Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05-26-1992 Council Packet
mtf*V': '»> • ir y HINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1992 ROLL The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson, Counci I members Gabriel Jabbour, J. Olann Goetten, Mary Butler and Edward Callahan. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, PubIic Works Director John Gerhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Qaffron, Pol Ice Chief Stephen Sullivan, City Attorney Tom Barrett, City Engineer Glenn Cook and City Recorder Teri Naab. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7;00 P.M. («1) CONSENT AGENDA Jabbour added Items #9 and 11 to the consent agenda. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Ayes 5, nays 0. Motions for all I terns adopted by consent agenda will be included In the minutes in their respective numerical order. (*#2, 344) APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Orono Council held on May 11, 1992; the minutes of the Reconvened Board of Review meeting held on May 11, 1992; and the minutes of the Stubbs Bay Assessment Hearing held on May 4, 1992. Ayes 5. nays 0. LMCO REPRESENTATIVE’S C.'MMENTS JoElien Hurr was present and noted the next Board meeting of the LMCD will be held on Wednesday, May 27, 1992. She noted the LMCO has established a subcommittee to study the sale of non-fuel items from docks. Goetten expressed concern that food wrappers may end up In the I ake. Hurr stated that the Water Patro* has made four arrests to date for BWIs. She reported that a subcommittee met on May 9, 1992 to discuss water structures and is recommending denial of the request of Forest Arms residents to redesign their docks. Callahan noted the charter boats were discussed at the May I8th meeting. f- • ••- 4\ i .. ;^V. ■: '•/' ,'v : > 5<:. i-' ■- ,'•*■> A-'. S f' in: ’ 'b> %k";i" ,g-- v«M ilMaimm MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1992 LMCD REPRESENTATIVE’S COMMENTS - CONT. Murr stated she is primarily Interested In where tnese boats are docked and noted the LMCD is unable to control any zoning issues with regards to these boats. She said the LMCD and the Water Patrol both license these boats. Jabbour stated that the LMCD does not license where boarding of these bo c occur and does not concern icself with parking issues related . .th this service. Hurr indicated that the LMCD has asked that the businesses have the ability tor parking for their customers. Callahan asked ab:>ut the Issue of boat clubs. Hurr stated that the LMCD has made no decision on this issue. Callahan said that It appears that Inland Marine at 1960 Shoreline Drive has decided to have a boat club. Jabbour noted that i-akeslde Marina has a boat club too. Callahan noted that one requirement of the conditional use permit for Inland Marina Is that there shall be no business which Is connected to that across the street. Jabbour suggested the City find them in violation and close the business down. Hurr announced that the LMCD has createo an environmental committee. She noted that at the last meeting, no one from Orono present and reported the next meeting will be held on Tuesday, June 9th at 8:30 at the LMCD office. She announced that the LMCD has scheduled a tour of the Lake for the Commissioner of the DNR for Thursday, May 28th at 1:00 and invited the Council to attend. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. LapinskI asked If he could address the Council regarding the need for a variance for a stairway off his deck. He questioned the necessity of such a variance. Mayor Peterson explained that tne variance is for the increase In structural hardcover within the 75-250’ zone where excesses already exist. Mabusth explained that there Is no increase is an Intensification of the structure. In hardcover, but there . ■ .flit.. ;;;rsn fI K# ■sm- K-n. m W--w- Jr:- ••■;■ i ■• W ■ ?■;mi?s ;;v m 11 C fe 1. &! ife- S;'jr: :'v fi'-O. fr" MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1992 PUBLIC COMMENTS - CONT. Laplnskl said that staff was unab e to show him the ordinance prohibiting the intensification of rardccver. He stated he would not be extending past the limits of the current building and the deck has been there for 20 years «;nd the stairs would go over existing hardcover. Laplnskl said he has a shower and wedding coming up in the near future and would be willing to get the permit, but wanted to speed up the process. He said he has the largest lot in the cove on an acre and a half and is set back furtrer than adjacent neighbors. Mabusth explained that 6 years ago the Planning Commission and Council developed a review process differentiating between structural and non-structural hardcover. She noted that it has been the practice of the Council to re/iew any application which Intensifies structural hardcover where excessive hardcover exists. She noted that a cursory review of the property indicates 75* hardcover in the 75-250’ zone. Laplnskl said that the Building Inspector was out inspecting the neighboring building project and noticed the repairs he was doing to his deck. They reviewed the plans for the stairway and was told by the Inspector that the stairs could not come off the side as It would be encroaching the neighboring property. The Inspector explained where the stairs would be acceptable and Informed him that If the stairs were to go through the existing deck there would be no problem. The plans were redesigned to what is being proposed. He stated that upon submittal for a permit, he was told that ho would need a variance as he was Intensifying the structure and expanding beyond the defined boundaries of the deck. Goetten stated that Laplnskl is over the allowed limit of 25* hardcover for that zone. She said that Orono is very concerned with run-off to the lake and therefore has zoned lakeshore property and only allows a percentage of hardco/or within each zone. She stated that many older homos are over those allowed percentages, and those are reviewed as improvements are requested for the property. Jabbour explained that the existing hardcover on the property may be non-conforming and Illegal. Ho stated that as properties are redeveloped, they are reviewed for conformance with the ordinances. Laplnskl said the neighbor next door has built a deck which extends much further out. i'-. h Htfr/ m1^%:: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1992 PUBLIC COMMENTS - CONT. Mabusth noted that the neighbor has been advised that he must file an after-the-fact variance application for construction without a buiIding permit. Jabbour stated that the neighbor may be asked to remove the deck If found not to be in conformance. LapInskI said that ho would fight the Council if they required him to remove any of the hardcover currently existing on the property. (««S) ai098 JIM RIVERS. 1442 SHORELINE DRIVE - AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3122 It was moved by Jahhour, seconded by Butler, to adopt Resolution #3122 for Application #1698 for Jim Rivers, 1442 Shoreline Drive, for an aftei—the-fact variance. Ayes 5, na's 0. («6) 41732 JOAN SWEETSER, 845 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION #3123 Moorse explained that this is a two lot subdivision application. Mayor Peterson asked about the Park Dedication fee. Mabusth explained that several years ago a three lot subdivision was proposed for this property but was never reviewed or acted on by the Council. This current application is bound by the new Park Dedication Ordinance. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Callahan, to adopt Resolution 43123 for Application 41732 for Joan Sweetser of 845 Old Long Lake Road, for preliminary subdivision approval. Ayes 5, nays 0. (47) 41733 TEMPLE ISRAEL (CAMP TEKO), 845 TONKAWA ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE - RESOLUTION 43124 Julius Bronkofski was present. Moorse explained this Is an application for a conditional use permit and variance to enable maintenance alternations to a drainage swale for the camp which is needed due to significant erosion. He noted the drainage area is proposed to be rip-rapped. Qoetten asked if all the concerns addressed by Shawn Gustafson of Bonestroo would be taken care of with these improvements. *• ♦• f '■ ..: ' .*•?■ "ii." ■ -V hr If-i t'H :iv- ^ '■■ -f- m ^i£ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCfL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1992 ZONING FILE #1733 - CONT. Mabusth explalnad that to maintain the 3:1 slopes recommended by the Engineer, the bank wiI I need to be excavated and that is the reason for asking for more detaiIed grading plans that will include alterations of the bank. Goetten asked If the City has received the opinion of the other reviewing entities on this Issue. Mabusth confirmed that the Watershed District approved the permit last Thursday and has Informed the City of the conditions of approval. She stated that the DNR and the Army Corp of Engineers will not require a permit review. Jabbour stated that the Camp has been a good neighbor at large. He expressed concern about Improving the road to the lake which may f ac I I 1 tate further building action near the I akeshore and suggested that staff inform the applicant of regulations pertaining to the Iakeshore. Mabusth noted that during the review it was discovered that the Camp Is on two individual parcels and wiI I be asked for the legal combination of these parcels. BronkofskI said that would not be a problem. He stated the main reason for upgrading the trail is to give better access to youngsters in wheelchairs. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #3124 for Application #1733 for Temple Israel (Camp Teko) at 645 Tonkawa Road, for a conditional use permit and variance to allow the maintenance alterations to the drainageway and trait. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#8) JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE - BIG ISLAND VET’S CAMP - RESOLUTION #3125 Cal Iahan stated he wouId like the condi11 on added to the resoIutI on prohibiting floating styrofoam docks. It was moved by Cal Iahan, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3125 and directing staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License to the Board of Governors, Big Island Veterans’ Camp for the period of January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992, with the addition of a condition prohibiting the use of floating styrofoam docks. Ayes 6, nays 0. I" rsf'’'.!', ,k.'V I'- I ri'-'W -f fe y i- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1992 (#9) PROPOSED RESPONSE TO DNR - SHORELAND FLEXIBILITY REQUEST It was movad by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to agree to revise the steep slope definition in the Shoreland Ordinance to 12X to be consistent with DNR standards, and to direct staff to forward to a letter to the DNR which gives a basis for justification to require no lakeshore setback for lock boxes. Ayes 5, nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT A) Callahan stated that tne Lake Use Committee nas been trying to deal with the issue of licensing marinas. Letters have been sent to Windward Marina, Minnetonka Boat Works, Sailors World and Crystal Bay Service regarding their licenses. The Committee has been working on draft letters to Gayles Marina, Lakeside Marna and North Shore Drive Marina reviewing their violations. He reviewed a draft letter to Gayles Marina which indicates operatiori must cease Immediately. It has been decided that letters to the other two marinas will point out the violation of boats and slips in excess of that which is licensed by the City. He suggested that Council direct staff to send letters to Gayles Marina, Lakeside Marina and North Shore Marina by Friday of this week. Qaffron noted that Gayles Marina has not applied for nor paid the 1992 I I cense. Jabbour asked about Lakeside Marina. Qaffron Indicated th.:t a drive-by inspection this week of property at 3350 North Shore Drive indicated that the property is suddenly being used for storage of employee vehicles. Jabbour asked If they could act on the application pending from 1985 regarding this residential property. Qaffron referred to a letter sent last week to Lakeside Marina which indicates that commercial use of that property must cease Immediately. The letter states that the vioI ations must be resolved and directs the owner to contact City staff. Jabbour suggested staff remind the owner of past court action regarding storage of boats on shore. Qaffron noted that has been Included within the letter. Jabbour asked If there had been an accident there recently. k i'f, a :'' V. I^v - •.rr a:>’- 7'.: '■;■ ?'r'lV’Ny.' . ^C^‘ ->:V. fe Ik fe‘“ M-^in pfK^fe- ^:: tv^ life '.t^ W,'^m' ’ '■ m MINUTES OF THC REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1992 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. Chief Sullivan reported that an elderly lady went off the road near Bohns Point, hit a pedestrian, the fence and a tree. It was inoved by Butler, seconded by Jabbour, to authorize the appropriate Individual to sign and send the letter to Gayles Marina as soon as possible. Ayes 5, nays 0. Qaffrofi reported that last week Gayles Marina verbally asked if they wouId be all owed to rebuild the sign outside their business. All Council Members agreed that if they do not have a license to onerate, approval should not be granted for the sign. Barrett explained that the Council has two remedies to the situation. The first would be to find the properties In violation of the ordinances and prosecute as a misdemeanor, and the second would be to brin^’ civil action against the operation of the marina which would rsnuire a court order to stop the business and Is more expensive and a slower process. Jabbour asked If they could not require a performance bond for these I I censes. Callahan noted that In the case of Windward Marina, a letter has been sent telling them to cease operation until payment for the 1991 license fee Is received. Qaffron noted that a letter has been sent, and the letter also requests the completion of required I terns such as paving the parking lot by mid summer. He stated the letter did not specifically say that the operation will be closed down If the Marina does not comply. Callahan stated that since Windward Marina is In violation and has been warned a number of times. If payment is not received In another week, staff should send a reminder note. JabDour reminded him that when the Council discussed the Issue of fees and It appeared In the newspaper ‘hat Windward Marina had not yet paid. Rivers contacted the City and said the least they could do was send a letter reminding him. It was move oy Callahan, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to authorize sending the letters to Lakeside Marina and North Shore Marina. Ayes 5. nays 0. i \ ii* asik. ‘r T 'i^' u. ;>• ifc-i .1 T.irt«^Tirii'>^«M MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1992 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. B) Callahan reported that a draft ordinance prohioiting styrofoam docks will bo brought to the Counci I for review. He directed staff to notify all marina owners of the proposed ordinance. Jabbour noted that positive comments have been published in the newspaper regarding such an ordinance. Callahan informed the Council that the partial removal of styrofoam docks for subsequent removals In years following. ord.nance tha 1993 vv i I I requ I re season, with Qaffron noted that as a proposed zoning ordinance amendment, there will need to be a pub lie hearing published prior to adopt!on and therefore could not be brought to the Council until after the July Planning Commission meeting. C) Mayor Peterson stated that Inland Marina has had more than 7 boats parked on site, which is in violation of their conditional use permit approval. Jabbour suggested to an interested neighboring property owner that he photograph all violations of the property. Barrett suggested that staff cneck the code for procedures to follow If they find the property in violation of the approval. Jabbour suggested that they cancel the conditional use permit approval If found to be In violation. He stated that he told Mr. Gilbert that the City would be anxious to revert the property to residential use. Callahan directed staff to remind the owners of Inland Marina that they are not to cross the road in conjunction with their business operations. Jabbour felt that the City should do anything within the limits of the City code to see the property revert back to a residential use. Barrett stated that the code provides that conditional use permit approval Is not subject to review unless it is found to be in violation of the municipal code. Mabusth said they would send a letter to the owner and start to document any violations found on the property. 0) Ooetten asked if the Mayor of Long Lake was specifically invited to the joint meetings between the Councils. 8 '/•V- P . • r: h#• ? .’ ' vi^ "- ■:#?.. 7"- ?S?--- I ll.. 1- ' 'i l>''lim-- Im gift' s?v,;.m jj.cv, S.j ^ i> v --,t - ': - * -■ y,'?V ■|l^--v:->* ,^>Vi K/r- . 1. . ;’ ^ll€. pi# - .i ■■ "Virr' lil ' '7^ : :-‘i. PW-- •'^v ■ 7-■ =’:V a._= s'-ppiM: P'p’-” ■.-V'" • 'IP- 'r\;^:C' ■mp P#S' ^ fp=>i.j,v /'i o;r^v:, *■ ■ - O m # -h'vj-. . “’5 ‘ - MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1992 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. Mayor Peterson stated she was not invited to the initial meeting, but to both subsequent meetings. Jabbour noted that the meetings were announced at Council meetings which are public meetings. But Ier suggested the Council quit talking to the City of Long Lake. Jabbour said that he did not trust anything that Mayor Swartwood says, and felt that It is she who has undermined the relationship between Orono and Long Lake, and felt that her behavior as a Mayor is inappropriate. Mayor Peterson said that Maple Plain and Long Lake have discussed their Joint powers agreement, and Mayor Swartwood felt that it was strictly a financial agreement. Jabbour reminded the Council that Orono had brought up the Joint powers agreement prior to the meetings and Long Lake had chosen to ignore it. (#10) COUNTY ROAD 16 MSA EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS - RESOLUTION #3126 City Engineer Cook explained that this is the County Road :5 project constructed by Hennepin County west of County Road 19 to 8pring Park. The City originally expected to use $200,000 from State aid funds for the project, but the right-of-way costs came in slightly higher than anticipated, requiring usage of additional State Aid Funds. Mayor Peterson asked about the Navarre business signs. Gerhardson noted they are on order. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve Resolution #3126, authorizing the use of $165,253.00 of MSA funds toward the City’s share of the cost for the reconstruction of County Road 16. Ayes 5, nays 0. (S#11) SPEED LIMIT POSTING EAST LONG LAKE ROAD - RESOLUTION #3127 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to adopt Resolution #3127 authorizing a 30 miles per hour speed limit for East Long Lake Road. Ayes 5. nays 0. M i 4 ' ' ‘a • I ■’ ;W”I:* )z.^w H iv & l:- te. B r re. p-i-P': l^ M- p-.fP --• v.-»i: j'-.'tjj-.... .T-r V'- “ -'‘-ji' fi-ii0. W' ^ ^,:' ■ *' s.r- rl;K; MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1992 (•12) METROPOLITAN COUNCIL RURAL SERVICE AREA POLICES - 64/640 Moorse explained that this Is a summary of information receivea from the Metropolitan Council regarding their rural service area poI Ices. Qoetten asked who was pressuring the Met Council to do this. Moorse explained the pressure is coming from the central cities Mayor Peterson tentatively scheduled a workshop to discuss this issue on June 8, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. (•13) APPLICATION OF CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT S3 KRAUS ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY QRE8SER CONCRETE/MASONRY 8TEININQER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY MET-CON CONSTRUCTION Moorse explained this is a request for payment. He noted that the City has obtained lien waivers for previous work. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve City Hall and Pub lie Works Buildings AppI I cations and Certificates of Payment No. 3 tor April construction manager fee and reimbursable expenses to Kraus-Anderson In the amount of $29,494.96; for public works building concrete work to Gresser Concrete/Masonry In the amount of $74,424.60; for site preparation toStelnInger Construction Co. In the amount of $74,413.90; and for public works building erection to Met-Con Construction in the amount of $9,130.00. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*•14) BID AWARD UTILITY TRACTOR It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to award bid for the Utility Tractor to Scharber and Sons for an amount of $23,896.00. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*/1o) 1991 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS e It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to approve the budget adjustments as presented and to authorize the use of $53,325.00 from the General Fund Reserve to offset the General Fund revenue Shortfall. Ayes 5, nays 0. rfe-mf [■‘i "'-v ';'r -. ./iv- I* r»‘ Wr-W~" -ja^-r- ‘^¥v-' E 1 ' • U" ■ V-- M:: ¥-‘ .,i> ,OW=.^.tt#'iim ^•' ..■'-'•v'- i-.- IfF'•5_’Crv>- ■"r ; ■ • w ' ^r : • »«■jf^- yi-'- Ji-'V . •MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETINGHELD MAY 26, 1992 (*•16) TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE - PARK DEPARTMENT It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to authorize the employment of John Heuer, 5625 Bush Road, Mound as a temporary park maintenance helper at an hourly rate of $7.50 per hour effective May 18, 1992. Ayes 5, nayc 0. (*•17) SALARY AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW - GREG PALMER, MAINTENANCE IK)RKER It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to adjust Greg Palmer’s hou-'y rate to Level 5, Step 3 of the Compensation Plan, $12,520 per h* ,r effective May 21. 1992. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*•18) LICENSES It was moved by Jabbour, following II censes: seconded by Butler, to approve the Special Event: IN Bass Tournaments - June 28, 1992 6:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. North Shore Marina IN Bass Tournaments - September 20, 1992 6:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. North Shore Marina One Day Non-IntoxI cating Malt Liquori Northwest Tonka Lions - June 19, 1992 - Lakeview Golf Club Garbage a Refuse License: Blackowlak A Son Sanitation & Rolloff Service Baldy Sanitation Inc. Residential Kennel: L. James A Kathleen Marler, 2775 White Oak Circle Septic System Installer: Dave Perkins Contracting Sewerman ~ Merlin’s Motion, Ayes 5. nays 0. JoEllenHurr stated that she has requested that the LMCO notify the City of all special events licenses that the LMCO approves. She noted that If a property is not In compliance, such as North Shore Marina, It should not be issued a special events permit. She also noted the Council’s concern ove*" parking issues, and felt the bass tournament may be a problem in ♦ at respect. 1 1 ';L :■ ' & ?>jf,. « MAr ■ t. ■ AMA[ AA^A ¥, MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1992 LICENSES - CONT. Sullivan noted he approved the organization requesting the permit, not the location of the event. Jabbour suggested they mention the license for the bass tournament In the letter going to North Shore Marina, and suggest that If the marina license Is not Issued, the license for the bass tournament may be revoked. (*•19) BILLS It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler the All Funds Account. Ayes 5, nays 0. to approve payment of ATTORNEY’S REPORT It was moved by Butler, seconded by Goetten, to adjourn the regular Council meeting at 8:28 p.m. to Executive Session to discuss pending litigation. Ayes 5, nays 0. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Jabbour to adjourn the Executive Session of the Council at 8:45 p.m. tM A Barbara A. PeterSon, Mayor DorothyM. «I I In,Clty Clerk . -I* ■ -- Vui* Jv .J AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR TUESDAY, MAT 26, 1992, 7:09 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 upon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL 1, CONSENT AGENDA* APPROVAL OF MINUTES * ♦ * 2. Regular Meeting of May 11, 1992 3. Reconvened Board of Review Meeting of May 11, 1992 4. Stubbs Bay Assessment Hearing May 4, 1992 % PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS POBLIC COMMENTS - (Liait 5 Minutes Per Person) fONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ♦•APPLICANTS** laaediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolutions at the Recorder's desk. Applicants need not execute resolutions for subdivisions, vacations and denials. 0r i;# 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. #1698 Jim Rivers, 1442 Shoreline Drive - After the Fact Variance - Resolution #1732 Joan Sweetser, 845 Old Long Lake Road - Preliminary Subdivision • Resolution #1733 Temple Israel (Camp Teko), 645 Tonkawa Road - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Resolution Joint Use Dock License - Big Island Vet's Camp - Resolution Proposed Response to DNR - Shoreland Flexibility Request MATOt/COONCIL REPORT GINtBR REPORT 10. County Road 15 MSA Expenditure of Funds - Resolution I.. N|:; 12. U. “ViN ■It CXTT ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 11, Speed Limit Posting East Long Lake Road - Resolution Metropolitan Council Rural Service Area Policies - 64/640 Application of Certificate of Payment 13 Kraus Anderson Construction Company Grosser Concrete/Masonry Steininger Construction Company Met«Con Construction Bid Award Utility Tractor 1991 Budget Adjustments Temporary Employee - Park Department Salary and Performance Review Greg Palmer 'Maintenance Worker 14. 15. 16. 17. .i?-; -it r i.::AGC1IDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR TUESDAY, MAT 26, 1992, 7:00 P.M. W CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT LICENSES (18*) BILLS (19*) AOJODRNHENT ■1:.INFORMATION ITEMS INCLUDED IN COUNCIL PACKET LH<!!5 Agenda ^/i8/92 m Metropolitan Waste Control Conunission Memo Dated 4/7/92 Highway 12 Task Force Memo Dated 5/8/92 Otono School Board 4/13/92 Minutes League of Minnesota Cities 1992 directory May Update Miscellaneous Items "’V. OffCOMIMG ISSUES AND EVENTS SS/iHlS - tHoll<lay - Memorial Day Observance S5/26 - TUESDAY - Council Meeting 7 p.m. •</02 • Park Commission 7 p.m. 06/08 - Council Meeting 7 p.m. 06/15 •• Planning Commission 7 p.m. 06/22 - Council Meeting 7 p.m. fi-- iit w:.w'- -V V*-* m. ^aiiirr‘n'"‘-ihiaHMiiri 1 K 'lirW.* m 'U- t^i<-iv' .A'-' 'Mk 1.0:^. . ,'stV ^ . t'lt-ts;’"* *'^t:|fe r K^-'" t'iw^i - ./V- '0i - ::MS' %,MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEHELD MAY 11. 1992 ^C/Jy ROLL Th« Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson, CounciImembers Gabriel Jabbour, J. Olann Goetten and Mary Butler. Edward Callahan was absent. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Public Works Director John Gerhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Police Chief Stephen Sullivan, City Attorney Tom Barrett, and City Recorder Ter I Naab. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:17 P.M. (•1) CONSENT AGENDA Butler added Item #10 to the consent agenda. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Gcetten, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Ayes 4, nays o. Motions for all Items adopted by consent agenda will be included In the minutes In their respective numerical order. (*♦2 a 3) APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Orono Counci 1 held on AprII 27, 1992. Ayes 4, nays 0. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve the minutes of the Board of Review meeting held on April 29, 1992. Ayes 4, nays 0. PUBLIC COMMENTS Bob Beutler. representing Stephen Brown. referred to a letter he submitted regarding adoption of a resolution for property at 3262 North Shore Drive. He asked the CouncII to reconsider their decision as the property adjacent to this parcel has been purchased by the DNR for a boat launch. Jabbour stated that the Council strongly felt that the garage should be removed and would not reconsider the request. He stated they must be as protective of DNR owned property as of residentlaily owned property. He noted that whatever happens to the land owned by the DNR Is insignificant when determining the use of the property In question. iTir iitf ■YmiiTieilrfii ,: ; |. • m .v^ii ®"Sss‘: liliA E?I'7'tS<’ (■: jif t" »«'. V ):: " ■4k 4k rlir - 'V;^: .‘fe.%: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1992 PUBLIC COMMENTS - CONT. JennlfT Dotzenroth. 3225 Casco Circle, advised Council that there Is a rumor that the DNR has decided to proceed with the Maxwell Bay access. Goetten said that Marge Gasch had talked to Gorden Kimball of the DNR and was told that the DNR was going to wait to proceed with the access until after the study was completed. Jabbour stated he did not concur with that and expiained that the City has worked very hard to get the DNR to ask the LMCD to study lake access. The DNR accompanied by City staff visited the landing and Gayle’s Marina and Indicated that they were no longer waiting for a decision by the LMCD. He stated a sense of frustration with the LMCD. He said it was Council’s duty to examine all governmental entities. Dotzenroth Implored Council to take action regarding this issue. Jabbour stated he would like to see the criteria negotiated and would like to discuss with the DNR what constitutes a parking space. He Informed the Council that Moorse was removed from the Standards Committee. Goetten stated that the LMCD has lost site of their original goals. Jabbour felt the DNR was more receptive than the LMCD of late. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to direct Council to send a letter to the DNR informing them of the need to discuss all possible land uses within the City of Orono, and to direct staff to send a letter to the LMCP noting that the minutes of the last LMCD meeting did not show Orono’s concerns which were addressed, and announcing Orono’s unhappiness with the LMCD’s performance. Ayes 4, nays 0. Qoetten suggested that they request Orono’s representatives to be reinstated to the Committees they were appointed. mm IferiiirtVf I, I -1 ........ Lf'i:&5“ m. \ ' Y,? K'^’- '*4 ■•’: ■ m^--m?''i'#*YAgf ' S'C Yv'/ Y MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1992 (#4) •1098 JIM RIVERS, 1442 SHORELINE DRIVE - AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE Mrs. and Mr. RIvwrs were present. Moorsa explained this Is an /■application for an variance for the constrjction of a scieened porch after 1976 after-the-fact built sometI me Butler asked what prompted the Issue to be brought up at this time. Mabusth explained that a neighbor requesting a variance was denied and then questioned Rivers' ability to have installed the porch. Butler recalled the general tone of the rules and regulations of the City In 1976 and noted a much less strict climate. r”®, It difficult to accept any culpability on the part of Rivers considering the numerous staff Inspections made of the property durtng the^ past years. She felt the application bordered on ridiculous. Goetten and Jabbour agreed. Mayor Peterson disagreed and stated the plans specifically did not Include the deck. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Goetten, with due respect to the Planning Commission’s reconrwnendat I on and time spent by City staff on the application, to grant an after-the-fact variance for Application #1698 for Jim Rivers of 1442 Shoreline Drive for the construction of a screened porch, and to direct that the question be closed and not addressed again. Ayes 4, nays 0. Rivers announced that he still intended to Instal I the green space as proposed. (*•6) 61700 DALE MCCURDY, 4041 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3116 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution •3116 for Application #1700 for Dale MrCurdy of 4041 North Shore Drive for a variance to allow the Installation of a deck. Ayes 4, nays 0. d ife;;:' i‘'H ;• ^- k!:^‘>'. ■■ :W,?- i ;4s% • •• ^f‘• '‘7- ■ *.•.’ .1^*- r'i . -*■‘- y.». ^•■.* . r . - t-T' 1|^^' 'Mr :p= S' «:t)p' •'! 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1992 (#6) 171* THOMAS LYTLE, 1935 CONCORDIA STREET - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3117 Mr. Lytle was present. Moorse explained this Is an application for variances to allow construction of a garage and deck on the property. The Planning Commission recommended approval. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution •3117 for Application #1714 for Thomas Lytle of 1935 Concordia Street granting variances for the construction of a garage and deck. Ayes 4, nays 0. (»7) *1725 BARBARA A JAMES OLEXA, 996 WILDHURST TRAIL - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION §3118 Mr. and Mrs. Olexa were present. Moorse explained this application Is an application for variances to a two phased project. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3118 for Application #1726 for Barbara and James Olexa of 996 Wlldhurst Trail granting variances for the two phased project. Ayes 4, nays 0. (•a) #1728 NOLLY AND DRAPER JAFFRAY, 640 BARRETT AVENUE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3119 Moorse explained this Is a request for a front street setback variance for an addition to the existing home. The current home Is 14'5’* from the street setback opposed to the required distance of 60*. The proposed addition will be 25*. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to adopt Resolution #3119 for Application #1728 for Molly and Draper Jaffray of 540 Barrett Avenue granting a front street setback for an addition to the existing residence. Ayes 4, nays 0. -m. : if . .Mm.:A miMm, Nrs :V ■-'- L' ■' ? ' IKa- i.ir* *u ‘H'. -^' I IC' :.Vyi- -:■ } ' - vy "ft ‘W^ • ■• ■ '•• •. •• lii'. ^ iii MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1992 («9) #1790 GREG MALIK, 3060 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION #3120 Greg Malik was present. Moorse explained this Is application for a two lot preliminary subdivision. The appi cant will be living In the existing residence until the new residence Is completed, which may cause some problem as far as the septic system is concerned. Malik said he discussed the parcels with Steve Schirmers who confirmed two new on-site septic sites on each of the propose lots. The road to the new residence will go over the existing septic system. The new primary site for the lot is on the west side and half way up the hill and the secondary site is In front of the house, but too close to the existing well. Schirmers stated there would be no problem installing the septic system at the primary location by using a half horse motor instead of a third horse motor to pump the sewage up the hill. Goetten noted the concerns expressed at the Planning Commission meeting were the primary and alternative septic sites for both I ots. Malik stated that he Is hoping to sell the front lot off and felt his chance of selling the parcel may be better with the existing home left on it. Jabbour noted he should be allowed to live in the existing residence for as long as ho wants provided the house is connected to an acceptable septic system. Mabueth stated she would need confirmation of the primary and alternate septic sites for both lots. Malik noted he couId use the alternate site by cappIng the existing well. He said he was anxious to sell off the additional lot. Mabueth noted this condition should be included within developers agreement to ensure compliance and noted that the cannot be sold without a conforming septic system. the lot Malik asked If that requirement could be changed to "the house cannot be occupied without a conforming septic system . He stated he did not want to expend additional money If the future property owner was going to remove the existing house. - w ;i!. f-' i... h 'uf;'. tef'. m-.w ' r- “ -■ r. • r.-- -Iv-‘ ^ ' i4 m it.M..IS# lift Ife- 19' I?. 9Ss-'mm NINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1992 ZONING FILE #1730 - CONT. Mabusth statad that the Planning Commission was concerned leaving a vacant residence for any length of time. about Ed Cohen, Planning Commission representative, said they were concerned that a vacant house would be creating deterioration. He stated the Planning Commission wanted the options and deadlines in wr1 ting. Jabbour suggested a six month leeway after the completion of the new residence. Mabusth said that would be fine as covers that period of time. long as the letter of credit It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to adopt Resolution •3120 for Application #1730 for Greg Malik of 3060 Sixth Avenue North for preliminary subdivision approval, based on the applicant either razing the existing residence or capping the well to locate two septic system sites on the property within six months of issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the new residence. Ayes 4, nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT A) Jabbour referred to the editorial published In the Sailor Newspaper. He stated at the last Council meeting, he announced the meeting to be held on Thursday in an effort to resolve disagreements with Long Lake. He was upset with the mis-quotes of the Mayor. He noted the Council is very concerned with following the required process. Qoatten asked prior to the meeting if there had been proper notice. Mayor Peterson pointed out a published opinion also In that same newspaper. B) Butler asked when Public Works would be cleaning up parks and fixing pot holes. Mayor Peteraon asked when the pi I up Days would be removed. She proceaa for clean-up days. of debris collected from Clean- suggested they re-evaluate the Qerhardaon noted some of the Increase may be due to the lack of burning permits Issued and noted permits have been restricted by the PCA and because of the additional work load for the police department. 6 1 •7a\ -I 1 ': ■.T , \f : - -V"Cl ■! . F?-:> C:' ■ ♦' . fr?:ip: ^ •'■■V m'-X.\yr- •m .ns ■ ,• .■ • .' MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1992 MAYOR/COONCIL REPORT - CONT. C) Mayor Patarson announced the annual meeting of the AMM held a weak from Thursday. She explained that at the last they discussed Legislative action taken during the year and the Items the AMM had dealt with. Butler asked If the AMM was successful to loosen up on aid to cities. Mayor Peterson affirmed they were Jabbour asked about sales tax. Mayor Peterson stated the AMM supportec the sales tax blI r "rr 'sr.' n,;;: lrr«voeabl« position on the use ot the southern KIghway 12, she felt It Incredible that these P«°P'* Miller. She felt It was a mistake to support someone * win this area because ot her position on the corrldcr. She stated thSt perhaps they have already made a decision on where the corridor will be going. (*S10) PAY REQUEST SI WATER TOWER HIGHWAY 12 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to authorize payment of Vay Reque^ si tor the water tower to Pitt DenMolnes tor an amount of $94,130.75. Ayes 4, nays 0. (asil) AWARD LIQUOR LIABILITY INSURANCE - GOLF COURSE Dolicy year April 1, 1992 through March 31, 1992 to the St. Paul Insurance Company at a premium of $1,375. Ayes 4, nays (••12) POLICE INTERN yiM i ;is‘ ■ . ^-a ij:'.' MM. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11. 1992 (••13) TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE GOLF COURSE It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to employ Rodney Wagner Jensen as a temporary counter helper at the Orono Golf Course at an hourly rate of $5.00 per hour effective May 7, 1992. Ayes 4. nays 0. (•14) BIO AWARD BEDERWOOO PARK EQUIPMENT Steve Johnston, Park Commission representative, was present. Johnston stated the Committee has recommended to contract with Minnesota Playground Equipment. Jabbour asked If they could act fast enough to avoid addition^ tax. Johnston noted the manufacturer has suggested prepayment and offered an additional discount. Moorse stated that the Legislature has restricted payment until merchandise is shipped. Jabbour suggested they contact the low bidder and suggest acceptance is contingent upon delivery before the increase. Butler asked the height of the slide. Johnston said to the platform, the height of the slide Is 9’. He noted the residents of the area have asked the poles to bo redwood Instead of aluminum. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to authorize the purchase of park equipment for Bederwood Park from Minnesota Playground for an amount not to exceed $18,592 to be paid for from Park Dedication Funds, and to attempt to have delivered prior to the sales tax increase. Ayes 4, nays 0. (•15) PAYMENT REQUEST - PRE~ENGINEERED PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING Moorse explained this is the second payment for materials for the public works building. He noted that both payments combined represent a total of 100» of the cost of the materials for that buiIding. 8 jfe' MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1992 PAYMENT REQUEST - PRE-ENGINEERED PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING - CONT. Con Metro, Inc. Ayes 4, nays 0. appropriated from the Special Projects Account. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#16) SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION - 1355 BROWN ROAD SOUTH term lease at a higher lease rate which will reimburse the City for improvements. Mayor Paterson asked the length of the ootentia! lease. Moorse reported they are looking at 5 years. si;;:: , .■■‘"..'r 0. («#17) LICENSES It was moved by Jabbour, following I I censes: seconded by Goetten, to approve the One Day Set Up Llcen##J. Minnetonka Center for the Arts Qfflrfrfffe a Refuse LIcenaftj. Cleanway Sanitation R i W Roll-off Service,Inc . Motion, Ayes 4, nays 0. Pif ■ ■ fpfe -■ ■i * .• ■■ ■' '■•; ‘ 'viv ^ •• "r*. ^^ / h;-i H. Sl- P % P w ■J-: r Uy. - ,j-‘ - I- ■'& /,; •A” .is-'X:': /■’'I'-'-.r^- •# ^••’V-'a i: ■Mf, I- If ff«- f',. ii-Wii<-3PS'4Mv;, ■■^■'•^ -4 # • • MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1992 (Mia) BILLS It was movsd by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, of the All Funds Account. Ayes 4, nays 0. to approve payment ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson,, to adjourn the regular Council meeting at 8:30 p.m. Ayes 4, nays 0. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hail in, City Clerk Mtim" . '„a- '•4 1 ■■■.■ - • ■ l-r iIVk ► -■ '; • H' '•m' ■^1, •i/' tv-' n I' #/"■' lifK * rf ®HP4 5 MINUTES OF ORONO 1992 RECONVENED BOARD OF REVI HELD MAY 11, 1992 % »«ROLL The Reconv0n*d Bodrd of Review met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson, Counciimembers Qabriel Jabbour, Mary Butler and J. Diann Goetten. Edward Callahan was absent. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Public Works Director John Gerhardson, City Assessor Rolf Erickson, Assistant City Assessor Dave Wilde, and City Recorder Terl Naab. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.H. Harvey Anderson. 1101 Willowbrook Drive. PIP# 26~1 18-23 41_0003 a 0006. felt the new val uat I on was still i nequ I tab I e and Inconsistent with the surrounding neighborhood. He stated the property next door which Is fairly comparable is for sale for $30,000 more than his asking price and yet It was originally appraised almost $50,000 less than his home and after the adjustment is still $19,000 less than his home. He noted another house down the street was valued at $24,000 more than his house in 1981 and since then have installed a pool, and until the adjustment was made, his property was valued at $19,000 more than that property. Jabbour stated they are told by the Legislature based on the fair market value. Anderson said that on his street there are seven homes which are In Orono and several M Medina. The properties In Orono have been raised more than those in Medina. He noted a property that Is comparable to his home on Salem Court which just sold for $265,000 and his realtor has suggested lowering his selling price. He said his wife asked the assessor why the discrepancy between the 1981 valuation between the two houses and the 1992 valuation. The answer was there must be some specific reason. Erickson explained that he has reviewed the properties In Medina and felt the valuations for those properties were correct. He explained that last year Medina realized some substantial Increases. He said the 1981 valuation mean nothing for this review. Anderson said his property abuts County Road 6 and the valuation for his property Is the same as those setting further back from the road. He noted his asking price for the property is $339,000. Butler felt that the assessor’s valuation asking price of the property. was near enough the Anderson explained that price is considered to be the top dollar amount to be expected from a sale of the property. 1 Wr « ■BR’^' KJ!-;’: ' it » ' mjK- ,im. iL MINUTES OF ORONO 1992 RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1992 Peterson‘recommended that he consider appealing to the County. Erickson stated he should do that as soon as possible as they have a limited amount of appeaIs that they will permit before referring the rest onto court. Richard Edwards. 2480 Carman Street. PID» 20-117-23 12 0028, felt that his valuation was still too high because at least a third of his property Is peat bog. He stated It is a poor piece of land and has problems with muskrats and beavers destroying the property. He noted the valuation set by the assessor Is $313,000 and the appraisal that he had done noted the value at $275,000. Erickson stated the valuation is within 5% of the appraised valuation, which Is an acceptable difference. He noted that the appraiser may have used unacceptable comparables if not familiar with the lake area. He noted he had not reviewed the appraisal submitted. Jabbour stated he wished the assessor had reviewed the appraisal. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to recommend a valuation of $303,000 for 1992 for Richard Edwards of 2480 Carman Street. Ayes 4, nays 0. Qoetten asked If they were suggesting to residents to have their properties appraised in order to get a reduction. Jabbour felt they were democratic process and professional value. allowing citizens to go through the that should Include guidance by a Edwards noted the assessor had told him that he did not individually look at each property to determine value where a hired appraisal has looked at that specific property. Cliff Often. 3800 Wavzata Boulevard. PID» 29-118-23 34 00Q9J, 2251 Pine Ridge Lane. PIPS 34-118-23 22 0017: 235Q_Way?at.a PIP# 34-118-23 22 0014, It was moved by Qoetten, seconded by Butler, to approve the recommendation established by the City Assessor for the three properties owned by Cliff Otten. Ayes 4, nays 0. Adrienne Ess lev, 1449 BayridAft_Road.PI.Df 10“11I~23 34 QQQIjl It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve the recommendation of the City Assessor for Adrianne Eesiey at 1449 Bayridge Road. Ayes 4, nays 0. s 'M ■hi . * ^r’* m 1‘ i' ;•'.!•:■ \y Ir ;• I' t:., ^'v 1^,0' ■’ '■..' ' v"' . -1 ii': ^iV*' .• r ■■'■■r *•’ r," . tr' la i--:^v.m ra ^ ’ :■* \y ■f .i- % "I # A • ', 'i v'i**" ■, ^ MINUTES OF ORONO 1992 RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1992 Katth Bares. 2020 Salem Court. P1D» 27-118-23 31 0015^ said the four other houses In the neighborhood that are comparable that just told Indicate a reduced valuation in property values. Erickson explained that the sales data used Is prior to October l, 1991. He noted market changes will be reflected on the 1993 valuation. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve the Assessor's recommendation for Keith Bares of 2020 Salem Court. Ayes 4, nays 0. Steve Soblenlak. 3399 Crystal Bay Road. PIP# 17-1 17-23 44 0021^ stated his valuation went from $84,000 for 1990 to $119,100 for 1991. He stated the house is being remodeled but currently the only valuation is with the land and the new foundation. He felt a fair valuation would be $98,000. He explained they purchased the property a couple years ago at $125,000 because he is self employed and could not qualify for a mortgage they opted to purchase on a contract for deed and an assumable mortgage. Butler asked If past practice had been if a property Is in process of abatement, the Board typically left it alone until County made its decision. the the Erickson concurred that to be true but noted they had not yet filed. Mrs. Sobienlak said they have filed for an abatement. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to accept the Assessor’s recommendation for property owned by Steve Sobienlak at 3399 Crystal Bay Road. Ayes 4, nays j. Leo Hauser. 425 Ferndale Road North. PIP# 36-118-23 14 0014., stated his former residence was much bigger on a larger parcel of land, and yet both properties are basically valued at the same amount. Butler reminded him that the former residence was built much ear Her. Erickson noted that land values in that area were raised across the board. He stated that older homes do not typically sell as well. Haus-'tr asked how the valuation is established. Erickson explained that they look at comparable sales on a mass basis and the level of assessment. He noted they suggested a lower ■{ =rr:7..—t’’*S.’r I I.;.:-:--:lifi r-.- r ■ .:'tp ?<.‘t', . ' ■ -j*.; #RK ^ifF .i ^ . 'R«b« MINUTES OF ORONO 1992 RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1992 valuation for 1991 at approximately $565,000. Hauser asked If he could expect a refund on taxes paid for tne first quarter on the higher valuation. Erickson said that would be based upon what the County decides the 1991 valuation should be. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to accept the recommended 1992 valuation for all remaInIng parceIs. Ayes 4, nays 0. Erickson asked the Board to also include property owned by Richard Keavney, PIDi 20-117-23 12 0034 and to allow the option of Inclusion of twc additional parcels if so deemed appropriate. Jabbour withdrew his motion. Qrao Ehalt. 346S Watertown Road. PIPS 32-118-23 43 0009,. said the valuation is $25,000 more than what he paid for the property In December of 1991. He stated he has only repaired the roof and painted the inside. Erickson stated this Is a nice lot and the owner got a good deal. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to reduce the 1992 valuation for property owned by Greg Ehalt at 3465 Watertown Road to $85,300. Ayes 3, nays 1. Mayor Peterson voted nay. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to accept the recommended 1992 valuations for all remaining parcels including property owned by Richard Keavney, and Brad Blakenship, 2605 West Lafayette Road, PJDi 2^-117-23 21 0007, 1992 valuation $403,600 - no change recommended by the Assessor. Ayes 4, nays 0. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adjourn the Reconvened Board of Review meeting at 7:15 p.m. Ayes 4, nays 0. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hal I In, City Clerk ■■ - fi li i'i 1 ■4vvf^ t.. r iv,r MINUTES OF THE STUBBS BAY ASSESSMENT HEARING HELD BY THE ORONO COUNCIL ON HELD MAY 4, 1992 ROLL The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson, CounciImembers Gabriel Jabbour, Edward Callahan, J. Diann Goetten and Mary Butler. The following represented the Cl ty staff: City Admlnistrator Ron Moorse, Public Works Director John Gerhardson, Finance Director Tom Kuehn, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, City Attorney Tom Barrett, City Engineer Glenn Cook, Assistant City Engineer Harlan Olson and City Recorder Teri Naab. Mayer Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Mayor Peterson stated the purpose of the hearing was to receive public comments on the proposed assessment for the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project. The owners have been provided with a notice of proposed assessment and a fact sheet regarding the project need and assessment. She stated that the Council appointed citizens advisory committee In late 1990 to meet with area residents and staff regarding the project and to provide the Council with updates of residents’ concerns. The Committee felt that the residents favored the Installation of the sewer but felt that the cost was unaffordable to many of them. She said that In November of 1991, the Council held a public hearing to listen to comments and Questions regarding the project. Council decided after that meeting to proceed with determining the scope of the project, and the preparation and acceptance of bids for the project. She stated the Council and staff has met many times to discuss the project and has also held three open houses to allow citizens an opportunity to express their concerns. She noted after the hearing Counci I would consider adoption of the project, after which there would be a 30 day appeal period. The Affidavit of Publication was noted. Barrett announced that this hearing is part of a legal process which allows the City to decide the assessment for each property. He stated that if a property owner wishes to appeal they must first submit to the City a signed statement of objection to the assessment Including property address and property Identification number. He explained that the appellant must Initiate with District Court an appeal of the assessment within 30 days of the final order of the CIty•adopt Ing the assessment role. m 1/ i MINUTES OF THE STUBBS BAY ASSESSMENT HEARING HELD BY THE ORONO COUNCIL ON HELD MAY 4, 1992 Qaffron explained that discussions on sewer installation for the area Initiated In 1974. The 1980 Comprehensive Plan identified five areas within the City to be studied for possible sewer- install at I on. Four of those five areas have been sewered and Stubbs Bay is the fifth area. He noted that in 1988 ari AI ternat i ve Waste Management Study was done for the area, which did not Include Oxford Road, Cygnet Place and Leaf Street. Since that time t e project has been expanded to include those areas due to the proximity to the creek or the lake, the small lot sizes and the potential problem due to a lack of an a Iternative septic site, in 1989 the PCA updated their septic system regulations, Including a redefinition of what Is a non-conforming system, which definition Includes systems that do not have a three foot vertical separation above zones of soi I mottiing or other Indicators of a seasonal water table. The DNR has mandated that cities with significant lakes and streams adopt shore I and regulations which development near shore I and and mandated the adoption of the PCA s septic regulations. Gaffron reviewed that staff has analyzed a number of factors of the area and established a classification system. He stated that 18 of 127 existing homes have falling or non-conforming systems and 78 homes probably do not have an alternate septic site. He noted that based on their data, nearly all alternative sites would require a mound-type septic system. He stated that homes without an alternative site, would have to Install a holding tank If their system failed. Gaffron said that municipal sewer will elImlnate existing septic problems and provide a cost-effective alternative to holding tanks. Cook explained the project design. He stated that the project is expected to take approximately four months to complete, and if do not encounter any problems with obtaining the required easementc, the entire project could be completed by September 1992. Moorse explained that staff worked with a number of assessment experts to determine benefits to the properties which are reflected In the assessment cost. He noted that to keep the cost down, formal Individual appraisals were not dona in the area. He indicated that some factors that quantified benefits included: 1. Cost of sewer vs. holding tank. It was determined that a 15 year period, a holding tank would cost two to three times the cost of the sewer assessment. 2. There are a number of properties in the area that have systems that are expected to have a short life span and would neea to be upgraded. r-; I,;- I' Ir MINUTcS OF THE STUBBS BAY ASSESSMENT HEARING HELD BY THE ORONO COUNCIL ON HELD MAY 4. 1992 3, There are a number of properties that would benefit from the reconstruction of the roadway In front of their property. 4. It was determined that this Is an accepted lavel of assessment for the area. He explained a sheet on past assessments which Included original project costs and current connection charges for the area. Moorse explained that some less quantifiable factors included the number of septic problems in the area, the ability to expand the home with sewer available, and sewer vs. septic for resale. He stated the proposed assessment is based on a 15 year period at 8% Interest. Property owners could prepay the assessment interest free. Mayor Peterson called for public comments. Michael Knight, representative of a number of people, which have submitted a notice of objection to the assessment, which include the following: Stephen Whitman, David Ilse, Joseph DeMeo, Jeff Dennison and Jannell Sheriff, Albert Nelson, Loren Klitzke, Gay Kelley, Melvin Peterson, Ernie Robins, Jeff Bartlet, Herbert Olson, Thomas Ritter, Carl Rhame, Jerry Hall, Brian Ahalt, MIcnael McLaughlin, Louise Belomy, Harlan Stockton, Pat Crane, Bill Levering, Lee Blermus, Hnnry Fuchner, Catherine Anderson, John McCoy, Harold Panuska, Joe Fisher, Donald Currier, Diane Ketke, Paul Vltko, Gregory Ehalt, Margaret Rossing, Hakan Andersson, Arthur Bloemendaal, Dennis Anderson, Calvin Presbyterian Church, Ron Forman, Robert Provo, Eugene Deterling, Dean Moline, James Lewis Brownlee, James St. Lawrence, and Michael Dale. He stated the main grievance nis clients have is that they were not a part of the advisory committee to study the pro.inct. He proposed that Council expand the committee to represent all owners affected by the project. He suggested Council table the vote to allow representation of alI residents on this project to meet and discuss their concerns with the project and come forward with a workable solution. Don Gronbarg. 05 North Willow Drive, to discuss_prppar.t.y——LIQ Leaf Street, stated he would like to appeal his proposed assessment of $18,880 as he felt it is not fair. He noted he has called the PCA and Dave Qustophson of the U. of M. Extension Services to obtain guidelines for benefits and was told that the benefit of the project would be greater for properties that are sub-standard or that have holding tanks. MINUTES OF THE STUBBS BAY ASSESSMENT HEARING HELD BY THE ORONO COUNCIL ON HELD MAY 4, 1992 v;- k ■i. . '4 f l'v^‘ aima PAtArson. 475 Oxford Road, stated they have recently built their home and have no problem with their septic system and requested that they be eliminated from the project. Joe DeMeo. 400 Oxford Road_i. asked that the Council proposal of the group lead by Knight. He more efficient and cost effective for his proper^ to to the trunk line along County Road 84. He noted he would like to see the project proceed, but the additional expense h*'" connect through a line on Oxford Road has no economic benefit. AnrivSchult2. 3409 Eastlak^_StreM_.. advised that his home is valued at $60,000 and each house adjacent to him is worth much more. He stated he has very little road frontage and felt that homes shoulo be assessed per lateral footage. Henrv Furchner. 360 Leaf StreM^ asked why the project will widen Leaf Street to 60’. He felt that Orono should remain rural and did not want them to destroy vegetation in the area. Mary Rassmuson. 3415 Eastlake Street, advised their house w'-s just appraised by FHA at $29,700, and the proposed assessment fo. their lot Is $8,800. She objected based on undue hardship. MarvLou Lutz._258 Cygnet Pipce. objected to the assessment. Vince Larson. 3500 Bavslde Road, stated he was very much In favor of the project. He noted that the appraisals being quoted were based on the property not having sewer. He stated that sewer will increase both the appraised value and the salability of a home. He felt that City staff are the experts on this issue and felt It was time to proceed with the project. He commended Counci I and the engineering staff. Candace Rowlette. 3775 Bavslde Road, explained she was on the advisory committee. She stated that Oxford Road, Cygnet Place and Leaf Street were not originally Included in the project, but these people have known for many months that they were considered for inclusion and should have tried to become a part of the process. Pane Deterling. 240 Cvanet Place, stated that they were informed In November 1991 that they were a part of the project, and at that t Ime he submltted to Council a peti11on show!ng 100% oppos111 on of inclusion Into the project. He asked the Council how they could ignore that petition. He stated that residents of that area feel like they are being dictated to. fk;P.;?i.' ."■A MINUTES OF THE STUBBS BAY ASSESSMENT HEARING HELD BY THE ORONO COUNCIL ON HELD MAY 4, 1992 Pat Crana. 285 Leaf Street, stated he is in favor of the project but opposes the method of assessment. He felt a property should not be assessed more than what a mound system would cost. Greg Ehalt. IQS Cvonet Place, noted his property is proposed to have a pumping station on It. He understood that he would only be reimbursed for the Installation of the station and not for future maintenance and felt that was unfair. Knight declared that he was not inferring that the engineering staff was incapable. He felt the issue couid be worked out productively with the Input of all residents affected. He asked what the harm would be in al lowing a reasonable time period to solicit comments from all affected property owners. Furchner noted they are proposing to take a 40’ easement along his property which would destroy his whole garden and he stated he would not allow it. CharMe B<^lgaard. 3435 Eastlake Street, explained that It was not the decision of the advisory committee to expand the project. He opposed the assessment as he Is currently using a holding tank, which Is working fine for his small cabin. Scott Anderson. 3415 Eastlake Stre_ejU felt that the assessment should be based on taxable market of the property. ^tvin Balqaard. 3560 Bavside Road, submitted an appeal to the assessment. Carl Rhame. 3245 Watertown R^di. opposed the additional 30’ of rIght-of-way. Cook noted that the driven portion of the roadway of Leaf Street will not be wider than 32’, and it currently Is 26’. He noted that Cygnet Place and Oxford Road will remain the same width, and Crestview, Tonka and Westlake Street may be a little wider after the project. DeMeo suggested they consider the addition of Foxbend property with this project. Mayor Peterson closed the pubiIc hearing at 8:05 p.m. Jabbour explained that the Council does not want any hard feelings to exist because of the project. »' • ■ ¥.i W‘m ■ MINUTES OF THE STUBBS BAY ASSESSMENT HEARING HELD BY THE ORONO COUNCIL ON HELD MAY 4, 1992 An Oxford Road resident stated he tried to Jabbour stated that all members ot the Council have been » a sewer project on either the receiving or giving end. He noted rftunril is Interested In getting the sewer for the least pS:, I'bTe" cost 1nd"s\VtVd this ls%he first time the Cl ty has b.en Willing to participate with the cost. He asked if it would be possible to separate the project. Cook explained that the bid was received in five ^ possible for the Council to accept any <=°^t)mation of those five areas. He noted an area could not be put on hold and still ret the bid without a special contract. r "/ifr;.: assessment amount If not used. He reminded them that if the project Is postponed, the interest rate could not be guaranteed. Mayor Peterson noted that due to the number of residents that have retained lega! counsel for possible litigation, she adjourned the meeting to executive session at 8:12 p.m. to 8:35 p.m. Mayor Peterson announced the pubiic hearing would be continued on May 18, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. at the Orono High School cafeteria, which will allow Mr. Knight’s group additional time. She stated that those submitting an appeal that evening did not need to attend the continued public hearing meeting. Barrett explained that the appeal period wili run from the final decision date of thj Council for 30 days. ADJOURNMENT . Mayor Peterson adjourned the Stubbs Bay Assessment Hearing at 8.3o p.m., to reconvene on May 18, 1992 at 7•00 p.m. at the Orono High School cafeteria. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hall In, City Clerk Ftr'-y’ f'.-' 1^ i;^ r I p m... iil>’IE f ' ii£^Kp A \ ■ i '^'I J, ,r CITY «f OROIWi^ r*. RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL '' ^f- wn . A RBSOLDTION GRAHTIHG AFTBR-THB-FACT VARIAHCBS TO mmiCIPAL ZONING CODE SBCTIOM 10.22, SUBDIVISION ] (B), SBCTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #1698 NHBRBAS, James P. Rivers (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 1442 Shoreline Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally descrijed as follows: (P I.N. 11-117-23 22 0005) COMMENCING AT A POINT ON LAKE SHORE OF LAKE MINNETONKA WHICH POINT IS DISTANT 70 FEET NORTHWESTERLY AT ..IGHT ANGLES PROM A LINE BEARING NORTH 67 DEGREES 40 MINUTES EAST PROM A POINT WHICH IS SOUTH 10 DEGREES EAST DISTANT 836.5 PEET FROM NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1 THENCE SOU" I 67 DEGREES 48 MINUSES WEST TO SHORE OF MUD LAKE THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SHORE OF MUD LAKE TO A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 50 FEET NORTHWESTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE LAST PRECEEDING DESCRIBED LINE 'T’TIENCE NORTH 67 DEGREES 48 MINUTES EAST TO SHORE OF LAKE MINNETONKA THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY TO BEGINNING EXCEPT ROAD, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WBBRBAS, the applicant has applied to the City for after-the-fact variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B), Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit a roofed/screened porch measured by staff at 21' 6" x 15' 6" located 9' from the shoreline instead of the required 75 ’, resulting in 318 s.f. of additional hardcover where 1,439.01 s.f. or 38.3% exists and %fhere none is allowed and side setback variances for structure located 14' from the right side yard and 20' from the left aide yard where a 30' setback is required. BOW, TBBIIBFORB, BE IT RBSOLVBD by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FIMDIUGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1698. Page 1 of 5 rail > I CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ___ l>' The property is located in the LR-iA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres in area. The property consists of approximately 9,250 s.f. The Orono City Council reviewed this application on May 11, 1992, and conceptually recommended approval of the after-the-fact variances based upon the following findings: A. The unauthorized addition has existed on the property for approximately 15 years. B. Applicant has agreed to remove 240 s.f. of existing paved/gravel hardcov-^r to be replaced with grassed area located within the 75-250* setback area. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other dangi- to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed after-the-fact variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. W Page 2 of b mm:'Mj?viM ^ferA--' .A- fP^ "■ for,-’-: t||iW £?*>■/ Co^ CITY or (HtOXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _________ ____ f'lil®‘ M'' ■ir.’-'P%Ife-Pk^- % m li ift' ^.r4 A' ||S»:' 1..^ ■ OOHCKOSIOHSr ORDER AND CONDITIONS Baaed upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B), Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Soctlon 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) allowing a roofed/screenod deck installed at the lakeside of the existing residence and qranting a 53' or 70.6% lakeshore setback variance, a 318 s.f. or 8.48% hardcover increase in the 0-75' setback area and a right side set setback variance of 16' or 15.3% and a left side setback variance of 10' or 33%, subject to the following conditions; 1. Applicant is being advised that of the roofed/screened deck in the future will require City approval. 2. Applicant shall install 240 s.f. of grassed area adjacent to County Road 15 located within the 75-250 setback area. The grassed area shall be installed oy July 1, 1992. 3 Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The undersigned applicant has read, hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. 'ife' y- ■' V. V;- •• ■ ^ ■ Page 3 of 5 ■m-'I"wSi.-' S i 'i 11?" h' ■[^',mfe' W'- ‘■f:>m-':* '- F iSf i |l F«f»*m.: >■..■'?:•>-■hv./'" 0 ’fet- M £ ■ Tiv. ff m*'. s; 'S. hs |c : r - ■’ '?t>^ ■ ■.■ -- •» a- ft-. ■ ■Ky L'!- 'i ' r ?: fti : is: 15'' ; i' ■■' ■■. ■',L*‘j-;' ' .' . : ■ r";‘ ‘>V< <11^1,4 CITY of <HtONO *8H9. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __ _ _ _ __ Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of May» 1992. ATTESTi V borothy M. Hallin, City Cleric Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property 0%mer(ai STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of May 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 i'ft.ris-. •’s mm ' w tp.'.-*^. 1 !rp :ilhV- i>' m. w m- : • i"*"-: - ^:r v^:; .> - '.-vA '‘■|s.>'* iff. M-. -fr- ■■ 1|S- - • •Co^k >\'CITY of (HtONO :^r«8»o RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO._______________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 b«fore me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appearedwa . . . .— — ^ ^ aJ wknown to me to be the person(s) described in and whc executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199_, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared Jcxiown to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the for^^oln^ instruxnentr And acknowlad9®d t:hat he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 lif'r’fSA. r- •ft- I u.h K-.r-. K-i; Iv tfj- t : t ;•}•■ ■ ■ '.■/ . <S'»' iu ' ■>.-; i£' I.: mm- P%:.; ': %: ^ ' yiA ■ite 9ot Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Dates Subject s Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building s Zoning Administra^jr M^y May 11, 1992 C/, % #1732 Joan Sweetser - 845 Old Long Lake Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Class 2 - Public Hearing '0 Pertinent Ordinance Section 10.28 - RR-IB, Rural Residential Zoning District Required area * 2 acres Total area of subject property = 9 acres Proposed Lot 1 « 2.6 acres dry Proposed Lot 2 ■ 7 acres (5.5 dry, 1.5 wet) Chapter 11 - Class 2 Subdivision List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List • Plat Map • Map of Ownership of Adjacent Properties • 1 and 2 Septic Mapping for 1987 Subdivision Application and Septic Report • Gaffron Letter 6/21/90 ■ Abandoned Well Record 4/14/92 ‘ 1987 Subdivision Application • Current 2 lot Subdivision Application C D E P G H I Esview of Current Application In 1987 the applicant had applied for a 3 lot subdivision that received a recommendation of preliminary approval from the Planning CoMnission in May of 1987. The applicant did not proceed any further with the review of the 3 lot proposal. Applicant has now filed a subdivision application proposing a 2 lot split. Original septic test information provided for the 1987 review has been accepted for the current review. (Review Exhibits E-1 and E>2.) Since the plat was filed, the applicant has advised that an adjacent property owner, Bruce Dayton, will combine Lot 2 with his contiguous properties to the east. (Review Exhibit D.) Staff has advised the applicant that she has two options for preliminary subdivision to either proceed with a 2 lot plat or as a lot line rearrangement. Both surveyor and staff concur that the subdivision must proceed as a plat because of the need for dedication of road for Old Long Lake Road at a 33* width. The ai^licant should consult with the prospective buyer to determine if the buyer wishes the lot to be an independent lot for future sale or shall the lot be included as part of the comprehensive Dayton land •r' Zoning Nemo #1732 Nay 11, 1992 Page 2 holdings for future development. (Review Exhibits J and I.) There is a dry contiguous corridor at a 70' width where a future road can be installed providing access at Old Long Lake Road and a 100' corridor along the east side of the property providing a dry land base for a connecting road to the eastern properties. If applicant proposes a two 2 lot plat, the City must ask for drainage and utility easements 10* along the exterior of all lot lines and 5' along the interior lot lines. Staff would require that the wetlands be designated at a specific elevation on the plat with the City obtaining conservation of flowage easements over the wetland areas. If the subdivision is to be a lot line rearrangement. Lot 2 is to be redesignated as an outlot. Drainage and utility easements at 10' width must be designated along the lot lines of Lot 1. As for Outlot A, drainage and utility easements are to be designated 10' along the street and west lot line. The City shall not take drainage and utility easements along the east lot line at ♦■his time but shall wait for a future subdivision. This will eliminate need to vacate interior easements at time of future subdivision. The wetlands can also be located and designated at the time of a comprehensive subdivision of the properties. Both Lots 1 and 2 meet the required lot width at 200* plus at the 50* street setback. All existing structures meet the required setback for the two acre zoning district. Former guest house at 718 s.f. has been abandoned and has not been used for habitation for over three years. (Review Exhibits F and G.) The well has been abandoned per the well record information from the State Health Department. In our recent inspection, staff noted that the well pit has not been filled in nor has the existing septic system to the south side of the residence. It will no longer be necessary to require the plumbing to be removed as long as both well pit and septic system have been appropriately abandoned. The following are conditions that must be included in your approval recommendation: 1. 2. Dedication of 33' of right-of-way for Old Long Lake Road. Former guest house structure on Lot 1 can never be used for residential habitation as lot only contains 2,6 acres. 3.Prior to final plat approval the well pit and septic system that served the former guest house must be appropriately abandoned. Depending upon applicant's resolve concerning whether the plat shall be a 2 lot plat or a lot line rearrangement, the following conditions will apply: k'-V s jLr*. V \ -^•’': r'.-r?K' -' • -E • # .. m . ♦■ r:i ^‘■ Sfe-! te,- br ' •' ■IssA * H r I i:5;:r»: Zoning File #1732 Nay 11, 1992 Page 3 a) If a lot line rearrangement: i. Lot 2 to be designated as Outlet A and must be legally combined with iuture owner's properties to the east. ii. Drainage and utility easements s'.? 11 be designated as follows: Lot 1-10' along all property lires Outlot A - 10’ along street and west lot lines 2 lot plat: i. Surveyor must designate wet Ian.;! at a specific elevation. ii. City to require conservation of flowage easement over designated wetland. iii. Drainage and utility easements to be designated as follows: 10' along the perimeter of all property lines to be excluded along the sides adjacent to wetlands and 5’ along the interior lot line. .p;- ■ mmumm' i d ..«.r p;‘' ssj':,- K#':' le -;^'v-Vr ^tev 'm ::v f.'.' ■-•r'.' 'v-:: i!' ■'\''s'',. ■;;*r ■ •■'_ j" V' ^-'Vf ^'il- [■«:: ""r'-. • 31* ■ if 3i-.' *««■ •fefc ■•:, L ul'> -C- fif; Ji'riy Zoning File #1732 May 20, 1992 Page 4 Additional Exhibit J - Applicant's Letter to City Additional ConBents and Planning Coaad.8sion Recoanendatlon The applicant advised that the subdivision will be a 2-lot subdivision and should not be reviewed as a lot ] Ine rearrangement. Lot 2 with a total of 7 acres is proposed ^ a separate single building site. Staff noted that the 70' wide dry bulldable corridor (review Exhibit I) was approved in the original 3*lot plat as a safe access to the 30 m.p.h. public roadway for a private road and will now serve the future driveway. The designated wetlands located within Lot 2 must now be designated at a specific elevation by applicant's surveyor. The applicant also asked for special consideration from the City concerning the staff requirement to fill in the well pit and to abandon the septic system. Staff advised that State law requires the abandonment of the septic system (pumping of tank and filling in of septic tank). Applicant reviewed the size and location of the well pit for Planning Commission members. The Planning Commission members unanimously concurred that the well pit would be a potential hazard and liability for the property owner and concurred with staff recommendation that the well pit be filled In. The Planning Cononisslon recommended unanimrus approval the Z-'lot plat of the subdivision application as proposed adopted the staff conditions for a 2-lot subdivision, enclosed resolution has been drafted for Council's review action. Please note this application has been scheduled at Nay 26th meeting of the Council at the special request of applicant, review Exhibit J. of and The and the the Isv " iVr. W-’ W1 rvm: •TV.VyH I »SF« Refer to Exhibit A, (hereinafter "the property"); and WHBWSASr after due published and mailed notice in accordance with e Statues 462.358 et. seq. and thr City of Orono Zoning and suodivlsion Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon;and *^***AS, at their regular meeting held on May 26, 1992 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the applicant, noting the following findings of fact: 1.The property is located within the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2.The property contains a total of approximately 9 a^res acres are designated wetlands.1.5 3.The proposed plat contains 2 lots each meeting the required 2 acres of dry contiguous area within each lot as follows: Lot 1 * 2.6 acres dry contiguous 2 “ 4,75 approximate area of dry contiguous 4.In an earlier subdivision review, an approved access location for Lot 2 was confirmed for the 30 m.p.h. roadway. The only access to the property is limited to a 704-' dry contiguous corridor along the east side of Lot 2. 5.Each of the lots have been found to have suitable area for both principal and alternate on-site sewage treatment systems per the site evaluation report by Mark S. Gronberg dated 5/11/87. Pago 1 of 4 ■ ■ s-' ■■ i: n ■-• - p;- |£ te ?■:-:* ‘I-’'' ••' ■’-'' !•>!: ^|i' iV, .i ; 'P.. fM; HOW^ THBRBFORB BB IT RBSOLVBDr that based upon one or more of the findings noted above » the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Joan F. Sweetser for the property located at 845 Old Long Lake Road per survey dated April 22, 1992 by Mark S« Gronberg of Coffin ft Gronbergr Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1.Access to Lot 2 shall be limited to the wide dry contiguous corridor at the east lot line. Applicant must apply for a driveway permit from the Public Works Director at the time of application for building permit. 2.Former guest house structure on Lot 1 can never be used for residential habitation as lot only contains 2.6 acres of area. Structure shall be retained for accessory use only. 3.Prior to final plat approval the well pit and septic system that served the former guest house must be appropriately abandoned and Inspected by the City inspection staff. FINAL p:jkt submittals Tie following list of final submittals must be sutimiitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on tha second and fourth Mondays of the month: 1.RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"«200*. Drawing to include: A. Lot lines platted per preliminary survey. B.Designation of drainage easements over designated wetlands within Lot 2 and to confirm location of wetlands at specified elevations. C. Dedication of 33* of right<~of-way for Old Long Lake Road. D.Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10* wide along all perimeter property lines and 5* each side of internal property lines except omit at designated wetland areas. B. Nasiing of plat. Page 2 of 4 ■|B»- i pf- 2. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: A.Title opinion addressed to the City. All ownersr mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. B.The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C.Signed and executed Flowage & Conservation Ease ent over the designated wetland (refer to sample enclosed). Legal description can be written as follows: Shown as drainage easements on the plat, _____plat name _____, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 3. PEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $375.00* A. Final plat fee « $175.00 B. Legal review and filing fees = $200.00 *C. Park Dedication The Park Commission shall review the 2-lot subdivision to determine if portions of the land will be suitable for acquisition by City for park or trail use. If the City has no interest in acquiring lands, the City will ask for a cash payment in lieu of land. At that point the property will be referred to the City Assessor to determine the value of the undeveloped land. The Park Dedication Fee would be based on the value of 8% of the undeveloped land. Please contact John Gerhardson (473-7357) for information pertaining to the scheduling of your application before the Park Commission. Park Fees must be paid at the time of the filing of the final plat. Applicant is hereby advised that preliminary subdivision approval shall expire in one year from the date of Council's approval of the preliminary plat (May 26, 1993). Page 3 of 4 - - ■- • iwr ■• Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 2€th of May# 1992. ATTEST t Dorothy N. Hallin# City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson# Mayor STATS OF MINNESOTA ) )83. INTY OF HENNEPIN ) ■ f- h !tr^' on this 26th Mayor & City The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me day of Nay# 1992# by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin# Clerk of the City of Orono# a Minnesota municipal corporation and said Instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public I' :Page 4 of 4 '§ sp i Aa . f»#ra: « . - - >; . fe-'- ’.. -"s '•- • ■ •; ■ . f^;!n / : m',-fS »j.* fes.'iv :Y-: ^ y . F' -TI’^IT A That part of the East half of thp Southeast quarter of Section 35, Township 118 it'orth. Range 23 ^^est of the 5rh Principal Weridian. described as follows; Commencing at the point of intersection of County Highway No. 27 with the East line of Section 33, T( "hip 118, Range 25 a distance of 502.5 feet more or less South of the East quarter corner of said Section; thence Northwesterly along said center line a distance of 338.3 feet to a point, said point being the true point of beginn’ng of this description; thence turning left a leflection angle of 122 degrees 48 minutes a distance of 745 feet to a point; thence turning a right deflection angle of 77 degrees 85 minutes a distance of 401.3 feet more or less to a H»oint, said point being 799.8 ’■eet I'est of the East line of said Section 35; thence North end parallel with the aforesaid East line of Section 35 to a point on the center line of County Highway No. 27, thence Southeasterly along said center line to the point of beginning, according to the United States Government survey thereof r:^|> i.. .xi,-.!,..*.I: b-.CXTT or OROMO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION I ntOPBRTY LOCATION Site Address ^ *L< (V #« r D,) vJ-5- //S' 3 aoa Please check one ^ Property ____ abstract or ____ torrens? Attach legal description to application. 3S^3f/ APPLICANT Name P J Phone (home) ^ ~Z ^ ^ _ _ Phone (work) Addr^^*2-^ K 6 3 (1£ different than applicant) Name _ _ Phone (work) Address: (attach list if more than one) City:Zip: jmSTING LAND USB (p- ... , Ili- P te »iPte: fEwNSM. ii- |:'3.y. L-P;-. VPi'- =■ ■ •IllPr" Pip;- W laii Ip Ntl; ^ llpiit ii" Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present Use (check) cm OF oRom Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land CHEC^.P jL Acres Total, all parcels f(hcool Residential; no. of units /_____ Other (specify) _________________ Present Zoning District L. ~7^ - ! fl Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density: Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check ) Units per Acres Y *1 / oL 0 Sq Feet Dry Duildable Land Residential Other (sped fy 'i^^^xLa.1 I^ imn 1. ^ ^PLICATION d? 4. ^ /'y^ ■ / (AyiMATBRIAL MBCBSSARY FOR CONPLBTB Pfi Conlttted Application Form Preliminary Plat Information on Certificate of Survey. Cartified Property Owners List of owners within 350’ (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department^^^F^nanco Cg^er Wdendum^to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ Date 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, Covenants, etc. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. CartifIcatlon by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete toning Official's Signature^_ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date- - - - - - - - - - / Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II 6 III) Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) Preliminary Review (Class III & all non-residential) $200.00 300.00 300.00 325.00 + 25.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) •(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 175.00 r.''- r 7 Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application Renewal of Final Subdivision Ar'^’ication 150.. 00 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and furthiur agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. R^licant's Signature PpA.P'. Owner's Signature Date 1 Date iL % \ 1 8ubiiiltt:& 18 Into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commissidii Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the 'third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorised agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. life' A .f *; •r#' >- ^mM, • •},“’;' w>»:i. •Aj»A^if. ,»». -^s, ..•i.j'VrV'''".-- • ' 1'* ^ -s'^ t 1^. «- .«# , V’ « < « •V • . *.• ■r*K *- *r/yJ^- ii- i ^’ ♦. .1'»..» *' 'V^ f k--: 1- %: .>• 1>V i i w 1^ S':,^s';s# fitfJ; ,,»■L P-fe. «! fSv:®? ^^>. ?r -' ^ - >?- .a-". - *^ “tei.. SITE CVALUATIOK RLHORT fCR JOAM SWECTSER OROhO, HlNNtSOIA 5-U-d/ X : Ss;;rr.r"^,-;ss Alloo^Jitl »0»l* 00 lh« •liwrn^u «un 4o 4»cr,y« p„rrol. •louUk iwr inch which along miui thw Jack of « hiuh »dtor UOU^Itf 4 Uondord ihcoid ihr, ^.u .II.J SI nL*JiT h«l wuJ I StJh^Il!?Sf2*-TS® "m®" '■'*• Wr inch (holai 1-4) “i; • i«o J*««‘ro 'yilL-m bocjuu. q( if.e i-oiiiblo liiQh ^aic-r lailo u !!:: «crio;:" '“' ”•'■ * ••»«^'' ‘'■•‘» •"■ If there are eo/ other iue>tloni, please contact ma. :»incure|y, f^ERCOR. INC. •^ark s. GronDerg ^'CA certifie<l . •* . ' V: =1 z'• •« « k j/%...Vk. t V ,* >*> #W*-' -J- • . • I • . * ^ a '* * • ■ :V . • %. iJ:S: ■ * -i V* * t' ' V k.*- -y » ’V • ^41 *' * • - I ' ■ • ■• kOiiufi r ’ iK. CITY of OROXO ■--A'l*o«i I>mr« llwi iM*Cry«ul lUy. Mtnnaaaui aA333« OMm On thf Sorth Shore of Lake Minnetonka Juno 21, 1990 Mr. h Mrs. Allen Sw^Ptser 845 Old Long Lake Road WoysatSf MN 55391 RE: 835 Old I-onq Ioko Read - Septic Billlnt Dear Mr. * Mrs. Sweetr.or: Tho City of Orono n ir receipt of your returned bill for t.ne guest house located on your pr iperty. It is ny l-'pression from your note that the structure is not current *y being lived in and tho well is not functional. We Will be pleased to remove thin building from t.he septic billing upon a site inspection ttit v-tifies the following: ] . •5• • All plumbing ^r^ \ plvr>ri''n ' -.xtures n-»ve beer removed froni thn .«!♦. r ! . ^ nry ' « p’ *PpO ! CLl^ With dir^e I would ilao note * » I' . f ttiio buill.t'u b.i:« i separate well th..t IS no longer in usn. ycu ir-* :pen n i b 1 •> :er havino a well driller prcrerly trout t*'«* well te p*.'v«*nt vruif'r .-crtaminat ion. Cr^o *o .ont.li** ‘ i5 y<^u wis^ tio set up an i n - p»'< * i 'n v.Mify 'h.it -n- Vjov- tt.'ms n.ive been comp 1 ^te<l . S.ncerely,, /y '/. Micha<*l P. c^tfpc>i\ Aasistant Planning & ronina Admlniatra*^or V* J ’ *.'w . • » ,e s.. «• ; ' e > cci Jeanne Mabuath, Building t toning Administrator stHJKsr.aiosts*; • <n.t.'tr l«C .■mw %OM»swi«»rK''*MviM:t.«»>»*••/naiJCMoess••****» las.matm 'V. . '■■ ■■I.'* STATE OF niNNESOTA DEPARTHENT OF HEALTH ABMOONED WELL RECORD 1. laaTii o» Ktw I- t irlMl Strttt M«r««| «M City ef Mil Locttten or fro» »e«<1 IflUfMCtlOA 845 Old Long Lake Roadt Wayzata, MN 55391 - - - - - -ED- - -tMCt locattM (Is ftcttos %rit •!•) N 1 • • L .A V *• • • 1 • • 1 < • • • • • • • • • « m • ■ .••* • • 4k • •» V ♦• • • tv •• •• • • t t l ml# s. oaiiLiNQ hcthoo (ff iQ CAblt top I IQ Q icQ ?□ ho Mo^ Hoa SQAIf uQ___ j£X«OtAry 6Q JotltO O 6. OiSTBUCTlCNS tfoM OOftryettO 01 f«» Er OOt trod tons rovovoO Q ft* Q I*®If oottryctioni Cinnot 5t ro«o«00a contact K)H Offor# staHnq. 7. use O OH#4tL000 :□ Irnqitlon ^ PuPMC C3 jQTtltW#!' fiQ«unlc'f04l ICC TQ Hr Co«0it1on*«9 iC — KAva. '4 2. fWMm OMMK'S MU« Joan S»««tser I STilTiif Adprtti if 0»f?trtnt l^•n proto^'ty oPOrtit inpicitfU iOOwt »jiftOlii:S Of 3. rotMTtOa to* COLO« rc««*TU» '«0" n a«t k«o«iA. in«tcat« f*r«4ti*i* '•» *•'' , 8. :451kC(5) ;Q Hack <Q O iQ R'kitic 6Q itiialetk Sltel 2 . 115 »• In. to in. to /t. ft. : %. sctcEs )Q Scr«#n40 ••n fro* i;U: P 0O«« Holt ft. to ft- to ft ( I * tno»f> 10. S1»t;c kAft* LlVCL 63 _________ft.jjjsato- □ kso-e ;/l/ /Q'9 UnO iL/rfict 3*t4 PIfilurtO U/ j U/ U. WtU«€AC CO«fLCTiO» •.n tit\9\% AC40t«r Bottmnt offitt XO-" 4~~l TlMiAA o--------- u. lilMa* fUfAtlOfia SOgtCl Of OATa . CASISCJ IC«VCC. USINGS tllfOtATCO. C C ;; UOUTI n G iNfOtmTlON itit ComM ^ •ontonlto C, srovf •ittnti Portland f»^* Q_t4-L^^^ f®v 13. «IAU5T SOUNCeS Of CONTANIIUTION 2Q foot 5;Quth oiroctio* gewer ^ typ# mn 4liiMf*ct*0 Mftro itiMnfF )Q Tot M »U«t Q tomvoO ^’^*^** fro. iQ Uomrililt C '►•5* C ••citroctHM | jQ Joi O Cootnfufoi O ----------------------------- IS. CIISTING wCLtl (^Uot# iMtet locitimi of 404*m#«o 4*0 4cti«o milt I* fmyy tmnof* •• J OtMr onotoO mlHt) •• ftofof^yf D "• AMiiOMS: □ torm**«f □ Tomiortry JflJ Not «Oiio4 l^yfUtu^ § liCVl tttONt |N#y No ¥ff< fo*' TrtMfor) 17. mret ocil CONTNNCrOtS CtlTinUTigi Tm, mil mt toolM o###*- •y jRirtuiUtio* tsu ro»e»'t *1 try* to too NOtt Of 9f t*0«lo«fO mN Otlltf. Serger3on-Caswel1. Inc. 27058 •ytlnoit I »co<*t# 444*-#«:InduF.tri.I Street ............. C^vfxm kroe 11*? ___•#»# ___Z2i_2£ Nam of &rt i lo** *‘“i . • *% % t *'^’ -V • V^ t • ►• "T . '^ 47? 7* . * J*' *• ^1 *n-^V£> ' *' .. « A - - ^ />• yC^-' (^^i*-Tt-0 Cl-'tt.^ „jt,‘^,/-~^-^<’^^ '._, •* ■'^**'-'*‘T-. *7 LL'‘»>ri,.-l !X/> i •• k C^&^2,CC^U • * - * • « .-^'i > r* _ :*'• • ‘*^' ♦ ^ i-r^ -W V^^v »-^.' 55Xi .»^ I . - V . f , ‘A/r, ‘ * %Ju - ‘ »-. V«*- . . • ' "• ^ <i ' * *■ r t - - - ik-•*.,■••■•■ j •Htrifi"**?** ■ * V- «► » T 7-k.:'.3:v' *‘C'* . j' ■ f’'; ■' - ■»"'' -^‘» ■* \ K ,» ^ '-1. Vj . •'.* A - - • =• .. " - .r • ■ - ■ ^ . ‘ - *■ > t *.. • i- •‘■^'.■■T- ■»r • I-V-'' >4.' lij*' ):■ - • Ji^ I *S: *¥ ,;*••• 1|- I 1^ Ip' WM 51-P'ter te: e-:':t,v'. pllte To< Dates Subject s Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members ^^vJV Mayor Peterson and City Council ^/4u ^ Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator^^j^C*^^ ^ May 13, 1992 #1733 Camp Teko, 645 Tonkawa Road - Conditional Use Permit/ Variance - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.03, Subdivision 19. Proposed land alterations involve earth movements in excess of 100 cubic yards. Section 10.55, Subdivision Maintenance of drainage improvements involve land alterations within the 0-75' lakeshore protected area where no alterations are allowed. List of Exhibits ~ A - Engineer's Report 5/8/92 B - Application C - Plat Map D - Anthony J. Gleekel's Latter 5/6/92 E - Property Owners List P - Dra. .lage Plan Plus Addendum G - Survey H - Cross Section - Drainage Ditch I - Cross Section Rip Rap Spillway Doscription of Request The applicant proposes maintenance alterations of .^n existing drainage way and vehicular gravel path that provides access to the lakeshcre. The maintenance improvements involve the installation of four spillways and a rip rar drainage ditch. The City Engineer has contacted the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to determine if a permit review would be required. The applicant has already submitted the necessary information for the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Board to determine if a permit will be necessary. Staff has also submitted the application information to Ceil Strauss of the DNR wlio has been asked to also determine if a permit review will be necessary. The DMR will then advise if the Corps of Engin>^ers will require a permit. Staff should be able to confirm by our meeting date whether these agencies will require formal permit review by the applicant. Erosion is severe within the drainage area. The adjacent gravel vehicular path is also eroding away wherever the trail abut.^ the drainage aree. The final sections of the trail and drainage ditch are located within the 0-’’5* setback area. If the path is to provide safe excess to the lakeshore for vehicles that trar ^port handicapped persons and for the pedestrian users, d_ainage improvements are IK >• . • ft f, I. i' :* i{ -.1^dai ^:: Zoning Pile #1733 May 13, 1992 Page 2 necessary and, hopefully, will be installed before the camp opens for the summer season. Please review Exhibit A, the City Engineer's report reviews the project, methods proposed by applicant's contractor and, finally, makes recommendation to insure the success of the drainage improvements. Hardship Statement 1. 2. Steeped topographies. Severe erosion problems. 3.Original drainage improvements are inadequate to deal with the watershed and heavy velocities of runoff. Need to maintain safe level of access for the public who use the camp facilities. ndation Any recommendation of approval must include the following conditions : 1.Remove PVC culvert and save sections to install at ditch block and pathway that crosses ditch leading to steps at west bank. 2. Class 111 rip rap at an average size of 9" must be used. 3.Filter fabric must be non-woven fabric per Mn/DOT Spec. 3733, Type IV. 4.Minimal slope with fabric and rip rap equired is 3 to 1 slope. Trail must be either removed or bank to west must be altered. If applicant is to attempt to save oak trees, retaining walls uust be constructed. If the applicant is to maintain 3 to 1 slopes and also maintain the vehicular trail to lakeside, certain large oak trees may have to be removed. Applicant must decide which option is to be followed and to provide detailed grading plan if sections of the bank are to be significantly altered. 5.Rip rap drainage ways should be extended all the way to the water's edge (929.4 elevation). ch •J i -1 .iP 'V-: ■Pif \t i# Ir:^.v.-Lffcp- m p 'ii; •-: y .'M m ■m '^-. V, ' K- ...i:.i-i t: u .-. .... ■■'* X ®fcp- r^- V. :h- toning File #1733 Mey 21, 1992 Page 3MOxtl itM and Planning CoaU-ssion Re<lation Staff has received confirmation from the MCWl) staff that they are reconaending approval of the permit application for Camp Yeko at their Nay 21st meeting. They have concurred with all of the recooBMndations of the Orono staff and in addition would ask that erosion control be shown on the final plans and that spillway areas must also add riprap to the down side of the spillway in order to limit further erosion. Staff will contact the Watershed office on the 26th to verify final confirmation that the Watershed District did indeed act on the application. Applicant was cautioned by Comnission members that Council may not choose to act on the application until the Watershed District had formally approved the permit. Please note the application has been scheduled for Council's review at the May 26th meeting at the specific request of the applicant, review Exhibit D. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the unanimous approval of the Planning Commission based on the findings and conditions set forth in the staff memo and as set forth in the City Engineer's report. Exhibit A. Staff has also included some of the conditions noted by the MCWD staff in their comments. Isv SlifC . ■ 1. .y.'L ■t te-s A. i- # 1^ rv •. 4 ■ i'- . * 's L^r i-m0i: 1fe., ^*’:s- m V-- ,C'&r.^ : |i - “ i“ft. tj.::-I ^4•:- •, ■ • • ^ =_. fr-ti?- .' . i* !VV %> ?Et‘ k'Ua bp . K|;' itef A RBSOLDTION 6RAHTIHG A VARIAHCB TO MmilCIPAL SOHIM6 CODS SBCnOH 10.55, SUBPIV18I0M 8, AMD GRAVTIK A COHDITIOHAL USB PERMIT PBR m 10.03, SOBDIVISIOM 19 FILB 81733 WBBRBAS, Anthony J. Gleekel, Co-Chairman of Temple Israel's Camp Teko Committee and an authorized agent of Temple Israel (hereinafter *the applicant”) has an interest in the property located at 645 Tonkawa Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City ”) and legally described as follows: Lot 12, Auditor's Subdivision No. 207 and that part of Lot 11 lying northwesterly of the southeasterly 20 feet thereof. Auditor's Subdivision No. 207, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property”); and WBBRBAS, per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 the applicant has applied to the City of Oronc for a conditional use permit to allow land alterations in excess of 100 cubic yards involving maintenance of a 300' drainage ditch and vehicular trail and a variance to Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 as sections of the proposed land alterations are located within the 0-75' lakeshore protected area where no such land alterations are permitted. BOW, TBBRBPORB, BB IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FIBPIHGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1733. 2.The property is located in the LR-IB Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 1 acre in area. The subject property consists of approximately 204> acres. 3. if The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 18, 1992 and recommended approval of the proposed variance and conditional use permit, based on the following findings: um&iti.Page 1 of 5 mm ii 1 i ..'b , .-4?- ;aic»‘ %■■-|>-t:fe:Ih ^:- ■six Fvh- 8". M' 'i M> ?:•' it:^m- |V' 'fx 4. 5. 6. im^- A.The drainageway and adjav^ent trail to be altered are located within the* severely steeped topographies of the property. B.Severe erosion problems exist within the the drainageway and vehicular trail. area of C.Original drainage improvements are inadequate to handle the localized watershed and heavy velocities of runoff. 0.There is a need to maintain a safe level of pedestrian and vehicular access for the public who use the camp facility. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Zoning Code and CoB^rehensive Plan of the City. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the repair and upgrading of the drainageway and vehicular trail will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Ccxnnission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance and conditional use permit on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 5 4 1 .1 1 «•- r ^ F- % >, ’ r?ur‘ M' , :’• '* V t:;?: :v. ' • '■■■k’" i!;' i lls#- ■>“v."P^'P' gilrf-',; COaCLIlSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to allow land alterations within the 0-75* lakeshore protected area and per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 grants a conditional use permit permit for proposed land alterations involving earth movements in excess of 100 cubic yards, subject to the following conditions: 1.Applicant shall apply to the City of Orono for the legal combination of parcels P.I.N. 05-117-23 33 0001 and P.I.N. 05-117-23 33 0002. 2.Upon approval of Application #1733 by the City of Orono Council, applicant shall apply for a land alteration permit. The permit application must include an amended grading and drainage plan that includes the following information: A. Removal of underground PVC culvert- B.Class III riprap at an average size of 9 inches must be used. C.Filter fabric must be non-woven fabric per Mn/DOT specification 3733, Type IV. D.Minimal slope with fabric and riprap requii.ed is 3:1. E.Provide amended topographic information where bank is to be altered. Locate areas where retaining walls are to be installed to protect mature trees. P.Riprap drainageway should be extended all the way to the water's edge (929.4 elevation). G.Provide riprap to the doimside of the spillways to limit further erosion. H. I. Add erosion control measures to final plan. Other pertinent conditions recommended in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit (submit copy of MCWD permit with permit application). Page 3 of 5 - A -V- rF-. liisP 4 y' >5 % it/-* ?■'m f-., -■' ■; •'» k- 0' i- £.■fir W‘ M- w ■/.. tT M i- i|Stv - > if#®!'-"’ ■ li" m kS^B- 'i 3.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 land alteration permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (May 26, 1993). 4.Violation of or non compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of Temple Israel, its successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. May, 1992. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 26th day of ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hailin, city clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )8S. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN } The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of May, 1992 by Barbara A. Peterson 6 Dorothy M. Hailin, Mayor 6 City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public 'i Page 4 of 5 - "U m•i^K-! 'll. mm^ f^'*r--:-. ■'*■ ■ tr r r I k'A i“€'£i<T itt;4;:m^ fj:-' '-■ T . ■■i * -f o. % '^0k'‘W ih^i■ -I*^V‘ t- ^1- >r #^€.' V.-v nr ii7 'N^?-.,. m-- ??v-r ■^5 iS'-- ii0% I^Pm-- b' ■"'1 '<*- y- '- ■‘T •r-_ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY O^ HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 befors sis a Notary Public within and for said county^ personally appsarsd IcnoitTi to Bie to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed ths sasM as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared theKnown to me to be the person(s) described in and who executec^ foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC i'Sv. Page 5 of 5 -V •*. ■• ••- ■ i.'L,. 4 -■{ I i % iA "1 M ^^4 ■ fi 5^ r- *’. .\‘ : -I M * -r w U- w }'p^ ’'i'',.v ‘■r V i'. Sf ... At'-. :» li'^' '• • •: f ‘ -r : m ■*■“■■ J- :ill.y. >;s idl Bonestroo Rosene Anderiik& Associates Engineers A Architects H Oqo Q BonrBioo Aooen w Aoiene PE* Joseph C Andpruli PE Mjrvm L Sofvjtt PE •<hj*d E Turner P€ G«enn B Coos. PE Thomas E Noyes PE Eopen G SchuTttCht P6 Susan M Ebersn C P ^ •Semor ConsuEanf HOM«d A santoid. PE Keen a Gotaon PE Aocet * P^*»y» P£ Bcnara W Ponef PE Oewd O LOSkM PE (tooeft C Buucft AIA Jerry A SouAtOn P£ Mart A Mamon PE Michaei T daotmann PE Teo fc Fe« P£ Thomas • Anoerson A i A Oooald C Butgjrdt PE ’’Nsmas E Angus PE Gary F ByiaocJpr p£ »smae* Wamne* PE Mcnae* P «£u pe ^^nes M Bmg A iC P Thomas ^ iNterson PE Micnan C Lynch PE >ames » Maonm PE jerry O Pprmcr »E Kerr«ch P Anderion PE Mart ff iDBl PE Mart A Sec PC ^ Morvrs PE Oamn J Fogerion PE Phmp j Cajv%en. pE Mart 0 VA/M. PC Mies B ienien PE L Phikp Gravel M. PE Kjien L Warner PE F Tbdd Power pe Keen c Taocs pe Sha^ O Guajfion PE CecAO OlKrer Pc ChJrtes A EncKsort Leo M Paweniry Nartan M OfO»^ James F Engemae* May 8, 1992 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building A Zoning Administrator City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Ibii Re: Camp Teko Property Conditional Use Permii AppL #1733 Our File No. 139-1733 Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed the application and supporting documents submitted for a conditional use permit on the Camp Teko property. There are several significant engineering issues related to the constructability of the improvements. Directly to the north of the existing steps and proposed start of the riprap is a ditch block. The ditch b’oek directs the runoff into a PVC culvert which outlets in the ditch approximately 200 feet to the south, the culvert exists with little or no cover and will create a problem when constructing the proposed ditch. Also, the pathway leading fr^ the mam trail to the existing steps crosses the ditch at grade and is in poor condition. The existing culvert should be removed and a portion should be salvaged to be reinstalled at the proposed ditch grade. The culvert could be used at the ditch block and at the pathway. This way, the pathway could be built up above the ditch bottom and improved with gravel. The proposed Class II riprap may not be suitable for the high velocities expected along tne ditch bottom. Also, the 6" average size is too easily displaced by the numerous pcdesmaiis in the aiea. We recommend Qass III riprap which has a 9" average size. The filter fabric «hniiki he fl non>woven fabric in accordance with Mn/DOT specification 37.33, type IV. The area identified as the last 120 feet of drainage ditch is of the greatest concern. The main trail and ditch are confined in a very small corridor between a large oak tree, a picnic canopy and the steep bank to the west If this trafl is to be used for any purpose other than pedestrian traffic, it should be widened, realigned, and improved. It appears as though it if presently used for vehicle access to the lake. The steep bank to the west h^ an approxiniate slope of 1:1 (horizontal to vertical). The minimum acceptable slope, with fabnc and riprap, is 3:1. To construct this slope, the trafl must be removed, or the bank must be excavated significantly, resulting in the loss of several of the large oak trees in the area. 233S West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MInnesoU 55113 • 612-636-4< ■ V ‘ V ___________________________________________________________________________________________________V. -V’____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ■ 5,-r •‘■/^ v4>' ■»-Y ••,'■'• ^ i-m. ii'iSy i-=*''-';‘w-'• mm: • 5*^; .- vi-^ Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth City of Orono Page 2 May 8, 1992 We would recommend that a retaining wall be constructed along the steep bank to save the oak trees and to provide a wider corridor for the ditch and trail. The riprap should be extended all the way down to the water’s edge, as the lake is presently at or near the Ordinary Normal High Water Level (ONHWL). We 1. ~ beeninforuicd by the Miiineliaha Creek Watershed thai a pciinit may be necessary to construct the improvements below the 100-year High Water Level of the lake. The Minnesota Department of Natural Reserves and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should also be contacted for their comments on the improvements. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC JL, Shawn D. Gustafson SDG:Ik ;V'^v,v' ■■■.- ■ -V • •vC* i J 1 i 4 pi-: M-«rIm: h.yr h ^:]rk •fU:I,, ir N ' femI# t- y'-f ■' ■ ,■.' w » » 1'^ 0iU •> r S'- m:'A: - '■r ’Mf- ™f: ft" CITY OP ORONO - GENERAL LAND OSfi APi^LlCATxoN m |propertt locatioh Site Address 645 Tonkawa Road #i!2 to •vS H ’ Pi^opftrty Identification Number (P.I.D.) 0511723330QQ1. y. I Please attach le^al description to application if not included on required survey. _ _ _ _ APPLiCAinr Name Phone (home) 3 / 7-6029 Canp Teko Address 645 Tonkawa Road Phone (work) 339-7131 OrcnoCity Zip I (if different than applicant) Name Temple Israel______________ Phone (home) 377-6029 Phone 339-7131 ______ Address 2424 Bngrson Avenue S,City MpIs.Zip_5540fi____ Date Property Acquired 1965 (?) --------^ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ^ nSS - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application $125.00 Residential accessory Use $175.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) ■e» $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $1 ''.OO Land Alteration ClfY OF uRiW Flf^^RCE OFFICE 13C0200000 ’•' QEH TL V A Vi f?r 1 f Va V fyfij .•a I Va Vruc-rv ' RECEIPT-fHm YOU Grading and filling - designated wetland oc^2fdiddd|>»AJMJ X Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more h?l ISdlnl, .Lwiu, Staining walla within 7S' of lak.shor. PRD/PID - see fee schedule Renewal Pee - $100.00 (no change from original application) j^ter^the—Fact Fee Double Current Application Fee A • /I w I I .4 APPLicAnons $200.00 " $250.00 " $175.00 " $ 75.00 ~ $300.00 “ $300.00 $100.00 other - see fee s Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) Vacation Easement Vacation Easement Vacation With Subdivision Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Appeals chedule mmmi r ^ p •-’S. - a ntBSBHT 08B OF PROPERTYPresent Zoning District Present Use of Property _ _ Residential Other (specify) Cano raSCRIPTZOII OP RBQOBST Describe request in detail; grade to Lake i innetonka Construction of drainage wav and rxp-rap on y-r. RBQOIRBD SUBMITTRLS 2I CeSifi^ ^^oVerty°"own™s List of owners within 350' (you can obtai Xist from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governmen Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map. 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). , 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements,. 7. As an addendvon to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARX RBQOIRBD TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A M0RXIH6 COPT <11* X 17* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. __ • se mm mm mm mm •• MR •• •• •• •• ** ** The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please xcnesiber that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. ________________ Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:,_______________________________ __________________ APPLICANT'S SIGNATORB The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. , / . |ii Applicant's siemature I ^-^4^ Date ,—f ^ ^ twnnms signature The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and furth^er authorised reasonable entry onto the property by <^ty st^ff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members ror purposes of investigation and verification of t^ 7/ ' / Owner's signature Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Coamiission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the tihird Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an I authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building 6 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. m It#- •*- ’iSi:mvft:, V--- Wt ^:u"- ■ ■ m *'• i. Y„ W-- ^V‘‘ ^ CAW omccs DSIEGEL, BRILL. GREUPNER & DUFFY. P A rof»MC**LY GAOSS man i^AACINS. s>cgcl a BR^cc atCMAItO StCGCL JOSIAH C. •WILL. JAMCS •. OftCUWWCW MflALO • OLirrv WOOD ft. rOSTCW. JW TMOMAS M. OOOOMAN m. cwAio wilotang JONW •. WATSON WM. cmwistowhcn acnwcll SUSAN M VOIGT 1300 WASHINGTON SOUAPE •OO WASHINGTON AVCNUC SOU^M MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55AO^ rCLCPHONt iB‘2' 339 '3' TC l€COP»«N t®'2‘ 339 e39 ‘ an TmOnv j OlCKMCL SmCPPI l POHLr ^OC l m jCNSCN AAiAN C WCiSBCPO POSEma Py TvjOm^’ ANNE A WCNMAPO^* jOPOAN m c C v^'S >*-V ' Rf ^ RC O M L GROSSMAN SmClOOn O haPlinS Mav 6, 1992 •ac SO AOMiTTtO N CAciFORN'A 15605AG Ms. Jean Mabusth CITY OF ORONO Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Temple Israel - Camp Teko Conditional Use Permit Applicaiion Dear Ms. Mabusth: Due to the need to complete the work requested in Camp Teko’s Conditional Use Permit application, I hereby request that this matter be placed on the City Council’s agenda tor May 26, 1992. If you have any questions please contact me at the number listed above. Very truly yours, Anthony J. Gle«el AJG/ss <• • 'i I i 1 jl Lb U fc, V- ------ MAY • • — I J 3 ‘ : ■ >' I- ^a*ss Es^s i:51 ■“‘i o » s; rv»%M 3 u« o rsi ► W O < f-*‘ I' '9.. ‘a.-: ;*w fc* e:: p: K-’ h^>- • “k •^* - fe- ■ ■"“ ■ ■ |£r " ^tViJ.''-^-’ ■• %*: v‘;.*^i.y”.‘"-‘’- ... ^"> T • 't/. >r . H Q 2 N. < i»|i 5|-*»c. c ,{sS|? S 8 gtIRSSSIMh 5 5 ^ f M V.mm 2 m M M . ^ * a X M Msiiili;¥ r* r- w !!• *5^151^5 I# *sa~ Ml M M (0 8»I-L r- d m UV Si»8 .1. i^2S5^ ;o y% Q I I 8 i:u<-i ^ ^ ^ ^ p ^ Q M « fS o S**ils, si** * i-s: s® 3a«sp im 2 ^ ^ r o 3 5 S in S r* 5 * 4 0 ffl S Min<s 3S* 8 ^§111r* Ml o 2 g ^ ni Ml A M M M (' fii 3 •tv- ’»'! A •‘i -,tl 4« f'-i •*l ."La w «• f ^1 IvH**1^r ff f>. 1: . \ X I" k' ' t ■ v--‘ .jO"" o: ,o ,-..Q O •^..3• f X Vv.-W'v- ' V . • V > -v^ ■ 3r/7*-Vi^* V. . . ■; -s .: ^:.v t ■- •^‘*»'»'v -f O TJ> s ^ \ -< 1 r.i*M V . • , ^ .— *. < • ^4 f i -^t-;,§.;.T:-.>wS;'’".\ *^•4. a ’ -r V - 5 t'- ^ « * •*- -*!^i,;i?s ';?■4 V *4, •- ^ * • • '» T .u; -•^,:..4t .. •f t! ?•;%, fi.U-:- •’*?.•*'*i'* *Nix #■ V'iLi L;'k:k- ■:•*' •* A ! • • • a :i. W ■^* ‘ • ’ • -.• •. • W * -'■ * . •* ',r .•' ?/'-■ .^ 7a'-4.'4 .'%^rs. -i' . f > * *• *S m • % ■t - •-‘^J «;f. i•> 'T/.- s IN f4 -A .». \ * © o •:'j H g “Tj >5si«iSS N -<rH 13|i8S --S3. 5|sa ? iMH? 8*»t: i ii*is *i"S*3 I! n # \N 01 SIS3 ► m *»*o M Kh Xrn s VN I H M vnvrt IN Kn 9^ > S I r>9 IN IN »o o o o iM"SIS (»o eI*'' i iNsis Mil: • s''\fl Ul IN oo M • * - • 0 ■\’)V?. ^ ■H•'» SliS^SSP-ili i®g5§?^ M M inin INin m S3 |w *ai k u 88 r*sm S «N -♦8 f I i 8 IN Mil IN 3 IN P‘ ri SI INtAmcn '■'i .^5 “ -"hM-f-'T'mr >%1 SW.V. .,x■gS’ ■feME U mmUME QCMITIIIfi I CMDIN6 3066 Sprue* StrMt ST. PAUL. MN 55117 (612) 4S44M4a »«ETNO MA. J2oU QpLD/lAiOA<ic D*tc K pv f: lA II r„. 1' 1 —-r*%\ r -t'-t- f-r 1 i- ? i t-t ■-- pAmwAV I /i -----f S- [• T,'r*' m ■ K i».<it. ^--t i ■ ! 1 I ____4 , i --------------------- ’•' 14'.. .4r;I i • _i i r i i T' _...-4 I k+- i- i. i- -...t- .. -• -I" I ■4 •* - ^ ..— - ............T-' --i —4* ■ • “—■♦ r •*r I ■ • I— , ^._4 I .. .* [ .-i ! T’ ( I- 1- -^ »I - ...I I ! ,WnkMiMMNUMI< ■' -TgKf> ML rniiMOK aammM t omnnc 3066 Spruc« StrMt ST. PAUL, MN 55117 (fit) 4644M4S SHEET NO 4/z^Ma. L-*‘— KtP{ EaP Spi //uiAy t>eTAi L A^A S k -, i ;L "I *f€CATtfO JJ * ^0** CCasjs .57 “ C/Z" I..: kj *7* ryjt' :r- 1 , i» k - ^i t i-Ti i 1 !< —^ ... -^ .. ’<X4 ^------- V/ewifiL*»wv ^,j|t i— T' -..., ...... — ; —t - i" ~-4 I ! -i. I 5 n III I I - -v., - f i m.tmtmm4m rm n. ifev W"^-' •i tj i ::-I--i^'I.;» ^v- ■:^-r;*r- .T-: Vos Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator %9% Datos Sobjoc^s Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning 6 Zoning A May 46, 1992 Joint Use Dock License, liig Island Veterans Camp 3Sr % % Lisb of Szblbits Exhibit A - Resolution/License Exhibit B - Application Exhibit C - Resolution #2802 Big Island Veterans Camp is requesting a 1992 Joint Use Dock License for a total of 12 transient slips. They have not listed any of the slips as permanent, although we would expect that up to 4 camp owned boats would be moored on a regular basis. The remaining slips '•^ould service the 5 overnight cabins and 25 overnight tent sites appro ’ in the Veterans Camp's most recent Conditional Use Permit, Resolution 12802. The increase from 8 slips to 12 does not exceed the 14 slips and 2 buoys allowed in previous licenses. The Veterans Camp has ample shoreline to support this number of slips and many more. Since LMCD only licensed 8 slips for 1992, our license is written subject to LMCD approval of the 12 slip level. Staff Re<datlon Staff recommends approval of a Joint Use Dock License for the Big Island Veterans Camp for the period January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992, per the attached resolution. Motion:Approved by__ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _* seconded by , to approve a resolution directing staff to issue a ^oint Use Dock License to the Board of Governors, Big Island Veterans Camp subject to conditions noted, for the period of January 1, 1992 to Deceoiber 31, 1992. Ayes _ _ _ _ _ _ Nayes _ _ _ _ _ _ _. ■- V—ri-r- <?. • slliiSV)' .•K ’'■t-;-' .im,:, p. - ■■ r* J'!;. % :4i; ',i i Jr m p"' hiJ- P w PP Ai-'f .. V '.•■ ■'iA; ¥v«.' fW: A.i' 6; te:.' fcl vl'^ te* , K'^«. i'r ' - ■ flfc 1’ fA!:: X ^ l ' ’■<■Ft ' »i RBSOLOTIOM DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE A JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE TO BOARD OF GOVERNORS, BIG ISLAND VETERANS CAMP SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 1992 TO DECEMBER 31, 1992 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, hereinafter "City" is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes, State Statute 412, et. seq. and State Statute 462, et. seq., to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City and other members of the public within the City? and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primary harbor limit of the City of Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota? and WHEREAS, the regulation of the navagable waters involves an exercise of police power of the State, LMCD, and the Cicy of Orono, all of which have adopted rules to ensure to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from activity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City which, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare? and WHEREAS, the regulations of the DNR, LMCD, and the City of Orono regulate the property rights of the riparian owners both as to residential owners and the commercial marina owners to the extent prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD, DNR and City of Orono must fulfill their trusteeship over the public waters by protecting against interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights of riparian owners, whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential o%mers; WHEREAS, as to Lake Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exlst:8 between and is shared by riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian ovmer has exclusive privileges over Lake Minnetonka. The only additional private right that any riparian o%mer may have over the public generally is to construct one dock to navigable depth of the public waters. There can be no dispute but that the public generally and each riparian owner to Lake Minnetonka has the right to use the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common with all other riparian owners. This right is a right not only to members of the public but the right to each riparian owner. Page 1 of 2 •:V ;• 'n:': -if- ^■r n-- ■ mm ■ This nutual right of enjoyment which is shared by riparian owners and the public generally includes the recreational benefits of the lake such as boating and fishing therein; the riparian owner has no exclusive privileges to these rights; and WHBRBAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial ])^neficial public use only as long as all riparian users of the lake regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no abuse of the limited riparian rights; and WHBRBASf the City has adopted reasonable regulations i*^^nrding the construction and use of lakeshore and dock facilities when such facilities are used and maintained by three or more families, which regulations include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code; and WHBRBAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to set forth the above noted general conditions and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application for an annual Joint Use Dock License described on Exhibit A attached, HOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the facts and conditions noted on Exhibit A attached. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono at their meeting on the 26th day of May, 1992. Barbara A, Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of May, 1992, Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor 6 City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 2 of 2 ■ -T: ■i: f j ■: • •-’? m-:v,- S-“‘m py-.V'-\ S' IfI*. 'iy. •r.!. 0y m:? 'j0 'll ^01':'0 4 '■:' ■'^V'' r , •ifM, l%#ifr i!''./V' '4 ffry >r <•■ iA:r-y7; I -' - • T't* ’’ r''; ^ . , ■ »;*.« ‘if-iw,- CITY OF ORONO EXHIBIT A RBSOLOTION HO. CONDITIONS OF ISSUANCE FOR ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE I. LICENSEE: Big Island Veterans Camp Board of Governors Dock Address: Big Island - Record Lot #1 - 100 Big Island Agent: Roger Fahrenkrug (Treasurer) Address: 5329 45th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55417 Licensee is: Incorporated club or recreation group (non-profit corporation.) License Period: January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992 II. BOAT DENSITY The number of in-place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown on the attached plan, Exhibit B, and in accordance with Resolution 938, in no case shall the number of authorized boat slips, lifts, or buoys exceed the number permitted in the prior year's license. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan: Bay Lower Main Lake Transient (Day use only) Slips Permanent Moorage Slips Boat Lifts Sub-Total: Slips at Dock Offshore Buoys Maximum Boats in Water Maximum Boats per prior license (14 slips, 2 buoys under previous license) MAXIMUM BOAT DENSITY, 1992 Exceeding this maximum boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation and/or prosecution for violation of Section 5.42 Subdivision 2 of the Orono Municipal Code. III. DOCK LAYOUT j«5«¥- ■ The dock structure or layout authorized by this license shall be as shown on attached Exhibit B. Any changes in this layout shall be subject to prior review and approval of the City Council. 't ■,J : P^'f; b i-' ?}-V ,ai- ./ i*:"' .4 )>' 1^' -'r'JrV '"' [it r w ■■:• i. ' . ''V K' •>:ri ■V* T^! ■ te^-' 1#^ ..sI- p'?' Slfcv ■tit- m.wmh Mi- . • ■ ^ ••-.t Exhibit A R«solutlon No. Page 2 IV. SPECIAL CONDITIONS required for compliance with the ordinance of the City and/or the LMCD. The issuance of this license is subject to full coinpLiance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and/or prosecution by the City. 1.Based on the 5 cabins and 25 tent-camping sites approved by City of Orono Resolution #2802, 12 slips are approved for the 1992 season per your application. These slips may be used as permanent slips for camp-owned boats, or as transient slips for day-use and overnight use by campers. 2.Future requests for additional slips will be subject to City Council approval and shall be reviewed and considered in relation to the concurrent level of allowed camp activity. 3.12 total slips are approved subject to LMCD approval of the increase from 8 to 12 slips. V. Nothing in this license shall confer upon any person for the benefit of any property any vested right to use Lake Minnetonka or the presiises in a manner permitted by this resolution, but the use of ^ke Minnetonka and the premises shall remain subject to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regulatory authorities shall deem necessary from time to time in the public interest. mm ■i ‘'j” *0 r- l-^*j<f Ot 1 Oi^M^o W- 3 S5 ■ *j^ci:,*‘®<*c4 Yo, Scnic fjftuu •iC,.*4.i;^^ £.kh'^T~ B 9) <S) ^ S) PoelC ht^t^y G»'*, Ou a/aS^ - /JC-^ •Ztio/i A>CJ I, '^ Pj*^ f - c. 4a / £ ( S*-^_ k it ,vfc ^ P:- ■P^- ^-'S- 'v',i , .... .*•<.' -'V- V . '.»-• <«. m;' (P:w ^ 6.4»^.<JE4 \ f .*-1* ’ ‘^\ \ mil^ #:n N. Ta/,^«dl! Uc72^<q/u<, (L^ S*1e. PlAjs; :z^;> >:.•• - .*..•• iVt;'"/^*..>.,iJiiS 'feii ■ RECtiVSO » DEC2 3I986 L.M.C.D. /ffl- »J> /ffa- 9* nil - gj> f911 -/2- dl^ f' t. ijJ^ 1 EJ mmm. ’^. ■ .. ‘V'•■■■'•' Ihl t*i¥l-Sx -/VP-IM /^fS ^ /f/A- /y^ /•f^7 - ^ /Jo p ^-I r. ci p c.C ^■^“•^fthc^ rr» ■i?- ■ ■m*' :A:_ }■■ r ■ 'jr - ■ ,, ■«. BM \.4^ ' v'.‘ ■?r ■ ■^v: K,'4v ‘S&-W>W^' hA^-i:'"'- ' o ;n r > (k e ^ ^)( ^ r. p • « p o ^ *’£? •!••.' ^-. 5: 0> 2P 0i > j» r VI O • ^ £ .•;+ Lew It o —i:o < s ^ ^ m m u 0 9 M i P- i •to -Kf^'M. a. ^ • C fA m < W-' ■r-J_f <1 n <;,'K-. ih.-'' f- ■••*.» J ** v> H*; ^ ^ • r * f L> ^•XP lA L-:'§.A- /•€^ a —^ A lA W 9 . A CL. 9 (^ E r c t % i> £ j n' - ? 1. 5 *:• - \ ^ ^ J 2». ^ S s ’ Jo» I-- (r • ^7T K-V'‘ • ' "••» "■■ ■ "IktrU-.--.' ■■ I 4^ M IP 5 >r» U* ;4- ?. ^ (• >c> /o’ i \ to S5»‘4#: ’^053^ O -4 19lriX3 Mai o on 7^ » • • ■ ' ’ u ?! ~a CD iq^ :i> :z M Cn !i i <S)r-■ >; \-1 a m 1 *><i; ? ( tp < :-' ■;i -1 m H 1 \ »;»a •1 :i:r i 2:■S15 (yi i (L. (A n JDk ft -rt !▼ • •c 3 ..■]•; 2 -0 ^ ’ 4 if c.... .«. ■ i^ -i'C ^ .-J ^ ,. rv^ 0 rn i ■ * - • _ V*'’!■ ■“': VL ■ <r'‘Wl‘'>' s? ' • h/ ^V I ":5'- 1^: iC’. m i i:S' ■?v I. I ■• I' :ri' I-' '■■' .• ^?'-; ■v^:- B.B.-:- . ■ W'.. • WB: ^.0.: m V ' ■ '*. K'-‘ [Si- ‘■T-i - :f.S'- :0i ?..• it CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 473-7357 LICENSE YEAR 19 92 (association) - - - 9 ''v l- i. ^ - ^ v/> JAM 2 1 1S82 ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE APPLICATION Pursuant to brono Municipal Code Section 5.42 *rrv Mr nrjnkin will Wt L/M4-'MW C r4/i“ C /" L jT • AMriMvA- CM I .XC-U • *,* i TC .*>rh‘f/iA a w'i ijw/v'vww» /*! i rrv/A ecifrurry ti "i) r "*n r V a V OCrCT&T^ T uAA:k' vnjj tluLkmAl I » # .‘riftM I c*Lf ^•••7vGi.*i r-nni ijAj Ti ~c*vv,'.i Kvx fiw Date Form Gent Ly Cicy SLaf 7 n n u 3. !T ’/10 0 2 'Jk/ imA Date Application Returned to City Fee Recived $By Employee Section 5.42 Sut^-'ision 2. LICENSE REQUIRED - It is unlawful for any Igroup or association of persons or families, more ' whether incorporated or not) to engage or participate in... :]oint use (of any lakesLre property) without first having obtained a license therefor from the City. PT FASE COMPLETE ALL ITEMS .AND SUBMIT SIGNED APPLICATION, REQUIRED LIcL.se APPLICATION FEE TO THE CITY CLERK BY JANUARY 31 OF THE LICENSE YEAR. ASSOCIATION INFORMATION 1. Association title or name (if any)L^J 2. Lake yi/^fA.w :> A'---------------------—— c La xIjv 1/ 3, Person responsible for this application: ^ -------Phone Si’ U Mailing aea.... i4<: ^ 4,'f ^ Relationship to 4»ec=or^<»ation / fP%4 Page 1 of 5 ..;v 'I'} \ I i ■•1 I .'I t,1 . -i' -.'t . l'. I- >r-.5. C:. fe' 6. S' ^y;- 'M-'m-m:-7. --V. r * m ■m-t 8. ^7Si •^v Association Is (check applicable iters): xmincorporated bcmeovne-^’ii group. incoiTDOrated Homeovner ’s Association- ^^^"unincorporated club or recreation group. Incorporated club or recreation group. Principal purpose of Joint use dock is (check applicable items): pxovlde boat ncoring and lake access for residential property, provide swiinming access, beach, or offshore dock. ^X^rovlde a club or association gathering place for activities. Dock la located on (check applicable item): one member's private property, easement or outlet ovned in common, property leased by the group/association. j^^*^roperty ovned by the group/association. List Dock location and ovnership information: street address t 1^0, X* legal property description PID # _________ listed property owner(s) Names of abutting lakeshore property owners: (North/West (Name + Address) Sottth/East) (Name + Address) Names of other affected property owners: s (Name + Address) (attach sheet if necessary) 2 of 5 M Sr^ :T"' ■■'i: r-r..; , '/*• •■] ?■ ■ ►>.'• '& HTh- lointly used dock is insured ty one of the following: Insurance Coverage - The joim:xy usea. nroperty owner ’s homeowner's policy. separate group/association ovned policy, list the following information: name of insured | ___T'Ar —\/ ^ putBg of insurance carrier of insurance agency .1^ C'*J policy no. (^p/<T/^r^ effective date of coverage //-/- s,„unt of coverage, Public liability, per parsoe, per occurence Public liability, per occurence t <^no ccG rUUXJ.Vi -V / - J V - Security and poUclng of the Jointly used dock and property is provide y (check applicable items): fencing.security lighting. j/property owner's presence. contract security service, other (specify) mCK INFORMATION 11. List Dock Use Area Specifications: width of shoreline, 3 ft. Length of main dock from shore, _7^ -o- Dock setbacks from aide property lines at shore, 12. Dock Construction (check applicable items). ft. and ft. ft. i U- #■ j^saasonal dock (relocated or replaced each year). _ _permanent piling vlth seasonal deck. _ permanent pliln*. and decking. l/ vooden decking. _metal decking. 13. List Dock Accessories: of firm extinguishers available at the dock ’'V*' f \_\jSTAT/0^ nUBUJa wx —— - W »nSb.r Of Ilf. preaarvers available at the dock 14. Llat n«-bar of allpa In each catego^ rallps" Includes boat lifts): V (day use) Off-Shore buoys Transient (day use on3.y) slips Transxen K 7 14 CO . Permanent moorage off-shore buoys .permanent msorage slips - -_• rennau Dry storage (rack) slips . t'ennancaw --------------- ^ '■« ^— . Maximum number of boats at the dock .. 15. ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ fI•r: P- h ; . I- A Ss.’ erdsioh and sedim ehtation cowtbol 16. ShoreUae is protected t>y (check applicable items): _ stone rip rap. _ vood seavall. _ oetal seavall. _ ly/giass a^ vegetation only, other (spe:ify)----------------------- Depth of VBter at shoreUne ft. out is at 100 ft. out Is 2 —* concrete seawall. 17. i ♦ M 7" IiqOIBEO ATTACaaffiNTS The following must accompany this application: A. none PLAN - ALL APPLICATIONSTXyZK PliftW - mrris-Li-»a....w..w A dock of all dLks! slips :i^%S:yr%'o1r-sSeef d^y sLra,e or other on-land functions are intended, these also should be shown on the plan. B. ,A/’r •H" ' m- UNINCORPORATED GROUPS OR ASSOCIATIONS , 1 ar^r^T'cacccos of all members and/or slip users.1 A list of the names and mailing addresses or aix ui«iul, operated under the same by-laws or agre^ent originally made in- - - - - - - (state year) and on file with the City. _ _ _ _ _Applicant's initials C.INCORPORATED CLUBS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1. A list of the names, mailing addresses and titles of a 2. corporation officers* A Statement as to the total number of members in the club or association. ^ members 3. . . A certlfiel”;py of the --- -/^rTe^pluc^:? Note: These copies are not required it ?„„n,.atinn and oxir joint use dock the followis, :™“/Lti:“r: Slor^ra:Lr«d%r'by-l.«. a. _____<s*«.m Applicant's initials Page 4 of 5 S X-■ ■ r- !>.. ■ -■ \.y. ■ fc:I ■■ = '^• l^v' '• i^. V)«* ‘ V- .#• s' V,; . . . D. ANNUAL LICENSE FEE - ALL APPLICATIONS Joint Use Dock License Application fee according to the current City Fee Schedule INITIAL APPLICATION PEE RENEWAL JOINT USE FEE, per year PLUS SLIP FEE for each permanent moorage slip, lift, dry stack, or buoy ______ slips § $2.00 each $ $20.00 TOTAL DUE THIS APPLICATION $ ^<9 ■ LATE FEE - Renewals Applications for renewal of licenses shall be made no later than January 31 of the license year. The City shall not accept renewal license appllcatipi^ received after January n unless t^ application is 'accompanied by a late fee of $25.00._ I REVIEW PROCEDURE When a complete application is received, the application will be ]^0viewed by the City Council and, in the case of new or unusual applicaitons, also by the Planning Commission and Marina Conunittee. The Council will pass upon the application after ccsnplete review. THE SUBJECT DOCK MAY BE INSTALLED AND/OR OPENED FOR USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCIL.1 Pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code, applicant hereby requests the Orono City Council^ J i Joint Use Dock License Application, and agrees and authorizes the City of Orono and the City's employees and agents to enter upon the property at any reasonable time to perform safety and code compliance inspections.i •I Signed Date^-/iI vA»' S®S.'af Page 5 of 5 .. r ■ f * ^ . . •* / . ♦ p%olet*^VuL^ t-%,^&UU 4^|t U.»€>c.k sH^ t*. ci ij 1 cs f ^ ^ D''*~i f ,ck ^r*b»ck ( S^«'o) vJ ® ^STv\ \ \ \ 4*:^v 'VwT ■7- 7 ;'; I (3 I '■!’ 'I%l/^fOC$. G/^ IrVl"^ ’s;ie. PlArJ " iV"c 3 / R£CtiV£0 # DEC 2 31986 L.M.C.D. ■•/. ,r /f?i' »J> ;ff®- /♦■>/ - «J> /{7^2 -/2- - /vi> f<t<f- /y/o flirt- /^ij- /jg j / p , O I* t> • 0^n?^ /) i:! Al'l a;;v4fci!'.. V. :V. iiii* . >-?7TV^.vww-r .■ #• -••*••••U"'« %il^.'V I ** > «• i *, »*. • » *••• .♦■• ••If • ^ >;•■•? •'• - •...........• • • ••!. . • >- — V' a. %m>' m: i. r .'l^'"'- :•• ;5? :*V . ' '*’ s. I i C I T N' I '''■ ORONC^ City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2802___________ A RBSOIDTIOH GRAHTHIG A CONDITIOHAL USE PERMIT PER municipal zoning code SECTION 10.31, SOBDIWSWH 3 (D) AND A VARIANCE TO SECTION 10.31# SUBDIVISION 11 FILE #1518 NHBRBAS, Alan Wisdorf, Governors, Big frry applicant") has an interes- in ^ the City of Orono thereinafter "City") and legally described as follows. see Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter ”the property"), and WHBRBAS. the ei?h*in'“"ht'eiirtin^o/eVn'lVt ll %^l ^f“-/Voundations instead of the pier foundations as proposed. HOW, THERBKORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono# Minnesota: FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1518 2. The property is A^^T^^Subdi°vis^ion^ the Zoning District. Per Section • facility will requirecurrent recreational use level of the facility wiix the following area allowances: 25 tent camp sites require 12.5 acres iar«“aSI?on”,a af^O user level requires 12 acres TOTAL AREA REQUIRED “29.5 acres Existing Acreage “ 57 acres 3. On April 16, 1990 the 0”"°/the application as proposed and recommenaea on the following findings: Page 1 of 5 11 H’ r City of ORONO CITY OF ORONO resolution of the city council NO. _ subject property. B) The proposed use will have no negative impact upon the neighboring property. 5U.“"=» s.“» ».5r=srw D) The proposed use will require no 31^ required standards sec forth in Section lO.Jir Subdivision 3 (D) for overnight camping us*-.. E) The City continues to receive no from the permanent or seasonal residents of ® since the camp reopened in 1988 for day recreation use. F) Pier foundation proposed with the 5 cabins is consistent with previously approved repairs to foundations of existing cabins at camp in 1987 and 1988. 4 The City Council finds that the conditions existing on u;iis property are peculiar to it and do not apply to other property in this ^air^nor pose avariance would not adversely affect light, , fire hazard or other danger to neighboring P^°P®J not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is to alleviate a difficulty; is necessary to preserve a ®“‘=’®“”Yn ^ the right of the applicant; and would spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensi of the City. 5. The City Council finds that granting a “^e permit for the construction of 5 cabins will not be detrimental to the health, safety or 9«n®J^ ^ pose a oublica would not adversely affect light, air nor fire hazard or other danger to neighboring the will it depreciate surrounding property . keepingpropoUd level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent- and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. %■ Page 2 of 5 [* i'!’iV■^ 4 .r. *' ’'k.• t • - •• •• -••.*•*IK !+5' ^ vi*r' cr" ■# I®-'-' 3--t.-y -=i ■- ■f€‘r City of OROJNO C ' n 'r ORONO"J RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2 802 rifcv Council has considered this application Siding the findings |ecommen^a^t^^^ applicant S£fec?‘Srthe'’"prlpcsed use on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLOSIOHS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or »»” "p^eV Mu^^i^pa"? City Council hereby grants a (D) to permit the Zoning Code expansion of overnight camp use at construction of 5 cabins ®^PLot n, and approves a variance propoLd where block foundations are required, subject to the following conditions: 2. All low lying ®2re“**Thit alea^'tTbt mtintaine'’dof the defined camp site area, this a^ea ^ in same manner throughout overnight camping season. 3. All 11 remaining buildings to remain secured as directed by the Orono Building Inspection Department. 4. All designated fire ^ sit^Plan^for'^Ove^rnight compliance• 5 Any changes in signage for the 1990 season must be approved by staff. No signage area can exceed 5 cabin. NO internal plumbing has been approved for the 5 cabins. The City does not recognize the 5 cabins as accessible to the handicapped. 8 Page 3 of 5 1 I. i ■t •u:w -iL. • m . % [ . .• CITY OF ORONC City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^^02 __________ m^ll cabins ^^S^^SubdivisioS^l^^^^ 10. Applicant is hereby ajvised^^h.t/f^.t^any existing septxc , inspection by the Orono staff, or failing upon the regular ^ shall cease that .all or th^5 cabW25 tent and immediately. i be reopened for public use recreational day use shall adeouate septic treatmentuntil applicant has ^"^tallei adequate septic^^ facilities to support sewage needs of the F 11. Authorities granted by ^®®°^pg^"ss^ive Su°r^i^"«rcised'£y tppUctti^n for a -%S?^?t^%"\he^Vpl=?af tSn^itirnrof tfJ tiroluli^on will expire on that date (May 14- 1991). 12 Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and “;dIiio^%":f this resolution -ca\\in*/mi^tV^^^^ misdemeanor. 13. The undersigned ®PP“|*^j^^/yp3plution "an1a'Vn° »e-|o%Td ^o°f ^^:trdfn^g”f thirr^riutfon^irrhe'chain "of title of the property May,^ 1990. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of ATT Dorothy r>7n Lv- <1 ^ 1 Aallin,' City Cle Property Ow5wijjerr (s) Jamds R.^ Grabek, /7.U (/ X Pace 4 of 5 f ' fe '' - : .b. v "-.V # %vtf* r> f . .,tr ka» • • • • ’-«> &<:.■ .-V :5l,--. /4>. 'r ,*^l- ‘•- V . 'V:l ■■•N, '4 i* "■^' 5^: . :.r • !«■'- i'P ' '■. ■' • City of OROINO C. f ^ V RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^S02 __________ ORONO STATE OP MIKHESOTA COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) ) ) The foregoing «• this 14th day of Citv of Orono, a Minnesota of the City. MsSw ^JlNNTOTA Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. On this day of •-. \l{ -199 0 said county F sona 1 Ty ' Jhu'C'atlv:\. a Rotary PublTc within and on behalf of the Boarfl/of 'LoveTn°“ ^ executed the knovm to me to be the person(s) °®f^ he (they) executed foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he itney; thf s^e as his (their) free act and dee^ oitfa/nof^s ^ I THERESA L. NAAS MnARV rUMJO - MMNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNiy^ly ■■ ™ ■ e e a 1 9"f-' 9^ my commission expires Page 5 of 5 ■iA -•• . ' X t - ■ y-r I ; ♦ 1.' ,S% \^'.yr M p|l’"5^-.ii%Wi-m RESOLUTION #t2802 Zoning File fl385 exhibit a |:Slon Tw«ty^~ <«),^ ^or^”’of\ot A, property*); ?:-r .^ JL m <. V ^ 1 >; • 1 Kr" ■Cr: r^• KJ S' J.'.v 'J i -;i ■ m ’ iv:. ; S kr ■|'fk-' It I-ff'r W:'. f'K:feI-' 0 It *vC’’li' ti*' St. ^J5; ■ ,kvt •5'«‘- !«.J t->-- Is-m ■}KS‘ 'k>, \iy .-i- u ;v> '.- '"•/%» To:Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator % Fromi Date: Subject: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator May 18, 1992 Shore land Ordinance - Response to DNR List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Proposed Letter of Response Exhibit B - Memo and Exhibits of April 8, 1992 Council will recall that the DNR's response to our Shoreland Ordinance requested additional justification in two areas: 1. Definition of "steep slope" at 18% versus DNR's 12% definition. 2.10' setback for lock boxes. On April 13th, Council dir "'■ed staff to review the background behind the City's 18% "steep SxOpe" definition and report back. Additionally, Council indicated that there clearly were some locations where a 10' lock box setback from the OHWL is not reasonable or feasible, and we should make this point to the DNR. Steep Slopes Until the recently enacted Shoreland Ordinance, Orono had no strict definition of steep slopes. In fact, references in the zoning or subdivision code regarding steep slopes until 1984 was limited to an additional building height allowance on lots of 25% slope or steeper. In April 1984 a new subdivision code went into effect, and within its definition section, "dry buildable land" was defined as excluding drainageways, flowage areas, flood plains, wetlands, marshland or slopes of 18% or greater. However, the only other reference in the subdivision chapter is a general section abo c the "character of the land", which <rlves Council discretion to find land to be "unsuitable for development" due to, among other things, steep slopes (but does not define "steep slopes"). While the 1980 Comprehensive Plan makes a few references to the preservation of slopes from both an aesthetic standpoint as well the need to maintain vegetation to limit erosion, there is no directive that slopes over a certain percentage will be considered as unbuildable. 8*. i Memo May 10, 1992 Page 2 The Hennepin County Soil Survey categorizes slopes at breakdowns of 0- 2%, 2-6%, 6-12%, 12-18%, 18-24%, and 24-35%. The soil survey does not Indicate that a specific slope percentage is necessarily limiting for development, but indici tes that construction costs and the need for more attention to grading and soil erosion protection become factors in the use of slopes for development as slope increases. Our 1978 Septic Code limited septic systems to slopes of 6-12% depending on the system type, and from 12-18% suggested the need for additional design consideration. However, the buildability of a lot using septic systems is not necessarily excluded merely because some portion of the lot is steeper than 18% slope. I have not been able to locate any concrete information as to why 18% was chosen as the boundary between buildable and nonbuildable land in the 1984 subdivision code. For unsewered property, if conforming septic sites are available, it can certainly be argued that it is technically feasible to construct a residence on a slope steeper than 18%, and adeguately protect the site from soil erosion and stability problems. Since 1984, staff has rarely if ever invoked the 18% slope dry buildable exclusion, and other than for dealing with septic systems, finds little justification for 1^ ' versus some other percentage slope. In the new Shoreland Ordinance, steep slopes are defined as lands having average slopes <^f 18% or greater as measured over horizontal distances of 50* or more, that are not bluffs. The DNR's proposed definition was primarily to deal with agricultural lands, and reads as follows: "Steep slope" means lands where agricultural activity or development is either not recommended or described as poorly suited due to slope steepness and the site's soil characteristics, as mapped and described in available county soil surveys or other technical reports, unless appropriate design and construction techniques and farming practices are used in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance. Where specific information is not available, steep slopes are lands having average slopes over 12%, as measured over horizontal distances of 50* or more, that are not bluffs. Since the agricultural references have little value to Orono, we just adopted the last sentence, changing 12% to 18% to fit our dry buildable" definition. Only five sections of the Shoreland Ordinance provide performance standards on steep slopes. These are attached as Exhibit C.^ These sections tend to place performance standards on certain activities on steep slopes, prohibit others, but generally do not entirely disallow development merely because of the steep topography. Jtoy^lS, 1992 Page 3 Because of this "reasonable control" rather than an outright prohibition# changing our steep slope definition to 12% to conform with the DNR will have little impact on our current regulatory practices• Concliieion Absent a concrete basis that supports 18% as the critical threshold between buildable and unbuildable land# and keeping in mind that the DNR's intent in limiting the use of steep slopes is to direct and regulate activities on those slopes rather than totally prohibit their development# it may be reasonable to accept 12%# for which the DNR feels there is a reasonable basis. water Oriented Accessory Structures DNR regarding this issue is contained in It®; The proposed response to the the attached draft letter. staff Reconmendation 1.Agree to revise the steep slope definition in the Shoreland Ordinance to 12% to be consistent with DNR standards. S?:2.Direct staff to forward to the DNR the attached letter which gives a basis for justification to require no lakeshore setback for lock boxes. Ilf' Bp- A’; * m ilt- \ M Is- ■ W £; ■r-Vv- .-ymy Wd r- May 18, 1992 Ms. Ceil Strauss, Area Hydrologist Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Metro Waters 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55106 Re: Shoreland Management Ordinance - Flexibility Request Dear Ms. Strauss: Thank you for letter of April 7, 1992 regarding our flexibility request. Specifically, you asked for explanation or justification for flexibility in two areas: 1. 2. Steep slope definition. Lock boxes in bluff and shore impact zones. Regarding the steep slope definition, after a review of our current codes and Comprehensive Plan, we find that there is little technical justification to support 18% as the threshold at which a slope becomes "steep ”. In assessing the number and impact of the Shoreland Regulations sections that reference steep slopes, it appears that revising our ordinance to meet your 12% standard will have little if any negative impact in developing our shoreland areas. Therefore, we would agree to revise the steep slope definition percentage to 12%. ■S/vS'--- - I Regarding lock boxes in bluff and shore impact zones, the following coBunents are provided as justification for requiring no lock box setback from the OHWL: .? A.At a maximum height of 4' and maximum footprint of 20 s.f., lock boxes will have only a minimal visual impact as viewed from the lake. I. I Ite ■ ■ 1 mm I.-Cv.1^0i'-. '•- • C'. :A' Mi';jy Ms. Ceil Strauss May 18, 1992 Page 2 B.The.concept of allowing a lock box at the shoreline was developed specifically for properties with stee[ banks at the lakeshore and little or no terrace area in_and of the OHWL. The intent was to allow boating equipment such as life jackets, paddles, water skis, etc. to be stored rather than lugged up and down a steep stairway after each outing. In such areas, where construction 10' back from the OHWL would often require excavation into the hillside, it was determined there would be less impact on the shore lands by not requiring a setback. C.Orono has specifically adopted more restrictive setbacks for General Development lakes than required by the DNR and has totally prohibited new "water oriented accessory structures" other than lock boxes within the shore setback zone. In effect, on each lakeshore property this eliminated the potential for a 250 s.f., 10' high structure located 10' back from the shoreline and merely allows a structure less than half the height and less than 1/10 the footprint area, but located at the shoreline. From a visual impact standpoint, the lock box is much less of an impact aesthetically, minimizes detrimental grading impacts into the shoreland banks, and limits the near shore hard surface area. Based on the above factors, the City of Orono again requests flexibility for lock boxes as a low impact water oriented accessory structure while concurrently prohibiting the much larger water oriented accessory structures with a significantly higher visual and environmental impact on the lake. Please contact me at 473-7357 if you have further questions regarding our request for flexibility. Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffron Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator MPG/ch cc:Ed Pick Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Adm. Ron Moorse, City Administrator City Council r. h.,.. firPj - ii 4-. Ivrr W-. r- t,’. fI >■ isr*'mp--. ^4i' I'I-I i.:.4 m i5;v'>„. M’m p’. p' wr- m -:- Mir Subd. 16. Shoreland Overlay District Standards. The Shoreland Overlay District Standards are in addition to the requirements set forth in Chapter 10 for the districts. In case of conflict, the most restrictive provision applies. G. Steep Slopes. Any applicant requesting a permit" for construction of sewage treatment systems, roads, (]fj,veways, structures, or ether improvements 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. I. Vegetation Alterations. 2. Intensive vegetation clearing within 75 feet of the shoreline and on steep slopes within the Shoreland Overlay District is prohibited. Limited clearing of shrubs and trees less than 6 inches in diameter and cutting, pruning and trisunlng of trees of any size is allowed to provide a view to the water from the principal dwelling site and to accomodate the placement of permitted stairways and landings, picnic areas, access paths, beach and watercraft access areas, and permitted lock boxes, provided that the screening of structures, vehicles or other facilities as viewed from the water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, is not substantially reduced. J. Topographic Alterations/Grading and Filling. 5. The following considerations and conditions must be adhered to during the issuance of construction permits, grading and filling permits, conditional use permits, variances and subdivision approvals; g. Plans to place fill or excavated material on steep slopes must be reviewed by the City Engineer for continued slope stability and must not create finished slopes of 30% or greater; N. 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 slopes or bluff impact zones. Steep slopes, shore setback zone and bluff impact zones shall be maintained in permanent vegetation. Subd. 18. Subdivision/Platting Provisions. A. Land Suitability. Each lot created through subdivision, including Planned Unit Developments or Planned Residential Developments authorized elsewhere in the Zoning and Platting 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 limitations for devel<'pment, severe erosion potential, steep topography, inadequate water supply or sewage 'treatment capabilities, near-shore aquatic conditions unsuitable for water- based recreation. Important fish and wildlife habitat, presence of significant historic sites, or any other feature of the natural land likely to be larmful to the health, safety or welfare of future residents of the proposed subdivision or of the community. r?‘V:t* ■ v' Tos I ■ '-f Fron: £1>ate: ; . k ‘ ,'-v^ i \ \ 1'. > • Subject: r,- ’iy i. ^!r:' #’■W: •a % 'syrft- &fe Y ‘*' •■' M'^’- IK'-:* ,r h: 3^- V • ift te- I- . ■ ■mI - V* „, ••r'-^,',i. 'I.' sfg.'.iiV-'. •. Cl'/' Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator April 8, 1992 Shoreland Ordinance - Response from DNR Attached is a letter rrom rne uwk requeauj-iiy auuj.uxv^iiaj. information regarding our definition of "steep slope" and the issue of lock boxes. Regarding Item Ir staff will research the background of our current ordinance and attempt to^ find some technical justification for our definition. Regarding Item 2, Council should consider whether the 10' setback for lock boxes is acceptable. If so, we could easily revise the ordinance to omit the need for flexibility in this section. Arguably, the only time when a 10* setback would not be possible is in a steep slope situation where there is not a 10' strip of flat area at the shoreline in which to construct a lock box. Staff Re dation 1. weeks. 2. r r ' *------------------------------------------------- - revised to require a 10' setback fromthe OHWL. 18% two 56, be r fV Isv 0* I fJ ,,W>Vlt -•V- i [Vtfc ■i#:-v- ■ |i' ■ vl'i' p-fc'" i. •iV‘-. / ‘.-■-'. ■ v^>- Ivv^. : ■S:'P ; V >rr>-,^v;; < j» 5 V“ Bi pfev-fo’-?4'--' ■m>- M STATE OF 1^ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES' ■'I 1 I PHONE NO. resE': ft' pi;t'f':'PR.pi' METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 55106rlLc NO772-7910 April 7, 1992 APR 8 1992 Mr. Nike Gaffron City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE: REVIEW OF SHORELAND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE, CITY OF ORONO, HENNEPIN COUNTY Dear Nr. Gaffron: Thank you for submitting the city of Orono's most current shoreland management ordinance. As you know, we have begun review of the ordinance for compliance with state standards. Your efforts to assist us in our review are appreciated. Additional explanation and/or justification is needed for the following flexibility requests addressed in your March 12, 1992 memo: 1.A. 2. Steep Slope Definition - Orono's current code defines steep slopes as those greater than 18% rather than 12%. Further justification is needed. For example, does the city have any technical studies or reports that support the use of 18% for the steep slope definition. 2.D.2. Lock Boxes in bluff and shore impact zones - It appears that the lock boxes, as defined by the Orono ordinance, would be a subset of the water oriented accessory structures that the city could allow. If the city required a 10 foot setback, no flexibility would l>e required. What is the justification for not requiring a 10 foot setback? We are in the process of doing a detailed review of the ordinance, and may have further questions in the future, however, the requested information should be forwarded t<^ this office as soon as it is available. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding this request. Sincerely, Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist cc: Ed Pick AN EQUAL OPPUf^TUNITY EMPLOYER S -h Stairways, landings, and lock boxes, — Itr4.r.; ►•ened ^£® leaf-on conditions.—ling sunnner, leat uw ^ _ thi.s section. Renainxiiy setback zone. _-i than the cen^ lots, except that .^®err the average buildings ®^^^\®andings , and lakes, and shall stairways, 11 apply only to line shall iS'JreS ?5'SSitt.ri... »• ,■;' *“^.•55ii^r JEr*.“S.SS?3S? £r.s?^“- “* T*^fildencs buildings onresiaen vioor Elevations.~^ All D Minimum Lowest FI °o/ Elevat^i^ons^^ ,t^uctures located .f ^lie^tion ^Subject to the flooc plaxn re,ul elevation co„sxstent^w.Jh^.^^ ordinance section. The tegnie-°ty ^ 10.SS, Subd. requirements of th !l,-ihin the Shoreland elevation shall ^ «+ructures constructed i -inaino basement. 7 of this code. All structure floor, flood overlay District shall have^thex^^^^ 'I’olain elevation as follows: ------------* 1. For lakes, by Pla=^|^th^l°;«^^ , level »t leas^®/t^ove^tte ^j^chever is higher. .„t above the Ordxnary Hxq ,..^eas.s. by placxn. Lowest fl< .^__g and streams, by placing the 2. For flood of record,at least 3 feet above the flooaIt 3 £een «ter-or^^ the greater than 2 0 :SUi£ied“il thir.ection shal l ^ inches in ^height. Such a i / All unplatted cemeteries ere automatically m Lufrs. ^ ^ 27* -surface Water-Oriented Cummercial^ ^ f business ' 28. -variance" 7 J^"\^""„i;„e‘'s"ota Tt^utes Cha^tll term. i» defined or descrxbed rn 62.*** 54 "Water-Oriented Accessory Stru^^^^^ 4ciUty- -,A -^^Vefc- easonably needs to oe Examples of sucn houses, b^ltbSu^es, garebos, screen houses. ^ 1 nd" - Shall have the same meaning as -^on 1^*5 zoning code.,fined in Sectron 10.55_______ section 10.53 • . . , this ordinance subd. 4. o^rtfe°’'p-^ric wattr bodies as ‘%^\flK^i^n rubd^^isf^ri^rthis ordinance. _ ^ .......... _a.n in subdivision / oi - public subd. 5. complianoe. 1hr.use,° si^z^e.^^We^/^f ofs\i«tr£o£lo«; the i« \“y ‘s?lJ^l-d rrn\;"t^;cutting of^ the terms :n^d^“her%“^--- regulations. ___________ zoningurns ----------- zoning Administrator i| subd. 6. =“^|'f“?“rktion and ®d$%”fro°rdlne»®®.oonsible for the administr of this Snance. Any violation of^its tequiremen s ( Ls section*" “T.:., 1 the Protected wateira •' . • • i'fj ^ -I*■-?■■» f •*V ’f. t. l- t. IKK-w ir >r- : '•f. S'. V- '"■yi y-\: r/ ' • . -;* * i- 't-K i . i .-. . ■-»■ i'- ■ CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. RBSOLDTION apfropriatioh op mohicipal state -aid ponds TO C.S.A.H. 15 WHBREASr it has been deemed advisable and necessary for the City of Orono to participate in the cost of a construction project located on C.S.A.H. 15 within the limits of said municipalityr and WHEREAS, said construction project has been approved by the Department of Highways and identified in its records as S.A.P. No. 152-020-06. HOW, THBREPORB, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota that we do hereby appropriate from our Municipal State-Aid Street Funds the s’ n of $165,253.00 to apply toward the construction of said project and request the Commissioner of Highways to approve this authorization. May, 1992. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 26th day of ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 1 of 1 ^ ■ - ■■ .j V^r 'V-' ■Vf'"- . :^'./vI,;./; ;^A- :m hc; ,‘v ■h. ii f# -tif:. w U ‘^ k ■Ic'fvfcy- b- 1^'hv r. .4-1 , h •,- .• ?.r-^ *0;^ Ml'hi # kirn: ■f l; ' ^•‘'v ■ F ^V' * '* fk. ’ 1 f f '- 'y* /I TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Ron-Moorse, City Administrator John R. Gerhardso'i, Public Works Director May 20, 1992 Speed Limit Posting East Long Lake Road ' V • ►* ' %cV In March 1992, the City of Orono requested Mn/DOT to conduct a speed survey on East Long Lake Road. Attach*, is correspondence from Mn/DOT of their recommendation. I have attached a resolution for posting the proper speed lim'*- for East Long Lake Road. I recommend approval the resolution. •t: : liiferv **I' t tk *f h'' m S-i.kV' fr ^■•: - iv' l\lyhp: 5^;. •• # ? >- - 't. ■t" r rl' ■t-' ‘1 fe: ?■■It m-: W---fc- li: S:fe; v‘ ,.A i"-,.. ky illi Ki:;'m. RESOLUTION # A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A 30 MILES PER HOUR SPEED LIMIT FOR EAST LONG LAKE ROAD WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal organization existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and WHEREAS, the City of Orono has reauested the Minnesota Department of Transportation to conduct a speed study on East Long Lake to determine the reasonable and safe speed limit and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has determined that 30 miles per hour is a safe and reasonable speed limit. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono does accept the recommendation of the Minnesota Department of Transportation for a safe and reasonable speed limit of 30 miles per hour on East Long Lake Road. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Orono City Council does hereby direct the Public Works Department to post 30 miles per hour speed limit signs as appropriate on East Long Lake Road. Adopted by the City Counci 1 of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held May 26, 1992. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Attest: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk I"-' - «»> - T:*:' 'j:.: i*'v Iv- » d<-*- srl ■T •> !*■' •,M‘- \ ; fi-'u',/ ’ V.fe- i'". -V-' r . ■ w- i- V'' :v; » ^ ''i • ^ •4 ^0ESoi. Minnesota Department of Transportation Transportation Building 395 John Ireland Boulevard Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 April 22, 1992 (612) 296-2950 Dorothy M. Hall in City Clerk Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Ms. Hallin: As requested by City Resolution No. 3101, dated March 23, 1992, attached is authorization to erect the appropriate signs designating the reasonable and safe speeds on East Long Lake Road. Please keep this authorization in your permanent files, we have our necessary copies. Erection of signs shall be in confc' ..ance with the 1991 Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Note the contingencies on the authorizations. These must be met before the regulatory speed limit signs are erected or changed. Miciuel J/ Assii I ♦ Sra, P.E. ice Director, Traffic Engineering cc: Joljn Gerhardson, Public Works Director (Transmittal Only) ctnt* if.;- • > ‘•V >" -i may ^ 6 1332 .'T. • • • -r • An Eifiial Of>portuuity Einj>tuycr - V r ^ * * ■ ‘•.'.f* ) - -T, r. "Jt'f• y’Stv*’ 1 ?i 1 %■ Dtpartmtnt of Transportatfon i. I .'■f- F ,=■■* • B ftF Wi'-iiS:’-' . iii:v TO; TO&-'mmm-fi- it?-' Metropolitan District Transportation Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Oakdale Office, 3485 Hadley Avemie^North. Oakdale, Minnesota 55128 c. Drive, Golden Valiev, Minnesota 55422Golden Valley Office!]5fl55"N0^ Lilacj j \_ —> —'Reply to ;5801 IXiluth Street, Golden Valley, m 554i Telephone No.______________________ April 2. 1992 A r' r> \ \6 1S92 John Gerhardson, Public Works Director City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323-0066 Re: Speed Zoning - City of Orono East Long Lake Road Dear Mr. Gerhardson: A speed zoning study has be^n completed for East Long Lake Road as requested by Orono City Council Resolution No. 3101 and your letter of March 27. Based on Investigation results and as discussed with you previously, we have recommended authorization of the following speed limit for East Long Lake Road: 30 mph - between the intersecton with Old Long Lake Road and the Intersection with Spring Hill Road This recommendation is currently being reviewed by our Office of Traffic Engineering in St Paul. As soon as the review has been completed, a formal speed limit authorization will be issued to Orono. Before posting the new speed limit the road should be reviewed to ensure that all needed signing Is in place, in good condition, and in conformance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Special attention should be given to the curve areas where warning signs with advisory speed plates might be needed to inform motorists of spot locations where the regulatory speed limit cannot be safely maintained. \/ MINNESOTA IMO Ail Equal Opportunity Employer - “ -h;M -5' ' V *tei triv fm ■•li'i-.;-,- ' It 'll:., m. '. 'fciix'm mCf: f f^^.:mm. ■m !si:s' ip;>; ^ aifWi; . John Gerhardson April 2, 1992 Page 2 A copy of the radar speed sample obtained for the East Long Lake Road study is enclosed for your information. If there are questions concerning either the speed data or our recommendations please contact Ed Brown at this office. Sincerely. / Robert E. Dixon \ Traffic Studies Supervisor RED:pl:EB % ...; 'ujiia i m-SP I «t at i o n FIELD SPEED SURVEY SHEET I To:Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator / Prom: Date: Subject: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Adfllinistrator May 18, 1992 ^ 4 « t ' fdtMetropolitan Council Rural Service Area 64/640 Summary %9 In 1991 the Metropr'< itan Council adopted new Rural Service Area policies for development outside the MUSA line. Approximately three-fourths of Orono's land area is outside the MUSA line. The Met Council intends to require comprehensive plan modifications from cities whose plans are inconsistent with the new rural policies. The key issue for Orono appears to be the rural density maximum of 1 unit per 10 acres, or 64 units per 640 acres. In the long rvn, if Orono doesn't comply with their guidelines, the type of sanctions which Met Council might employ could Include refusal to allow new connections to the Metropolitan Sewer System. List of Exhibits A B C Met Council 2/10/92 Memo 12/5/91 Policies for the Rural Service Area Notice and Agenda from 2/27/92 Forum Discussion The Met Council has for many years held to the concept that long-term development with septic systems should occur with a density no greater than 1 unit per 10 acres. With our 2 and 5 acre rural zoning districts, Orono already has just over 1100 residential units on 7400 non-lake acres outside the MUSA boundary. This yields an existing density of 1.5 units per 10 acres or an average lot size of 6.6 acres. At full development, which under the current slow growth rate could take 20 to 30 years or more, we would expect about 1800 rural units or 2.4 units per 10 acres (average lot size around 4 acres including wetlands). Met Council has indicated that communities should calculate the density section-by-secti.on throughout the City, excluding surface waters (lakes) and major metropolitan rights-of-way (Highway 12?). While the Met Council'would encourage clustering of residential development, their intent is to protect agricultural and environmentally sensitive lands, leaving open space that could be efficiently developed at higher densities in the future rather than at the present. They will encourage i nL, Am i Tr I h js- &!■. ' Vi’ r ■ ■;. Metropolitan Council Rural Service Area Policies - 64/640 May 18, 1992 Page 2 planning for "rural to urban transition" areas and they will support lethal efforts to prevent development that is incompatible or inefficient for future urbanization. However, they appear to be diametrically opposed to Orono's philosophy that development on 2 acre lots will adequately eliminate the need for future sewers and MUSA line extensions. None of this comes as a big surprise, the Met Council has been discussing 1 unit per 10 acres for many years. However, it appears that they intend to exert whatever limit^^d authority they might have in attempting to shape development as the metro area expands. Perhaps the most disturbing impression I got at the February 27 forum was that in areas such as Or io and North Oaks, which have 2 to 3 acre minimum lot sizes ana are slowly moving along the merry pathway of orderly development. Met Council would apparently attempt to limit any future density increases for sections which are already at the 64 per 640 density. Analyzing Orono's rural sections (Sections 2-11 and 25 - 36), only Sections 6, 9, 25, 29, 30 and 32 have not reached the 1 per 10 density, but they are very close to it. Overall, Orono currently is at a 1.5 unit per 10 acre density. Met Council apparently would eliminate additional density increases in those sections already at the limit, but might be wl i ling to allow the developed portions of those sections to develop at the 1 per 10 density. This all sounds pretty big brotherish; however, they do control the valve on the big sewer pipe that goes to Shakopee, I would encourage each Council member to read the December 5, 1991 amendments and the February 10, 1992 memo from Bob Overby regarding implementation of the new rural policy. We currently have a comprehensive plan amendment, including MUSA line revisions, before the Met Council, presented as a minor comprehensive plan amendment. This amendment does not include Stubbs Bay, which will have to be the subject of a future amendment, (and which does require additional flow into the MWCC interceptor), but does include the MUSA line amendment for the Long Lake sewer plant property, which th City has agreed to proceed with in a timely fashion. The Met Council planners have requestd a number of items of additional information, including breakdowns of sewer units between the Long Lake and Orono lift stations, estimated increase in sewered population and sewer construction by 5 year periods for the next 20 years and additional information regarding infiltration/inflow abatement. While they have not broached the issue of development densities, I would not be surprised if that ultimately enters into their review. Again, please read the attached information Isv F'b. 9.- 'V?: r1-‘ U I. ^i'.: la-’-Mr-- Pirfm.-. f.'[.'V 0m^-0^. bi-- f r>-: 0^?:v ’ nvC^'- ^0 ■ IS1st.. 0: b^;'- »».- ■ te"Iv i^:s: mM:- »^r v . > ii ^^■■:. ■6*v iSJ. rs^=- fe-'*-t ^ mi-mW:. H METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 E. Fifth St., St. Paul, MN 55101 612-291-6359 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: February 10, 1992 Metropolitan and Community Development Committee Research and Long Range Planning (Robert Overby) IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW RURAL POLICY INTRODUCTION On December 5, 1991, the Council amended the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework (MDEF) to include new policies for the rural service area of the region. The new policies became effective on the date of their adoption. The rural service area is that part of the region located outside of the metropolitan urban service area (MUSA) and not designated for commercial agriculture. The new rural policy affects townships cr cities that have areas in their communities that are in the Council’s rural service area, and affec.s counties which have authority (or an agreement with townships or cities) to plan and zone in t^e rural area of the county. The Council will hold a Planning Forum on Thursday, February 27th at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers. The forum will explain the policy changes and discuss how local governmental units should incorporate the new policies in their planning and zoning. A notice inviting local planning staff and consultants to attend the forum has been mailed. Along with the planning forum notice, the Council will send a copy of the new rural service area policies to all local governments in the rural service policy area. A second planning forum will be held sometime in May, and will address specific options for cluster developmer'. in the rural area. ISSUES The purpose of this memo is to '^xplain the following: 1.How will the Council review plan amendments ;'rom rural service area governmental units until metropolitan system policy plans are amended to reflect the uww rural policy? 2.What thresholds or criteria will the Council use to require a local government to modify a plan amendment that is not consistent with the new rural service area policy? NEW RURAL AREA POLICIES SUMMARY The new policy continues to uphold the basic rural density policy of one unit per 10 acres. However, many of the policy changes provide more options for local governments to use in their planning. There are two major changes that will affect how the Council reviews local plan amendments as they concern the rural area policy and metropolitan system plans. The first significant change is that the policy states that the Council may require communities to modify plans that are inconsistent with the new policies: The cumulative negative impacts of development that is inconsistent with the Counc.i's rural area policies may have a substantial impact on or constitute a substantial departure from metropolitan transportation and wastewater treatment systems plans. Therefore, the Council may require communities to modify comprehensive plans that are inconsistent with the [rural area] policies. .... J ... * *■ t- • *V'% r' This policy is a significant change from the old policy position, which did not connect the inconsisterc}’ of development under the rural area policy with system impact or substantial departure from system plans. The new policy states the Council's intention to require plan modifications from communities whose comprehensive plans are inconsistent with the new rural area policies. The second significant change is that the new policy explains that "some communities cannot comply with all of the Council ’s policies for the rural area because they have existing development patterm that are inconsistent with the policy" and provides a procedure and criteria for the Council to make exceptions to the policy where it may be warranted. This policy provides a means for the Council to recognize that some rural area communities have already allowed development at densities that exceed the Council's one unit per 10 acre standard. The policy also allov^ the Council to work with rhe community to negotiate an exception to the rural policy requirements. However, the Council will only allow the exception if the community's planning fits the criteria in the new policy. COUNCIL AUTHORITY T^e Metropolitan Land Planning Act (MLPA). Minn. Stat. §§ 473.85 1-473.872 (1990). requires that all local governments within the seven county metropolitan area must prepare comprehensive plans that are consistent vdth regional plans and policies. Local government comprehensive plans must be substantially consistent with the Council ’s metropolitan system plan policies and with the policies of the Councirs non-system pl^ns. pe MLPA requires the Council to review local plans for consistency with Council c..:icies. Section 473 175 of the MLPA provides that: The council shall review the comprehensive plans ot local governmental units... to determine their compatibility with each other and conformity with metropolitan system plans. The council shall review and comment on the apparent consistency of the comprehensive plans... w.th other adopted chapters of the metropolitan development guide. The council may require a local governmental unit to modify any comprehensive plan or part thereof which may have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure from metropolitan system j ins. The MDIF is not a metropolitan systems plan, but it is the key chapter of the Council ’s Metropolitan Development Guide. The new rural area policies will be referenced and incorporated into the systems plans when they are revised in 1993. Once the new rural policies are part of the systems plans, the Council then can use its authority under the MLPA to require local governments to modify their plans. * The Council will then send every local governmental unit in the region a metropolitan systems information statement that explains how the system plan has been revised and how those changes may affect that local governmental unit. Section 473.856 of the MLPA provides that local governments have nine months in which to decide whether they need to amend their local comprehensive plans to ensure continued conformity with metropolitan system plans. If a plan amendment is necessary the local government must prepare the amendment and submit it to the Council for review. _ '* *vV - ' -7";C"' H'"\ h. r ,t'- If’ I- % f Lp gf' # 'ikr i-..te--- li I t'fl. PLAN AMENDMENT REVIEW PROCESS The Council has established separate procedures for major and minor plan amendments. A major amendment is: (1) (2) (3) (4) A complete revision, update or rewrite of an existing comprehensive plan in its entirety; A substantial revision, update, rewrite or addition to a chapter or element of an existing comprehensive plan; An amendment triggered by a proposed development that requires an E. .W or EIS, and is inconsistent with the existing comprehensive plan; or A change (land trade or addition) in the urban service area involving 40 acres or more. The Council may require a local governmental unit to modify the amendment if the Council finds that the plan will have a substantial impact on, or contain a substantial departure from, metropolitan system plans. The local government cannot implement the proposed plan amendment until after the Council has concluded its review. A minor amendment is: any amendment other that a major amendment. Minor amendments wf.hout potential system impact or substantial departure are subject to a 60-day review and comment period for consistency with the Metropolitan Development Guide. The local government can implement the proposea plan amendment before the Council has concluded its review. ISSUE ANALYSIS How should the Council review local plan amendments, and what thresholds or criteria should the Council use to require plan modifications under the new rural service area policy? Minor plan amendments Minor plan amendments, by definition, lave no substantial impact or departure from metropolitan system plans. The Council ’s plan amendment guidelines permit the local government to implement the plan amendment before the Council ’s review is ended. If the amendment is consistent with Council policies, further review is usually waived; or if minor comments are necessary, it is sent directly to the Council ’s consent list. If an amendment is not consistent with the new rural area policy, staff would prepare advisory comments in a MCDC consent list report to explain the inconsistency. However, the local govern ent could still go ahead and implemeiu the plan amendment during the Council ’s review. Major plan amendments The following types of major plan amendments are most likely to raise issues relative to the new rural policy: requests for additions or changes to the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA); changes in rural area plans or policies; chs ges in the land use plan element; or changes in a sewer or transportation plan element If a major plan amendment is inconsistent with the new rural policies, the Council must determine whether or not it constitutes a substantial impa*.. on or departure from the current metropolitan system plans. If so, the Council may requite the locai governmental unit to modify the plan. i-i. \ * ;r'‘' t- a ^:v. 'f.;.5* li t • ** ;■•" ■ A', k U;- fe w The Council has mo5t ^'re^uently used the Vtem impact" criterion as the basis for requiring a community to modify us comprehensive plan. This has been narrowly interpreted to mean a direct impact on a regional facility, such as a highw or a sewer. However, the \fLPA does not limit the Counci! to managing growth only through tue system capacity/impact criterion; it also authorizes the Council to protect the metropolitan svstems from local policies which are not substantially consistent wjth metro system policies, therefore, the Council may require a pl<.n modification based on a "substantial departure" from a system plan even thougii the plan does not have a direct impact on the capacity of a metropolitan s\stem facility. A memorandum of 10/11/91 by Assistant Counsel Brian Ohm explains this broader interpretation of the MLPA. Although the Council uses the same guidelines and process for each plan amendment it receives. each plan amendment is unique and must be analyzed on a :ase-bv-case basis. If the amendment is inconsistent with the mral area policies, the Council will need to determine whether or not it represents a "substantial" departure from a system plan and if a modification should be required. Not every instance of inconsistency might be considered "substantial". For e.xample. a plan amendment that is in. onsistent with one very important policy or several less import, u aspects of the policy plan might be considered to be a substantial departure. Or. stated another way. a plan amendment that is consistent in every way except for one minor issue might not be considered a substantial departure from the plan. In such a case a community would not be required to modify the amendment. Until the system plans are revised, the Council must rely on the e.xisting systems plans in order to find a substantial departure or system impact. Tne revised system plans will include more detailed criteria to indicate a substantial departure related to the rural area policies. The following are examples of current system plan policies that the Council can use now to require modification of a local plan that is inconsistent with the new rural area policy: Policy 1-2 of the Council’s Wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan states that; On-site sewage disposal systems are appropriate to serve single-family residences at development densities of 4 units per 40 acres or less, if governments plan for them and adopt a management and control system consistent with federal and state laws and Metropolitan Council guidelines". The Council could use this sewer system policy to require a local government to modify its comprehensive plan in cases where the plan allows rural residential density greafer than four units per 40 a^s - even if there is no direct impact on a metropolitan sewer interceptor or treatment facility. The s^er policy plan requires the local community to adopt additional controls fc- managing on-site systems when the local plan allows residential densities greater than four units per 40 acres. If the Council determines that a plan modification is needed, then the local government must modify and adopt the revised plan and must adopt reviseo official controls (in this case, on-site ordinances) that are consistent with the modified plan. * Policy 12 of the Council’s Transportation Policy Plan ^;TPF) states that; The Metropolitan Council will work with the Minnesota Department of Transportation and local units of government to ensure the .metropolitan highway system and its supporting road system are built and designed to adequately serve travel demand to the extent possibh. to provide for the safety of users ana to minimize negative impacts on the environment. / ♦V t. >i-‘- "V-'.' '■'f?V.v 4:.''I ■'- S hi'' " ’ii-:.' k ■^~-m- m Strategy D of policy 12 states that; The Council will approve expansion of the urban service area... only when the state and/or the appropriate local unit of government demonstrate that adequate highway improvements will be provided when needed to avoid exceeding the capacity of the affected m^ropolitan highway. Strategy E of policy 12 states that "transportation facilities should be planned, designed and operated to function in a manner compatible with adjacent land use... . The Council could use policy 12 to require a plan modification in order to avoid a potential system impact, if the plan allowed development densities that would be inconsistent with the new rural policy. CONCLUSIONS Staff recommends that the Council use the following approaches for reviewing local comprehensive plan amendments under the new rural area policies: The changes in MDIF rural area policy do not mean that the Council may require all communities to update their plans to address the new rural area policies. However, communities may amend their plans if they wish to take advantage of some of the new policy options. Until the systems plans arc revised to reflect the new policies (L93 or thereafter), the decision to amend plans will be at the discretion of the local governments. This means that it will take several years before all communities adopt plans that comply with the new policies. In the period before the system plans are revised to reflect the new policies, the Council will -i^iew all major plan amendments to determine whether or not they may constitute a substantial impact on or departure from the currently adopted metropolian systems plans. If the Council uses its authority under the MLPA to require plan m<^'^.iications in such cases^ this action may accelerate local compliance with the new ^^olicies and ultimately would discourage additional development that is in conflict with the policies. After the metropolitan systems plans are revised, the Council will issue s^tems statements that will require local governments to amend their comprehensive plans if they are inconsistent Language will be added to the systems plans to reflect the rural area policies and to clearly indicate the criteria for determining whether or not a substantial impact or substantial departure may exist. ■ ■ '4;.r- .1 . i * < ■4 ,3 1 .4 __^ --W-f > M<^k V;- s» «ti: ' f-; mA 'Iplx-- I’f-M- MkMi. ’ t/?»t - mt-M w i. i.-S- ' -f p%f^' '"'S DM r> S rff- .i,u- w W&-k'^r ■;^- •. t* ■'A'.;--.- 4; m - m..kmtk-% 'r'v ■' V ' '' f ^-j>. ■ ! • V • f>;fe ; ■ *■ :il' ito?' r#£a mmm- isf- 1*^: 8»«f.. amendments TO *rny^ METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK (MDIF) POUCIES FOR THE RURAL SERVICE AREA Adopted December 5, 1991 MetropoUun Council Mean Park Centre 230 E Fifth Sl St. Paul. MN 55101 A.Publication No. 640*92-012 ;.,;'(;^t r«. : " -t ;5 ^•- . :■rngm -» r-. •!«"'1r . vn*' > '4 ter r-ix ii.’ mr^ Vm- ^'4Nir';v ■ AMENDMENTS TO THE METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK (MDIF) INTRODUCTION On the pages that follow arc amendments to the Metropolitan Development and Investment FmmewoHc (MDDF) that were adopted by the Metropolitan Council on December 5, 1991. The amendments affect three sections of the MDIF. New language is indicated by underlining. Language that was deleted from the MDIF is stricken (striokea). Pages 1-9 of the 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 contains the policy statements. Pages 10-14 are modifications to pages 33-35 of the MDIF section titled "Planning and Investment Procedures: the Council and Metropolitan Systems." This section gives direction for fiiture revisions of other chapters of the Metropolitan Development Guides in this case, the Wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan and the Transportation Policy Plan. A small change was also made to the section on parks which relates to the rural area. This change is being made now in order to incorporate policy direction from the recently adopted Regional Recreation Open Space Development GuidelPolicy Plan. It is consistent with discussi( of urban-generated uses, held in connection with the rural policy study. Pages 15-16 are two new appendices to the MDIF. The first is "Criteria for Council Approval of Local Plans That Arc 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 Dau Center. 230 E Fifth St., St Paul, MN 55101; telephone 291-8140. The MDIF costs $5; the other <k)cumeots are free. Questions about the policy amendments should be directed to Anne Hurlburt of the Council staff, 291-6501. L • W ■ ^ . 1/ ■ ■ ■■mm . i f* M ... te.. t- '.-•i If' ¥■ ••4 H I"tfVC MIII'r-' fe -^■JCvVV P-Url' wm. |lvtf ^ AMENDMENTS TO THE METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK (MDIF) PART ONE MDIF, Page 22-25 RURAL SERVICE AREA Tlie focm of thg rnuncil’t trowth-manaoemein tiraiegv of encourngine growh within an urban .ran reauirB «« ncenmnanving policy that limits growth in Ihe niral area. Extensive nnt take advantage of regional inv estments thyt have been made in the Mrt>an $c.rvice ar?a^ service area contributes iQ yrt>an sprawj ^n4 .IPcreases the cosis nf servicea. Some services that require higher concentrations of people tq t>e cost-effective, such «« transit, may become prohibitivdv expensive. Development in the rural area also results in demand for locnl semens, and pan chany t.bs rharRcter of While existing service levels mav be low, new resid«?nts are hkelv IQ demand additional services. Development can result in erosion of the natural and man-made e^ronmen^^^^ in the first place. Conflicts often develop between ne^ emirban residents and residents who depend on agriculture for all or part of their livelihoods. nevelQomept in the rural area can have adverse impacts on the quality of the natunil envifonment- Pmtectiny and maintaining the qualify of surface water and groundwater is a.jcp if^neem of the Council. While technological advances have improved on-site, sewage di^pQsjj Evstems. their proper installation and maintenance is still a critical cpng^rCL ntinn ti that agriculture and other rural activities are onlv temporary_la.nd the he developed. Most of the rural area will not be needed for ufban development in the lorcseeal permanent land usei in th^:ie 8rC9s, th^ r^n there ^vill be a need to emand the urban service area in^9 som^ are?}.thai niral. notential rctjonal. as well as local, impacts from IMPPrQPn^te. are buiisiitiT luiai. « wf hg needed to expand the urban servic e area. If ire urban service areas before development occur?, U ,isnot Dlflil tor Lncir iiimic uruon — poMihle that land uses and develonnicnt patterns mvf inter l?l0Ck thg ggntigyovtf. yfficignt-afld ^t-effective extension of local and regional urban >cfvice$^ 1 J yf Vi' ft'*-- r : ''. h-:- •s ^ ■ '.-i. § fel l! .. ft-ilf'' .'M: T ^ Ift W-' ft: ^r^l? .;■ ,.-r'/r- t ' .r‘(*' M' ‘‘ft,- r:ft'i ■■. ■ p • , Ip": ■ - ^vftSvi-r fal«' ‘a?’' The cumulative negative impacts of development that is inconsistent with the CounciTs rural area policies may have a substantial impact on or constitute a substantial departure from metronoh'tnn transportation and wastewater treatment systems 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 Councir policies for the rural area because thev have existing development patterns that are inconsistent with the policy. In the oast, the Council has found these plans to be inconsistent with regional policies, bui has not provided a procedure for maldny exceptions .to the policy where it mav be warranted. Criteria for Council approval of inconsistent clans are provided in an appendix to this document. Commercial Agricultural Aren The commercial agricultural area includes those lands certified by local governments as eligible for agricultural preserves under the 1980 Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Act. This approach places the responsibility for defining 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 arer. is large, covering about 600,000 acres in 498^1990. 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 process. 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 reporting year required under the Agricultural Preserves Act. Under the Agricultural Preserves Act, a local government passes a resolution certifying land eligible 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 Preserves Act provides protection for the farmer from urban assessments, property taxes at development v.-^iue 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 eli^le Cor the agriculture preserves program. However, the Gsuncil recognizes two levels of ■ protection in the commercial agricultural area: primary and secondary protection areas. Primaiy 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 forming has been established. .S'. - ft/.ft:-" ■ ; ■ -■ A/' M i. .*;v ■r,>v K- ;^V. fi.-. ■U •? ! /I ' ■**«•, I'- “ :f^ ■ fi K'r ’ -.* »■h. :?P ■§& P" % »i -^' :-•< ‘W y. :vS' y*: IfK- .... * Secondary protection areas cover the farms in the area that have not yet fefmed-been covenanted 22 agricultural preserves. The Council believcj the commercial agriculture area is a place where agriculture is the best permanent use of the land. Long-term investments in farm equipment and in land preservation can be made with the confidence that urban development is not going to destroy or limit these investments. General Rural Use Area The general rural use area is the area outside the urban service area that is not designated for cominercial agriculture. Over 40 percent of the land in the Metropolitan Area falls in this categoiy. The area contains a wide variety of land uses, including agricultural, residential and urban-type facilities. There are sizable parts of the general rural use area that host no particular kind of land use-land that is often called unused. Most of the area looks 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. fftict within the general rural use Qrea» General Farmland A large part of the general rural use area is devoted to agriculture. The Council supports the continuation 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 st«t-ue for the agriculture preserves program, the Council will reclassify them as part of the commercial agricultural area. Rural Residential E)evelopment s%w*« »wiw.atial development consists of homes' on large lots may be an appropriate land. ,u^_in areas that are hilly, wooded or otherwise unsuited to agricultural production. The Council iiral rtfidantiol daiulopmant ii parmonant land use and not an -rnrly 'w The Council supports this type of use as long as the density does not exceed on.o housing * .t per 10 acres of land. The Council will compute rural residential density on the basis of jt40-acre parcels square mile or section based on the public land survey). This will prevent excessive clustering of a large number of homes on small nunimuin loij lhat ciioc, b^ iithin tht ^nrall rltnitl] nap Thr C-—^pp"*** ri..rr«rifyt hmr-uirm it could result in the need for urban services, such as package sewarggs disposal systems. Some communities in the rural area have significant land area in Public P?rlff ?.hd 9P?n ?p?ce ^ or wetlands that are legally restricted from dev elQoment. Others have protected !arge? Qi agricultural land bv designating it part of the commercial agricvltyniJ ?rW. Th? r-«^wmbe thta when it aonlies the density policy. Lower densities in areas restnet^ ffOm dewelonment mav be balance higher densities in sections, without SUCh ded [1 pot result in excessive clustering that would create demands for services (sucfl-M lewef and water systems, storm sewers, roads and other urban services'! not typically needed ill t M"r 'i! * /[B’ .;.-v>:- ”■ •■ A&ii “lural developments. The only areas that will be excluded from this calculation are surface wnter and major metropolitan highway rights-of-wav. The Council encouraf?es communities to implement the density standard through clustering where appropriate and cdhsistent with local olanniny objectives. Implementing the density standard as a 10»acre minimum lot size is simple to administer, but mav result in an inefficient development pattern and in more land removed from aipicultural production than if smaller lot sizes are used Qusteriny mav aid in adapting the density policy to the diverse character of the landscape. Some areas have lakes, wetlands, wildlife areas, large areas of public lands or difTicuU soil conditions that make clustering more desirabhe. Other areas have good agricultural land that can be protected through clustering, and >jsed to balance the density of development on areas less suited to agriculture. The Council does not recommend a minimum lot size. Lot sizes in the general rural use area should be determined bv performance standards. At a minimum, they shall ensure at least two sewage disposal drainfields on each site, a primary drainfield and a replacement should the original system fail. All residential development in the general rural use area must be subject to the standards for proper design, location, installation, maintenance and on-igoing monitonng provided bv the Councirs Wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan to ensure against negative impacts on the environment and the metropolitan wastewater treatment system. Existing Urban-D'^nsity Development Residential subdivisions^ mobile home parks and clusters of moderate-density residential development also exist in the general rural use area. They 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 development in the g eneral rural use area consistent with setvicc levels appropriate for a-fufal-afear Local governments with existing urban density development should address the operation and maintenance issues of on-site systems to avoid potential problems and the eventual need for costly local investments. Urban-Generated Uses Many facilities exist in the general rtiral use area that require isolated and spacious locations but may 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 fKilities, gun clubs, festivals, mining sites and similar facilities, and are usually public or ouasi-public in nature. The general rural use area is an appropriate location for these facilities. The Coundl's interest is that these facilities are provided with adequate public services adeeuoteiy MMd, consistent with local and regional plans, and to the extent possible, that they do not interfere with agricultural activities. Otto Land Vwi In addition to africulture. single-family residential de\-^lopment. existing development and urban ited uses, there are other land uses that mav be appropriate in the general niral use area. lether or not a land use is appropriate depends on whether it is consistent with local and m -"“Cl : ^ Vir^'r :v V * !■; f.. w. Fv ■/ I-IH: t‘.w.i"& ■ S- " ' V ' ‘r- ;.v \4-il: i • • regional plans and if it meets all environmental quality strndards. An appropriate land use would not require urban-level support semces (such as highways, transit or sewers). Uses should be of n «cale compatible with the servicea available and the need to serve local market demands. To the extent nossibte. they should not interfere with agricultural activities. QQg_^gtg££^y_n£Jagd uses that mav be appropriate in the rurol are:' is ncH^hborhood convenience 3 grocery store or gasoline station. If it is of an appropriate scale to serve locaj reaidents and does not ..eed urban sewers or highways, it may be appropriate in the general rural use area. Even though a particular land use mav be acceptable from a regional perspective, the Council will r^rninmend that every community provide for every possibl e land use in its rural area if it would not be consistent with local plans. Each community must determine whether particular land uses would be compatible wifh existing uses, local standards and the goals of the community,. All uses would be subject to anv local, regional or state pennitting or licensing requirements,. Examples of uses that mav be acceptable are included in an appendix to this dpcument. Lot sizes for all land uses should be determined bv performance standards. At a minimum, thev should ensure at j^ast two sewage disposal drainfields on each site, a primary drainfieid and a replacement should the original system fail All development in the general rural use area musj be subject to the standards for proper design, location, installation, maintenance and on-gping monit or mg provided bv the CounciTs Wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan to ensure ayainsT .leizative impacts on the environment and the metropolitan wastewater treatment system. Rural Centers Rural centers historically have ser%'ed as retail service centers and transportation centers for the surrounding rural area. However, changes in agriculture and rapid urban e.xpansion have changed 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 of available labor in rural areas and, by their nature, tend not to be dependent on close contact with other firros for their supplies or critically dependent on transportation. The Council has identified 35 rural centers, with populations ranging from j*jst over 100 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, are 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 of convenience retail stores, while others have only a bar or gas station. Some have small manufacturing or service businesses; others arc 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. Ru.al locations in the past decade have been attractive and some, although not all, communities have experienced an upsurge in growth, principally residential developmenL Development trends are down from the highs noted in the early 1970s but continue at modest levels into the 1980s. ,r- r i.I' S-'V. f: . I, I'- uf t- K' r.. t. if /t 1-^'-m: iij" Several services are important in adequately serving additional rural center development, but sewage disposal Is the most critical. Urban-density development in an unsewered rural center poses the risks of on-site sewage system failure, contamination of groundwater and eventually the expense of new on-site or central sewer system installation. The possibility also exists that remedying 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 development poses service problems and may, at a later date, result in very high local service costs. The Council proposes a strategy that offers local government an alternative way to structure this development by designating and creating a "rural center." These new centers would be limited enclaves for urban-density land uses, facilities and services within the local governments’ broader corporate jurisdictional boundaries. They would not be coterminous with the entire oorporote 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 Financing of necessary support services would be a local responsibility. Areas of existing urban-density uses 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 services in a staged, contiguous manner. Residential, commercial and industrial development at urban densities should be accommodated only in rural centers with central sanitary sewers that are meeting state and federal water quality standards. Larger projects should be located in freestanding growth centers that have a full range of services. Rural-to-Urban Transition Planning Rural-to-urban transition areas are areas that may eventually be needed for expansion of the urban service area but are currently part of the rural service area. While these areas will not be considered a separate regional ooliev area, the Gjuncil encourages local governments to plan for potential expansions of the urban service area in their comt)rehensive plans. Qimmunities nlannlnp for transition areas should consider land characteristics (such as soils, wetlands, watershed boundaries, agricultural soil capability^ existing land use and development patterns, the transportation system, and long-ranw plans for expansion of local and jcaonfll j^ i ivateini. Transition areas should fetierallv 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 wish es 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 lc«I residential devriopment or africultural uses. whk:h preserves large parcels intact until they can be subdivided into small lots and provided with urban services. If residential subdivisions are permitted, clustering should be encouraged. The large parcels remaining mav later be efficiently 1■ .'J !■:it► m-.^w ^•/ y»v rv'- i"" '•:S-f'It-:- ■•'i? i- iiff. te-I.;- :•:•.■ m, ►>'•n- 'V. *^;. tf:- g=- p'" in-p:>;l: - Ks:te reaubdivide^, an^ % smaller, clustered lots can be more economically provided with ser/ices or bypassed if necestanr. Local governments should use caution in implementine "ghost platting" or similar methods for subdividmg land idto larg^ with the intention of rcsubdividine them when services are to be pfovided. Reaubdivision and installing utilities in existing subdivisions can be a very difficult and i^ult in hiyher costs. The development pattern established mav not be appropriate fl£jjjgflyable when the area is incorporated into the urban service area. yriwmments mav also want tn consider whether the land uses permitted in transition areas would discourage or prevent urbanization in the future. For exampte. a use that requir.es a snacious. isolated location should probably not be located where it is likely to be surrounded bv incompatible urban development in the future. The Council will 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.or iq any time frame for expansion of seivices bevond the urbaji service area, .Jb<r CoMndUajl continue to aoplv its policies and criteria for expansion of the urban service areti hen a regional need has been demonstrated. The Council will support local efforts to prevent cj/elofiment m 1 latible with future urbanization. The Cbuncil will examine the need to plan for rural-to-urban transition areas in its metropoljtan systems plans. Local plans will be considered but will not determine the transition are_ns designated for regional purposes. IL RURAL SERVICE AREA POLICIES The Metropolitan Council does not support extensive development outside the urban service area because It can lead to the premature expansion of local and reaional services, and fails to take advantage of regional Investments that have been made in .the urban service area. The cumulative negative Impacts of development that Is Inconsistent tum nipiii nrM nnlicits ipflv hav* a substantial Impact on or constitute a politan transportation and wastewater treatmentlOi: pllinSa UEffiLliBLS^XP^ l^oiincil niaT w ■■■i#vaiav comprehensive plans that arc Inconsistent with the policies. The Council wjU consider esceptions to the noHdes for local novemments that cannot meet the policies because of existing subdivtslons or land development. Commercial Africnltural Area l?|. The Metropolitan Council supports the long-term continuation of agriculture in the rural service am. The Council will use the following ranking In decisions to accommodate fhcilitics serving urban residents. 1.Primary protection area: land covenanted in agriculture preseTO will receive primary protection. Urban facilities should be prohibited in this area unless there H. ip :i- ft ft? . 1^p' I is strong documentation that no other locations in the Metropohtan Area can adequately meet the siting and selection criteria. Secondary protection area: lands certified but not presently in agricultural preserves will receive a level of protection secondary to agricultural preserves. 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 m9A. The Metropolitan Council supports long>tenn pioservation of agricultural land in the general rural use area. However, the Council will also support residential development at densities of no more than one unit per 10 acres computed on a ^0*acre basis (a maximum of sixty four units per 40 acres square mile based on the onbiic land survey). The Council will allow land area in public parks or open space, wetlan^^ |hnt are legally restricted from development, and agricultural land that has been desiT"«tgd ns port of the commercial agricultural area to be used to hiohi>r densities In sections without such limitations, provided that It would not lesnlt in exc^^w clneferina that would created demands for urban sendees. The only areas that will he excluded from this calculation are surface water and major metropolitan highway rights-of«wny. The Council encourages clustering of residential development which will result In a more efficient dt-velooreent pattern and help to protect agricultural and environmentally sensitive lands. Lot sixes In the general rural use area should be determined by performance standards. At a minimum, they shall ensure at least tv sewage disposal dminflelds on each site, a primary drainfleld and a replacement should the original system fail. 19C The Council will not extend metropolitan systems to serve urban*densiiy residential development In the general rural use area. Where urban-density development already txistSy a local government should address service issues in its plan, particularly on-site sewer system operation and maintenance. 19D.In addition to agriculture, sinele family residential development, existing development and urban-eenerated uses, the Council will support other land uses in the g eneral rural nse area, provided that they are tir XI 1' .d:tnl quality standards, not require urban-level serve local market demands. To the oaricultural activities. t possible they should not Interfere with Rural Centers The MetiPpoUtan Coondl will support a rural center’s plans to accommodate additional growth'iNmvided th^ are consistent with the center’s ability to finance and administer services^ poiticulariy sewer service. The Council supports rural center service Improvenmnts but not at regional expense. 8 •4. o'‘'- ’■\i$fr''I#IS*--r" k'- 1^;? u. il.. ft'-J./.; • ■■ • • 210. ■\ . The Council will support a local government’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 service ini|stments. Rural«to»Urfaan Transition Planning 22*le Metronoiltnn Council will encourage local governments to plan for ruml-to-urban msltfan areas In their comprehensive pla ns, and will support locaLefrortS to prtyeni develooinent Incompatible with ftiture urbanisation. The Council wUl not commit to the slow of metropolitan services to serve the area until such time as there Is a demonstrated, regional need to expand the urban service area In acc ordance with eatnbllahed Council policies and criteria. Local plans will be considered but will not determine transition areas designated for rerional purposes. t ■‘1 n 6 k-\JP- : '1 if PART TWO MDIF, Page 33-35 PLAiWlNG AND Em:STMENT PROCEDURES: THE COUNCIL AND METROPOLITAN SYSTEMS The Metropolitan Council is concerned with managing metropolit^ systems in ways that will help realize the objectives for 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 Council is committed to providing regional services and facilities within the urban service area. Ifowever, the Council will not support development of facilities substantially in excess of forecasted need. The challenge to the Council and commissions is to find the middle ground between overbuilding and undersizing essential facilities. Some farilities that deliver services to the urban service area will have to be physically located 'vithin 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 connections. For example, solid waste landfills with requiren?ents for large acreages will likely be located in the rural service area; sand and gravel extraction and regional parks depend on the location of the resource and often occur in the rural service area; and highways, power lines and pipelines that tie this region to other parts of the state 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 settlement 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 provice 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 the uciional 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 area receiving regional sewer service, the Council will determine regional service allocations for sewer flow using the same procedures that are used for other communities located within the metropolitan urban service area. l:. i • Va [v. r . * ly-f; y K t A - >4 p ;< Ir •:v ;.»i A t :). tv. "v ?> ih- uy,* V M Wj- |rV.fe''U:''V4: (^miQil vvill assure the continuation of service adequate to meet the needs of development currently receiving regional sewer service. In order to meet this commitment, the Council emphasizes the need to monitor the condition of older sewers and sewers with a history 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 systems. The Council will establish standards for on-site sewage disposal systems in the rural area to gmun^ater and the health of rural area residents, and to prevent the need for mSmature ^ the regional sewer system. All elements of the Minnesota Pollution Cf?ntrQl Agency standards for on-site sewaye disposal syste ms should be followed in all areas. All gnmmunitiea shall require at least two sewage-disoosal drainfields to be located on each building site, a orimarv drainfield and a replacement should the original system fad. &tggpt in thg commercial agricultural area, all facets of the Councirs standards fpr the PfQpcr {««»annftnn maintenance and on-going monitoring of on-site systems should also be adop^gd._11 lg r^nncil will require all communities to certify that they have met these standards pngr to flonroval of local comprehensive clan amendments or making favorable recommendatjQnS. 10 1-1:1 The Council will review its existing policies concerning community on-site sewage disposal system s and nackase treatment plants in the rural area in light of the Council s policy to encouragg 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 rural water supplies mav be necessary to detect pollution from on-site sewage disposal systems. Pl«nnin« for the metropolitan sewr »wwm thovid <?n nn..iri,, the urban Mrvice are»: snecificallv. impacu on the wmte availability g hajis rSAO. and the undep«e nf metropolitan sewer facilities. Planning for the metropolitan sewer syste m should also consider how local cpmprehepsjv? sewer plans should ruraUto-urban transition areas, and protect them from incompatible jppgj^ppient that mav later block the efficient extension of the sewer system. TraDsportatkm MetropoUtao highway improvements will be planned and developed to serve the needs of residentt in the urban service area, including the freestanding p)wth centers. Highways wUl 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 hifhway service will continue to exist in the urban service area due to travel behavior, devUipment patterns and the nature of highwys facUities. but efforts will he made to provide a reasonable level of metropolitan highway service throughout the urban service area. .Vf- . A . a p- . f r r;f m- W«-mipEr-; s4’''S' '4'Jvh >. •; The Council influences metropolitan highway development in a variety of ways. The Minnesota 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 policymaJdhg and project planning in virtually ail 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 Intentate Substitution funding priorities, which are set by local elected oflicials acting through the Council’s Transportation Advisory Board. Highway planning is very important because the ability of people to take advantage of the opportunities the area offers and acquiring essential goods and services depend on having a good highwrqr 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. Trafflc 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 are proposed that differ substantially from assumptions made in the regional transportation plaiL Implementing traffic management strategies for metropolitan highways is a state or regional responsibility that frequently has direct or indirect implications for local systems. Local 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 hi^iway planning. The Council recognizes the importance of outstate connections, particularly for economic developmentand will a| iway 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 jrreater than the policy except where an exception has been approved according to the guidelines of the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework. Hlyfawav planning must also consider the rural-to«urban transition areas, and how riyhts-of-wav for the mtem of principal and minor arterials that will be needed in the future should be protected from incompatible developmenL a |tr-'f>i'; k' »r-=f; ••* i;' r . ^i?' :|i- FV- c. ■a'I'. s’. Ifx px\ S' V'^r 8?! L'Sj- f • g’.w-^- fe‘ I' i- «:■fe'*‘fe®!' |kii- M Eoip:: ;i>’. ■ fe;: P-.ff iV;‘'fei i^r 1= % ^Kt'i^m- w.' •••. ■ Buses operating on streets and highways wiU probably dominate public transit service through the remainder of the century. This does not preclude the introduction of some fixed-guideway facilities in heavily traveled corridors, but costs and time constraints work against a massive shift in form over the n^t 15 years. Nevertheless, the Council will continue to seek creative, forward- looking solutions to transit service problems. LocaUons with large numbers of households and/or high employment in relatively small areas offer good potential for pubUc 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 wiU 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 who live in low-density areas or cannot use the public system. Regularly scheduled regional traiuit 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 planning for the special mobility needs of elderly and handicapped people in the rural service area or for the use of public funds specially appropriated for this purpose. Transit planning will take into accouru the cost of providing transit semces to low-density ajeas^ and how that mav change over time as transit-dependent populations increase in these areas. Planning for highways and transit should consider the relationships among transportation needs, population densities and the provision of human services including.public schools, health and social services, employment opportunities and emergency services. Parks The regional parks and open space system includes facilities in both the urban and rural service 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 develop^ 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 numben of use^ wi|| g^n^ralW pcgPI in the urban service araa- unless the demands cannot be adequately met. If it is n?ceS^?ry.tQ ‘ I such facilities in the rural service area, adequate support sepgce^ such as yp^ids and mmtbe • • j S Airports Every effort will be made to get the maximum use out of the existing airport system, consistent with the Council’s airport policy plan. This is especiaUy important for the "major" arid •intermediate" airports, aU of which are located in the urban service area. The» faciUtica should continue to operate and to operate safely even if it requires substantia! upgrading of existing facilities and modifications or controls on nearby land uses and development proposals. Land use Hi; ------------- I .'y mi compatibility is critical to ensure future as well as current adequate operations at the regional airports. If a new "minor" ai^rt site is needed, lands in the commercial agricultural area as defined in this document should be avoided. In addition, the only facilities developed on or adjacent to the airport should be those directly involved with making it useable and safe. Other Area Systems This framework focuses on the four metropolitan systems of sewers, transportation, regional parks and airports because the Gjuncil has special obligations and responsibilities for them under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act Under the Waste Management Act, the Cou* il’s solid waste program has the same status in many respcxts as the four metropolitan systems and will receive the same level of protection as those systems. However. The Council also has planning responsibilities for several other systems that serve the residenL of the Metropolitan Area. Currently, the Council has adopt^ plans dealing with housing, health, surface water management, juvenile justice and water resources, as well as major position papers on the aging, arts and development disabilities. All of these planning documents and the programs associated with them contribute to metropolitan resource management. The Council must direct attention to the impact of this framework and metropolitan system plans on these other area plans and programs, as well as the extent to which the other plans and programs modify the development and investment framework 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. For 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 of forecasts; b) accountability to Council legislative mandates; c) concern with orderly and economic development; d) adherence to the same process of regional planning and decision-making; and e) reliance on the area's population for most of their financial support. ’iV'-- :»>■ i «t’sSiSr’'. Ill'll ^ ^ - - - ■ ■ , i# I Uf k' ilk I ■' ■!s f - r'v fi>\fe; ‘ nji ifc'-' #.:■• ;^;.v 'i •**t,- m m . . •• » - < ■fc-" 1*1;-If PART THREE MDIF, Appendices Anntndte rrfteria for r<mncH Approval of Local Plans that are Inconsistent with MDTF Rural Area Policies finmB communitiM in the rural area have existing develooment patterns that are in<^n$i$tent with r^uncil Doiicv. Soedficallv. some communities have Rlreadv develoDed at-fesidenMal den^i.ti^ yrenter than one unit per 10 acres. This appendix provides criteria and procedures for Tpnpw,^nd approval of local comprehensive plans that are inconsistent with the density poHc!;., Prri^ntinna to the Policies for the rural area will be considered only for communities that cannot maet the policy hecauae of the exiatina subdivisions or land dgvglSP.nient. The Council approve ** review of a local comprehensive plan. The extent of the exception will be based upon how well the community will or has: protected good agricvUurall90dl rrfttffrtrt we*landa and other enyironmentallv sensitive areas; implemented oerformonce standards for on-site sewqgsjlisposal systems that are cpnsisi with the Councirs lVa.t/^afgr Treatment and Handlinz Policy Plan: and adopted a comprehensive plan consistent with all M(tn>poltfon_Pevelopmeni Quide chanters, especially those for the metropolitan systems fsewen. transportation, ^v^ation and parks.^ In order for the Council to support an exception to the rural density policy, the cpmtnunitv rtiust provide the following as a part of its comprehensive plan arnendmentj 1 1 1 & L & 2. IL The total land area (acreage’^ of the community, adjusted for surface water and major hiyhwav riyht$-of-wav. The number of existing lots of record,, .... The amoupt owned bv public agencies or occupied bv institutional apd restricted from devdooment. The amount and location of undeveloped land, with an analysis of its development potential based on current and proposed planning add TOnin£» The amountand location of land planned an(J agnculturc and residential develonmenL with a d*T !frip*y^ ^ permitted The amount and location of agricultural \ftn4 ^ certjfigd eliaible for the Metropolitan Aaricultural Present PrPgML . , ^ ,, The amount and location of wetlands, with infonmtion demQMtrating how such areas will he nroteetp^ from development . r Conies of ||| to adoption of performance standards for on-sit_e ^Eradl^f I!^%*!^POied rural-to-urban transition arga^t, afpng wi|h pl?m aqij pQijcies to protect snch areas premature or incompatible dcvelopmcnL AltWithWITlI infrinnMi*" mav be n«f fflfffbring the local comprehensive plan ItUQ compliance with metropolittn iwtClM Plm Schedule for implementint the plan amendment. i s'm-:ifev'hi wIff I# fist.$r^'k apri'■xMW 'S Pis Appendix: Land Uses in the Rural Area Thtt appendix helps dari^ what land uses mav be supported bv Council policy for the rural service area, and provides guidance for both the Gauncil and local governments. It tt important to remember that even though a particular land use mav be acceptable in the rural area from a regional 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. All uses would abo be subject to anv local regional or state permitting or licensing reouirements. Land Use Recommendattens tor the Rural Area Pollqr Aim EnmplM of CoBsIsteBt Land Uaas Comnardal Africttltwal RtfioB Agriculturalt broad range of agricultural land uses, including horse boarding and training, kaioels, sod farms, tree farms, fish produaion and processing, storage areas or buUdings; fbr primary proteaioo areas, uses consistent with 1980 Agricultural Preserves Act Rcaidcntial: single family residences at a maximum density of 1/40 acres, accessory apartments CoBuncFcial/Industrial: small on-farm operations normally associated with farming Insiitutionalt urban generated facilities, such as waste disposal Cadiities; prohibited from primary protection areas unless no other location available; prohibited from secondary protection area unless no site in general rural use area available General Rural Use Aren Agricultural; all uses listed for commercial agricultural policy area Residential; single fiunily residences at a maximum density of 1/10 acres computed on the basis of 640 acre parcels (one square mile), twin homes/duplexes (meeting density standard), accessory apartments, group-living homes with shared cooking bdlities Coomierdal/Racrcatioaal and Urbaa*Geflcraicd Uses: urban-generated uses, induding reereadonal vebide parks, raoetrMks, festival sites, campgrounds, gun clubs, private airports, solid waste bdlities, auto salvage and recyding. other similar fadlities, nei^bortiood coovenieoce/service/tetail uses, such as financial offices, video stores, gasoline, groceries, daycare centers, commerdal/service/retail uses adjacent to or served by existing metro highways, agricultural products processing, home occupations, bed and breaklittt lodging fadlities, dentist and doctor offices, landing areas for ultralight and model airplaiies, retreat Csdlities, golf courses laduatrial; sand and gravel mioing, urban-geiKrated uses that require a spacious, isolned location, small manufacturing firms originating from home occupations, oil or gasoline storage tank fums, refineries, solid waste transfer/processing facilities laetltntloaai urban-generated uses, such as waste-disponl installations, jails, (xisons. public airports, human service agency satellite offices, parks, trails, open space, other similar fadlities, unique natural or conservation areas, schools, cburdMS, cemeteries ......i ail*?; ’ *-. ' n' .i- M « H h 13:ii#' y/ ' 4 . - /;4,METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mtan Ihtrk Centre. 230 East Fifth Street. St. Paul. MN 57l0l lhj4 rr 612 291-6359 F\S 612 291-6550 TTY 612 291-0904 February 10,1992 :FE3 12 13^2 RE:New Rural Area Poildea and Invitation to a Planning Forum Dear Local Government Official or Staffperson: On December 5.1991, the Metropolitan Council amended the Metropolitan Development apd inuMtnwnt Framework (MDIR to Include new policies for the general rural use area of the region. Thegenertf rurii um area of the region is located outside the metropolitan urban service area (MUSA) and to not designated tor commercial agriculture. A copy of the new policies is enclosed with this letter. The new polidee continue to uphold the Council’s basic rural density standard of no more than one dwelling unit per 10 acres. However, the land area for calculating density has changed f^ 40 acres (maximum of tour units) to up to 640 acres (a maximum of 64 units). The now polidw do not specWy a minimum lot size. Instead, minimum lot size should be determined by performance standards. Many of the other policy changes (such as allowing clustered development) are designed to provide more options for local governments to tailor the regional policy to fit unique conditions In their communities. Vu Ci S3 c« N 5 The Council will hold a PLANNING FORUM on THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, from 9 to 11 a.m. in the Council Chambers (first floor. Mears Park Centre Building).I? The program wfil include the following items: a summary description of the riew policies, an explanation of how the rural area policies are related to policies in the Council’s metropolitan systems plans, an explanation of how the new policies may result in amendments to local comprehensive plans, and plenty of time tor questions and answers on each topic, The Council wIM hold a second planning forum on rural area policy sometime in May. That forum win *f*. In more detail, examples of rural development options (such as clustering) under the new policy. A notice on this forum will be sent to you at a later date. I encourage you to attend both of planning forums. Sincerely. Manr E. MxiarsonRitary E. Chair Pr IfeSiS;.- MEA/kp Enclosure ’i i 0^1te;1.H « ■:•*-.Metropolitan Council General Rural Use Area Planning Forum February 27, 1992 AGENDA 9:00 am IntroductioD Anne Hurlburt Manager, Division of Comprehensive Planning and Local Assistance 9:05 am Poliqr Overview Carl Ohm Principal Planner, Metro Systems Dept.I 9:30 am Implementation Bob Overby Planner, Division of Comprehensive Planning and Local Assistance am Questions, Answers, Anne, Carl and Bob General Discussion am Meeting Evaluation Please fill out form on other side of the agenda. Adjournment '""''"aiiiiitiiilil'______________■ . .. J....................................................................... ’%&i-'r w'rJiar. f —• .ir^A'^'V;:. V."’ im-1,^;- tell-isift' ■■ ,^, ■■- f' • ' :t-'’ >'f ' h/rt.. kM' ■1^': y- ■■■ pi. Uw^‘ *|1£i v‘ >-ffe. ij-.-rf . " -i'-R TOt Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron, Moorse, City Administrator Datet Subject: Nay 20, 1992 City a'all and Public Works Buildings Application aAf[f Certificate of Payment No. 3 % /^3 1 Attachment:Application and Certificate of Payment No. 3 Kraus-Anderson Construction Co. $29,494.96 Greaser Concrete/Masonry $74,424.60 Steininger Construction Co. $74,413.90 Met-Con Construction $ 9,130.00 We have received from Project Construction Manager John Davies approved application for payment of work at the public works location as follows: Krau8~Anderson Construction Co. - for on-site supervision and reimbursable expenses through April 25, 1992, $22,052.96; and for construction management services for April, $7,443.00 *> Grosser Concrete/Masonry - $74,424.60 Steininger Construction Co. - for site preparation earthwork, $39,870.00; and site utilities, $34,543.90 - Met-Con Construction Co. - $9,130.00 The attachments are presented for your approval. PROP08BD MOTION: Moved by seconded by to approve City Hall and Public Works Buildings Applications and Certificates of Payment No. 3 for April construction manager fee and reimbursable expenses to Kraus-Anderson in the amount of $29,494.96; for public works building concrete work to Grosser Concrete/Masonry in the amount of $74,424.60; for site reparation to Steininger Construction Co. in the amount ofP$74,413.90; and for public works building erection to Met-Con Construction in the amount of $9,130.00. Motion, _ _ Nays Ayes Isv Mm bLut>«____ ■M "V «;*♦•mrrMu:,'--fP'^ ■7>>» i?i 11^: ^f'- p-% Ilf' WMt, !i%cIII. •r*£-eft' ■■ I KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CONTRACTORS & CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS_________________ May 18,1992 Mr. Tom Kuehn Finance Director City of Orono 1355 Brown Road South Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Orono City Hall and Public Works Buildings Orono, MN K/A Project #4059 Dear Mr. Kuehn: Attached are two Contractor/Vendor Applications and Certificates for Payment for the above referenced project. Please make payments directly to the vendors listed for the amount shown on the Architect’s Certificate for Payment Summary Sheet. Very truly yours, KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY John Davies Project Manager p/lp Enc. 1%., f'%m.- %!>I':> •i. Minneapolis Division 525 South 8th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 Phone: (612) 332-7281 FAX: (612) 332-8739 Equal Opportunity Employer ■( V r.'t 'T.r rfl.li- liS:?ijfft;- p Ktl Ir 00 I os S atc M I > 3a(D </>o ro o Zo Oo 3 oo 3<n co o 3 S SiS’ t/> o> ♦oo <0 < 130) a \3 o (D o O Oo 3 W co o 3 to COo oo o CO CO o CD CD (D O 3 to Oo 3 O Z Q> (A O 3 iA I Oro o Oo 3 Co o 3 Iw too oo oo 01c (fi > 3 O. CD (A O 3 4Aroro ocn hj CO O) O 33 > O §c “D13 m X isp!^ * 1®• o 3 > Xo mo 3 3 O fi) Xo 0> ■8 3 0» 3 cncn o ^ O o <'* o « Q. 3 w a ~ 2 e ^ o O ri O 2 t” o - CD rm S O ® i O ^ ^ i 2 3J 7 O a cncn COro C/3oc X XO mo-H § ° Q. O 3X o C £ O c ^ ii X 2. E, n £ ® 3 (O O Oz X >o > Xo X mo Xm X O O Xm X 5o >X X o > X X Xo X Xo 2 o > z § mo CO -- CD3 -: I ^ to iO to S DO DO DO CO CO ox>> iife >“0“O o > =!oz > o oma H o > Tfloa a > Sm 5 I w .'I J fe. ■ ir •^ V. ; fc ; '-iir h{yy:^' |¥. teff'■«:«!? '•■:-■ '■'nv^ %m f^tV "'or k.;«r.i»- mm • TU5A § > <o <0a> oo «» •* CD ro <o<o CJ «D bo» •»o oo Ui fO cn r <■» w O S y « 4J O Oo « o 9 oo 4^ Oo «» Ul CJ IS)<o s «•cn ro oo ss fO o o oo o o 3 (A ?co S£oa 4^cn cnoo oo 4# O o o «» o s ucno> oo •»«•* b ro o cn fs)o oo y* (Ocn o o 4^ o> is § ucn o» s 4D Os rorsj o o o oo ooo bo oo •4o> 9 to oo oo JR 9 COo CJ o CO 9 oo 40 Os CP 9 Oo oo uwo o JR cn 9 O o CJ s o o o fO cn oo 40 fO 9 fO cn 8 40cn 9 Uo 9 8 40 nj 9ro cn o •ff'W -• '* r>' % *'• S 3| > ■D Dc 5O i > CO -j m V --•^ ^ - ,-v & .,>■ W;, “ iv.i'>-."- .. . mL i'fe- Pi/- jM. fet' ■ r i ,. v<,:, ;c" , V.^/»> l|fV ;#■ • - •' wi i'-a ■‘ vp'. '■yHa® Vii^"'sif'.r ■r ^r-- m KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CONTRACTORS & CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS____________ Invoice #P28401 May 4, 1992 City of Orono P.O. Box 66,13S5 Brown Road S. Crystal Bay, MN 55423 Attn: Mr. Tom Kuehn Finance Director Re:Orono City Hall K/A Project #4059 Request For Payment This request for payment is for consu^ction management services of Orono City Hall, as per the contract for the month of April 1992. i\mount Due: $7.443.00 < ■ Mmneapolis Division 525 South 8th Street. Minneapolis, MN 55404 Phone: (612) 332-7281 FAX: (612) 332-8739 Equal Opportunity Employer ’‘"~‘^'^i^iil8fti n'" ir¥'Siiiiili^iiiiSitifiii ■i .1 ■I ‘i ] A J *'1 MiM.',^ , •«J’j:,.; :‘V ^riSrl:?- '.iV:' 3^t;. m>''. ■ i‘> #.;- ■ = ^:'<r . '/! v:,iV'-^" ■ $mjat-4 '■ :^ !■•• iiir •■■■■»»"<- ■ %1/H KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CONTRACTORS & CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS Invoice #P28402 May 4,1992 City of Orono P.O. Box 66,1335 Brown Road S. Crystal Bay, MN 55423 Attn:Mr. Tom Kuehn Finance Director Orono City Hall K/A Project #4059 Request For Payment This request for payment is for on-site supervision and reimbursable expense; through April 25,1992, as per construction manager contract dated November 12, 1991. Project Superintendent Doug Revard 200 hrs. @ $50.00/hr.$10,000.00 Safety Tom Nelson 7 hrs. ® $45.00/hr.315.00 Reimbursable Expenses Copying Postage Biffs Blueprinting Cellular One K/A Ewipment Rental Keller Fence Minnesota Society of Arch, (forms) Revard (petty cash) Coflin 8c Gronberg City of Orono (permit) Twin City Testing UPS 221.40 3.75 55.26 56.25 5.10 1,653.18 1.360.00 138.74 77.05 1364.00 708.93 5,495.30 399.00 Amount Due This Invoice $22.052.96 Minneapolis Division 525 South 8th Street, Minneapolis. MN 55404 Phone: (612) 332-7281 FAX; (612) 332-8739 Equal Opportunity Employer ni - 4 •^1 • £ ‘ ''A ■- va jik.' ... z 3 CT* o >-o-o o <o Q. > o < rsa. 2c 3 5- as T! '< :>0 sa -o n < 5‘^ c rD </» ^ > Zn m CLn zr ^ Q-^ •< ^ O 03is. - 3 >oc ozun Omocn Ozv-o osoam SO tn C 2 2 >;o -< noz v-n U> Ki) SOm n I a* 3 o oNI 3 ~ -n <£ O o 3 <t o“: s » « 11 a O o + 3 m ^ O <0 •• 3 n O “- 9 o - ^ ? So? I |a z tl* 9 0« /I O so o Z •9 «/» 5"?§i55 3 S ^ M ?B n Oz O O Q°|o ui O w 5 > O m so ^m r- O 3 O E ft C S o - o 3^ 3N k£> 73 >n 73 tn >-o "O n > Oz oso 5 2m Z n > a ^ ac 5i !l 5' O 3 3 5- UI3 *• s. !(• o? 9 ^ VI or rt01 ? O n 3" 2.^ O ^ 9\ 3> hO D X» sj vj Oo 3 3 <tA O 3 DO SJ vj i 3T (t O O Lt A n Cz so >n nc 3 oso TO Q) UQ cn LH 3: H- 3 3 (D OJ T5 0 NS 03 NS O NS D) Z 3 O 0< M D rr < > •0 0 2 >son I r- r< ^C n ^ O' o ^ M D 2 H- 0‘U M 3T ?*: H-(n cn O mn ocn 3 Z CDo o Qi r-h n S H- O rf M K sr U) z OS CD H- C M H L/1 cn to u» ft .u M O CD H- (D rr 0> ct (D h a o H- M D H- ua o cn Q > 0)cn oo 0» p Ou noz 2 > 2 ^ O n m X "Om SO > 'Q•V O > -4 mz 5O un oo N> UJ 0 1 VO NJ oz Zo o n > o § O /A < an < cr 52 § -4 so c 33 o 7S > -0 •0 S^' O Z >za n m SO n > m ’moso 5 sm Z C\ 5 ooocs fnz-s o 3 5 ll O 9 O 3 1^ ft CL ft □ □0DD 5 IB_ ^ ^ I _I i C \* . >.4 ■,A' APPLICATION FOR PAYMENTPROJEa 8AME: ORONO PUBLIC VORKSIRCBlTEa'S PROJECT NO: 1124.04 APPLICATION NO: TWOAPPLIQTION DATE: 4/24/92 PERIOD TO: 4/30/92 %tMMMM**MntmikMttH1iH1t*nM***tf*1HHt*t**f*****»**t>ti*»*»*********»»»**»**********»Hi*»ti**i,*tt*i * ITEM *DESCRIPTION ON HORN •SCHEDOIED^WORK COMPLETED •MATERIALS*TOTAL * 1 •BALANCE *RETAINAGE< • NO.*ft VALUE •••••••••••••••••••••PRESENTIY^COMPIETEO^COMP *TO *j •ft ft •PREVIOUS *THIS • STORED *S STORED * *FINISH *4 *ft ft ft APPL. •APPL.*ft TO DATE * **i Mi#M**»*******************t******il***************************t**********»»*******»**i*»****************»***i « 1 •FOOTINGS & PIERS ft 28275 •13000 »15275 ft ft 28275 *1.00 *0 *2828 • 2 •BU BELOH GRADE ft 36588 •1000 *35588 ft ft 36588 *1.00 *0 *3659 * 3 •Rb mT ABOVE GRADE ft 63661 •0 •31831ft ft 31831 *0.50 *31830 *3183 * 4 •SLAB i TOPPING ft 53303 •0 •ft ft 0 *0.00 *53303 *0 * 5 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 * 6 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 • 7 ft ft ft 0 *ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 * 8 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 * 9 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 * 10 ft ft ft 0 *ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 * 11 ft ft ft 0 *ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 * 12 ft ft ft 0 *ft ft 0 * ERR •0 »0 * 13 ft ft ft 0 *ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 • 14 ft ft A 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR •0 »0 * 15 ft ft ft 0 *ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 * 16 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 * 17 ft ft 0 *ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 1 18 ft ft ft 0 *ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 » 19 ft ft ft 0 *ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 * 20 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR •0 *0 * 21 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 »0 • 22 ft ft ft 0 *ft ft 0 * ERR *0 »0 * 23 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 • 24 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR •0 *0 • 25 ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 • 26 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 • 27 ft ft ft 0 •ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 • 28 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 •0 * 29 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 * 30 ft ft ft . 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 • 31 ft ft 0 *ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 * 32 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 • ERR *0 *0 * 33 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 * 34 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 » 35 ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 *0 • 36 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 * ERR *0 •0 » 37 ft ft ft 0 *ft ft 0 • ERR *0 •0 • 31 ft ft ft 0 •ft ft 0 • ERR •0 *0 • 39 ft ft ft 0 *ft ft 0 * ERR •0 *0 i ft TOTAL ft 181827 •14000 •82694 • 0 ft 96694 *0.53 *85133 *9669 < MMMAMtfMiMiMiMMiiiMiiiiMMMiMMttt*************************************************************** a lifiSIMA r-.;; i 4 •f i A . .i; A ■ i 1 .r. ■ ’ I im 11 iiiiiriatMil f V'‘ ■ ■ .•P-- f * * r^\ -' r- ju ■ ■is >1 /r’-i*' 1mp: F' ■ i‘ sij L;'fe |.„ ,i‘V r'<' 1,. ^ 4 "O 50 • v<» itl I • \ 4. •T' to ODro < iTjo s s i- ► ‘ -'■' % 8 s § oo 2 H 9 > O H m X H 9 H O H > IScn ww § s cr% NO s 1 9 0> o 2mn li Zo 9 9 01 m r 5 r o 2C0(0r •< Sr 9z IHz H O -4 > ?►«s ocz-4 « ft S s sag gm ^ </» 3 S £ E * R *"2 3 S c/t Scn —^ t/» S 2 3 « £ L o > HW I IVO >r *9so 8 S z <o nm U> CJ> to r **' # A . •- - * / ;. • . .• > .fr r';rt‘-,■-.•*>; t. • . * . . -. *.. • X. •• . •• • • * .* i " • 1*, . -< V^N • • • • • - :-V' < . V » J ■ • ‘ • • ■“ •i.. *. . ‘ : • *••••» • ■ - . ‘* .ij1 'i % t >-v'.Nr^T' f. ir ¥-■ 'f-r •V ’§|ris n|p.r| g. 3! ?? -! SSSoia- s g 5.3 2 2 -• 2 —*o 5 c3 CL O’ =-3 3 — ii 2. « Q. 3 S •• S’ '*3 J ®- 9 5 1*2 ?= S-llaS-g. <*<•-*•anllgi/> 7 0> <• 3“* o SJ 2. i MB «« W ^ % ?3 7^ 2. S ? « o Q. O 1 8 ^ 1EV|S»=!a S'?? 8 ^3 l?||SO sgoJ8 ^ Ir7»ryyj| ? 3 ” a; 3 •o n n S. 5 3 §o o. 9 ^ Ul KJ -> fS g ~ M i 2 •• wjlO ■ro S t/i g. ^ D D Ofc) -?-ra^s,' *T3 O 2 rf W □□□□□S 2; Q 5 9 n ? ^Z U V c >•o nr > '^ • oz >za omPP n > o pp 5 m H© i D Onc S S •H o V4s 3 cn O 9 Mi 5 It a It i Os NJ tsf.. I J ?fTr-r *•n > §> S, 1 o ^ ^ Z3 i 2 o n I cLo 3 >-o s: "o A ^™ ft»n o- o £. c a 3 o’ 3 O__ u» 2 «» 1 n O §f z% 5 *! ;« •» n — St Q o « < afii fti S' ^ o- Q- -i |59-0 <9 5 2 n 3 3"Si^ 19 3 3 QJ (9 OQ a»^ s o'a 5^ 2, ro 01 r* m sh m -no 3 3 0>•< I m Z Oi -D-o4r n O 3 5’ 3 OQ nOz zc > oz cn X S D O 0 1rn 5 O 3 S o o<<9 3 <9 i o•w fW V> t t A ) ^ STEININGER C^ CO. 3070 Laxington Avenue South ST. PAUL. MillINNESOTA 55121 Ns 14/7 Phoiw 4S4-1980 Kraus_An(^erson.Construction Co.. .Inc.DATE ^/15/92 - -JOB NO.4059 _ _^5.25_5puth .Eighth J5t. ... _ _Minneapolis^ .MN.„5.5404 JOB NAME 0rono_City. Hall_.and .. Public’ Works Garage JOB LOCATION t - /‘P ------- - ------ ■ tXRMt ^0:1x1 I, mr-: . ,■■ W mikrnrn, ' .V 15; SfV'V;,ji n'i <5 DESCRIPTION CONTRACT EXTRAS TOTAL CONTRACT AND EXTRAS PREVIOUS BILLINGS PRICE AMOUNT 254,000 117,500 ••• WORK COMPLETED TO DATE BW ,.v “* r r —ife. Utt ^ Ife<»,»* V r.--: .. w ^4-APR 2 0 1SS X ji’a TOTAL WORK COMPLETED THIS BILLING LESS: PAYMENTS BALANCE DUE: $44,300.00 less 10% Retainage 1_6J ,.800 44,30.0 $39,870 WmmNAL ,#%. %l^* ,AP-A. • ... V. ! i Ii 1 1 ______ i 3 1 ^ - ... I-.*. , -.T •V' Jlff»2 i. '< Mf «. 5- i|ai^ ?l|s Os?;i?» ■ mlllfzHlr ^ 5‘*o 2 5' i 2 c o’ g o «2.0 5 c 3 o- «T ^ 3 3 — a, 2. i Q. 3 ^ ^ • fD 3“ rt O3 O.^2 j ?"S n= g-lls^S. O ^ O 2" 3H ^ a 5.5:0 •‘S'r:o ^ i 2. ;g <0 — 2 s. 2; V «^ 5* rt ? 2 > '2. o if o —. ** *^ —3 S P5 2 o fo — V > =• »aaaaaa|»^ 5 SIa- o sill Iiw3; -J rt> ^ sr*)-t A?-f- : • :• *■;• ^ W KJ 3 n5*<ao mr£o^.'"SsS'rSrsjs **'^:a-w5s 5=» 5 3 o® 2 2 9 ^ Jt-< *n _( m O »*wsl So 3TO ^““ + ''<035s.^G " 0 3 2 r*'' VI cr •» w o tj ;• 3 > o 9. □□□□□2 o > 9 §9 o ^ ^ T- I 5 i tUHUHiitHCONSTRUCTION CO.. INC3070 L«xington Avenue South ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 55121 Phone 4S4-1980 N2 1476- m-^‘' .. ^' ^i •'. *; 01 ^ u ro X X X X X T) O< I <#O. O 8 8 » 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 p r» Iom 0 1o % 0 1 O O 5 O o J3 (0 > "D “O § T1 O JJ *D > m IE 8.k t § 8 § 3i oo illl II HS 9 o t O<% Io Ho > 3 £ Q Sio -io> ? = I I !i| I II ll $ Q O oa- a ^ <* *8 •I JS i IIPm I > TO "O § >z O om33 T| 5 m T1 O3) 5 s;m 5 » 9 i0» ■ .^. >•, y^- , m wft&v I- ■' i'i' ’ ■ 'I';) ''v' t-r.-;fe'i ’ ^■1 • W 2 >>/■I I?; 5 riEMNUMBER> 1 3 • 1 m B GENERAL CONDITIONS LABOR1 •#I 0T1 1 v 1 9 1 9i m; u SCHEDULEDVALUESo o OOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO FROMPREVAPPLICATION(D+E)WORK COMPLETEDQ pi 4,0006,1440000000000000000000000000THS PERIODm o OOO OOOO 30000000000000000000 1 S5 11?| if nj 'll p t 0000000000000000000000000000>i§ M O S333 33333 3 3333S 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 8 3$1- 1 0000000000000000000000000M8'e€69^>Ml X 1.014400•14000i 000000000000000000000031 - U i i o o o o o i! « I ...V-: V - • V*^ • • i I a li ? I iti^MiMiriWriir'ivrlfe^vff i-MYfrrli II ■iifurit^T*-•^i. . i;-v t fAiSi.v ':'y 1^;,Pi;: W'’ V V i •’'■ »’ (ki.v v,^b3 p 5 s 1^ *3 • • y I .11 1 ■1 «wl.r^ b-2i 1 . > .Ow I >4^ - . V;: i mmiy ii: k ■■■ r^^-> Wk r: ' ■ V-' '• K 'V ■ X*-.V ‘ i -y 'M ;ss; '■■ t¥-. 5jj{{jj| 554SSZ<jS^o«o«-^g»w»<^'^~‘ s o o o o o o o ooooooooooo»o°°Q<^^*=*- o e o o o o o ooooooooooo<^o^<»**^^*^- o o o o o O OOOCOOOOOOOOOOOQOOO o o o o o o o o o eooooooooo°°<>*^^*=**=**^^ ^SlS3aS333S 3333^^S^§.S. OOO oooooo oooooooooo°*^*>*^^ ^lH\o 2 I?? 2Itili !l^l\i I hi 4IiN5 a ft Dilh * « HP •• «l • ^ M ' ' V Ijj.• • I« i i 4 >1 w ■ .-’U ••3'•ia s i8i J "i ki Vr ■sVi ■1 1‘ < ftf/kMrfa >k k lirw> ;’■ ■. ifr. I®'-' rrK*’» ■it'..-' ■■m^vhri-c-'. pi:f|i> i-V" ■ W tri"fcV V - ^V-V ^ i'-*-K.,\.» ^.,-0 i e»>>vVj|5r pf-'r-.te:-p' w*fe: u;. -;'_’;v-Vi . •. >\ -V. !-K'>- f-;V-r- - Ipia,. »-.1:Sfc. - r j .-W>-\ ^T- : iK-- Upp-'^ is® \*^- 'it' - te-- TO:Ron Moorsor City Administrator FROM:John R. Gerhardson/ Public Works Director DATE:May 20, 1992 SUBJECT: Utility Tractor Attached is a previous memo recommending the award of the bid for a utility tractor for the Public Works Department. This matter was tabled originally so that clarification of certain issues could be resolved. At the budget workshops on May 13 the Council suggested we proceed with the purchase to avoid any additional costs. This purchase is now in process. It should be noted that when we estimated the cost of this equipment for budgeting purposes the amount entered in the budget was $21,000. The low bid was $23,896. Previous purchases have come in under the estimated amount such as a trailer for the park mower, was estimated at $5,000 and was actually purchased for $3,225 and the power broom attachment was estimated at $5,000 and purchased for $4,068. Future purchases will also be reviewed so that the overall total does not exceed the estimated amounts in the budget. Recommendation: To confirm Council action of May 13, 1992 to award the bid for the utility tractor to Scharber and Sons for an amount of $23,896. Proposed Motion: Moved by , seconded by , to confirm Council action of May 13, 1992 to award the bid ^or the utility tractor to Scharber and Sons for an amount of $23,896. Ayes _ _, nays_ _. ima 4 __. > A- TO* FROM* DATS: SUBJECT: Ron Moorsor City Administrator John* R. Gerhardson March 18, 1992 Equipment Purchase - Public Works For the 1992 Budget, Public Works allocated an amount of the utility tractor with side mount flail mower. for replacement ,rK--On Wednesday, March 18, 1992, we received and opened the tractor and mowers. sealed bids for r. The following is the bid tabulation: Bid #1 IM'v Long Lake Ford Tractor Ford Model 4630 Edwards Mower Model 7472 Demo % *•Less Trade-in Less Special Paint Deduct $7,600.00 1,200.00 i'yr' ■ Total ■ fii;Sfe;- ■; Bid #2 , - '• V . Long Lake Ford Tractor Ford Model 4630 Edwards Mower Model 7472 HD Special Less Trade-in Less Special Paint Deduct $7,600.00 900.00 w TOTAL fiS.l,7m i§m- Long Lake Ford Tractor Ford Model 4630 Tiger TSF75 Mower Bid #3 V. Less Trade-in Less Special Paint Deduct $7,600.00 1,100.00 TOTAL m #■' ,v.. $26,677.00 7.300.00 $33,977.00 $ 8,800.00 $25,177.00 $26,677.00 8,600.00 $35,277.00 $ 8.500.00 $26,777.00 $26,677.00 8,200.00$34,577.00 $ 8.700.00 $26,177.00 I J k:i ■■7 •<: y Memo March 19r 1992 P«9» 2 Scharber an^ Sons John Deere Model 2355 Tiger 75" $24,446.00 7,500.00 $31,946.00 Less Trade-in Less Early Pay Discount Less Special Paint Deduct $6,850.00 200.00 1,000.00 $ 8,050.00 TOTAL $23,896.00 I recomn^end to purchase the tractor and mower from for an amount not to exceed $23,896.00. Scharber and Sons 01;. pp'"' i’ - iJ' ■ ,1 i 'in f • i ■•1 .AJt.1 m-'p •V. r- TO: K.* II# #l-‘P;P-. psrW' 'mr I'V'-r h"- PROM: May<tf Peterson and Oronu City Council S Ron Moorse, City Administrator h. % DATE:May 20, 1992 SUBJECT: 1991 Budget Adjustments ^1^ KV-ScW;*!.; ■ The City Council at its May 13th work session reviewed a recap of the 1991 expenditures and revenues. Both revenues and expenditures in the General Fund were under budget. Expenditures were $139,375.00 less than anticipated. Revenues were $192,700.00 less than anticipated. This resulted in a shortfall of revenues versus expenditures of $53,325.00. It is recommended that this shortfall be addressed through a transfer of $53,325.00 from the General Fund Reserve. In addition to adjusting the revenue shortfall, there are a number of budget adjustments needed to reflect the actual 1991 revenue and expenditure levels. Please see the attached summary of 1991 budget adjustments . Council action requested: Motion to approve the budget adjustments as presented and to authorize the use of $53,325.00 from the General Fund Reserve to offset the General Fund revenue shortfall. ch I iss' . ■■■. pw#- i V i I 1 m* -» %4 • •-p. summary of General Fund budget adjustments Expenditures Department/* purpose Adopted Budget Requested Amendment Amended Budget City Council Administration ;Finance Police ^fire Protection BMroency Preparedness Animal Control Recycling/Pickup . Special Consulting & Police Services 65, 170, 144, 1^073, 180, 3, 11, 68, 32, 430 570 150 870 020 670 440 390 250 450 . 750 7,150 (39,050) 3,600 3,050 2,450 11,400 6,400 65,880 171,320 151,300 1,034,820 183,620 6,720 13,890 79,790 38,560 ipecial Revenue Funds PARK FORD 'Capital Outlay K Planning Project 11,100 -0- $(11,100) 1,750 -0- 1,750 totals $ 11,100 S (9,350) $1,750 S s S s: s ss S5 s =3 = s = s s rsssssa: IMP & EQUIP OUTLAY FUND Capital Outlay 1991 budget $ 61,350 $(14,600) $46,750 <4.^reases in the Special Revenue Funds budgets ate due to certain items/ptojects not being purchased and/or being purchase at less than anticipated costs. special Revenue Funds revenue budgets amendments ate as follows: ^ARK FORD interest income ^ark dedication fees 14.000 30.000 $ 650 (21,000) 14,650 9,000 K>TALS 44,000 $(20,350) $ 23,650 MP a EQDIP ODTLAY FUND inar fees Interest income iale of equipment transfers from other funds 3,350 22,000 -0- 60,750 350 (6,750) 300 -0- 3,700 15,250 300 60,750 OTAi^S $ 86,100 $ (6,100) SSSSSSS3S $ • 80,000 mm. ■1 1 ......... b’M ,,■•te' 9‘mm Kfe: h‘\ ivl:. ' i- '4. 9 ^■ ^ il r-V, .4.»' -4. t>; -PA, '■> a- I \‘‘ni- f-ii f::,p ■■‘1^ ' , ■ / ■\i' ‘-j£r '1. im 'i*>s5(tfc;- /6TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Ron Moorse» City Administrator John R. Gerhardson May 14, 1992 Temporary Employment - Parks % %9 Each year it is necessary to employ temporary park maintenance helpers for maintenance of City parks and City grounds. We have advertised for and received applications for the positions. After review of the applications, it is my recommendation to employ Mr. John Heuer, 5625 Bush Road in Mound as a temporary park maintenance helper at an hourly rate of $7.50 per hour effective May 18, 1992. It la also recommended that a performance and salary review will be conducted after thirty days of employment at which time the hourly rate will increase to $8.00 per hour upon a favorable performance review. ch V 1 K ii (iS'S ;v. ' t f^:X> .'•■ 'J'V ■. ^ • ' • fr-4 .;v,: / i#^„- S 5^-?. • m^.i<fe'’'4';' i,Emt t'*':. ■. I'f'.'T:- ' .!Sj&> •fSft%::-' ai&''v ■ -y-:K K"V^-’ TOs PROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ^0/^a %/ %, </ Ron Moorser City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director May 20, 1992 Performance Evaluation Greg Palmer Maintenance Worker On May 21, 1990, Greg Palmer began employment with the City of Orono as a maintenance worker in the Public Works Department. Greg started at a pay rate cf Level 5, Step 1. In Mav 1991 Greg advanced to Level 5, Step 2. Greg is learning and progressing very well and has a very good attitude. Recoanendatlon to adjust Greg Palmer's hourly rate to Level 5, Step 3 of the Compensation Plan, $12,520 effective May 21, 1992. Proposed Motion: Moved by seconded by to adjust Greg Palmer's hourly rate to Level 5, Step 3 of the Compensation Plan, $12,520 p^r hour effective May 21, 1992. Ayes_ _, nays jib pivr-"-..' m 4ki - V. f > ■ - . '*’•*\«•,n^.:r«•: i V'gfe.-i: j t,if i J-:fw',; ■- r? %• [••t. ■. ?<- f;.,«« ;' • fi. :: • /f\list of licenses fop V jl;’CIL APPROVijV *5^FOR MEETING OP M?ifc, 1992 Special Event - IN Bat. Tournaments - "une 28, 199 2 6 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. North Slior. e Marina - IN Bass Tournament-. .-v'j loer . 0, 1992 6 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Noi f • Marina One Day Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor - I ri-'-uAtist Tonka Lions - June 19, 1992 - Lakeviev ' if Club Golf Torunament Garbage and Refuse - Blackowiak & Son Sanitation &• Rolloff Service - Baldy Sanitation Inc. Residential Kennel - L. James & Kathleen Marier 2775 White Oak Circle Septic System Installer - Dave Perkins Conv.racting 15775 Juniper Ridge Dr Ramsey - Sewerman - Merlin's 8182 NE River Road Elk River 1 i •J km" 0'm. •Perniit a i Fee: SSO.OO V-- •> PARADES & SP2SCIAL EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION CITT OF OROMO, MTilNESOTA ji'-Phone Number s-H Name: SfTtUtP 4. Address feo)C )QO Cityr State# Zip; _____SS^*l3 K kV location of Parade or Event: kA<f£ MiiMLfiJ<A - A/0 <*'^'6^ ftii-0 X/te.T» ^iJ/utC JKA£/*/A______________________________________________ Person(s) and/or 0rgani2ation(s) Handling the Event;_ _ _ _ _ __ /A/ S 45J 3f7^n S^A:e^ /V> Date of Event;Hours of Event; /o.QO Cd*niSt ______________ ___________ Insurance company;$^»4 rTtS^AU> ^ Amount;'^/ OOO^QOd^OQ^ rCopy of insurance certificates to be submitted with this application. !-• I an aware of all applicable State and other laws regarding parades and special events and will abide by same. I also agree to hold the City c- Orono harmless from all liabilities that may arise directly or indirectly from the parade or special event approved by the granting of this permit. Filature Date Approved :Denied By; Remarks : r ir 1|.:m-m.. ■■ H,-':lnv.-r i'ife R4 CoMfefrTi^ &r 'THi c«**t 'To /»»<#je/-<4 S/ S4*et Acsc H/k/i at'ff/t- ysj, : ' £y^05 /n 3:30, wt txr^^cT /iSnur /oa ^ r»RYp*t ...yS- : i? .■j if*-'" ' '9:v W i L. .Cvv *j;,. tr tT 'Brr |: " lu . ■ ' i^Trrvf^ CIE^ oHfotHcr ’ CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66*Crysiai Bay. Minnesota 55323 • Munidpai Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka DATA PRIVACY APyiSORT i «(* ; ' • 7. in accordance with M.S. 13.04, Subd. 2, "Rights o£ subjects of data*# wa would like to inform you that your request -or a permit or liUnaf from the City of Orono or any of its departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential information. \P.:fe 1 r i'P. •B. /I ■ ' • I ■m a;a: You are notified that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3a The information may be shared with other I-o^al, sj:ate or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit o- license. 4. If your requested permit or license requires Council action to approve, some information may become public. 5. You have certain rights under M.S. 13.04 to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name is required to process this application or permit. > ____________ First Middle Last /ffO Address City Phone X understand my rights as stated above- .gnature RilUmG a ZONING - 47M3S7 AitisnNC administration a finance - J73-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-73S9 m. r'’ f’V r- K #• K; rf- ^:j.. ;',v^4.' i • i: PJUUU3ES & SPSC2AL B7ZSITS PERMIT APPLICATION dry OP OROMOr Minnesota 3<a^ ^ Ok J3k ^ •s * h- 9hon. HU«b*t: V7^-yy.g/// ^GXS-S'f^Vl S30.00 w*'f Naa<; Sn^oti^ 0<. R44>^A:t^A_ Address: ^ &o>c } 0 0 City, State, ZLns (jn^lcPaQ /»<0 Location of Parade or Event; )vA'/C£» A^O flap A7 JJiitTA ^- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Peraan(s) and/or Organisation(s) handling the Event ^((rj 6t¥^klA i>/fit:cfi/L Date of Event . 9lno/<tai Hours of Event; /o.'OC ^*3^04 :k ‘fiiHijet catmsT V Insurance Company:^*OTTS^^ ^ Amounw . ------------------- Copy of insurance cerrijicares to be sucmitted with this application. 1 am aware of all applicable State and other laws regarding parades and special events and will abide by same. I also agree to hold the City of Orono hamless from all liabilities that may arise directly or indirect-.- from the parade or special event approved by the granting of this permit. si^ature Date 6 Approved!Denied:By ^hAy^\j\S,-S£L !?■ AemarJes: sfeliS .. # a m CiM^&rP aki C /4T TWf /A/i/^UJ Pw^<: /(AAtfiS, Ci>^C €/ uJt Ai.Sc HAtit P a AA a C!} A^ 'Tfit- ft^/iACc t^OS ATT 3130. jtaa ^s /tr 3.'ao^^ P',A^ yjt. txner /ac tiaais tv caa,A(f^. mi,’& .. f 'i € i. iv- vIE=^ aFF€ii^*Ge- CITY of OEONO Pom Offic* Box d6«Crynai Bay. MianaMca53323• Muaidpai OfEUxa On tht North Short of Lake Minitetonka DAT& Parw^CY ADVISOR? . ; ■: * K ;■r' la aeeordanca with M.S. 13.04, Subd. 2, "Sights of subjocts of ~ a.‘=“ V.%you to furnish co-rtnia privats or confidential information. U: I ■• S--' k- V>» You are notified that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permr- or license. , ;v # K #■■/M :5 4, x£ your requested permit or license retires Council action to approve, some information may become public. 5. You have certain rights under M.S. 13.04 to review private data on yourself. 6« Your full name is required to process this application or permit. ; • ■■■ • T... ■‘:v I# a: •••■'I \¥'-' f. First Middle Last A 0dK /(fO Address (£^1. state yhone '«i- - - • v'Hi'ii' Z "T*de*^*t*"** my rights as stated above. .gxMture iuiLaeiGa zof«iric - vwyan A£MINirntATION 4 FINANCE - 473-7358 PUBUC WORKS - 4 7 3-735 9 ii.5-5' »*‘ P-P':'W t! • *. • •'• *. V. ■ I -'i n, • L*-.* r?*' •■a: ^v: 1"'^ < • ' 'i\ '' iv-v; -J.C*P k- m BM-’- »#r W-^ • ■■ ■ - V, , # *.4 1 '» •I »« t . V .» 1 |*U1UI kHU0 .li>|»tH4li(»«i l«fl lUUU lM4tiN« III M^tlNM'iHl«»%ict<i«t MtN l.li|Wir **ON** iw«II «v» RETAIL “ON SALE’ONE DAY PERMIT $15.00 dtate of illinnedota, coaxTY OF__--------------- * »• •AV. ^•ity Orono •Vv t To the ...............fr°«9.?=Al..................of the............91^V..............of.........Of®*?.?. .............................................. ....State of Minnesota: Northwest Tonka Lions - Rodney Wilkens 0 •- A ' i * Ktrtilf a|ipl.i.es/0r a lietnM far tha term of---- fraa^ lA^............................*““4ey of One Day - June 19. 1992 • >'.r* # . ’ i < . .* «ri'.: , 19...—, to fell At Retail Onij, Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquors, « ffle tame are defined by law, far coneumption “OX" thoee eertain premUee In the ---- ________________ city_ ____ _ __jgf ________5L?!°n°........................ I.. *. 0 19’- fa . J 7 * -> I %Vi dseofihed ae foUowep itvu/il.< i * I Lakeview Golf Club 405 North Arm Drive '••V- -- J*«-m at whiek plaee mid appUeawt...operate -the btuineee of One day golf tournament cm or LW ....Jim^EJiFFICEijwooooT^ and ta that end repreeent and etate ae followe: fou That mid applieant..........................................eUUen of the United Statee; of food TQS'M and repute; and ha........attained the a(e of tl ytare; that................................................proprietor of the 05/i2/92 I'*-w •V- f«:?V‘ ,* • eetablUhment for which tPw Ueenee will be ieeued if this application U {ranted. T)uU no nuinwfactiirer of each non-inioxicatinf nudi liquore has any ownsrehlp^ in whole or in part^ if» said businoss of eaid appUoant...or any iniertst therein; That eaid appUoant .. .make...this application puretiant and subject to all the laws of the State of Minnssota and the ordinanoes and regulations of sa^d 'W. >.v. I •• •r.. '•.; r • ^ •• V appUcable thereto, which are hereby made a part hereof, and hereby agree.... to observe ond obey the same; «r •i^ (Mor«•tiMr ioioiiiMi«ta> if amy. «C loaal rogmloti—a) > » - • .• • 1 • Each applicant further ucies that by the cotiiniencemetu of business and by July^ \f Jjd^stidxed^g year said applicant will have paid the Federal Special Occupational Ta.\ to the Bureau of Alcohol. Tuhacco and Firearms for a retail dealer. T;<- .4 •4 ^ • . A.*'• . . . • - • '♦** 0 * * v*u rTy. t Datod 1____ t V.t 1\ P, O, dddrese ^D. ____________ JppUoani... -AK‘ .. V-f:- .:>v^ V < v . ]!f!..'(i ■ f • ’ 5^ af e ^ > V*} , o ’ *• •1* V •. I I ••. ^hur.' „„„„„ORONO pSC-J '’ .^^1?llUtilSL,u V-• .'iP.O. Box 66 Csrystal Bayr 55323 473-7357 ) License Year Date Received Fee Paid Initials GAR&AGB &OR*S UCENSE APPLICATION undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City of Orono and herewith makes application for a license to do so. iesiness/PlxB Address Rfjirhnuu/ib. 6 Son ScLruXat^on S floZto^^ SeAv/.C(L 1195 Sunntt^^eJtd Rd N Mound Hum.55364 i (Street) Bosiness Phone Number 472-339^ (City)(Stace) (Zip Code) l^licant's Name F/mnfe Biackoutiat, Address 1155 SanmiAMd Rd N Mound Wtnn. (Street) nione Number 47Z«2977 (City)(State) (Zip Code) 3ieck One:Individual Partnership lumber 5 lescription of Vehicles (attached list if more): Loaded Loaded Tear Mfgr. Gross wt. Rear Axle wt. size/Yards License Number cm OF omo Corpo^>Hi$OfnQFFICE I Jl1700000 01 £f.V 105.00 CHECK TL 105.00 HECEiFr-rnm you ^240570 cool ROl T06: 04/29/ 1991 lUeAteAn-StoA 5A^Qon 2A 25 Ydb VU9/272 pB- Il9l4 w. Stax 6,000 34,000 yiJS L-cce*^-^ <*1. yUS4497 VXf7269 VXI7270 ixth FeAndofe i t VU91226 g month. 2can 20.00 a month. Scan hA., May, Joey, sep^. hov a^ieA 5th 1991 Rb^‘Ti«eJks ._wSEP BROCHURE) uno <wo/LOXAjncLtcZu 2500 tcation of dumping area HgAtL-PLiw/: ui Mpfa. 3/LOoktifn Centex Plant S EPJ in Eden P^ul Ollz ORDER FOR THIS APPLICATION TO BE COMPLETE, YOO MUST ENCLOSE THE FOLLOWING: lorety bond in the amount of $1,000. Proof of insurance in the amount of il00f000-$300,000-$50,000, and 10-day cancellation clause. Annual fee is a 30*00 flat rate fee, plus $15/truck, and a $30.00 transfer fee (if applicable). am the owner and operator of the above business and I have paid all license fees taxes required by law. The above infoinnation is correct. Apjijf 27, 1992 Date USB ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends: Approval _ _ _ _ _ Denial _ _ _ _ _ _ Other (specify) lature of city Official Date ^T/jl //9Z i 1 »■-■ CITY OP OROMO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bayr MN 55323' fii:r j^ClB it.’ ALicense Year Date Received Fee Paid Initials 473-7357 I i GARBAGE 6 TOR’S LICENSE APPLICATION j ^^4 The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City of Orono and 'herewith makes application for a license to do so. Iliisiiiess/Fimi ~~ _______________________________________ (Street) 1 '(City) ^ Address > > Business Phone Nuaiber /itr, '-r7'ytv2jj.V? to. (State) (Zip Code) Applicant's Name Address A‘^cc> <7Je.*uu^ Jhi '______u—{■■-< /-U:' ""ir— ^ c (Street) Phone Number 3l3S 5 (City)■Qfim -i.. OFFICE Check One:Individual Partnership Number of Vehicles to be used in Orono / (State) (Zip 1311700000 ^ Ol.QEH 45.0(CofHE^ati^^n RECFiPT-wm you __ mi250 cool m 05/06' description cf Vehicles (attached list if more): Loaded Loaded Year Mfgr. Gross Wt. Rear Axle wt. Size/Yards License Number i .1'T2£3 f fvr h LS.fi'CCO^ A’‘Ceneral area of City served jLc-'r-t^ —* / fv fv - iehedule o? Collection charges/ dates f,' •’■ Approximate number of customers in Orono Location of dumping area /c ^ j/_ 1/ IN OPn**? FOR THIS APPLICATION TO BE COMPLETE, YOO MUST ENCLOSE THE FOLLOWING: h flunty bond in the amount of $1,000. Proof of insurance in the amount of - 7'^. X am the owner and operator of the above business and I have paid all license fees required by law. The above information is correct. - - - - - - - - - - - - -:-S Appirc^t ^ 7 Date * ■ ^ * FOR CITY OSB ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends: Approval_ _ _ _ _Denial __ _ _ _ _ Other (specify) CIa^^L' _ _ __ _ _ _- - - - - - - -—- - Ili^piialEure of City Official Date v>* |ivr ICKWMKT. LICENSE APPLICATION Effective January 1# 19 to December 31, - • V--Owner: _ _ _ _ ^ -77 f elude city and zip Property Address: (In ‘ ‘ ' - - Mailing Address (if different): Phone: (home) VVS"' 3^^ ^(work) IBSIDBHTIAL Kennel License Infopiation: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time (over 3 months of age) % Principal Breed: Purpose for more than 2 dogs: Dogs normally kept: ^^_inside kennel structure jComiSRCXAL Kennel License Information: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) :;k Marne of Business:llTi QF OFONd Flt^AMCE OFFICE ?ex^l!e;'"^boarding! breeding, veterinary care, re-«T S500000 01 iEH 0*^ / Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name) (phone) Dog runs/exercise areas are:inside outside both The undersigned hereby makes g^f o”n; ^the license approval and at any ocner ^«“rhidf^bv the license duration; and the *6^ including any special license approval. Date >er City Ose only n r' tennel inspected by- //^ I C -?a -T)Date ■rh /■? tecommends Approval Denial 'V^ .ik tiJJ p•1 r i;f r fe; P •>' r»f“ r-v “?i- sr , ■' ■■KLm ' „ V -Vr.!v :vi;y Nv' :-rm IS-# :l®'- • • •CITYof OKONO (612) 473-7357 Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLBP LICENSE APPLICATION All questions must be answered. License feer bond, certificate of Insurance, and evidence of MPCA Certification must be attached. All applications are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. 1. 2. 3. 4. Business or trade name Business address ^'7 S f Business phone ^^9— q/qo^ Residence phone — Name of applicant or company representative holding MPCA certification O a w i ^ 7 ? \ [_____ 5.Type of certification held: Certificate expiration date I n s t a 11 e r Pumpercm OF uRDHO FJ^m^ OFFICE 6.Have you ever held a Septic System Installer 1 iceiisy^^^^^^j^ Orono before?Most recent year *7 j / VZTk'fi-wA 7.Have you ever had a license revoked? Where? When? 5<?. TL oOt hliEiPT-THM YDL H24i630 COOl ROl U ---------- 05/1 8. 9. Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes No Do you pump out septic tanks? Yes No SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: Z! 2. $50.or License application fee. ^p. $2000 JO license and permit bond naming City of Orono asS^p^^ obligee. The State Plumbers fond will not be accepted. $50-100-300,000 minimum Certificate of Insurance^^.ji?-^^ Copy of current MPCA Certificate. LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED List persons other than applicant who are authorized by you to apply for permits under your license 'T)/aw^<r s______________________ The undersigned hereby makes application to the City of Orono, Minnesota, for a license to Install and repair septic systems, and/or pump out septic tanks, subject to the laws of the State of Minnesota and the Ordinances of the Cirty^of Orono. Date CITY USE t:?LY ^ A- ^ Applicant's Signatur i Cirfcyt of Orono. Staff recommendation Approval Reason for denial: Denial 5'~SO-9^ City Council Action Date Date license mailed Approved Denied *5 ■#i.Foal 'juice ooA oo axYo c^: '•>•- i' U' £ f- ; fl,(-:A- V' .,>v » V-. ’5- V=’ 1-5 * - if f--: ■ li?' K. ■? • .r teli8iiW.lnii^fc^ Cryital Bay» BiinneMUi 55323 SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLERS -LICENSE APPLICATION BUILDLNC A ZONING - 473-7357 assessing All questions iJUlSt be answered. License fee, bond, certificate Mjpfanci, 1*05 evidence of MPCA Certification or Horae Sewage Treatment Workshop attendance must accompany this application. « t “ . . _______ ________%•_____|_ J__________ / -1 n \ J-,., ^ 1All applications are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. 1. Business or trade name ^E' ^ JlA A~ N /0*-S> 2. 3. Business address OB' U {1(\}^C,lU([/ I I ( / — -5^330Business phone ^I3t- V«b Residence phone e^UViO-, Name of applicant or company representative holding MPCA certification _______________________ Installer X PumperType of certification held: ____ _____ Site evaluator ____System designer . Is this a Provisional Certificate? (\fO Certificate No. /.^&/ 'lAVl FIC£ 8. d. If no Certificate is held, provide evidence of attendance at one of the On-Site Sewage Treatment Workshops hej.d imme^^l^tj^\ prior to the current construction se^on. * Have you ever held a Septic System ^noteal^er license^^h^^^j Orono before? KT/3 Most recent year _ _ _ _ Cl^CK TL , ^ liECEm-rnm yol Have you ever had a license revoked? J^O When? HI'40990 COOl iOl T. Where? Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes_ _ 10. bo you pump out septic tanks? Yes X No No kG:) 05/( \jQe do JlA36-lal( S€ m'OSUBMITTALS REQUIP.ED: ____. /^.oo ------- rmSCE OFFICE 1/^ 1. license application fee. 13llt00000 2. $2000.00 license and permit bond naming City of Orono obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be iPT-lim YCiiX 3. $10-50-100,000 minimum Certificate of Insurance.-ry:vr;^) li X 4. Copy of current MPCA Certificate or evidence of atten^Kcfi Ac/'i ilyat On-Site Sewage Treatment Workshop [j.eld immediately prior to current construction season LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED, List persons zher than applicant who are authorized by you to •PPl/ permits under your license _ _ _AfAity _ _ _ Date The undersigned hereby makes application to the City of Orono, Minnesota, for.license to install and repair septic systems, and/oi, pump out septic tanks, subject to the laws.: of the State of Minnesota and the Ordinances of the City of Applicants Signature £/'2JaJ^^ Staff reco^imandation Approval Reason for denial: Denial Date City Council Action Date ^ - H v .. ^ f i« dflAlHi. ________ Approved Denied m Mlo X JO -< m » m » m » OO CDO OO moQ mm OO JOJO MM mhi -on no OO r-Ci >o </>z v> mo C/)X a m » » M O 00 LH 0 OOmuim V.% M M M CD CO <0 CD V.-s.CD CO CO CO IS) M IS) ^MC a I M oomcj U) U) 00 000 MM 000 VJ^ O)000 0)0) 4 . CO coo m M *0 X M M M •o O C/) M > Om 0 OO 0 M M M •1 f 1 H i idJ tJCJ U) Ul mm fsl 01 out M 1 1 1 f M MM M M K)K»K) CO CD CD CD 1 1 1 1 CO tJU)CJ M MM M a1m m m m » w 00000000000 > -a m 9 » u • » 9 m • 1 1 1 i_r»CKSCKSCKS00000000000cncncnLnun/it/»tncnuMji iO(DO<DtfMD<D(DCO(D(0 <D(D(0C0<D(O(D(DCD<O(D K>rsjN>roKjfs)KjK)fOfsjro O P\> CJ 00 ♦— tt»U)^fO MOMAMDOHDOrslCO^CnO Miit^O)ooai<D(0--^r>JOO eooc/*09<£>oooitncnoo CPCDCSCDQ900C90DC00900 (/> C/U/U/) V) (/»</)(/)(/> (O 88888888888 ao;D:*:v93D«3Qa>»« m mmmm mmm m m m mmmmmmmmmmm 3C 2? M«HmMM—imm4/)mm </M/>i zmz ___ 0(/)C/>m0DQ00 HM n niM 90 OnXMi/>mn cm SOXXM ?5*8S O*«$mSSm>:0c :^w*«/»c X-too M com >mMr-m3ocDOZ z^ XCD 0> nzC z ZotJ-Hmzzoo ozp z-o0 m >>r* a J9 m X CD 0 X M flMKIK^OOOOO I I I I • I I I I I I U>U9UC*>UU>CJtJtJUiJ 00000000000t/i c/« ui m ouM/i cn ui c/i I I • I I I I I I I I UlUl^^lbJbOtrOMMK^ OIOMJO9«0Ot^J^«bOO 0<0'^0l^0l0<0c000 I I I I I I I •• I I «D CD 09 000 ^ rOK)U«OOOMK>fsJM»-* a MM a MMM »M M a M a Ma»a Ja ^a aaa•xl M a a 'Sj aaOOa000aOOa0a 0aO) O)a ^ Ca ^a CJ Ul a rs>a Ma00 oc a 000 a a C7>a «a OOmen (D iO (D iD CO fsj ^ 000 (0<DO CDOD ^ l-Hmm m m f^to #--1M OO M O) CD CD MI-4 m m m m CD mo X si o M o -< 000cnmwn 00 tn en ocn Om CO CO CD M CO CO O > Hm om So 0 CO CO CO fsjKjrsj CO CO K) rsj IDX /? ^J M coo 0)0) ^ M O) O) O) CJ LJ OON J1 MM OO <0 00 men M M mm rocDcn O) oc 00 OO OO nnn >>>ono XIXmmm -D-un >>>nnnmmm 9D90 90 000 000 MOO n V, m m moo V)CD OC7 </) CD mm muu MM OO XXmm com o nm CD a a »a aaa■:a aaaaaa1 0 1 0 « 0 1 0 t 0XXXXCDCDCDtr.CD kjnjT >>>>cc n r- OO n r- MM f"mm M CD < CD CD m -c m 0 0 >z § 0CD CD JO m z MM >r* r“r*"O m m 1* 1 X 0 M M 00 0 z XX CD MmmmmM 0 n Xm O X m 5 M CD 9D Mm -I -D m > X M ao o m r- CD CD O M M H M <-40 -400 0 jaM ^ M M CJ 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1#a<a #a#a|a la la la tJCJ Misirs)09 00 CJ CJ C a ICJ CJC a ICJ OO IS) M M MMM IS) IS)Is) ( 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1mis)mM 0 mm M mCD CD CDISMD CD CD K)O)OO OCDCD M *—CD ID * 1 1 1 1 1 1 • CD OD CDC a JM f>(0 tJ COU)M U) M «>J * ^M K) on Mz < n b 0 ID 1 N) I CD Ki CD Om o m ■Wf.-1 xirv W- '.'44':. '■te W^H'-’^'' -irE' 1^'- ’ rs>rON)K>K)M cn uun i/1 cn tn Ol CA CA O) Ob 0> ra M O oooooo i/1 i/1 i/I i/u/> ui o cn tt> ID CO fO iO (O K)K>N>M K)K) CO N) o o o o o o ni fti ni m rn zaezzzz cccccc mm a ffc ni z >r •? 'O *D -O "O >>>>>> 99ZZ 30;09 </> ID C/H/1 (/) (/> oo oooooooooooo 30o (/M/M/) (/)(/) CO CCCCCC '^'W-O-VTI ni fiA ni ni ni rn (OC/MOC/M/)CO oc 30 ►H o m K) o in CD K/ i/I 1- CO CO CJ k- K/ro M i/I in 1 — k-m^lkcocoo*>J CO CD •“* ►— MlOlMi/llkUlfS} 4 « fS)N/N/M HOOMkUMDi/lO in in m X z m 00 ID Xm (/)c/) m o m :o -D O Ob Om CO CO o in CO r j in in o>a> maioo oo OO :d O m 3D 1-4 o c/> O <-4 c *n m m ^<^00 O o IkCOCOK/k^k^K)•—k- 1 1 1 1 f 1 1 1 1 #k |k |i |k |k Ilk Ik Ik tSJMMKIfSJhO Nl tJ CJ UI ill CO COCO CO CJ N>o .|k ►- 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i/HDUliDMk*in k-o DIOIDIIklkfM >ik in 0101040(0 ID 40 CD f 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 iOlOtDiOlkUl 40 CJ k — UINIK/k-fsIi-^k-CJ Ik »•*» m ••• »9 •» 1 1 1 1 O o O o X X X X CO CO CD CD ►-Ik » *- OJOJtOCJO^OJOJCJOJ Ik N) Ik 'nJ OJ o Ik '-J ro on IS/ Ik ooooooooo inminininininiPin o if o in o on o in COiOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO (OCOCOCOCOCOCDCDCO ro tj ro ro fs) fs) f\> fs> rj CO M CD fS/ CO r\> CD rvj oooooooooiiiiiiiiimrtimmmmmmm 3D3D3PZZZ3D:D30 ooooooooo >>>>>>>>> »“«l-f>-4l-4l-ikH»-4MK-l‘n~n-n‘^-n-T)-n'»i*n m m m m m m m m o o o o o o o o o :«3D3D30Z3Q3DZZ TJ'DT»UD"D ‘D*0'D 3D m C-i c k-«»-4»-4t-4>-4l-4l«lk-4kH C0C/M/)CDC/)C0I/M/)C1 -4 > z CO 3D m 'D > ►H 30 "0 O "O r- CO ^'^"JOOCOOO o o (*/ N/k —>—k —k-»K-»*—»—*»—CJ Ik IIIIIIIII 1 1 1 1 Ik k-*k-»k-»l-»»-»k-»K*k-»00 K/»—CJ cei/ii/uncnini/iciii/i^k-in Ik k —is>K>K/rors/Kirjis/rs)o kj Ik in IIIIIIIII 1 f 1 1i/iininis/k-k-ooo k-k-in in COOlIklk'ojrs/CACJO M kj Ol 40 OCOCDCO^IOCDCDO CO ID 40 k-> III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l£)CDCO|kCJCJk>*»^0 CJ (a)CD 40 UkJk-*NICJk»infsJO k-k-*fSI rj k-* k-fsj kj in in /k fs; in Lj k —O O 'J 'J 09 OO O O k- io fjkJOOMDfsja)*--CO oo 09 OO fs) rsj Ui Ui oo Xk CO m o ►— ID O iO CD k-» »—oo ^ -J |k Ik ip'nuKjioioooiniDin to u C7» cn CD ID OO O) •k •m •o V » » I n X CD » I o X CD m I O X CD Ozm O X o cz O o o oOooQ T)r*z O -<O z >z m <o M r*O mc>r*o z 13 r*-<n 0 >O D r*k4 30 3D 1-4 z <-n o m k4 m cr zzCDoo»-4 -4 K4 z 30 z CD k4 o >oo m Z am CD O 30 ►H •D l-lo >oooc zo M z < Xm CD CD Qm CO fs> o 1-4 O O 30o o Xm o X 3D m o *-4 CD •Hm 3D 0 in 1 fs/ A I 4D kJ O fn 3 m »mm mm oo O m m m I O X </> o ►- <D (D K> tflUl tJUl lAlA lAUI >o X o Xm X o > oo IM I N) I tn CO I CD Jl m m » K)K> 00 00 'nI ISlMNiN) tn uu/i tn •-4 ^ rjfsjfsj -4 m » » fo i/9 OO tn LA oooownc/^cntn ooo iAU'cn CD CD COCO K) N)(O CD CO CD MNJfsJN) CO CO CO ro NJ fsj •*4 ^>1 <kCA fh cn ^ OOIA tn *>iqo ►- N> CA >- r>) ^ CA OCJ OI CO ►-MOCA rOMNINI oooooo MO O-^CA OOO OcniM cn o> c?> oi OOOO I oo a o C9 o o ooo^10J0-J3 30 3C 30 *TITI OOOO mmm XX cccc CO CO CDmm^-D-D-U cocoto3u:d mmm COCO XXXX 30 30 :ommmm -4-4 >>>>►4MI4 > >r-mr*r-ZZZ -4-4 -4 -4H -4 ooommXXXI OO ►4 14 1-4 #4xzz zzzmmon >> oooo r-r* o >>C^<-l<4C|*T>"0 -O X TJ U CCCC CCCm3DZzzzzCO CD CDX14 »4 mmmm o rr- 14 14 14 »4 CCC >mm ZZZZ CDCDCOr*mmmm CO CD CD CO CD CD CD r~ m m OOO OOO -4 tJKJ » I CJCJ 00 CAD) 1 I lAUi o> ^ CD CD I I CO CD Ml— "4000 till cn cncACA I I I I cnM^-»- CO Jb O CO ^ CO till CO CO CO CO Mco^- IA M 09 CD •4 M tn 00 o » » » » ■ » I O i/9 m m u i O i/9 Ocn CD M 090% 4^ OOoo o o <m X > »-4 CO m 30 < > CO CD n m » I O CO ocn CD M MM ^ ^4 cncn o r- m S 8 -4m 30 MMM o o CfMACA 1 —►— 1 1 1 1 1 ^JbcnuicnCJ CJ MMM tn Moooo% 1 1 1 1 1 ^1 —o09 00 00 M CO CD CO 1 1 1 •1oooCJ►-ooo ►- m m m I O 3iC CO o Xm o o > Hm §o 1-4 -4m X om ID O M •o H IHo oo Xo M X < CD CO M ’-i o l-l O-n O30 O Xo mo mo •4 CD Hm o CD 'O • M O OI f ^ "O CD > ^ Q > m Q m f . • f -•> »•»> »»«»•«• m »•»•m » 1 t 1 1 1 1 t 1 O o o o o 0 0 0 X 3?3;35 I/I VI V)VI VI VI VI VI *-40 -sj'.g^-^OOOOO MOOO O -4 > U>»-*|k»^♦-»o 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 till 1 1 o Ik fb !».Ik o 0)10 N)fSjK)N)rON)N)K)fO IOCOCJCa)tJ K)c K)K) 10U)U>C0U>UICJ^^-oooo Ik lO z fOMK)H«K>MfS)00 0> OM7) 0>oo fs)-1 1 1 1 f 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 till 1 1 OIK)iiuiuninfs)fsjo^O #k»-00 fs)LH z lDO)^^<D^(DN>|k o -^UUO w o <0(D OC0<0(0OUMD(0O oo ^(D(D Ln O 1 •1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 till 1 1 <OI^oto»- »-a>iO »-4 K)K)OCJIkfO cn CJ z < •ou» 1 •K>o o» 1■ fD ISI C/)>»»»m »O »»»m V >ni m »•»o 1 1 1 1 1 m O O o O O 3il 31 (/)</l i/)%A in u» ^:v:' m m » » » M tJ fo MM ->4 ^ '-J -i OCaI CJOJ «s» o> QD m » V » » U O) » J» » ■ iiim ., i- ..^ O) cn tp CD CD cr> CD l^)^J CD CD 9 » » 9 9 9 CD CJ 1^ o o OO o OCDiDID ID u%tD \ M M MM M »—• ID ID CD ID CD CD V.\V,\ ID CO CO ID CD CD K)M rgfs>ro rj O iD CD KI O OO O OtnVD CD LH CD W M »— ►—M CD CD CD CD CD V.W \'V CD CD CD CD CO f J f^J rsj i^CD ^ roK) tJLj » I O </} Hm Cm O 90 M m Tl > l-l 99 cm u> N> CD O I CD II » I O 9iC I/I I/) CD HH mm MM MM OQmm 99 90 onoozz CP(/) -HM on OO CD(/> M M mm 90m M U H -<M Xni ZID u»< MNI iDcn I I ID CD MM I I 00 1 • OOoo 9 m 9oz I/I O C/l z z M o o M X X r~M M >r~MmzM CD z Ozmo>m z XMomZMzOr“> 1 1/)o O O X z ominX om Xc 90 >om K) CJ K> I CD CO » ID » » » Io 9^ CD 90 90 mm mm OO <<mm OO MM C/Io X > 90 CD m 90 •V 90 o >c oo CD O Mzo c M M r~ M M -< X o > too “n M OO >> oo CD c T> "O Cm mo om <m m 90 O*o o Moz M m in o O ►—o o oMMM 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 9^»—Di CD M N)CO 00 fj CJOICDMooCJoOoN) fsj M CJ1111 1 1 1 OI o M CD ID CD K>OJ o K>CD ID CD CDCJoCD►- M O o1I11 1 1 1ooU)CD CD CD CDooMCJM •»m »9 9 •m »999•9 » 1 1 1 f 1ooooozXXXXinIDID(A iA O Xm o X zo o > Hm >EC ID O Ul • bJCJ tJUl <D CD • • OOoo M M • » ^ 00 CD M ih CJOU)OO .896.896..977.977fs9KI K) N) ^M CJ OO N) CD CD CD 670670fsj CD O z oo OlOl 00 09 CaIUI OO IDOCD OOO oo OO OO OO th OO .49.49•vlM CD ID IDO ID CD OO OO OO M OO »D H 9 M m %m 9 9 9 <•m ES m X om I/I O M *o Oooc Mz < (D • IP fSJ o M -< o-n Oz Ozo o Xmoz m o M C/I O IT Z c fsl O oi I «> m K> Xm i/i ID > Om Om OI >I ;i 1 Hr :0^e': w . ■■'. . ■' ■f ;-' ,f.i. >. ':■'* ■ . ,■' I".*' r' *- ., I*« -/V- ■'f-' *'•/; ■ -'A',. V ml.- ■ ■ » ifc„ ii- 4 r •. H ■ ifef 6>- mihUW- si-f Til,. ' Ou>o M O Ul o III ID K> ID M > m III 1-4o f fn i-i Ms I/I m ■D > 1-4 Ocm Ul •si I O ►- I ms •ooo • oo 0 1 CJ ID I M. s4 ID O •m m m • m -I M Di tn D» S| 00 u> €7> Ditto •sjsl CO 00 LJOJ inui O Ul o Ul o LH OO UIUI <0(0 (D M (D fs> ID ISJ (D(D K>K> H Mo m IP Z M H s4 Di I U> 00 U) I Ul ID 0 1 ID CaI Cmo f $ cc >> 3Q30 •P IP ►H#-!zz OO ni •p Xm 8 Co -4 t/^ ►-IM -I-4mmtoo o O OO Tim ii Z ►H m >om TJ >:p H (/) Dtto tto -4 -4->J 00 00 00 tJCj U> h- to> » to to •4^ s4-4 ^ 00 00 00 00 00 Ul UIUI UIUI •4 ID OI ^4 *4 (O Ul *4 •4 00 00 mm m to to to ooo UlUiUI OO o o o Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul o Ul o Ul o Ul (D(D (0 ^J fvj N) <D (0 (D <D (0 ro N> K> N> N) (0 N) (D f^> (0 IS) UIUI <D €*><D(D fS)M (DCD UlCOM <7> CO U>M ►- ^ O POOO to • UIUI Jto Ito OO (O OI U)OIMMO Ul s4-4 OO MIS)K)fS)MON)M C7) OO *4 O UIUI OO •4-4 OO OOO ^ Ul»— 00 to to m to to to ccc >>>t/l U) (/></) CO m m m (/)</>(/) CCCCK rn m m rn m (/)(/)(/>(/)</) OOOOO a z •H-n O ?Dz U> c M z 50 ►4 o ►H > H m 1-04 ►H ZZZ OOO >>> c z m O 50 “O M Pcz •p m m ZZZ OO-HO-4 cr-r->4 >4 >4 >>m>m z >>r- t-r~-4 -4 r* —1 f”»4 U>(D m mm >> m> m m XX >>>p p ommOOOP O X P X p U)UI m mm pp 0^0S8S8S Z U) CO -4 5P ♦4 T) m > »4 5P § Q (/) O U) 0 »— 1 (0 CO I ►- s4 I U> Ul to to>to to to to to to to II to to to tototototototoV I 1 1 1 1 1 1OOooOooP'T :>c z pUlI/I CO C0 CO U)Ul s4 >4 Ul o Ul (D ro ►-►- I—tJCJ •4M OO O) M UlM D (4CJ UIUI OO OO OOUl U) rsj u> -4 OO <71 <71 OO to CJ UlO <7> M fto <7> D (0 UIUI OO MM OO M MM CJ OO OO O) oi OO to to to to to O Oc i -< -n ftim sj OO ^OO •4-4 ^4 0 0 O O OCJK- ^CJ 1 —•CJMMH-^•—►-CJ •— 1 1 f 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f 1 f 1 1 Di ttolto D D D ito ttotb Ditto ito ito D DMCOC4CJCJCJCJU) CJCJCJ M M CJ CJ U)tJCO 00 00 00 UIUI MUIM M CJ D D 1 — K- >—UIUI O UlO ►-*CJ M 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I • Ul MM UlH-O uicnuiOto-♦—M Ul •— CD tto CD •4 0)CD tto ^CDM M D CD M CD <0(D (D tto (0 <D CD CD CD CD CD CO CP CD 1 1 •1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •1 1 1 1 ID #to CO CJ»-^(0<0 <D CJ CJ ito CO CJ M MM M CJ Ul M)-» ►- Ul»—►—M M to- m O o > -4m <m S m Z om U)o 5P 14 -D 14 Oz oooc </> c/> Qm o •4 H -< O 70o m Oz mo M (/I m 70 O Ul I KJ I Dm 0 ■j - m 9 9 9 9 0<D • « OIU VIOJoo O VIo^ Tl-n §§ MO M*- HHqo -«H r-r- <o fO <D (O •—o H>►-H*H*►—H*H» »—•—K- 1—H*H*H* 9^o CD '-J •Nj vj CD CD (D CO CD CD CD CD CO CD CO CD CD m fsJ H*H*H»H* H-O OO o OO O O o C a J N)H»o CD oo 00 cn o>VP O o O a O O O O O o o o OO o o o o oVIIPVPIPCPVPCPVPVPvnIPvn vn IP VP VI CP CP V*V.•\\\\\\V.►—•—H»H*H*H»H»H»H-►-H»H» H»H»H* H*H*H (D CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD COCO CD CD CD CD CD V,\\V.\\\\\w 'v.\ CD CD CO CD CD CD CD CD CD CO CD CD CD CD CD (D CD CD N>K)rs)fsl ro fj N)fO rvj rj ro roKi fO K)K>ro oo h- H»CP CP fslN>H* H*H H*COOJ ►— »-*'vj ^VP VP roH- ^H» K-CD OO CP CP OO 00 H K-KINJ H H»o» CP cpvn CP CP K> rvj 0» tJ o o VJ VP CP U> U)rorvi oo isiro oo vn vn COtJ OO oo CP CP 00 oo o CP oo tON3»-ee oo H» H-6 iPVI bo oo ^ w OO CD CD CD CO OO oo H* H»oo ooo oo OO vncp VPoooooooooo00 OO CP CP oo oo CD CD oo ooo oo 00^ ^oo OO o o > CXI VI M m (/I C/l > -< Q X O 2 M ? > -< X m r“rno o Oxo 30 O m (/) C-4 z i-tom Io (/)n o (/Im 30 < Mzo JOo ►Hz >r~ •H 30m m o < zm O ♦Ho V) “nor- H >< V)m 30 < K > H m 30 i/i CO >o >>cc <tPCP X 30 mm HI oo m C-I o mm CP cc H >c -C-I 30 c/l r- r-XX OoX-<-<o >> X H<m XX c >Z zz C > >Z mm m ODCO (PmCC30ccHriVICP CP CP CP m O O >-IHI o --4 HI M n z z O >ZZ m mmoo>cPiP H4 z CP CPzo ooc *n Oc -H HIo HO HI H m H CP CP o T)o X >>>V)>m z r r*30 o c r*m o m T3 OO cXDZCP>m HI 30 H >30 r*r*-o 30pcm-<O z >H <p X m r-r~so o o -1 -H H r-CP HI -<-1r-30 30 H4 Hl —1 CO O mc r*>Q O z —1 m -1 >"O r~r-S H4 c z o Hi CP m r“r“m mOmXzHI30Xr->><c o o m •H CP O z HI 2 CP CP CP c c CPommHI r-(/)com > >r- O oo > -I V) >o o o Mom oc HI “O >o » 9 9 Ioz o > Hm >Ec <m OO 30 HI -Im om (/Io 30 HI-o HIo H-o o O o o O o -DO o o > tJ ro H*H*H»H»H*fO H»H»CD CDH*H»o 1 1 1 1 1 »1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •o 4N Di Dk M oCJVPCDCDCDrsiCDCDOOCDCDCD(D CD CD CD M M c OI fsl H*CP OO o CD fslK)O KIN)M zoOifs)09 O OI CD O CD 00 CD CD OI CD CD OI o H 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IP CD Kl H»hJ H*H*vn CP O K)CP vn VP VPfs>O H»Z OI CD CD N)CD fSJ N)CD ro CO CD CD OI O)^o ID o CD K>CP CD vn CD CD CD 1—O CP OO CD CD CO o CD 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f 1 i 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 CD o OI CD CP CD CD CD CD OI CD (D CD (O^o CD HI M o CP H»CP H*•-*H»H»VP CD CD M KIM o z Xm VI VI >om O-n O 30o o Xm o m o H# VI m 30 0 VP 1 fs> OI I XI >on Q> 1 I *•*" * ' ■ \ 1% tv-I ^1- . .A ,•., '• !te;- fe';. ■mh ■m> Xo too M xxxxxxxxxxxxxxoonnonooonoono <OIDtfMDI£HDIO<D<Dtf>^<0U3U) OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO o to o ai to Xr CD O cr> 00 XX OO UD to OO CD 0> Xo CD o <T> CD Xo CD O CD CD IXXXXXXXXXXXonoooooooono CDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCOCOCDCD OOOOOOOOOOOO CDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDDiCDCDtD CJU>CJOJ(a JCJLJCJUIU)U>U> O tn OOOOOOOOOOOOOOtnuttnuiuunuuDtncnuuntncD o ui o cn 0 01 OOOOOOOOOOOOOO O) CD 0> CD OI CJI OI OI OI OI OI OI OI o Cl o CD CO CDCOtOCOCDCDCDIOCOCnCDCOCDCD CD KJ CD fSJ o *jy o cn o CD o Cl CO CD M CD ID I-H* CD 1—I-* ^ CD09 UlCO *^MOII->M UlfMO OOOMCri ^ |3h CO CD OI fO CD l-« OI OI CD CD CD CO OO U> OO OO IDl-OiDOIOI-KIUIl-OOOooCO •— 1-U ' h'*(a ) ID CD CD Ul CD N)►— •—o o ID CD OO O CD UUD OO OO OO ^ CD CD OO OO OO OO CD 0(0 OO OO ■«»o m >-nn l/H/M/l C/UD (D </) (/H/H/H/) l/UD (D Q O <z CDm >>>>>>>►>>>>>> > (D Tfmo “Titi-n"t|T|*n-n-n“nTi“n-n"n-n OOOOOOOOOOOOOO >>>>>>>>>>>>>> CD Mr-nM rOK>lSJNIN)MKIK>rMrMN)MN)NJ O ♦- I o ID 0 1o 0 O 1 Oo -^'^-^OOOOOOOOOOO I I I I I I I I t I I I I I Kl Kl K>K> Nl K> ro M K> ro Kl K> M Kl « I I I « I I I I I I I I I Vn OI VDK> H* l-« 1-^ O O O O O O CDOI^t»O0*Nlh«»-«OI^|^toU)KI OCOCDCOCDDbCD^COOOOCOO I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CDNII—MCDtJl— l-CD(A}K)fOKJI— miuinum iilliiiiiiliiirTTT*rT“r-r*rTT-r-r“r- Z $ r“ CD I- O -0 “0 OO i/)tA ii (/ICO X CD O 00 CD O O Z mm O O C ?0 (/)m o o l/M/l XoOcc-4zzvD ?0 (D•n -tl -H -4 ::« JO CD O TJ m O > (D X O O 'O ►-*tDN>Ik Ik 1 1 1 »1 1 Ik Ik Ik Ik 1— to Ul COCO U)O tD ID KIKI (D Ik CD CD CD M 1 1 1 1 1 1 O ►-LDtD CD O to M CD Ik CO o CD CD to CD o o 1 1 1 1 1 1 ►—to CO CO CD o K)»—Kl •—CO o OOOOOOOOOOOO IDlDCDCniDlDCnCDCDUICDUD OOOOOOOOOOOO OlCIOIDIOIDICnOIOlQlCDCTI COCDCDCDCDCDCDtOCDCDCDCD NJNlfMf^MNirONjrvJISJfSjrO cn CD CD »— 00 OO CD ►-CD I-ISJQC a IC a I ^ifc'DUnOCJCDK-'*—►^'>ICDH-a CDCDCDCDtOCDCDCJtAlh-CD'vJoo OCDtDOICDCnOOOONJlDK- l/M/)(/M/)C0(/UD(/)l/)(/M/)(D >>>>>>>>>>>> -nmmm Dmmmmmmm CDOOOOOOOOOOO >>>>>>>>>>>> vj-^-^OOOOOOOOO t I I I I I I I I I I I K>rOMNIKirorsJN>N)MlS>>- I I 1 I I I I I I I I I CDCDC/IKl»-‘l-*»—►—►-•OOl-' CDCDfrtb00^H*»^l-«OIUIM OCDfDCDi/I^CnCDf—CDCOUt I I f I I I I I I I I I CDCDCD^UICDOJLJCAll-^l^bJ U)N)H-KICDC a >I—»— Xn CD O o Xmo X to to fs> o M H -< O CD O > o-n 0 o CD o o CD fsl > E Cz -H OO 00a o OO OO o JO O <m -D > -< O O O JO O Xmo X Xm Q M CD m X om lAo » •D •H IHo X XX X 1 » >>>>>» z zz 2 z • c CIC C c 1 >>>>>O r*r-r*r*r-X (/» uHiimm : cccccccccccc >>>>>>>>>>>> O > O 1 oo »—c: Ul z »-•-4 1 1—Z M o CD 1 Ul l-l ►- •o 1 .Ul o o •1 «l ill fsi "D c/»> ■X c/»O »>>m >z Q f c nio> JK r- (D ►- f cl Q ] 4\ i © ■ r-‘ ♦ S/ r M«.1■Ji^ s &■■■■ <o o 09 wm^. ?*,, f;?'/ CO o 09 o xxxxzxxxxxxxooooooooonoo tf>COCOIOCOCDCOCO(OCOCOCOooooooooooao tOUXOIDUMDCOCOIDCOCOCO XXXXXXXXXXXonooooooooo COCOCOCOCDCOCOCOCOCOCDooooooooooo oooooooooooooocooocr oo XXXXXXXX OOOOOOOO COCOCOCOCDiOODCO OOOOOOOO X m XX Io0OOO CD m CD CD CD o m OO O -4 m OI »CJ to K> O Ul o Ul oooooooooooo uluitnuiuiuiuii/iuiuiuicji ooooooooooouicncnuiLPuiuiuitncnui OOOOOOOO uicncncntntnu’Ln 0 01 o<n OOOOOOOOOOOO CHCJIO>(7IOIOIO(7IOIC7IOIO> OOOOOOOOOOO Oy OI 0> CJI 0> CD CD O) Ul CD CD OOOOOOOO CDCDCJIdCTICTlCDCD CD M CDCDCOCOCOCDCDCDCDCDCDCD rs)K)r\>fsjiNjK)KjNj»s>NjroKJ fOCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCCCOtO Nl K> N> ro N) KJ ro K) K> rj fo <£) fO U3 CD CD (O to (O N> fv> ro M r j r J r J r j O oo o Ul uun cn O OO o (7)0)01 OI \ CO CD CO CD Niro NI rofs> U) Ul uun CO 09 CDN) ►- ^ ^UICJ'^C ►— C7I --J (D OI OO OO to CD ooUioeotJOOO^Oi^ooi^ COOO'^CiJ^^'^H*ritAjr\>ui ro Ul »-r-ai uii— k *C a > Ik cn ro 1— • • • tOUlN)-4|klDCnCDCD CD CD t— O^-CD 00 09 CnCDOONICJI—l^tONJO r^'UMotnNiuiotk^oo UI9kk-roro O O O CD CD ^ CJcn ^OlOOCDCOlklkNIlkO OO -OCD > «Dr-rJH*r-N)0)UiNiCD-4to OUlOOCDCnONIU)oo ooo ►*NltO|k|k-4l— |k0r--400 OOl 1^000000 oo ooo »m •»• c/» H O r- §Ho CDm CD I CD CD I M CD I CD CD >•nni "0"OHTJijTj'qtnj*DTj-omnmftimmnimmmmm H- I— I- I— CDCD(D(/)CDtDlD<D(DCDCD 00n oooooooooooo >>>>>>>»>>> CDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCD XXXXXXXXXXXX >>>>>>>>>>> XXTXXXXX mmmmmmmm OOOOOOOO onooonnn >>>>>>>> CD-omo 01 M OOOOOOOOOOOO?d:o^po::d3D?dxi?03o:d»OOOOOOOOOOOOzzzzzzzxzzzz OOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO >>>>>>>>>>> XXXXXXXX >>>>>>>> KJfDMK3K)fvJMfS)MK)NJ 00 00 00 00 09 00 00 00 00 09 09 zzzzzzzz CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD T3 O CD H > Om M Zo oooooooooooo -4-J-^OOOOOOOO -4000000 I M o Ul 0 1 oo 0 1oo I I I • I I I I I I I I CD UMD CD CD CD CD CD K> K> M fsj 0900Uirs>K>rDK>K>#i»l-^^M OCDOl^-H-^-^-^lDOOO I I I I I I I I I I I I H»OOOOl—►-oo KliDNIMUliflffeCDISIlSICOIk cdcdcocdooocdcdcdcdo I I I I I 1 I I f I I I CDl-*COCAjl—>**f—>—CDtD^—»~* I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ^ Ik CD Ik|k|k9k|k|k^|k|k|k|k ►JMN)K)N)N)K)N)N)N)M I I • I I I I f I I I UI c UIK)k ->-»—l-OOO tDC7)^|kOO^^->»-«ail^CD OCDCDCDUlIhUi^CDOCO I I I I I I I I I I I <DCD(DlklDtJCDlD»-«^«^ U)K)>~-K)CnUJ^-»—LHLJISJ uicncnuiuiuiui*D I I I I I I I I UIUIKJ h -h -OOO oii^^^fsiaiiDO CD CD CO 1^ CD CD too I I I I I I I I tDCD^CJU)!—V-O K)l-IS*tD^-Uifs)0 i i Z $ IIUUUIUI lUlUUUl uuuu cccccccccccc >»>>>»>>>> zzzzzzzzzzzccccccccccc >>>>>>>>>>> zzzzzzzzcccccccc >>>>>>>> ii t1 "Hmmmm “OoCD -4 >om zmcCD m H •Hm :99 CD CDro o X m o o 1-4 Z -H O -< 1 o ^ > -H O m PD O >Xoc m CD CD *Do>>o CD mm CD -H mm H X X < >CD CD 5 m CD mm CD z -H zz H ommoz:d :d oXmo PI Q M CD m i-f —4m Om CDo M *tl H MO o oo o > ►—•— n-»—o 1 1 1 •n •—Ikl-o NI CDO CD c O)OUl o zro<7>0 o -4 1 1 1 1 o NIO ro zoCD O CD o o too CD • 1 • 1 1 o -40 -4 r-4 o roo ro Z < 9»o ■D 1 .COoo■9 CD •ro Xm CD > i • ■?i $ ID > omzZZzO c 1 cc c m >o >>>r-mm m CD ro 4) 1 I 4 ■ m ri *••» » ‘ >■ . •^•'^ ’•' ►»• - ,"^» .* •-. . ^» ...<r ,-.» -• > . * - ♦"iii • \ 'v 1■4 Itv- h 05/10/92 PR CB PRREGOR 133EMP « NAME 471688060 474563339 476921819 471840871 475443862 472503991 469526026 476643387 475989721 468821018 472529007 468701868 507585424 469686562 468420832 469087884 474667812 475380151 477500666 475444249 477463877 388625358 471569863 473141624 477647279 475604753 504260307 472500574 121262417 475344512 480843542 476018974 477700023 334506281 477028779 473108428 468909535 476783251 470700901 469848107 475382983 473746173 473609629 470566529 469629194 475569177 267460042 472563051 474663296 470704904 475505292 468629488 500403192 477881539 ANDERSON, BRUCE L BOBZIEN, SUE A BORIS, SCOTT W BOSMA, JAMIE L BRINKHAUS, JOHN F CHESWICK, GARY B CORNICK. JAMES L DELANEY. JANE E DEMBOUSKI, JAY C ENGLISH III, IRVING ERICKSON. KURT R FISCHENICH. DAN T FRITZLER. JOHN M QAFFRON. MICHAEL P GERHARDSON, JOHN R GOMAN, DAVID J GREGORY, JAMES D HALLIN, DOROTHY M HANSEN. STEVEN C HANSING, CAROL J HASEMAN, CAROLE JENSEN. ROONEY W JOHNSON. BRADLEY P JOSTROM. FOREST J KARNITZ, RICKY D KENNEN, JANICE M KNUTSON, CHARLOTTE A KUEHN, THOMAS M MABUSTH, JEANNE A MCINTYRE. WILLIAM E MCNICHOLS, DAVID L MILLS JR. WALTER H MOORSE, RONALD J MOROWCZYNSKI, JAMES NELSON, DAVID D OAS, DANIEL 0 OBERAXGNER. SCOTT G OBRIEN. RANDY L OMAN. LYLE E PALMER, GREGORY A QUAST, WAYNE A RATHBUN. BARRY J ROSS. JOHN A SCHOENHOFF, JOHN 6 SKREEN, DALE S STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD SULLIVAN, STEPHEN X THOMTON. HARK R TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F TOWZYK. MARK W VANG. BRUCE L VEE, LINDA S WALTERS. LINDA G WECKMAN. STEPHEN J YTDOPT GROSS 31 18935.08 31 9910,58 31 2018 80 12 5411 66 42 15653.65 31 16480 00 31 17538 99 93 556 51 31 13826 50 31 16811.51 31 15189 36 31 17526 83 31 16065.36 33 14310.93 42 20115.42 35 1521.35 42 13178.47 12 12327.62 42 11403.10 31 5591 78 12 8455.23 93 55.00 31 15929.40 93 385.88 31 2182 55 31 2506 57 15 9854 97 15 21052 96 33 17921.81 93 128 63 31 4564.48 93 533 50 12 21384.00 31 16435.42 35 1985.71 93 307.63 42 10831 43 92 11865.98 33 14310.88 42 10430 24 92 14267.73 92 11796 79 93 71.50 31 2292.78 42 11346 07 93 12328.83 31 19173 65 31 14800 90 31 15961 89 31 15173 61 33 12327 62 12 9108 87 15 10936 46 33 10287 01 • ' kx4*. ; • - • i * •CURRENT . * P ^ •GROSS 1 w 1693 35 1 ' • .987.52 339.90 304.92 « A 1568 1648 00 1469 28 333 38 1348.21 1602 44 1526 40 1524.38 1599 04 1434.01 2120 69 191 21 1446 29 1235,28 1317 .17 550.83 839 36 55 00 1539 97 215 25 108 60 231.04 987 51 2109 60 1795 .84 68 25 1141 12 272.25 2238 40 1497 84 199 51 267.38 1331 41 1246 08 1434.01 1180.16 1529 22 1459 58 71 50 412.00 1526 .16 1235 28 1941 12 1538 .15 1579 48 1497 83 1235 28 938 08 1145 29 1030 81 r .1 tv- S-. . 8 ' * ‘ V . . • * t ^ ' •• -J*'* >LV/* ' V* '• « k V* *' ' Ai •. ' r ,*ji**/’>?^*o**^» • •**'*^-*»*' * «-* * / '/Li.. '-■'Cl. • •< - —• >- *T' At-J ‘tv- i; b-'< ■ ;.• : • -J'.-- ■*“ *C *' ^ ‘». 5 *•- a,.-'* ”*- •’ W--S7 , ... ... 60.139 23 ssscasaBBsasss V 0 - j? r. Vx sat L. • . fisi- t-r' ■ l.!rr ■f - , Ly'^'- ■ r# j’j^v i'“-' -V ,'V ^i: f.V.:^$i- f. ‘'■!9^ :v" K-- •♦.• •7 . •r-« ^p::'^7-"• v ' :■ .r 7v'-'ii7 7i;:-: S'-' ;^v 7 >>, 4^ 7-r f:. m-• ■ '■ J;,’. %p^,- p7* ‘4^^. P^^.‘-»(-•. 0 mhK* k'-: 777 :V w$4' ■ tip" --,. -V'' , , • 1 . 2. 5 . I OTYOf CRONO LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT jii[iE[iir5^Ti LAKE USE AND RECREATION COMMITTEE agenda Monday, May 18, 1992, 4:30 PM Norwest Bank Building 900 E. Wayzata Blvd, Room 135 (Elevator access for Handicapped: use west entrance on Wayzata Blvd.) MAY 1 4 199^ Further review of Goals and Objectives as discussed at last meeting: (handout at meeting) A1 & Alma’s On-sale Wine and On-sale Beer License applications for Ai & Alma s I charter boat, Public Hearing Report 3. Special Events: 2) B applications, with stipulations N Bass Tournaments of MN, Bass Tournament, Sunday, September 20, 1992 Excelsior Chamber of Commerce. Fourth of July Fireworks Display, July 4, 1992 Deposit Refund of $100, Northwest Tonka Lions Club, Winter Sports Fest, 2/1/92 & 2/2/92 Renewal applications, information only 1) MN/WI Pro Am Bass Tournament, _ 2) Lake Masters Swim Club, 5-Mile Swim, 7/tD/ Z 3) Don Shelby U.S. Invitational Bass Tournament. 9/11/92, 9/12/92, 9/13/92 Definition of Special Events: continued for further review 4. Charter Boat Certificate Issuance update "Boat Club" concept - discuss how these watei raft might come under Code Sect. 3.08 Rental of Watercraft regulations, and what, if any. Code provisions might be conside red. ^Concern over high water levels and ®® ® ^ ® in Stubbs Bay, per resident s letter of II w Water Patrol Report A. Annual Report: discusrion and recommendations (per copy provided at U/22192 Board meeting) Written update on significant lake incidentsB 8. Additional business recommended by the committee 0 •‘a. r -u' ;:!>■-'.■■ MAY-41992 L.M.C.O. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District LMCD Fee f ^ 3-/1..) OPEN WAl SPECl/ (for LMCD use) a:- Becauss this form is I to bo copied, please f ueo block Ink or type.I i ■A- •V y-; 1% ■:■ X I OPEN WATER FISHING CONTEST/TOURNAMENT APPLICATIONS SPECIAL EVENT LICENSE _ In Bass Tournaments of MN (Nome of applicant) 2502 Murray Road. Beaver Lake plaf tsmoii fh NF (Address) 477-4B21 (Phone number) Steven A. Banker (Responsible party, l.f different from applicant; (A191 628-572£ (Phone number) If no answer, call RR 2 Box 10(; .Address) Rockford MN 55373 1. Describe event Bass Tournament TakA AreaCa) All areas accessible by LMCD Number(s) (see map) —----------------------------------boat All 2 3 Point of access (note on enclosed map)----Public &—Friv^ Event data - attach additional sheets If necessary: a) tiareia) Sept 20, 1992 ------------------------------------------------ b) Time of dav 6t00 am to 3*00 pm c) Participant's entry fee: $ 150.00__ weiah-in to follow_ d) Total prizes to be awarded $___100% of entr^fees «) Location. Shore Drive Marina------ UA.yh-Tn North Shore Drive Marina _ f) Estimated number of watercraft^ ^(^9 —estitnate- - - g) nu«b«r of participant, (persona)-----200 estima^ h) What parking provl.lon. are arranged on land through the affected city! Privats p3rking at North Shor0 Driv6 M3r.i.n3_e_ i ■ • elH* « •• eMBA* «ar»ie < 1) HO. ar. ...nt euperyieor. ijentlfled. - Jn -Bass staff «U1 hflYf nUUtS. • - —.................. • ^ and hats to identify them j) If event Is for a touryment or contest, rules must be attached. Check so Indicating (V >• (over) 4 i t': "■ •« • r#- fvx- •■■ !i'-‘.; > ‘’^y' ii-. r.’=v h . ■•■> ■ "i-u; 'M-i. ' . • ft Lake Minneconka Conservation District Open (facer Fishing Contest Special Event License Application Fage 2 • In Bass Tournament (Event) 4. Will temporary buoys be used to (a) delineate your area of operation, and/or (b) determine points of Lake access? no if so, enclose a site plan with buoy locations indicated. Removal of markers is mandatory immediately upon event conclusion. 5. Describe effect on Lake water quality None 6. Describe litter control our staff will ensure weigh-in area is cleaned 7. Will any portion of this event be conducted on shore? ________yes______ If so, describe weioh-in at North Shore Marina___________________________________ 8. Are any additional Lake-oriented activities planned in conjunction with this event? no____ If so, please specify_____________________________ 9. Describe any safety or navigational hazard? None 10. Describe ocher safety provisions that are beinp, arranged; Safety/Check Boat will patrol waters during Tournament___________________________ ll. Will event require Water Patrol, city, or other enforcement supervision? nn If so, describe? ______________________________________________________________ 12. Will event create additional noise on the Lake? ygg If so, describetMayH more boats earlier in a.m. Bullhorn used at weigh-in site in 13. afternoon. Will event restrict general public use beyond special event area? no 1^ *®» describe: 14. Is event open to the public? No ~ niust be pre-registered . _ 15. Describe how time or place of event will affect intensity of Lake use: Weigh-in site may be congested, but we will do our utmost to keep traffic flow smooth and safe. ______- 16. Public liability insurance: Coverage 9 1> 000,000 « 00 _ Companv Scottsdale Insurance Company 1 . i E ; i-v .‘•i• • W^' X- rf' » ■ r p ■ h ^7- 7 W5?.fevtS Si- »-i*% !■ .'■' iiM' &»■ staff recommends the following stipulations for the open water fishing tournainents . 1. Permit requirements of the Sheriff’s Water Patrol, the City of __ _ _ _» Hennepin Parks and the DNR Fisheries must be met. 2. Use of starting guns or bull horns is not permitted 3. mm. Participants must be notified that: ^ a. prior to launching in Lake Minnetonka, watercraft that have been in waters known to be infested with zebra mussel, which includes the Mississippi. St. Croix, and St. Louis Rivers, and St. Louis Bay of bake Superior must have been thoroughly dried or washed- down with hot water at least 140 degrees, inside and K Ihln leaving Lake Minnetonka, all lake weeds must be cleaned from watercraft, including wet wells and internal areas, bait/tackle containers, and external areas including trailers. 4.Participants must be notified that they are required to comply with applicable LMCD boating ordinances. copy enclosed. Of particular importance are regulations limiting watercraft speed to 40 mph and noise to 82 dbA. 5.All temporary signs for the event visible from the lake must be removed within 24 hours after the event. All signs must comply with city ordinances. 6 .Deposit refund is subject to. a. Compliance with the above stipulations. b. The completed LMCD Special Event Report, form provided, being submitted byprOVXUcJvlf ucrxii© -------------- A copy of the DNR tournament fishing report being submitted by d. suDmi i>cu uj _ _ _ __• , ^ A copy of the DNR permit being submitted prior to the event. Al'iatr.i*.r^/rL iliiliif fi nrt> tt'r-- m ';■ ' 'S!p4 ‘' ■• 4ir Hte'SE-, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission . « Mears Park Centre. 230 East Fifth Street. St. Paul. Minnesota 55101-1633 May 7, 1992 612 222-8423 MA/ 11 - •• To Slactad Officials, City Managers and Staff: Budget Breakfasts seeking input to the Metropolitan Haste Control Commission's (MNCC) Proposed 1993 Budget are scheduled as listed below. The MHCC invites you and/or appropriate city staff to attend. Pre-Budget meetings were held in March to gather input prior to developing this proposed budget. The Commission appreciates comments received from all who attended. He realize that wastewater treatment is a major cost in your commvmity's budget and are anxious to provide our system users with effective treatment at a reasonable cost. He believe it is important to provide yo*i with an opportunity to review and comment throughout our budget process. In order co accommodate those who will be attending the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) June Conference, MHCC has scheduled one of the breakfast meetings at the Radisson South just prior to the LMC Opening Session on June 10. You do not need to be registered for conference in order to attend this breakfast meeting. He will end breakfast meeting in time for you to make the conference opening session. MNCC will schedule a Public Hearing on the 1993 Proposed Budget at June 16 Meeting of the Full Commission. Action on the 1993 Proposed Budget, containing any changes as a result of suggestions from the breakfast meetings and Public Hearing, is anticipated at MHCC's July 21 Meeting of the Full Commission. There is a meeting for industrial users on Friday, May 29, at 7:30 a.m., at the Holiday Inn Roseville. If the meetings listed below Tih your schedule, you are also welcome at the industrial meeting. don't users BODGBT BRKAICFABT ITIHG B M: I MAX 27 - WmWBBDAY KBLLX XMM - ST. PAOL 1-94 « MARZOM 8TMBBT 7:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m JUNB 2 - TOBSDAX DROVHR'8 urn - 80 1-494 4 OOMCORD 7:30 a.m. - 9:00 8T. PAUL jaMB 5 - XOPPBR KBTTLS - 088X0 225 CXMTRAL AVINUX 7:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. JDHI 10 - HXDIIB8DAX RADX880M SO. - XLOOliniOTOW 7800 MORMAMDAU BLVD. ATRIUM 2 7:30 a.m. - 8:45 a.m. TO PLACE YOUR MBBTXHO RBSBRVATION, CALL SARAH KLINE AT 229-2129. . . tf 1. *4.m Equal Oppoftonity/Affirmalive Action Employer 1^ O 'i i i ■4 -1 •g y »423 il!ji JJh >f :1l >f '/Ill iC jr •i • LI T ■ B« ■'*<! r9n«v« T^mH5TR •i*ikf i* •liH* • Bi^*• ^*4« roH ». . ..I-;..j;.t. ■>.' ;;C , .-J r.“ Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Meats Park Centre. 230 East Fifth Street. St. Paul. Minnesota 55101-1633 May 1, 1992 612 222-8423 MAi 1 1 To Elected-fOfficials, City Managers and Staff: Budget Breakfasts seeking input to the Metropolitan Waste Control Consniasion'a (MWCC) Proposed 1993 Budget are scheduled as listed balow. The MWCC invites you and/or appropriate city staff to attend. Pre-Budget meetings were held in March to gather input prior to developing this proposed budget. The Commission (ippi^^ciates comments received from all who attended. We realize that wastewater treatment is a major cost in your commxinity's budget and are anxious to provide our system users with effective ^^•atment at a reasonable cost. We believe it is important to provide you with an opportunity to review and comment throughout our budget process. In order to accommodate those who will be attending the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) Jxine Conference, MWCC has scheduled one of the breakfast meetings at the Radisson South just prior to the LMC Opening Session on June 10. You do not need to be registered for the conference in order to attend this breakfast meeting. We will end the breakfast meeting in time for you to make the conference opening session. MWCC will schedule a Pxiblic He^»ring on the 1993 Proposed Budget at the June 16 Meeting of the Full Commission. Action on the 1993 Proposed Budget, containing any changes as a result of suggestions from the breakfast meetings and Pxiblic Hearing, is anticipated at MWCC's July 21 Meeting of the Full Commission. There is a meeting for industrial users on Friday, May 29, at 7:30 a.m., at the Holiday Inn Roseville. If the meetings listed below don't fit your schedule, you are also welcome at the industrial users meeting. BODGIT BRXAKrAST ITZMG SCHEDULE MAY 27 - WEDNESDAY KELLY XMN - ST. PAUL Z-94 « MARZOW STREET JUNE 2 - TUESDAY DROVER'S IMM - SO. ST. PAUL 1-494 « CONCORD 7:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.a 7:30 a.a. - 9:00 a.a. JUNE 5 XOPP 225 - FRIDAY KETTLE - OSSEO AVENUE 7:30 a.a. - 9:00 a.a. JUNE 10 - WEDNESDAY RADISSON SO. - BLOOmNGT 7800 NORMANDALE BLVD. ATRIXM 2 7:30 a.- 8:45 a.a. TO PLACE YOUR MEETING RESERVATION, CALL SARAH KLINE AT 229-2129. Equal Opportunity/Aff rmalive Action Employer fAl “ 1 V ........A.. %t Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street. St. Paul. Minnesota 55101-1633 612 222-8423 1992 LEGISLATIVE UPDATE A number of measures were debated in the 1992 Legislature and by federal regulators recently which affect MWCC and ics ratepayers. These issues, and others, will be addressed in the budget breakfast meetings later this month. Here are highlights: 1, MWCC staff worked with the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities, the Suburban Rate Authority, the Northern Mayors Association, the Metropolitan Council and several metropolitan cities to reach a compromise with legislators to commission a rate structure study by the University of Minnesota. The Metropolitan Council will contract for the study. It will examine the social, economic and environmental effects of assessing costs within the sewer service areas where the costs are incurred, as compared to the current system of assessing costs uniformly throughout the metropolitan area. Upon completion of the study, results will be forwarded to the Legislature. 2. A provision in the Legislature's 1992 Omnibus Tax Bill calls for elimination of the sales tax-exempt status for certain political subdivisions, including the MWCC, effective June 1, 1992. We anticipate an increase in MWCC costs of about 1% next year. 3. On the federal level, MWCC has been alerted to a proposed amendment to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Reauthorization. This amendment makes changes in the so-called domestic sewage exclusion. From MWCC's viewpoint, the following language in the proposed amendment is of considerable concern: [AJ publicly owned treatment works...receiving or treating any pollutant which is a hazardous waste shall not be deemed to be generating, treating, storing, disposing of, or otherwise managing a hazardous waste for the purposes of this Act if the treatment wor<s has established and is ’ enforcing requirements to prohibit the introduction of hazardous wastes into the treatment works, (emphasis added) It appears this language would reguire MWCC to develop limits for all hazardous waste covered under RCRA or run the risk of being considered a manager of hazardous wastes under the Act. The de- velopment of limits for all regulated hazardous wastes is clearly beyond the resources of MWCC. We have forwarded our concerns to Congress and the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies. m-4. Representatives of MWCC's offices of Governmental Relations and Quality Control were in'”it^d by Wisconsin Legislators and the Boundary Area Commission to present an update on the Metro Plant Phosphorus Study at a public hearing in Prescott April 6. The meeting gave MWCC an opportunity to share information with the general public and state and local officials on the progress of the study and make them aware of the next phase. If MWCC is required to remove phosphorus from the waste stream. Its budget could go up by 40%. EqmI Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer “ , __ ■. " v'' i:r<•::j^ , 4 K' «> !Ev p •■■I 1,1 li ■‘:'-'>r . VKm fe: • fc -er V,; 'f \ ■■ P-k P-" I I:^0i rf|: iife^ "•^, V %'■ T",*' r-- Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Mcars Park Centre. 230 East Fifth Street. St. Paul. Minnes'ota 55101-1633 May 7, 1992 MAf 1 1 To Elected-Officials, City Managers and Staff: Budget Breakfasts seeking input to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's (MWCC) Proposed 1993 Budget are scheduled as listed below. The MWCC invites you and/or appropriate city staff to attend. Pre-Budget meetings were held in March to gather input ‘to developing this proposed budget. The Commission gippi^ociates comments received from all who attended. We realxze tbat wastewater treatment xs a major cost in your communxty s budget and are anxious to provide our system users with effective treatment at a reasonable cost. We believe it is important to provide you with an opportunity to review and comment throughout our budget process. In order to accommodate those who will be attending the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) J\ine Conference, MWCC has scheduled one of the breakfast meetings at the Radisson South just prior to the LMC Opening Session on June 10. You do not need to be registered for the conference in order to attend this breakfast meeting. We wxll end the breakfast meeting in time for you to make the conference opening session. MWCC will schedule a Public Hearing on the 1993 Proposed Budget at the June 16 Meeting of the Full Commission. Action on the 1993 Proposed Budget, containing any changes as a result of suggestions from the breakfast meetings and Public Hearing, is anticipated at MWCC's July 21 Meeting of the Full Commission. There is a meeting for industrial users on Friday, May 29, at 7:30 a.m., at the Holiday Inn Roseville. If the meetings listed below don't fit your schedule, you are also welcome at the industrial users meeting. BUDGET BREAKFAST MEETING SCHEDULE KAY 27 - NEDMESOAX wwt.t.v xMN - ST. PAUL 1-94 6 MARZOM STREET JUNE 2 - TUESDAY DROVER' 8 nm - SO. ST. PAUL 1-494 4 CONGO] 7:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m 7:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. JUNE 5 ROPFSR 225 - FRIDAY KETTLE - 088EO AVENUE 7:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m JUNE 10 - WEDNESDAY RADISSON SO. - BLOOMINGTON 7800 NORMANDALB BLVD. ATRIUM 2 7:30 a.m. - 8:45 a.m. TO PLACE YOUR 4 •TING RESERVATION, CALL SARAH KLINE AT 229-2129. • •- Equal Opportunity/AHirmative Action Employer ^.3 I':-: % # • V Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Mears Park Centre. 230 East Fifth Street. St. Paul. Minnesota 55101-1633 612 222-8423 1992 LE6ISIATIVE UPDATE A number of measures were debated in the 1992 Legislature and by federal regulators recently which affect MWCC and its ratepayers. These issues, and others, will be addressed in the budget breakfast meetings later this month. Here are highlights: 1. MWCC staff worked with the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities, the Suburban Rate Authority, the Northern Mayors Association, the Metropolitan Council and several metropolitan cities to reach a compromise with legislators to commission a rate structure study by the University of Minnesota. The Metropolitan Council will contract for the study. It will examine the social, economic and environmental effects of assessing costs within the sewer service areas where the costs are incurred, as compared to the current system of assessing costs uniformly throughout the metropolitan area. Upon completion of the study, results will be forwarded to the Legislature. 2. A provision in the Legislature's 1992 Omnibus Tax Bill calls for elimination of the sales tax-exempt status for certain political subdivisions, including the MWCC, effective June 1, 1992. We anticipate an increase in MWCC costs of about 1% next year. 3. On the federal level, MWCC has been alerted to a proposed amendment to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Reauthorization. This amendment makes changes in the so-called domestic sewage exclusion. From MWCC's viewpoint, the following language in the proposed amendment is of considerable concern: [A] publicly owned treatment works... receiving or treating any pollutant which is a hazardous waste shall not be deemed to be generating, treating, storing, disposing of, or otherwise managing a hazardous waste for the purposes of this Act if the treatment works has established and is ' enforcing requirements to prohibit the introduction of hazardous wastes into the treatment works, (emphasis added) It appears this language would require MWCC to develop lisUts for all hazardous waste covered under RCItA or run the risk of being considered a manager of hazardous wastes under the Act. The de- velopment of limits for all regulated hazardous wastes is clearly beyond the resources of MWCC. We have forwarded our concerns to Congress and the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies. 4. Representatives of MWCC's offices of Governmental Relations and Quality Control were invited by Wisconsin Legislators and the Boundary Area Commission to present an update on the Metro Plamt Phosphorus Study at a public hearing in Prescott April 6. The meeting gave MWCC an opportunity to share information with the general public and state and local officials on the progress of the study and make them aware of the next phase. If MWCC is required to remove phosphorus from the waste stream, its budget could go up by 40%. EqudI Opportunity/Alfirmaiive Action Eniployer Mr nr:-VI'-VV >f5T;. t.,»!• P-- ^r I*. -■■v ••' Ife' i. ., <•»> .1 = ip®fe}.’- W'-" ■ ■p- ll'’^ . ,‘V:tf- ill''" v; Iv ' Sf' hS-' Kiii'te::.:-r •'V- 1^'^' v;h -;^i -f?*a , Highway 1 2 Corridor Task Force518 Wes» Litchfield Avenue Willmar,/(/linnesota 56201 P O. Box 287 612-235-0300, MEMORAM)UM Date:May 8, 1992 MAV 1 1 la-i From:Ken Warner, Coordinator To:Highway 12 Task Force Members Subject:MAY 28TH MEETING NOTICE Chair Gordy Wetter of Delano has called for a meeting of the Highway 12 Task Force for rmSDAY. MAY 28TH. 7:00 P.M.. NORSEMAN CAFE IN COKATQ.HU Discussion items will include: 1. Introduction of New Project Manager -- Val Reinaas 2. Scoping Document Update 3. Status Update of Orono to Long Lake 4. Federal Legislative Update 5. Highway 12 Legislative Meeting 6. Highway 12 Construction Update 7. Other Business i ■r Looking forward to seeing all of you at our next meeting as we all work together for a viable Ifighway 12 Corridor! 4 Mpai.. ■vv* .—* .:. ■K'jL :t.- i< 'H>' f ^?|t i^i- &■ '-?■ §■ :r -•■ % g-‘I't % • • !...... f i'T'-■ ft:. . \^• ■■ ^ ' 51____UuilCIllMS minutes of jhz regular meeting of the school board OF ORONO independent SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON APRIL 13, 1992 may 1 4 1992 The regular meetinr of the School Board of Orono Independent School District No. 278 was held on Monday, April 13, 1992. Present: Dave McKown Don Anderson Jim Franklin John Maresh Peg Swanson Martha Van de Ven Tnomas Mich Neal Lawson Dave McKown welcomed Boy Scout Pack #206 to the Board meeting and the Scout Pack led the Pledge of Allegiance. UPON MOTION by Jim Franklin, seconded by John Maresh, the consent agenda was approved as follows: : iSLE iHfire sorinkler system within the budget limits, - cancelled the regularly scheduled April 27, 1992 Board meeting, - approved the bills as covered by vouchers 073428 through 073806 and o^^^ce checks as covered by vouchers 1883 through 2021 - approved the following coaches for spring sports: Eric Hanson, baseball boys; Mark Monson, assistant baseball coach - boys; assistant baseball coach - boys; Darlene Kollmg, assistant softball, Tracy Nordstrom, assistant softball; Lynn Anderson, ^. ,T boys; Kari Esnough, assistant track; Matthew Laue, assistant track. Bill Greenwood, assistant track. Motion carried. Dr. Mich reported that a special Board meeting was held on March 31 jjbich time the Board approved the bond referendum election for May 19, Ti?st advisory 4eting for the high school principal search has been held there beinq seventy-five candidates for that position; that he was yelr?end gymnastics booklet compiled by Connie Priesz; hockey trophy and good sportmanship award are on display in the middle o trophy cabinet; that there is a display in the in^ddle school trophy cabinet regarding Pat Jones and her selection as Middle Level Educator of the administration had met with representatives of the hockey association and the city of Orono to make clear the position of the School nossible sale/lease of land for little league fields; that the high school band Sfp to Colorado information from the Band Boosters and he thanked them for their good work in this Hennepin Technical College will be celebrating their 20th year on April 23 fr^ 2^00 - 8:00 p.m. at the Eden Prairie campus; that the P[°9r^ Sood Touch, Bad Touch" will be presented to the 3rd and 4th graders 9^ 17 there will be a teacher workshop and the Board is invited to attend. i n .V ¥' V /-. V, y/ '•i'. r*v • ’ -■• V . ^'•.* AS': '■■■ i- ily1... lr% • ■■ fv;' :>■r-:^i mim >'y fiV“ i i ' -^. i*Av--- t 'm ,.v ^.v'/ ' ■■ ' triK'- ■■S'y'- Ron Nelson introduced the members of Boy Scout Pack #206 and informed the Board that the pack is currently working on their scholar badge and so ^re studying education in a variety of ways thus their attendance at the Board of Education meeting tonight. Each Board member provided a br^ef update on the progress/direction of their respective long-range planning committees. Or. Hich reported that on May 19, 1992 a bond referendum election will be held for a variety of projects that are instructional in nature or seek to preserve the investment that the Oist-ict has in its campus/buildings. He stated that a newsletter will be published in order to provide information to all of the resi dents of the District ana that administration will meet with any groups fhe District that would like more information regarding the referendum. Dr. Mich informed the Board that Julie Palmer and Pamela Schroeder will co-chair a com munity group for the purpose of supporting the bond referendum. Neal Lawson provided the Board with background information which was taken into consideration as the administration developed their recommendation to the Board that the length of the bond referendum be 10 years in duration. UPON MOTION by Peg Swanson, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education authorized that that duration of the bond be ten years. Motion carried. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by John Maresh, the Board of Education called for bids on blacktop repair at Orono High School, Schumann Elementary, and Orono Primary. Motion carried. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education called for bids on roofs at the Orono Middle and Schumann Elementary Schools. Motion carried. for the respective precincts listed: Precinct Polling Place Election Judges 1 Schumann Elementary School Cherry Stubbs, head judge Pat Velch ____________ Ruth Eisinger School Elayne Halldin Jeanette Henderson r Cur 'H;-m rr> r w ;■ i- k;’„ VY wr ■ (,.•. •i'v. ‘'’k-i.fsa; if #' vA ;• ja;*'''-"'S'liV'W-fc fe. :te-'A Orono Primary School Alice McPherson, head judge Judith Davies Carol Strassburg Jeanne Sorensen Sharon Peschel Substitute: Ken Turnham Motion carried. John Maresh MOVED, Don Anderson seconded, the following resolution authorizing the issuance of tax anticipation certificates of indebtedness: A. B. C. 0. E. WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 1P4.72 to 126.76, both inclusive, authorizes school districts, in anticipation of the receipt of general taxes theretofore levied for school purposes, to issue certificates of indebtedness in the aggregate amount not to exceed fifty percent (50%) of such general taxes due and payable in calendar year 1992 and not yet received and as to which taxes no penalty for nonpayment or delinquency has attached; and , . . . ^ , .4 .4 «.WHEREAS, the total amount of general taxes levied by Orono Independent School District Numoer 278 (the "Oistrict"), for school purposes for the year 1992 not yet received and as to which no penalty for non payment delinquency has attached is not less than $8,885,763, and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 124.76,'subdivision 2. the District has the authority to npgotiate the private sale of the Certificates without complying with public sale requirements because the Certificates mature no later than 13 months after their date of issuance; and . ^ . WHEREAS, the Board of Education (the "Board"), has heretofore deter mined that it is necessa.y and expedient to issue its Certificates of Indebtedness in the aggregate principal amount not to exceed $900,000; WHEREAS, direct negotiations have taken place with the State Bank of Long Lake on the interest rate NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Education of Orono Independent School District Number 278, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The Board authorize the Treasurer to sign Certificates of Indebtedness with the State Bank of Long Lake not to exceed $900,000 at an interest rate not to exceed 8% per annum. 2. The Board pledges state and local property taxes it receives to the redemption of the Certificate of Indebtedness no later than June 15, 1992. Neal Lawson answered questions from the Board for clarification purposes. fk-'rm- ’■’7 f^.'; ^•4. # ■ Mm Wv, J ■ •' ?. ;V’ %v; i‘"'g|& !P» notion carried.Lucie Taylor. Chair of the Technology Committee, reported to the Board on the work of the ^Technology Committee and she presented an action plan/resource timeline for the committee's recommendations which were presented at the June 10 1991 Board meeting. She stated that each recommendation was studied individually and considered in terms of money, human resources, space and time, revisions were then made and the timeline refined for presentation to the Board. Ms. Taylor provided a sumnary of the plan and answered questions from the Board. Ms. Taylor stated that officially the Technology Committee as a part of the long-range planning process has completed its work but that the committee s recommendation would be the appointment of an ongoing district technology com mittee which would work to implement this plan as well as provide continuity of the plan. The Board expressed appreciation to Lucie Taylor and her committee for all of the time/effort involved in ucveloping this plan. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Martha Van de Ven, the Board of Education approved the following maintenance and improvement projects recom mended by the administration for completion during the sutimer months: ■> V- mm F'-' " ■■■ ■ ■■ ■'■te^'4 ■• ■‘L. - i >* iii.wV/'^';’' , ^4Vf’ -V ''iH ■ if "n' ■< ■ .. irki^;4 A t 1^''[ ^wm. l?«fi Approved by the Board of Education - April 13t 1992 High school - S«al coat front parting lot and driveway - Repair tennis court fencing - Re^ir shop addition roof edge I R!Sount ‘’g*as8*bSs)cetball backboards - Repair/replace sidewalk from Music area . Repair lockers as needed - Repair mezzanine tile Middle School - Add fire sprinkler system , i «.,nv- Repove and replace underground fuel oil tank - Roof repair- Repair bleachers as needed Schumann Elementary Add fire sprinkler system Roof repairKS!5'«'SS “as. 1.». Link . Sidewalk and landscape west of building and possible parking Orono Primary Provide more parking space on east side of building Taper blacktop by north exit to playground Pepeir or replace condensate tank in boiler room Provide 2 additional window air conditioners in office area Repair/replace window screens Pill along building with black dirt and sod Carpet and paint Chapter I room District wide - Painting projects at all locations - Inventory items in storage areas - Repair/replace carpet as part of normal replacement cycle A i There are hundreds of other repair/improvement jobs that will be completed by our custodial crews which do not have significant cos* impact. These projects will be done as a matter of course. The administration is asking approval at this time so we can plan for these projects this summer. '.iMZ-ri-i i-. 1 m^r .vT.: if mv -■•; ?«. %•••-«,• : ^ -v ;■m."*i!»!■•:/;■.'Arr.';f .• fe;);^• ■ :v i'X ‘ as»u Motion carried. a candidate for the Board of on May 19, 1992. Or. Mich introduced Mr. Tim Pattrin who is Education at the upcoming school board election 4 UPON MOTION by Jim Franklin, seconded by John Maresh, the meeting was adjourned. Motion carried. cui ^ ^^ohn Maresh, Clerk Approved: Dave McKown, Chairman X:I7^X: ^ t . ^ f - .f ''VT: MFXF 'X: . jv'*: •4 I li .'^'v^>.A >;|- > •■ 1f.si S.-'-u f’' y fiV !^' ■ te;: . ?>. ^r[ r^..,: ^i'. z ■ ¥ii \5‘* ■ K ■m'- [■■•>■' fO-- ■ ?7 V. ,I^rv^' irr„ lf‘r ■ ifr '^• #■' ji’} >. -•w- ^-#• £ ..*:' • i :• A •»' 't'l r. NIHUTES OF REGULAR XEETIHG OF April 16, 199?. L MIRBEHAHA CREEK KATERSHED DISTRICT BOARD OF MAHAGER^? MAY 1 8 1992 The regular meeting of the Board of Managers of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was called to order by President Spensley at 7:35 p.m. on Thursday, April 16, 1992, at Wayzata City Hall, Wayzata, Minnesota. Managers Present: Spensley, Love, Maple, Erickson and LaBounty• Managers Absent: Thomas and Lindley. Also present were Board advisors Quanbeck ana Jones. Approval of Agenda It was moved by Manager LaBounty, seconded by Manager Erickson, that the agenda be adopted. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting The Managers reviewed the minutes of the regular meeting of March 19, 1992. It was moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager Maple, that the minutes of the March 19, 1992, meeting be approved. Upon vote, the minutes were unanimously approved. Approval of Permit Applications It was moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager Maple, that permit application 91-60. City of Plymouth be approved, and the permit issued, based upon recommendation of staff that the applicant had met all applicable rules. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. Applications It was moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager Erickson, that permit applications 92-38. L & M Properties; 92H6« Pguqlag Willard Baker. Jr.; 92-53. City of Orono; and 92~54j ..CltY OL Qrono. be tabled, based upon staff recommendation that the applications are not complete. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. . ■: .7- ■ ■. X >'■ ■’S'» -1-(04/ia/S2) . t-y. . .’i. 1-.,: .4. m- I %■ t*'. % O' i'^. t' I-: S. r!‘. ■‘1 “V V? I m-. Haarinq of Permit APpXjcat^Q*^ Citry of Minneapolis - f»^w«f-nietion of a bridge Logan ehannal imorovcsmeiita. Staff reported that the City of Minneapolis has i.guested a permit to reconstruct the Logan Avenue Bridge crossing Minnehaha Creek In the City of Minneapolis. In addition, berms would be cSwtructed along the Creek, and the channel modified from Penn Avenue to Humboldt Avenue, in order to lower the Pjoiected Minneapolis. The study specifies that two additional bridges be reconstructed at James Avenue and Humboldt Avenue. The construction of these bridges will be considered as a of separate permit applications, with construction projected for 1993-1994^ The Board of Managers previously reviewed bridge design at its regularly f'and provided concept approval for the bridge at that time. Staff notes in its report that significant information remains to be S?ovidid, and recommends tabling of the application pending receipt of this information. Additional information was received from the City of Minneapolis since the time that the staff report was completed, but staff indicated that it had not had an opportunity to review the information. meeting. President Spensley expressed his concern that information had was his opinion that the Humboldt Avenue Bridge would not materially affect the Creek’s capacity, and that he would provide calculations confirming this opinion. President . . reiterated his concern that the new configuration not result in substantial problems for area residents. van ■oarS MlnvtM -2-(04/16/92) k •• but that the study had not been followed. Instead, the City ® focus has been on planning bridges rather than flood control since 1988. council Member Carole Johnson, who represents the 13th Ward of the City of Minneapolis, also appeared. She indicated that the 1987 storm was one of three major storms to hit the area within thrift To ?Lrs. This led to the City Council passing a nood olM which was updated in 1988. The City has started imSleTOntition o£ this plan in the 54th Street and Upton Avenue area. The construction of the bridges is the next phase. Council jU^r Johnson indicated that all three th^^thLI rr^^lSt’^llaJ’of'^Jainnn ^itrarefw t^scL^st'parrs.^rnr tSo'irrgrchrrches ^?n§1reSent.. As such, the bridges need to be reolaced in order to handle traffic. She requested the Board s apprSvTl o? ?he permit in order to expedite the construction process• President Spensley stated that ^s^the District in this matter is somewhat District can regulate construction of the bridge in the floodplain, and can make sure that the construction will riduce the channel capacity of the Creek. Manager Maple noted that aesthetic issues concerning the thl Diltrilt cannot suSsUtute its judgment for that of the City concerning whether or not replacement of the bridges is necessary. A discussion ensued concerning why the Logan Avenue Bridge was being ?ep?aced first. President Spensley stated that it would «oL to Lke more sense to correct problems further downstream first!' Mr. Willenbring stated that the Logan viewed as the biggest impediment, and, as a result, it constructed first. President Spensley stated that it's the practice of the Board Manager LaBounty asked whether the berms were being constructed in order to create more buildable Jv® council Member Johnson stated that there are no idifi- -in t-he area Manager LaBounty questioned whether the project «u!d Save aw MgativS impact downstream. Council Member Johnson that the City shared this concern, that most damage had iSSirSeS UM?!eam rathL than downstream during recent storms, and .hat the Citv believed the project would not create downstream wSSlSSS. ManSSer lSve stated’that the District is a gover^ent agency of last resort in regard to flood control issues. He IIOB aoard Ulnut*-3-<04/16/92) i.; rr.- III fr. ■h. ^:V:f>: »- •i». f '■■ ■- •> fcK'r: lem- (#;:; •'•.* (.rl>‘‘.r. stated that permits should be issued only where the District is satisfied that the applicant will comply with all District standards, based upon review of a completed application, to date, staff has been unable to verify that the project meets applicable tUl^?%eSding receiprof^'iteSris spicified^in^Jtaff°S report. The motion was seconded by Manager LaBounty. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. Q2-^n. HiHoitav Corp. — Stormwater management Plan for a 17-1ot BiMlft tawilr tMiaentiai subdivision located in the of Chanhaasen called Staff reported that the majority of the proposed site drains to a large onsite landlocked basin. The basin has been determined i;p$!c«rS*s%:opised li ?rt.dule^t ares o£ S?orbl?pTpp^tr«^SS!f\°be%^Snopn! • Hf fba. the developer was coaicerned about whether setback requirements could be met if the size of the pond is expanded. Staff stated that the Wetland Conservation Act has a no-net policy, and that staff believes its recommendation to be consistent with tne Act. It was moved by Manager LaBounty, seconded by Manager Maple, to approve the application, with the permit to be issued upon receipt of those items as set forth in staff’s report in a form and substance acceptable to staff. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously, with Manager Erickson abstaining. gy-41. Albert D. Hanset...— Stonwater wanaaeaent iXan__________________subdivision located in the Citag^ Prong. staff noted that the site includes some potentially sensitive WBfill*. of those items set forth in staff’s report, in a form and substance acceptable to staff. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. ■oard UlnatM -4-(04/16/92) S'* t: 0-' tvr: ■;■ .■f I'i-. 1^.I" b.:- ... "-itJSiS isaa m ■ ...c ...a blanket, and floodplain alteyatlgHi BChO rit-v of Tonka BaT^ Staff reported that applicant has requested construct rip rap shoreline erosion, and to lay a sand blanket of aooroximately 30 feet along the shoreline. The sand blanket would SSn«2t Llount? qSestionea whether this constituted rvni«S^frr?2rDis???ct’^s^?ules, placed sand bankets only 10 feet waterward. Staff explained that only 8 blanket would actually be placed below the ordinary high water mark so no variance would be required. Staff recommended approval, pending receipt of ite^ listed in staff's report. wt* Forbord was present, and indicated that staff s based upon recommendation of start, witn tue . uoM receipt of those items, as set forth in sta** ® *" ® ?o?S SSd sSbstanee acceptable to staff, upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. City of pichfieid — Stormwater management Plan tOL yficoqpfcfiiction ■ of Jefferson PacX* location of an erosion control fence. rather prefer to locate a grass silt strip around the F L Losion control fence. President Spensley noted that it hMbSSn the policy of the Board to hold other governmental units to the highest standards in applying Board rules, and that it - - ka anainst the Board's policy to grant a variance in this rase The Richfield officials indicated that they would be Sifting to coSpiy wItS the Board's rules in this regard. « was Smvod by Manager LaBounty, seconded by Manager aoDlication be approved, based upon staff's recommenda ' . , fhS pemi? to be issued upon receipt of those it^s set forth in ^ g^2f£*5 report, in a form and substance acceptable vote, the matter carried unanimously. Q^«ao. Taowell zitxloff — Installation ttf rin rap shoreline erosion proUctioBs Ldhft Hiimetonha. CltY„a£ Hjnnfttrigta^ staff reported that this project W-UCSD Board UimitM -5-(04/1fi/a2) v‘‘^:.tv U-- •, K: K' i't iv,-^ yk. ^ •I‘ * • f:- t>' hV V*Vm,.. with the exhibits submitted as a part of the earlier permit application. Staff recommends approval, pending receipt of a coirectly completed permit application form, it was moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager Maple, that the application be approved, with the permit to be issued upon receipt of a completed application form satisfactory to staff. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. 92-50. Llovd Sioel — Installation of 110 lineal feet of ran shoreline erosion protection. Lake Minnetonka. Deenhaven. It was moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager Maple, tliat the application be approved, based upon staff approval, with the permit to be issued upon receipt of those items set forth in staff's report, in a form and substance satisfactory to staff. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. 92-51. Robert E. Laslcv — Installation of 160 lineal feet of rip ran shoreline erosion protection. Lake Minnetonka. City of It was moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager Erickson, that the application be approved, based upon staff's recommendation, with the permit to be issued upon receipt by of those items :>et forth in staff's report, in a form and substance acceptable to staff. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. 92-43. Bover Building Corn. — Stormwater Management Plan V.nr a 12-unit townhouse development in the City of Shorewood. Staff reported that this matter was referred from the Violations Committee. Construction occurred on the site without permit being issued by the District. Applicants now request a permit and seek to address District concerns raised by that construction. Dale Campbell and Todd McLoath, engineers for the applicants, were present to answer questions. Staff recommended approval of the permit, pending receipt of Rule J fees and the requested letter from the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority concerning maintenance of the pond. It was moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager LaBounty, that the application be approved, with the permit to be issued upon receipt of the items as set forth by staff, including payment of Rule J fees, with the items to be in a form and substance acceptable to staff. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. 92-48. Howard Eisinoer — Stormwater management plan for 10.000 cubic yards of fill on an abandoned landfill site in the City of Orono. It was moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager Maple, to table the application, based on recommendation of staff. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. UdD losra yilintM -6-(04/16/92) I r. II:. w p >■ - i m.' t-;- r-' Approval 2t2fr s"re2SSJ^iaation! with the pLmits to »’«s^ai.£ ^ A cs^-aff'c r^>nort in a forin and substanc6 acceptable™to^staff. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. I'l^ints and jm y.,- ManariAr Love seconded by Manager Maple, that the tS2'°report If the Complaints and Violations Committee to heard. Manaoer Love noted that Council Member Bob Gagne Manager uo e .i-tendance. Council Member Gagne indicated ?hat th2"city had been involved in grading ?he necessary Pe™it^^°? =°Sft'222 ?2p?US^n”“e22^^^ capital improvement Program ^^taff rndicated^^^^^ Sun^ld 22ettr2£2 remainder o£%he storage capacity elimxnated provide P”5e2t'°"Ma2agef i2v2*n2?ed his appreciationdownstream from the P^®3®cc. y citv and moved that thefor the *Ptthright approach taken by the crty^ project proce^ with ‘"e City to gain permis^ ^^^^^ for constructing the taffled weir.^ M2S2d bj »2aff. ^Manager LaBounty seconded the motion. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. Programs Conn Mr Ouanbeck reviewed the status of the proposed Gleason jsnssrS'; 2's:r," •h “i51i ‘sS‘;L5 ’’s'2„ present voted in favor of the resolution. -7-(04/16/92) Mr. Oberineyer appeared on behalf of the City of Wayzata, and thanked the Board for its expeditious hearing of this matter. i- r I'- i i' [' i:::m Status Report of Ad Hof? rommittee coricernino the proposed Carlson dredging project. Manager Love reported that the District has heard nothing from the applicant in the past 60 days. He stated that a lettar had been sent to the applicants, confirming the status of this matter, and noting the Department of Natural Resource's designation as the lead agency in regard to the project. Executive Committee Report President Spensley reported that the District had received eight Statements of Interest and Qualification in regard to the consulting engineering contract, and that the Executive Committee had voted to solicit formal proposals from four applicants, Wenci; Associates, Inc., HDR Engineering, Inc., Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc., and James M. Montgomery. The Executive Committee will interview some, if not all, of the candidates after reviewing the proposals submitted. The Executive Committee anticipates making a recommendation to the Board at its May meeting. President Spensley reported that the Minnesota Legislature had passed legislation which increases the enforcement powers of watershed districts, allows watershed districts to recover their costs of enforcement, and simplifies the appeal process. He further indicated that legislation to increase the administrative fund levy had also passed. Mr. Jones stated that the enforcement legislation was closely patterned after the legislation proposed by the District. He further noted that President Spensley had played a key role in the legislation from its inception, and had spearheaded the lobbying effort whi^h lead to its final passage. Complaints and Violations Conm^ittge Report fcont.l Man?.ger Love indicated that two of the three issues discussed at the Violation Committee had already been heard by the Board. The final issue is the issuance of a permit to the Paxtons (permit application 91-107). It was moved by Manager Love, seconded by Manager Maple, to issue an after-the-fact permit to the Paxtons, upon completion of the agreed upon excavation and payment of Rule J fees. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. i. 0' A. Finance CQimittee Report President Spensley indicated that the financial reports contain certain line items which ere no longer active, such as enforcement actions concerning Casco Cove and James Kangas. He rd MinutM -8-(04/16/92) f. instructed staff to review these issues with Mr. Lapic. Manager Love moved approval of the Treasurer’s Report authorizing payment of all outstanding invoices. The motion was seconded by Manager Maple. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. m ft r> Rules and Mr. Jones indicated that Board members received copies of a proposed revision to the sand blanket rules relating to public beaches, and a proposed new rule governing the District ^ . responsibilities under the Wetland Conservation Act, on an interim basis. The proposed rules were reviewed by the Committee which voted to recommend them to the Board for public hearing and final approval. It was moved by Manager Maple, seconded by Manager Love, that a public hearing be set for the proposed rules at the May meeting. Upon vote, the motion par.sed unanimously. ■ .. I -•T fe- i; 1; 1': i'"' S-: - ■ I ‘‘i >. i 'h. Engineer*s Report 1. Mr. Quanbeck reported that the lake level, no of April 16, 1992, was 929.69 feet. He indicated that during t e month of April, rainfall has been about 50 percent of the amount also suggested that there may be a need to examine possible licensure of rip rap contractors. 2 Mr. Quanbeck reported that the Headwaters Control Bllows'the District to remove fish screen? on May 15. He further noted that last year, the screens were left in place, resulting in the significant costs in cleaning and maintenance. President Spensley indicated that removal of the screens would be appropriate, and that the District had the power to do so. Mr. Quanbeck requested the Managers confirm that, based on budgetary considerations and implementation of the Management Plan, that the engineers be directed to remove the sevens on May 15. The Managers confirmed the engineer’s request unanimously. The Managers also directed “^aff to renew the District's request that the U«p not harvest milfoil when t headwaters structure is operating, and to request the LMCD to regulate boat traffic in the headwaters dam area. 3, Mr. Quanbeck reported on the Hydrologic Monitoring Program. It was moved by Manager LaBounty, seconded by Manager Love, that the program, as outlined by staff in its memorandum to the Board of Managers, be approved. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. 4. Mr. Quanbeck reported on the private crossing Minnehaha Creek located in the City of Minnetonka. He noted that the crossing creates some restriction of the Creek s channe capacity, which impacts pro erty upstream from the crossings. rd Miiwti -9-(04/1fi/S2) t. i * : a A- ■ i • rf',i:^«. I" tV '■-5 c -.-. • \:r.. v;^; ,: :■ t';. -I ■?::v >, ■ jii'” ^r. /■ Mr. Jones indicated that the District has no clear duty in regard to the private crossings. Mr. Quanbeck noted that he estimates it would cost a significant amount to replace the structure in question. Manager Maple suggested placing warning signs as appropriate to alert canoeists to any problems with these crossings. The Managers directed staff to respond to the City of Minnetonka on this matter. 5, Mr. Quanbeck reported that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has submitted comments on the Long Lake Clean Water Partnership proposal. To date, the Environmental Protection Agency has not provided its comme s. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has indicated that it would not fund the aerator portion of the Clean Water Partnership project. 6. Mr. Quanbeck indicated that an Environmental Impact Statement has been issued for the proposed expansion of I-35W, and that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet has been undertaken for proposed construction at 77th Street in Richfield. It was the sense of the Board of Managers that these are important issues, which should be closely followed. President Spensley indicated that the matter would be referred to the Plans and Programs Committee for additional action. Attorney*s Report Mr. Jones stated that the District had received an inquiry from the State Auditor concerning inter-fund transfers. Mr. Jones further reported that he had spoken to legal counsel for the Auditor, and had explained that the inter-fund transfers had been necessitated by the District's need to defend itself in litigation initiated by permit applicants. Mr. Jones stated that the Auditor's principal conc». rn upon learning the reasoning for the transfors# appeared to c.uat the District had a plan for the repayment of the borrowing. Legal counsel to the Auditor was very impressed by activities taken by the Board of Managers to address this issue, including the District's support for an increased levy for the administrative fund, support of legislation to shift the cost of enforcement actions to those violating District rules and the fact that the District had hired an independent consultant to review its administrative functions and to provide recommendations on potential colL savings. Mr. Jones reported that response will be provided to the Auditor. Assuming that the response is satisfactory, no further action will be taken by the Auditor. Adiour There being no further business before the Board of Managers, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted. John E. Thomas - Secretary 918DAJ(148) rd Ulnuti -10-C04/ia/S2} 1-^ t i’x Sit' <• it '•■fj*' RESOLUTIOH MIHHEHAHA CREEK MATERSH DISTRICT RBSOLOTIOH OF THE BOARD OF MAHAGERS OF THE MIHHEHAHA QP*™ WATERSHED DISTRICT RECEIVIHG THE niGIHEBR*S REPORT AHD DIRECTIHG THAT A COPY OF THE REPORT FOR THE GLEASOH CREEK HATER kHAGBMBHT PROJECT BE FORMARDED TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISIOH OF HATERS OF THE MIHHESOTA DBPARTMBHT OF HATORAL RESOURCES AHD THE BOARD OF HATER AHD SOIL RESOURCES. Manager Love offered the following resolution and moved its adoption« seconded by Manager Maple: HHBREAS, the engineer for the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has completed his report as required by Minnesota Statutes « 103D.711, subd. 2, which report sets out the project plan for the undertaking of the Gleason Creek Water Management Project; and ^TteTslil D?s?Jict; and iBAS# the state agencies may have concerns or express interest with regard to the project plan. HOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the engineer’s report setting forth the project plan for the Gleason Creek Water Management Project be received and accepted and that the attorney be directed to file copies of the report with the Director of the Division of Waters of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Board of Water and Soil Resources so that said individuals and agencies may submit their report to the managers with respect to the proposed project plan. Following receipt of the report, public hearings will be held to consider whether the managers should proceed with the Basic Water Management Project. The question was on the adoption of the resolution, and there were five Ayes and aero Nays and two Absent as follows: Spensley Love Maple Erickson LaBounty Thomas Lindley hXSL X X X X X U3X Absent X X upon vote, the President declared the resolution adopted. mi •1- tfij;.'?’' w^r' .--^s W0' « * • • ^^'-ih'i-:-.-;: . --£-V V & IsS.E?P''m 1, John E. Thomas« Secretary of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, do hereby certify that l have compared the above resolution with the original thereof as the same appears of record and on file and find the same to be a true and accurate record of the resolution adopted by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Board of Managers on April 16, 1992. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said Watershed District this __ _ _ _ day of May, 1992. John E. Thomas - Secretary (SEAL) 918DAJ(158) -2- n 1 , A •i I'-f, Vir 'I: i. y ' 4 \ t rP*,'' '/ ■''■ ■ ■' ff’ir'>'.f ^V 4v: ,p. ! Pr? 1. 2. (DRAFT - 04/10/92) RULE L Policy: The Minnesota Legislature enacted the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 in an effort to preserve wetlands with their attendant benefit to the natural environment. The Board of Water and Soil Resources ("Board”) adopted "Administrative Guidelines: Interim Program of Wetland Regulation" ("Interim Guidelines") in December, 1991, which will govern the implementation of the Act until permanent Rules are promulgated, but in no event later than July 1, 1993. The District has been designated by the Board as a Local Governmental Unit responsible for administering the Act. In adopting the Board*s Interim Guidelines, the District intends that any existing District Rules which apply to wetlands that are also regulated by the Interim Guidelines and which impose more stringent requirements than those contained in the Interim Guidelines, shall take precedent over the Interim Guidelines. This Rule shall cease to be of force and effect as of June 30, 1993, absent action by the District's Board of Managers to extend the Rule's applicability. _ _ _ _ _ _ The Interim Guidelines are incorporated as a part of this Rule as Exhibit A. The District notes that under the Interim Guidelines, the District will have authority over Class 1, 2, 6, 7 and 8 Wetlands, in addition to Class 3, 4 and 5 Wetlands, which have previously fallen within the District's jurisdiction. The Act also restricts alterations of all wetlands regardless of their size. Prior to its designation as a Local Governmental Unit administering the Act, the District limited its regulation of wetlands to Class 3, 4 and 5 Wetlands with an area of more than one-half acre. Attachments 1456DAJ p:- ■i,/.' m^ '- .■Ri;'i^.'"EXHIBIT A [INTERIM GUIDELINES] f ‘ • »r ' -tIflp^i;-• • ^rV ' F'r^" ■ ■ m- ■'j- IfM^- !■*'■■ “il^- EXHIBIT B[INTERIM WETLAND MANAGEMENT POLICY] ':S=';■ 'jSr"; ■■' t A a •’i ■i iI 1 1 i * \ t:5.J- '-L-JU ^r- #•' ,¥}'fi\ ■ :> SM. >■ iil^ fe-mi:v 'Ste-;- tW"?'I®'' '-■V^'m.- ■>%W--' §mm'■ii- «?&A^3;v. m^-’r-y y ^vv: M % LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT MEETING AGENDA TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (TRC) Meeting of May 21, 1992, 8:00-10:00 A.M. Norwest Bank Building Conference Room 900 E. Wayzata Blvd., Wayzata I.Discussion and Approval of Minutes of 4/9/92 and this Agenda II. Ill Flexibility Request - Minnetrista A. Description of Request (Blake) B. Discussion and response of TRC members Other Issues A. Marina boat storage / use (Stroraraen) B. Revisiting consideration of ordinance standards for lighting of shore facilities. C. Other unresolved issues (open) -----------------------, » 1 9 1992 y Li^ ¥' i :| 1 1 •i X'i CkallliJ I' • r / Liv' >.v ■•■•l ':< “. f ‘ti-L. f.'*>f ,* ''-i^ V /•’ *k< & :* r~ — - LAK.' MINNETONKA CONSERVATION OtSTRICT 1 > * « MINUTES TECHNICAL REVIEV COMMITTEE (TRC) Meeting of April 9. 1992. ® ^ ® 6 • \1 * q Norwest Bank Building Conference 1 y 900 E. Wayzata Blvd.. Wayzata I.Minutes of 2/27/92 and agenda for 4/9/92 approved. (Attendence list for 4/9/92 attached) II. Flexibility Requests A. Orono Ed Pick began by announcing that Orono adopted upgraded shoreland controls on Feb. 24 and sent them to the DNR and the other 13 cities on March 12. Ed and Ceil Strauss then distributed copies of the following relevant documents: - 3/12/92 letter from Orono Mayor to Pick transmitting the adopted ordinance, checklist, and memo requesting flexibility on several items. 3/12/92 memo from Mike Gaffron. Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator, to Strauss/Fick outlining flexibility request items and City’s rationale. 3/11/92 letter from Gaffron to City of Woodland transmitting Orono’s shoreland ordinance for review and comment (same letter also sent to 17 other cities). 4/7/92 letter from Strauss to Gaffron acknowledging receipt of shoreland ordinance and flexibility request memo, and requesting additional justification for flexibility on steep slope and "lock box" items. 3/31/92 letter from Pick to mayors of the TRC cities reminding them of their obligations under the shoreland grant agreements to adopt shoreland controls, their opportunities to react to flexibility requests of the other cities, and the upcoming TRC meeting at which Orono s flexibility requests will be discussed. Ed went on to explain that Orono went ahead and adopted the ordinance before receiving comments from the other cities and the DNR because it has had a subdivision moratorium in effect for o >onths which it wanted to lift. The City necessary amendments after review by the cities and e Discussion next turned to the several flexibility ‘ by Orono. Mike Gaffron explained the lock box concept as being Sirthr^^o-rso -er™rha;e;L°-."?rrn U^nd sJssSbrr?e%*u!rf t^rcij; io ?Liude^rJo-m?bL^rf?o^s the OHWL for the boxes. Orono has defined "sleep slope" as one exceeding 18% to keep it compatible with an existing cutoff in its subdivision ordinance. Steve Prestin noted that in an early draft of the shoreland pegs. 18% was the cutoff for defining a bluff. However, a review committee changed that cutoff to 30% and then included the term "steep slope" to cover slopes of 12% to 30%. Jay Blake mentioned that Minnetrista currently has a setup where development on slopes of from 12% to 30% requires a thorough review, while slopes steeper than 30% must not be altered and must be protected by donation of an easement to the City covering these areas. Gaffron commented that such an approach might be useful to Orono. Impervious surface limits prop'^sed by Orono are more refined than the straight 25% coverage limit in the DNR regs. Orono's aporoach includes: - No impervious surface within 75 feet of OllWL - 25% coverage limit from 76 - 250 feet - 30% coverage imit from 251 - 500 feet - 35% coverage limit from 501 - 1000 feet Allowable impervious can be transferred back, but not toward the shore. Since a survey is required for building, most landowners opt to have the surveyor do the impervious calculations. The City has had this setup for some time and has been experiencing 20 to 30 variance requests per year. Gaffron mentioned these are often granted to allow 30 - 35%. Several members asked about details of administration and enforcement of these standards. These included questions about how plastic or fabric materials often used under decks, behind rip-rap, and under gravel or wood chip landscaping is handled (Orono counts it as impervious in most situations). Another question inquired abcut how the City handles piece-meal driveway paving, landscaping, and other projects that do not individually require permits, but which can add considerable impervious surface over time. Gaffron responded that Orono is as strict as they can reasonably be (i.e. all drives are considered impervious), but that enforcement is often a problem. Prestin commented that these and other shoreland management isuues such as controlling vegetation removal are difficult to enforce if landowners are determined to get around them. He suggested a concerted, long-term educational effort to convince people to manage their land properly as a way to reduce these problems over time. Generally, members seemed to accept the Orono approach, but with some reservations about enforcement. DNH is willing to accept it. The last Orono flexibility issue discussed was their request for retaining an existing 30 foot height limit. Since this issue was on the agenda (item III.), members thoroughly discussed it at this time. Gaffron mentioned that Orono nad used a definition which started measurement at the lowest grtde. but has switched to the UBC approach. Prestin asked whether cities evaluate height from existing or proposed grade configurations. Comments indicated that "proposed" grade is used most commonly. Several members did acknowledge, however, that when combined with the UBC measurement procedures and a 30 or 35 foot limit, this can result in houses that appear quite high from the lak<‘. There were some comments that starting the measurement from the lowest grade would help some, but the concensus wa.s that the UBC approach should be retained because that is what they use outside _ I.. t ■ '"4^ > T .'Ti ' r [jSS*-P"r .!, r--¥ U' r 1-: E': ^ . ■k-? ff* -a f?.r .•Ir -... t!- :r h 1 ii » shoreland. Strommen observed that the UBC approach, coupled with a 35 foot limit, is producing houses along the shore which are actually high enough that they can block lake views of other homes located further back. Ed Pick mentioned that the DNR is on record (Appendix C) as willing to accept a 35 foot limit for Minnetonka. The concensus of the members on this issue is that 35 feet or less as a limit and use of the UBC procedures is acceptab1e. Chairman Uttley asked members to comment on the Orono package. Several stated they did not have major concerns. None of the members expressed major reservations. Ed Pick next made a few general comments regarding the processing of flexibility requests. He reminded members that DNR only has 60 days to officially respond to requests, so it is very important for each city to quickly review information the> receive and act promptly. Ed said that if a city officially objects to another city's request, the DNR will notify both the subject and objecting cities of the situation and will attempt to get their representatives together to resol'.e the issue. Someone suggested that when a city sends flexibility information to other cities it should be sure to copy staff to expedite review. B.Wayzata consultant’s flexibility proposals ~ the DNR response. Ed Pick reported that DNR sent a response to the consultant in early March which indicated that 100% impervious coverage for any area is not acceptable. They indicated that the highest they ve approved in the past was 75% (Burnsville. Maplewood). DNR also is asking the City to provide more details on how low-coverage areas which are used to offset high-coverage areas will be kept pervious over time. Members seemed satisfied with this response. C. Scheduling TRC review of flexibility requests Sliorewood " mid to late Summer. Excelsior - Council has not yet taken action to hire a consultant. Greg Withers intends to take Prestin’s review of the City’s existing controls to the Council. Spring Park - an ordinance has been finished and a flexibility request package is being prepared. Woodland - a draft ordinance has been prepared, but it needs a little more work, so it snould be ready for review by the TRC in late May or June. Victoria - a Comprehensive Plan revision should be finished in June, and an ordinance in July or August. Minnetrista - Planning Commission hearing in late April and to the Council in May, followed by submittal to the DNR. Minnetonka Beach - might be ready in May. Tonka Bay - a consultant has been hired and work begun • ’I -_ rnfwmw:Jt ') • .\-i •'»IIMound - is proceeding according to schedule and should be ready in June. III. Height Limit Issue Members agreed this had already been thoroughly and sufficiently covered earlier in the Orono discussion. IV. Next Meeting Flexibility requests of Minnetrista and possibly one or two other cities should be re Jy for review. •s ■ j « I 1?;%= P- kk ■ ..P'- •B9.m, ■ - Kv‘m.. (*! wm »•■ '• ih ■V • /■- #•Si& 1iS^ IS'® '• ys' - ii PI In'; KP- Kpisv,’ ' ' i,r>. • •!iII :t y- f' f ___ I.- j! Ca £T •iv^'i' X ILSi’^r V4 $ * •* $^\v''3u^55" '%£4 l^rck -^r)w iAAA'U v ! • •« • I JA^i {i »I {)y^^‘'-*-^x. —^..____ l/;ct7(7^/^. ........ /tU'w. ukUyyyija. 2^ Oci^ Afi*titc> Z^MCO c.or^^l'i'^^ D\J^ OcvMJ, cf«~ PtOkf i_mO ■:■. ...UA--. f-^*7-’ S. 7I f ■W- r K-r.,i'K ^:- y.; :•' ■' .!.'< 1^ p. fe '.^ p^ V .•M- E-t> r”-^: :v'i“ ■. i> y f.'-‘ ,v. . _h- ' > ' 1 -S-V " ',K^::.' 3. MiniEHAHA CREEK MKTERSHED DISTRICT BOARD OF NABAGERS AGEHDA Thursday, May 21, 1992 St. Louis Park City Hall City Council Chambers 7:30 p.ra. 1, Call to order: note attendance. 2. Approval of Agenda. Reading and approval of minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 16. 19^2. 4. Hearing of Permit Applications. A.Permit Application Ho. 90-79: Applicant: Robert Waade 998 Wildhurst Trail Mound, MN 55364 Location: City o£ Orono, Sec. 7BD, Forest Lake, Lake Minnetonka Purpose: Stormwater management plan for a 4-lot single-family residential subdivision called "Wildhurst Estates." )?emit Application Mo. 91-80: Applicant: City of Minneapolis 350 South 5th Street Minneapolis, MN 55415 Location: City of Minneapolis, Sec. 16CB, Minnehaha Creek Purpose: Stormwater management plan foi construction of a bridge at Logan Avenue, berm construction and channel improvements. Permit Application Wo. 92-05; Applicant: Methodist Health Care Association 6500 Excelsior Blvd. St. Louis Park, MN 55426 City of Wayzata, Sec. SBC Stormwater management plan for expansion of the Wayzata Medical Center located southeast of the 1-394 and bounty Road ICl interchange. 1 Location: Purpose:i \ Jfsikut j V"-^;v. H- \/: 0-^b-' . «-.* Vv 0' i'-.w-'' <^ :4 • \ - i--'" S; “r S' \,\'"f-',i : - - . 1'‘ s ■liv pk- ff :& ■'-r ■H'^ I® » ■ D. E. F. G. H. I. Permit Application Ho. 92-35; Applicant: City of Deephaven 20225 Cottagewood Road Deephaven^ MN 55331 Location: City of Deephaven, Sec. 24AD, Carson's Bay, Lake Minnetonka Purpose: Placement of a beach sand blanket. Permit Application Wo. 92-36; Applicant: City of Deephaven 20225 Cottagewood Road Deephaven, MN 55331 Location: City of Deephaven, Sec. 24BD, Carson's Bay, Lake Minnetonka Purpose: Placement of a beach sand blanket. Permit Application Wo. 92-48: Applicant: Howard Eisinger 3245 Wayzata Blvd. Long Lake, MN 55356 Location: City of Orono, Sec. 32BD, south of Hwy. 12 and west of Stubb's Bay Road Purpose: Stormwater management plan for placement of approximately 10,000 cubic yards of fill on an abandoned landfill site. Permit Application Ho. 92-55: Applicant: Minnetonka Yacht Club c/o Cathy Allen 19800 Lakeview Avenue Excelsior, MN 55331 Location: City of Deephaven, Sec. 24AB, Lighthouse Island, Lake Minnetonka Placement of fill in the floodplain to repair erosion damage behind an existing sheet piling sea wall. Purpose: Permit Application Ho. 92—56: Applicant: Gary Parendo 5001 Avon Drive Mound, MN 55364 Location: City of Mound, Sec. 24AD, Emerald Lake, Lake Minnetonka Installation of 275 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. Purpose: Permit Application. No. 92^7.; Applicant: MnDOT 2055 North Lilac Drive Golden Valley, MN 55422 City of Richfield, Sec. 28DC, wood Lake Floodplain alteration to repair erosion damage at I-35W storm sewer outlets. Location: Purpose: -2- i: ?- !s!^ c^' 1^' * >■ ir 'v-f :'^v m i?"- IP- J. K. L. ^'-m& M. H O. Permit Aoolication Ho. 92-58: Applicant: MnDOT 2055 North Lilac Drive Golden Valley, MN 55422 Locat'on: City of Minnetonka, Sec. 8CC, Wayzata Bay, Lake Minnetonka Installation of approximately 1,225 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection.Purpose: Permit Application Ho. 92-53: Applicant: Mark and Claudia Cohn 4500 Linwood Lane Deephaven, MN 55331 City of Deephaven, Sec. 24BC, Lake Minnetonka Installation of approximately 127 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. Location: Purpose: Permit Application Bo. 92-60: Applicant: Robert G. Sotirin 5040 Shady Island Point Mound, MN 55364 Location: City of Shorewood, Sec. 30AC, Phelps Bay, Lake Minnetonka Installation of 45 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection.Purpose: Permit Application Ho. 92-61: Applicant: City of Minnetonka 14600 Minnetonka Blvd. Minnetonka, MN 55345 Location: City of Minnetonka, Sec. 13A, Oakridge Road from Minnetonka Blvd. to St. John's Drive. Stormwater management plan for installation of approximately 1600 lineal feet of storm sewer and reconstruction of 1600 lineal feet of roadway. Purpose: Permit Application Bo. 92-63; Applicant: Mike McCarthy 240 Sunrise Avenue Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Location: City of Tonka Bay, Sec. 27BD, Echo Bay, Lake Minnetonka Installation of 80 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection.Purpose: Wo. B2-64; Applicant: Location: Purpose: John Sanborn 4079 Highwuod Road Orono, MN 55364 City of Orono, Sec. 7DD, West Arm, Lake Minnetonka Installation of 5C lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. - J- IIT »A. p I';' A .S'- 1^' V .,. . i-.:a,r fef- i.'rIS..r.t'-i?' mK ■Mh' M P. 0. R. S. T. a. ft Permit Application Ho. 92-66; Applicant: Robert A. Hagstrora 27820 Island View Road Shorewood, MN 55331 City of Shorewood/ Sec. 24BC, Lake Minnetonka Installation of 210 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. Location: Purpose: Permit Application Bo. 92-67; Applicant: Ralph P. Stillman 19955 Cottagewood Avenue Deephaven, MN 55331 Location: City of Deephaven, Sec. 24BC, Carson's Bay, Lake Minnetonka Placement of a beach sand blanket.Purpose: Cfii Applicant: H q « 92-fifl: Location: Purpos^': C.E. Troyar 2525 Kelly Avenue Orono, MN 55391 City of Orono, Sec. 20AA, Carman Bay, Lake Minnetonka Installation of 100 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. PArmit Application Ho. 92-69: Applicant: Hartman Construction Company 1600 Arboretum Blvd. Victoria, MN 55386 City of Victoria, Sec. 13B Stormwater management plan for a 33 lot single-family residential subdivision called •Katie Hills, 7th Addition." Location: Purpose: Permit Application No. 92-7_Q: Applicant: Lundgren Brothers Construction, Inc. 735 East Wayzata Blvd. Wayzaia, MN 55391 Location: City of Plymouth, Sec. 19BD, north of Co. Rd. 24 and east of the Plymouth-Medina boundary. Purpose: Stormwater management plan for a 28-lot single-family residential development called "Churchi,.! Farms 3rd end 4th Additions." PArmit Application Wo. 92-71: Applicant: City of Minnetonka 14600 Minnetonka Blvd. Minnetonka, MN 55345 City of Minnetonka, Sec. lOBD Stormwater management plan for utility installation for a 14-lot single-family residential subdivision called "Crowne Hill. Location: Purpose: -4- •*^ ^r' ^ r If; fi’:, il'f:?tV' iK .- m‘. ? - f?; Kv.-. i 0.' ^'vr. . i':am.. ■■;£^-'^'V ft.<r tH V I'ifr I ' ■ -rv - r.‘ ■>, i' " > K, f./ ■’^■V ••; :5?:''''^^Ir, y.:qy- Ipf-' ’yx^. V. X. AA Permit ADOlication Ho. 92~72;. Applicant: John Miller 4423 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 City of Orono, Sec. 9CA, West Arm, Lake Minnetonka Installation of 100 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. Location: Purpose: W. Permit Application Ho. 92-73: Applicant: Location: Purpose: Temple of Israel 2424 Emerson Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55408 City of Orono, Sec. 5CC Installation of rip rap along a drainage swale and alteration of the floodplain to provide drainage for the swale. Permit Application Bo. 92-74: Applicant: Tod Bolin 1995 Cottagewood Avenue Deephaven, MN 55331 Location: City of Deephaven, Sec. 24C, Carson's Bay, Lake Minnetonka Placement of a beach sand blanket.Purpose: Y. Permit Aoolication Ho. 92-75: Applicant: Location: Purpose: Matt Rand 1905 Beach Lane Minnetonka, MN 55361 City of Minnetonka Beach, Sec. 15CB, Smith Bay, Lake Minnetonka Floodplain alteration to remove an ice ridge. Z. Permit Application Ho. 92-76: Applicant: Location: Purpose: Crown College 6425 County Road 30 St. Bonifacius, MN 55375 City of St. Bonifacius, Sec. 5B, Parley Lake Stormwater management plan for construction of a gymnasiun. Permit Application Ho. 92-77: Applicant: City of Minnetonka 14600 Minnetonka Blvd. Minnetonka, MN 55345-1597 City of Minnetonka, Sec. 12A Stormwater management plan for reconstruction of Ford Road from Cedar Lake Road to Runnymeade Lane, including alteration of a Location: Purpose: wetland. -5- ■- ‘i- I k ;4r- ¥■ i b.I i > r >- fX Ife- X- ^v; i:te.Ki mtm. .. V "’v-'KIMl BB.Permit Apolication Ho. 92-78: Applicant: David McCulloch 235 Lakeview Avenue Tonka Bay, MN 55331 City of Tonka Bay, Sec. 27CA, Gideon Bay, Lake Minnetonka Installation of an unspecified amount of rip rap shoreline erosion protection and placement of fill in the floodplain. Location: Purpose: CC.Permit Application Ho. 92-79: Applicant: Mrs. D.H. Ankeny, Sr. 692 West Fecndale Road Wayzata, MN 55391 City of Wayzata, Sec. 12BB, Brown's Bay, Lake Minnetonka Installation of approximately 245 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erusion protection. Location: Purpose: OD.Permit Application Ho. 92-80: Applicant: Charles and Candace Nadler 2509 Kelly Avenue Excelsior, MN 55331 City of Orono, Sec. 20AA, Carman Bay, Lake Minnetonka Installation of 243 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. Location: Purpose: EE.Permit Application Ho. 92-81: Applicant: Chris Lindstrom 20050 Lakeview Avenue Excelsior, MN 55331 Location: City of Deephaven, Sec. 24CA, Carson Bay, Lake Minnetonka Purpose: Installation of 20 lineal feet of rip rap shoreline erosion protection. 5. Executive Committee Report. A. Report of consultant Cam Andre. B. Update concerning consulting enoineerino contract. 6. Complaints and Violations Committee Report. 7. Finance Committee Report. A. Treasurer's Report. -6- i i ■ . .r -. - r - :V i: fe: fe '■• n---;'P'M''.', ■ ■n-: • % B.Plana and Programs Committee Report- A. Gleason Creek update. Rules a A. Policies Committee Report. Publf Hearinc concerning proposed amendment to Rules Zp^ulatino sand blankets and implementing the Wetland . iservation Act of 1991. 10. Engineer’s Report i 11, Attorney’s Report. 12. Unfinished Business. 13. Mew Business. 14. Adlournment« S37DAJ(55) ^ 1 *1 -7- P&.a C^,. f r-j. ■••»- i 1% I I } ,w^s-. '■.J ■ ■.-.J . j:,. . •• ' V>4-. •V '•.>>, ;'• .H.: , •• i, Wl? ' »- -s- V.-A I I '*'■■■>:«, V.;V ,W'--':>-''‘-V i,:.; ff i' ■#. 5 !-sT£H5'rrrllS';? f :%ri. ’‘" W '4 "si ■ -t "«' •'•iil -tfiJ -iJti Ci<f 'C>i y* *\ «: jt.-t> ^^k. •• j -iM’> I. Mtr*d« r—tfwf C* t«^ •• «•«•« <!»•<• •tt f «lt«i. ••••rfM* r—a «tt» fr«v«t c« mt«n ••t«tln« Mt*rt«l. 1. r«c !• 14) rt|» ra^ Mtlltray* la la ataa «av«i waiar tla«. Oaiar rla rap aa aill f«r« aim acMlaa mtfd a*a4 taClttraUa*. alaa aMl taatall ftitar faarit ta a«ip I. Uat l}q* a( «ral«aM 4tt«« m altli 1) aa»aaa aaaa aa*ll aaarfrawta af (ra«a. a> laeawaca «l«a» ta pc»ai4a paaltiaa Pralaapa. I) rtaaa ftliav taMtc a*4 ria rap ia Attca. 4) aaitp4a pat»«air aica praaal