600.00 L.S.7,000.00 L S 100 z 7.000.00 L.S.7,250.00 L S lOOX 7.250.00 L.S.6,500.00 L S lOOX « 500.00 L.S.31.200.00 L S lOCX 31,200.00 A. . S .6.800.00 L S 1001 6.800.00 Acre 4,000.00 0.5 35X 1,400.00 $207,840.00 L S $2,900.00 L S lOOX $2,900.00 $2,900.00 $3,360.00 $3,360.00 ii h* ^*‘n 0^1 ^ •rtOJECTt Puairftoux Wo. 3 fUOIt Qrooo. i CWTlACTORt tlctaiT Con»truction PAYMENT NO. I q ^ rir.al FILE NO.:^_ _ _ _ _13930 DATE: FebruarT 11. 1992 STATEMENT OF WORK M..Coatract It—Unit Unit Price Est’d Quantity Amount Quantity To Date To Data r •Mit ■ ■ ewj> iiia:CONDITIONS N Jliafc aa4 cevar for maaonry work t!*- Jkldiiioiuil labor for cold weather work I' tiii^ haatlag and equip, protection L.S. L.S. L.S. $2,930.00 650.00 500.00 ;K£r lOTAL tatT B . ADO MkBf AraaT sm. ' lOfSBt C8AN61 ORDER NO ... S-:OikffGt PIPER m. 2 B' h' !•» TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 mM:1-::,'*f- f- ^NGE ORDER NO. 3 m:: DART A ■ INSTALL ALARM HORN -i >-V ss 1|AMT R - MOVE ROCKS L.S. L.S. $240.00 160.00 ^TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 3y.- ¥ r' • - ilSWOPR Page 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 $3,360.00 4.080.00 $7,440.00 1 L 1 1 92.930.00 630.00 500.00 $4,080.00 - Tlia EXTENSION L.S.$0.00 1 jk 1 $0.00 - SPARE BRICK L.S.265.00 1 1 263.00 - ALT. CHEMICAL EQUIP.L.S.0.00 1 1 0.00 « BRICK ADJUSTMENT L.S.OoGOI M•1 1 -28.00 $237.00 $240.00 160.00 $400.00 PuMphous* No. 3iucif ■ Orono. Hinnttota CMTIACTOt« tic'aiT Conttmction PAYMENT NO.« 9 U PinalFILE NO.:_ _ _ _ _13950 DATE: February 11. 1992 STATEMENT OF WORK Contract Itcn Unit Unit Price Est'd Quantity Quantity To Data Aaiount To Data § ry' fOfAL iASt no VOKK TOTAL ALnitNATt BIO fOTAl C8AII6B Otm M TOTAL CHANCE OBDEH HO TOTAL CBANCE OBOBI HO 1 2 3 S^07.8*0.00 2.900.00 7.440.00 237.OC 400.00 Wk'. TOTAL TOP!: COMPLETED TO DATE $218,817.00 •>T IP mm" 4..C “ ' ' V Page 4 '' U950PB '7 «?■* '-■Vt-V ■ .iriiili .. .>.S;-£D..,. r * •\p *O t- i ■ PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS ClTTt fiOJlCTi mi No.t COmiiCTORt Orono. Hlnn«sot* Puaphoute No. 3 13950 Rlchaor Construction i.;' 1;:* . OllClIiAL COtmuCT AMOUNT $211,340.00 TOTAL CHANGE 0RDL..S ?,j/ .00 REVISED .,QNTRA' A .<'» $219.417.nj fi&S •U-5-00 2-22>91 o I.U.Rl NO. 1 2 3 CHANGE ORDER DESCRIPTION Heviss ■otor starter: Prov.d* heat 4 labor tor vint»r conditions Ti»« «*t.. spara brick, al* Yeaicai o-ulp.. brick adjust. Install alarm horn, mov# rccits AMOUNT ;>/. 440.00 237.00 400.00 TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS - ADD $8,077.00 nOJECT PAYMENT SUMMARY: P' 0. TOTAL PAYMENT TO DATE RETAINAGE FOR PAYMENT NO. .• TOTAL VALUE COMPLETED 9 4 F $218,817.00 0.00 $218,817.00 13950PR ■. j ■ ilPi-...- ■ « PAYMENT per:oapayment VALUE Np.FROM TO THIS VCUCKER rCMPLETED RETAINAGE .if""' P0::1 a-1-90 10-31-90 $22,074 20 $3,043.00 $1,161.80 , ijj,...2 11-1-90 11-30-90 24.295.30 28,617.00 2.440.50 ij ) I**s 12-1-90 12-21-90 32,474.80 62,801.00 4 149.70 b t -V 4 12-21-90 2 .^-91 66.829.17 153.340,30 7.667.03 s 2-5-91 2-25-91 5,225 00 158.840.50 7,942.03 G 2-26-Sl 1-31-91 29,925.00 190.340.50 9.517.03 . 1 1 . ■ f ' ■at jg.7 4-1-91 h-30-91 15.235.15 2bA.377.50 10.318.8J 1 9 a 8 5-1-91 6-30-91 11.437.53 ~ •’.417.00 10 920 85 A :r ■ c ' ■9 7^1-91 .2-10-92 n ’0^85 - .8 >’.0 •’0 m pSt; •'ifiVr Mm'‘K^O- is-' fe. r^: fe.r.f-' ' ■WM.. . , ■ ' >'.• i!i*-.: M W'w0 V. .• Btrc&5iiiv> -3i h ;■•• I®-" :V' fU feMi? JfiA ^ W' eMtff ^ J Bonestroo Roscne Ancter«k& Associates Enginem A Architects ?5ffr Ac>*^^W »-.»*»n?*^ ■ A-v^==* ML»» »>«’■’ . ■^lly v-^*^* ■ * fv -»e? > ^ ’*>0 *«■ ? * GpAlir' A ^fXW k |t>*L .«'Sr »r' ■'*• A « *f A»v . >«k:K4 'yyr -m? C %«A|4*Clt M V^ « «♦« H VlK*ute * tjutr^arm •* inM*f t ^ *-»^<trT-^> A. •lW|i*-^:w ‘f V»*»'••41* vtbruaiyd, 1992 "//? of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, V 0/^ **t iM* Attn: Ivis. Jeanne Mabusih Re:F ie No. 13%3 Slom Water Management Dear Jeanne, We have received quotes from thise firms for completing the to^xigraphic mapping in the northern area of the City (11 sections). The foll'^wmg is a summary of the quotes received: Topograplik Mapping Ground Omtro) Aerial Photography Total U\)myu 539,465.(X) 3,800.00 NC. Markhurd $41,185.00 4,6tX).00 __8 50.00 Manjigz $58,7i5.00 N.C __iLQ. $43,265 $46,635.00 $58.7i5.00 We have worked with all of the firms on projects m the pait. We have included a copy of work performed by Markhurd and Honzons. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONEiSTROO, ROSFN’E, ANT>ERLIK & \Sl 51ATPS, INC. Gtenn R. Cook GRC:d 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota S5113 • 612 636 4600 ____________ ____________________________________________ HORUmS. IMJ» IrrM HippiM l^r«ft‘<»f«M»n.(U \*A * • w - *«?vw> :• ^ ^ , 3’ju : »v SC 3'>4 ^05 > M3 0C?*C \ V e 3" C^' S»v'’S Oous ^ • 6^^ S?w# C c:« 0^ MN 5534.1 V,, w • >■ r,'i • (ft*# W'-' p-\ •'." r I ; -■ vi-i'V. ;■• ■■ • % :j ^t'r fB#' l-ii S; If' ft;:' January 29. 1992 .•si?'^ Mr. Glezm Cuok Bonestroo, Roaene. AndertiK k Assoc. 2335 West Hi^war 36 St. Paul. MN 55113 RE: HE-1Z30 Dear Mr. Cook: Referenco is made to your ) ter of January 2, 1^92 and our recent telephone conversations. Accordiagly. we are pleased to fumish our fwoposal for aenal survey services fo» the City of Orono, MN. [)etails of our proposal are des<-ribe<l below. PROJECT AREA The areas coT«red by this proposal are shown on the attached map wtth the exception of the City of Long Lake. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY W« will obtain new aerial photography this spring as soon as weather and ground conditions permit. This photography will be obtained with a precision mapping camera suitable for preparing the topographic mappmg described below. Delivery will consist of one set of 9" x 9" contact prints. GI JND CONTROL Horizons, Inc. will furnish the ground control necessary for controlling the topogfraphic maipping. The vertical datum will be based on L'.S.G.S. elevations and hori-:ontal control based on Hennepin County coordinate system or Minnesota State plane coordinate system as determined by you. DIGITAL TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING 1" 100' We will furnish the maps at a scale of 1" = 100' showing contours at two foot intervals. In addition to contours, the maps will include spot elevations, roads, buildings, main driveways, railroads, major fences, drainage, shorelines, swamps and tree outlines to the extent these features are visible on the photography. If areas are obscured, the contours will be dashed to indicate tbev are appro'ximate. Delivery will c^^nsist of computer drafted mylars in one-quarter section format. m . •.(PkMse reply lot'ie MmnelonKd oium\f .J ';i. Ai-W~m iis;«K-/.' »r ^plli kfar* Glena Cook Jaauary 29, 1992 Page 2 tr* ••m-.v if' li®' ■W We will yi«r> deliver the digital mapping on diskettes in ,\n Autoi ad .Vawmg File or DXF (Autocad) File Format to be determined bv vou. Pl*-ase discuss deliver\’ format with Ms. Lisa Seaman (l-800~b5S-3613>. If deliver%- is desired in another software format, *e reserve the right :o review our prices. fiii MAP FEATURES A CONTENT # 1* - 100* scale LAND USE FACmriES NATURAL FEATURES .V Parks (li'^ewaBts, fences, tre^s) GoU Courses Boundaries Cenmteries Boundaries Mobile Hoase Park Boundaries tno individual mobile homes) Miaei^Quarry E »i “ 'sries Annotation on all .^oove Trees Rivers Drams Lakes Si pomis Swamps STRUCTURES TOPOGRAPHIC MATURES ■I ■'it.: ;;. •>.■,<■,•?§*■ •tr m Roads, Urban (face of curb) Roads, Rural (edge of pavement) Trails (well defined) Railroads Buildings Ehnveways Alleys Culverts Walls Fmices (including residential property fences) Bridges Pipelines Dam Structures Large Signs 2’ Contour Intervals (normal) Spot elevations Depression Tic)is Grid ticks or grids Field control points -J’-r m iiI?" ? 1 ' r"'''’' #*'■SI M \ , ■ :'l' -•■ %. j,- ■ M Ef k'§r fi'M, 'f»‘ ill- >P:.. ,PI\^ 'B, &■ !.»J?. >•'•?. '‘':*S V. ' Mr. C ’ •‘tm Cook immuMr\ ^9. 1992 Pttf e 3 DATABASE FILE DEU^'ERY This data bate file deliverv i» bas#*d on the foil*' * parameters: 1. The data psrovided will operate on IBM Compatible hardware or rquivalfnt. 2. TTie Disk Operating System will be MS DOS '> 1.3. V 4. 5. 3. The media for data tranafer will be either Sb' 1.2 MB floppv issii ?r lb" 1.5 MB micro disk. 4. Simple title bk>cks will be sho * n if requested (to Incluile legend proper t an'! client name, map scale, contour interval and nsirth arrow (please spiecifv anv special title block format needs). 7. Symbols will be represented as Blocks in th«» lata file. 8. Polylines are standard with AUTOCAD R-ll. 9. The overlap or edge match of the dat < files on a nmltiple sheet delivery project will duplicate the hard copy sheets delivered please specify exceptions prior to project start). Any oon-standard data base file leliverv other than the above standard deliver\- can be provided at the discretion and approval of Horizons, Inc., prior to project begizming at an additional agreed upon cost. MAP USAGE, ACCURACY & LIABILITY Except where the ground mav be obscured, map accuracy will comply with National Map Accuracy Standards. &nefly, these state that 90% of all well d'»fined features shall be correct within 1/30 inch and 90% of elevations correct within 12 contour intervaL If areas are obscured, con,.ours will be dashed to indicate they are approximate Spot elevations, if any, within these obscured areas will also be approximate. This map and/or database has been designed to meet National Map Accuracy Standanls at its original scale of I" - 100' and contour interval of 2'. When the scale of the map is reduced or enlarged either photographically or digitally the horizc.ital and vertical accuracy is no better than the national standard map accuracy for the scale and contour interval the original maps where intended. Map accuracy is e’so related directly to and no better than the accuracy of the horizontal and vertical control. It is the responsibility of the map user not only to field verify the accuracy of the map information but also to ascertain whether or not the map scale, contour interval and accuracy are satisfactory for w.hatever the purpose the map is to be used. Horizons, Inc.'s liability for any inaccuracies in this map shall be limited to the correction of any such inaccuracies found due to the photogram metru process, and shall not exceed the contract value of the map. mmMM...: !?«%■ • ■- U4'--^' #■ si?-''- if^:#v; te?® :i•A*'--;.,.' &k- Ifek I Hi'' -sij*>■ \‘ * ' *-.i . ;.:^ ;vVk ' |-t&' : M - r--k mr^- &s ' 1;:.--st'fik GktSD Cook laimarf 2^. 19^2 Page 4 PERFORMANCE SC:HEDULE We will obtain the aenal photography this sfa^ng as soon as *eath*»r tnd fc.ri^un i conditions permit. We estimate the mylar plots of the mapping data can begin to t>e delivered *ithir 40 days after suitable photography is obtained and <:ompleted tvithin dO days. Delirery of the digital map database on diskettes shall follow within 14 davs after the mylar plots. PAYMENT Oiar charge for the services des<~nbed above will be as follows; 1, Digital Topographic Mapping d" - 100*' $30,4bS.00 2. Ground Control S ,5.800.00 Payment of Ota* invoice will be due Withn 30 davs after invou ing. We aiqreciate the opportunity to furnish this proposal and loos forward to being uf gill lii I We would apjweciate vour purchase order nd/or signing ,tnd returning the attached cqpy of this proposal, whi-h will serve as our contract and notice to proceed. If you have anv fui'ther questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. ctfully Bubmitteu, izoesOnc^ ZL- Daryl D. Sather Midwest Division Operations Man.%ger DDS/bab^l8/l8 Enclosures PROPOSAL ACCEPTED FOR CITY OF ORONO BY; Signature_________________________________________ Title______________________________________________ Date ______ ■ Items Accepted l{o :'v^ :;l^‘ -*■ '-C^'..'V^'' m R::c^.:.--.Ip^' ^■:;-^.’v (iiff •■'iv t- 'i ]■■' im y^->. \'’ L f 'R y- i > 'M . ■<4<‘'^ ,i'>^:m V ' 'Vvgv-#5% rJ -Aoo n eV •i.-r a»sse Mm^. F .m. ,., a cr # »y "k. p n t * % • S ' r f r-- J ui- V » ••t*•• ’V* I V Lj:^ / '■^- r < I i ^ ^ -1^,#»i« r li <v * »< «•• <f N rv^' C^C3 f ^ / r t ^- c±- r--■"►v . •<i«f > i ! 1 ' \ nr ~j ■/ f o IJ__ J r t-Lur' t«r i ^ 1 * / »« - » fe If \ n'*\V r v»\S ^■-. ..., , j-'^ <>-#/ 1 I, -T /» ^ i ..'\n f i %/ ‘ r> . /?- •41.1 •vtMiC » 4J%t PN /^-(^ \ NOKTU :~'^r^n"A:^r::s;z:-----y. c: _ , f tCMj. m r^* NEW HOPE. MINNESOTA It tV<^/ mmtesLCOIIP*OflATlOM St I»mA. IIN SS107 (•ix)itinz7 Fsm (t13) 2S1-07S1 m January 31t 1992 BorNVStroot Ro»«ne» Anderlik i Associates 233S West Highway 36 St. Paul, riN 55113 Attm Glenn R. Cook R»*Topographic Popping City of Orono, MN Dear Mr. Cooks nartinek Corporation is pl«»ased to submit our proposal for the referenced **ork in accordance with the specification* delineated in your letter dated January 2. 1*?92. iJs!; ■% 1. Scope of Services A. Obtain black 6 white stereoscopic aerial photography of the project area as delineated on a map furnished to us. The area covers appro .mately 720o acres. One set of 9” X 9” aerial contact prii ts will be delivered. B. te' Set photo targets prior to the aerial photography and obtain horizontal and/or vertical values for these tar^’t points. The horizontal d*.tum will be eitt.'er the Hennepin r unty Coordinate System or Minnesota State Plan* Coordinates, whichever is preferred. The vertical datum will be NGV/D 1929. 1^1-C. Genera-e an analytical aerial triangulation solution to produce supplementary control for mapping. The field surveyed photo target points will be the basis for this solution. i*.-- D. Lit.-- Produce planimetric/topographic mapping at a scale of A** - lOO' with contours at 2' intervals. All planinetric features suitable for plotting at 1" * lOO’ and visible on the photography will be compiled. Hardcopy map sheets in 1/*^ section sneet format on reproducible mylar along with digital f*les in AutoCAD Release 11 -format will be delivered. It appears that 47 sheets are needed to cover the area. All mapping will conform to National Mapping Accuracy Standards. ■«... DigRai Riologrammatry • Sun/aylng • Raprographlcs An Equal Oppo^unity Employ«r m, :fc-V-'' T^‘ •if' k'ir' . V t/'. r ■| ^•;-r . I?: mf..:- ,r:^' ■■ . :• r ■■ ^^7- ■i:-" : ■ s; :•...,. ^ .>■; ;;■' . -. •: ■;./ 'I Vf::. . ' •,vv t ' K'i. ■ f . ^ 1:7'^I". II. Period of Perfomwince A. Aerial photography mil be obtained during the Springf 1*?P2. flying season (Apr il 1 May 1>- D. Targeting will be done just prior to obtaining the aerial photography. However, field surveying for obtainirHg control on the photo target points c an oe started iiMnediately> if desired. C. Analytical triangulaticn will be completed withir <£) Meeks following completion of the aerial pfiotography or completion of the field surveying, •whichever is later. two Assuming a starting date for the actu.?l mapping of June 1. 199H. all *ip sheets and digital files will be delivered on or before September lb. 199S. 111. Compensation Ckir lump sum price for the work, excluding the targeting and field surveying, will be Fifty—Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifte^+n Dollars (*50.715.00). Our lump sum price for the targeting and field surveying Mork Mill be Twenty Thousand Seven Hundred DoMars (*a0,700.00). Invoices payable within thirty (30) days will be submitted at the end of each month for the percentage of the work completed. A progress report will be submitted to verify the percentage amount, if requested. We appreciate this opportunity to offer our services to you and the City of Orono. If you have any questions, or require any further information, please contact the undersigned at 612-291 1127. Sincerely, MARTINEZ CORPORATION Berald V. Erickson Vice President. Photngrammet-ic Production L&Lk M . f.:-' T- i MMKHURD ,.h; Sj|r». ovIM.f N. .'►• • N-* -■.'.^ •'■'•■'I ' • ‘P'S • »'‘>v» V. *.'■ s. ••» ^s:»4 kO»»0«TU!«^> »IX,«?fB TO ;4; f n : i, ' *f>.^ f. • «» . ■*. ' ' * "■ I.B.A m n- C.'r JiV'- ' .,.i ■. I'-' f. ^;'V ^ .:- -".i' :^. ;'^. Y: ■’■•• • E7090 January 30, 1992 Hr. Gl«nn R. CookBonostroo Rosone An^’arlik & Assoc. 2335 !!••'»: Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 0aar Hr. Cook: 1» aiade to your 1 .ter of J'»nuary 21, 1992, and to our ralatad telephone conversation.. Accordingly, we Dloasod to furnish our prrposal or aerial survey ^ • A_ _ _ ^ ^_ ^ eaik.T-Vic6 .VICOS for the City of Orcno, MN. IXitaili of our proposal are descri’^ed below. Our uiMlorstanding of the area is as indicated on the map attachod to your January 21 letter. A photo copy of that IMP is or-ilosed. The area contains approximately 12 OO^‘o ailtoS less the town of Long La>e. Please examine tSos<' Units carefully, and unless changes are indicated on tJ.e prints returnoa with the acceptance copy of this proposal, wo will unaerstand the limits are correct. Asrial Photography will use existing aerial photography obtained at a scale of approximately 1** = 850'. This photography was flown in April, 1989, with a precision mapping camera and is suit^le for preparing the maps descrioed below. Lap content will be as of that date. We are also offering a pri's for new Spring 1992 photography covering the mapping area only. I^round Control forlie wi.ll provide all necetsary ground control topographic napping through a subcontract witn a local survey fiin. Horizont.*-. ar.d vertical control will be based on datums to be defined by the city. During the course of our survey, we will establish semi"*pemanent type stations for future reference. These points will be properly referenced, described and L,hown cn the naps ^at we furnish, if they fall within the mapping 4 I 11 K'* ^i; 1 IS-mi’P.''y-V^:» KvtS?‘ •■ c?-O S;f >f-f,< %t-: pM:.; a ;3»vp*; :;5-i iif< ijfi' Mf B-ii Si: S': iirasp Iteg" iSiSi Jilt ,.^i W- ^iS:: te '-■ tefc •bKft.'tiSi-S-i- mm Fl^te ir •S/ l» pms, ,,y ft" 'ft,. lift-Mm.»is?" 4itfssas L l 'limi'ts. Otherwise, description information only will be furnished for your use. Aerotriangulation The aerial. photography and ground contr will be used to perform fully analytical aerotrianoulation to establish both horizontal and vertical control described above 8U1 lemental^PPcontrol for orienting individual photogrammetric models Oiapositives will be prepared, and pass point pugging will be accomplished on our Kem PMG-2. Neasxirements will be accoB»lished on our Kern OSR analytical plotters. The results will be processed on our VAX computer using the PAT-B-S adjustment program. Topographic Mapping We will digitally collect planimetric and Digital Terrain Modeling (DTM) data for a designed scale of 1” « 100' showing 2-foot contour interval. The attached ievel/layer list itemizes the features which, to the extent they are visible on the photography, will be collected. The topographic mapping will be deliv-^red as reproducible positives made from our digital files. Sheets can be laid out to cover 1/4-section areas with a small overlap between sheets. The sheet format will have a neat area of ?7** X 27" with am overall size of 32" x 36". There will Lc a total of 48 sheets in 1/4-section format. We can, of course, deliver in other sheet formats and are open to negotiations for any format you desire. Delivery AutoCAD Delivery will consist of (5-1/4") diskettes in AutoCAD format, version with specific requirements, we will in title and border information. high density floppy 11. Unless furnished use our own judgment Map Accuracy ajid Liability By accepting this proposal, you agree the work described herein will meet your intended purpose. The use of this map for a purpose other than that which is originally designed may render the map unreliable. Except where the ground may be obscured, map accuracy will comply with National Map Accuracy Standards. Briefly, these state that 90% of all well defined features shall be correct within 1/30 inch, and 90% of all elevations correct within 1/2-contour interval. If areas are obscured, contours will be dashed to indicate they are i n tn'T>«■•' '■^ v : 7;/.. '-' 7 /..;-,'.Jlf7;%- ■^'■I;'.-. . 2 i ■.•‘i 7>»i !>'’• .• '.V- mm'rn-'i ’> i‘^Vi|';;j4’'*‘' “wl? It, .‘rrw .*t'i. ■■5fe fSW' Th« accuracy standards should b« applied y to the basic scale and contour interval I” « 100' andapproxisate. only to the —w— - -2~foot C.I. for which thp maps were designed. MMOCBURD's liability, in the production or use ofs^:a£'Krisa:€3T”i" '..t? nnp#. Ho representations or warrzuities are made other than tMse stated herein. Perfoxaancse Schedule B^ause KJJWHUIU) has existing photo coverage, we ^an^g^ work innediately. We propose a •k: ‘ ^ ““SSduirKiSSiig 30 wrCing days af^er notice to proceed and extending for 60 wrking days. If schedule is unaoceptable, we are open to negotiating ••^Isfactory delivery schedule. If the new option is chosen, then the delivery schedule aft a mutually photography will begin •ter the imagery is obtained. Cost Fee Schedule Our charge for the services described above follows: will be as 1. Ground control 2. Topographic mapping 3. Aerial photography, option Payment: Terms and conditions $4,600.00 $41,185.00 $850.00 /-* W. Shipments other than First Class Mail will be invoiced at cost plus 10% and, therefore, be in addition to our proposed fee. tfa will submit monthly invoices for the perce.itage of the IJSriJ aS-^SSSd. Te^ of payoent will b. net due 30 day. from the date of invoice, and will be subject to a 1.5% aexvice charge on balance each month thereafter. 9k i>aMp f ;V r ^ i ^ \I\' ':?«»':... CsS^- fcffe^m* ^4?.ss.:% '■ ;- / I 1%:^, .. ,i^:; .' -". .,.1. pPvJip 'Silt'"'-l«f-t -it'iSt V V- -•psi .4' -■ ■ ■ Ip'#; ^ P , SiS;- ■ ii®# • •i' /.V iP.' -1<. . . v*=^ "■”Wi^.-: * US* iupr«ciate the opportunity of furnishing this proposal aiMl l0(A fozvard to bein^ of service. Receipt of your PMCCheee order based on this proposal or your signature on the encloeed acceptance copy will serve as our contract and notice to proceed. Th2mk you. Very truly yours, Kenneth W. McClanahan Technical Representative :»• Proposal accepted for Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & AMociates by: Signature, Title_ _ Pate Item accepted. •3 ■ . 1 u .P;'. '% ■« 'I I ‘C:,................r.;- -..a-.-.^-...r-rr.--;'tr^ |i •ittUMBSSS’ r ’M if '.V iSi-Isa- Dtifinl^ion Jjl3C calflg ML OLL 100 Grapl&ic 1 2 4 5 0 7 10 11 12 13 14 10 10 rmd r«<l cyan cyan cyan sag mgbrown 1 1 1 0 0 6 X X brown yallow 1 1 2 1 1 whita wbita 1 0 1» 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 27 wnx^ yallow imita 0 0 rila (GDF) cell pattacn daacriptiflji Horizontal control point Vertical control point X Drain or shoreline Swaap outline Swaap syabol Road/Street Road/street (under Driveway Trail (single line) Sidewalk (public) Bridge X X construction) 20 29 31 32 33 34 35 35 37 30 wnzise yallow yallow whita white whita whita whita whita whita 0 0 0 0 0 0 £>xaewa Bridge Railroad tracks Railroad crossing Airport runway Radio, TV towers Electric transmission i Utility pole (generic) Building Building (under construction) Slab or ruins Wall Billboard Culvert PoolGolf course features Unidentified object (line) Tank signs tower cyan brown 2 2 0 0 0 0 VJ^WWIi brown —illowyall< blue graan graan iwli4 ¥m 1 1 0 7 0 0 0 X X White rad 39 52 rad blue 53 54 rad gray rad 1 1 2 1 1 1 0 4 5 3 2 Tank Fence (major) Woods outline tmita • aW 4 A ow WilX White white 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Woods wui-xxovs Single tree Pipeline Under construction outline Shoulder Guard rail X X Guard rail Index contour Intermediate contour Index depression contour Intermediate depression cor Snot elevation A blank space indicates a line feature. This is a complete listing of features that we 1««100'. We request that you evaluate this list as shown, will meat yo\ir needs. - - - - -XI— charge additional fees for any features you may wish to add. Index depression Intermediate depi Spot elevation Approximate area Grid ticks Title blocks r wxxx youx netsua* MARKHORD reserves the right to cha alterations or additional features features that we are prepared to evaluate this list and determine •vV ■‘■"L .v';; .t33* id :t3 I I dn ;r<rinvAL • 2 ./ i ifHOTKWAfntcTRrC MtTH025 r«JCK rawHS t^N ;n app:;..i«»3o NE 1/4. SECTION 11 TU8N.. R23W CITv OF MEDINA Wl CQCKOINATf CX'"H ZOtik U>0 “J. w ro«T iNrtnv^'i.;* i^TCM Ki.vN St A Lr vr:. HENNEPIN COUNT'^, MINNESOTA r.>i •P I ~M ifirnrik;. - z nzr 5E 1/4, SECTION 1 TllSN, R23W r*?:c kthou"* r*tOM TMctM :u ap«:l.i«»3'. CITv OF MEDINA i:*!SP«*ff COCTH Z0f4.NP3 ’".I HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA it **i Sf A Lr.VT.: .••• .-• i 4 i ■J. n ■■a <va mrife ■ "','T-■li'T.iwir.'/Or-c V /ARon Itoorsor City Adainistrator ^ John R. Gerhardaon» Public Works Director February 19, 1992 Adopt a Street, Park or Highway % m'C ]^et fall I was approached by a eeaber of the staff of the Orcno S^iool to review the feasibility of a progran sinilar to the Adopt a ■i^way program sponsored by Mn/DOT and Hennepin County. Most recently you and I attended a luncheon with the Tamarack Senior Citisen groups at the Church of St. George in Long LaVe to discuss with then any coienmity project that they could help with. X have attached a copy of the guidelines used by Mn/DOT for review. assist the City in roadside and park cleanup and other projects giie prograa would allow volunteer groups, organizations or residents that say develop such as flower gardens, tree planting, etc. 1 would recoBusend that the City offer this same type of program for city streets, parks and city buildings and grounds m.m ST mM immw ' y.mm ^ mW' mms^* ' ■'l' -V ... i©k, a;/- V 0SX ' ' ifeasar: ■ AV A*' . ^ #5^ '1 : »•, • > s ? s »3 5-Ji IkI-I Z»MV ^ a E J1 2 i? = ;y ill= 2s ^i=. ^2f Jc O' ZS 5 I '-n < yi'^i < f I -- S’ »■^ • t 2^-5w r < IT iJrm _ / > VIv« 3- -4 35 2f 3Z5 a ^ 1 rc S- - / Q s n c Vs0 ii^S O * I ir 6i 5 V’ 5 ■H* r» c; jr' . ZS.' °it? si ^rzi r 2 ^ ^ V4 ^- > W ^ ^ VI -• C i r-ry I ^ z a ? 2 - y f j ' — 3 •*“ 3 i-'35 - f $VI Z ii J3; ^ < ? f-v f ^?, f ? V',:.'‘>rf-^r^;?;v# lw_^v »‘,f^ ?* S=T /■ *. \ . ^ %* ' 'i M ^ % % ^ V % M I'-'.•• •r ^ •m ^ L t'* H - f • * * — • • _ *• •• • '—— aL^ # t / £ 3 X V < V M- :5. t: •' V 5 5 MW F“ r ^5 Cl, •e 1 7^ Z 7 2 ^ \- £ c 3 r 5 2 /* £ V < V* i 7> « 3 C. y* «*• #- / 2 3sr & 7 r « J' X 3 — X ^ i. * ':^2.5 : ^ i> ^ _ 5t Z 3 ^ i’ 1 s h * 3: 3 l:f ? 2| 1 =- ,1 C- «r =f VTS J — yi ^ j ^z€l 7> |- t •Wb “* *» i jr -1 ^ ^ 3: « ■**— "* w », ■~' — 3 3: ■ ^J X- _ r VI X ^ r^ Z *• X ^ ir l£ £ 3 ± “t z £ X V d’ 3 fV z 5T 5 i?5 fv 3 ^ ./f cfj a / 3 i 3 S s X / "x X £ 2 rv r j 3C r~ f *. ^4> * z z _ ^ ji > jr 2 2 = ^v 1 x:3 3 3? 2 3 4 yi X — 7 ^Zt< yi rv 2 3 5^ r 2 I V c tv V 3 I.'/« £. / c^ ,<►£r — V 3^ wv c Z =: < i cL -J ^ 2 ^ W ^- r X £ W ^ X Mk. •S X :w ? 5 Q ? I o *>y VI “«w O "a *>j 1 •1 S’ » I A:*V‘:' aSv- r\‘4 I o ^ >. » \ ■:^- o ^ :: /• & |- flft « y:;*f «>' * ..V.' y. i a, a o • . 3*^0 t r I i * SL S' i*• ■ I ? r^j »f *' 1^ flweiS#'-;■'’ ^ ■ ■■ Hff JiiMi|-|' fe|.I i ^ s- H f'!’X'. fj-J ? *• . ’ * K_1 . ^ o j;' •-; -1 ? -s ."S 2. *»A ,, l,|f5. J 3* > i mm^I — »t|-| I ■• A- ■ IrlMiii'-*^ i » _ ..... .A. •S* tiv-**')-- • VJ?*-'?' •■* . ,.. -,1, V*'••-«•* •l«- ,r» «».*.JV*-W*'<«I Mwa •»v-_»- ^ — •. .• ■ .•»• • •" »-y Wt - ^ ■ « • * i^ 8, a^iiu ^ c a g»-2 g •y ? - p < 'tci O •r. ■<>■■ it. §‘11 ri' \ ' ^ *'y TT- ‘ iS?' ffirass'- rj Minnesotii Dt'j.kjrtment o^ Trau<^H)rtiitwn mt. pr 2 51?"' Adc^t-a-Highway Terms and Conditions ■ fe ■ X. The group agrees to pick up litter on a segment oi state highway seltvted in consultation with the Minnesiiia Pepar tmen*Transportation's (Mn/DOT) local t>tfice. Rtvommencied lenpin is two miles AtVln/LX^T s (fisoetioii, certain high%vays may not be eligible. 2. The gtiMtp shall review the safety training materials beton each pickup to alert participants to the hazard'' and precautiora of working on a hlghwa> right-of• w av. 3» The group shall pick up litter during daylight hours onK Pickup> may not be allow ed at certain times such as on or holidays. 4. The group shall provide adequate supervisum to participants eighteen years ot age or younger Unlc*ss spcHrifkally I, chikiren eleven or younger shall not participate WcMk shall be limited to the area betw-een the outer shoulders and the nght-ot-wav boundary'. Participants shall not pick up Utter in the median unless specifically permitted by Mn / Dt) F. Work may not be done on the road way itself. The group riuiH arrange litter pickup date(s) in .nivance with the maintenance engineer or hts/‘her designee in the - appropriate Mn/DOT office. Tlie group shall obt.on their supplies during regular business hours. 7* The group shall place filled trashbags on the shoulder slope close to the ditch bottom. Mn/DOT will arrange to pick up the bags. Crcmps are eiwouraged to recycle appn^pnate materials for their own benefit B. Borrowed or unused supplies shall be returned to the .Mn/DOT office within one week. k The Minnesota Department of Transportation agrees to: 1. Provide high visibility vests, trashbags, safety training materials and temporary ’ traffic warning signs when necessary as determined by Mn/DOT. P:;. v: 2. Arrange to remove fiUed trashbags from the adopted highway !¥a 1'^' ' Arrange to remove large, heavy or hazardous material fn>m the adopted highway I Coordinate pubUdty with the group to soUcit local medi.i coverage Erect a highway sign or otherwise recognize the group's clean-up efforts. Highway signs shall be erected only for groups that agree to adopt a highway for a minimum of two years. The name on the sign shall be limited to two lines of eighteen to twenty characters (including spaces). Mn/DOT resery'es the right to approve and/or edit names or i % acronyms nr'*1 i A A %4 I . ••j ■S '7 '-* ' • /..v-. , ■ . '■ ■V -..i*'' '; /’.f- - ♦ rn-m f(Q|^ Minnesota Department of Vans^vrtation - i- ■!?:. ■ii-v' 'i<dttck ijOi) Adopt-a-Highway Permit di Adfl|>t*a-Highwa)t The group agrees to pick up Utter at least thav times a \ ear tor a mirumum ot wo vears. , .-t. G Pic|Mi*Highway. Yhe group agrees to ^ck up litter one time only. We ffequcil petflUssion to pick up litter on V’’ ■**' Vrf-.: vO-'i'--.-'’ »»••••, • Mk« « I ibr a total of miles. TbtMuoKSOta Department ot Transportation resen es the ngbt to refuse, cancel or revise lhi.s agreement it in its sole judg-ment nJttlillitfiMVOfthe group or its sign is political c»intro\’ersial or in questionable taste, or if the group is not meeting the terms and oandliiomof^is agreement. By signing thb agreement, the group acknowledges the ha/anlous ruilure of the^work and agrees IbOOBtpiy with the terms and conditions herew *^h tc the s,itisfactior ot the Miimesiita Oepiirtment ot Transportation. Except fc>r the negligent acts of the.State, its agents and employees, the volunteers or their agents shall assume all liability for# md swetite Slate, its agents and employees, harmless trom, any and all claims tor damages, actions ur causes of action Mdidng out of the work to be done herein H»f ^iVMd aU volunteers of the group or other persons while engaged in the performance of anv work or service performed .under this agreement sh^ll not be considered eniployces ot the State, and any and all claim, that mav or might arise under dhe Wjiker'sCompensation Act of MinnesoU cn benalf ot said employee's or other persons ivhile so engaged, and any and all cl'ima made by any third parp/ of the group's v'olunteer*; or other persons while so engagt^f on anv of the work or ber vice* lobe rendered shall in no way be the obligation or msponsibilitv of the State. of group 1*.(please print) Name of group tepresentadve " ' Phme (home)(work) ike, .Name tc appear cm sign ^ ) 1 ------1 ! i ;___• 1 i i ’ }\ _! - dip.'i. .* , %>«cial provisions Area Maintenance Engineer Date ^ ■........................................................................................................................................................................ i i ..i 4 1 3 i .vf f. #1 ■ ■3 rid I *»'ff?,-■^'*'-:S:wg5;??' ■■ Ri«.i.' -- i» ..'!.•__;■ . • _r*.’>;>-:II,V;hp^?te';. .■■rr•^li^ i?: tOs FROH: date : Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator February 19, 1992 %!, %> » SUBJECT: LKCD Lake Access Task Force Meeting The first Sleeting f the Lake Access Task Force will be held at ?:(|0 pal. on tiednesday, March 11 at the Lmcd offices. l plan to p..rticipate on the Task Force. The Council may want to discuss % ich CounciImember(s) would be interested in oarticipating on the Task Force. iis t Sw*> I.h •V,*n: I ’.V m&m m'.w: ifiSte; ^ ■"' *" ‘ y ':V. ^4; I- ' \nw- I: ^iti^ M w~ ........... m '•fe' Mi: A? Hir: 1 #1 1 ! •i 1 4 >1 ♦» ii viS I .1 .. i** * '• w Tot z-.:,: z Iv' •h PF 'pz •■^- ’' ' i’ Z/'i :; • ;; ■•' ■I-'-,;.: V • •'Z'' izl. ■' 'Z' r • •■• •*. . . » . ^ 4»z-z. ,' r(r;' Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator ^O/.. Oates Sobjects Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Plannirq & Zoning Admi8A^±raT4||^ Feoruary 20, 1992 Lake Use Committee/Marina Licenses %0 The next meeting of the Lake Use Committee, which was scheduled for Thursday, February 27th, has been rescheduled to Thursday, March 5th, 7s45 a.ra. in the City Council Chambers, to accommodate schedule conflicts. At the request of Lake Use Committee Chairman Callahan, staff has sent a follow-up letter to marinas whose fees are still outstanding. Since your last update. Windward Marine has paid their license fee for 1992, but is still requesting a reduction ..n the 1991 fee. The issue of enforcement of marina regulations has been discussed with City Attorney Tom Barrett, and he will be prepared to discuss various procedural options at the February 24th meeting if Council desires. To summarize: 1. ’ rv ir>' ' , ! "ii'■■ #1- Pit ■ The licensing regulations. Municipal Code Section 5.42, indicate that a violation occurs when a person engages or participates in a business use without first having obtained a license from the City. That section goes on to give standards which must be met in order for a license to be issued. 2.Section 10.41 defines the land use regulations and standards of the B-2 Lakeshore Business District. 3.Operation of a business use without a license, or being in non-compliance with the standards of the B-2 zoning district both are punishable as misdemeanors. The two options V City has for pursuing such violations is through a crimine violation tag or via a civil complaint. Neither of the above code sections gives the City the authority to "shut down" a marina operation without going through due process, i.e. in a formal complaint we would request the Court to force the business to cease operations and/or comply with our regulations. This would likely be a lengthy and expensive process for both parties. Council should note that issuance of a violation tag, while requiring an appearance before a Judge, generally results in merely a small fine and minor aggravation for the violator. It does not typically accomplish any of the end results for which the City is actually striving. The civil complaint on the other hand, allows the City to request specific actions to occur, is more likely to result in the violator 4 February 20, 1992 Fa9« 2 hiring counsel and incurring significant expenses to fight the issue, and has a greater likelihood that the City's desired end result is accoirplisbed . 4. II?' Oltinately, the City's goal is not to shut down marinas but to have then substantially comply with City regulations. Where historic deficiencies exist, the City must determine whether those deficiencies are acceptable as is, or whether steps should be taken to gradually bring the property/operation into compliance. Inherent in the existing regulations are many standards with which few if any of the existing marinas comply. The only performance standard for which a procedure for gradual compliance currently exists, is the landscaping requirement. Council stay wish to asiend the B-2 standards to forma li2e a structure for requiring gradual upgrades in conformity for issues other than landscaping. Aa noted previously, staff would recommend that the Lake Use Committe review the siarlna licensing and B-2 zoning code sections, and consider whether revisions are necessary to establish procedures for bringing the properties into compliance. This review will also include a review of the historic and current conformity of each of the marinas. The City’s goal should be to establish t e current level of oosf^liance, dfctermining what degree of compliance should he sought, to fonnilate a program for bringing each marina into compliance which is acceptable to the city, and proceed with licensing reflecting this process* The City must be willing to negotiate with the marinas, but also must be prepared to follow through with legal action to force cOMpliance, if the regulation of marinas through licensing is to be effective. ch V* - .:v-. i..: .. C -----•*- -.»fv- /> :'.- V iV •.•;■. - -/ J,^ *■WMm.i't'" TOs PROM: DATBs SUBJECT: //' '/^ ^O. Ron Moorsor City Administrator /V‘ / John B. Gorhardson, Public Works Director February 20, 1992 Entrance Signs Navarre Business District z <■ Pm %g Following the upgrade of County Road 15 from Navarre to Mound, the Citioa of Orono, Spring Park and Mound p’^rt: cipated in the costs to develop a landscaping plan for that area. m Fart of the landscaping plan was the installation of entrance signs at foar locations, two on County Road 15 at the east and west city boondarias and two on County Road 19 just north and south of County Road 15. X have attached draft sketch plans of two alternates that could be OOnsidered and will also present color photographs of an inplacc sign siwilar to what is proposed. Bstiaiate cost for each sign is SI,000 not including landscaping or pensits. If Council approves, we would then discuss with the Navarre Retail Council for their input. y& f -5:-' ■> ;i4i# iSr?’Sft ■i. •Vi'-' ili*» •-V- H f. W- If). spfl. ffie.,*''MW lite' I-;.- ■ d i i. r -I- ■ •U */• •;: .^v v:^'<v #%. i#; w itm*. Kt®? c^-' l®N.. KiS'sJf-' ii&m. .f.'s.-. ;>;t-, ; :• jr ■^^' X' \ «M rt U'-^ pIn.Kfc ■i 1 '■f..W 4s#-„ ,., -W- A*” ^lli» '■•? = P(^’-''V ''- '■'i ■.. . ■ ■WA Ci!:. ' •' |rs. K- Sfv''? ^'4‘iSw ii# .V..'v fi?. 4': •■’■' ■ ** *” • ifP" dW " ■ lif ■■ • m^.iSti||i^ ;4:?iVaf Ki>S: &.iv: fc:,^V ■b "•.r ■.• ;Fj. '•■ 7- , 4 -A'' •'^‘i >■* •'.4„ 3:'^3^' -\mmt • # ••f?v,:, Jp.-: . QP licshsss for council approval roit HBETING OP February 24. 1°°:^ ;s V Ro lincenses ^45 % 4 \ V' • . • ••• 4 A J tjim R:‘f ■•ii- A ♦% ■I*' ■• ■*j.'• • •' -»>r. * -# { "V#- «V4j 02/11/92 M Ct MKEOOt 124 CMP • NAME DPT 471M9090 474SS333t 471t«0t71 475443192 472503991 499529029 475919721 491921011 472529007 499701999 507595424 499999592 499420932 499097994 474997912 475390151 477500999 475444249 477493977 471599993 477947279 475904753 504290307 472500574 121292417 477700023 334509291 477029779 499909535 479793251 470700901 499949107 475392993 473749173 470599529 499929194 475599177 297490042 472593051 474993299 470704904 475505292 499929499 500403192 477991539 ANDCffSOM. BtUCC L ■OeZlEN, sue A •OSM4. JAMIC L MIIIKHAUS. JOHN F CHCSWICK. GARY B CORNICK. JAMES L DCMKKJSKK JAY C ENGLISH lil. IRVlira ERICKSON^ KURT R FISCMENltM. DAN T FRIT2LCR. JOHN M OAFFRON. MICHAEL ttRHAtOSON^ JOHN 9KMAN, OAVtD J ORC^Y. JAMES 0 DOROTHY M STEVEN C CAROL J CAROLE BRADLEY P RICKY D JANICE M CHARLOTTE THOMAS M P R HALLIN. HANSEN. HANSINQ HASCMAN JOHNSON KARNITZ KENNEN. KNUTSON KUEHN mBUStH. JEANNE A MOORSE. RONALD J MOROWCZVNSKI. JAMES NELSON. DAVID D OtERAZdNER. SCOTT Q OBRIEN. RANDY L OMAN. LYLE E PALPKR, GREGORY A OUAST, LMYNE A RATHBUN, BARRY J SCHOENHOfF, JOHN B SKREEN. DALE S STEFFeAhAGEN, RONALD SULLIVAN. STEPHEN X THOMTON. MARK R TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F TOPCZYK, MARK W VANG. BRUCE L VEE. lINDA S WALTERS. LINDA Q WECKMAN. STEPHEN J 31 31 12 42 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 33 42 35 4 2 12 42 31 12 31 31 31 15 15 33 12 31 35 4?■t. 92 33 42 92 92 31 42 93 31 31 31 31 33 12 15 33 YTD GROSS 6912 3929 2311 6242 6592 6695 4919 6788 5880 7230 6471 5704 8096 518 5319 4915 4252 2221 3371 6371 946 1140 3929 8395 7146 8553 6199 795 4497 4541 5709 3999 5591 4591 113 4252 4917 7539 5777 6347 5962 4915 3536 4064 4102 19 91 26 28 00 55 1127 61 47 12 83 30 86 49 93 29 74 15 39 57 04 89 35 73 60 61 07 62 74 81 61 06 1' 30 29 12 24 24 93 38 94 81 76 16 X X. CURRENT GROSS 76 52 41 56 00 64 18 04 02 69 26 12 28 1935 98’ 575 1568 1648 2148 1128 69 1866 91 1517 90 1774 1599 1434 1885 109 1298 1235 1013 21 545 58 839 1754 165 243 987 2109 1795 2039 1596 199 1199 1054 1434 948 1329 1054 113 1013 1235 1984 1426 1854 1454 1235 888 1145 1030 36 18 49 02 51 61 85 40 94 96 07 J2 02 90 76 33 30 21 29 56 49 42 24 28 73 29 90 56.273 99 ^45 % m om ma ;■ 'i;*> O•a r.':C :ii 4 ■' * ■■’"'C ’ Urn ifo i- •■* , ■^[’ .■ vy ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■}'i' 'iW: WMi'-r.Hmmm *i‘- mmw ■i:. >' . -' sef;'■ ■ ' *riKii" |gfls> lik, mmi<mM PI'#Si#?; W-^J ■ rw.^. W0' ■ ■ t ■ sfe"'-'#. • ^ » » » 0•n 01 :-':-JF'- ft o K» oo oc 3 m 5 9 m m » m a 10 Ul O o in 10o » » » » » o «0 10o o 10 <0o » » m » ooooo 1010101010 101001010ooooo oc ooo o 0 0oo» 0 o 0 0 o fsj di o 0 0o o » V o 0 0o o Xm o o fsi o Ni o•s>o 04 ooooo K) K4«SI N» ^ o o N» o KJ ID fl4 «> ««D«0<O K> fSJ fSi N# rsi ID PJ m Kl « Kl W Ki ►- «• 8r* 8 •M > f C 3D 00 > C o -< > jr 8|S|| :d0idp :d0» 00 m X •-4 "D •M4 8 3t 8 8 oo "D 'D f0 00 0^ 0^ 00 <0(010 (/M/I *10 rmm n o 3 M D 8 ?2J on l»«<ar ar (0 O X m O »-<o-<-< 01 o •M 2 2 X 3: ><0>> 40 X < 00 O ti (0 m K3D>f0O '■2*88 S Sc f0 3D Xm >o ai C <0 00m 00 Cl X > 2 -0 00 00 I#;- Miii^ o N» 8 8 O > «9 K4 ISMSI UtitJ wu»O 04 '*4(0 40 CD OO w w ChM0 0k 0i»Dk 0 40 040 GPI ^ 01 ■*4 OO «» ^ (010 0#04 OO 1010 N>KJ C4 0I Jkl0 DM0 1010 OO 0k ^ SS «€D S<^§§«ii»O »— 01 OKU <C lO o o CO »S> fs^ 0O0J OO CJ CJ U> 4k O <010 40 •*4 o o OO o» •• »••»»m •••• CD >>r-*01 A r- >*01 f* O 0-'3D X »i4 1-4 409f0o-4rO> 0>*D X Di 0 Q 30 2 p m >>f *0 -4 m X r*o(r»-4 Q O o 3D X <0 >►-< X O 9D »-4 00 -4 *n 00 > X oHD o » 1-4 § O O o o O o NIKI ID IS# Kl o o 10 o p^•—4-4—4-*I/IUIUI10U4 ►-O H-O f 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 ( I 1 1 1 1 o 0k M 0»0k 0k^0k »0b 0k 0»m>0k Q ID K4 ID CD »D UKDCJCJCD CD CD 04 K>C (0 10 ISJ CD 40 40000 0»IS#U>CD M 40 O 04 10 PS4 CD 40 40 ADHD CJ K»O CD -c 1 ••1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1o4-»-►►-►-»M 04 0k J4 ^ 0H O 4—to Kl X 4D #14 IS4 fSJ Kl 0k •»«4«»oiDi 40 IS#0k O 40 40 40 40 40 ID i40D<00 40 lO •—lO•f t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 4 1 P»CD 40 (*»CD 0k OOOOO 4-»CD o 0k 4-4 *»D D-D-4-p^Nl ooooo '•D o fSJ :x < o o 00 (O »-4 <0 0 Kl 1 Kl I 4D Nl C0 •D > »m »»4 »»»»•!£2 o »m »»»»14 »»»m »»»»»»»»»•O 1 1 1 1 I 4 1 1 1 1 moOnonooooo■ / Ot X X X 3C X 2 DI CD C/l (O 1/)c/l C/l c/>1/1 (/) y 'X -1'1 rt.:^sv W[ ■ ■l»' O U9 Kl » » » » oo uiyi » » » » oooo v/< ^ ’*«i vf» OOOO v/l vT vff v/» u» ^ IKJ «NJ fV ^ •xa fs> Kl ooooo u« gR v/l ^ vJ** oo m mmt <» OOOOO gn 4^ v/l i/I UK fSJKfKj N; V.#^ V/ l>» «/* Clii a* <5> C^ (3 O Uf* 4/ <o «0 M t . i.,*., ■ .1# ss jsi.,:M : feef»vii^V'Jf«.;,:";Ai;V«' 'WV '■ n -' -■■■%: . i V-?- r V* ■ P. * :» •its :rm Z. "■< .’v '“:Vr-fV" . ■'; ’x ■• , ■ .••• ,X '- r'-r* 01 - /> 01 f sfii- iS»»" 'i... “ K»M OOOO KJK>K»K> OOOO K»KO OOOOO K* K-J K> 1^. J ooooo KJ KOKON> N> o Ks> K>K»K»K#K^KJKIKI t0 « 40 « • fvj 40 40 40 «D «0 KjfsjK^KIKI 40 ► J OKiyi^M «i4#OMO W Nl «» un«» «K »>* «» i/« Hk K. j O 4^N,> W U> 04 cn o»o «•«• ^ U*» *x4 Kxj 0> 4/4 cn OR c»OO IS»00 «»OOON> »—W0 4/OCROO»0»U» ►-* Oi O 04 CD v/ I I » •• O k - NiO» 4/4 Jfc 3 •— K J 40 01 ssss 88S2 C5 C^ O Ci^ O i3 ^^SS!fRf 041 OOOOO r*4 rt41^ f44 aczxxarc c c c r. K-KK-^*-#4-4»-4 MR-4MK4oooo0R04lltilf0l VI«0«0V» SSSSi ff-f-rT” '<1 m 'V \J XI >>!»>> 930 XI ao 9 —4 -H "HI —4 —4 4/) m n K-f O 4/» OOOOOooooo s c«u i*PR.#MORi4 40 V) ffim << xxzar 1040 <040 1*000 ^00) ^0 99 9 99 <0 4040(0 40 •0mm o V0 » » » » O 40 40 40 o o Xm O 94 O IS) Kj K»N» OO OO OO OO 9m 04 9 40 Oo § 40m 9 O 40 m m m I ............................,..<%*■■ s s*" a.:,: » » » Io 40 » » » I O P( (0 o 40 » » I o P4 40 » » » I o p«: 40 O Ki 400 OO O<z 5 H9 m X 5 s; 9 i o %4000 -K4-40 0 ooooo 'H "H "HO O O o "a |x«P^ »■«iillOKl^ K*►-*►—0* 1 I f • • • 1 1 t f 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 < 1 1 1 1 I • 0K jR 4R0R JVJR 0R 4K 0* JR JR jR 0* JR JR JR jR jR JK 4R 4ii 9l 4^ ta it>4-»^»l*#«|M»KIKI40KI iilUIKIKIKJ KjfsJKlRJRJ 4a CJ ca 9B SS 4041140 01 KIKI^KI KIK9CJ 4*14*1 CJCJUlWCJ O 0* P^K—•— 4J *—^ jR JK0|R*#RIMJRKIM -^4 LJ <0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 lift 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1o4040U101»*fSI OOOOO (04040ISIK*O O 40 OI 01 1P«*^KI 4DOMSI0»40 40 <040 40 0440 JR4RIS>(0 40 40o<D<D O4O0K4O 01D40 9 40 to 40 40 40 to to 40 (0 40 (O (O O 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 #MI mm 4D0»4«IUJ <O(OCJ0*R<**p*R>*R«^t0(O4OlR4*l ►—!»«•to 4*1 KIR*<*IKI4a IR*CJKIR*N>«x4 KifS>*—KI —0*<a v> <p Nl o •HI g P 2 o9 oson 01 O »-H 40 m o KJ 9 • K> O ^ 9 <0 >S! ^om (• i? 1 >. ■; I ' ' . , ' ^; *••5 '■ ^ ' *;■ lit ■'. ■ isfii'-. ■ ■A sm p#f ,-Mm^ K;.r9«- -i. wm r iEISte %xi $:$kA ^ -a ■ .f ' ‘ii ■ ,‘i ,:^>.. .f. V. 4 ^:‘f ' .• ’%v*' - p' ■■ S3SS3SSSSSS mOIMiVI 0» OI ill OU^ 4H ^ ^ o uiu» » m » oooo oo a»^ K»K» OO \f*<n CJ M O I/I NJ I/I O vfi wfl CJ o » • m m OO I/I I/I i/iai CJ uw u> OOOOOOOOOOO tdM «td MmdtjJ CJ M lAiA •— ►- M M •fc ►- U» fUfUdix di fli diiii diiaiisi ai#-#sj OO iDOid MOM OO ISJfSJ o diiH» N> li* »«•SS JbtdOtttt MOM M oo M M «^dldl it di ^ dl di it M w»*iSi OO i/iO I/'ooo OO OOO •»»»•»» :W-oooo on «4 «4 «4 «4-4 o4 «4-# *4 «4 OOOO I IA(A li i o3 X i X oX oooo mmmmmmmm mm «IOI Of- iA > :k:kmri m \A Oo 88 *n ^ *r4 •■« l>(M M M nu mmm xxxx muMWiriiriifiim fn f*i m •I HMt ^ VH^ mma I t » t I I I t I I I M M ^ f^ ^ Kl MMM fi» Kl »J I I I I I I t I I I •M#i«»-»«^obQeoo I €1 m w w I I • • I I I I I • I ^ ftj id c«i id ^ ^ ^ ^ fMi/4a>^^l/H/I^^K>K> OOOO OO -JO O o OO id p>» pm p^ pm p^pm C/l-►—►- •--' 1 till 1 1 1 f 1 1 1 1 1—^ M d» 4ii JH M M id id td CJfsJ CdC/id K»I/lid M I^OIUIUI MIS>MNI M Ul OQ td p* p<*p>^»-o Mi/I Ul Kl OO t III!1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 O K>>- <-0 ►-1—UIK»►-M OOodk^fsjdt Kiro OI M o M oo O M^IDM MM MM o M oo •till 1 1 t 1 1 1 t 1oJlkid C/^tJUl MM K>M ooaKlid^l/I ►- ►*tdKI Kl oo i!lf >•>‘1 M o Xrno s o OOOO OO OO O O OO O > Kl KIKIKIKI KIKI K* Kl Kl Kl IM Kl 'K 'V pmpm pmpm ►-* I—►pm pm Iw*P»P^ P* M MMMM M M M M o»M M M >s 'v.-V \W M MMMM MM M M M M MM Kl KINI K/KI KIKi KIKJ VI Kl Kl Kl Mp f— -n O tJ •PO •-•rmi»•-jf-Si >3PO •H M l-i-p m >-«v>M -H Xt^X K4 X ■H ni 3d 4/im MM ornoc« s O O H S M X < Id ID Kl O -< S} s i o Xmo X Xm O (A •> Tl b 0 VSJ 1 K> I fiO Kl a 4A -P > »m »»m »»»p o »m »m m »»»> mmm»m »»»»O i t t 1 1 1 1 1 m O O o o o o o o?c p:X PC X iA u>t/>lA 00 00 00 00 id I • •* <1 i i •‘ V ^ V ...It •- I f ’ i;‘ - .f I '^iT.. ^ H Sf tiMr' •■■li?y lISs;’’'* ■®'fc-f*:S®s. .:■•■ •^;-i ■ m O o ' V f: y ■ ■ -.It ^ ■ a« K' -i::■■'■'V ^ . _-rf ss ' .- S''r::. .* i ‘'I • Wm-, , ¥%,v7$.iv,- -• :':^'5:v: am-i 0SCy-r P>4m K» I S fill ■> V j ‘y *''®» ''ii z. ' ’■’ f''f. ■*ur'‘'^ ■■'■' ^1®®' f'® f* ^JI 40* I IW» f ^ mmmm f» • t.;-5.^/■;:->: feifr#' o UK IP IP • m m SS u» IP IP » » • m m O KJ «r lU WUI IPOi KIPU -< r*in ooo ipiptp iPl^i/V IPI^IP •Pl<» N)MK> OOO fSpPS»N> «• Jb»«M UIIP W«JI </ltplp X ccc %mi -4-4-^w r*m mm n r-r-m X 1 mmm •4-4-4 fp Mmm M fp PI PI IP IP IP IP » » » » ooooo I/K vP\PUMP utu* IPiPU»U" VP lPlPiP\PiP IP IP IP VP vP OOO o vP vP vP vP vP vP vP Vp VP vP VP m o» OOO vP vP vP VPVPiP vPiPiP O vP VP VP 9MP O IP O VP VP p 0« VP ooooo oooo K> PJ K# Nj OOO KlKJfsJ o N> o ►v' 0«»0iD«l NIKIPJNJNI 0«I0 VO KlKIKIfsJi VO KJ fUl QDCSQi S < X•n iiiil 9999PI 999:9 3«mPimm XX mmmmmccccc IPIPIPIPA nil :pm 'll 999 999 o X > c a ni X oo mmmmm IP ip IP IP IP ^IP IP IP IP 999m mm m llUl ^IPlPCP 990 9 acccc>r-0 m m 999 9 9 9 9 X 999 9 xxx>c r~r-r-r--4 m 9 m mm m xxo 9 9 PI PI PI PI -4-4 > IP (/UP CP OQ —1 O 9 m 8 X o vP P ->4 (O ^>J 9 m ui •—m jbm m N$m U) Nt^OONIIU CJ VOIP W oooo Jh ^UM*I 9m IP I/I o O VP VP (POliOMPi oooo 9 O mm 9 01 oooooo 9«IPOIm oooo IPC'I IP VP 0»S» oooooo *^l09m (O oooo oo OO wo »•»•»• X IP 9 9 8 m »-« Om 1-4m IP o o OC OOO MOOO OOO M o O m m louim mm mmm comm m mmm 9 m m f 1 1 1 1 1 1 f 1 1 fill 1 1 1 t 1 1 99999 9999 99 9 9 9 9 m u»CPWCJ CO loco Cl CO MMMNI COCO VO CO M M IP MMM 9 999 9 CO CO com OOO 9 CO m N»UI99 ooooo 9MmO OOlOi m NI O 1 I 1 1 1 f 1 • « 1 lift 1 1 1 1 1 1 m IP (PM MmmOO VPMOm MmO CP M M NI •4 999 9MM 0> (O O 99M 9 MM 9 9 9 lO 999 99999 9999 090 O 9 9 1 1 1 1 • 1 f 1 1 lilt 1 « 1 1 I • CaI CO 999 9iOlomm 99mCO OlCOm 9 9 9 ►-M MMM MCOmvPM MMMm mtom CO M N> o Xm n X o psi O > IP A m X om »*4 9 > O O 8 JC -I X < lO ID o 9o o o m O IP f 9 o o NI t NI t (O NI e »9 9 u »»»» CP CP m »•»»»»9 > i»9 9 »9 »»9 CD I 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 m ‘ O o o o o o r>o •■ IX X X X X X X m IP CP CP IP CP CP CP CP 'j > orn ,..^v • \-i- * .I'.-. s-''-: Tkr^- • ‘A - K-. ;^--'^,- i@Pl®iv-'' m m » » » » i^m 1^01 mtm 9 9 9 9 9 9 o U« 9 9 9 m 9 9 ou*m *• Ui » » » » » » O iHm » » oo 9 OIOI «DO> O Kf^ U« o» v/» 9 m 9 9 » oov/» o» ^ CJ w OB OB O CT v» Kj o U» O kJ* 0000 IT tl* v/t ** 01 OkOft C» cj ukW n Xmo OO O O O OO O OO O o o OOOO O > KIM M M M MM M MM M M M MM M M -4 X.X X ’XX,X XX X X X X X X X m ►- B-»9m #—•— ►—•-*►— •—9*►-••—^ ^ |w» 00 «•00 00 00 00 00 00 09 00 99 OO 00 00 00 00 00 'N.’V,X*X,X XX X XX X X X X XXXm«OO oooo oo ODCD OD CO oo CD (D 09 CD MM M M M MM M MM M M M MM M M i^.:. i^' 1 - 7^^.: ^7 H-4mm li m^ s . -^... P cc r-Pf-r- MM ■u, ii »■; ^-Si#>■ s JH Ms S iS ■ fc' <«; 7:7> if'.‘ -f-V- %U4r Ci"' y;-- 'V • ^7' K}fS»W NHy^CJIOm m oo oooo OfP CJ M iOMM VACA 00 00 LJ«D CO M CD OOCDiJ oooo atm OiDO WUI CJ U>UlUl oo MMOOfOUl boo 9ss bb oiOi OCAUI tflUl »—V/UA X X 0104 oo MOOOO Vv KbQKb oo OO ctf^ai oo mxoo lA Ul OO oo ►-0 Ok- O •9 9 o o o •B »o • o 94 94m 3 -4? I r*«4«4 fMlN -ti-o -4 •< « O OO >> o $ rm »*i4 l-l mm Xm -< .«d -<, (A tlm JO (A m»nmm 5IS5 o X Om V) oo •—I O > -i mm </• (A imm ws <m S 3 30 -< <A(A(A(A m tA S <A O 94 CA s<A ssss W^M79 fH <m m rn m m m *TJ ^ 4 »-« 90 JO Ji 30 OmIEI k —P mo 94 mm z o cA 99 39 99 99 CA >i-im o 99 99 m mmm ni -♦CA r-<94^99 39 39 mmmmoXmozz<90 ^o f—r*—C-C 99 c 1-4 -4 O 99 m >o 90 39 30 90 99 Zm o ss z •H CAz m CACA CA 09 m >Z m X 94 om (A O H4 •o OO M o C oo o OO O O $199*M •—9»►- ►—♦—•I—►-»—M ►-» f 1 f 1 (1 1 1 1 c 1 1 1 9k JO JB 9»Ob JB 9k JB Ok Ok WCJ M M M MM M MU)M M M 00 CA M OO CD ►-MM M O 0*91 CA O OO O MM H»01 • 1 1 I I c t 1 1 1 1 1 1 NBO«m B-o »-•►-9^o-O CA M MM O o MM M XCJ M PI CD «MD m o o D»CD o>OkM CD CD CD 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 MM 00 M o CJU)CJ M*-M CD X o-o-►-I—O CJk-K-CJM M M O • III O UlUICJCJ • 1(1 coui^ ar OIObOOKJ O ID09UMO • I t I I «0 CDCJCJ 1-4 Kjk- -n^- z < ID (O KJ o 3o 30 m O 94 <A m 90 <• O •sj *19 » IS9 0 *• I CD 01 Kl D g:|t.^ 25 ^ | , . •"7';i »9 m »»»•9 m 9 9 »»»»9 9 9 9 m 9 »»9 1 1 •1 1 1 1 1 O o o O o O O o PC :k ZK P^Pf p: lA CA CA CA CA CA CA S ^9 CA > S Siom ■i r-»v '' »•' ■ ■,•,•;?!'SS, f**te ps‘, fe#a" : *i i' 'P-00^ ill tew -' IMj:- «fe - fisii" * iplfcs . '^S- ■';: JSi?:' life ■■ €r'" ^■ «■ - 'i- mmM felf3: ^ yy ■■■'■/•* s'; ii«# ^ysaiv.iva '■ ■• pfey-'- Ir' K K. Its k.-®' ppS'yte#‘ |t«-. ^ fMr Ilf- IP <■ «Ss IKi; ^ JS'ifl- ^ W^‘ifcfc #• 0 a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0—• <n n iA 01 Kf*il*CH 0 40 sA SA U4 <n vP cf*X 40 xo ID ID «>(D 0 40 «4P m K) *-•►-*•*»0 c 0 0 0 0 Ok UJ N*0 ID o»CO i#3t 0 3 o o o •sj o ► J o o o Nl o »-k o N1 "N. ^s> 9» 4» kj «> f J Cl •o «p K> CP «o •V. CO K> m fN* «^4 |m»i^ »>• K| O ►- U» •b»*-Ok^400^-0 WUI U* »M*»—• 1W*C»0I <*4 ••4 <9 NINJ UI W Ok Ok UliO M fM oi<o 00 vOiO OQ 10 4»«^CJNI4h 40 00 00 «»«•<001 li* ^Ok Ok 00 00 00 Ui WO c/>w 00 00 ww 00 00 U*k/»00 00 00 •»OHBb«POUlCiC 00 04 40 00 €9 <0 0 0 00 00 00 00 m •■»»»V *»m O *n»-n ^^ 90 O m S C > in Oa »<*> ooooooo ns iA Os l/> -4 o > >om X > m m o o -4 dP C, VI ♦-4 o dl 8 90 -4 1-4 90s 8 -4 s m V) «/) 0 1 -4 wi 50m o 50mm 3< ro 50 r* M (A -4m 50 n 8 O n 85$ r*C‘-4 ;ss X Xr- 5-^ li •os •p m Ui 50m 50 r*i > »-4 50 os•n > O t/|m X ►-4 Or* n I o 50 > »»-* X m < >r- C > Q C </> ►~i OXv> *o|ras >00 m orn Osr* < •-4 E » m » I O </> o > m X om »-4 •P -4 i-4oz 0 0 M 0 0 0 0 > KJ k-*U k—Ok •—»k-*k—k—Jb 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 0 jih 4U Jit Ok #k Ok Ok Ok Ok 0 U4 CO UI UI CJ UI UI UI UI UI a CO CO UI K)UI Ok 0 00 4^z 1—40 ►-OI UI 01 UI CO 0 K)-4 1 1 1 «1 1 1 1 1 I 0 m jli ►-0 u-PM UI z u>K5 €0 M 0 w <0 M Ok 40 0 0 40 40 40 Jb 4D ID 40 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 00 •—40 UI 0 UI k—U>Ok 40 k-4 UI k—Kl ►—0 UI •»4 ►-IM UI z < 5 8 n X f*io 5iC mtn O VI -4m i» Oro n » ro O Ok I iO m Ki c X n TJ VI > VI o > m om V.r^ a' t— m A %“ ;^- -;a K . :^' S# ■.•: • /m^ .‘i- -i»A tel^is.;:-, -wm ,^V-- -4 r“r* r*r*r*r*r*r~r-momfi*fp n fp m rn r»»m IP m -4 <<<<<<<<<< >m fp m m rm rn m 8fr*r*r»r-f r-r* o m 44 Oi Ul N>•—w c fadt m O So irt 5 -;“ ' >-l ’ ;Vv H' •i O N» 10 o ►- ■-r Srv^-:^:r l%f'’ >. fS s > • O QB Pfe"o O ^ I e 3 ; i o-pm m 1^ mo pit •i o 5 * •H 9 rn O ’n I -4 »-< O o fp "II •M 2O m i/i sr* > O $ o 3iC N,c' -■■ -;A:/# o m m o > *ti X «/iQ Q IB 9 X5 i I I 8 I 5 4?^'" IvP r*i >8 f-m i/% Z m m i v> m S »m O VI -4 < M -< Mm-n sS Oo : s s ma O ui zn -pS >o no ►4 < UkM If - 'U ov>o > m O »sfe;'>t:'--rt;5;5i i o fS ^iiP.Pit HIv» o > m wm-■,. ^*'^■ ■•.>•>.■• r- ^41# FF.' oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo o o K) rs> Kl ►- ID m K> Kl oooooo m i/% ►4 VIo o ooo ooo m ^ VI cu »"« -4 8 VI > o o 3 5 5 f o ni o z <4 i S -4 VI c VI r»% 9 Oo ID M S 2 I I-'ip-,.■Mfe.. O 8 8 s PIm v. ti ►4 i ►4 VI «< VI -4 X o ISJ 0 om 1 ■■3 f 1 •| 11 p|fefc^P; 9^- /' tew ^1 'pffe V':';.: '■ •«: :t m .:-k^ .^9$-^ ‘=y-F •mf-'- '%m. 'fl|« ^•;i ■ 1:: is fry-' * ■: ' ii# A’.' i* *•-•: 3 3 Of\ iJLf% CS. V:# % ^ ^-^ fvCIL MEETING FEB 2 4 1992 CITY OF ORONO vLl9fr-(,\ i' 1 itiv' rt ■ 01 .... r*' i"r"m,t: P»J:„, j? X (It> o/>•' ; ‘ imW S ^ ^ •:/^jr\r CITY of ORONO Ofllrvn trr«l Mtaiwwn 55 »rv4iii* February 10, 1992 William Crawford, P.E. Metropolitan Diatrict Enqineet Minnesota Department of Transportation St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Dear Mr. Crawford, As you requested, we have reviewed the Draft Scopinq Document for T.H. 12 and are providing our commen s in this letter. The most important issue from the City of Orono's perspective is how to resolve the identification of a preferred alignment. We believe it would be helpful to all parties to have a preferred alignment Identified in this Sconinq Decision Document. In fact, only one or two cities ou^ of all of the cities Involved in the Highway 12 corridor process have indi^-ated opposition to the identification of a preferred alternative. The great majority of cities have indicated they want preferred alternative identified as soon as possible. If the EIS proceeds with no alignment preference, a number of problems could result: A. There will be continued uncertainty for property owners who are trying to sell or develop their properties. B.If a preferred alternative is not identified this year, Highway 12 will become a divisive election issue and a number of newly elected officials with much more intractable views on the corridor issue could be added to the Highway 12 corridor process. C.Because the very long and involved process we have just completed has not resulted in the identification of a preferred a 1 ig.iment, citizens will begin to move toward increased polarization concerning the issue rather than beginning to determine how best to live with an identified alignment. The longer an alternative remains in the process, the more "credibility" it gains, and the more difficult it becomes to remove it from consideration. TELEPHONE - 473-7357 • FAX 4^34)5 in William Crawford, P.E. February 18, 1992 page 2 of 6 c o 5 t q r e 3 t deal m ■' r e c o rr p I e t e and i n v o 1 e iy ki':-!:;'.:.: •V-: Vi' ; t* •* s . • ^ ^ V; it' <,‘'.'‘w:. -■ *■ ,>:v ^ .•■t «'ls •'■ ■ >, '. ‘v -/1 i iTi ’V occur red D. The EIS process will probably money, take much longer to discussions very similar to those that have repeatedly during the scopinq process. If a preferred alignment can be determined now, we be 1 leve that the EIS process will proceed much more quickly and will b*^ much less expensive. Residences, businesses and cities will be able to make plans with some assurances and MnDOT can concentrate its resources on the mitiaation of impacts. We urge MnDOT to reconsider this issue and identify a preferred aliqnment as quickly as possible. The Scoping Document has indicated a 1 imired expressway on the current corridor will provide an acceotable level of service. The document has also indicated the major adverse imoact ^of the corridor is its potential economic impact on the city of Long Lake. It has been demonstrated that these potential economic impacts can be readily mitigated. The City of Orono has indicated its willingness to assist in the mitigation of economic ^iip^cts. Given this, and the fact that the Scopinq Document has clearly Identified substantial environmental, social and land use impacts related to the "North" and "South" corridors, it becomes very clear that the cos*"S of the bypass alternatives are much too high in relation to th r benefits. The first pa~agraph on page 3 of the Scoping Document should include a stronger statement about Orono’s comprehensive p1 an. The paragraph does not accurately reflect Orono's opposition to an alternative corridor. Neither does it indicate that construction of a highway on a new corridor would result in de/elopment patterns that are inconsistent with the Metropolitan Council’s Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework and the comprehensive •'Ians of Orono and surrounding communities. Orono's Comprehensive Plan specifically recommends improving Highway 12 on the existing alignment. In 1980, Orono amended its Comprehensive Plan in response to MnDOT dropping its plans to relocate and upgrade Highway 12 in Orono. MnDOT also indicated that because Highway 12 was a low priority in relation to other east-west routes, no upgrade plans would be considered until after the year 2000. In keeping with its committment to environmental protection and its policy of preserving rural land use, Orono's Comprehensive Plan indicated any upgrade to Highway 12 should be on the current corridor. The comr^ehensive plan was reviewed and approved by the Metropolitan Council and the cities adjacent to Orono. The City of Orono has a I ng history of valuing and protecting its rural character. ’’ ■ city's continuing efforts in this area and its success in preserving a rural environment are the major factors that have drawn people to Orono and continue to draw people to Orono. Orono residents now rely on the City to continue to maintain this environment. A new major roadway cut ,r ■' ‘ *■ ■ * . W---' ite ff i’■ - r-'■^-rvl-;;/- ;,<■- fi fU:,' 6 !;■''■, & ife.. ■% fc"*- K-^"- s I- iW'|c«4i ^ ‘.:- Nillian Crawford, P.E. Fabruary 19, 1992 page 3 of 6 through the heart of one of Orono's most pristine areas w^uld destroy what Orono has worked for the past 30 years to preserve. A new corridor would change both the total character of the city as well as the quality of life for all those homeowners who would experience the noise and visual impacts of a major roadway wher-^* once there was a rural environment. On page 12, issues and Concerns. - There is no mention of "impacts on the quality of life in residential areas that are currently in a rural setting." it is orono's oositinn that this is one of the most important underlying issues relate There is to b'Dh a m a 2 o rthe north and south alignment alternatives. __ _ difference between the impact expanding the current corridor would have on those who already live near Highway 12 and the impact of a new corridor on those who currently live in a rural environment. There is nothing in the Draft Scoping Document that addresses this. Those who live near the current corridor moved or built there with the knowledge that they were near a State Highway and urban development. Those along potential new corridors moved there to be secluded from the noise and visual imparts of highways and urban development. The Imoart criteria do not address this issue. For example, it is not a valid comparison to simply count the number of housing impacts on each of the corridors as though they were equal, when the "Mnrth" and South’* corridors are now without any impact and the present corridor impacts simply are additive to known present impacts. This same validity problem is true for other attempts to compare impacts between the three routes, especially environmental impacts. Two possible approaches to analysing this impact difference are as follows: A.Include in the Impact Criteria Tables a column indicating the number of homes not currently within 400 feet of a highway corridor that will be within 400 feet of a proposed corridor. B.In comparing impacts of the various alternative corridors each alternative should be compared to current conditions rather than to the other alternatives. This would more accurately reflect those areas that are already heavily affected by the noise and visual impacts of a highway corridor. The following are more specific comments about the Scoping Document : Page 3, Report Purpose - It may be helpful to the lay reader to explain why an EIS is needed for the T.H. 12 project and what a "Tier I EIS" means. Page 17, Figure 5 - The complex way the alternatives are ir- 9m -Fi ^: -:v V' KF'; I'i -•'i"M "f- 'M •IK i-i":n !?■ '-'£^ iH">y9mu it=- ".fe" :.>■ :<l|- :'lf :#■ ‘:iiS -1 l-^ r- liV-- *ik m 1 f''" ■- ■; i|:e:. Ililliaffl Crawford, P.E. February 18, 1992 page 4 of 6 F®;,/ segmented, mixed and matched, njrr.oeted, and des-r.iel is difficult CO follow. This may be frustrating to lay people trying to review and understand the report. Page 17, Figure 5 and list - It is not clear in the reo^rt why segments B1 and G1 were reinstrated for evalaation while the T.H, 55, County Road II, and County Road h North alternatives were "considered and eliminated". Weren't PI and G1 "considered and eliminated" as well? Page 25, Table 2 - It is unlikely that Long Lake will have the growth indicated, particularly when compared to the more modest growth projected for most the other developed cities in the corrio^r. The population forecast f^r t.onq Lake is much too hioh in comparison to Orono. This information gives tne impression that Orono is fully developed and Long Lake has sianificant undeveloped land, when in fact the opposite is the rase. While it is clearly noted that these numbers are from the Metropolitan Council model, they should be modified or supplemented to show that Long Lake is a fully developed urban are^ and Orono has a large amount of undeveloped land planned for rural-type development. Page 25, Table 3 - The "number of retail businesses" and the "total retail sales" should not be included if !*• is available for only 3 of tne R c i t i es t ownsh i ps. Perhaps this information could be provided by each city rather than using a more general source of information. On page 29, '^tem 13, Land Use Impacts, the listed impacts should include development pressures concerning the property between the current corridor and any new corridor and how these development pressures will affect both the character of the city and the abi 1 ity of the city to provide increased city services to serve the increased development. On page 30, Item I, Publ'.c Park/Recreation Impacts, should include an analysis of how run off from i additional roadbed would affect Lake 'Minnetonka, which is a regional recreation facility. Pages 30-44, Evaluation - In general, it is difficult to determine from this discussion if any of the potential adverse impacts are considered a "fatal flaw" for carrying an alternative into the EIS. The Scoping Decision Document should be clear on the reasons various alternatives are eliminated or retained for farther study. Pages 31-34, Tables - An addi^-ional table providing summary information for each alternative would be helpful. It is difficult to compare total impacts of one alternative to another since the information is provided only by city. ■f mii r ■m-‘ir ?&■ ■ fi ' :;■'. I! •- ■ t ?il.A fc •i: r- ■ • .-V*i ,v-..m’ r fete-.■rf'a ■ iP^^- $v- I:rv ■ Willian Crawford, P.E. Fabraary 18, 1992 page 5 of 6 Cities should be provided with comparative cost figures for each of the alternatives. These costs should include the total cost of construction and riqht-of-way acquisition for each of the alternatives. The inpact criteria should include the number of acres of land not currently used for roadway purposes required for construction of each of the alternatives. Page 31, Table 4 - **Within the corridor" should be better defined. Although this is not necessarily the case, s'''"c people will interpret the residences "within the corridor" as being those acquired for construction. Page 26, Economic Impacts - This statement should not single out just Long Lake. Similar comments could apply to all of the cities where a bypass is an alternative. The source of the information on market valuation is not identified. The EIS needs to be much more detailed about comparable economic impacts. Page 36, Wetland and Floodplain Impacts - Some of the on wet 1ands thanalternatives have a much greater impact others. It is somewhat misleading t) say that each alternative affects at least one wetland and floodplain. In particular, the south alignment appears to have a larger acreage of wetlands impacted and th’s perhaps should be identified as a potential adverse pact for the south alignment. Page 43, Traffic Impacts - The information oresented on Level of Service does not appear to be consistent with the information in Tables 4 through It would be helpful if cities could be provided with information indicating which numbers have been changed in the Impact criteria tables since the tables were last provided to the cities, including an explanation for any of the changes. Any changes made to the Draft Scoping Document in response to comments from cities should be indicated in the revised document . Finally, it would be helpful if the potential adverse impacts were summarized by alternatives in a brief summary at the end of the report. J' Williaa Crawford, P.E. February 18, 19*)2 jpage 6 of 6 If you have questions concerning any of the call ae. cotnaerts, please Sincerely, I& *- •• Ron Moorse City Administrator cc: Larry Dallam, HNTB Steve Hay, MnDOT Hf h : gt ‘,..... ffiS'i- '•'V iVv . jT • ■i *■'? ife i ip"Hi- w ti 'ii : fr; _; i»t*fSSUs. jf^r, iii ^m.MfpSK- '-f‘•^'. i-. 'v:. k-' . :I»V/'"- . t :'A S^r*!-, g'K :*f, ':If- '.1 -;'7«|.’ ■ 7pS»’ Wffr ’ V-I T%. .-^4ff r Ff .V iPHif' - . V?^W-'-^y.'- ;(«’V,“ ,*■ 1&#wl»l "-.S^ll .“"y ■ ‘ Hi '« *r ^ / > ■ ‘t- ■' -' V 4 /M. r.' .- LAKE USE AND RECREAriON AGENDA > V \ LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRIC^ "* 7 F E /T Monday, February 2-», 4:30 F'M Norwest Bank Building 900 E. Wav7ata Bivd. Room 1^; (Elevator access for Handicap veil: uae i^est entrance or Wayzata Rlvd.) fEB 1 8 iooo H«nn«pin County Department of Pv.blic v.v7>rks: Denis Bailey, Engineerinij T a'■ n n i c i a n - I. ,4 k e Improvement 1. 1992 Maintenance Progra. 2. Slow Buoy Program {sam • as 1992) 3. Update on new Countv Lake >!inneLotn<d map DNR ' s proposed change in size f snowmobii*^ registration n uab e rsl staff report on 2 24 meeting wirh D\K. btute Sheriff's Assoc., Water P.trol & L'tl' Resolution to supersede Resoiutiori •*)! declaring low water level to authorize permits for temporary dock extensions beyond the DLA arul Resolution tf7i allowing residential temporary d.ick extensions without a permit. b c d Special Events: 1. Deposit Refunds ^$100 each: a. Ehlert Publishing Group, Wintertainmont, 1/23/92 - 1 /25/'^: Westonka Snobla/ers, Fun Run, 1/3192 ~ 2/1,92 Lafavette Club. Fainil* Fishing Derby, 2/2/92 MN/WI Pro Am Bass Tournament. 6/2/91 KN/WI Pro Am Bass Tournament. 3/24/91 Lord Fletchers. Broomball (e.xtra deposit) Holiday-Johnson Leukemi.a Crappie Contest renewal application received 2 1192 for contest on 4/18/92: Re iuest to waive late fee on application received less than 90 days prior to event per letter dated 2/12/92. 3 e t M Subcommittee to review signs at accesses 1/16/92 meeting, no action recommended minutes of Water Patrol Report 1. Violations update Progress on fish house count Incidents - vehicle sinking, etc. Timing outlook on 1991 County and Lake Minnetonka da ta s umma ry Additional items 2 3 4 G. Additional business recommended by the committee . • ' •.Ct|^ .. ^ / / J #iM*S*if: 9C\imZk9^ I Iv MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT R.O. Sm StT. WmlU. MmnMola »53f 1 MMO.friet«R*C. R Saman INt. •JtfnE. Thomas • (hcnait! R liQp UM • OviODR LMRty • Thomas Map« * Itll «l■■(TO■■l piP'^' ■ ,■ ;s& S*IP fst if®; 1. 4^t"fli|: » ■3^aL’- m M S'- ■m, •vf. ="^-. • ■ 'ly ■ ,i-f" S- 7. vC-'’' ''' '• W‘~ rl®"'i - COMPLAISTS A3D VIOIATIOHS COSWITTES MEETING 5:00 p.m. Tuesday, February 18, 1992 Hopkins City Hall 1010 First Street South (935-8474) FEB 1 3 19C2 Libbs Lake 2. Den and Judy Sinnons — Pemiit Application Ho. 89-fi. Toia McMorrow — Permit Application No.. fl9-2Q.fl. 3. Jeff Fox —Wo, 90-138. 4. Nifineapolis *^ark and Recreation Board — Todd Park Violatlas- 5. City of Shorewood — Possible Violation. 6. Jeff Danbury — Rip Ran Violation. pld Business 8. AdlomiL^ 899DAJC30) mm- jA ’r.rr^’ -v-f ■‘T.niii ,11 ’' 1. 2. 3. W ■ m. ,.v' • *¥ '%■ ‘^ii^ ■(Tf ! . e fe M, ’■ ■; ■: : ■ Li!• lile^ ■ ■"■./ r a‘’. ■•. . ■*• ■^l^r-" %■■ ■ ; !>■' 'N' m' B '■-- ’< > -S . . .• ;iW L-^v V; .^: ■< ■. A : > r V ' ' i., - 1®'' L|I^'.fe«" , i,f.; ■"?',: ? v' r- . • ■' Wm- *.^v^t •*'.r • te:-. 4* ■" ■ /-tv ^ ®'. # .si-; • -M. '.a, ;, MIirHEHUIA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT BOARD OF MAHAGERS AGEHDA Thursday, February 20, 1992 Wayzata City Hall 7:30 p.ro.FE3 1 8 f Call to order; note attendance. Approval of Agenda. of minutes of the Regular Meeting ofReadinfl. January 16. 1992. 4. Hgarino of Parmlt Applications. A.Panait Application Ho. 91-141: Applicant: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board 310 So. Fourth Ave. Minneapolis, MN 5541F City of Minneapolis, Sec. 9BC, north of Lake Harriet Alteration of a wetland in the Roberts Bird Sanctuary to increase open water area. Location: Purpose B.Pwratt Application Ho. 92-06: Applicant: J.R. Wagner 2030 Shorewood Lane Mound, MN 55364 City of Mound, Sec. 18CA, West Arm, Lake Minnetonka Installation of 150 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. Location: Purpose: C.Perailt Application Ho. 92-07: Applicant: William Standke 415 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 City of Tonka Bay, Sec. 27CA, Gideon's Bay, Lake Minnetonka Installation of 120 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. Location: Purpose: O.Permit Application Ho. 92-08: Applicant: Chuck Downey 2665 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 City of Orono, Sec. 20BC, Spring Park Bay, Lake Minnetonka Installation of 100 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. Location: Purpose: ■■rr If#; ‘ ;V : ■ l-f'.t' '■: i-. ■pP-: fm^:.ms‘ m r ■ X/- /' ■ ■ ‘ . %■ Xv!' I'V-. 1*4^ •■ ^ - p j v^- ^ ■K.^: p>mf E. P. H. Perait Application Mo. 92-09; Applicant: Irene Standa 2659 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 Location; City of Orono, Sec. 20BC, Spring Faik Bay, Lake Minnetonka Purpose: Installation of 180 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. Perait AppIicatiQn Ho. 92-10; Applicant: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board 310 Fourth Ave. S. Minneapolis. MN 55415 Location: City of Minneapolis, Sec. 15DB, Mi r.ehaha Creek Purpose: Installation of 265 lineal feet cf revet mattress and rip rap shoreline e.osion protection along Minnehaha Creek at the I isv bridge. G. Perait Application Ho. 92-11; Applicant: Location: Purpose: George Hanson PO Box 232 Excelsior, MN 55331 City of Orono, Sec. 23CB, Big Island, Lake Minnetonka Installation or 80 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. Applicfltion.Hfl> 92-12: Applicant: Mr. and Mrs. David York 2825 Casco Point Road Wayrata. MN 55391 Location: City of Orono. Sec. 20CB, Spring Park Bay, Lake Minnetonka Purpose: Installation of 70 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. I. Permit Application Bo. 92-13: Applicant: Location: Purpose: Larry MacCormack 26020 Birch Bluff Road Excelsior. MN 55331 City of Shorewood. Sec. 29DC. Lake Minnetonka Installation of 70 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protectio’i. Permit Application Ho. 92-14; Applicant: Location: Purpose: Carol Regan 27090 Edgewood Road Shorewood, MN 55331 City of Shorewood. Sec. 29DC, Lake Minnetonka Installation of 75 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. -2- 1 ----"a. i? Hit’'' .'#i> .J>’ # .liilf' ’ ; i.r~ , E»:.1 Fte* ?#■• Yf:« ‘iv ■ !&•m» ' v '^'.* K: V - S. Xi • o. p. Q. •\ lit Application Ho. 92-15: i^pllcant: P«t«r Weir 20040 Minnetonka Blvd. Deephaven, KN 55331 Location: City of Deephaven, Sec. 24IK, Carson's Lake Minnetonka Placement of a beach sand blanket. Bay, Purpose: Perait Apolication Bo. 92-16i Applicant: David F. Koenig 2020C Cottagewood Road Deephaven, MN 55331 City of Deephaven, Sec. 24DC, Carson's Lake Minnetonka Placement of a beach sand blanket. Location: Purpose: Bay, PeMlt Application Bo. 92-17; Applicant; Ellen Heller 20060 Minnetonka Blvd. Excelsior, MN S5331 City of Deephaven, Sec. 24DC, Carson's Lake Minnetonka Placement of a beach sand blanket. Location: Purpose: Bay, Peralt Application Bo. 92-18: Applicant: H.T. Worthington 20270 Minnetonka Blvd. Excelsior, MM 55331 City of Deephaven, Sec. 24DC, Carson's Lake Minnet* nka Placemen** f * ’each sand blanket. Location: Purpose: Bay, Permit Application Wo. 92-19: Applicant: Mike Knoblauch 20020 Minnetonka Bivd. Deephaven, MN 55331 City of Deephaven, Sec. 240C, Carsor Lake Minnetonka Placement of a beach sand blanket. Location: Purpose: 1 Bay :■% Permit Application Ho. 92-20: Applicant: Robert E. Hullsick 20080 Minnetonka Blvd. Excelsior, MN 55331 City of Deephaven, Sec. 24DC, Carson's Lake Minnetonka Placement of a beaci sand blanket. Location: Purpose: Bay, Permit Application Wo. 92>«21: Applicant: Thomas R. Pokonosky 20100 Minnetonka Blva. Deephaven, MN 55331 City of Deephaven, Sec. 24DC, Carson's Lake Minnetonka Placement of a beach sand blanket. Location: Purpose: Bay, -3- * . «.»- llte Ig) % ;•• • ^c: 4"'11*; ' f-'ST '•m'- ' ,.;y4.- P-"'' ' ■ ip -t4-'\v.5i^ pe It: m Vi ■ \ •ij. . ^V: fe. HVPfc': 'III* srSMil|--P : 1. s. T. 0. Applicant: Location: Purpose: iQfl ap. ^Z-ZZ- R. Woodburn 20180 Minnetonka Blvd. Deephaven, MR 55331 City of Deephaven, Sec. 24DC, Carson’s Bay, Lake Minnetonka Placement of a beach sand blanket. Permit Application Wo. Applicant: H.E. Midthun fLLOl: Location: Purpose: 20220 Minnetonka Blvd. Excelsior, NR 55331 City of Deephaven, Sec. 24DC, Carson’s Bay, Lake Minnetonka Placement of a beach sand blanket. EB.mlt ApRiici.tl9n.Hfl> .ai-ai: Applicant: Grant C. Johnson 30355 Glenmuer Farmington, Hills, MI 48334 Location: City of Chanhassen, Sec. 3BA, north of SufivMrgate and west of Murray Hill Rd. Purpose: Alteration of a stormwater management pond constructed under MCVfD Permit No. 88-23, •Eight Acre Woods." Applicant: Ro. 82-25; Location: Purpose: City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MR 55447 City of Plymouth, Sec. 29DB Stormwater management plan for replacement of culverts in the "Chelsea Woods" subdivision northwest of the intersection of Dunkirk Lane and County Road 6. V. Peraih Application Ho. 92-26: Applicant: Location: Purpose: City of Long Lake 1964 Park Ave. Long Lake, MR 55356 City of Orono, Sec. 35CB, Long Lake Creek Stormwater management ^lan for a 13-lot single family residential subdivision called "Fleming Trail Addition." w* Penait Applicotign Hp* 32-27: Applicant: Location: Purpose: Richard Neslund 742 Twelve Oaks Center 15500 Waysata Blvd. Wayzata, MR 55391 City of St. Louis Park, Sec. 18BC Stormwater management plan for a 7-unit townhome development called "Lehman's Amhurst 4th Addition." -4- .y --.« n--- —. •■>; im » #m»-. Si# ..,t W""^ .'? «■- RaportL Qf Ad Hoc Committee concerning the proposed CarMnn dtftfgimi .aiQlftct« 4. ggifcguttv CQfflnittge Report . -'H:‘ #t: -#ter-' t. Cotrolainta i..r #1 || ,f ,9. ,M.W ^I A® ^'1^. ‘ P^. PinaBca Cogmittca Report. h, Traaattrat*a Report. ^lana and Rulaa and •r %:• .f • gngiBgflg.1 Attorney*a Report. Buaineaa te%r PM .Hew Buaineaa. X5. AdlQUI] ii t't; »17DAJ(41) * ■■ ■ ■■ yy:y^¥m&' itu,., - ■':^sgpfc.. -5- •s. ■1 H f- ' . ^ ^ 7v ,5.-,''. Ij 1. •• .*■ HiaUTES or REGULAR MEETING OF January 16, 1992 MIHIIEHAIIA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT BOARD OP MAHAGERS . : C •* f The regular meeting of the Board of Managers of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was called to order by President Spensley at 7:36 p.m. on Thursday, January 16. 1992, at St. Louis Park City Hall, St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Managers present: Spensley, Love, Maple, Lindley, Erickson and Thomas. Managers absent: None. Also present were Board Advisors Quanbeck and Jones. Hrorgyal flg Agenda h; ' ■i’: •r*.T-O It was moved by Manager Maple, se'^onded by Manager Love, that the agenda be adopted. Upon vote, the nsotion carried unanimously. AParoral Ql Minutesof Regular Meeting The Managers reviewed the minutes of the regular meeting of i|||, 21, 1991. It was moved by Manager Love, seconded by ^li^Manager Maple that the minutes of the November 21, 1991, meeting be approved. Upon vote, the minutea were unanimously approved. At Application moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager Thomas, that permit application 92-05. Methodist Health Care Association ii- ir be tabled, based upon staff recommendation that the application is lOK>t complete. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. : ■ Approval of Permit Application moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager Maple, that permit application 92-02, Bill Miller be approved and the permit issued, based upon recommendation of staff that the applicant has met all applicable rules. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. i.'>- 'Mmv fflanaa Sto-■1 ?t-... Hearing of Permit Applications 92-04. William R. Enalehardt Associates. Inc. — Stormwater «aent plan for reconstruction of Winnewashta Parkway from TH7 ixtjrai- staff had initially recommend the tabling of this project, -1- (01/16/92)’ Board UiMit ■1 1 ii- l|i"' Ifo J-- ■ i?#-»w-' which involves the reconstruction of Minnewashta Parkway in the City of Chanhassen, based upon the need to receive additional information. Staff received such information subsequent to the issuance of its report. Upon initially reviewing this infonsation, staff now recommends approval of the project, pending detailed review of the information and receipt of any additional exhibits, and the concerns set forth in the engineer's report. Craig Schmidt of Englehardt Associations appeared representing the City of Chanhassen, and addressed the issues which trere raised in staff's earlier report, and addressed in a meeting with staff on Monday, January 13. 1992. Staff stated that the information provided by Mr. Schmidt appears to satisfy all outstanding concerns. President Spensley asked whether the City ^f Chanhassen has ccmq^leted its Comprehensive St rmwater Management Plan at this point. The plan has not been completed, although the process is uiklerway, according to staff. Tt was moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager Erickson, that the project be approved, based upon staff's recommendation, with the permit to be issued upon receipt by staff of all outstanding items as set t.-^rth in staff's report, in a form and substa.nce acceptable to staff. President Spensley asked whether there was any urgency in the issuance of the permit, in light of the fact that the applicant had not submitted its information in a timely fashion. Mr. Schmidt indicated that the City wants to let bids as soon as possible, given the fact that this is a significant project, estimated to cost over $2 million. Upon vote, the motion carried 5-to-l, with President Spensley voting no. Sl-145. Carlson Real Estate C enproxl^^^iy any — Dredging to remove from a channel for Mr. Quanbeck reported that this matter had previously been discussed at the November meeting. At that time, the matter had been laid-over, pending receipt of additional information, as recoomended in staff's report. Such information has still not been provided, issues which remain to be clarified include whether the plan, as submitted, meets the minimal impact standard as required under the District's rules. Staff stated that access CMiists to the property without undertaking dredging, and that the dredging would appear to be necessary only to permit future development of the project. However, no such development plans have been provided. Peter Pflauro, President of Lundgren Bros. Construction, appeared before the Board and indicated that the applicants' felt that they had been "broad-sided" by the Board at the November meeting, when development plans were requested. Mr. Pf?.aum stated that detailed development plans had never been requested by staff. He further indicated that he did not understand the District's need for such plans, and could only conclude that the Board lllmrtas -2-(01/16/92) ... District wss not playing fair. According to Mr. Pflaurn, the land was ptirchassd as an investment and the dredging permit vas in place at ths tiaw, aiuS if Carlson Real Estate is not allowed to dredge the channel* it will decrease the value of the land. He Stated that the Board's request for a development plan would be tisM-consuaiing and very expensive. President Spensley stated that it was his recollection that the review requested hy applicants was for conceptual approval, and that the applicants had acknowledged, at the last meeting, that tiMiy lacked a completed application. Mr. Sather. appearing on behalf of the applicants, agreed that the applicants had not ejrpected a permit to be issued, and wanted a chance to discuss the BMtter openly. They were left with the impression, however, that the Board found no need to review the issue until a plan had been developed. Manager Love stated that faii.iess requires the District to apply its rules equally to all applicants, including its minioaim iaipact standard rule. It is very difficult for the Board to apply its rules in regard to dredging without more inforaiation concerning the proposed development plan for dredging. Hr. Bather asked how much information would be needed for the District to complete its review. He wondered whether the District would require a preliminary plat of any future development? Manager Lindley stated that the applicant has not come forward with any plan at this point. Mr. Pflaum restated his position that Carlson Real Estate must be permitted to complete the dredging or it would suffer a substantial loss in property values. President Spensley noted that even if applicants believe they have a right to dredge as a matter of law. there are still many technical issues concerning the dredging which have not been addressed. As such, there is not a complete application before the Board, and the Board must apply its rules consistently to all applicants. Mr. Bather questioned what standards the Board would apply to the dredging of channels that may be common-user channels. President Spensley replied that the standards are based upon the anticipated use of the channel. That is. if it is anticipated that the channel will be significantly used, one set of standards would apply; however, if few users are anticipated, other standards would be applied to the dredging. The Board's goal is to minimize the disruption to the Lake involved in the dredging process, while preserving appropriate access to property. As such, it is important for the Districr 'understand how the channel will be used and what techno' will be utilized in doing the dredging. Mr. Bather indicated that, given the existence of the old channel, and the proposed plan for the new channel, which indicates how deep, how wide, how long, how many cubic yards of material are to be removed, and where the spoils would be placed, the Board should have virtually all the information it needs. lOB Board! Ilinutos -3-(01/16/92) ■fT - ||Ai i ■'-. • • - 'I 7v •'’■Mi' * h p-tel -■yU: Manager Erickson indicated that Rule E.(3) of the Board's rules w>uld apply. As such, the Board needs to know the desired purpose for the dredging, and needs some preliminary plan in order to go forward. Mr. Dayton appeared on behalf of the applicant, and indicated that the proposed project is to redredge an existing channel. He interpreted the District’s rules to indicate that dredging shall be allowed to maintain existing channels. Mr. Dayton maintained that the District did not have the legal right to tell the applicant that the applicant could not redredge to existing disaansions. Hotrever. he indicated that the applicant might be willing to discuss some modifications to the existing dimension of the channel. Manager Spensley stated that while Mr. Dayton's analysis may raise soomi legal issues making this a unique project, the Board has not based its review of the project on any historical rights, which Buy or may not exist. Rather, the Board has always held Carlson Real Estate and Lundgren Bros, in high regard as developers who have gone beyond the letter of the Board's rules and attempted to incorporate the spirit of the rules to achieve outcomes which are truly in the public interest. The Board had hoped and expected that the applicants would approach this project in the same spirit. President Spensley stated that the Board had done what was requested of it by the applicants at the Board's Eovember meeting, and that it had reviewed an admittedly incomplete application, in light of the Board’s rules, to give the applicant an initial perspective concerning how the Board would view the proposed project. The Board's review had not been undertaken in light cf any asserted legal rights of the applicant. President Spensloy indicated that, just as Mr. Pflaum expressed some surprise at the Board's reaction at ts November Sleeting, the Board was also taken aback by the fact that the a Hlicants had found it necessary to file a legal brief outlining tl Ir rights. Mr, Dayton asked what should be done in order to resolve the issues, and whether a process could be developed to address the concerns raised by t?th the Board and the applicant. Manager Maple stated that it would be helpful if Board members had a clear understanding as to whether the 1959 Department of Conservatior. Permit still applied, and what information the Board's rules require an applicant to submit in regard to such a dredging project. President Spensley agreed that there were several legal and policy issues which needed to be resolved with an eye towards seeking a resolution which would benefit the public interest. Mr. Pflaum requested that a working session be established in an attempt to resolve the outstanding problems. He indicated that it was obvious that there had been a cremendous communications problem to date. mo inra UinutM -4-<01/16/92) ■iMit . "LUliPi I ■ ■'":J='<r ' ^■-.. /l^'w \l rt-Vo.:- V’. vV. b-i- k'-t .Sf ■.(••.■■r i>' 'V.'. ■ , \Xsii ♦■ ••' if'"- tyrJ "I V iMRafifti 4«»r* f%: - '*%. %f- ■ V- r-. II*''W- /.tJ , ■iiW"W0M,.. .,• V."'''‘iir^-'’’ • V* -- p-r .s:vvv . L ’ ' ■' i&:\. ■ m •* 1 ‘^'-; ‘ 'ii%: ^!^-' President Spensley stated that, although he believe the Board had eoa^llad with the applicants' request to engage in a broad-ran9in9 discussion concerning the project in its conceptual Stagas* ha nonetheless appreciated receiving the applicants* legal position in a stwao rather than in papers filed with the court. President Spensley concurred that a process wnich would assist in gathering additional information would be helpful, and suggested that an Ad Hoc Committee be appointed f<^r tnis purpose. Manager Lindley noted that he would support the appointment of such a Comalttae, only if it would coronly with all open meeting law reguiresMnts and if any policy issues would ultimately be decided by the Board. It was moved by Manager Lindley that the permit application be tabled, and that the President be authorized to appoint a working Committee to meet with representatives of t^e applicants in sn effort to resolve the outstanding issues. The BK>tion was seconded by Manager Love. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. President Spensley noted that he accepts some responsibility for the miscommunication, and further noted that he appreciates the frank discussion which had taken place, and the willingness of all present to appear before the Board. President Spensley then noted for the record the receipt of Mr. Dayton’s letter and referred the letter to legal staff for review and comment. 91«141. Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board — Alteration of s wetland in the Roberts Bird Sanctuary to Increase.QPeB_wele UfiA- It waa moved by Manager Lindley, seconded by Manager Erickson, that that issue be tabled. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _— Installation of approximately 250 lineal feet of rip ran shoreline erosion protection. Staff indicated that additional information had been provided in regard to this rip rap application, and that staff is nov. satisfied that the application meets all of the District's rules, and as such, recommends approval. It was moved by Manager Thomas, seconded by Manager Maple, that the application be approved and the permit issued, based upon recommendation of staff that the applicant has met all applicable rules. Upon v^'te, the motion carried unanimously. 92-03. Bob Jasper — feet of rip ran of approximately 115 lineal protection. Staff indicated that additional intor.mation had been received since the issuance of its report and now recommends that the application be approved. Manager Thomas moved that the permit be approved, based upon staff's recommendation, with the permit to be issued upon receipt of those items, as set forth in staff's Sinuti -5-(01/16/92) r islsiit r :<'-v-r- yf^.- ia*v V'- ro|K>rt« in a form and substance acceptable to staff. Manager Erickson seconded the motion. Upon vote, the motion carried unaninously. Board deliberation regarding whether an Environmental should be required for the Channel Drive HoMeoifB!ar*s Association Dredoina Project located on St. Alban's Bay of Lake Minnetonka. Mr. Jones stated that since the close of the public hearing, the following documents had been received for inclusion in the record: 1.A letter dated November 26, 199^ from Mr. Tom Hovey, Area Hydrologist, Division of Waters, Department of Natural Resources; 2.A letter dated November 30, 1991, from Mr. Charles E. Wendle, a representative of the petitioners; and 3.A mefwrandum from Ron Quanbeck dated December .., 1991, reviewing issues which the Board of Managers had requested staff to examine. Mr. Jones provided the Managers with a draft resolution prepared by staff denying the petitioner's request for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (“EAW**) in regard to the Channel Drive Homeowner's Association Dredging Project (the "Project**). Mr. Jones stated that, in reviewing the record, staff had isolated three issues. The first issue is whether an EAW is required on a mandatory basis under Minnesota Rule 4410.430, aubpart 25, as a harbor or marina project involving an area of 20,000 or more square feet. Mr. Jones noted the conclusion of Mr. Hovey of the DNR that the project does not constitute a harbor or marina project. Mr. Jones further indicated that both Mr. Hovey and Mr. Quanbeck conclude that the amount to be dredged in the dock area would be less then the 20,000 square feet required as a threshold to the mandatory EAW in any event. The second issue is whether an EAW is required on a mandatory basis under Minnesota Rules 4410.430, subpart 27, if the area affected by the Project exceeds the one-acre threshold requirement. Again, both Mr. Hovey and Mr. Quanbeck calculated the area to be excavated. In both cases, the calculations show the area to be excavated is less than the one-acres threshold requirement. The third issue is whether an EAW should be required on a discretionary basis under Minnesota Rule 4410.450, based upon a finding of the Board that the Project has the potential for significant environmental effects. Staff's review of the record suggests that the dredging project in question is not ilfifcf.loard Uinutm -6-(01/16/92) Lib? ‘•h .:■ • s ' .’^'z' •r^- f'iS ’;j-’ iT.l.’ - , -w. . ; ■ s. ' :L' - -i: .•> hit-mm '3T ■iigaiCicaatly different from other dredginq projects which occur OA LalfiA MiAoetonlia on a regular basis. The only unusual circuBStance raised by petitioners is the location of an auto salvage yard near a wetl'^nd which drains into .:he area to be dredged. However, no credible evidence was entered into the record showing that the auto salvage yard is a source of significant pollution. To the contrary, Mr. Hovey points out in his letter of Hovenber 26, that the PCA has no record of any spill or release from underground storage tanks at the site. As such, the evidence on the record "fails to demonstrate that the project SHiy have potential for significant environmental effects." President Spensley noted that all Managers had been present for the public hearing, and had received copies of the written laaterials submitted after that hearing. It was moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager Erickson, that the resolution, as preparad by staff, be approved, based upon the recod before the Board. Mr. Jones called the roll. Managers Thomas Maple, Erickson, Lindley, Love and President Spensley all v^oted in the affinsative. The motion carried 6-to-O. President Spensley instructed Mr. Jones to notify the Environmental Quality Board ("BQB*) of the District's action, and to forward a copy of the resolution (a copy of which is attached to these minutes) to the EQB. Executive Committee Report President Spensley reported on the meeting of the Executive Committee, which was held on January 14, 1992. The Executive Cosnittee reviewed the status of the engineering contract with JasMS M. Montgomery Consulting Engineers, Inc. ("JMM"). The Executive Committee recommends extending the current contract through May 22, 1992, by approving a contract amendment to that effect. The amendment would further indicate that for any capital is^rovement project being considered by the Board, JMM would not be guaranteed that they would serve as the District's engineers for the project, although they would be allowed to bid on the work, along with other engineering firms. Finally, the Executive Committee recoiwnends that, in extending the contract, the Board authorize all work done by JMM to date during the month of January. President Spensley moved the Executive Committee's recommendation. The motion was seconded by Manager Lindley. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. The Executive Committee further requests thac legal counsel begin the process of soliciting proposals from consulting engineer firms interested in providing services to the District. The Executive Committee recommends a two-step process. The first step would involve the solicitation of interest and qualification from potential applicants. The second step would involve narrowing the applicants to a manageable number, and soliciting more in-depth information from those applicants deemed to be best able to UOID amrd UimitM -7-(01/16/92) < «IV Fv V 1 L*jfT*H#l»i r«T;TC« r*irBr*j [•IWr*! Wh II •i#r#r T« L*)lf L«i«*rc 7rtMa4*L*wiii •1 i«« [«Ki mil)*] [•# VfT«HMtl SYil •ItU Mltfl!r«w»i NIVtil Pm. m.. c.,.•:;..., m ):i-h. ■■■iisftm- r/iT V r&^- N"- ■ te rii. -r: ■ ', :‘i - •••• ...... , .K^c:;v - I" W-\ ■IS> 1^- 'i'i;;-- U ' ■' :;-^A tg ■ijT.'- l$it ^i> -** ■: V- ■- iv ’‘- X-x -.m- increase data collection activities concer.’ he Creek s capacity# thereby aore accurately establi' <c che Creek's capability to handle increased flow Fin y the Plan would be attended to extend the dam's operating <’ja: n i.’ t:o November, as appropriate. It was moved by Hanager Thom..s, seconded by Manager Maple# that the Plan be submitted to the Department of Natural Resources# with the application to be supple .ient<bd to include these three recommendations# which were b 1 ' at tlM public hearing held by the Plans a . ’=’1 concerning ' *0 Headwaters Control Structu'f Or was noted that these changes had been approvet staff to draft language implementing the rhang brought back to the Board for its final review jr vote# the motion carried unanimously. on ‘■est i.ony taxen - j C mittee in lan . It , with .on would be approval. Upon Irgaamag: a Report The Managers revit i the outstanding invoices which had been recommended for payment. it was moved by Manager Lind ley, seconded by Manager Erickson, that the invoices be paid. Upon vote# the motion carried unanimously. Narager Lindliy indicated ..t there is a neef to develop imsre de..ailed information concerning the status of inter-fund loans. Manager Lindley moved the reappointment of Mr. Lapic as the Board's Accountant, at the same rates charged by Mr. Lapic during 1991. The motion was seconded by Manager Thomas. Upon vote# the motion carried unanimously. Manager Lindley indicated that Du Wa-ne Schibilla and Associates would perform the annual audit again this year. He indicated that the Board must authorize him to sign disclosure authorization forms, allowing for materials to la disclosed to the nud^tora. It was so moved by Manager Lindley -^^nd seconded by ^aaager Thomas. Upon vote, the motion carricri unanimously. Manager Lindley stated that the Board w.ll need to begin withholding FICA from per diem payments in 1992. In order to assist in this process, there is a need to submit reimbursements for payment on a twice ye*<rly basis. Upon discussion, the Managers concurred that such a per diem reimbursement schedule was appropriate. Engineer's apart Mr. Quanbeck reported on the following items: 1, The Lake level as of January 15, 1992, was 929.60 feet, which is well above the desired level of ^'28.6. Mr. Quanbeck indicated that there is currently a slow flow over the spillway at the Headwaters Structure. Mr. Quanbeck reviewed wit>' the Board a Board lllnutss q-(01/16/32) '■ ■ ■■ •H'. - >-V i- UtJ:-C tv '■4. H- ■'•- r.V ■■ ■ /■' ,"5- ; . ■• draft press release indicating ‘.nat the Lake is 1.08 feet over the de :ired level, and noting the potential for spring flooding. 2. Mr. Quanbeck reviewed the LCMR's request for finding proposals. He noted that an appropriate proposal might deal with Pesvey Pond« or a part of the Long Lake Clean Mater Partnership. He further indicated that proposals relating to abstracts suhnitted to the LCMR by the Oist.ict might be appropriate. It was onved by Manager Lindley, seconded by Manager Maple, to authorize the Engineer to prepare and subniit such an application for two of the abstracts relating to identification of sources of excess nutrients loading to Lake Minnetonka, and investigation of phosphorus loading from abandoned wastewater treatment facilities. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimusly. 3. Mr. Quanbeck noted that the Board of Water and Soil Resources will be involved in the designation of the Local Oovernnent Units ("LGUs") under the recently enacted wetlands legislation. The LGUs will have the responsibility to oversee ^he Act during an interim period starting this year. A discussion ensued in which the Board concurred that the Watershed District is in the best position to coordinate wetland issues. It was noted that this is consistent with the Lake Minnetonka Plan, and that municipalities should receive such designation only when Cosqprehensive Stormwater Management Plans have been approved. The Board requested Mr. Jones to contact ne Board of water and Soil Resources to emphasize the District's position on this matter. 4. Mr. Quanbeck noted that correspondence had been received from Jim Von Lorenz concerning conditions in the Creek around 36th Street in St. Louis Park. Mr. Von Lorenz stated that there is much debris in the Creek at this point, and that it is adversely affecting the marshland in the Meadowbrook Lake area. Mr. Von Lorenz addressed the Board, and indicated that cities do not do a good job of keepi.ig the marshlands and the Creek free of debris. There is a need for some organization to take responsibility for this matter. He stated that the Izaak Walton League has expressed some interest. Manager Maple concurred with Mr. Von Lorenz, and indicated that his points were particu'arly timely, in light of the high-water conditions and the impact that m' srials in the Creek could have on the Creek's ability to handle the substantial Spring flow. President Spensley stated that the District should work with Cities to make sure all relevant ordinances are followed. He indicated that the debris is not only an eyesore, but could lead to flooding problems. The Board directed staff to contact the cities along the Creek to express these concerns. 5. Mr. Quanbeck noted that the metro-MAWD organizational meeting is scheduled for February li, 1992. * e .»Board liinutas -10-(01/16/92) ~*'li ' ll'ifilrtiitll r -■ :■<»■-•••• ■•■^#;*.• Attornwr*a Report Nr. Jonas reported that: 1. Tha DVn has signed the Gayle's Marina restoration order. Manager Lova stated that there is speculation that the dnr may ba interested in purchasing the Gayle’s Marina site. :.;.'i ■ L ' * ■‘hi.' 14.Si..:: ’rlRifei 444-' 2. A aMMting was held with the principal authors of the watershed legislation, together with representatives of the i.oard of Ifater and doll Resources, Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts, the Attorney General’s staff, and certain interested ■atropolitan watershed districts. Mr. Jones stated that, as a 4'eSttlt of the meeting, a revised bill was being prepared. He noted that the District will seek special legislation allowing the Hennepin ^ onty Attorney to prosecute any misdemeanor violation of District .rules where no municipality is willing to claim jurisdiction. The remainder of the bill, as it relates to the stility to recover enforcement costs, the imposition of civil fines* and the streamlining of the appellate process in response to the Marina decision of the Minnesota Sr.nreme Court, r^Min siihstantially unchanged. President Spensley indicated that the Senate lnvir'^»*raent Committee has agreed to hear the bill during this session. Mr. Jones stated that, with the revisions it is hoped that the bill will receive significant support from all interested parties. I : r,’.- ■ if , President Spensley appointed an Ad Hoc Committee to meet with the representatives of Carlson Real Estate, in regard to the dredging appl* ation. He appointed Vice-President Love to chair the Committee, and also appointed Managers Erickson and Maple to serve on the Corarai-tee. President Spensley indicated that all meetings of the Committee should be appropriately noticed, and that other members of the Board should feel free to attend any of the meetings. tS/V-'i (rj ■ S,.'" §:■^4' ▼ Adjournment. There being no further business before the Board, was adjourned at 10:59 p.ro. the meeting Respectfully submitted. John E. Thomas - Secretary Attachment 918DAJ(108) IK3flD Board Mimitaa -11 (01/16/92) E*S'' Mf %s m* C;-?' • >fP ' 'MS teipr &■: ■' 5l' t'- :. . s-v;: : te«^ ■: •Si#".. ■rM ' 'it%r'y.: ;'V:- :-. ^ ■ ■ MU:,uc ■ m' MS- ,,■;:. j;' . i’ :r> ]im- ■U' ■*’ • iii; <-l'V* - ■m '^«- m- U' i 5- , t-:-^ V;h RESOLUTIOH NiaifEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT A RESQU7TIOH FI AS8B88Mnr WORK CHAMffi DRIVE HC PROJECT. ISO THAT AH EHVISONMErTAL T IS HOT REQOIREO FOR THE 1IER*S ASSOCIATIOB DREDGIHG. * -» :);i:SREAS the Minnesota Envircnn«ntal Quality Board (’EOB") received • petition frora citizens (the "Petitioners*) requesting that >«n Esvironaental Assessment worksheet ("EAW*} be required in regard to the proposed dredging project to be undertaken by the Channel Drive HosMOwner's Association (*Association*) on St. Alban's Bay Of Lake Minnetonka (the "Project*); and MREIUSA8 tiM EQB designated the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District <*liCWD*) to be the Responsible Governmental Unit (*RGU*) to * .snsiae whether an EAW should be required; and WHEREAS the Board of Managers of the lOfD ("Board”) conducted a public hearing concerning the Project at its regularly scheduled OHMtil^ of November 21, 1991, to take testimony from representatives of the Petitioners, representatives of the Association, and the general public; and WHEREAS testinony was provided by the Petitioners, the Association# and representatives of the Department of Natural Resources (”DNR*)# with materials provided to the Board by the ituiividuals testifying being made a part of the record; and MIEREAS the Board closed the public hearing after taking testimony and indicated that the record in this matter would also include any written comments received from Interes'ed persons within ten (10) days of the completion of the hearing; and ■i WHEREAS such written comments were received from the representative of the Petitioners, the DNR, and from the MCWU’s staff. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Managers of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, based upon the testimony and the record compiled by staff and officially before the Board of Managers, does hereby find as follows: (1)An EAW is not required on a mandatory basis unler Minnesota Rule 4410.4300, subp. 25, since the proposed project does not constitute a harbor or marim project, nor does it meet the threshold requirement for mandatory EAW status for harbors or marinas of involving an area of 20,000 or more square feet; I. - .. . V (2) l?W An EAM is not required on a mandatory basis under Minnesota Rule 4410.4300, subp. 27, since the area affected by the Project does not exceed the one-acre threshold requirement; (3)An EAM is not required on a discretionary basis under Minnesota Rule 4410.4500, since the Board finds that there it no credible factual evidence in the record before it upon which to determine that the Project has the potential for significant enviroruaental effects. In reaching this conclusion, the Board fimSs that: (•)Ho evidence was presented indicating that the auto salvage yard located near a wetland, which drains into the area to be dredged, is causing pollution tl' .<b) P'S .V Ho evidence was presented indicating that the dredging activity contemplated by the Project would create an environmental impact significantly different from other dredging activity which is routinely undertaken on Lake Minnetonka or other public waters throughout the State. Adopted this 16th day of January, 1992 ir^r-918DAJ(106) r- -2- 'V /'■ i M f •*Anliilce Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission M30AK STREET • EXCELSIOR MINNESOTA «J331 • (612> 4:»4 55J9,i' ■■■ Kli,:» .-.:• ■ ■ Sli' -?- b'; - ;»r , - m0^: fe-bb’’ * 1 11 in JV. 'b':-"' iffli J ¥ r b; j-rs.?-i-.:vr- a-%2w . ,* Si. alsa;".:.' ■ .'f LAKE HimiETONrA CABLE COBIfUN I CATIONS COHMISSION FULL COBHISSION MEETINO " ■"— TUESDAY. FEBRUAIY 13. 1992 5:00 P.H. EXCELSIOR COBBUNITY CENTER AUDITORIUM FEB 1 2 13-- Ag g|j£A Call to Ord«r Approval o£ January Minutes Reports a) Of £ 1cer 3:Treasurer *1 f. wt r • ' Year End i Montnly laims Keport b) AtlBinic trator ■'1 roduc r i on . uor d i nator c> Triax Untaftiahed Business a> Presentstiori by Keoionai '.hannei o statl regarding unacceptable cable carriage b) Renewal of channel 6 Fees c) Tciax Report on Filteen Systee Extensions £or 1992 d) Triax Sample of Customer Billing "Stuffer and statement regarding tne billing change ot March 1, 1992 New Business Adjournment e) Triax Plan of Latest Marketing Effort f) Quarterly Newsletter Report g) Employee Compensation in Lieu ot Insurance i 1^. m- 'W fcV ;,- m' itfpv ^ y^m'^ uM^y-- [yp;p/^^ '^'^yy.' mSi':'' :^r- ^ y-l:k!yy: ffi’? 1\- ’ jt'- ■ •fi . -5r ..■t-'-:«'4 »■ ,. :::a‘^^v- Wm. Hlii»-:: mm.. y,mt. '•> »■ iP LAKE HINNETONKA CABLE C0HMUNICA7I0NS COMMISSION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 21. 1992, 5:00 P.M. |K>0« 204, EXCELSIOR COMMUNITY CENTER 443 OAK STREET, EXCELSIOR CALL TO ORDER Ch«ir Br*nc«l called the to ordar *«t 5:05 P.M DIRECTORS PRESENT Barb Brancel/ShorewoocJ Jl« Olda/Excelsxor Too Markle/Mtk- Beach Otto Wilcaek/Mini.etriata Tim Sala*-^/Minnetrista Lesley Hughee-Seamans/ Tonka Bay OTHERS PRESENT Jio Dan 1•1s/Adm1n. Kathe Ehiert/Ad Asst. Paul Natarow/TriaM Jim Schindler ' Pr. coor Jane Bremer/Triax Jeremy Borash/guest XI.APPROVAL or HINUTES Brancel asked for discussion oi moti 'n to approve the •mutes of «-he November and Deceraber meeting. Motion 1.21.R2.I: O.'da movec to approve the minutes, Hughes- S^ljiOAns seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Ill BJ££gfi.ta Motion 1-21.92.2; Wiiczek moved to approve tne Juat Claims for the period 11/13/91 through 12/30/91. Salaaar seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Admini«trator*s Report. Chair Brancel introduced the nev administrator, Jim Daniels to the coaeissioners. He stated that he had met per­ sonally with sach of the fourtsen city managers, explaining that he felt communication between the commission and the cities it 9^v-ves was important. He then described the information dis tributed regarding the upcoming MACTA conference, suggesting that he and Jim Schindler attend and as many commissioners as possible. Olds stated that the MACTA conference is usually reae ably priced, therefore commissioners are encouraged to at tend. He recommended the commission continue to support atten­ dance by as many commissioners as possible. Daniels agree to follow up on attendance with commisai<^ners by sending out the agenda for the conference. Motion 1.21.2.3: Olds moved to approve the expenditure of funds to support attendance at the MACTA conference by as many commis­ sioners as possible. Wilczek seconded. The motion passed un­ animously. , ^ w * Daniels stated that he had recently attended a Chamber of Commerce meeting and was asked to talk about the commission. He will be working on prograeming with the thr »e .chambers that serve the commiSwxon's area. He stated that Kathe Ehlert would be leaving at January, and he would be looking for a repir .-ement. Production RmpojA Jim Schindler distributed the production report. the end of c 11xng 23 ■4 1 h- f.if I !•' h'i dtt' :'r R?'K»t Wa-fm:.0 ; f h" V.:u* ,... ?is»5 ; :.. ^ -•■ c:-' if I'. ■■r ■ ii •' *^vY ;• ;^r.< * ■|. LMCCC Minute*“ - i i a Two H*» vlxrectecl cow's!*** xonwt s ar’^icie* on locei proqra* H f» * i 9 o d 1.9 t 1 b u t e 'i * procirea* produced since Noveraoer lb*. Attention to several recent n-v^paper •in«, as well as orientation classes letter of appreciation froe the Inter 'nur-h coawunity Association. Schindler stated that w rK<»hops would continue, ^ne Video Producers Cluo continues to ee% . , and a snoot intj u scheduled for February 12 with the Chatipers of commerce. Triax Report Nexaroe introduced hi* guest, cane oremer, wno wouid be ad- greasing the coeeission later . He stated ruai '-ne monthly report indicated that homes passe i had maintained at 5i.41 51.5f and he would supplv the written report the next day. He then distributed the st lo production report*. (taxarov stated that L'aniels had written to him regarding tne Cherry Hill Far* area, and that »hat area had been scheduled tci •xtenslon last Hovember, but the early winter storm nad stopped construction. There are fourteen other extension project* re^oy as soon a* weather permits. ulds asxed Nararow to supply a list ot those project*. Nszarow alsc stated the» had responded to a suoscrlber complaint regarding the i.ate fee charge. Hughea- jgsieaiens stated it would be helpful to subscribers it the date psyaent was actually due were printed on the bill. Naxarow stated the subacribei '.ot if icat i on mailed lict ycir I.«d in«*. am Corsatlon on it. He .said statements wei« mailed the first ot ths month# with payment due on the 12th, but w3io accepted until th# 22nd without assessment of s late fee. Markl# said that was a very short time for people who aig.it be out of town. Daniels asked Nsxarow to clarify due dates and he stated he would respond at the following month’a meeting. IV.UNFINISHED BVSIWESS a) Hotro Cable Network Ch. 6 signal problem; report £roe Trisx Naxarow stated that at the November meeting he had explained to oeffloIssioneia that they had been work*ng on the channel b problee# but because it goes through several amplifiers before they rscelve it, they can't find the source of the problem. Pattrin explained to Daniels -he path the signal takes f’'om King Cable in Brooklyn Park, through the elementary school at Highways 12 and lui and then to Triax. Naxarow agreed t^ .ar­ range a meeting between Daniels and Tom Wimler to try and find a bwttei way of receiving that signal. V.NEW BUSINESS a) Triax "franchise tax" listing on January (1992) monthly stotement Chair Brancel explained that the January Triax bill had a bl addition to it, identified as a franchise "tax", stating that the funds received b/ the commission are a "fee", not a tax, ana Triax should cia»"ify that, explai-iing that she and Daniels had discussed it with Triax. The rommisMion had received a written tsb. •m--Wfc ■to :v ■;■>■ P i5 M- s‘"44^’’-' cBifi- pi^ .;■:. .>t. S .v; !:V £‘» Vv--' tov...g.^:- ^!vto.:. i.;;a: ■ ‘4:^-1 ^ >.-V ■^rnm LHCCC Hinut«s -- P«g<? Thr«« statMent from Triax indicating a change m the billing, but what thay actually did was different trow what the Coaaisaion and Daniels had understood fro* the written coaaunicaticn. Brancel asked for clarification and solutions from Triax. Masarow introduced Jane Breeer, of Solutions. Inc., a company (^et works with cable companies to remedy comaunications dit fxculties. She agreed that Triax's original letter could be subject to several interpretstions, and that this is not a tax, but a fee and subsequent bills would reflect that change. She subeitted a eeao to be distributed to subscribe a which could be used as a newspaper aJ or letter to attempt to clarify what the company's intent had been. Two things that happened; a rate in­ crease of 51 and an itemiration of the franchise fee, explaining that the franchise fe is not a new fee, but that Triax simply wanted to identify it at this time. Bremer stated that Triax is Hfixious to work with the cbmmission to clarify the issue with subscribers. Olds asked if it was the intention of Triax to in- er«M« their fees by 5X, Bremmer said yes. it was. Oida stated that whlls the cossission is not in a position to legislate rates# he had seen no indication that Triax would be raising im-dia Afid that subscribers had no idea of a rate increase either. Bremer stated that Triax had three goals to accomplish with her letter: 1. there had been a 5% rate increase dictated by increased programming costs to break out the franchise fee as a separate item vO explain the value that subscriber receive for that franchise fee She stated that the goal of the Cs pany is to apologise to the commission and sake a commitment that it would not happen again. Brencel asked how the memo would be used, Bremer stated it could be used however the commission wishes, as a newspaper ad or a bill Insert or both. She recommended a newsoaper ad, as a bill insert would take 45 days to implement. Daniels would give a list of the five local papers to Bremer. Daniels stated that according to the commission's attorney, the way the franchise "tax" is now itemized is not acceptable. Bremer stated she had not seen that legal opinion and asked tor a copy. Brancel asked that the item be removed from the bill until the matter of the wording is resolved; Bremer stated any change to the bill takes 45 days. Pattrin stated that the commission receives 5X of gross revenues# excluding sales tax, and the way it is stated now is a way of excluding the rate increase from the franchise fees. Olds stated that it is okay to say that 5X of the goes to the commission, but to add it as an additional item on top of monthly charges is confusing and misleading. Wilczek stated that mathematically it is incorrect and therefore not in coro- plianre with the franchise agreement. Sr 2i.r stated that this issue had to be re-oived as soon as possible, that he had lost a great deal of conij.dence in Triax 2 3 ifc;;'■ .. . • v .r-v W- •■.. :■ , .... .. '■ ’fe%V ■' ■'•'•-PM ?;?'■„ i<.; . 'pim 'i: '■ t:.. ■•:#■• isT,y I !l iX- ^--mr ■ /■-.• ■•”.) '% 1 •'■ m 5#" lijiK-.S?*.-' , . LHCCC Minutes -- Page Four •nd th« coBBiisslon has a prot>le» with Triax being straight with thee. He reeinded coeeisslonera that Triax had recently been found in violation of the franchise agreement on the service ^nii charge and was shocked that this kind of thing could happen right after that. He stated that Bremer's memo had to be com­ pletely reworded, that it was unacceptable as it stood. He w«»nt on to say that legal opinion states that this is a violation ot the franchise agreement and to call a rat© i.-icrease a tax is outrageous and deceptive. Putting it in a different form is s;Lal.lsrly deceptive and tha commisiion should adopt a resolution immediately. Hughes^Seamana guoted from Bremer's memo the phrase as vou Icnow” (with reference to a rate increase*, stating that no one hnew of e rate increase. She felt using a newspaper ad woviid be a good idea, but clarification should be in the bill also. Bremer stated that Triax had legal counsel and had been ad­ vised that what they wore doing was appropriate. Brancel asked Triax to remove the 'SX franchise tax* item from the March bill if the matter had not been resolved bv Feb 10. Neither Naaarow nor Bremer were authorized to respond, but stated they would answer the commission the next dav. Mazarow agreed to piece a newspaper ad and change the format of thm bill. Herkle stated that Bremer's memo covers the ma lor points, •uggeeting that Triax publish an updated rate schedule in the ad along with Bremer's memo. *^j-ancel stated that whan subscribers called Triax tor an ex- pIa..ation of the bill, they were not told it was a rate in­ crease. but th t it was an increase to the coeemiasion. Nazarow st^stmd that cijtomer service representatives were trained to ©x- plsin it properly. She then suggested that the meeting be car­ ried over two days until January 23, 1992, in order to give Triax an opportunity to respond. Salazar suggested that Daniels talk to Nazarow and list all areas that the coaeieeion needed clarified, and Pattrin asked that a sample of the corrected bill be presented at th© 1/23/92 meeting. Old* stated that the clearest thing to do would be for Triax to publish a revised rate echedui© that shows a 5X increase. Brancel agreed. b) Quarterly "Public Access* newsletter Daniels stated he would like to know the commi.ssions feelings about starring a quarterly newsletter, highlighting ^he ac­ tivities of the commission. There was discussion about methods of distribution, postage costs and the co «t of a still camera. Osniels agreed to submit a preposa. to th commission estimating costs for production and diatribut j.on. c'' Approval to purchase camera Daniels asked for approval to purchase a camera for use in the office. Motion 1.21.92.4;_ _^Pattrin moved to appro e expenditure of not % ■ tg,-’’.--r " r'^' C r.fV■ rv' / \ - iP' ‘it:,-.:'’ Ik; .rLf-. :■ m-:- •'*- -li 4? ^ V i; -swv' ' .-:. ■ ■ir^ ■ ■■ ■ L '■ I -' % W' .:\m ^.^:- '' y LMCCC Mlnut«* -- Page Fiv« «ore than #200 for paaaedi unanluousiy. stxil camera. Salazar seconded. The motion <•) R«Mwal of Channel 6 fees Daniels explained that sone cable coamieaions contribute to Channel 6, depending upon how much they intend to use it to d. play eoee ot their prograeeing. He is concerned that if chani.el 6 is not watchable, then the commissic.n would not want to proeote It. Milctek stated that channel 6 doesn't really eake nn effort to provide the channel to us, therefore, in the past, the coaeiesion had decided not to contribute to channel 6. Pattrln suggested that a representative be asked to address the coeeisaion. Olds stated that the commission had supported chan­ nel 6 Binieally in the past because it is im> >rtant, but had cut back because of the lack of quality. Jersey Dorash stated that he had announced that hia rogram would be on channel 6 and asked for financial support from the coeeiesion to do that. It is important for him to widen hia eudience, and he would be changing the format from 1/2 hour to one hour end broadcasting bi-weekly insteao of monthly. He stated that he thinks the fee is SI 5 per showing. Olds stated he would be supportive of airing outgoing programming, rather ^hen Just channel 6 in general. Dar ...els stated that Channel 6 s rate would he determined by how often it would be used to dis­ play programming. Wilczek asked for a specific figure from channel 6 before ar agreement coulJ be reached. Brancel askeo for volunteers to help work out pay issues with employees and compensation in lieu ot insurance. Wilcsek and Olds offered to help with that. Pattrin stated that there is a problem on CNBC (channel 26>. Namerow stated he would have Tom Wimier look at it and respond. Jim Schindlei stated that Jeremy Borash would like to do a live call-in show from the Excelsior studio. In order to do that he would need a telephone intercom system. Radio Shack has the necessary equipment for S24.95. Brancel authorized Schindler to purchase the intercom. Brancel thei asked for a motion to carry the meeting over to Thursday, January 23, 1992, at 5:00 P.M. Motion 1.21.92.5: Wilczek moved to carry tne meeting over to Thursday, January 23, 1992 at 5:00 P.M. Hugi.es-Seamans seconded. The motion passed unanimously. K:•;4i ■'s • I-' V :• V- i-:'„ .■ My-A: if'-- '•' %'.' mi: p> Ml,//' mM ,, "’ ‘%te. ■•;,1 f S? .■iH; '■ :'^- LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION CARRY OVER OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING THURSDAY« JANUARY 23, 1992, 5:00 P.M. ROOM 204 EXCELSIOR COMMUNITY CENTER 443 OAK STREET, EXCELSIOR Chair Brancal called the eeeting back to order at 5:U5 PM on Thursday, January 23, 1992. DIRECTORS PRESENT Barb Brancol/Shoreeood Jte Olds/Excelsior Otto Wilczek/Minnetrista Lesley Hughes“Seaeans/Tonka Bay Tie Salasar/Minnetrista :>TKERS PRESENT Jin DanleIs/Adm1n . Paul Nazarow/Trlax Ric hanaon/Triax Chair Brancel asked Paul Nazarov* to ^.Jdress the coemission hadregarding their response to the "franchise tax" issue whic^ not been resolved at the January 21, 1992 meeting. Naza*ow in­ troduced Ric Kanson, Director of Operations, Triax Western Division, stating that he would respond. Hanson began by stating that Triax wished to apologize publicly for the confusing letter regarding the separate franchise fee line item that W4*s broken out on the customer's billing statements wi^lch began January 1, 1992. He stated that he felt a sentence explaining that the net effect of breakir.g out the franchise fee would result in 5X increase on the cus­ tomers monthly bill would have saved a lot of confusion. The notification t> the commission was not intended to hide a rate increase either to the commission or to Triax subscribers. Regarding the legality of the way Triax is breaking out the franchise fee as a separate line item on the bill, Hanson stated that many cable operators in the country break out the franchise fee in exactly the same manner. He stated Triax's legal counsel in Washington DC supports Triax's actions as legal. However, Triax -oes .lot intend co fight this with the LMCCC, preferring not to spend money on legal fees to resolve something that should be settled between the LMCCC, Jim Daniels and Paul Nazarow. He stated that Triax would change the bills to conform to the way t-MCCC wanes them to lo-k, in nc way stating that the way the franchise fee was shown on the jary billing was wrong O’- illegal. Triax would add ehls change to the March 1, 1992 mtatemeiit, as it is too late for the February statements. He then apologized again for the misi.ea'iing letter sent to the com­ mission concerning the franchise fees, but reiterated tiiat Triax does not apologize for breaking out the franchise fees as a line item, and reserves the right to look at this agajn in the fu­ ture. He expressed hope that in the future, the communication between Triax and LMCCC can keep improv..."»g so that occurrences like this do not repeat themselves. Han.?on stated that he had read Fazarow's letter *‘od other letters from regional managers, mtating that it is uni .tunate that the information that the net >* • -•mmIr: Gr< "^‘>-.-»',-j‘V:- ■ -•'j I v'V, -*‘ 5^-5.I®:^ :-y. ®;c; ■ I'. i’-Ai-’ mt-': ■■ ,' '.■■■■■ ^ 4; ■• -.’!•! -:V^. . - ^,^•*>'t: <'■ ' ''"■ ^' , ■ VT y- ■ *,• >'i' »•■ -r- “■ ■■:, ■*V4 •.;.i ■ i .; ■ ' ^m... LMCCC Minutes -- Page Two effect would be an increase of Si was not included. He apologized again for omitting that. Triax is wiliinq to change the bills, and notify subscribers in the manner tnat LMCCC and its legal counsel have requested in order to save future legal fees. He also stated that this misunderstanding was not the fault of Nazarow. He had been directed to break out the franchise fees on short notice. He explained that subscribers need to know that 5X of their charge is franchise fees. Wilczek asked Hanson to specify how the item would be ex plained on the bill; he explained that the fees would be listed, then by way of information the comment would appear, that "of this, ’i 'ertain amount is franchise fees." Nazarow and Daniels would review how it would appear before it goes out. Hanson stated that according to LMCCC counsel's example the subscribers would be paying approximately .09 per month sales tax. Olds stated that as a subscriber, he was disturbed by *^he lack of notification of the 5% increase. He has no objec on to Hating the franchise fee as a portion of the cost of cabx.jf. Motion 1.23.92.1: Wilczek moved to accept Triax's statement and that Jim Daniels will work out the final details. Pattrin seconded. Salazar asked Daniels if this was acceptable, he stated that it is consistent with the commission's attorney's position and was therefore acceptable. Salazar asked tor clarification of means of publication and that that information be included in the motion to accent. Hughes-Seamans asked that the date due appear on the >ill. The motion passed by a vote ot 5 ayes and one abstention (Salazar). Nazarow stated that the letter he distributed would be revised to eliminate confusion regarding the March 1 billing. Motion 1.23.92.2; Olds moved that Jim Daniels work with Paul Nazarow to develop language for the insert to subscribers as well as a press release to go to newspapers close to the March 1 billing date. Wilczek seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Daniels stated that by making this change by March 1, Triax does not have much time to get this done and the commiosion wishes to thank Triax for their prompt action. Brancel tnanked Triax for their cooperation and prompt action. Wilczek asked Triax to print a due date on the bill, Nizaraw stated they will do that. Nazarow distributed the Triax reports from December and January December 1991: Homes Passed Basic Subs Expanded Basic Subs Total Pay Units Total A/O's Total Remotes 11,916 107 6,046 3,615 3,957 2,356 (T ' ■.'iiH )5f-m ■ rlSi^i'll# :- ■• |ss= fei»r ms. «■ ■fer-: kListe*H-'■"•■ if P%>-ternHr ■&.S::m ■' *■:• • . . ■, *:• r^ *V ii;,--, :> Ay?:. 'X'^- LMCCC Minute* -- Page Three January 1992: Homes Passed Basic Subs Expanded Basic Subs Total Pay Units Total A/O's Total Remotes 1i.91b 104 6,0 30 3.597 3,999 2.321 He then stated that the Cable Cops w:il be doing their marketing progran* headquartered in the basement of the Sxcelsior Cossunity Center, starting February 1. The promotion will last no longer than five weeks. Daniels asked for a plan showing what cities the Cable Cops will be working in and when. Nazarow agreed to provide that. Motion 1.23.92.?! Wilczek moved to adjourn, Hughes-Seamans seconded. The mA>eting adjourned at 5:50 P.M. Respectfully sAbmitted. f/rZHSfc, ’iolleen Lindskoog. Ad'mrCnistrative Assistant ’ i ..r; ' ..a •••-*n; -, j . ^ v^v. •' ■*ffiS;'■i:--V ^ •W - ^pfi ’lijr ’•*U ■^:.r*• I Tonka Bayh.rMinnetonka Beach Excelsior !• , - Shoreifood ;$0flng Park Brono long Lake[t: h greenwood ^ Oiephaven Woodland Medina I Victoria I Minnetrista kSt. Bonifaclus - > >(»•#••• • fem' IT-ji'-'-sp---: LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Monthly Report December, 1991 EXPND HOMES BASIC PASSED SUBS GAIN (LOSS) 606 221 1,237 1,807 739 2,285 784 275 1,525 190 586 651 607 403 347 122 516 1,207 312 1,144 371 115 682 97 266 411 270 186 (3) 0 (1) 0 (8) (8) 5 (1) 7 2 1 2 2 0 11,916 6,046 (2) 50.73X TOTAL SUBS: 6,155 51.63% BASIC ONLY 9 1 21 20 8 17 7 1 9 1 2 8 3 0 107 1.7% GAIN (LOSS) 0 0 (1) 1 0 1 (1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PROMO TOTAL A/O'S TOiAL PAYS TOTAL REMOTES EXPND BASIC 223 214 131 0 142 84 59 0 171 208 159 0 929 763 480 3 115 165 114 0 849 763 502 0 196 225 135 1 76 . 65 36 0 505 432 290 1 84 72 42 0 175 156 86 0 239 196 123 0 195 171 115 0 58 101 84 0 3,957 3,6t5 2,356 5 13 (44)(11)(10) 1 i ■r* t'i K«r--« ri .,#■>- _^ ' ^ r.^ ^ ■• mm-^ ^" 'if' i®i'pis r^'S ' ■' - ’;. ::iii Bay ccnka Baach /iiy>iiljiifrtr INuKftdc i^l**'Miute - Mainxl•"-/if:- %m±mKn HxdlOTd '■■%. : mm '■^y ■yi^y „.bKvv. ^S'lfimetrLsta ~U<;.', It BaiifsciiaK,!| B'■V ■ -' -. .; *' ' • ■* 'k'-'-^:yy mm, km^iir ;-;'s* 0yteS'H«3 pf? p-#.:..-' ■ tes -a:.mm pfe. IOCS CC*9I 606 221 1,237 1,807 739 2,2B5 78U 275 1,525 190 586 651 607 11,916 lACE IffiJEElKA cm£ 0:>HKICXrrOS aMSSICN xrt EXRD MSTC GAIN SUBS (loss) 346 122 506 1,207 304 1,151 373 U8 677 96 263 411 268 186 6,030 50.605 TDM. SUBS: 6,134 51.47X Hxithly BEEoti JanLBtv. 1992 BASIC CM^ GAIN (loss) TDM. A/O'S TDEAL RAiS IDEAL REMTIES HOD EXRD msic (1)9 0 226 218 128 0 0 1 0 142 88 58 0 (8)20 (1)171 303 156 2 0 19 (1)928 748 471 0 (8)7 (1)114 164 109 1 7 17 0 866 763 ■495 0 2 7 0 201 231 132 1 a 3 1 0 79 65 40 0 (5)10 1 510 •433 287 0 (1)1 0 83 73 41 0 (3)1 (1)174 156 85 0 0 8 0 241 193 123 0 (2)3 0 195 171 ID 0 0 0 0 59 91 83 0 (16)104 (3)3,989 3,597 2,321 4 1.7%32 (18)(35)(1 A # •;.*S •c;2 wm r'- ■Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 • 1612) 474 5539 'W- *SS-Si‘ »sk; - ' ^ -.vf : '<v - vj-t-l-s. W. -V ■ ■ r-.-i:. Wi •’ m ' §0: g« f .f-: f^0- '>#¥-' ■ m.r January 28, 1992 Senator David Durenberger 154 Russell Senate Office Bldg. Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Durenberger: The Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission, made up of fourteen communities in the Lake Minnetonka area, urge your opposition to any senator Robert Dole (Kansas) amendment that significantly reduces the consumer protection provisions of S. 12. As a regulatory Commission, we solicit your support for the current S. 12 and ask you to look at a substantial increase in the measures that protect the consiuoer. The cable communications companies, have market supremacy, and until technology creates some real competition, the subscriber deserves regulatoiy protection. Your vote is required to pass this cable legislation (S. 12), and prevent any effort by Kansas Senator Robert Dole to weaken the regulatory measures. Vote FOR pro-consumer progress legislation! Sincerely, Barbara Brancel, Chair Lake Minnetonka Cable Commission - .. __- - .-■* l.-'V- . • r" ' ■S^;6r""w^Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission ^■■WP SSSS?BW»;. f. r* ■:'pr. gm ''&■' "^i- i^pv- mm '■•.* tr!.. n~'' K* /* 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 • (6121 474 5539 January 28, 1992 Senator Paul WeiIstone 702 Hart Senate Bldg. Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Wellstone: The Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission, made up of fourteen communities in the Lake Minnetonka area, urge your opposition to any Senator Robert Dole (Kansas) amendment that significantly reduces the consumer protection provisions of S. 12. As a regulatory Commission, we solicit your support for the current S. 12 and ask you to look at a substantial increase in the measures that protect the consumer. The cable ccxranunications companies, have market supronacy, and until technology creates some real competition, the subscriber deserves regulatory protection. Your vote is required to pass this cable legislation (S. 12), and prevent any effort by Kansas Senator Robert Dole to weaken the regulatory measures. Vote FOR pro-consumer progress legislation! Sincerely, Barbara Brancel, Chair Lake Minnetonka Cable Commission ■ . A. . f a-A't frS: ■?» h tP ■ -- V r"#= ^. * ® " ~B c eg bT &w 5^ * r Sa 3 e ntiii HHi hF npJil ■11*1 ^ lllll “ I? P^SII •- ies&BiiS *41 ■if®! l!Ufli illSf • *? ; »!• • / ; -. r S 12 - Winning Margin Is the Only Question By JEANNINE AVERSA - WASHINGTON —If ihectjo-1& ' - - - venbonal wiadoin on CiyitolWW:. . H^l is 10 be believed, the ca­ ble re-regulation bil! S 12 will be passed in the Senate this week- The cnicial question is whether a less onerous package bdi^ peddled firan- tically by the industry can gar ­ ner enough support to weaken S I2 ’s winning margin. HMt fess onerous ahereative pack­ age, supported by a coalition of Republicans and Democrats, also re­ ceived the approval of the Bush ad­ ministration, which has staunchly opposed any attempts by Congress to re-regulaie the industry, accord­ ing to a variety of sources. A White House spokesperson declined to oomnient on the matter. Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell (D-Maine) scheduled de­ bate onS 12 to begin today at 3 p m. No mnendmenu or nwtiore will be permitted that day. The alternative bill is expected to be brought up for a vote when amendments to S 12 are offered. A vote on S 12 could occur aa early as Wednesday. The proceeding will be covered on C-SPAN n. ••Our objective is to get as many votes as we can for the substitute," said a cable industry source, who added that cable faces "a tough up- -___— - . ^ ..a-?_ •*hill fight to win support for this le groups are gambling that a for the ahemalive measure will later translate into a vote against S , 12, lobbyists for S 12 said. 1 The number of votes the altema- live bill gamers, even though it is not expected to pass, will “measure whether people want a more mod­ erate approach or not," the cable in­ dustry aource said. That will send an iiimortant signal to the House, where^ —---------------* communications lawmakers have said they will take their cues from the Sen^ in shaping the House ca­ ble bill. a minimum, the alternative measure needs to secure 34 votes. Assuming these 34 senators vote against S IZ then the bill would puss just shy of the needed, but weak, ve­ to-pro^ margin of 67 votes Cable lobbyists are mum when it comes to a hewi count on the alternative. But a broadcast network lobbyist said: “Last week cable people were say­ ing they have 40 votes for the sub­ stitute. but I think they were smok­ ing something." The altetnative bill contains a co»i- ple of new wrinkles. Most impor­ tantly, it would allow cable opera­ tors to escape local regulation only if another independendv owned multichannel video provider offets service to at least 50 percent of the homes passed by the cable operator and if at least 10 percent of those homes subscribe to the competing service. This is tougher than a pre­ vious version. Also new to tlie alternative is lan­ guage that would eliminate s statu­ tory automatic 5 percent increase available to regulated systems and that would permit rollbacks of ex­ isting basic rales. As in an earlier version, the alter­ native would only allow for the rale regulation of a bask tier of broad­ cast signals, access channels and C- SPAN. S 12 ’s rate provisions would apply to all services, except preini- um. Gene Kimmelman, legislative di­ rector of the Consumer Federation of America, called the alternative “a sham,” saying k does rwtiang to con­ trol the rates of popular cable pro- g ramming. and without program-ac­ cess provisions it does nothing to foster competition. But cable groups, who are con­ cerned about the program-access provisions, said the allcmalive is more sharply focused on consumer issues than S 12. which, they said, is more oriented towards giving ca­ ble’s comnrcrcial rivals a leg up at cable’s expense. Cable representatives deny that the industry’s support fc. the alter­ native measure signifies a change in Its position, which has been to op­ pose all legislation to re-regulatt the industry. One proponent of S 12 called the altemirive bill a last-minute attempt by the White House to cut its losses and avoid a showdown in an elec­ tion year. A slew of amendments are ex­ pected to be offered including a “sil­ ver bullet" to strip retransmission consent out of S 12. Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) is considering an amendment that would roll back rates to pre-deregulation (1987) lev­ els and adjust them for innation. 5len. Patrick Leahy (D-Vl) plans amend- rnents pertaining to convertor box­ es and the legal rights of home satel­ lite programming di..tributors. As previously reported, that al­ ternative also; removes a multiple ownership restriction for broadcast­ ers; expands the opportunities for telephone companies to automati­ cally build cable systems in areas with populations of 10,000 people or less; prohibits exclusive cable franchises and allows cities to re­ evaluate a system’s performance well before its (randuae expires; im­ poses retransmission consent and must-carry; directs the Federal Convnunkations Commission to set up customer service provisions, tech­ nical standards and home wiring rules; requires the PCC to adofX rules requiring direct-broadcast satellite systems to set aside 4 to 7 percent of their channel capacity for non-com- . .... • 1*_____ utv-u wawMuvw —--------j------ mercial public uses; and directs the PCC to study competition in the ca­ ble marketplace. Senalon interested in the alterna­ tive include Bob Padewood (R-Oie,), Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Robert Dole (R-Kan ), Conrad Bums (R- Mont). John Kerry (D-Mass ). John 1 Breaux (D-La.) and possibly Tim I Wirth (D-Colo.) I" 'A . .'. //>V '/// * iM . jf/ '/. 't J/j/l ^ t I WJU 3II'!; l|i - E S’ ^ ^iS-- I 1^1 S »®C2 iS84 “o !r* So* ^J20Or*»*^9^ ,^5*5 TJP'--— — P o-o<^ls1|ili,^:-i| "iSifsilr'■ -1 n S a ?*33 2 2=^^ o. rr '*• fii ■n § r 3 M fea P : ri * 3^52 o ^ is « 3 A Z3T to — ulh&il||? s- 0 2 i? ? ? 5- I 00 5 3- s!. 59 ! 5« C/3 G ii'i il I?I? «I e.3 * B 9HI,!,g-« f 8 I w »3 i s *» <5 c. •» 5 .1 3e O’ oo o. o 2. a o“3 c: sr S 5* K ** =-a 3 a -iA-UiA- r5^. I 09 ^ D = a 3 2. 5 > £ p c JS — ^ 9- X “ 3 5- 2 a a.’® § «l ^ f> 5T « 3 g I 3 ^ 9^■Z o -tj a. 3 a? O 3 «3 CM <~ :r o ^ /o «/» 5 ’ 6 1^ uu S 7- 5* =r — lii f Ic n =»■ Z O, ^—.-2 o Si^ § <5 3. 3O • SS^S ^ OJ- =r*^rrdo s. ^§ 7's.a. 3 S- A g i i’ll . 0» fO:r n - 8- "-5 2 3 ? ?2. T Wrr ex. 2 s •» n 3 3 ^ 3 -n 3 3 o’ •^iir i-H5- 5*. |S f ^ It 11 < 3 M ^09 5 ^ ^ ” £ " B O 3 s Z"*> 5. O IS I S’ = = 5 I 1.5T ^ I £;<« o g 3 & 2 S ^.. j, -_I;S|<S S^lri^l§'Sgi-'5|,s|»§E ”.3'5isjags £s« sie.g3'5-2. §-&^, 3--s^ g "S,g*QoKsPo®ff2'Ss;- 3> = £ c S <r fe S-zS*.|^|gSo§5g 520«- 5oB.^-^ l§i!i- ^ S5"S 00 - ^ ^ - Jl ^ — — 09 C -A •«--n«£3|s§^ s E “-5{2|2:S'3. <§::5 .. : « ^ I g I5?|g? 5!-li? S 6 ^£5 iL r c2 g- « S3 S 2. f',§ I > < I. S£ i S ^ 3 5 g 5 5oo < ^ “ i 5 2 S' s— « = 3 t*53 E - 3 " ^„ — O (» =»• ? OD 3 s *'5'* I- e O4 i5 3 1 ’^? K F R » : aR ^ - 8. n » g: 6 I 2! sS’s S’!"« ;s • * 8* o § 3 i w — -ts :r ;; n X8 s *< 2 P c g.'g c &*8 I 09 Q. ^ 9 tf» 4 « Qt •o g oa O ^ ^® ^ B o H : O ■■’.21 B.*|:| lllfHI 3 T! s.s's.a-g i s -ii'3 * i? : - * 8 11 * ^ i- syiiiE 1 *■§ gI?1111%^K K ’5 IS^i 2. Ssg:? g 3 «R I* i*|iii 2 . B 5-® S I5fItw «< a 3Ills la=* i S'! l. *• «.r>i^* *’^4TS»^ '‘^9-2. Z s 2. J <p ZH si ,5 —(n OQ B9 c^g 5 5- ^ o Q. C 3 3' 2 I III D. 2 —• o 3 -3 ^S *<? 5r ^ g O 3 C 2. •» S. S 3 S.- ^-o = -. S; s- <"* 2 i '^ tj < t.^l ? ? §• « ^ s- 3 ®';?o 3 f'S Sim-’£ I S ' 2 r * ^ £. 3 W • ® ? 5 3 5a g. ” 5 §• “C o^ c« d r:^ c* 3_ 09 B 5^ a <335g ‘^j;- 3- 3 E c §. < c - ^ g r ^c 3 -p ^ 3 g g = ,< Ei 2 § « o. ^ A, 2. c. c E S. 2 - 3 I S' I i. illft? •7 n ^ X c f« Q.I ^ ^O. —• CO K-a ro fo -• CL 2. B < 9 ^ o ^las fi; u> CO 00 f'8 I I :i.' H'- M; H: I »• / f H' U'rf wun ■. * u. '-V.' 'r‘ 4'- ■H-: II i-mill ?• < ci|ll|!3 3 ff'* r^'ifli m-r'4llll!fi S fl ? J...i « § g - 3 8.2*>'? ff33 *^-=■8 3.1 s '»I ?3 ? 83*^ ,c ^ i-s.3^®-- 3 0*8 =?? |53 i-8 o 3 '*8 3" 2 2. n 2' § 5- 2 5 ■*s;s§s2» ft m 3-0.^2!-'^ S g“. ^ & cr < ar» 2 = '< cr 5 ^ o <5 Q-X 2 ®^c_g-82. «i c; g n •2 i - 3 z« - ? - 3 tn » or ™ 3f5 S = -2 ? ^CO §:h?3n3 2, Mi MMi ^ O T5 fc* 3 3 X =: -1 o r*r- i* flpil-jifitl4 tif?ir- M •<'»S.3S" S s ? «Io 61 (t fT s-^S.5 ll Sa sIlf»» S 3 2 5 a ^ ^3- |. S 3 3 = 35’l TJ* £.?ihf^ 3 2 H ?:s f E ?s Is. 1 2! fti s‘ 3 cr Mi ZZ. Mi C? ?* ^ o “rr -a J *9 g =. .■si Hi'! ^ Q.-’ ^ T3 3 ?9Q‘ ^ o' N> 5o3n{3rc;.-»5’>Mi5-Ci2^r>2*3 i?i Ilf •: I os- “ 5‘ fS "a ^ S-2.83 S ? 5-o. »«•^•' 5 |2.§>lB cr or ^ S - 2. O P ^o5 3* _ O 01 -jT ” ’ =2 ”8 = 31^ IpNo^E. C"P-' aN2 i-sT £ 3* 5- ^ c * o ^ O 3^ =.£■O 5^ O a S-S. ** 3ss. 8 Bi 5?§ !?• 0.0 g- ■°!3. a ® a o. <» Sg*ggiji> > 3 ? 3 3 ^ .VIIS'cLo 7 8 S s I- •i- -%.• -■■ ■ I'i H"' Jr r!- » .V ' <=' •■•^ ■ - ry> ‘ B: ^■U:.|tei r; Talk of CompnMtiise in the Air Is S. 12 Nears Senate Hoor Bjr Vlncwit* PMctoloup IMith The D ebate On The Senate cable ■ ■ reregulalion bill, S. 12. just two weeks awiy. the cable industry expressed a willint;- ness to negotiate for legislation it can live with. Any discussion wouH center on the bill’s controversial retransmission v 'tsent provision, which would let broadcaster payment for carriage of their s^nab on cau. -stems In Los Angeles on Jan. 12. NCTA president I Ties Mooney said, 'If they (broadcasters) •ant must-carry, then I guess whatever objec- jons we may have to that, well let go. And I ..'uppose if our backs are put to ‘.he wail and they insist on being paid for retransmission, then we*d have to do that too. *But the thing that drives us nuts is when they insist on having both.” (An NAB spokesman pointed out last week that the cur­ rent version of S. 12 gives broadcasters a choice between retransmission consent and mu8t<uTy.) Mooney said he expects to see "action* on cable reregulation bills in the Senate and the House of Representatives. While the battle over retransmis.*iion con­ sent steadily escalated in recent months, Mooney’s comments were presaged by Amos Hostetter. chairman of Continental Cablevisinn Inc., in June when he told the House Telecom­ munications and Finance Subcommittee. "What’s unacceptable is the “heads I win. tails you lose’ retransmission consent/must-carry proposal that CBS has concocted. "Either there is a public interest served by requiring carriage of local broadcast stations or Ih^e is not. If the public interest does not require mandatory cable carriage of local broadcast signals, then I would agree that broadcasters, copyright owners and cable op­ erators should be free to bargain for the value of the benefits they confer on one another." The NCTA’s renewed willingness to craft See SENATE os (>age 3 S. 12 Nears Senate Floor SENATE coHlimted from page 1 a compromise may play out favorably in the upcoming debate, and there were ru­ mors last week that some senators could work out a bill more palatable to the ca­ ble industry. "I know of some things concerning S.I2, but I am not talking about any of them," said Bert Carp, vice prcsiilrnt of government affairs for Turner Hmadvast- ing S3Tstcm Inc. "For the time hritig, our office Is under the cone of silem-e." Another wild card in the behind the- scenes negolblions- what miglii come out of upcoming talks between Mooney and James Hedliind. president of the Associa­ tion of Independent Television Stations. Iledkind said his .-issoctalion still sup­ port S.12. but it’s willing to work out a compromise that the cable industry could live with. Hedlund is expected to meet with Mooney during the week (rfjan. 20. Video dips The National Association of Broadcast­ ers has stepped up its grass-roots lobbying effort in recent weeks. More pro-S.I2 video clips have been sent to members, and they’ve been asked to report back spe­ cific information on when those clips were aired and explain why if they weren’t. Rraadcasters also have been asked to con­ tact their senators on a weekly basis. Capitol Hill observers expect the Sen­ ate and the House of Representatives to pass cable bills, but they may end up looking quite different and could get stalled at the conference level. Another obstacle may be the House Judiciary Committee’s plan to review any cable bill that includes retransmission consent b*v-ause of its copyright implica­ tions. which could slow the process. Copyright Ralph Oman, the U.S. Register of Copy­ rights. said retransmission consent, plus program access and nondiscrimination provisions are copyright matters. That means the Judiciary Committee’s Intellec­ tual Property and Judical Adminsitration Subcommittee should review them. The debate on cable legislation may lake a different turn if it follows the lines of a Jan. 15 discussion hclu by the Intel­ lectual Property Subcommittee when Steve Effros. president of the Community Antenna Television Association, brought up the potential impact of compression technologies on compulsory license. Cur­ rent cop)^ght law doesn't account for a changing television world, Effros said. He asked if video-on-demand is a simultane­ ous transmission and what would happen if broadcasters digitize their signals, scramble them and send them on an indi­ vidual basis to viewers. Broadcast sources said the cable in­ dustry is trying to prepare for the lime when digital compression will give four or five signals to each broadcaster, wholl then be able to compete with cable op^ra tors in distributing video programming. ^ :V. ii V. m-r if ■■ A I If km- i'-^-:’-: l-r'fe' m-i POLICY BY CHRIS NOUN The Case for Cross-ownership fs surely a measure of the ad>le industry’s success that the FedenJ Cofiununkations CommisBion is thinking not only oflsIinK die telephone oomixBiies imo die video bustneea but of allowing the broadcast networks into cable. A proposal to alow telephone oomparaes topravidea\idndial tone*serviocB being dtailenged in US District Court by both the NationaJ Cable Tdeviskm Association (NCTA) and the Communis Antenna Trie- vision Aaeorialion (CATA). The FCC has arid that imlQce cable operators, telephone oampanieawonlhavetohavethepennis- rion of local governments before tliey can provide Mich constant, videoon-wder ser­ vice to homea. CYTApierident Steve Eftos has semi- •erioualy pointed out that ttui means cable tgKnion wMring toavoid ptoinga town or dbr’a HnchiK fee oouU their systems to a telephooe company, then lease back the wire, provkfiog vtfhirily die same ser­ vice withoin being taxed. Ihat. Eftos said, is pnibably not what the FCC has in mind NCTA and CATA probably aren’t going to object, however, to FCC ctudnnan A1 SBcea* desire to repeal rules keeping the broadcast nets feom operating cable sys­ tems. In the ps^tiie cable industry Im said it does not object to changes in what arc known aacroronwnetahip prohibitions. Sikea—so fer alone on the commbsior fat his wholehearled desire to repeal the ntle9~-thinks that broadcasters should be idven the opportunity to devdop a second source of income and provide competition for cable. *1 am not neutral on this item.” SQces says. *If we want more of something, we should neduoe the burden. If we want less of something; we should increase tlie bur den.” In thbcaae, the financial burden rests OB broadcasters to ctNnpete against cable programmers white subject to restrictions programmers and operators don’t have. Sikes, of course, has been defeated by his fellow oonvnissionm before, most put> fidy on the financial interest and syndica­ tion rule changes. Only commissioner Jim QueOo appears inclined to vote against repeal In voting in favor of examining the cross ownership issue. Quello cautioned that he had not made up his mind about changing th( nites. 'My guiding principle will be the proba­ ble effect of such an action on the mainte- naiKe of free over-the-air television.* said Quello. who Uke Sikes is a former broad­ caster. The PCCs request for comments on the posatbte repeal asks for several sugges».• rc fCC chairman Sikes wants to let the Big Three into cable operations among them, fimits on the number of sub- scribers a particular broadcastowned cable system might have nationwide. The idea of approving regulations spelling out what sta­ tions kidividuai cable operators‘must carry” in their markets is also being exploretl. But white much talk has been devoted to the idea of broadcasters owning cable systems, the FCC only makes passing ref erence to the idea that if the rules are changed, cable operators could buy net­ works. In other words. Tele-Communica­ tions Inc., which now has a slice ofThrner Broadcasting, could someday own CBS, the nctwoiit Ted TUmer once tried to buy. And, interestingly enough, it's CBS that has paid the least interest to the proposed diaiige in the restrictions. It is also the only network with no cable interests. NBC—which has invested in CNBC, the Olympic pay-pe^-view TripteCast as well as in A&E—supported repeal in comments k filed with the commission earlier this year. Capital Cities/ABC Inc.—^which owns most of ESPN and has interests in A&£ and Life­ time—has also come out strongly in fevor of repeal. (CaMevision magazine is also ownetl by Capital Cities/ABC.) But the crossownership discussion- and Quello’s insistence that he not be grouped witli Sikes in his willingness to look at repeal—has highfighled some dissension between the three nefwork.s, tiieir affiliated stations and the independent TV stations against which th^ compete. 'If you're an independent station, (here are two monsters out there, to pul it sim­ ply—the networks and cable operators," said >im Popham, president of the Assoda- tion of Independent Television Stations flNTV). “If we have to rely on cable (sys­ tems! owned by a network against which we compete, we'ie not at ail sanguine about carriage,” The independents ** affiliates have been trying to work uuf a comi Ymisewith the networks But even the commission has acknowledged the difficulty of devising channel cjffriagc regulations—the ultimate form of protection—that will withstand court duiitenge. None of the network reps in Washing­ ton think the crosaownership repeal will affect other lobbying effbrts--spedficaJly changes in copyri^t tegisiation or attempts to pass a cable reregulation bi*l ”I really don't see this coining between us.” says NBC attorney Howard Monderer. “No one isagainatS. 1 2. There aie varying degrees of warmth but no one is against S 12.” But cable lobbyntsare taking a slightly more cynical approadi. "It’s insane,” says one indushy representative. "It’s very inter­ esting to see how alliances change as com­ petition over a dwindling pile of money increases,’ he adds. ”It's Idnd of fun to watch." G3 48 CAIIIVISION ■ JANUARY 27, 1992 - I i. K S: r-1I OPERATIONS lYSUNONAmilAUM Raising Rates Like Clockwork A Pennsylvania system finds that small €tnnual fate increases helplimit subssriber objecti ons T here’s one sure wiy a cable qrstem can upset sub ­ scribers: Institute a rate increase. Just as surely, as QfSteni CM James Culvet knows, thm’s no way to escape some level of discont among poitkiaos when the increase is hnplemenied But Culver, who manages an Arm- shnig Utthes ayalem fcr some 27,000cus ­ tomers in and around Zeiionople, Pa.. 30 nules south of FiQsbuii^ has what he con­ siders a sure lire method of dehising pub­ lic resistanoe to rate hikes: Do them annu- aOy on a smaO scale, and get Ihe word out as eariy as possible. *Rate uicreaaes are a given in this busi ­ ness. It shouldnl be atmiething we try to hide," Culver says. “The sooner you give people information ^wut what you're doing and why, the less beating youll lake." The Armstrong system's ability to maneuver rate increases, channel lineup changes and other situalions with nununal adverse subscriber reaction through the years has earned good marks from local community leaders. On a national scale. Culver and his 27-person staff also won recognition when they were given an ‘All Politics Is LocaT award from the Commu­ nity Antenna Television Association in Jan­ uary 1991. But ten months after receiving the CATA honor. Culver and company had to demonstrate their mastery over rate con- troverqr control all over again, when the basic rate went up $1.20, to $17.85 per month. Since the system adjusts its basic rates every autumn, as program service costs increase. Armstrong can keep the size of the uicrease low. usually about $I to $1.50 Subscribers end up expecting some type of increase rather Lhan being hit with a hefty increase seemingly out ol the blue. Culver explains. *We could follow the course of other MSOs and schedule increases every three or 6ve years." Culver observes. "But doing that means a higtier charge and the poterv tial for more trouble." Despite the annual hikes, Armstrong says its basic price is about $1 to $2 less than other systems around the state. Communication in every manner possible is Arm­ strong's basic technique to defuse subscriber outcry. Sixty days prior to the rate hike, the Zeiionople system's five cus ­ tomer service representatives start informing subs who call in duri'ig business hours. Letters go out to city coun­ cils throughout the system ’s service area, as weQ as to com­ munity newspapers. FoDowHip letters are sent to coundl men> bers 30 days before the hike date. If need be. Culver or his assistant manager attend coun­ cil meetings to explain the situation. And if that isn't feasible, since many of those councils schedule their monthly meetings on the same night. Culver will meet with council members ^ their convenience. The opefHloor policy Culver maintains with political leaders extefids to customers; he answers about 25 calls a week from subs on technical problems and program­ ming issues. Culver also accompanies a technician or salesperson on their service shift at least once a month, just to stay abreast of sub concerns. About 150 subs objected to the latest increase by writing letters to Armsfrong. Beyond that, few subscribers responded through phone calls or disconnects. Cul­ ver handled some of the letters and phone calls himseff "I'd like to think that the reason why we didn't get more reactkm is because we’re doing the right thing." he says. indeed, more people protested during a programming con* oversyearfierlastfrD than during the rate increase. When a local Rttsburgh independent station turned into a Home Shopp^ Network n affiliate over MTi ru*i\V • ifUSi • I Tp 1 the Labor Day weekend. 400 subs phoned their complaints into Armstrong in Zefiono- ple, thinking that the cable system was responsible for the changeover. With HSN I and QVC already on Ihe syston ’s lineup. Arms trong dropped the Rttsburgh indie in favor of Com^ Cen­ tral The system used only local newspaper ads and listings on an alphanumeric com­ munity calencar channel to notify subs. The system ended up getting a few compli­ ments from !>ubs in the process. Q!1 26 CAIIIVISION ■ JANUARY 77, 1992 ■V /;v Cabltt Aktt* traia •le«a....p.l Jan. eabla ft pay TV eanavs.p.3 Dipltal radio panatratlen..p.4 Tep-SO MSO aarkatlnt >tat«.p.6 Natvork aarkatlng contactt.p.7 Cabla ravanua Z aadla rav..p.8 Sanior Analyatt Aaaoe. Analyst» Asaea. Analysti Rasaarch Assoe.t Larry Carbrandt Bill Hsrchatti Hitch Shapiro Karwi Valll January 20, 1992 if' CAMSUCAUrOMHA«B234734 * (4QI|tt4.itM ^ h^ic cable aarketlng locoewtlve that roared through the late •Ms U ehuttlnt •long. *>/ t*" t.rr.ln of th« rM«.*lo«ary '90». Tllgi table balow and the charts on P. 2 coapriae our latest look into a poaaibla correlation anong basic cable progran spending, basic nettrork ▼lewlng share and Intamal subscriber growth. The consistency of one benchnark suggests a correlation does Through the years, basic cable ptogran spendlng/sub/share point ^ rensined In a narrow range between 50 cents and 90 cents. ' U.S. cable operators routinely netted 3 mil. new basic subs/year during the late 1980s, but this year could add less than 2 mil. (a 3.5X in- According to our Intost oatljiiAtAs. ..n1 n V - .1I i- A - c ^'T - ‘ mMV * s ’ :-*■ Ur © XHTESIUL sub GROWTH/BASIC VIBWIHG SHAHE/CABLB PROGRAM SPENDING ANALYSIS 29tS J91« 1907 1980 1909 199C 1991 1992 (ail.) (all.) (ail.) (ail.) (ail.) 1 Basic sabacribars 2 Hat new subs 3 New hoeas A Faaatratiea of 5 Saba frca new IP 6 Xntamal sab gain 7 Intamal sub growth rata • Basic cable wiewing ahara 9 Basie prgn. spending (nil.) 10 Change from prarious year 11 Prge spand./sh. pt. (nil.) 12 Changa fren previous year 13 Progran spending/sub 14 Change fron previous year 15 Spending/snb/ahara point 16 Chmge free previous year 36.66 2.43 4.20 30% 1.26 1.17' 3.2% 19 368 423.1% $19.37 416.6% $10.04 414.9% $ .53 4 8.2% $ 39.68 3.02 4.68 30% 1.40 1.62 4.1% 20 496 434.8% 24.80 428.0% 12.50 424.5% .63 418.9% 42.64 2.96 3.75 30% 1.13 1.83 4.3% 24' 572 415.3% 23.83 - 3.9% 13.41 4 7.3% .56 -11.1% 45.69 3.05 4.00 30% 1.20 1.85 4.0Z 25 739 429.2% 29.56 424.0% 16.17 420.6% .65 416.1% 49.31 3.62 5.67 30% 1.70 1.92 3.9% 29 1.006 436.1% 34.69 417.4% 20.40 426.2% .70 4 7.7% 51.74 2.43 3.19 30% .96 1.47 2.8% 32 1,410 440.2% 44.06 427.0% 27.25 433.6% .85 421.4% 53.91 2.17 1.90 30% .57 1.60 3.0% 35 1.702 420.7% 48.63 410.4% 31.57 415.9% .90 4 5.9% 55.82 1.91 1.73 30% .52 1.39 2.5% 37 1,871 4 9.9% 50.57 4 4.0% 33.52 4 6.2% .91 4 1.1% SUtaat Bine 1—year-end counts. Line 6--Line 7 ainus Line 5. i. Line •--Sasio eahie network total day ahere in cabia hoama. Line 7--Line 6 divided by L.ne © 1992 Paul Kagan Aaaoelataa, Inc. estinatea. (continued on P. 3) eioe The Best View of the Business World • East Coast 201-585-6427 • West Coast eiB-MO-SiS? • Midwest 313-643-9033 I*. [ t ft • ’ t '» i I >i'l% I*•r ]%. t • f \ii'V-t ( I ''r * - P i'r ir •1^ k. p fr % MARXETUtG WSM lA/Jsn. 20, 1992/P., 3 of 8 •j. THE TBAIN SLOWS DOWN (continued from P. 1) i i . . ■>. » The alowdoim has spread to several areas of the cable Mrketlng mix: ‘4 r i e Net new homes passed in 1992 are projected to fall short of 2 mil. for the second straight year, coaq>arad with 4 mil.-S mil. average annual gains during the 1980s. The market is nearly saturated'’‘cable operators have built past 91Z of U.S. TV households, and.are expected to top out at 93X in three years. As a result, MSOs must produce stronger internal sub grovth to match or exceed the unit Increases of years past. This hasn't happened e .» * *» »*. e The Internal sub grovth rate (defined as net subs gained from the existing homes'pasaed universe, divided by total basic subs) is projected to slide to 2.5X In 1992, from 3.OX in 1991 and 4.3X as recently as 1987. A major reason is the rising percentage of marketable non-subs who are former subs (as opposed to "nevers"). Like "nevers," fortser subs have been exposed to years of marketing campaigns. But in addition,'they have sampled cable TV and rejected it "and now must be lured back into the tent. e Basic network oroeram spending, which has tripled in just the past five years, nonetheless is showing signs of slowing. The forecasted lOX rise for 1992 Is modest next to the 20X>40X annual spurts of the past four years. was e B|^£ic^cable viewing share in cable hoams is nearly double what it in 1985 and has given no indication of plateauing soon. Basic cable vlewership got off to a flying start in 1991 with record ratings for CNN's historic Gulf War coverage, then spiked again in the summer as viewers eschewed broadcast network TV reruns. Continued gains of three share points/year will be difficult, how­ ever, with the growing success of the Fox network, the possible launch of a fifth.broadcast network and the advmt of premium TV multiplexing. The unknown factor in the'' equation is the amount of dollars and ef­ fort system operators are putting into marketing basic cable's isiproved program < fferlngs. Ultimately, MSOs may need to compleisent soaring cable program investments with a corresponding rise in pr«aotional spending. U.S. TV households (TVHB) gosms passed hy cable Basic cable auba Pay cable units Local cable ad homes Expanded basics Video shopping homes Backyard dishes Backyard pay TV subs SHATV subs Wireless cable subs (MfDS)'(ail.) Homes passed X of TVHB ■ , ! Shopping homes Z TVHB Cable subs Z of TVHH Backyard dishes Z of TVHH Cable subs Z of homes passed Pay units Z of cable subs (mil.) (mil.) (ail.) (nil.) (all.) (mil.) (all.) (ail.) (ail.) (all.) : »• TV CENSUS —JANUARY » -1991-9 Unit19911992*1992* 91.183 92.180 93.136 0.997 86.158 88.025 89.508 1.867 51.933 54.234 56.307 ♦ 2.301 41.576 42.400 43.613 •f 0.824' 44.333 48.333 52.167 ♦ '■U.OOO 12.267 13.083 14.083 0.817' 65.167 67.167 69.167 + 2.000 3.067 3.493 3.771 4- 0.427 0.704 0.756 0.840 g 4- 0.052 . 0.830 0.890 0.949 4> 0.060 ' . 0.153 .0.210 0.291 ♦ '0.057 9AZ 95Z 96Z ' 4. 1 71Z 57Z 73Z 59Z 74Z 60Z -• • \ ■ 3Z 4Z 42 % • . 60Z 62Z 63Z r 80Z 78Z 77Z ♦ Pmremtt K •f 4- ♦ l.iz 2.2 4.4 2.0 9.0 6.7 3.1 13.9 7.4 7.2 37.4 * ProJ«etmd. O 1992 Paul Kagan Aaaociktmr, Inc. astinatas. 'r- i' -: »»»».(*iti!^ j ^ Ifj- 'a- * >:i’> w v'::"--‘-i- !'■ r ■ fev.'fii-M %■■ ■y^C^'<'- i'-jr" ...its* ipswi Hi. y- JLf.- . ;wji. ^V>r ' ;H' ■■ ■ ■ ■ mH ■' Mi ■ $^-Sp W0^:- fej-0i •.1,1 ^j!s''j' ' 'W^y' wr&-* 'Ifi 'j* *. V I NEWSWEEK : FEBRUARY 10. 1992 y--:BUZZWORDS I isten closely to those cable- TV guys fixing your box. Here’s what they might say; Disco tech: A technician who only handles disconnections. Buniing a pole: When an in­ staller accidentally slides down a telephone pole. Fish Job: Running cables inside walls. Usage: "That fish job is too tough for a rookie.” Drop: The actual cable, from pole to house. Hberoptichead: A customer who thinks he knows every­ thing about cable. Usage: "That fiberoptichead wouldn’t know a drop from a fish job.” Cable dog: In the West, lifelong cable installer who seeks no upward mobility. In the East, worker who deals with underground cable. V V / \ / \ . „ IH ii ;<!1 :! *S ii -♦■v' ■X‘- £ [~~\AiORIJD BUSINESS EXTRA <. !. K P:' r> > V Quarteriy Revenues Rise Century, Jones, C-Cor Electronics improve over last year ■y lUtliy Ctoytow ^•CoK EunmoNics Inc. continued its ^ flnandsl reboond. reporting s second Hunrtef Ibcri net inconae of $271,000 vs. • net low of SM9.000 last yew. Over the fant year. C-Cor's cost-cutting measures cwipled with the cable industry’s im­ prove buying levels heb>ed C-Cor ’s hot- And while net losses increased for two cable operators, their operating income efimbed in fiacal second quarter results ■ Century Communications generated Mol revenues of $76.6 miRion for its fis­ cal second quarter, up 1Z4 percent from the same quwter a year ago. Net losses Increased abnost. 41 percent to $20.9 mil- Bon. or 34 cents a share, from $14.8 mil- Bon. or 22 cents a shve. ■ Jones Intercri>ie Inc reported second quarter revenues of $26.1 million, up S2J million from the $23.3 million re­ ported in fiscal 1991. Net losses rose to $9.7 m...7 million, or 80 cents a share, from $$6 mllBon. or 54 cents a share. ■ bi adiMoo to an tocrease in its net in­ come. CCor also etqierienoed a significant Bit In its revenues, rcach^ $11.1 nuUion during the fiscal second quarter compared to revenues of almost ^ million during t^ correspowfing quarter a year ago. ac­ cording to president Richard Perry. C-Cor ’s net income for the first six months of fiscal 1992 totaled $396,000 on sales of $20.5 million vs. a net loss of $1.1 million on sales of $18.1 million for the Unit six months of fiscal 1991. CtniMriiig Ml losses Earnings per share for the quarter and six months reached 6 cents and 9 cents, respectively. That compares to net losses of 19 cents a share for last year’s corresponding second quarter and 25 cents a share for the six months. *T am very pleased by the continued Improvement in our financial results,’ saM Perry. "C-Cor ’s evnings come as a result of improved buying lewis in the c> ble Industry, coupled with C-Cor's ongo ­ ing efficiency measures.” A 10-YEAR LOOK AT CABLE REVENUES Basic, pay, pay^>ar-vlew. home shopping and advertising revenues have dra- maUcaity risen in the last 10 years. Here ’s a ctose looK; Home Total Total Ybar Exp« Pay PPV Shop. Instl. Ad. MIsc. Rev./All Rev. % Rev. Rev. Rev. Rev. Rev. Rev. Rev. Rev.0 Sources /Sub/Mo. Chg. (mil.) (mtl.) (mil.) (mil.) (mil.) (mil.)(mlf.) (mil.) (mil.) •gg 2,061 21 1,317 n/a n/a 67 17 173 3,656 14.17 ♦16.7 •U7 2.530 75 2.020 n/a n/a 90 32 237 4.984 16.35 >15.4 3,048 170 2,747 n/a n/a 107 50 303 6,424 18.15 -t-ll.O. ’•4 3,545 255 3.370 18 0.5 134 86 365 7,774 19.69 -fB.S ’•6 4.145 298 3.727 25 4.0 177 139 423 8.939 20.98 ♦B.S 4.891 403 3JB9b 37 23.0 253 192 472 10,166 22.18 45.7 *87 6,014 377 4,106 88 57.0 241 264 613 11,761 23.82 »7.4 ♦88 7.343 267 4,491 210 70.5 257 313 667 13,619 25.71 •<•7.9 *88 8,670 264 4,890 303 84.7 282 496 766 15,757 27.64 ^^7.5 *80 10,169 495 5,105 253 72.0 289 628 845 17,855 29.46 ^-6.6 ♦81 11,696 668 5,287 390 81.0 296 721 929 20,069 31.67 +7.5 Inc nciwUttcr 'Citvt TV Century’s operating cash flow was equal to 53.3 percent of revenues or $40.8 million, an increase of almost $5 million over the $35.8 million during fiscal 1990. $15.1 million Total revenues for Century’s six nwmths reached $151 million, an increase of $16.8 minion, or 12.5 percent, over the prior fiscal year's first six months. Operating Income before deprecia­ tion and amortization for the six months was equal to 53 percent of rev­ enues or $79.9 million, an increase of $10 million over the $69.9 million the previous year. Net losses for the period totaled $41 million, or 63 cents a share, vs. a net loss of $31.2 million, or 46 cents a share in 1990. Jones Intercable said its quarterly rev­ enues increased only 3 percent. That stemmed from the fact that during fiscal 1991*8 first quarter, the company recog­ nized partnership liquidation distribution totaling $4.3 million, while no distribu­ tions were recogniwd during the first or second quarters of fiscal 1992. The increase in net losses w.'re at­ tributed to an extraordinary gain of $4 million during 1991 as a result of the company’s redemption of a portion of its convertible subordinated debentu^. No such gains were recognized during the 1992 fiscal second quarter. For the six months, Jones reported a decrease of 4 percent on its operating cash Dow to $23.7 million from last year’s $24.8 million. That was due to the part­ nership’s liquidation distribution recog­ nized during fiscal 1991. Disregarding the effect of 'he liquida­ tion distribution, operating le .ome before depreciation and amorth .lion would have increased 16 percent from $20.5 mil­ lion during the first six months of fiscal 1991 to the $23.7 million reported in the current period. CABLE WORLD/January 20. 1992 'Tv- *•• E-i-r -■•'.^yU:-r ^Tv^-.-'-' .-■•5;:; CTAM Study Hnds Cable’s Value Edging Up Vuiu Booiioiac TImb tUn I Mwidt^apraflitifalebene* fli nr cable teleWaioa: Coa- OM.ehigM|i CaMe’s eBioiated value y llta wliM caateaian were la raak it aeeardlag to uoat ita Bataa aa a aaoeaaitjr NOW CABLE STACKS UP pDMI atucflad viawar attitudes toward cable in Novoftibar as part of Vm aacond wave cf its attitude and uaaga stu^. CaMa aubacribara ratad cable; ' Irmpdaalva^entaftalnmant^. J.............69K (1990/61%) A naoaasity!..........................................42% (1990/38%) Good, even for light vlawars...................76% (1990/72%) aiaweia ia the Mcead wave of CTAM’s atadjK. cable aubecribeia and 400 ■arveyed as part of the alady, which was released at CTAATs rtaearch coafcfeace Jaa. 14. A ii‘: Ma was laeapeaaive eatertaiaanent. up laaaiali fron 1990'a Bidy. 41 awn ■ 76 iwwaat rated cable aa "good.* aairt TV, if. *II*s partly the economy and the whale andag phenonaeoon.' aaid Giris IM; sake aad pragrammhig for Times Ifirror Cable TV aad a CTAM confer* CTAM researdicrs were encouraged Iqr the aaige atudy results because they lared or bracked with last year’s This Had of oondaulty shows u we ). ael iaal a flash hi the paa Xiada. dkador ol marked_________ Waraer Cable Commaalcatioas and CnUicfv^lerenceco-chairiaan. Kesearchers had tinkered with '*^e Uady's latest idiaae so they could look sail: News and information services pappsd up .w an important cMegory for Both paups ranked services such u CNN. HeadBae News and The Wsather as very vahiaMe, a notation that ha UgaificaBC as some operators pon­ der ahUUag marketing emphasis away um Other study findings included: • ABer nearly a decade of Jokes about aapragrammed VCR clocks flashing *UbOir and real consumer confusion over how to tape television shows, viewers any flaafiy be getting the hang of using thiirVCRa M- f ■ -A; '.•if-r"n According to the study, cable sub­ scribers tape an average of 4.7 programs per month compared to 3.S programs in 1990. Cable subscribers also appeared to be a bit nnore savvy than non-subscribers studied in the survey: They only record an average of 3.3 shows per month. ‘The American public is finally figur­ ing out how to tape something with their VCRs.” Forgy said. CaMtfuiito Another note on the VCR phe­ nomenon: Some 51 percent of sub­ scribers said they check their cable guide before renting films vs. 1990‘s figure of 47 percent; only 18 percent said they go ahead and rent anyway even if the title ia on pay services that month, compared to 1990’s figure of 24 percent But, if they do rent a film that turns up on cable, SO percent of subscribers said they don't see the rental as a waste of mon­ ey. And only 5 percent questioned why they subscribe to premhini services if they duplicate titles by renting — a figure that tracked with the 1990* rtsuka. Translation: Subscribers don't see cable and video rentals as mutually exclusive. *1 see ail of this as wonderful news,” Kisch said. ■ Some 58 percent of re­ spondents still had their first cable subscription. Of the 42 percent reporting multiple hookups. 35 percent had moved and only 7 percent had multiple connects at the same address. in other words, most of cable's chum can be attributed to moving households. One way to solve the problem might be to create a natfonal clearinghouse to stay in toudi with and quickly reconnect people who move, Kisch said: T would say go a4^ the movers and do it a lot more effidentfy ” The 1990 study uncovered what was termed the *restim viewer* — uwally young, married parents who endlessly prowled through tire channels with their remote controls and displayed little loyal ­ ty to any network or programs. 3ut thb year, the CTAM conference heard Aro.n Rutgers University professor Robert Kubey that viewers still retain program loyalties and do remember when fovorite programming appears. Kubey, whose conclusions weren’t part of the usage study, said television use can be predicted by peofde’s moods. For example, a bad day at the office can translate into more tube time that nhrhl J 'v. i in-nuiffc rmiffCA ue added to every singteshow? Making cable a teacher ^MLK M nm Classkoom will pass an )MnfMrtHt milestone in the next few Mkt. jMttfMe years after it ww cre- wt, lAnce of cable networks and lenlofVwM be provijing comtnerctai^ M, gdacatkifial programming to more n Ml of the junior and senior high hail ilMdeiilo to the nauon at no coat Jwlrorhnoh CflMe in the Classroom chairman mm Hostetler says that in the next IP yean the service will be available to IhideMt to Ar nica to a junior or pivhigh school pas sed by cable. That Is an extraordinary achieve- ML tt ranks wkh the creation of C Ml of the n hlrtlons cable, any other in- •try. has made Iheiialion. •lit it also tone the ques- important con- home of the Magic, and how long it takes the Portland Trailblazers to fly to Charlotte to play the Hornets. That kind of instruction in NBA ge­ ography has come largely by accident. But a heck of a lot more could be ac ­ complished if those who produce televi ­ sion programming would keep in mind that their shows can be used to educate as well as entertain. Educatto nal prograoiiiiiiig The notion is not novel. MTV. for ex- smple, hss blended anti-drug messages into some of ita programming. Disney has a body of animated product in which Goofy or Mickey Mouse explain how the solar sys- from here? • o^oua an I *"<l Mifry ^ pro* MMiinf avail • diroogh Cable in the Classroom I to en^le teachers to make even tor use of it Hb arc cotiudeot that the companies lived to the project will do juto that Btot we oould-^ to offer a saggew I. Eduetolso begins to the home, and Kgittt at M earfy age. Long before won are exposed to cable in the they snslch cable in the liv ingkweom ________of the programming on lie to vdwtole from an educational i^potoL much of it still is not Chil* m don’t just watch educational penaatog. They also watch sports, toona, atocoms. game shows and ev- thtog elae on tdeviaion. » in of that programming also can be In my home, my 7-year-old learned geography courtesy of aa Spo*ia Nefwwk. TKT and WGN. wMdiea ail the National Basketball adation games on those and other verfcs and wants to know how nnich it it in Minnesota, where the wohrea play, than in Orlando. 5^And'- • Another eThtag... WTkomiuR -A Southwkk tern works or what life was like in an ­ cient Greece. But a lot of what kids watch on TV is still chewing gum for the mind. Would anything be lost if there were a little nutritional vaK Could more children’s game show^ be developed along the lines of BBS's ■Where in the World is Carmen San Diego’" Would anyone really object if each sporting contest on television showed a little map with the location of each team's hometown? Couldn’t Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd argue about a math problem, or Yogi Bear find out that President Theodore Roosevelt created the nation ­ al park system? We believe in the ertative abilities of those people who produce the prognun- ming that draws millions of viewers to cable every day. They are fully capable of ensuring that every program on television con­ tains some element of education wit'n O'It diminishing its entertainment value in any way. Glenn Jones, chairman of Jones In­ tercable and founder of Mind Extension University, dreams that one day all Ameru a will be a classroom. The cable industry has done a lot to make that happen. Perhaps the next step along the way will be to make sure every cable program is a teacher. FCC Stands With Bush On Regulations Freeze By JEANNINE AVERSA y^ASHINGTON — Federal Communications Commission Chairman Alfred Sikes said the agency intends to cooperate with a forthcoming White House proposal that would impose a three-month freeze on new federal regulations, some of which could affect the cable industry. President Bush plans to unveil his proposal, which is still being put together, during his ,»,• (•« .• *7'pirii*?rT*[i:r hope the tech - .yjber of cable-related regulations, in- p|j^Q| slondoFcis eluding ones on technical standards. j___ cross-ownership and video dial tone, p [itefnj OOeSii ^ -We hooe the technical standards ; yp jp .-' 'Vi ztr.in [item] doesn’t get tied up in this, said Brenda Fox. the National Cable Television Association ’s general counsel. It is unclear exactly which rcgula lory items stand to be affected by the Bush proposal, said the PCCs managing director. An­ drew Fiahel. Fishel, uncertain as to the plan ’s scope, said the i=CC has not received a copy of the proposal from the White House. The plan is also expected to require agencies to re­ view existing rules and regulations to determine whether there is a less expensive or burdensome way lo carry out ihcir activities. -We hav. -’t identified anything.... We don’t know how this w ould affect existing roles or pending rules.” c-,;,! prr <ooV<*swoman M.iureen Pcniino. adding tliat no longer serve the public interest. According to The Washington Fast, among the ar ­ eas targeted for review arc nilea that pertain lo “th*. type of companies that can provide cable service.’ pfcralino and other PCC fticials denied this and won­ dered where ibe information came from. Perauno and Fishel said the FCC has not yet beer tfV«vt to give the administration a list of potential nile; and regulations that might be re viewed. Because the FCC decided to pu reconsideration of its broadcas network/cable cross-ownershii rule on the fast track, some attor neys believe this could be aflectei by the freeze. The last round of public com ments in that proceeding is du* March 17. The ooss-ownenhip role forbid the Big P.iixe networits from own ing cable systems and forbids cable MSOs from own ing broadcast networks. The next major item at the FCC is its video dir. tone proceeding, which would allow telephone com panics to transport cable services on a commoo-caine basis without cable franchises. The last lound trfcom ments in that proceeding is due March 23. Bush’s proposal is not supposed to affect regula tions mandated by Congress or the courts or regula tions that would encourage economic growth. Sike: and other agency heads met with administration of- ■•lULilll •ri*T n n*j tTiMUlL r»"5TTTr«l •TTTTriIilM»l!K >AViiT-?>itira Pv-•1* %- lok ?U|lrH 4.i-: *81"^utflte Jlf 1 S if ==u IB* ■n<D </) C w Is^P'4 i 8 g:-'* ^••* 2 # H ® C. 2 Ij " 8 SH ?fliN “ fi 5- ^ ^ ?5^iN•3 jT CO .-..'iifro -• 6 ; ”^“•S;S f g llgir B. I 11 5- a — ^ I f iUI I 8-?s im ipi a,£ Si^g 5 I 5 p I hiiSilsfla 31 j wii ll!''i 2 o 5 3 »» a.I-» 9 > ?iJilt'* £l 15' - o 5?ll ^ SI sIs iisll f ^ ^*2. ® e I piri U Sfei'g.i' 11^H91U-.1 i.a ^mn 3-2: 3 0 3" C H “ i'99" i 3 -isa 31??!?^ o P* 2 = -^ Ro • w C CiS T i|||5|l|l|l|t ill nh^ I « &It I? 1,1"8. <A OII«: I g s cr Q 5 ^Sll§!^lh-52 ^ 5 o 3 5llll^iis s a «5 .S' 7 B 8 i»—» CL ;: 3nilsB'^ 5 3»3:2 2 g-|’S' 5 a 8 S jf « R 3- a 8S ¥ ??S'S=is'i •* “ I-1 \ %-?- . .•'■ !|f» ii' 3[il--.- 'a IS®. “•< S-S^Fq-js^Ss-SS-g^o b:'< '< Jj P 8-^ ? 5= g-3|?5-®3 III i n *e <IS 3 8 i: s is — s?. §“^I! ill! Ui^ I g-0^20 S. f» D ^ |t|HiHiK < s?^ 9i-" S lii-lli:5* 8-| r.? « z f‘5 o :§ C2« s. llfl 8i»Sil'i'|ag|Ki j|!S?.S8||e|3|' g ls||e^f|§,= i " |l|s?|l'< B. ?r R *' 9 a- 12,'' |il.17- HilPJP |fi|lli|| e p.•* s s?mII||I| ,f M hi ll?s s5 «r n =r p» irt 5- £ j?8 Pl.'^ gg 1 gg-S 3 g las-t Ml n Q C S' S o S 5-a 2 3- n S'^'S 3-lffl S-5 3 S.8 = a *^ 5 5. g *• S ^ fc^»«3««RG2 m S' R ‘ S* jy 2 gif 5 » * Egf h!: 0M T1i6 Battl6 A Look Behind the Scenes Tet Steady A nd Montos -Lonc lobby- I lof efforts by a small group cl cable m4 b««lat"g exeoitives played a key role hi supine the federal government's de- daioB to diminate the strict guidelines m kUUy leveraged trrnESCtkms adopted Id UMe. By ^tue of their business stru 'ure, fiM> fell under the ruk< ^ov- emiagHLTs. ABtf a revisioo of the rules in Feun’ irv Ittl made it even more difhcuh for cenpa- des to get kMOS. a lobbying effort by va^ fd>i» industry executives begu.i in ued in last year's second quarter. Industry players such as Con cast I. treasurer John Alehin and Tele- ___{nc.’s Senior vice nresi- dent Barney Schotters took the > *ad in trying to persuade banking regulators that the rules diacriminalcd against hralthr endita by using bottom line stan- dards rather than cash-flow tests. ‘*V/e f<vniaed on the field-levd troops,” dlin saift. ^er diose seeds were planted, we in the generals so that what was said ■t tK. fsnk-and-file level trickled all the ns/to ihe top.” he said. '^n- of those generals was Bill John- so'L f ief executive officer of Scientific* Ai Inc. T'.»re aras an early meeting with the i secretary of the treasury in April i Then, NCTA executive vice president Oecktf Anstrom put together a group of high-ievd cable and banking executives to begin lobbying the agency lexers. In June. Johnson; NJ. Nicholas Jr. co- chairntan of Time Warner Inc ; Brian Roberta, president of Comcast Corp : Amos Hostetter, chairman of Continental Cablevision: J. Carter Bacot. chairman of Bank of New York: and Timothy Hart ­ man, vice chairman of NCNB (now Na ­ tions Bank), met with the Federal Re­ serve Board's chairman, Alan Greenspan. The group mounted another intensive lobbjdng effort in October and Novem­ ber. Joining this time were Gerald Levin, vice chairman of Time Warner, and Ger­ ald Hassell, executive vice president of the Bank of New York. Johnson said optimism began rising wiien Treasury Secretary James Brady said in October that ;he HLT rules would be clarified by the end of 1991. The group also helped block an effort in the House of RepresenUtives to lock in the current definition of HLTs that barred banks from making any more such loans. The House eventually shot down the banking bill with the HLT provision. That was an intense few weeks.” Johnson said. M fc d very go<^ about the efforts put forth by everyone in this matter." Johnson said. "I was very impressed with all the people we met at the regulatory agendes and it has restored my faith in the ability of industry to work with governmental bodies in a Uioughlful, rational way.” ^ K sr 2,S D IT ^-a "E c. a w 5 -x: n a &|HSi|||g._ “ : 2 a ^ a.5 » m S- s ^ S'® ? ?0 2 “• ***2 •« ° ^ <1 B» Oi < rr. 5 t R o « 9 iE*. 3 ^ 00 « O o rr • ^92 .5 < a D 3 R S ” S' ® S lit: o •g a S' 2 - 3.1'S ” o a. 5 « 3 3 S- r% Q IB 3* 5 or o3 § 3 ^ J-o -3 n S' S ° <. j; •I " 2 s ® S S' ^ - - 2 ^ n I 5i» b 3 f 51 i f..........»r.vi =e,;^5‘- ^ METROPOLITAN COUNCIL JlMdtm M*an Park Cenm. 2J0 East Fifth Street. St Paul. .W^ K ^ .'y a-'^^ v >s/: :v/ A<<.m 6/: 291 *•- ' s?. ^ ■ Febaiaiy 10,1992 FEB 12 i-;2 RE; N«w Rural Araa Policies and invitation to a Planning Forum Qf§f Qovsmment Official or Staffpsrson: On OtfsmfrST 5^ 1901. the Mstropolitan CouncM amended the Metropolitan Development and PfMneMMOfk fMDIR to include new polidet tor the general rural use area of the region. Tha ganard nirai use area of the region is located outside the metropolitan urban service area (MU8/^ and is not deai gnaiad tor commercial apiculture. A copy of the new policies is enclosed vMidiia lattar. The new prrfl*^ continud to uphold the Coundi’s basic rural density standard of no more than one dweWnq unit per 10 acres. However, the land area tor calculating density has changed from 40 acres (mas imum of tour units) to up to 640 acres (a maximum of 64 units). The new policies do not speci iy a minimum lot size. Instead, mir^tHim lot size should be determined by pertormanoa elanflarm Many of the other poMcy d.anges (such as aitowing dustered developmanQ are designed to provide more opti^ for local governments to taltor the regional policy to it unique conditions in their communities. ‘fi The Council will hold a PIANNINQ FORUM on THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27. from • to 11 a.m. In the Council Chambers (first floor, Mears Park Centre Building). ■t:- y < ' . / The propwn wi indude the toOowing items: a summary description of the new pdides, an axplanafion of how the rural araa poHdes are related to polldes in the Council’s metropolitan ayttems ptons, an explanation of how the new poHdes may result in amendments to local comprehensive plans, and plenty of time for questions and answers on each topic. wmSliTl; The Coundi wW hold a second planning forum on rural araa policy sometime wW discuss. In more delal. examples of rural deveiopmem options (such as c new policy. A no6oe on this torum will be sent to you at a later date. I encourage you to attend both of planning forums. Sincerely. sji '■: •! Mary E I m -■ , ' A. If'- ^ .-it. Ifi?' fei ’ ipi- A ■■;'■’■ • ij hif‘s ^pi*^ •- -is*.- ■"■ .> -.%» te£- fl-:' g||fe . "it'--. iatf’ i»c >■ lias^ M5?,, ^'" Yf- '^:r. -sirv'-V- IfYYY.-'' 'f i . i: : J'^- • u y-li» 'y.^nik' :-‘i^i ;\'.v y: p#!' ■Y:;*t. r- AMENDMENTS TO THE METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK (MDIF) POLICIES FOR THE RURAL SERVICE AREA Adopted December 5, 1991 Metropolitan Council Mean Park Centre 230 E Fifth Sl Sl Paul MN 55101 Publication No. 640-92-012 ii ‘■V: ' sSSSi#^’"''; , , ,, p.|,^8i»'«’ 4 I1 k ‘V: ■®Pli ■' ■^fe" ,f^iv ‘SK-- P: ■ ?i., : s-^^i: ■Ml life:'iwi- ■.k' =l'y.^m W'f¥ /V i »• >:r :■ iS'.^^pam AMENDMENTS Ttr THE METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK (MDIF) INTRODUCTION On the pages that follow are amendments to the Metmpoliian Development and Investment Framework (MDIF) that were adopted by the Metropolitan Council on December 5. 1991. The ameildinents affect three sections of the MDIF. New language is indicated by underlining . Language that was deleted from the MDIF is stricken (strieken). Pages 1-9 of uie amendments modify pages 22-25 of the MDIF. beginning with the section titled "Rural Service Area." This is part of the Geographic Policy .Areas section of the MDIF. and eontains t^ci policy statements. Pages 10-14 are modifications to pages 33-35 of the MDIF section titled "Planning and InvestnKnt Procedures: the Council and Metropolitan Systems." This section gives direction for fijture revisions of other chapters of the Metropolitan Development Guide', in this case, the Wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan and the Transportation Policy Plan. A s.'^.all change was also made to the section on parks which rel.ifes to the rural area. This change is being made now in order to incorporate policy direction from the recently adopted Reffonal Recreation Open Space Development CuidelPolicy Plan. It is consistent with discussions of urban-generated uses, held In connection with the rural policy study. 1?! Pages 15-16 are two new appendices to the MDIF. The first is "Criteria for Council Approval ol Local Plans That Are Inconsistent With MDIF Rural Area Policies." The second is "Land Uses In the Rural Area." This clarifies for the Council and local governments what land uses are appropriate for the commercial agricultural region as compared to the general rural use area. For additional copies of this document, for the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework itself, or for additional background information, contact the Metropolitan Council Data Cdnter, 230 E. Fifth St., St. Paul. MN 55101; telephone 291-8140. The MDIF costs $5; the other documents are tree. Questions about the policy amendments should be directed to Anne Hurlburt of the Council staff, 291-6501. ■'It111. s ^1I. frMni wV:k ► ■■ ■ ■ rtfefc;" te -IMiPi:- M- piif ':.■!■ i- V W0: mrM^^iMi‘ f- •• V,. p» is®' kr ‘" •p" ■ -V i-i'3 ■K,. Ir Vi .Ifc H.fcr *Saivvfv r'- Si *-'■.■ ir : *.: . • ‘‘ "■■ ,Sv--v tS- J '■ AMENDMENTS TO THE METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK (MDIF) PART ONE MDIF, Page 22-25 RURAL SERVICE AREA The focus of the Councirs growth-management strategy of encour«itimg growth within an urban j^rvice area requires an accompanying tx)licv that limits growth in the rural area. Extersiye <ieveloPinent outside the metropolitan urban service area is not appropriate because it can lead to premature and cc«tlv demands to extend regional services such as sewers and highways, and does not take advantaifc of reyional investments that have been made in the urban service area. Develo^ent outside the urban service area contributes to urban sprawl and increases the costs of service require higher concentrations of people to be co-.t-effective, such aa transit, mav become prohtbitivcfv experwive. Development in the rural area also results in demt. i for local services, and can change the character of rural communities. While existing service levels mav be low, new residents arc HKc Iy to demand additional services. Developir .nt can result in erosion of the natural and man-mnde that attracted residents in the first place. Conflicts often develop hetween newenvironment gx rban residents and residents who depend on agriculture For all or part of their Jivelihoods Development in the rural area can have adverse impacts on the quality of the natural environment. Protecting and maintaining the quality of surface wnter and grou ndwater is a kev concern of the Council. While technological advances have improved on-site sewage disposal svstCTtt. their proper installation and maintenance is still a critical concern. A common misconception is that agriculture and other rural activities are only temporary laruj uses, just waiting for the land to be develoned. Most of the rural area will not be needed for urban development in the foreseeable future. Agriculture and rural land uses are legitimate_and permanent land uses in these areas. As the re^on grows, there will be a need to expand the urban service area into so me areas that are currently rural. There are potential regional, as well as local, impacts from inappropriate, development of the rut-al areas that mav be needed to expand the urban service area. If communities do not plan for their future urban service areas before development occurs, it is possible that land uses and development patterns may bter block the cont iguous, efficient and cost-effective extension of local and regional urban services. ‘V- ,|S. . ,.fef"'h'A-:, ’ji k^.rj. • £-•. ^l*■IiJ ',t; rr:\ ^i.if t-.ii , :'f. ■ & ■% i: [|i»^ if"' '^V-v *4"- ■k feats' i%v:-M-fo; if’ The cumulative negative impacts ot~ development that is inconsisteni with the Council's rural are.i DoOcies may haN'e a substantial impact on or constitute a substantial depariure from metn''po!it,^n transnortation and wastewater treatment sv ’stems plans. Therefore, the Council mav require communities to modify comprehensive plans that are inconsistent with the policies. Some communities cannot comply with all of the Council’s policies for the rural area because thev have existing deveiooment patterns that are inconsistent with the tx)licv. In the oast, the Cpunnl has found these plans to be inconsistent with regional policies, but has not provided a procedure for making eareptionsiQ the poliev where it mav be warranted. Criteria for Council anoroval ot inconsistent plans are provided in an appendix to this document. Commercial Agricultural Area The commercial agricultural area includes those lands certified by local governments as eligible tor agricultural preserves under the 1980 Metropolitan Agricultural Preser\es Act This approach places the responsibility for detin.ng agricultural lands on local governments. With Council protection policies for commercial agriculture focused only in areas where there are local government plans and protections, local and regional policies support one another. The amount of land included in the commercial agricultural area is large, covering about 600,000 acres in 4(^8^1990. This constitutes over half the farmland in the seven-county area. The geographic area defined as the commercial agricultural area is .subject to frequent change when tied to the Agricultural Preserves Act because land can go into and out of certification when local governments decide to alter its status. Local governments may replan and rezone certified areas if a change in policy is desired, but this change must occur as a public pro<'ess. For the purposes of this document, the commercial agricultural area is defined as the area certified as of March 1 of each year. This date is the end of each Council reportirig year required under the Agricultural Preserves Act. Under the Agricultural Preserves Act, a local government passes a resolution certifying land elifftrfe for protections and benefits and limiting housing density to one unit per 40 acres. The certified area is then considered long-term agricultural land. The local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance must reflect this land use and zoning. Farmers owning land within the certified area may then enter the program. Land in the program is referred to as covenanted land. The Agriculture Proen'es Act provides protection for the farmer from urban assessments, property taxes at development value and conflicting land uses in exchange for a legal commitment to continue farming for at least eight years. Within the commercial agricultural area, all land has been certified by local governments as eligible for the agriculture preserves program. However, the Council recognizes two levels of protection in the commercial agricultural area: primary and secondary protection areas. Primary protection areas are lands covenanted as agricultural preserves. They will receive the greatest protection possible from incompatible uses because the greatest level of commitment to farming has been established. M ■l^K ■ ^r~ >■' ■! - - A .:Tf- ^—■'W"-- s*ttr’s r, ill’ s'; ‘IP-..te :■ 'f^ ;^i' >‘iks.i;.^ s? ^fi-V>v . Sk.i-. f,M'. F • C-‘: Secondary protection areas co%er the farms in the area that have not yet tWffK?<j-hcep. covcnanu'-! agricultural preserves. The Council believes the commercial agricuiture area is a place where a^ricuh’ire is the best permanent use of the land. Long-term investments ;n farm equipment and m land presenation can be made with me confidence that urban des'elopment is not going to destroy or limit these investments. G^teral Rural Use Area The general rural use area is the area outside the urban servnce area that is not designated lor commercial agriculture. Over 40 percent of the land in the Metropolitan Area falls in this category. The area contains a wide variety of land use. including agricultural, residential and urban-type facilitms. There are sizable parts of the general rural use area that host no particular kind of bnd use-land that is often called unused. Most of the area !vX)ks rural, but many of its residents are tied economically to the urban area and many of its land uses provide services to people living in the urban service area. ^ within the general rural use area. General Farmland A large part of the general rural use area is devoted to agriculture. TTse Council supp<.)rts the otMtinuation of agriculture and encourages local governments to support it by zoning agricultural land at one unit per 40 acres. For farms within an area so zoned that are subsequently certified eligible sign up for the agriculture preserves program, the Council will recla.ssify them as part ol the commercial agricultural area. Rural Residential Development Rural residi may be an appropriate land use in areas that are hilly, wooded or otherwise unsuited to agricultural production. The Council .«--------lHWMdealjel-d«velefmeAt-a-peraMBeBt-4afld-u6e-m4-iie(-«A-e8f^^-«tefe-ef _________ The Council supports this type of use as long as the density does not exceed one housing unit per 10 acres of land. The Council will compute rural residential density on the basis of $40-acrc parcels (one square mile or section based on the public land sjrvev). This will prevent excessive clustering of a large number of homes on small minimum lots that sizes, but within the ouifall densi^ eopi The Council opposes such clustering because it could result in the need for urban services, such as package sewesage disposal systems. gnmff eypmun ' in the rural area have significant land area in public parks and open sp.'ice. nr wetlands that art, legally restricted from development. Others have protected lar&e amounts of africultural land bv designating it part of the commercial agricultural area. The Council will recognize this when it applies the density poliev. Lower densities in areas restricted from development may be used to balance higher densities in sections without such limitations. provided it does not result in exces«iw^ y{t«tering that would create demands for services (such as sewer and water systems, storm sewers, roads and other urban services) not typically needed jn ■ i w:,: », ;. ■ m:-'. ■ m:: tural developments. The only areas that uj|| be excluded from this calculation arc m :M jcc w^ier and major metropolitan highway ri^hts-<.?f wav. The Council encourages communities to implement the density standard through clustering where appropriate and consistent with local planning objectives. Implementing the density standard as .1 10-acre minimum lot size is limole to administer, but mav result in an inefficient development pattern and in more land removed from acncultural production than if smaller lot sizes are used. Cluaterina mav aid in adapting the density policy to the diverse character of the landscape. Some areaa have lakes, wetlands, wildlife areas, large areas of public lands or difficult soil conditions that make clustering more desirable. Other areas have good agricultural land that can be protected through clustering, and used to balance the density of dc\clopment on areas !css suited to agriculture. The Council does not recommend a minimum lot size. Lot sizes in the general rural use area thould be determined bv perfonnance standards. At a minimum, they shall ensure at least two icwafe diapoaal drainfields on each site, a pnmarv drainfield and a replacement should the original svatem fail. All roidential development in the general rural use area must be subject to the standards for proper design, location, installation, maintenance and on-going nn)nitoring provided bv the CounaTs Wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan to ensure .nrainst negative impacts on the environment and the metropolitan wastewater treatment sv-stem. Existing Urban-Density Development Residential subdivisions, mobile home parks and clusters of modciatc-density residential development also exist in the general rural use area. Tliey frequently demand urban services but are in locations where urban services are difficult or costly to provide. The Council’s principal concern is the potential need for the costly extension of central sanitary sewer and particularly metropolitan sewer service. The-Council supports deva lopma m in the genera l rura l use-a rea Of a nifdl grea t Local governments wii xisting urban- density development should address the operation and maintenance issues of on-site svstems to avoid potential problems and the eventual need for costly local investments. Urba n-Generated Uses Many facilities exist in the general rural use area that require isolated and spacious locations but m.'jy be intended to serve the urban or entire metropolitan area public. These facilities include campgrounds and recreational vehicle parks, regional parks, trails, waste disposal installations, racing facilities, gun clubs, festivals, mining sites and similar facilities, and are usually public or Quasi-public in nature. The general rural use area is an appropriate location for these facilities. The Council's interest is that these facilities arc provided with adequate public services ad equat ely sawad, consistent with local and regional plans, and to the extent possible, that they do not interfere with agricultural activities. Other Land Uses In addition to agriculture, single-family residential development, existing development and urban- generated uses, there are other land uses that mav be appropriate in the general rural use area. Whether or not a land u.se is appropriate depends on whether it is consistent with local and ^ V • < V ■ -■■:'{■ V ■■■ i ‘^>> ;r- ...^ i' .r ;♦.te-i'n.ir *4 t ,r*- • .?• 55?-: .S-V regional plans and if it meets all environmental quality standards. An appropriate land use ^ouki not require urban-iev’d support services (such as highways, transit or sewers). Uses shouiU be ot scale comnatible with the services available and the need to serve local market derrands. To the extent possible, they should not interfere with agricultural activities. One category of land uses that may he appropriate in the rural area is neighborhood convenience lentil <«ifh as a grocery store or yasoline station. If it is of an appropriate scale to ser^e local and does not need urban sewers or highways, it mav be appropriate in the general rur.U Even thouyh a particular land use mav be acceptable from a re^^ional perspective, the Council will not recommend that every community provide for every possible land use in its rural area if it would not be consistent with local plans. Each community must determine whether p.irticular land uses would be compatible with existing uses, local standards and the goals of the community. All uses would be subject to anv local, regional or state permitting or licensing requirements. Tliy^ ^ acceptable are included in an appendix to this document. Lot sizes for all land vKif be determined bv pcrfomiance standards. At a minimum, they ensure at least two sewage disposal drainfields on each site, a primary drainfield and a replacement should the nriyinal svatem fail. Ail development in the general rural use area must be subject to the itandarda for proper design, location, installation, maintenance and on-going monitoring provided bv the Councirs tVasrewnter Treatmeni and Handling Policy Plan to ensure against negative impacts on the envi:->nment and the metropolitan wastewater treatment systom^ Rural Centers Rural centers historically have served as retail service centers and transportation centers for the surrounding rural area. However, changes in agriculture and rapid urban c.xpanston have changee the traditional rural service roles of many of these small centers to residential areas for urban people and locations for industries with little tie to local agriculture. The latter make use ot available labor in rural areas and, by their nature, tend not to be dependent on close contact with other firms for their supplies or critically dependent on transportation. The Council has identified 35 rural centers, with populations ranging from just over KX) to more than 5,000. Some rural centers, such as Norwood and Young America, encompass the entire corporate limits of the community. Others, such as Lake Elmo, arc small enclaves within a larger rural community. Services available within rural centers vary. Some have central sanitary sewer; others depend on on-site waste disposal systems. Some have central water systems. Some provide the full range ol convenience retail stores, while others have only a bar or gas station. Some have small manufacturing or service businesses; others are almost exclusively residential. The Council does not support the extension of regional systems to rural centers because of the distance from the urban center and the small populations of rural centers. Rural locations in the past decade have been attractive and some, although not all, communities have experienced an upsurge in growth, principally residential development. Dev< jpment trends arc down from the highs noted in the early 1970s but continue at modest levels into the 1980s. m•r-* 1 ■ ti-.- ■'. . ’-i-' m -'5^ ^ "f^-. 'P# ^ v '. ■ '.:-. >v ■ ■'-•-■• - :i-m: r ■:?# V i|i. iZ' '&■40r. ■ 0m ■’■^^ '■iii.- :v ■ -#r ■' ;-,. ■ l^H' M tr ■:■■ .i Several services arc important in adequately scrying additional rural center dcveli^pfri'^ni. but sewage disposal is the most critical. Urban-density development in an unse\^ercd rural center poses the risks of on-site sewage sy'stem failure, contamination of groundwater and eventually the expense of new on-site or central sewer sy-stem installation. The possibility also exists that remcxlying a pollution problem may require an extension of metropolitan sewer service through rural areas. Lack of sewer service is a serious constraint on the amount and type of development that rural centers can safely accommodate. Some parts of the rural Metropolitan Area, especially Anoka County, are receiving large amounts of scattered urban development This scattered developrrent po.ses service problems and may. at a later date, result in very hi^h local service costs. The 0:>uncil proposes a strategy that oilers local government an alternative way to structure this development by d'*signating and creating a "rural center.” These new centers would be limited enclaves for urban-censity land uses, facilities and smvices within the local governments’ broader aorporote |urisdictional boundaries. They would not be coterminous with the entire corporata jurisdictional limits. Under this strategy, a local government would identify an area to receive urban-density residential, commercial and industrial development and the facilities, including local central sewer, where appropriate, needed to serve it Hnancing of necessary support services would be a loc'^l responsibility. Areas of existing urban-density ases are likely candidates for selection as new rural centers. Rural centers should accommodate additional development consistent with their ability to finance and administer services, including sewer, roads, water and stormwater drainage. If additional land is needed to accommodate growth, rural centers should extend sc. .ices in a staged, contiguous manner. Residential, commercial and industrial development at urban densities should be accommodated only in rural ccntc’S with central sanitary sewers that are meeting state and feder.i! water quality standards. Larger projects should be located in freestanding growth centers that have a full range of services. Ra.*nl-to-Urban Transition Plannlna Rural-to-urban transition areas are areas that may eventually be needed for expansion of the Ufban service area but are currently part of the rural service area. While these areas will not he considered a separate regional policy area, the Council encourages local governments to plan for potential expansions of the urban service area in their comprehensive plans. Communities planning for transition areas should consider land characteristics (such as soils. wetlands, watershed boundaries, agricultural soil capabilitvl. existing land use and develonment patterns, the transportation system, and long-range plans for expansion of local and regioual utility systems. Transition areas should generally be contiguous to the existing urban service area. In most cases, it would not include the entire jurisdictional limits of the local government, but might if the community wishes to plan for the eventual urbanization of the area. Land in a transition area should be protected from incompatible development patterns and land uses that mav later obstruct the extension of urban services. The most effective strategy to protect the transition area is to restrict development to very low-densitv (one per 40 or less) residential development or agricultural uses, which preserves large parcels intact until they can he subdivided into small lots and provided with urban services. If residential subdivisions are permitted, clustering should be encouraged. The laree parcels remaining may later be efficiently i- ■ Ia IP’[4:-^ ' resubdivided, and the smaller, clustered lots can be more economically provided with sen-ices or bypassed if necessary. Local governments should use caution in implementing "ghost platting" or similar methods for ituhdividtny land into large lots with the intention of resubdividing them when services are to he provided. Resubdivision and installing utilities in existing subdivisions can be a very difficult process and result in hiyher costs. The de^ '’opment pattern established may not be appropriate or desirable when the area is incorporated mto the urban service area. Local govemments mav also want to consider whether the land uses permitted in transition areas i|j*cpuragc or prevent urbanization in the future. For example, a use that requires a spacious, isolated location should probably not be located where it is likelv to be surrounded bv incompatible urban development in the future. The Cbuncil uHll review local comprehensive plans that include plans for rural-to-urban transition areas, but will not commit to the future extension of metropolitan services to serve the area orjo any time frame for expansion of services bevond the urban service area. The Council v ill continue to apply its policies and criteria fot expansion of the urban service area when a regional need has been demonstrated. The Council will suptx^rt local efforts to prevent development incompatible with future urbanization. The Council will examine the need to plan for rural-to-urban transition areas in its n^etropolium systems plans. Local plans will be considered hut will not determine the transition areas designated for regional purposes. RURAL SERVICE AREA POLICIES IL The MetropoHtaw Council docs not support extensive development outside the urban service area because it can lead to the premature expansiun of local and regional services, and flails to take advantage of rei^ional investments that have been made in jhi- urban service area. The cumulative neearive Impacts of development that is Inconsistent with the Conncirs rural area policies mav have a substantial impoct on or constitute a lyphiy^^Htlal departure from metropolitan transportation and wastewater treotmenl systems plans. Therefore, the C* nncil may require communities to modify comprehensive plana that are Inconsistent with the policies. The Council will consider exceptions to the policies tor local govemments that cannot meet the policies because of existing subdivisions or land development Commercial Agricultural Area ^.75. The Metropolitan Council supports the long-term continuation of agriculture in the rural service area. The Council will use the following ranking in decisions to accommodate facilities serving urban residents. 1.Primary protection area: land covenanted in agriculture preserves will receive primary’ protection. Urban facilities should be prohibited in this area unless there ip*,., -- ;-v:...r-I ■ f\-r: t"- ':r' is strong documentation that no other locations in the Nietrc*politan Area adequately meet the siting and selection criteria. can 2.Secondary protection area: lands certified but not presently m agricultural preserves will receive a level of protection secondary to agricultural preserses. Urban facilities should not be located in this area unless there is strong evidence that a proposed urban use cannot be located in the general rural use area. General Rural Use Area The Metropolitan Council supports long-term P*^*®etvatlon of agricultural land in the general rural use areu. However, the Council will also support residential development at densities of no more than one unit per 10 acres conipntcd on a 640-acre basis fa maximum of sixty four units per acres square mile bnsed on the nubile land survey). The Council will allow land area in public parks or open space, wetlands that are legally restricted from development, and agricultural land that has been desienated as part of the commercial agricultural area to be used to balance higher densities in sections without such limitations, provided that it would not Iftwit la excewlve dasterlna that would created demands for urban services. The only arena that will be excluded from this calculation are surface water and major ►litaii hiihwnv riahts-of-wav. m The Council encouraaes clustei. of residential development, which will result In a more efficient developroewt pattern and help to protect agricultural and environmentally sensitive lands. Lot sires in the general rural use area should be determined bv Pertoimance standards. At a minimumt they shall ensure at least two sewage disposal dginflelds on each site, a primary drainfleld and a replacement should the oricinal system fail. ISC The Council will not extend metropolitan systems to serve urban-density residential devdopment in the general rural use area. Where urban-density development already existSy a local government should address service issues in Its plan, particularly on-site sewer ^tem operation and maintenance. m Ln addition to agriculture, single family residep^lal development, existing development a.nd urban-*nenernted uses, the Council will support other land uses in the general rural use area, provided that they are consistent with local and regional plans. Appropriate rural land uses must meet all environmental quality standards, not require urban-level StiPPOrl scniceSt and be of a scale compatible with the services available and the need to serve loail market demands. To the extent possible they should not interfere with agricultural activities. Rural Centers 2M9 The Metropolitan Council will support a rural center's plans to accommodate additional growth provided they are consistent with the center's ability to finance and administer services, particularly sewer service. The Council supports rural center service improvements but not at regional expense. 8 - V.', •' lu,.‘ .' .-- i'v* , !|«i;vi<fi-. S' ^ ■miV.- p^' ■■• r ':i.''‘’v. / ■’ m #■■.. ^ v -'- 's '-'te.'v;-v •I#' Im fe:. ■V‘^-i-^> i4 ::.-,T -"J/ ■ Sf.-"-:. ■ Is^Vv- •A |v*' ^' : / j .-> ^ •, ( m-i’m--,. ife-,. ;!/gi ‘a ^- ' ■ :'K^^ :-;^ •^' . S' ■ ■ ^-.\p "■ 4 - ''. ' .‘r. 4#M'‘-'r y - :• ' -'‘v' f il. ;••... . ’U ;'*: i V'. < V :'-■:>.; 210.The Council will support a local gov*mnient’s plan for a new rural center and its requests for state and federal grants, provided the local government restricts urban densities from surrounding rural areas and will support the new center with necessary '•errice investments. Rnml-to»Urban Transition Plannln£ 22i The MetmpftHtan Council will encourage local eovermnents to plan for niral-to-tirban tmnaitlon areas in their comprehensive plans, and will support local efforts to prevent development incompntihie with future urbauiy;ation. The Council will not commit to the itrtnre eatension of metropolitan services to serve the area until such time as there is a iMtrated. regional need to expand the urban service area in accordance with .■J'illKllshed Council colicies and criteria. Local plans will be considered but will not ermine transition areas designated for re2ioual pun oses. F' # ■ %;. % ■ V I- I" ■ y: '0»':S ili'v.'0'^iv ■ W>> fcmm '-'W%m•:S :.<' i'.U . W : 4-r i' ;’v'- ' -t Ua fci^'V :'f#, ;iv^;;v ,;v^> ■ y r ^ V- . d; Kp. r :f^- PSf-«/,- PART TWO MDIF, Page 33-35 PLANNING AND INVESTMENT PROCEDURES: THE COUNCIL AND METROPOLITAN SYSTEMS The Metropolitan Council is concerned with managing metropolitan systems in ways that will help realize the objectives fw long-term development of the region as reflected in this document s discussion of the geographic policy areas. The following metropolitan system guidelines provide direction to the Council's systems for developing the more detailed policies and programs contained in the individual system plans. The metro governance process, discussed later, explains the procedures for carrying out the guidelines through the actions of the metropolitan agencies. METROPOLITAN SYSTEM GUIDELINES The rinuncil is committed to providing regional services and facilities within the urban service area. However, the Council will not support development of facilities substantially in excess of forecasted need. Tu& challenge to the Council and commissions is to find the middle ground between overbuilding and undersizing essential facilities. Some facilities that deliver services to the urban service area will have to be physically located within the rural service area even though they primarily serve people living in the urban service area. This may result from land requirements, the location of natural resources or the need for interregional connectfons. For example, solid waste landfills with requirements for large acreages will likely be located in the rural service area; sand and gravel extraction and regional parks depend on the kKation of the resource and often occur in the ural service area; and highways, power lines and pipelines that tie this region to other parts of * e and nation will have to traverse the rural service area. When urban facilities must be located in the rural area, they will be located, developed and operated in a manner that minimizes interference with agriculture and the rural set iement pattern. Sewers Only land within the urban service area will receive regional sewer service. Service will be provided in accordance with regional and local staging of development as outlined in the Council ’s sewer policy plan and local comprehensive plans that are in conformity with the Council's regional plan. The Council will take the necessary actions to provide metropolitan sewer interceptors and wastewater treatment plants adequate to transport sewage generated by users in the urban service area and to treat it to the extent necessary to meet the requirements of 'b" national pollution discharge elimination system permit for each treatment plant. Central sewer service currently provided in rural centers can continue at levels consistent with each center ’s ability to finance and operate systems locally. In rural centers or any other part of the rural are: receiving regional sewer service, the Council will determine regional service allocations for se ^er flow using the same procedures that are used for other communities located within the n ;tropolitan urban service area. P W. l^'v ■ f’r- P>i. f ' '■ '»■ IV ■ E"' ^57. < K I i'^ r’’: ►" ’ f.-, 'Y'-J' r';'\-> fm.. %Y-' '•> >». :■ Kf-" 'v V '•' * /f-. .'-*’ The CbuncU will assure the continuation of service adequate to meet the needs of Jevclopment currently receiving regional sewer service. In order to meet this commitment, the C ouncil emphasizes the need to monitor the condition of older sewers and sewers with a h.Nt >r> of problems, as well as the trends in sewage volume as opposed to design capacity The Council will also work for increased coordination between the sewer and the solid waste system in the area of planning and project development of composting and co-composting. Recycling residuals from the waste treatment process with municipal solid waste may help resolve disposal problems confronting both the sewer and ihe solid waste s>’stems. The Coundl will est»|»;>lffh on-site sewage disposal sv-stems in the rural area to protect the reeion’s groundwater and the health of rural area residents, and to prevent the need for premature extensions of the regional sewer system. All elements of the Minnesota Pollution Control Aycnev standards for on-site sewage disposal systems should be followed in all areas. All communities shall reouire at least two sewage-disposal drainfields to be located on each building site, a oritnafv drainfield and a replacement should the original system fail Except m the commcfcial agricultural area, all facets of the Council’s standards for the proper desien. location, installation, maintenance and on-goina monitoring of on-site systems should also be adopted._The Council will require all communities to certify that they have met these standards prior to aooroval of local comprehensive plan amendments or making favr»^-^hle recommendations in project resTCws. "P*? review its existing policies concerning community on-site sewage di.spvDsal SN^tems and package treatment plants in the rural area in light of the Council’s policy to encourage clustering in the rural area and the improved technology which is or may become available in the future. The Council will also consider whether monitoring of ru»-al water supplies may be necessary to detect pollution from on-site sewage disposal systems. Planning for the metropolitan sewer system should address the impacts on the system trom disvelopment outside the urban service area: specifically, impacts on the service availability charge fSACT and the underuse of metropolitan sewer facilities. Planning for the metropolitan sewer system should also consider how local comprehensiv e sewer plans should address the rural-to-urban transition areas, and protect them from incompatible development that mav later block the efficient extension of the sewer system. Transportation Metropolitan highway improvements will be planned and developed to serve the needs of residents in the urban service area, including the freestanding p’owth centers. Highwas-s will be provided in accordance with the Council's regional transportation policy plan and local comprehensive plans that are in conformity with the Council’s regional plan. Varying levels of highway service will continue to exist in the urban service area due to travel behavior, development patterns and the nature of highways facilities, but efforts will be made to provide a reasonable level of metropolitan highway service throughout the urban service area. FI' t fev- m-w- mnu. if- Sir' !■i 9 II,. -V• - ji i ' , .-■ Ir % f. ^Li: r -. ’A J-i: v: - 0-m-k.:- ik ■I'-'i r il‘- rf^F- The Couocil influences metropolitan highway development in a variety of wa>s. The MinneSv ’Ha Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) constructs and maintains most of the roads in the metropolitan system, and the ultimate authority for highway programming decisions rests with the state commissioner of transportation. However. Mn/DOT seriously considers the Council’s highway policymaking and project planning in virtually all metropolitan area highway priorities. The Council approves construction on controlled-access highways and develops guidelines for setting highway priorities as well as guidelines for approval of interchange improvements. The Council is also responsible for endorsing Federal Aid Urban and Interstate Substitution funding priorities, which arc set by local elected officials acting through the Council’s Transpiortation Advisory Board. Highway planning is very important because the ability of people to take advantage of the opportunities the area oCfen and acquiring essential goods and services depend on having a good highway system and on keeping it operating well. This means roads on the existing system must be able to provide the type and level of service designated in the Council’s transportation policy plan. Traffic management strategies or new construction will be necessary when traffic volumes approach design capacities, when road conditions pose hazards and slowdowns, and when new developments arc proposed that difl^er substantially from assumptions made in the regional transportation jiian. Implerrenting traffic management strategies for metropolitan highways is a state or regional responsibility that frequently has direct or indirect implications for local .sv-stems. Lx)cal governments will have primary responsibility for carrying out traffic management strategies on local systems. New sources may share the responsibility for funding new construction with the traditional county, state and federal sources. New sources may include the region, local governments and the private sector. With the potential for funding and operational limitations, denying access to the regional system may also be necessary for unanticipated new developments. Highway planning should also address air pollution caused by heavy concentrations of auto, truck and bus traffic. Although this problem has traditionally been associated with the two metro centers, it is a growing problem in the regional business concentrations where highways are reaching capacity. The relationship between metropolitan highways and outstate Minnesota is another consideration in highway planning. The Council recognizes the importance of outstate connections, particularly for eoonomk devetopment ^ and will apply th e same policies for eiqvons ion and maint enanc e and lilt 40 outstate oonn ections as it will to th e motropolitan hi ghway system. Metropolitan highways in the rural area will be planned to support a level of development consistent with the Coundrs rural density policies. The Council will not plan for a level of service that would support or encourage development greater than the policy except where an exception has been approved according to the guidelines of the Metropolitan Development an d Investment Framework. Highway planning must also consider the rural-to-urban transition areas, and how rights-of-wav for the system of principal and minor arterials (hat will be needed in the future should be protected from incompatible development. i: ^tV' - ■•'V ^•^f- r' i-^f . Pi- IIr . i'^, 4V N ?■;-' «. ■X-'A'-'':i«t i 'I'-' I*. ir #5' wm ‘•fc ‘••<v':i m. .jtji •'^\ •j«;*^*(w» ■ L ;• •.■ feV; $&* p p’;- P l|r:^ > ■t - K'-,i?v I'.:tf, fci ' . I'i- ■ W S«' kfc Buses operating on streets and hi-tjhways will probably dominate public transit ser^ice through the remainder of the century. This docs not preclude the .ntn.xiuction of some fixed -guideway facilities in heavily traveled corridors, but costs and time const'amts work against a massive shift in form over the next 15 years. Nevertheless, the Council will .xmtinue to seek creative, forward- loo'ring solutions to transit service problcm.v Lccations with large numbers of ho.a>eholds and/or high employment in relatively small areas offer good potential for public transit service. It is also important to provide transit to the people who have no other way to travel. This generally means elderly, handicapped, low-income and young people. Providing service to these people will probably involve above-average subsidies. Some parts of the urban service area with low-density development may be served only by paratransit on a demand basis. This is also true for some of the transit-dependent people .vho live in low-density areas or cannot use the public system. Regularly scheduled regional transit service will not be provided to the rural service area, but residents of the area can arrange for and finance public transit or public paratransit on their own if they so desire. This does not preclude the Council or the Regional Transit Board from becoming involved in plarming for the specia' mobility needs of elderly and handicapped people m the rural service area or for the use of public funds specially appropriated for this purpose. Transit planning will take into account the cost of providing transit servf es tp 'ow-density areas, and how that mav change over time as transit-dependent popul tions increase ir these areas. Pl*nni n? fftr ^«gbwavs and transit should consider the relationships among transportation needj^ pO|julatiQn densi 'es and the provision of human services including public schools, l,ealth and social services, employment opportunities and emergency services. I*arks The regional parks and open space system includes facilities in both the urban and rural :ervice areas. Regional recreation open space will be acquired to serve the needs of today’s urban population and to preserve outstanding natural and recreation resources for the area’s future population. Facilities will be developed according to priorities in the Council s regional park plan, which will emphasize the needs of residents in the urban service area. The development of regional nark facilities that attract large numbers of users will generally occi r in the urban service area, unless the demands cannot be adequately met. If it is necc^arv_tQ develop such facilities in the rural service area, adequate support servic es such as roads and sewers must be provided. Airports Evciy effort will be made to get the maximum use out of the existing airport sptem, consistent with the Council’s airport policy plan. Tliis is especially impiortant for the "major and "intermediate" airports, all of whic.h arc located in the urban service area. These facilities should continue to operate and to operate safely even if it requires substantial upgrading of existing facilities and modifications or controls on nearby land uses and development proposals. Land use •« p*C f_-t C'r • / ■: C-TfS ■• « ' ; w ' .Jfe'i.' . €':fe ^v--y- ■ PIJ*' E* ■ Xi-^ pi"fev. ®r f«i' life- compatibility is critical to ensure future as well as current adequate operations at the regional aiqxirts. If ■ new "minor" airport site is needed, lands in the commercial agricultural area as defined in this document should be avoided. In addition, the only facilities deveiopied on or adjacent to the airport should be those directly involved with making it useable and safe. Other Aran Systems This framework focuses on the four metropolitan systems of sewers, transportation, regional pa.ks and airports because the Council has special obligations and responsibilities for them under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act Under the Waste Management Act, the Council ’s solid waste (KOgram has the same status in many respects as the four metropolitan systems and will receive the same tevel of protection as those systems. However. The Council also has planning responsibSities for several other systems that serve the residents of the Metropolitan Area. Currently, the Council has adopted plans dealing with housing, health, surface water .management, juvenile justice and water resources, as well as major position papers on the aging, arts and devdr^Hnent disabilities. All of these planning documents and the programs associated with them oontribine to metix^litan resource management. The Council must direct attention to the impart o( this framework and metropolitan system plans on these other area plans and orograms, as wett as the extent to which the other plans and programs modify the development ano investment firanmwork and metropolitan system plans. The Council also recognizes that numerous interrelationships exist among the other area system plans and the metropolitan system plans. Examples include aging and health, transportation and housing, and sewers, solid waste and water resources. some of the other systems, the relationships are less obvious However, all of the systems, whether designated as metropolitan or not, have the following in common: a) assumptions about future directions of area-wide growth and change and reliance on a uniform set cf forecasts; b) accountability to Council legislative mandates; c) concern with orderly and economic development; d) adherence to the same process of regkioal planning and decision-making; and e) reliance on the area's population for most of their financial support. MTLilBy,:: I-. .C, lisv ^^m ir> P'- -Kr---''" !'P * ■*• Vsi- . > '5^fi!^ fe-i-Ip .t* :^ ••• ■ 'V ,. ' • ■ -'P. I ■•'■■ '■>. ■■"m i-rv-;. * r:'" 1'^iv-/t ;i' ’81^ '^’^i t r .s\, J r- •■-S';.4P PART THREE MDIF, Appendices Appendix; Criteria for Council Approval of Local Plans that are Inconsistent with MDIF Rural Area Policies Some communities in the rural area have existing devdopm:nt patterns that are inconsistent v.uh Council policy. Specifically, some communities have already developed at - residential densities peater than one unit per 10 acres. This appendix provides criteria and procedures for revieNv nnd approval of local comprehensive plans that are inconsistent with the density tK)licy. to the oolides for the rural area will be considered only for communities that cannot meet the policy because of the wtiatiM subdivisions or land development. The Council may approve qn t7ff*T^ijQn P^rt of its review of a local comprehensive plan. The extent of the mteeption will be based upon how well the community will or has: protected good agricultural land: protected wetlands and other environmentally sensitive areas; implemented oerformance standards for on-site sewage disposal s\-stems (hat are conM^em, with the Cbuncirs Wastewater Treatment and Hanaline Policy Plan: and adopted a comprehensive plan consistent with all Metropolitan Development Guide cha pters, especially those for the metropolitan systems (sewers, transportation, aviation and.j>?rfe.) In order for the Council to support an exception to the rural density policy, the community must provide the foUou ’ t as a part of its comprehensive plan amendment; 1 1 The total land area Cacreage) of the community, adjusted for surface water and major highway rights-of-wav. The number of existing lots of record. The amount and location of land owned bv public agencies or occupied by institutional 1 1 7. uses and restricted from development. The amount and location of undeveloped land, with an analysis of its development potential based on current and proposed planning and zoning. The amount and location of land planned and zoned for uses other than agriculture and residential development, with a description of uses that will be permitted. The amount and location of agricultural land uses, and any areas that will be certified eligible for the Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves program. The amount and location of wetlands, with information demonstmting how such ar eas will 2a 9, m n. be protected from deveioumcnt. Copies of all local ordinances relating to adoption of perf-^rmance standards for on-site sewage disposal systems. The location of anv proposed rural-to»urban transition " cua, >ng with plans an d policies to protect such areas fr^m premature or incompatible development. Additional information that mav be necessary to bring the local comprehensive planJntQ compliance with metropolitan systems plans. Schedule for implementing the plan amendment. P-m fT" K. ■'. '■ ■ • • ' ■ Appendix: Land Uses in the Rural Area TT)t5 appendix help» clarify what land uses may be supported bv Council policy f^r the rural service area, and provides |guidancc for both the Council and local governments. It is impoftant to remember that even though a particular land use mav be acceptable in the rurni area from a regional penpcctivc. the Council wifi not recommend that c%'erv community provide for every poasibie land use in its rural area if it would not be consistent with local plans. All uses would also be subject to anv local, regional or state permitting or licensing reouiremeriLs. Lead Use Recoromendatlons for the Rural Area M: r-- 'y * ■■ t i ■m. • • .» M. [#.• r?'.rp,I. ^ -■•V' Mkjr Atm CoaaMrdal AcrkoJtanl Rcfioa General Rnral Use Am Fiamplee of Consisteat Land Ui Agricvltarah brood range of agricultural land uses, including horse boarding and training, kennels, sod farms, tree farms, hsh produaion and processing, storage areas or buildings; for pnmary proteaioa areas, uses consistent with I960 Agncultural Prcser\es Act Reaideotial: single family residences at a maximum density of 1/40 acres, accessory apartments Comwerdal/lnduattrial; small on»fafm operations normally associated with farming Institutfoaal: urban generated faalities, such as waste disposal facilities; prohibited from primary protection areas unless no other location available; prohibited from secondary protection area unless no site in general rural use area available AgricuitBraf; afl uses listed for commercial agricultural policy area RMidtadak single family residences at a maximum density of 1/10 acres computed on the basis of 640 acre parcels (one square mile), “win bomes/duplexes (meeting density standard), acceaoty apartments, group-living homes with shared cooking facilities Comaercial/RacrMtkMMl and Urban-Generated Uses: urban-generated uses, .ictuding recreational vehicle parks, racetracks, festival sites, campgrounds, gun dubs, private airports, solid waste facilities, auto salvage and recycling, other similar fadiities, neighborhood oonvemenoe/tervice/i^tail uses, such as rinancial offices, video stores, gasoline, groceries, daycare centers, commercial/Service/retail uses adjacent to or served by existing metro highways, agncultural products processing, home occupations, bed and breakfast lodging facilities, dentist auU doctor offices, landing areas for ultralight and model airplanes, retreat facilities, golf courses Induatrtal: sand and gravel mining, urban-generatoj uses that require a spacious, isolated location, small manufaouring firms origmating from home occupeiiono, oil or gasoline storage tank farms, refiiKries. solid waste transfer/processing facilities lostihitioopl: urban-generated uses, such as waste-disposal installations, jails, prisons, pubik airptvts, human service agency satellite offices, parks, trails, open space, other similar fadiities, unique natural or conservation areas, schools, churches, cemeteries ie- “I'V • ,1.' MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON JANUARY 27, 1992 Prior to the start of the Board meeting, the Board members met with the high school Student Advisory Council. The next scheduled meeting will be held on May 11. 1992. The regular meeting of the School Board of Orono Independent Scnool District No. 278 was held on Monday, January 27, 1992. Present: David McKown Don Anderson James Franklin Peg Swanson Martha Van de Ven Thomas Mich Neal Lawson Board meiiber John Maresh arrived while the meeting was in progress. UPON MOTION by Jim Franklin, seconded by Don Anderson, the consent agenda was approved as follows: approved the minutes of the January 13, 1992 accepted the resignation of Kenneth K. Jensen, high effective at the close of the 1991-92 approved tht appointment of LuAnn Eisinger as a part Orono Middle School effective January 22, 1992; approved the Activity Fund Report for second approved the bills as covered by vouchers 072741 through checks as covered by vouchers 1705 through 1733. regular meeting; school librarian, school year; time cook at the quarter, 1991 072876 and office Motion carried. Board member Maresh absent. Or. Mich informed the Board that Ron Gilbert's father had passed away and the*, flowers had been sent on behalf of the Board of Education. Dr. Mich reported that he wanted to acknowledge the retirement of Ken Jensen after 36 years of service at the Orono Schools; that a breakfast for area clergy will be held tomorrow morning; that on ’anuary 30 he would be cc ducting a class on the Advanced Elements of Effective Instruction and he invited Board members to attend; that he wanted to express appreciation to everyone who worked on the sixth annual recognition luncheon on January 20; that each school has been working on developing a newsletter and that he wanted to distribute the first one from the high school; that this past week he was par^ of a superintendent's group that spent the morning with Dr. James Ranier discussing his ideas on education and materials are available if Board members are interested; that he wanted to present to Martha Van de Ven an award for completing all the phases of MSBA training for new Board members. •I.’- • . . I.::-:. - Vi- j •• •^»*»,—.I'l I? - ^ . ■ [t ' r -■■ : •. ‘ '• m.yt"-- i ■ f" ‘ • m-" H. ‘jm' ti'-? f-'r ?'■ ' ?iP' '■ ^’.-. .y, ‘-'I -.■. ■St'-'V-.- ■ V'-^' i--' -T-- ■H^i -y :0ifry-- i .. ■■ '.V-i . ^ IM ‘m:-K'vl/- *. fe . i r‘.' ■;. ♦ , * ^i-. fe. K. i Each Board member provided a brle^ update respective long-range planning co^rvni ttee^. on tne pfOQress/direction of their UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Ji'n Frank i’n, tht Board of Education authorized the Board Chai’-man to sign and subnnt tne District’s Pay Equity Report to the Department of Employee Relations before Ja-^uary 31. 1992. Hr. Lawson informed the Board that with the submission or this report, the District will be in compliance with requirements of tne State at this time. Motion carried. Board member Karesh absent. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Jim Franklin, tne Board of Education accepted a permanent scholarship fund gift from William and Doris Fenholt in the mount of $25,000 for the purpose of establisning an annual vjcational/community college scholarship award to an Orono High School student, using award criteria developed by the donors and the high school guidance department. The Board expressed appreciation to Bill and Doris Fenholt not only for this generous gift which will be onooing in providing additional education for stu­ dents, but also fo! the many years of service they have both given to the Orono School District. Motion carried. Board member Maresh absent. Mr. Lawson reported that he has reviewed cash flow for the District and although there will probably be some shortages, it is not advantageous at this time for the District to enter the market for short term borrowing as has been done in the past years. Ms. Susan Heidt, business education teacher, reported to the Board Awareness Program at the high school. She provided background the development of the program, the on-going piogram which covers choices of students and for which a program is held once a reviewed other activities that have taken place or will take program. Ms. Heidt expressed appreciation to the Orono Lions Club money to cover the fees that are involved in providing the monthly on the Career information on the top career month and she place in the for providing programs. Pat Jones, Bruce Frahm, Kay Sauss, Darren Wolf and Pam Brinkhaus represented the eighth grade team and presented information to the Board on this team approcCh. Pat Jones provided background information on the development of the team iuea and its philosophy. She stated that there are 16 - 23 members on the team, which meets every Wednesday morning in order to provide- a vehicle for com­ munication, concerns regarding students, the making of decisions that impact students as well as teachers and interdisciplinary curriculum/teaching . The Itm\:% > i^.-' ^?^l^ ='' p®'V-:>'';. KV!j-. W... l;Mf-sr;*^.:;T, . m^. I’Ws.si€ r--. 1 ■ ' ^: J :J'-*f*- «■' ,. KV- ■; ^ ' Ilf%c>.-v.m: ')f.i‘. V , fism ^&'- "i-ev.' i-:.. ‘M-;. ■fiV \r' fe: Suip- p- Ssi-; other representatives presented information on basic issues that the team has been working on this past school year. The Board expressed appreciation to Ms. Heidt and to th<' representatives of the eighth grade team for their informative and exciting reports. UPON MOTION by John Maresh, seconded by Jim Franklin, tne meeting was adjourned. Motion carried. Approved: ohn Maresh, Cle'k Dave McKown, Chairman Mir^i Mull KXmfl r#fti* M I MM I Bir^#i Wtil* [•itjii 4 is'M''?■mMs^mm. •4^‘ im tk-^->..: %/.*V m IP Mi ■ f km