Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-14-1992 Council Packetr MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 ROLL The Council met on the above date with the foiiowing members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson, CouncIImembers J. Diann Goetten, Gabriel Jabbour, Edward Callahan and Mary Butler. The following represented the City staff: Acting City Administrator John Gerhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, City Attorney Thomas Barrett, City Engineer Glenn Cook and City Recorder Terl Naab. Finance Director Tom Kuehn and Chief of Police Stephen Sullivan arrived later in the meeting. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. (•1) CONSENT AGENDA Butler added Items #9, 11 and 12 and removed Item #22 from the Consent Agenda. Callahan removed Items #2 and 22. Gerhardson added Item #16. Goetten said she did not feel the City should have to pay half of the chargee. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to approve tne Consent Agenda as amended. Ayes 5, nays 0. Motions for all items adopted by consent agenda will be Included in the minutes in their respective numerical order. (•2) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Callahan referred to Page 2, paragraph 6. He recalled that Mr. Luce pointed out the principal for purchasing the capital equipment would come from the City of Long Lake, and at some point in the meeting, in response by a specific question from Jabbour, the Mayor of Long Lake stated that Long Lake would pay fo the capital improvements. Ail Members agreed and asked that the minutes be changed to reflect that conversation. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Butler, to table approval of the minuter of the special Council meeting of August li, 1992. Ayes 9, nsys 0 Butler suggested that e representative of the Long Lake Council also sign the approved minutes. I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14. 1992 (*#3) APPROVAL Or MINUTES It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to approve the minutes of the regular Council meeting of August 24, 1992. Ayes 5, nays 0. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. (#4) §1748 ROBERT & RITA HOVLAND, 1245 NORTH ARM DRIVE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE Rita Hovland was preserit. Mabusth explained that the appiication was reviewed by the Planning Commission at both the July and August meetings. Planning Commission denied the amended proposal based on size of the structure and the Planning Commission felt because of that size, the structure should meet the setback ordinance. The building has been reduced from 30’x33* to 25'x3e'. Lot coverage was no longer an Issue. Goetten suggested shifting the building thereby only requiring one variance. She questioned the structure width of 25’ and noted boards come in 24’ lengths. She stated it would be less et^oensive to build the garage at a 24’ width. Jabbour noted the applicants may have felt more on one of the adjacent neighbors. He comment on Qoetten’s question. '•ley should not imp arked Mrs. Hovia. j >se to Hovland stated once the wails are up, a 24’ wide garage would be reduced to 23’ of usable space inside and they need 24’. She pointed out one Planning Commission member did vote fc* the proposal because he felt they had followed the directives of the Planning Commission. Callahan referred to the minutes of the July 20th meeting where the applicants stated the reason the large garage was needed was because their son was moving into the house and has two vehicles and a boat. He asked if the applicants were trying to isake the property hold more equipment than is feasible. Hovland noted the graveled area has been reduced to one car width end win be used more as s convenience ee the garage it far fr<»i the entrance to the front of the house. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 ZONING FILE #1748 - CONT. Butler felt there were a coupleof applications before them tonight where the applicants were caught between two groups of Planning Commission members. She frit applicants that complied with the directives of the Plarinii v Commission should be recognized for doing so. It was moved by Butier, seconded by Jabbour, to direct staff to draft a resolution approving setback variances for Application #1 748 for Robert and Rita Hovland of 1245 North Arm Drive, approving a 15* side setback from the north lot line and a 13’ setback from the south lot line. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#5) #1750 CHARLES & SHIRLEY PYLE, 3548 IVY PLACE - VARIANCES Charles and Shirley Pyle and Daryl Hanson were present. Mabusth explained this application was also reviewed at both the July and August Planning Commission meetings. She noted the revised proposal includes additional removal of 75-250’ hardcover at 172 s.f., and the 663 s.f. roof structure originally proposed has been reduced to 374 s.f. She noted the real issue for this proposal is the lot coverage. Lot coverage was originally proposed at 24.5X and has been reduced to 21.5%. The Planning Commission recommended approval based on lot coverage be held at 10%, which would mean the applicants would have xo give up either the roof structure or the family room addition. Butier stated here is another situation where the applicants were g.ven directives from the Planning Coiwnission and came back with a proposal and were denied. Soetten felt that does not mean that the vote should have been changed. Jabbour agreed with Butler. He expressed concern about residents exerting energy and money on revised plans and the City doe# not act in good faith. Qoetten stated the lot Is small and nee excessive amounts of hardcover. She asked the applicants It there were any other areas where they could reduce hardcover. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 ZONING FILE §1750 - CONT. Hanson said from the beginning they knew they would have to make concessions, and they tried to reduce the hardcover prior to submitting the original proposal. After the first Planning Commission meeting they were asked to reduce hardcover percentages more, which they have done. Jabbour noted that at one point a project becomes over ambitious for the lot. He stated the City’s ordinances reflect their concern about water run-off into the Lake. Mr. Pyle said the first group of Planning Commission members to review the proposal did visit the site and felt the project was beneficial, but the second group did not inspect the property. Goeiten stated she appreciates the cuts the applicants have proposed, but felt the project too ambitious for the lot. She agreed with the Planning Commission's recommendatI on of 18X total lot coverage. Mrs. Pyle referred to two small planting areas in the 0-75’ setback area. She stated the boxes around the plantings and plastic underneath could be removed. Mabusth stated this would reduce 0-76’ hardcover by 177 s.f. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve Application #1750 for Charles and Shirley Pyle, 3548 Ivy Place, for variances to construct an addition to the existing residence, based on Condition #1 of the resolution be removed and a condition that the triangular planting areas and plastic underneath be removed, and limiting lot area coverage to 21.5X. Ayes 2, nays 3. Callahan, Jabbour and Goetten voted nay. Motion failed. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to table AppIIcatIon #1750 for Charles and Shirley Pyle for two weeks to allow the applicants tima to reconsider their proposal. Ayes 3, nays 2. Mayor Peterson and Butler voted nay. Motion carried. Goetten explained that If the application were denied, the appIicants wouId not be allowed to return with another proposal for six months. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 (#6) #1767 ALBERT D. HANSER, 1685 FOX STREET - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION #3175 Albert Hanser and Jack Taylor were present. Mabusth explained this is a request for a conditional use permit for a guest house use. She noted the applicant has foi lowed the directives of the preliminary subdivision approval and have filed the application. The structure is non-conforming because of its substandard setback from a recreational development lake. The issue for this review is the requirement of the septic code to repiace the system if it is deemed non-conforming. She stated it has been found non-conforming the based on septic test information received for the rest of the property, mound systems would have to be Installed on the property due to the nigh water table. The age of the system suggests the required 3’ separation could not be met. The guest house currently has a standard trench system. Based on code requirements, the system would have to be replaced within 12 months. Hanser stated he has lived in Orono for 20-i- years and his property is SS-*- acres. He referred to a letter from Sullivans which attests to the functionality of the septic system and how it has been maintained in the past. He said it would cost as much money to prove the system meets the code as would a new system. He noted they do not rent the guest house and their daughter lives there now. He said he would be willing to make a written commitment that they will continue to maintain the system as has been done in the past. Hanser indicated the rules have changed dramatically sln.e they started the subdivision process and they have been caught in the middle. Taylor stated the Council should consider the rule, If it isn’t broken, don*t fix it. He stated the septic system was installed per the code effective at the time, which the current ordinance requires. He noted Weckman indicated the system may be dumping pollutants into the water, and Taylor asked whose responsibI 11ty it was to prove. Qoetten said she asked the same question. She stated she was told an on-site evaluator could clarify that issue for a couple hundred dollars. She felt that would not be too much to ask. Jabbour stated this it a policy question on non-conforming system. He felt the applicant has presented a very good subdivision and expressed a desire to work with him to resolve the issues. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 ZONING FILE #1757 - CONT. Gaffron reviewed why the new shoreland regulations have more restrictive standards than previous codes. He explained that for about 15 years there has been a standard for all new systems that if there is mottling present, which is an indicator in the soil that there is a seasonal perched water table, a 3’ separation above the mottling is required. The DNR and the PCA mandated that any existing system that does not meet that separation is considered a non*conform Ing system, and in shoreland areas, the DNR has said those systems must be made conforming. Gaffron explained that staff does not have all the facts regarding the septic system lor the guest house, and absent testing in the immediate area of the system, staff has had to lock at testing done on the remainder of the property which indicates mound systems would be required. He said the logical thing to do would be to hire a site evaluator to do soil borings at the site of the existing drainfield to aetermina its relationship to the mottling elevation. Manser stated the rules keep changing and felt the City should not continue to hold up the subdivision process because of this issue. He said he would b© happy to hKe an evaluator. Jabbour asked if the system is now considered Illegal non­ conform i ng. Gaffron stated by definition, the system is non-conforming and cannot stay that way based on the new shoreland requIrements. Taylor Indicated the definition of a conforming system Is one built to codes not withstanding its location. Barrett opined that if the City decides to change Its rules, they must add an obligat on to provide for non-conforming structures, and if that is not provided for. It might be considered a taking of property. However, the regulatory values imposed by the DNR, PCA and the City with respect to shoreland property, may involve a public interest which is high enough to allow the City to regulate even non-conforming uses and require them to be upgraded. Jabbour asked if they have a way to allow the subdivision to continue \.ondltionec upon the applicant providing the Information required to prove the system Is either conforming or non­ conforming . MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14. 1992 ZONING FILE i1757 - CONT. Mabusth stated they can add a condition in the conditional use permit resolution with regard to the septic system and noted that the subdivision application is completely separate from the conditional use permit application, so that the conditional use permit can be approvco and not hold up the subdivision. Taylor said they would like an additional time period for testing. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt Resolution #3176 for Application #1757 for Albert D. Hanser, 1685 Fox Street, for a conditional use permit to allow the guest house use, amending the condition allowing a one month testing period and if deemed non-conforming, a one year time period to replace the system. Ayes 5, nays 0. Hanser added that if the system needs to be replaced, it would diminish his property values. Gaffron stated he would be happy to meet the applicant and his site evaluator on the site when the soil borings are commenced. (#7) IM758 JAMES LAWRENCE, 1550 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - CONDITIONAL USF PERMIT - RESOLUTION #3177 It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #3177 for Application #1758 for James Lawrence, 1550 Sixth Avenue North, approving a conditional use permit for a guest house use. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#8) §1759 P. PROFT/R. WELLS, 60/70 MYRTLEWOOD ROAD - SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT - RESOLUTION #3178 Robert Mitchell was present to represent the applicants. Mabusth explained the subdivision involves approximately 1/3 of an acre, half of which is wetland. The Wells’ property currently consists of 1.6 acres. The area proposed to be subdivided off could not be used for septic purposes due to Its proximity to the wetland. There is not an alternate septic site on the Weils’ property, but the existing system could be expanded upon. The area in question appears to be part of the Proft property. Mitchell reviewed the Proft residence is oriented to face the southwest. He stated without the Profts controlling the area, it is an Invitation for a nuisance to occur in the future. The Profts wish to stabilize the neighborhood situation. 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 ZONING FILE »1769 - CONT. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt Resolution H3178 for Application #1759 for P. Proft and R. Wells, 60 and 70 Myrtlewood Road, subdivision of a lot line rearrangement. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#9) #1760 ERIC NIELSEN, 2140 PROSPECT AVENUE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3179 It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to adopt Resolution #3179 fcr Application #1760, Eric Nielsen, 2140 Prospect Avenue, for variances to construct a new residence. Ayes 5, nays 0. (»#10) 845 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD - AMENDMENT OF EASEMENT :t was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to approve the filing of an amended drainage and utility easement for Hilltop Farm and direct the Mayor and Clerk to execute the Consent Form. Ayes 5, nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT A) Butler referred to Item #9. She stated that If this is a common lot size and configuration In the neighborhood, as stated numerous times, and sewer is available, the Council should seriously consider rezonlng the area. Callahan cautioned the City in doing so as they have been Informed by the Metropolitan Council that the City should rezone to larger parceIs. B) Goetten urged alt to vote In the primary. C) Jabbour reported on the Public Access Task Force. He explained the LMCD originally thought the members of the Task Force should be divided Into 25 sub-committees. The Task Force was finally divided into two groups commissioned to study the criteria for countIng car/.railer parking spaces and for actually countIng those spaces. He said the LMCD was Incapable of conducting the meetings so a facilitator was hired. He explained that after the criteria was agreed upon, the spaces were counted, but the LMCD did not agree with the number they came up with and those numbers were manipulated. The Chairman of the Task Force was about to report to the LMCD Board on those findings when Jabbour discovered the numbers had been changed from 045 parking spaces to 140. At the last meeting, the LMCD realized the original numbers might be correct. He said he has volunteertd to raise the money to hire a certified engineer to draw those parking spaces on half section maps based on the negotisted c»“iteria. He realized at the last meeting, that the LMCD was chipping away at the criteria. 6 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING MELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. Jabbour expressed his frustration with the Task Force and thanked the City of Minnetrista for attending those meetings. He felt the City should revise their position and inform the DNR that they wish to deal directly with the DNR on the access issue. He reported the DNR is preparing a drawing to present on the Maxwell Bay access at the September 28th meeting. He suggested to the DNR that they discuss the proposal with the neighbors. Goetten asked If there were any other locations within Zone 1 that could be used for access. Jabbour explained the City has a promise from the DNR that the Maxwell Bay access will not proceed until the Task Force comes up with findings. He noted the City has made .and available in Zone 1 for future access use. He added now there is a willing buyer and seller for this site. Callahan stated he was not under the impression that the Task Force would be dealing with details of the access site. Jabbour stated he told the Task Force that the City Council of Orono will be adamant that Orono standards should apply on Orono land. He stated it is very embarrassing for the Lake Minnetonka community to be portrayed in front of the State Legislators that out of 8,000 boats on the Lake, there is 148 available to the general public and the rest are private. He said his question to the LMCD is, "What have you been doing in the last 30 years, and out of the 148 spaces, 67 are within Orono at North Arm, and they are planning an additional 60~70 within 2,000 feet. There is 152 miles of lakeshore, why is Orono paying more than its fair share?" He added because of foresight in the early 1970s by the City to have open land, and the pressure is on those that did the right thing. He suggested the Council express their desire to have the Task Force dissolved after it presents Its findings and let Orono deal directly with DNR. ENGINEER’S REPORT (••11) PAY REQUEST t1 - LIFT STATION t9 It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to authorize Pay Request ei for Lift Station i9 renovation to New Mech Companies in the amount of $10,972.50. Ayes 8, nays 0. (••12) PAYMENT REQUEST 92 - STUBBS BAY SEWER PROJECT It was moved by Goetten, seconded by dutler, to authorize Payment •2 for the Stubbs Bay sanitary sewer project, to Progressive Contractors. Inc., in the aaiount of $305,777.00. Ayes 5, nays 0. r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 (#12A) PAY REQUEST #2 - 400,000 GALLON ELEVATED TANK It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Jabbour, to authorize Payment #2 for the 400,000 gallon elevated tank to PDM, Inc. In the amount of $130,492.00. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#13) LONG LAKE FIRE CONTRACT Chris DIetson and Butch Loomis were present. Oietson understood the status of the fire contract as set forth In his letter dated September lOth. He explained after the special meeting held on August 18th, Moorse sent him a letter on August 26th. After that, a meeting was held with representatives from both cities to adjust the contract. As a result of that meeting. Long Lake proposed the terms set forth in his letter. He stated at the conclusion of that meeting, Moorse and Sullivan were going to recommend approval of the v’^*'‘^5al to Orono Council. He reviewed the terms of the contract. Callahan clarified that Moorse suggested to Dietson that the Council would consider a three year contract. Dietson agreed. Loomis stated at the end of the meeting two weeks ago, both Moorse and Sullivan said they would recofwnend the three year contract. Jabbour explained that Moorse has not had the chance to deal with the Council’s concerns. He said he would not agree to a contract until those concerns are addressed. He stated he would like to do things on a longer term. He Indicated there are four other municipalities In the background waiting for a response from )rono. Qoetten noted the Council expressed concerned about any contract other than a one year contract as there are several issues the two cities need to further discuss. She understood the Orono Council was willing to accept the terms proposed at the meeting held on August 18th. Dietson stated the Council’s position is a surprise to him. Me said Moorse’s letter stated they would accept the proposal presented on August iHth with two modifications with respect to capital equipment and the advisory coiwnittee. Me called Moorse at that time and told him it was not acceptable and they had another meeting. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 LONG LAKE FIRE CONTRACT - CONT. Callahan reiterated at the special meeting held on August 18th, both Dietson and the Mayor of Long Lake stated that Long Lake was going to pay for the capital equipment and it was suggested to Long Lake that Oronc would accept that offer. He noted the equipment Long Lake was going to pay for was $28,000 and now they are proposing to pay for $14,000 worth of equipment. Ho said it occurred to him that Long Lake did not have the money to pay for the equipment, but he has read in the newspaper that not only do they have money to pay for the $28,000, but indeed they have enough to pay for the whole fire department. Mayor Peterson noted the approval of the proposal was tabled at the August 18th meeting because she had not received the proposal In time to properly review. She reiterated that Moorse has been listening to five different people and may have felt the Council was going to accept a three year contract. She stated after their meeting with Moorse the previous Thursday afternoon, he was aware of the Council’s position. Dietson said he was not authorized to accept a one year contract and would need to take the counter offer back to Long Lake for their consideration. It was moveo by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to direct the City Administrator to negotiate a one year contract prior to Septemb^. ' 22, 1992 based on terms of the contract submitted by Long Lake at the special meeting held on August 18, 1992. Ayes 3, nays 2. Callahan and Butler voted nay. Motion carried. Mayor Peterson asked Loomis to consider another special meeting to discuss the contract. (•14) SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT - VIKING BASSMASTERS’ FISHING TOURNAMENT Tom Nelson and Ted Kowalski were present. Kowalski explained the bass club is similar to soft ball groups. He stated the tournament has been held at North Shore Marina tor the last 1C years, and is geared toward family involvement. He noted they ere a non-profit organization ana they donate any money made on the tournament. He said they try to i«eep the group as quiet as possible. They launch at North Arm and have inspectors or site looking for exotics. He felt by denying their license, the Council would not be putting any pressure on North Shore Marina as they do not get any benefit from the event. 11 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT - CONT. Mayor Peterson suggested the Bass Club begin the process earlier the next year. Kowalski asked that the CouncI • consider *-*ilvlng the late fee. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Goetten, to approve the Viking bass Masters application for a special event permit for a fishing tournament at North Shore Marina on October 4, 1992, and to refund the late fee, with the understanding that the penalty will not be waived In future years. Ayes 4, nays 0. Jabbour abstained. (#15) GRONBERQ (LEAF STREET LOT) ASSESSMENT Mayor Peterson recommended tabling this Issue as she had just received the Information from Mr. Gronberg's attorney. She noted specific questions raised in the information, and felt in all fairness to Gronberg, the Council should have a chance to review the Information. She stated the Council would make a decition at their meeting of September 28th. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Jabbou-, to table consideration of Donald Gronberg’s L»tubbs Bay sewer assessment appeal. Ayes 5, nays 0. (»t18) ESTABLISH PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR CERTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS BUILDINGS ASSESSMENT It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to set a public hearing for October 12, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. at the Council Chambers to consider the special assessment roll for the 1992 hazardous buildings. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#17) 1993 BUDGET & PROPOSED TAX LEVY - RESOLUTION #3183 Kuehn noted Moorse has proposed a $10,000 increase In the general fund operating expanse and has not proposed any changes in property tax or resarve. Jabbour felt the Council needed to thoroughly review the budget at Q workshop. Goetten was concerned about making additional allowances to compensate for cuts in State aid. 12 _ _ _ _ _ r.I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 1993 BULGET & PROPOSED TAX LEVY - CONT. It was noved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, Resolution S3180 approving the proposed maximum 1992 collectible in 1993 at a 5.6* Increase. to adopt tax levy Butler asked why the difference in the dollar amounts shown for the general fund and the tax levy. Kuehn stateo the tax levy amount does not include all sources of revenue. Jabbour said that residents will not understand that a 6.5* sales tax has been included in expenditures, which '9 something new the Clty must pay. Kuehn seated because of the HACA increase proposed, there will ba a reduction In property taxes paid to the City. He added the tax capacity for the City has cf.anged and actually affects the percentage paid. Jabbour noted during the workshop he w(I I be trying to reduce line items n order to build an additional reserve fund. Vote: Ayes 2, nays 3. Goetten, Callahan and Butler voted nay. Motion failed. Goetten stated she does not want to be locked Into reducing Iine 11 ems. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution • 310C approving the proposed maximum 1992 tax i evy roMectible in 1993 of $2,120,139, an increase of 8.13* over the tax levy collectible in 1992. Ayes 3, nays 2. Mayor Peterson and Jabbour voted nay. Motion carried. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Callahan, to establish the proposed 1993 General Fund expenditure budget In the amount of 163,719, an increase of 4.59* over the 1992 Genera fund e'.pend.tura budget. Ayes 3, nays 2. Mayor Peterson and Jabbour voted nay. Motion carried. (tli) LEE * JUllE MAHHLN INCLUSTON/EXCLUSION FRCtI STUBB3 BAY SEWER PROJECT Let Merren wet creeent. j.bboor aaraad -itn Mr. H,rr«n that tn, asoluilon critarla na. Changed tince the begtnnire* MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 HARREN - STUBBS BAY SEWER PROJECT - CONT. Mayor Peterson also agreed. Gaffron noted there were two additional properties included with the project based on the design of the pipe. He said the question here is, are there additional properties with similar situations as Harren? Jabbour asked how far Harren Is from the Lake. Gaffron said Harren is approximately 500’ from the Lake but geographically one could argue that the property should be hooked •JO to sewer. He stated the pipe would have gone right by his house if it had been placed In the street, and properties on both sides of him will be sewered. Butler suggested that a future owner will be extremely mad at the City when the septic system falls and he finds out the City did not force the owner to connect at this time. Jabbour said if it were his house he would hook up immediately. He stated he is trying to interpret the City’s philosophy. Qoetten asked if the property is within the MUSA boundaries. Gaffron noted that line has been set to be concurrent with th© two acre zoning district. Butler said that after making accommodations In the design of the sewer responding to Harren’s concerns, for hirii to now say he does not want sewer is unthinkable. Harren indicated he was not involved ifi the discussion tc move ’.he pipe. He felt the City moved the pipe to bast serve their Interests, not his. He stated he tried to suggest to the City th© best alternative. He added, Ini 989 he installed a new mound system and was t<>ld at that time he could not use u holding tank until the sewer w.*s available. He noted he was included because of a technicality, end he should be excluded for the same criteria. Gaffron said from early on the City has tried to accommodate Harren. Me refen-ad to a letter dated in 1989 to Elden Construction stating he would be happy to discuss options of action with regards to the septic system. a MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 HARREN - STUBBS BAY SEWER PROJECT - CONT. Cook stated the cheapest way to hook the property to sewer would be to run the pipe to the west, leaving the effluent pump in and connecting it to the sewer iine. Harren «%tated the pipe wouid then run through his grove of black walnut trees and under his pooi. He stated the iine would be over 260’ . Cook said the line would be half as expensive as the gravity line to the east. J^bbour asked the difference between the Harren and the Ilse situation. Gaffron said there was no difference, and the I Ises were given the option of being excluded from the project. Callahan agreed with Butler on the position of a future owner, and suggested filing a document in the chain of title expressing the City’s position that it will be the responsibility of the property owner to connect to the sewer at a later date. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to exclude Lee and Julie Harren’" nroperty at 175 Landmark Drive from the Stubbs Bay sewer project, subject to the owner signing a document to be filed within the chain of title notifying any future owner of the responsibility to connect to the sewer at their expense within one year if and when the septic system falls. Ayes 4, nays 1. Butler voted nay. MotKon carried. Barrett stated the document could perhaps be don© In conjunction with the settlement for litigation. Harren asked that he not be required to Incur additional legal expense. Callahan noted the cocument Is to protect the City and the City will draft the appropriate document. He added, the City is not recommending to Harren that he sign such document. Goetten stated she felt the City had been dealing with all owners in good fe*th with regard to this project. IS MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 (#19) ESTABLISH DATE FOR KELLEY PARKWAY DEDICATION Dedication of Kelley Parkway was set for Wednesday, October 14, 1992 at 4:00 p.m. (#20) RECYCLING AGREEMENT Gerhardson explained there Is not an increase in the new recycling contract and the company has added the collection of magazines. He felt the City may be able to get a longer term contract which could save the City money, and stated he would contact the recycling company about this. He reported the County has changed the method of refund from a percentage to an entitlement, which will reduce the refund by approximately $3,000. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Callahan, to extend the recycling agreement with E-Z Recycling for 1993 and add the collection of magazines to the items being picked up, for an amount not to exceed $63,160. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*»21) COMPENSATION ADJUSTMENT & PERFORMANCE REVIEW - POLICE CHIEF It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to Increase Stephen Sullivan's salary from Level 12, Step II to Level 12, Step III effective August 19, 1992. In addition, when the Compensation Plan is adjusted effective January 1, 1993, his salary will be adjusted accordingly. Ayes 5, nays 0. ($22) COMBINED CHANGE ORDER FOR CITY FACILITIES TO REFLECT CURRENT BUDGET STATUS Butler stated this is the second time the contractor has not provided the information requested, and she expressed her f rust rat I on. Jabbour asked staff to take the time to explain this frustration to the contractor. (Si23) POLICE SERVICE CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OF LONG LAKE It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to accept the Information regarding the Police Service Contract with the City of Long Lake. Ayes 5. nays 0. (••24) FALL CLEAN UP DATE It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to designate October 17, 1992 as the Fall Clean Up Day with the guidelines established as noted in the memo of September 10, 1992. Ayes 5. nays 0. IS MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 (*i25) APPOINT ADDITIONAL ELECTION JUDGES - RESOLUTION #3181 It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to adopt Resolution #3181 appointing additional election Judges for the primary election to be held September 15, 1992 and the General Election to be held November 3, 1992. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#26) LICENSES Callahan noticed Mr. Larson is requesting a license for the Parade of Homes. He said a rumor has swept through the City that perhaps in obtaining permission to change the driveway configuration, the full facts were not revealed by Larson, or rather were concealed. He suggested staff review the tape of the discussion with Mr. Larson, and should there appear to be a discrepancy In the statement concerning maple trees In particular and the facts about the maple trees, that the permit not be granted. He said he recalled Mr. Larson indicating a major reason for the reconfiguration of the driveway was to save mature maple trees. It was suggested afterwards that no maple trees exist on the property in that location. Mabusth noted she found that the BuMding Inspector did not understand driveway placement In the development, but staff wl revisit the Issue of driveway placement in tht Sugarwoods plat. Jabbour understood there construction crews. was a straight drive being used by She clarified when standing on site and looking straight up towards the garage openings, as stated by the developer. It appeared some young maple trees would be lost with that driveway alignment. The straight drive used by construction crews is actually In a different location than the drive staked for Council’s review at their September I4th meeting. It was moved by Butl«r, seconded by Mayor Peterson to approve the following IIcenses: Septic System Installer License: Duane Ritter Excavating Special Event Permit - Parade of Homes: Scott Larson Homes, 2112 Sugar Woods Drive Rid wood Homes. 2455 Old Beach Road L. Crame»’ Co., 2012 Sugar Woods Drive Cudd Company, 21lO Sugar Woods Drive Ayes 5, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 (*»27) BILLS It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to approve payment of the AM Funds Account. Ayes 5, nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Peterson adjourned the regular Orono City Council meeting at 10:06 p.m. to Executive Session. Ayes 6, nays 0. I Barbara Peterson, Mayor r AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 1992, 7:00 P.M. (*)Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held 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 OP MINUTES 2. Special Meeting of August 18, 1992 sc, * 3. Regular Meeting of August 24, 1992 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Charles Kelley Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT **APPLICANTS** Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolutions at the Recorder's desk. Applicants need not execute resolutions for subdivisions, vacations and denials. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. #1748 Robert & Rita Hovland, 1245 North Arm Drive - Conditional Use Permit/Variance #1750 Charles & Shirley Pyle, 3548 Ivy Place - Variances - Resolution # 1 757 Albert D. Hanser, 1685 Fox Street - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution #1758 James Lawrence, 1550 Sixth Avenue North - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution #1759 P. Proft/R. Wells, 60/70 Myrtlewood Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Resolution #1760 Eric Nielsen, 2140 Prospect Avenue - Variance - Resolution 845 Old Long Lake Road - Amendment of Easement WAYQR/COUNCIL REPORT EWGINEER REPORT 11. Pay Request fl 12. Pay Request #2 Lift Station #9 Stubbs Bay Sewer Project 14. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 13. Long Lake fire Contract Special Event Permit for Viking Bassmasters Fishing Tournament at North Shore Marina Gronberg (Leaf Street Lot) Assessment Establish Public Hearing Date for Certification of Hazardous Buildings Assessment 15. 16. 1 r AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 1992, 7:00 P.M. 18. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT Continued 17. 1993 Budget and Proposed Tax Levy - Resolution Lee and Julie Harren Inclusion/Exclusion From Stubbs Bay Sewer Project Establish Date for Kelley Parkway Dedication Recycling Agreement Compensation Adjustment & Performance Review - Police Chief Combined Change Order for City Facilities to Reflect Current Budget Status Police Service Contract with the City of Long Lake Fall Clean Up Date Appoint Additional Election Judges - Resolution 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (26*) BILLS (27*) ADJOURNMENT INFORMATION ITEMS INCLUDED IN COUNCIL PACKET DOOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 09/14 - Council Meeting p.in. 09/15 - State Primary Election - No Meeting# Before 8 p.m 09/21 - Planning Commission 7 p.ra. 09/25 - Hazardous Waste Collection 9 a.m. - 3 p.m. 09/26 - Hazardous Waste Collection 9 a.m. - 3 p.m. 09/28 - Council Meeting 7 p.ra. HINflTBS OP TBE ORONO SPECIAL COOTICIL MEETING - August 18, 1992 FIRE SERVICE ALTERNATIVES <^4* A meeting of the City Council pursuant to posted notice at 3.30 p at the Orono Council Chambers with the following mem»&jn|^p Mayor Barbara Peterson, CounciImembers Edward Cal lahan^^jteb Jabbour, J. Diann Goetten and Mary Butler. Also in atW^ftanci were City Administrator Ron Moorse and Deputy Clerk Lin^l^^ Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m. of the City of^rdn^^was NwA .m., Tuesday, :he following memll&jnR. pre^^:^*^ Mayor Peterson introduced the Long Lake representatives, Scott Luse (Long Lake CounciImember) and Chris Dietzen (Long Lake City Attorney), who presented Long Lake's proposal for fire service. Mr. Dietzen discussed the proposal booklet each CounciImember received earlier in the day stating tabs 1-3 cover information requested by Orono including* revenue, expenditures, equipment list, equipment replacement plan, etc. According to information received from Orono, he understood the existing fire service areas were based, at least in part, on a study that Orono did in 1900. One of the areas of concern was the response time. He presented an aerial photo showing the location of fire departments serving Orono and proposed fire service boundaries. He indicated their proposal offers much better service and response time for fire and medical emergencies. On the issue of cost of service (under Tab 3), the proposed budget is $97,433. Based on the past formula of 78.2%, that would result in a total figure for Orono of $76,192.61. Generally, Long Lake was able to reduce the budget by eliminating the major equipment as an item of the budget thus being more comparable to other proposals. They would propose that as major equipment needs occur, they would look at bonding. The equipment is in excellent shape and they could defer the need for new equipment for a period of time. Each line item has been reviewed as to possible reduction and some have been reduced. The current contract has been a fixed rate contract so Orono is billed a certain amount whether that money is actually spent or not. Some years have been under while others have been over budget wh«n the extra amount has not been charged. The Police contract carries forward credits and additional expenses. Long Lake wou Id be willing to change to that type of contract. Since sianagement of the Fire Department has been a concern. Long Lake is suggesting a Fire Advisory Commission consisting of one member from Medina, Orono and Long Lake. T)ie City Council would appoint that person and would not necessarily have to be an elected official. They would have the right, opportunity and ability to go to the monthly business meetings of the Fire Department and Officers Meetings and to indicate their concerns and issues they want addressed. They would have the right to certify the election of the Fire Chief and the Assistant Fire Chief. Under the City charter, the City of Long Lake is required to certify this election and they are willing to give this authority to the Fire Advisory Coassission. I MINUTES OP THE ORONO SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1992 Shannon Madden, the medical and training officer for the Long Lake Fire Department, supplied information on response times. Kelly Shaughnessy, an officer of the Long Lake Fire Department, explained how fire calls are received. Jabbour commented that to go forward, they should be aware of concerns of the past. Orono has never had any problem with the Fire Department and its capability to perform. His concern lies with the capability of the Fire Department to function within the parameters that Orono wishes. Dictzen added that he had advised the Long Lake Council and Fire Department that this should be treated as a business, being cost competitive and providing services to customers. He also had told Rick Perry, the Fire Chief, that he would have to attend Orono Council meetings and make reports to the Council. Jabbour stated his concerns over the Long Lake City Council eliminating 10% of the budget, some of the fire people feeling unable to function on this budget cut, and money being diverted to the general fund for the City of Long Lake. Luce stated that communication could be directly from the Fire Department to other cities rather than from the Long Lake City Offices. They have also asked the Fire Chief to appoint someone to take over the administrative role of the Fire Department who would perform like an officer providing monthly reports. Goetten expressed her concern over the major equipment fund. Shaughnessy said this was also a major concern of the Fire Department and these discussions should help all people involved. Goetten asked how the Fire Department would obtain new equipment when necessary. Luse explained that if the purchase were over $400,000, it would be a referendum and under $400,000 would be through bonding. He added that in the proposal they were trying to compare their budget to those of other cities and eliminating the major equipment fund seemed to be the closest comparison. Shaughnessy stressed the importance of negotiation between the cities of Long Lake and Orono. City Administrator Mcorse stated a major issue that still exists is the capital equipment replacement and its financing. He compared some of the other proposals regarding this issue to Long Lake's equipment replacement. His concern is that, although Long Lake has responded to Orono's concern over cost, those reductions have been through capital equipment replacement monies and seem to be a short term savings. Luse pointed out that in the budget only interest on the bonds is included as costs to be shared by participating cities, the principal comes from the City of Long Lake's capital outlay. Jabbour asked what percentage Medina pays. Dietsen responded that Medina pays roughly 4% and Long Lake 18%, Jabbour feels capital outlay should be included in the budget, Dietsen • MINUTES OP THE ORONO SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1992 stated the percentages were arrived at by using assessed values of homes but could be negotiated. Mayor Peterson stated that in all fairness to Long Lake, a decision should be made at a later time when CounciImembers have ' had an opportunity to study the proposal, Shaughnessy invited members to the upcoming Fire Department Officers Meeting and cautioned Council to avoid using a formula based on the number of fire calls received. Mayor Peterson also noted that in comparing proposals, the first year's bid may be more attractive to "get your foot in the door" and future years may not be as attractive. She reiterated that response time is of utmost importance and decisions will be based on this. Goetten added that sharing of services between cities to reduce costs is becoming more important. Comments were received from the following members of the public: Gary Printup, Mr. Tourangeau, Mike Ellis, Dr. John Sagehorn, Cliff Otten, Dianne Jentllucci, Jim Cox, Marv Siebold, Lloyd Fairbank, Rodney Minick, and Peg. They expressed major concern over response times. They noted that a dollar value cannot be put on human lives and reported several incidents where the quick response time of the Fire Department was important. There were comments and questions regarding Wayzata's ability to provide increased service. They asked that Council make a decision regarding Fire contracts for the "right" reasons and keep communications open between Long Lake and Orono. Callahan questioned why the cost of the same response time is 50% higher from Long Lake than other cities. Jabbour reminded Long Lake to be competitive making it impossible for Orono to make a decision to establish their own Fire Department. Callahan stated there may be explanations regarding higher costs that are acceptable and that ever if the costs are higher, it doesn't mean Orono would not choose Long Lake's proposal. The figures may not be correct or understood. Mayor Peterson stated that in the past Orono has not asked to be involved in the administration of the Fire Department, She thanked Long Lake for providing the information requested and as a courtesy to Long Lake felt Council should take time to review their proposal and decision on the Fire Department contract. Dietzen again volunteered Long Lake's willingness to answer any questions Orono may have. There were o.estions as to when a decision would be made regarding the Fire Contracts. Mayor Peterson stated there will be public hearings at the regular Council meetings and thought a decision would be made by mid-September, The meeting .adjourned at. 5:45 p.m. ATTEST:Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Lin Vee, Deputy ClerR MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORCNO COUNCIL HELD AUGUST 24, 1992 Oc i 5 ROLL The Council met on the above date with the follcwing members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson. CounciI members J. Diann Goetten, Gabriel Jabbour, Edward Callahan and Mary Butler. The following represented the City staff: City Adnninistrator Ron Moorse, Building & Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, City Attorney Thomas Barrett, City Engineer Glenn Cook, Chief of Police Stephen Sullivan, and City Recorder Tori Naab. Mayor Peterson called tne meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. (#1) CONSENT AGENDA Goetten added Item #6 to the Consent Agenda. Butler added Items ♦» i E ana 13. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten. to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Ayes 5 nays 0. Motions for all items adopted dy consent agenda will be .nciuded In the minutes in their respective numerical order. («2) LEAF STREET RECONSTRUCTION TO MSA STANDARDS Mayor Peterson noted she had received several calls from residents unabIe to attend the last public i nformat t on meet t ng regardino this issue. She informed them to attend this meeting to express their views. She opened the public information meeting at 7:03 p.m. Goetten stated that her main concern with the project was saving as many trees as possible. She advised oecause of tne exceilent Job being done by tne contractors, there have been fewer trees tost than anticipated. She stated in Itgnt of the area reaidtnts opposition of widening the road, sna agreed with reconstructing the road outsida the standards of MSA, but askad that the rcadway oe brought up to City standards. Butler concurred. Cook noted he would rather not re w^natruct th« street at width, as it would be wider than the project soecif•cat.one a 24* Jabbour said hit conce-n at the last meet ng was tiat was diverting t'-ow City stmJaros. but since that meeting »s be informed that the nrev out lev/e" projwr* rwconstructad the stj-eets l^ss^ ^an '■equired by C t/ staridards. He suited a concern .nat ^''e pav for the road once, a noted tne C'ty beCommunity only forced in the near futura to upgrade the road. Mayo*' Retaraon agreed witn the majority oem.on. I \ • MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 24. 1992 LEAF STREET - CONT. Cook advised that the section of road being proposed at MSA standards would work well In Orono and would actually fnininize the impact on adjacent property. He felt they would be seeing more of this design in the future as roads are upgraded. Goetten commended Cook for following the Council's directives so well and for saving as many trees as possible. Moorse asked how far they were on the project, and felt the staff may be giving a premature estimate of the number of trees to be saved during the project. Cook said they started at County Road 84 and Leaf Street, and have gone approximately 400’, moving northward. It was moved by Jabbcur, seconded ty Mayor Peterson, to remove Leaf Street from tne MSA funding list. Ayes 5, nays 0. LMCD REPRESENTATIVE’S COMMENTS JoEllen Hurr was present. She noted the LMCD will be considering at their next meeting, a reccmmendation to approve the license for North Shore Drive Marina, contingent on tre applicant being In compliance with Orono’s code reauirements. She informed them that the Environment Committee will hold a special training session on October 3, 1992 at Lord Fletchers, training persons to do monitoring of Lake Minnetonka for water quality. Jabbour volunteered to help with North Arm and Echo Bay. Callahan informed them that the Lake Use Committee will not meet the following Wednesday. jabbour announced that the Public Acceis Task Force has been doing an exceptional job. He felt at the last meeting they took a step backward, but with the help of JoEllen, Scott Carlson, and the Fishermen’s Lobby, a consensus wav formed to return to the original mode of operation. i 2 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 24, 1992 PUBLIC COMMENTS Jabbour stated he recently had a medical emergency at his home at which Officers Anderson and Thornton responded. He felt the quality of life here is much higher because of individuals such as these gentlemen. He noted a week later a fishing boat almost ran over his boat while on the lake. He reported the incident to the '^^ter Patrol and Lt. Cheswick answered with the Water Patroi and apprehended the driver of the fishing boat. He felt Lt. Cheswick went out of his way in this matter. Jaboour thanked Chief Sullivan and his officers. Frank St. Lawrence, 253 Cygnet Place, noted that the notice of assessment was dated August 7th and received August lOlh. He noted the deadline for pay off of the assessment interest free is August 26th. He requested an extension of that date. Moorse was unsure why the discrepancy regarding the no. ice. He stated by Statute, the Council must allow a 30 day pay off period. Barrett advised he would research the question of whether the Council has the authority to extend the deadline date outside the State Statute limitations. Attorney. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*•3 & #4) APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved bv Jabbour, seconded by Gcetters, to approve the minutes of the July 27. 1992 regular Council meeting. Ayes 5. nays 0. It was moved by Jabbour, minutes of the August 10, nay;» 0. seconded by Goetten, to approve the 1992 regular Council meeting. Ayes 5», (•5) tl730 GREGG MALIK, FINA-^SUBDIVISION -^REmUTION «31 72 Gregg Malik was present. eiiie MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 24, 1992 ZONING FILE »1730 - CONT. Mabusth explained that the applicant has installed the shared drive, and the Septic Inspector confirmed that the septic system was not destroyed. The septic system is now considered non- conforming as it is 6’ from the shared drive, and the applicant has one year in which to bring the system Into conformance. The existing drive will continue to serve during the construction period. The City is in receipt of a developer’s agreement and acceptable security to cover the restoration of the former driveway. It was moved by Goetten, seconced by Butler, to adoot Resolution •3172 for Application #1730 Gregg Malik, 3060 Sixth Avenue North, approving the final subdivision. Ayes 5, nays 0. (»#6) #1746 THOMAS & MARGARET LOWE, 2630 WEST LAFAYETTE ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3173 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten. to adopt Resolution #3173 for Application #1746 for Thomas and Margaret Lowe, 2630 West Lafayette Road, for a variance to construct an addition to the existing residence. Ayes 5, nays 0. (»#7) #1753 SKIP MADGE, 875 FOREST ARMS LANE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3174 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3174 for Application #1763 for Skip Madge, 876 Forest Ar.as Lane, approving average lakeshore setback variances. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#8) SCOTT LARSON, 2112 SUGARWOODS DRIVE - REQUEST DRIVEWAY REALIGNMENT Scott Larson was present. Mabusth explained tha first plan submitted was denied because of the i^riveway realignment, which did not meet the reaulred standards. A straight alignment was approved for the driveway when the building permit was issued. Larson reviewed the layout of the property and th® tooosraphy. He stated with this proposal he has tried to install the enf'snce at a level n|os#^ ro the elevation of tn® garage. Drainage wi I I continue to flow from west to east. The proposed ^eal ignment dIs t u rbs none of the existing vegetation, and extends the char act#r of Sugarwoods development. He noted witn tne propoteo drive, excava11ng cost s and retaining walla will be kept to a mini mum. I 1 b minutes of the regular orono council meeting HELD AUGUST 24, 1992 2112 SUGARWOODS DRIVE - CONT. Larson felt the drive provides character for the Brtrtitional enhancement for the Sugarwoods project. He advised he hA Diantinq 9 mature Green Colorado Spruce and a Crimson M^le along sers'onal plants along th, front. Ha raguasted approval for realignment for the driveway. jabbonr asked If tha lot araa coveraga calculation dr Ivewa/s. ncIudes Mabustn adv.sad It doas and‘U?:rt“b^rrirnorr;:rc:::?iga‘SroSi:r;n%bisprcpart.. rharaed f'-om the Planning Commissionjabbour fait the prasen.atio placed ;sora anpnas.s on l^v^ng e:rstln/veg"etaVlon. which is .mportant to Orono. enough time to properly review uhe issue. jabfcour felt that was unfair to the Planning Commission. Larson agreed and said the Planning Commission also let him know that. Jabbour said it would be a slap in the face if the ‘ their decision, since the Planning Commission was in an unfair situation to begin with. Mabusth indicated the builder Is *““0' ' lor to the time the building permit ‘i‘ *“ g the suppUmental is2;r*p^ovt3:d “a‘rr^b^rr:er'.° 's“ugirod\ ^d’eviiocm.^?. jabbour asl«d if the realigned drive had been installed? mabusth noted work on the driveway was atarted. tut th. Inspector Stopped work on the ptOject. Qoetten asked if trees will be de»?-oyed with tnt straight •Iignment. ik MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 24, 1992 2112 SUGARWOODS DRIVE - CONT. Mabusth noted based on applicant’s information that they wouid lose more trees with the straight alignment. She reported she received a phone call from David Ahlers, neighbor to the north, in which he expressed opposition to the proposed drive as his privacy will be affected and that drive will have a visual impact from his residence because of the alignment between both drives. Call ahan noted the builder obviously was no tified of the requirement but did not understand the severity of the request. He stated this issue is a civil war between the Planning Commission and developers of this property. Goetten asked if there was some way to alleviate future reauests. Mabusth explained the original intent was to save the trees and minimize the impact in the front street setback area. She felt the straight aligned driveway may actually work against the intent of the PRD She stated she wouId like to see the PIanning Commission reconsider the i sue. She added the straight aligned drive has presented problems in dealing with the contractors who feel the whole intent of the PRD was to maintain the natural buffer and screen residences from street activities and maintain cverall natural setting. Jabbour noted after-the-fact applications rubs everyone the wrong way. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded bv Goetten, to approve the driveway realignment for Scott Larson of 2112 Sugarwoods Drive, and to note that the Council is In agreement with the frustration expressed by Planning Commissioner Bel lows, but added that they should look at what Is best for the site and the ecology. Ayes 5, nays 0. Goetten warned Larson to gain approval prior to beginning a project when building in Orono. (*i9) ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - SECTION 9.21 PUBLIC NUISANCE SECTION 9.23 PARTICIPATION IN NOISY PARTIES ORDINANCE fclOa, SECOND SERIES It was moved by Jabbour. seconded by Gcetten, to adopt Ordinance aiOd, Second 3er.es to reinstate the puc . c nuisance ceftnition as Section 9.21 and readopt the Noisy Parties Ordinance as Section 9.23. Ayes 5, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 24, 1992 (#10) MARINA LICENSE REVIEW - NORTH SHORE DRIVE MARINA LAKESIDE MARINA GATLE’S MARINA Qaffron explained that the Lake Use Committee has recommended denial of the three marina licenses, based on specific code violations, which violations can be enforced. Callahan explained the Lake Use Committee based its recommendation on the fact that if the licenses were denied, there may be a problem with enforcement, whereas, if approved, nothing would get done in the near future to 'mprove the situation. Ha felt that the marinas were in violation of the code, they should not granted a license. He added the Committee did not see a point punishing the marinas in violation, and rather is more involved updating the code which would deal with enforcement issues. i f be j n i n Butler said not only are the marinas violating sections of the zoning code, but by not having a license, they would also violate the Iicensing code. Callahan felt they should have the City Attorney review the issue to make sure there truly is a violation. Butler suggested that the Lake Use Committee concentrate cn updating the ordinance. Callahan stated they had started to do that but marina owners want a response from the City each year as to whether they have a marina I i cense. Goetten stated Callahan has done much wcrk on the Lake Use Committee to get these issues going. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Callahan, to deny 1992 marina licenses for the following: North Shore Drive Marina, Lakeside Marina, and Gayle’s Marina. Barrett suggested the Council adopt, resolutions officially denying each of these license requests. Goetten amended her motion to direct staff to draft appropriate denial resolutions. Callahan seconded the amendment. Ayea 4. nays 0. Jabbour abstained. I IL MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 24, 1992 (*#11) SHORELAND ORDINANCE - WAYZATA (PRELIMINARY FLEXIBILITY REQUEST It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to accept the Information regarding the preliminary flexibility request from the City of Wayzata. Ayes 5, nays 0. MAYOR/COUIi( IL REPORT Callahan asked if the City wishes to respond to any of the shoreland ordinance flexibility requests, how they should go about doing so. Gaffron stated once the final draft has been sent to each City from the DNR for review, the City would have 45 days to make comments. He added the submittal from wayzata is just a preliminary document. Jabbour asked Gaffron if he was attending the Technical Committee meetings. Gaffron stated he has attended the meetings regularly. Jabbour understood several Communities have hired a consultant to draft the ordinance, which he thought the Technical Committee was to do. Gaffron noted that some consultants have drafted documents that the DNR won’t accept. He said the Technical Committee meetings have become more a work shop session to review each city’s proposed ordinance. He stated that while we thought the original intent of the Committee was to provide a single ordinance for ail 14 lake Communities, that quite apparently is not going to happen. ENGINEER’S REPORT (*#12) CHANGE ORDER #1 STUBBS BAY LIFT STATION It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to authorize Change Order No. 1 for the Stubbs Bay Sanitary Sewer project improvementi. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*•13) REQUEST FOR PAYMENT #1 - STUBBS BAY SANITARY SEWER PROJECT It was moved by Jabbour, seccnded by Goetten, to authorize Payment No. 1 for the Stubbs Bay sanitary sewer project, to Progressive Contractors, Inc., in the amount of $M5,255.77 . Aye# 5, nays 0. 8 * I ‘ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 24, 1992 (#14) BID AWARD FUEL STORAGE Moorse explained that discussions with vendors has lead to their recommendation of fiberglass below ground <anks. He noted the cost difference is $4,300. Jabbour stated the fiberglass tanks will only cost $1,C00 more. He explained the original request was for an estimate on steel and fiberglass tanks below ground. At that time, the fiberglass tanks were bid at double the price of the steel tanks, but that bid was based on retail figures. He saia he advocated the above grouna tanks as the fiberglass tanks were prohibitive in cost. He recently met with Gerhardson and the contractors. He stated the Council’s mam concern was the impact of the tanks on the environment. The contractor at that meeting recommended fiberglass below ground tanks with safety precautions. Jabbour asxed why the safety precautions were not included m the original bid. and he was toM that the bid was based on minimum standards in order to secure the bid. He added the additional difference in cost is for the brine solution and other safety features, which should be purchased for either type of tank. He noted that all Target stores and the U.3, Postal Service have removed their underground tanks. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to award the fuel distribution system bid to Pump and Meter Company, for an amount not to exceed $72,209.00, to include two fiberglass tanks with brine solution and other safety features. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#15) APPLICATION OF CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT #5 Jabbour stated that Boarman has told him that If the City keeps requesting revisions, they will be charged for those revisions. Goetten asked about the $79,000 listed as a change order. Jabbour explained that It was for soli corrections done at the beginning of the project. Goetten asked about the status of the contingency fund. Moorse said he would brief the Council after the meeting with the contractors the following day. Jabbour asked that all Information pertaining to the project eieo be tent to Charlie Kelley. i:r- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 24, 1992 APPLICATION OF CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT 46 - CONT. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Goetten, to approve AppI I cat I on and Certificate of Payment No. 6 for the City Hall the Public Works building, as follows: Kraus-Anderson Construction Co. Steenberg-Watrud Construction Co. Qephart Electric Kremer & Davis Gresser Concrete/Masonry Allied MeehanicaI Stelninger Construction the and $21,340.15 83.799.00 22,529.30 1,341.00 19,799.10 24.245.00 40,434.20 Ayes 5, nays 0. (#16) COMBINED CHANGE ORDER FOR CITY FACILITIES TO REFLECT CURRENT BUDGET STATUS Moorse explained they did not receive the information regarding this issue. (#17) SELECTION OF COUNCILMEMBER(S) TO SERVE ON LONG LAKE FIRE CONTRACT WORK GROUP Moorse explained that at the last meeting, it was suggested during the fire contract reviewal process, the City Counci I be represented at the work sessions. He stated this would not be an advisory committee, but merely a work group to review the details of the contract. Callahan felt the negotiations are an administrative matter and the City Administrator and Police Chief should continue the negotiations. He added he appreciated the invitation to the work sessions. He suggested the negotiators be instructed to negotiate on the following bases; a) they accept the offer made by Long Lake contingent upon Long Lake contributing $28,000 to the capital budget, and b) that the Committee be informed as to the relative positions of Orono and running the department, i.e. 80% of the fires and the funding should be recognized. is contributed by Orono. He felt that fact JabOQur reiterated that the Council Is appreciative of invitation, but explained that Crono tradti t i one I I y has adminI St rative issues to staff. tn© left Callahan felt the invitation would allow them to fine out now the department actually functions, but added most of tneir auestioni were ir.ort technical. ■A i jk.^.Lu MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 24, 1992 LONG LAKE FIRE CONTRACT WORK GROUP - CONT. Butler reiterated, the last comment made by the Long Lake City Attorney at the last meeting was, “this offer can be withdrawn at any time". She said she has lost confidence in the system, and was not willing to volunteer a lot of staff time for this Issue. Callahan noted the contract needs to be settled within 30 days, and felt there would not be much staff time Involved in that short of a timeframe. Jabbour advised they should have an answer within 2 weeks. He exp**essed concern over I inking the doI Ice department and fire department service areas togetner. Goetten felt this issue is linked to a much larger Issue, and the fire department issue needs to be resolved if the two cities intend tc work together in the future on anything else. She felt they owe it to the resiaents to work through the contract with Long Lake, but felt it important to document all meetings and decisions. She stated she would be happy to help with the process and felt it may be very Informative. Mayor Peterson felt that the tendency is to combine issues arid felt that should not happen with this issue. Jabbour asked that he get a summary of the last 6 years of the capital expenditure fund. Rick Perry, Long Lake Fire Chief, noted there is money ir the fund for new equipment. After 1992, the fund will contain $33,000. He explained tret the firemen used to invest the money themselves, but as of end of 1991, the City of Long Lake took over control of the fu»:'Ji in that account. Jabbour explained they are concerned that the City of Orono is not recognized that they are 80X owners of all capital expenditures. Perry noted it doesn’t matter who owns the equipment as it will be traded in for new equipment when needed. Jabbour explained that Orono has a ver> hign bond rating, opposed to that of Long t.ake. He was concerned that major purchases would be procured with Long Lake’s bonding rate. 11 M J MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 24, 1992 LONG LAKE FIRE DEPARTMENT WORK GROUP - CONT. Callahan noted in the minutes of the July Fire Department meetings, the Mayor oi Long Lake discussed a major purchase in 1993, the result of which would be that the department would not be able to make other purchases for a number of years. Perry did not remember what that involved, but did not feel that was feasible. Jabbour said that Perry Is doing a great job and added his responsibility is to fight fires. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to continue to appoint as negotiators, the City Administrator and whomever he selects to work with him in dealing with the Long Lake Fire Department contract, and that the City Administrator be instructed to negotiate along the lines that the C ty will pay $75,000 for tne fulI service of the Long Lake Fire Department, contingent upon Long Lake contributing $28,000 to the capital budget for machinery, and that a joint committee be established to review the fire chief and assistant fire chief’s contracts, and to direct the committee to attempt to obtain for Orono the position that Its contribution to the whole process deserves, and to report the results of the negotiation at the September 14th meeting. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#18) ESTABLISH A WORK SESSION TO DISCUSS LONG LAKE FIRE SERVICE PROPOSAL No action reouired. (#19) ASSESSMENT DEFERRAL INCOME ADJUSTMENT - RESOLUTION #3175 Moorse explained that this is an updating of income limits for the City's special assessment deferral program. In the past, the rate has been set the same as HUO’s lowest limit. That number has not been updated for a number of years. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #3175 amending the program for deferment of special assessments for persons 65 years of age or older. Ayes 5, nays 0. (a#20) CAROLE HASEMAN PERFORMANCE REVIEW & SALARY ADJUSTMENT It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Gcetten, to authorize a magm adjustment for Carole Haseman from Level 4, Step I ($10,492 per hour) to Level 4, Step II ($11,109 per hour) effective September $, 1992. Ayee 9, neyt 0. 12 MINUTES or THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 24, 1992 (*•21) TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT GOLF COURSE It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to authorize the employment of Thomas Kampmeyer as a temoorary counter helper at the Golf Course at an hourly rate of $5.00 effective August 25, 1992. Ayes 5. nays 0. (*•22) RESIGNATION STEr-.'EN JOHNSTON - PARK COMMISSION MEMBER It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to accept Stephen Johnston’s resignation and to draft a letter of appreciation for Council’s signature, and to place an ad in the local newspaper to advertise the opening. Ayes 5, nays 0. «««« It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to scheduie a Truth In Taxation Hearing for Deceriper i, 1992 and a secondary meeting for December 9. 1992. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*•23) LICENSES It was moved by Jabbour, following Iicenses: seconded by Goetten, to approve the Gear West Duathon 6k run - 30k bike - 4k run September 27, 1992 from 7:00 to 10:30 a.m. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*•24) BILLS _ _ _, It was moved by Jabbour, seconued by Goetten, to approval payment of the All Funds Account. Ayes 5, na> 0. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Butler, seconded by CaMahan. to adjourn thti regular Orono City Council meeting at 8:52 o.ffl. to Executive* Session. Ayes 5, nays 0. Barbara Peterson, Me/or ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hal I in. City Clerk 1 *1 * .? h, To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission M«.mbet^»fe Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator FrOB£ Date: Subject: Ron Moorse, City Administrator ^/> / Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building 6 Zoning Administ^J^or ^ September 10, 1992 #1748 Bob Hovland, 1245 North Arm Driv<v - Conditional Use Permit/Variance Pertinent Ordinances 1.Section 10.03, Gubd. 10. Conditional use permit required for all accessory structures to be placed on through lots. Section 10.03, Subd. 9 (E). Accessory structure is shown at 900 s.f. in area and requires a 15' side setback. Option A, Exhibit J (preferred by applicant) - variance to north side lot line. Required ■ 15’ Proposed * 13' Variance ■ 2' or 13.31 Option B, Exhibit K, - variance to both north/soutn lot lines. Required 15* Proposed « 14* Variance ■ 1' or 6.6% 3. Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C). Lot coverage requirements Total lot area ■ 11,767 s.f. Allowed lot coverage " 1,765 s.f. or 15% Proposed •• 1,7 37 r.f. or 14,71 No lot coverage variance required. Section 10.22, Subd. 2. Hardcover within 250*500* setback area. Area ■ 11,767 s.f. Allowed - 3,530 s.f. or 301 Existing « 2,080 s.f. or 17.6% Proposed ■ 3,163 s.f. or 27% No hardcover variance required. i • ^ Zoning Pile #1748 September 10, 1992 Page 2 List of Bidiibits A B C D E P G H I J K Application Property Owners List Plat Map Survey Elevations Section Ploor Plan Hardcover Pact Sheet Planning Commission Minutes 7/20/92 Option A Option B Description of RiMiuest 'J’hirf application was originally reviewed at the July 20th meeting of the Planning Commission, rsv:.ew Exhibit 1. The request involved a 30' x 33' proposed jarage with area of structure at 990 s.f. (at 750 s.f. structures must be located 15* from aide lot lines) that was shown at 10* side setbacks. In addition, lot coverage was proposed at 1,827 s.f. or 15.5% where existing lot coverage was at 1,398 s.f. or 11.8%. The Planning Commission recommended denial as it was applicants' position that '.hey CGuld not reduce the size of the proposed garage based on the special storage needs. At the August 10th meeting of the Council, applicants made a special request to be rescheduled before the Planning Commission for further review of an amended plan. At the August 17th meeting of the Planning Commission, applicant presented an amended plan that now proposed a 25* x 36* structure. Total area was reduced from 990 s.f. to 900 s.f. Structure still requires a 15' aide setback. Note that at the -5' setback line, the lot measures 53' in width. Applicant has submitted two proposals. Option A, Exhibit J, preferred by applicant, places the structure closer to the north side lot line at 13' and meets the 15* setback at the south lot line. Option fl centers the detached structure at the mid*-point requlrimg a 1* side setback on both north andl south side lor lines. With the re »ised proposal there is no longer a need for a lot coverage variof»':e as lot coverage is now proposed at 14.7%. With both proposals there was never a need fcr a hardcover variancQ within the 250-500* setback area. The only variance sought now t>y applicant with revised plan is a side setbaclt variance. 1 rli'*. Zoning File #1748 September 10, 1992 Page 3 Statement of Hardship 1.Lot width at 50' whore a required side setback is 15' would limit the width of the structure to 20'. 2. 3. There are no adjacent lands available for purchase. Placing widest portion of structure in an east/west direction has minimized tree removal and the saving of mature trees within the rear yard maintaining a natural visual buffer from adjacent yards. 4.The lower elevations to the rear or west side of the lot and the house locations along North Arm Drive minimize impact of setback on the adjacent properties. 5.Applicant has special storage needs for two large collector cars and a 21' boat that can now be stored within the 25' x 38' structure. ^Planning Commission Recosmiendation Planning Commission voted to deny the application (3 to 1) finding that the applicant had not provided sufficient hardships to support the setback request for the oversized accessory structure. They also noted that the vehicles could be housed in a smaller space and their position was that there should be no exceptions to the ordinance for oversized accessory structure. The minority opinion of one felt that the applicant had attempted to address the concerns expressed by Planning Commission at the ®^^9lnal review which was to reduce the number and intensity of variances required in the original proposal. Options of Action To adopt the Planning Commission denial recommendation. OR To approve per the findings and hardships noted above Council Actii To provide staff with conceptual direction so that an appropriate resolution can be presented for Council action at their September 28th meeting. Isv Ur’ ORONO - general IiiUlD USE /lPPLIC#VTiON_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _iPROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 1245 North Arm Drive Orono Mi Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 0711723410014 Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name Phone (home) 559-5355 Bob HovAland Phone (worlc) 559-4737 Address 12400 46th Ave. No.City P)>Tnouth Zip 55442 OWNBl (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Bob Hoviland Phone >e mail toAddress 12950 Hiway #55 City Plymouth Zip 55441 Date Propfiiity^cquired I (do) (f^o no^ also'^o 7/87 ovm the ad5acent parcels of land. • mm mm mm mm mm mmm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm ^m mm mm - -mm PEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - (month/year) _ _ _ $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application « X $125.00 Residential accessory Use $175.00 Institutional (church, school, e*e.) $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments CU ) OF uiW f /.vAVii* OFFICEirj02ocooo $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg 01 QEHn xtLJ a OC iOr ,V a W htUiFT-lWOOi YQO $250.00 Conunerclal/Industrial Use 0244890 cool FOl TOi' VS/IS/ $200.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd, or more 4 Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75* of laJceshore PRD/PID - ceo fee schedule Renewal Pee - $100.00 (no change from original applicatioB) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee 1<1 OTHER APPLICATIONS $200.00 $250.00 $175.00 $ 75.00 $300.00 $300.00 $100.00 Other - Commercial Site Plan Review (-f consultant fees) VacatIon Easement Vacation Easement Vacation With Subdivision Rer ’riii.q (PUD - refer to fee schedule) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Appeals see fee schedule 4 .JL. PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District LRIB Present Use of Property Rest dpntial Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe request in detail:Conditional Use Permit to install accessory structure 30 ‘x33 on a through lot. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can ohtai. this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governmen Center 348-3271). Plat Map. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIFS OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (11" X 17* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. i The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: . Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature '£J Date 6/12/92 OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. i' /Owner's signature Y / r/ 4'_____________ Date _6/12/92 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building t Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. % . CERI^IFIG A SURVEY I'1 I . 1. • mJ- I f .) ^T» • I.5' ■in-. ,1?eS;A^u * •*/OOk I . • *. Gl/V^/i loS ' ■'■ se-ih^'cJ, 3s'o “ - ••• I ^ r-* ■. ■ f • »: • ■ *. « • ^ *'*'v** ^ ' • ■ ' » '- v . ■ “ ■■•.• '• /t) ;• ..; • • •/ : .•*.I . -f • < . r >•. 'f ■* •• •{. rJ}'ma • • • • • i: V • * %• A I .* * :1 *v •-V'', "M V.',. ^ • ■ V* •*•#'• ’ f.r f » ,* * If * f • ^ ‘ 1 ► • 11 ••iiw ♦ • 4 • f .«v< I 9 J • * f' " -f • I ^ A*.«;??»««i ^ ' . • ' I ^1--% : j I I.. * ? i fiomrn iWjir Am • ® OCNOTCS IRON FOUND t't •» < • ” . 1 • r • ♦ I** • i • *» j*<¥. • Of NOUS IRON S€T. ••^OfNOTfS OIRCCTiON Of SURFAcr rt nw£aSKl« '«vST7iJ“MO€mr€$ RflOROSfO fLfVATlON . fLfVATIONlLOWfST fLOON «iA#OAIIAOC FLOOR • • CERTIFICATE OF SURVEYI • • I » • \ 1 t 4 rr..- i -'. t i • •’?• * • I 1 Kinsss Tsir I * flOUTH ‘ >*•••'• • • r-•••».,i I • • f * «• 0 • • •• • % liga en ™ wI mtU SU"MCC FLOWra OCNOTCS CXISTINO CLCVATIOM lud OOiOTCS HIO^OSEO ELEVATION elevations LOWEST FLOON 9^«0AflA0E FLOON ‘ TON OF FOONOATIOW r HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY PLAN, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR.UNDtR MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OE THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. )► KtM A. REAUMC fieci STEREO LAND SURvevON Al2-S4I-SSSt 4> S *<OP'(MS^»OtW?iAa J ••j If1!11••! •* • ► a H. DR.’wHnrF"4 •• 4 ••• • . • .*. • •' * . • . ••t % DBL. 2‘‘X|‘2“*HDR. - W/fe" OXBRD.—-] . . •»•• •• *» •} • • • • 1 0, • H. C-• • • i•• •r' • .1• DBL. • ! Si • T#* • •.»iR. WHITE . • .V • • ••• • • • •• *./ • ••* *•' -r . •• r•* !* ■/•!.. .V. • • . •f . •s'Xia'HDR. w/ii“ OXBRD.-r-i •••••1•11 1 •••• •f.' •• • • 2X30' APRON • 2'-cr,3-0“ ‘ 1 ii 2zPJ ! • 4. ; . 16-0".-i 5fi ^ •e/*— • <--------------• •' •-• • #• ••• 30-0' #«» • —# • • • V OOP. PLAN SCALE: \‘-0“ > » k TEXTURED [.• .>r.-yji€iL2; I :%r • • ^ .i-^***,.% • •. * RIGHT S IDE ELEVAccAte K4". r-o“ 60^ HOV£LAUC» I245* Uo?\TH PA1V6. OV^UO, MU. 5S55 xi(-55'9- 4*757 T • «1 ■CM.! ^4 ’ » ! '" O"AMIOVIO tY 9f f^^F o*n uliyl^z i • pu'RK5luT OAR^fb T»45 AJJAI cO*jnf EPRiJ PRKIKIE..HM- 55S4U :93D- • OHAfma *52214 ggnui I \..V* »•f • • f •• ••• • N •. » • *. 4' m I •748 s • 'i • • f t' f K . 235^ASPHALT QR FIBERGLASS SHINGLES 15** FELT • 4 ‘X0'Xj!i’ O/BOARD w/)i" .CLIPS BL. 2^X4*’ TOP PLATES -------2"X4" STUDS e I6".0. C. •2X4 ENGINEERED ' TRUSSES e 24" 0. C. i • 2fX6" TREATED BOTTOM; PLATES w/BOLTS 6* 0. C. 4 CONC SLAB 2 RE-INFORCING RODS AROUND PEIMETER OF SLAB BOXED hard BOARD INTERMEDIATE TEXTURED HRO. f^rnTinw HARDCOVER CALCUUTIONi KORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0 Existing H ardcover in Zone WORKSHEET -75' ;|S-250'(^0-50^iOO-lOQO' fr r, V • • A, H ouse ' y i • 7-^Z. < c t length X WIDTI^' ____L - • • X 1 1 . -- -1 « K.e ' • t V 1j ----- - t • ^ C . X 1 + j ** <.P. a. Garage y.sy> i . c. Driveway y 1 945* f- - “ i; c --------- X 1 ! , _______i______« ___ ....... <. E. 0. SlDE'f^ALX Y • 1 ^ !E . C . X 1 1 I . i____• cr p ^ D ' X . 1 ( > 1 e. ’atio / Deck X 1 ‘--------— • • e . « F. Landscape x , - - ® ,.......... «. fAREAS UNDERUIN BY ■ ------------, X PLASTIC ■ Tl SHEITIHQ X ! - - ■ « P X i ----------------r- - • fiilf. «. OTHf/ .. i - • f>6' ...• T Total H ardcover in I Total PgopMTY Aa Sa in E__ ......-rQ ONE j. .... j • M/ ■. s.P. , B . 4 X ^00 • ^5,4 ^ •33 J ■i II. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1992 ZONING FILE §1746 - CONT. I ^ Johnson noted there Is always the Issue of the tennis court over me lot line, which may become an issue In the future. (#4) §1747 JOHN O’SULLIVAN, 2420 SHADYWOOD ROAD - RENEWAL VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING - 7:21 - 7:24 p.M. The Aff Idavl t of Pub I I cat Ion and Cert i f icate of Mailing were noted. Cohen, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approval of Application #1747 for John O’Sullivan, 2420 Shadywood Road, approving a renewal variance. Ayes 4, nays 0. (§5) §1748 BOB HOVLAND, 1245 NORTH ARM DRIVE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING 7:25 - 7:30 P.M. The Af f I dav 11 of Pub 1 1 ca t i on and Certificate of Ma 111 ng were noted. Mr. Hovland was present. Mabusth explained this is a through lot. The applicant Is proposing replacement of a detached structure which has seriously deteriorated. The structure to be removed is also located close to the right-of-way. The proposal is a detached garage, 30x33’, which requires a 15’ setback because It Is In excess of 750 s.f. The proposal creates a .5* lot coverage overage. Cohen asked if the garage needs to be that large. Hov* ind explained that his son is moving home ar.u has two vehicles and a boat, which they wish to store inside. Peterson asked if they planned to use the graveled area. Hovland said It may have a limited use. Johnson said he preferred to have the required setbacks met. Mabusth reported that If the garage were reduced to 25x30* It would meet the 75;^ s.f. limit and the required 10’ setback. Rowiette asked about comments from the neighbors. Mabusth Indicated all comments they have received to date were DOS 111Va. * - rM ' ^ I rvwTT»j;r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1992 ZONING FILE #1748 - CONT. Cohen asked what Is the hardship. Hovland stated they need that large of a garage for their vehicles and storage. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Cohen, to recommend denial of Application #1748 for Bob Hovland, 1245 North Arm Drive, for a conditional use permit and variance. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#6) #1750 CHARLES & SHIRLEY PYLE. 3548 IVY PLACE - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 7:31 - 7:35 P.M. The Affidavit of Publlcat I on and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Charles and Shirley Pyle and their architect, Daryl Harson, were present for this application. Mabusth explained that the applicants propose to relocate an existing detached garage closer to the residence and install a patio area and a family room addition. All structures meet the requi ad side setback. Thera Is 863 s.f. of roofad structure to be placed over paved walkways and patio. There is a decrease In hardcover, but an increase of 9.1X in structural hardcover. There Is an excess of structural lot coverage. Johnson expressed his concern about the loss of trees and the intensification of the lot coverage. Mr. Pyle explained that they originally Intended tr attached the garage, but because of the layout of the hou^#, it was not feasible. He advised that one of the tree.^ to be removed has a Jisease already. Mrs. Pyle said they were not opposed toi replanting trees. Cohen asked If the appiI cants were wl 111 ng to consider delating the roofed area. Hanson stated the applicants are willing to decrease the roofed area by 200 s.f. He noted that part of the area is covered by a trelI is. Mabusth reported that the City has trellis area is not hardcover. taken ^he position that 1 I /1 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY • I •»»? ft /'-YV(i'Q)^/.()% '1'^ S('.((w)'J 3s'o’* I . •. f J • I » SCALE: /.•« ?? • ♦ j LEGAL DESCRIPTION . !'1 .; Lot 2. niocH 4, SAGA HILL’ UEVISEI)/ ; Uenneplti County* Minnesota. ..................................................................... /\HEA ’ •, ■ ' t . . U,7 67 nq. ft.' or 0.2701 acres NOdTH BOOK IX.n PAGE #El DENOTES IRON FOUND DENOTES IRON SET DENOTES DIRECTION OF SURFACE FLOW .» DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION UiO DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION PROPOSED ELEVATIONS LOWEST FLOOR GARAGE FLOOR TOP OF FOUNDATION OJECT NO i.o4^oa REVISIONS i HEREUT CF.RTIFV THAT THIS SUHVfcT. PLAN, OR RLPORT WAS PHEPAHLH r»T MF OH UNDER MY DIHLCT SOPEHVI3IOH AMD THAT I AH A DULY HfGISTEHlI) LAND SURVEYOR UNDIR Tilt LAWS OF Tilt SfAlt OE HlfiMFSnTfc______________________ KIM A. REAUME RCOiSTEREO LAND SURVEYOR CERTIFICATE I* » *‘L r'Mi'-vS OF SURVEY •Vc«r6 /'-X)lt'. i/ Gi A//)?/. sp-/Ui 3s'o'' '•* *.’. V • * • ' * i . .* — • • *i 'iSCALE: T ii 4r.«>T _j- ;• LEGAL DESCRlpflOn : • ' ; iI . . « , i ■ Lot 2, lUock SAGA HILL’ UEV1SF.D,‘ : Honncpln County,•Minnesota. • • » . AREA ' . • ,. • -- - - -— , » . ; 11*707 sq, ft.' OC 0.2701 acre®- . i - , . • ' * ** - - ^ NORTH wt o HE NOTES IRON FOUND • OENOUS i n ON SE T DENOTES UlRECnOfl OF SURFACF Fi nu, •«< DENOTES FMISTlWn BOOK I PAGE I NO~"~[nEVISIONS OARAGE I LOOfl TOP or FOUNDATION —n——— ■ — __________ I lltHniY CERTIFY niAi THIS SIIHVIY IM AfJ. OR RI FOHT WAS PREFARn, Hi 'f,f ^'^‘•‘-WVISION Awi, 1 AM A DULY Rf Ol STEHED I AND SURVIVOR UKDFR THE LAWS OF THl STAIf OF MltHltSUTA. KIM A. REAUME r*tC» STEREO I AND SUMVEYOR 612 54?«»SS1 To; FroBt Date; Subject s Chairman Kelley and Pianning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorser City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building fit Zoning Administrator •'•t: September 10, 1992 #1750 Charles and Shirley Pyle, 3548 Ivy Place Variances - Resolution ; 5^ %%\ Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 0-75' setback area ■ 4,075 s.f. Existing hardcover « 948 s.f. or 23.26% Proposed hardcover ■ 948 s.f. or 23.26% ' 75-250* setback area » 8,150 s.f. Allowed ■ 2,037.5 s.f. or 25% Existing * 5,870 s.f. or 72% Proposed * 4,253 s.f, or 52% Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Review of lot coverage Total area > 12,225 s.f. Allowed lot coverage » 1,833.7 s.f. or 15% Existing “ 1,810.2 s.f. or 14.8% Proposed ■ 2,640 s.f. or 21.5% Variance * 806.3 s.f. or 6.5% Planning Commission recommendation to limit lot coverage to 2,200.5 s.f. or 18% iStmctural Areas Credited aqaiMt lot Coverage; Existing house » 1,273 s.^.or 10.4% Proposed garage ■ 612 s.f. or 5% Addition ■ 381 s.f. or 3.1% Roof structure ■ 374 s.f. or 3% Total - 21.51 Idst of Exhibits A - Application Al- Applicants' Addendum B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Survey/Existing E - Proposed Site Plan F - 1-2 Hardcover Fact Sheets G - Planning Commission Minutes 7/20/92 H - Planning Commission Action Notice 7/23/92 I - Planting Schedule Proposed by Applicants Memos from July ( August Planning Commission Meetings Zoning Pile #1750 September 10, 1992 Page 2 Description of Request The applicants propose the removal of the existing garage within the street yard and the installation of a new detached garage to be placed closer to residence structure. The comprehensive improvement project also includes a family room addition to the southeast side of the residence located out of the 75* setback area and behind the average lakeshore setback line. The garage structure at 612 s.f. in area meets the required 10* side setback. Applicants propose 374 s.f. of a roof structure to be placed over a walkway and patio area to connect detached garage and residence structure. The roof structure meets the required 10' setback from both side lot lines. Per the directives of the lot coverage ordinance the area of the structure has been included in the lot coverage inventory. Note the 50 s.f. of trellis area has been reduced from the total roof structure area. The improvement project will also result in the loss of two large mature oak trees in the street yard. Planning Commission members were asked to consider conditioning approval on a replanting schedule. The application was reviewed at both the July and August meeting of the Planning Commission. At the July Planning Commission meeting members noted concern at the intensification of the lot coverage from 14.0 to 23.9%. Members also questioned whether additional hardcover removals could be made to offset the increase in the structural coverage. Commission members concurred with staff that the removal of the large, mature oak trees should require a planting schedule (review Exhibits G and H). The applicants presented an amended proposal at the August meeting of the Planning Commission. The amended plan showed a reduction of 172 s.f. or 2% of hardcover resulting in a total 20% reduction in hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. Lot coverage was reduced from 23.9 to 21.5%. Review Exhibit I, applicants presented a replanting schedule as follows: 1 1/2 to 2" diameter tree. Sunburst Locust or Green/White Ash to be planted in the northwest section of the site plan and a 5-6' Black Hill or Colorado Spruce in the southwest section of the site plan. Review Exhibit E, note eak in drainage. Runoff from the majority of the proposed new imp.ovement shall drain to street side of property and eventually northwest to Casco Cove along Ivy Place. At the August meeting, the Planning Ccmmission accepted the amended plan as far as it related to hardcover removals and the replanting schedule but felt that the lot coverage variance was too excessive and conditioned approval on holding lot coverage to 18%, Applicants would have to exclude either the family room addition or y 'i1 Zoning File #1750 September 10, 1992 Page 3 roof structure from the comprehensive improvement project. The Planning Commission recommendation did not include a request to reduce’ hardcover vibhin the 0-75' setback area. This decision may have been based on the fact that the all proposed improvements were located in the 75-250' setback area and the drainage patterns on the property. Please refer to Exhibit A-1, Mr. Hanson, the Pyle's architect, has vjubmitted a letter in response to the Planning Commission's recommendation and has asked for Council's special consideration. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's approval recommendation limiting lot coverage to 18%. The subject resolution can be amended if Council proposes any changes. !. - 1 GITYofOROXO 1^^ A'RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _______________ A RBSOLOTIOH GKANTlIiG VARIANCES TO UmiXCIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C) AND 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 FILE #1750 WHEREAS, Charles D. Pyle and Shirley Pyle (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 3548 Ivy Place within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City ”) and legally described as follows: Lot 174, Taylor's Subdivision of Spring ParJc Lots, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to permit structural improvements to the property that i«*ill result in 2,200.5 s.f. or 18% coverage where only 15% is allowed ard a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 see)cing approval of hardcover variances within the 75-250' setbac)c area where only 25% hardcover is allowed and where 4,253 s.f. or 52% is proposed and 5,870 s.f. or 72% exists on the property. ■ON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning Pile #1750, The property is located in the LR-IC, Single Family Lalceshore Residential Zoning District requiring 21,730 s.f. or .5 acres in area. The subject property consists of 12,225 s.f. or .28 acres. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on July 20, :»992 and August 17, 1992, and recommended approval of the proposed variance application as amended based upon the following findings: Page 1 of 6 A w. / o m CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Hr Comprehensive improvement of the property results in a reduction of 1,617 s.f. or 20% hardcover within the 75- 250' setback area. B.Based on the existing drainage patterns of the property runoff produced from the structures placed within the 75-250' setback area will drain away from lake and into street. C.No major land alterations are proposed as a result of these structural improvements. D.New location of the garage addition will, conform with the basic development pattern of the immediate neighborhood . 4.The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the 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 cf the City. 5.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. COHCT^USICmS, ORDER AMD CORDITIOHS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Oronc City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.03, Subdivision 14 (08 and 10 22, Subdivisions 2 to permit the construction of a detached garage at 612 s.f. and __ _ _ _iu-^ect to the following conditions! 1.All structural impro*'es»nts shall be limited to a total of 18% lot coverage on the property. Page 2 of 6 iSM 4 I iTr- CITY of OROXO 2.'^ Upon application for a building permit, applicants shall complete the following: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _____________ 3. 4. 5. €. a.To piuvide a survey locating all existing and proposed improvements. b.To obtain a demolition per"*^t for removal of existing detached garage. To provide detailed gracing and drainage plans. d.To provide a planting schedule for replacement of two mature oak trees. Applicants to provide size, type and location on survey submitted with application. All hardcover scheduled for removal w^^nin the 75-250* setback area (1,617 s.f.) and as shown on page 6 of this resolution shall be removed pvior to the footing inspection for the new residential construction. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 14, 1993). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The .dersigaed applicants have read, understood and nereby agi« u to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby anree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of tide of property. fage 3 of 6 4 !' O * O CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO._ __ _ _ _ _ Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of September» 1992. ATTESTI Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property OwnerTs) STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) MB, COUNTY OP HENNEPIH ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of September 1992, by Barbara A. P«terson i Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor 4 City Clerk of the City of Orono, i Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrumr'»t was executed on behalf of the City. 0. 0'\ II •1^ 4' esH*/• i- CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) S8. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 •before me a Notary Public wichin and for said county, personally appeared _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _,^— ,_ _ _, _ _ _ _ _ _^ — known to me to be' the p2rson(s) described in and who executed tne foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free awt and deed. STATE OP MINNESOTA ) Notary Public ) ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _____________________________, -----------------------------------1 — known to me to be the person(») described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the sane as his (their) free act and deed. Nowry Public Page 5 of 4 CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50,00 pur each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100,00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming u*o«i $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application I fee) ~TTv f*«cwa * t wi c z > *• ^ ?*r*r*T/ c• * U u f ? i i. u PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address • * ’ '* C*J »-r Aa I ti/ • V V I < f ^14. a f U r " 11 * /^k,wwai » § I hiV\ I J wvv'i *>wa » wk-f property Identif, Number (P.I.D, ) * I* “'ZA^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date ProjL^er^ Acquired _ _ _(month/year) I (do)(^o nol> also own the^ aV^acent parcels of land. Present use of property; ^ residential _ _ _other(specify) Zoning District: Vl APPLICANT Phone (home) ^AlJD ' (at2/L' Name ^ f^fUTS^ Phone (work) Address: ^ City. Zip; OWMEB (if different than applicant) Name fVog Address 1 Phone (home) \ ~ _ _ Phone (work) City; _ _ _ _Zip: 56^11 OBSCRIPTIQN OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ OQO —- - AWVAjidr 0^ n detail; 1^4^ 4^.^. (gfeOJ^kl g>g_ —Describe request in , . _ . ,______________ chails ; DP t Chi- VARIANCES REQUIRB) _ _ Lot Area Setback: __ Lot Width Hardcover ___Lot Coverage Front Side ___ Rear ___ Average I*akeshore Other (specify) UAflDSUlP/DKSCRlPTim OF UNUSUAL PROPWTy CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: MrnvH-> MJc an¥OE— im» flAAJgg to f.eQ0^Ott -n-' iAcuk«^ 4^^a,OC^ SiCV ------ (attach additional sheets if necessary) S-s'3r£r;™.r. ;;",::..‘:r.r r. ss: 348-3271). 3. ✓' Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). , . i , 4. “~^Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include “^hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8h xll for 5. T^pographiT.urvey (existing and changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8% xll ), 6 w/ Sketches or p"^lans of floor 4 elevation views (provide 1 copy 8h"xll"). V/—AS af aLend™ to this application„ please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. • • The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. ^1®“* remember that vour variance application is noc—complete—if—the—a- - - information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or request^ by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional .ees (staff covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses review of this application, and certifies that the information ect t6) the best of his/her Icnowledge. ' “ oaf un time not incurred in supplied is true and co Applicant's Signature acRowledges and agr... to this application r,:!::^^*ro«»”::r:ri:,brs^^rVu^n^irrm;7^ tion and verification of this r^uest. Own.r’s Signatur. "**■* /7< Applicant must hav. all silU^ttals into the City offices 25 ‘’*5°'* Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings arc third Monday of each month.- Applicants must be present at a__________ review .eetlngs of the Planning Coa^ission and Council. an unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make ^°4 2onlnS authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Buildi g Office of this change rior to the meeting. Danl K Hansen. Architects 3841 Thoma* Avenue South Minneapulia, Minnesota .^5410 Telephone 612*920*6232 i1 V 24 August 19v2 t J ^UG 2 6 2£'-2 Mayor Barbara Peterson attd City Council Members - Kdward Callahan, J. Diann Goetten, Gabriel Jabbour & Mary Butler City of Orono, Municipal Offices P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re; #1750 Charles and Shirley Pyle, 3548 Ivy Place - Variances for Hardcover & Lot Coverage Dear Mayor Peterson and City Council Members; Continuing in the process to receive a variance for hardcover & lot coverage on the above property, Charles Shireley Pyle & myself attended our 2nd Planning Commission Meeting on 17 August 1992. We had expected to receive unanimous approval on the request for variance, because we had fully complied with the directive., of the Planning Commission Members at our first meeting, 20 July 1992. This compliance was documented by Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator, in her 11 August 1992 memo to Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members. Our revised plan following the Planning Commission's directives included the following items; ■“ Reducing roof structure below the directed amount. “ Increasing the amount of hardcover reduction by 172 sq. ft. over the 1445 sq. ft. previously proposed. - Submitting a replanting schedule for two large oak trees to be removed. Because of our compliance with all the directives, we were completely surprised by the 17 August Planning Commission Members vote against our application as submitted. We were also surprised bv the fact that only one Planning Commission Member had been at the last meeting and was the only 17 August Member to have visited the site. He was the only Member to vote for approval aa submitted but was not seconded. We find the lack of continuity between the two different Planning Commission groups confusing and frustrating In our attempt to proteed with an addition that we and the adjacent neighbors feel is a big improveswnt to the property. Both neighbors were willing to come and voice their approval, but we told them it was not necessary. The whole point In moving a two car garage adjacent to the house, was to give a unified appearance to the house as a whole and have a covered connection from garage to house. Existing bedroom windowa prevent attaching tha garage to the house. For all the reasons mentioned, we request that you approve our application as revised according to the first Planning Commission Group's directives. We feel that if the sane Members were present at the second meeting, we would have received their approval. If there are any additional questions regarding our application, please notify us. We thank you for your support. ncer^ly, Dary Hansen cc. Charles & Shirley Pyle ^ *%/e.'t«#17^ • X V Vflti TK % • ^•* A 'r^ ^• • * :>it' (M)-'".f V-iG (««» /.,;• "‘“rV'-' »*, ^r' ::: .,. A sv-nr A: i: / ~ ’ > ( >* • />/ ^ ,'*7 V' X— » "1^7 4^^/— '• "V A’A/'.r, 1 >0, » ;,V V y- / ^ fin ^WfW9 vtf '• •** . M'?( '«>- V V>"^t ■^'Jf'^’^r.i^n *__y" \' V '*’ ^ R«jN DATE 0A/2S/T2 BATCH DOT HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY THfORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNER:: LIST REPORT NO. PAGE PI4S54017PROP ADOH ONNCR NAHE TAXPAYER lUNE/ADOII SB EO-11/-25 At 0001 0003a ADDRESS UNASSI^O S L KAPLAN IT At TRUSTEES ‘ JAMES N LUPIENT 7100 NAYZATA BLVD MPLS MM 55A2A 38 70-117-73 A2 001603550 IVY PL 1 1 J OAMPIER HIILIAM S OAMPIER 5550 IVY PLACE NAYZATA 5S391 38 70-117-73 47 001703548 IVY PL CIS PYLE CHARLES 0 PYie 3548 IVY PLACE NAYZATA MN 55391 B PROP ADDR C^RCR NAHI TAXPAYER MAHI/ADDR 38 20-1I7-ES A2 0018 035AA IVY PL A N JENF.TT ETAL ARTHUR N JENETT 5SA4 IVY PLACE NAYZATA m 553T1 58 70-117-23 A2 OOIY 03534 IVY PL TRANK J BUYSSE TRANK J BUYSSE IVY PLACE HA.'ZATA m 55jn 38 70-117-23 47 0027 03560 IVY PL JOHN H HONOUR VII 1 HITE JOHN H HONOUR VII 3560 IVY PLACE NAYZATA MN 55391 pnop ADOUmmn Him TAXPAYtil UVU/AOM SB 10-117-2S BZ QOIB 035^5 IVY PI JCrrRIY A D€BAA DANBCRRY JCmifY A DEBRA OANBERRY SSAB IVY Pi NAYZATA HN 55391 TOTAL BATCH DOS 0Q0Q7 I 1 CtRUrv THAT Tl« FACTS iCPRCSCNTEO ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE RCRRCSCNrATION OF INTORHATION AS IT APREARS THIS OAIC ON THE RCC0R03 or 1MC HMMPIN COUNTY DCPARTTCNT OF RRORERTY.TAXATiaN, TO^THE BEST OF HT MCHLIOGI AND BELIEF DAT ^Erasj B CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR CHARLES PYLE OF LOT V4. TAYLOR'S SUBDIVISION OF SPRING PARK LOTS HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA a 4 *.■ U if fiiir.iat iiiiru iR'tMl t« %tf9 tmi •* i^9 «te«f »r«i •94 tM •* •• •itiilc !i JMi Utl la vB>« #wt % . r • »•• ••••#» »«*••« «r« »«%•« •••♦ •• ««tu« fMk -.4ci.-M r \* *40* i • % «,:*.iirrn::zrrr vpx^ u^tp 7^»\*-/r - ■ iVf^ ,.> j ^-------'—^'’ • —ri 7TfT<^ 1 •jj' n» • **"■"“ P ” 4»|» I , t - - vJ 0 • f r*• * 1H-1^ . : lAi I ; ! : \ \m>\ '•i.,,, ,-.rf— • » % aiuiTtf iMje »mM •• V J i rUi^ y/^'^/ J V4^W«F««? -^n^j.,_^ ^ .,, i'^ - V . (JMX9^ » ^ - • to* I « T • ff ' tlu.T U In /I i^rTft V»J1War>*s» i*i tmK-<<»rt»eP^fO^ -♦«*<» ~_6£, IM" [(Cf(sj»/ ro - UvlV^b/ r «3 r-I *<■!»» » V*/ 7* ./ivlii »*»*.• J -f J-Jj* ' Wi»i»H» r(l#U4<» \♦k^<rrfcP --------------- ----------^--------------------p. • P^T& tvffvfi '^ytt -KyJ iH - ceurx; •WlC'J ^ f/V i>i>g ^y^^■VTK/ ^ ' TWT?>VX I-MSt aj ^r ji .L'i ,£l. K^'i-nr>T f*^'' I/' cvdjp’TT^ • si?o^,efc^v#;pi^ ^ F^^'\^^C^i r»T-'' J/ A ■ >J /\,.|. K>!d \\JV fLi^e ri^»r , M»t.|\^ ■ (Wt tr HcHTVect] / f^i viv^ p%jepioe he>. ?>C54k9 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE one) C&~7^ 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000 Existing Hardcover in Zone A. H ouse X 3 -f Z /5 S.F. LENGTH WIDTH 9/-r/ S.F. S.F. syi*'t4/9^ 7?7C /<r . S.F. 7** WO pP /S .S3 5“ Z "ctyoop B. Garage _ .//HP * / 7 • • • r» c. D riveway D.. Sidewalk Cf WAf.X> E.^atio / 3eck yj5 S.F, S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. /X X X /7 z ZfO—iZrj7¥ 7,5 - ,_____37 s.F. F.Landscape AREAS yZ*Jr7c underlain BY . _________ PLASTIC" • ‘ SHEETING a. Other /77 s.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. f. (<T -/ ? -92 fT\ O Total H ardcover in Zone ^rr_ s.F. Total Prorirty Area in Zcnc /NA£dA [71 ?yf 4|TI ■ » 100 - 2(( tf.fr J! 0M,-t¥n) i .... LL .7t % • • HARDCOVER CALCUbATIOfI WORKSHEET F-^ SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ohe ) 0-75' (y5^250Q 250-500' 500-1000 EaXisting Hardcover in Zone Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property A rea m Zone a. House Z0.9 X //. 6 -2V2. y S.F. • • length width « * X dTS*. 7 S.F. • Vf./X S.F.• • m • X • « • • S.F. • X • se . . S.F. 0 B. Garage 2y. 2 X ✓ 22. 2 S.F. • » - c. D riveway X S3 3 7 Vo S.F • Cbx/Y*.z^.z X /. ^ «VV • S.F. • r # D., Sidewalk ’ * *• V.?X S’. 7 - •2S . S.F. 3 <?J. ^70 <r. J?X 2y ■/S’/, S.F. 0 « X m • - S.F. E. Patio / . 7 D eck X X r f z c ../z • S.F. p.Landscape • X •9lV S.F. areas UNDERLAIN BY X m S.F. PLASTIC"‘ sheeting 9 • ^ * 0 . j/X • // -V S.F. E * S'" <p. / O.vz X X ■7J ?2 77 77 S.F. 16 X /f y 0. Other 7. 5 X ,7 S.F. /Z?^ 'fS /2 73 s.F. [a ] S97o AL [1 T^so ».». m ffSo f K lOO - 7^. 0 <t- % (5. c the orono planning commission meeting minutes of the J^JLY 20, 1992 ZONING FILE *1748 - CONT. K.f i« the hardship* Cohen asked what is tneCohen asked wha aarage for their vehicles . ..H they need that large of a garage Hovland stated they ne« and storag*'and storage. ,o recommend den I a I of n was moved oy dohnson , T'nayt'o. permit and variance. Ayes 4, (SS) *1750 CHARLES » SHIRLEY PYLE. ^rnfA^E ^-^fSIlIc HEARING 7:31 - 7:35 P.M.variance - PUBLI ,„HCertm=at. Of Mailing were noted me Affidavit of POPI'cation n.rvl Hanson, w.rTne Affidavit Of POP" —- Daryl Hanson. v,ere cnar.es and SMrl.y PY-e and tnelr arcn.tect, Oary pJIaent for this application.present for this aPP"'----- relocate an Maous.n explained pa"'’'to“the rj*'<i/r"ructor« 'm^^ r.Uo "ar.rand » /“.""'/n/rns^eds's.”".' of roofed struet^u^.^to P. . . . . . . . ..ir“ar«=i«» o' structural lot coverage.I, an excess of etruc.u. nr.e.ed hi. concern about the loss of tree. Johnson |ot coverage,inteneitication of the lot ^ a _ int.n.lflcation or tn. .v. attached the .. ,H.t they originally Intended to not . . . . . . . . . . . . . . disease already.disease trees .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Mr*, pyl. »•'« .. . . . , rnn.ld.r d.'.tlng theCO. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. mng to con.ld.r roofed area. trelI is.„ city ha. t.s.n the position that * mSulI are. 1. not hardcover. ! k MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1992 ZONING FILE #1750 - CONT. Hanson noted the roofed area is proposed to tie the structures together In a distinctive way. He said the area proposed to be roofed currently is considered hardcover as there is sidewalk there. Mabusth explained that It is the structural Impact that they fe dealing wlth. Johnson reminded them that this type of issue came up during an application on Baidur Park Road. Hanson stated the applicants would be willing to further reduce hardcover In the 75-250' zone by removing plastic under IandscapIng. Mabusth said that may cause some drainage concerns. Mrs. Pyle said the Building Inspector has confirmed that it would not create a problem. Rowlette indicated she would consider approval of the application If the applicant reduced the roofed area to approximately 400 s.f. and removed additional hardcover used in IandscapIng. All other Members agreed. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Rowlette, to table Application #1750 for Charles and Shirley Pyle of 3546 Ivy Place, to allow applicants to redesign their proposal. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#7) #1752 GEORGE W. KALWEIT, 4265 FOREST LAKE DRIVE - VARIAF3E - PUBLIC HEARING 7:45 - 7:50 P.M. The Affidavit of Pub I I cat ion and Cert IfI cate of Mailing were noted. George Kalweit was present for this application. He referred to a letter sent to the City explaining the situation. He said they had contracted with a builder who was unfamiliar with the City’s ordinances and did not obtain a building permit. The project was stopped prior to completion, and noted his safety concerns. It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval of Application #1752 for George w. Kalweit, 4265 Forest Lake Drive, for a variance to allow structural repairs within the 0-75’ setback area. Ayes 4, nays 0. // CITY OP ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 473-7357 55323 ZONING FILE #1750 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: July 23, 1992 TO: Mr. & Mrs. Charles Pyle 3548 Ivy Place Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES TO:Daryl E. Hansen 3841 Thomas Ave. S. Mpls., MN 55410 TYPE OP APPLICATION: Variances DATE OP MEETING: July 20, 1992 VOTE 4 For 0 Against Planning Coasilssion recosMends the following: Planning Commission recommended tabling application to allow applicants time to amend plans to address the following issues: t A. Reduction of structural coverage. Approximate 663 s.f. of roof structure over walkways and patios to be reduced to approximately 400 s.f. Please note that trellis roof area is not included as Hardcover and tc specify area of trellis in your new calculation. B. Reduce original hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. It was recommended that additional landscape area underlain with plastic can be removed. C. Replanting schedule in light of the need to remove the two mature oak trees (I thought they were maples), NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Please contact Jeanne Mabusth if you have any questions pertaining to the directives noted above. Applicants' next scheduled meeting is dependent upo.t receipt of a revised plan. Deadline for the August 17, 1992 meeting is Wednesday, August 5th, or Wednesday, September 9th, for the September 21, 1992 meeting. r r 29 July. 1V92 m 3 1Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building 8. Zoning Administrator City of Orono. Municipal Offices P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota. 55323 Dear Ms. Mabusth, I am writing In response to the Orono Planning Coronlsslon's recommendation (C>, with regards to the Pyle's variance application, zoning file #1750. Replanting schedule to replace the necessary removal of two mature oak trees will be dependent on the construction schedule of proposed new g<xage, removal of present garage, and deletion of drlvewa/ area and designated hardcover, but prior to sodding of this area. We plan to consult with a landscape representative, from a local landscape service. In order to obtain assistance and recommendations. What species of trees will create an attractive Impression and will grow favorably under the large canopies of two other mature oak trees that exist, and will not be removed, within the setback zone of 115 - 250 feet. N.W. section of site plan. Consideration of the canopies of nine other mature oak and maple trees that exist along the S.W. property line or contiguous with the neighbor's property to tne S.W.. within the same setback zone. Planning conslderat 1onst 1. 2. 1 1/2 - 2 Inch diameter tree. Sunburst Locust or Green/Vhlte Ash In the N.W. section of site plan. 5 - 6 ft. Black Hill or Colorado Spruce In the S.W. section of site plan. Sincerely, // Shirley Pyle' cc. Daryl S. Hansen, architect Toj Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Froa:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building 6 Zoning Administrator Date:July 16, 1992 Subject: #1750 Charles and Shirley Pyle, 3548 Ivy Place Variances - Public Hearing Pertioent Ordinances Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Review of hardcover A. 0-75' setback area * 4,075 s.f. Existing hardcover ■ 948 s.f. Proposed hardcover » 948 s.f. B.75-250' setback area ■ 8,150 s.f. Allowed • 2,037.5 s.f. or 25% Existing ■ 5,870 s.f. or 72% Proposed ■ 4,425 s.f. or 54% Existing variance » 3,832.5 s.f. or 47% Proposed variance ■ 2,387.5 s.f. or 29.2% Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Review of lot coverage Total area « 12,225 s.f. Allowed lot coverage * 1,833,7 s.f, or 15% Existing • 1,810.2 s.f. or 14.8% Proposed * 2,929 s.f. or 23.9%* Variance ■ 1,095.3 s.f. or *■ 95% •Adjusted amount if it is determined that roofed patio and walkway not credited against lot coverage. Adjusted amount ■ 2,266 s.f. or 18.5% Variance • 432.3 s.f. or 3.5% i List of Exhibits - h - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Survey B - Proposed Site Plan - Elevations Southeast and Southwest P - 1-2 Hardcover Fact Sheets Description of Re<|i]e8t Applicant proposes the removal of the existing garage within the street yard and the Installation of a new detached garage closer to residence structure. The comprehensive improvement project also includes a family room addition to the southeast side of the residence located out of the 75' setback area and behind the average lakeshore setback line. The garage structure at 612 s.f. in area meets the required 10' side setback. Applicant proposes 663 s.f. of roof Zoning Memo #1750 July 16, 1992 Page 2 structure over a walkway and patio area to be installed between the detached garage and residence structure. The roof structure meets the required 10' setback from the side lot line. Planning Commission members are asked to consider the lot coverage ordinance specifically the section that reads as follows: "All roof structures which extend more than 6' above grade level." In reviewing the lot coverage facts for the improvement project, the 663 s.f. of roofed area was included with structural inventory. Lot coverage is shown at 23.9% where 15% is allowed. The Improvement does result in a reduction in overall hardcover of approximately 18%. Structural coverage increases from 14.8% to 23.9%. Review Exhibit E. Note break in drainage. Runoff from the majority of the proposed new improvements shall drain to street and eventually northwest to Casco Cove along Ivy Place. Hardship Statement Please review Exhibit A, Issues for Consideration 1.The improvement shows a 9.1% increase in structural hardcover on the property. Can non-essential structural improvements be reduced in area? How essential is 663 s.f. of roof structure? Review Exhibit E, the southeast elevation depicts impact of proposed structure. 2.Hardcover has been reduced almost 18% and is now proposed at 54%. Are there other non-essential areas of hardcover that car be removed? The majority of landscape areas underlain with plastic are to be removed with the proposed Improvement. What of proposed improvements? Can paved or Walkway areas be reduced? 3.Improvement project will result in the loss of two mature maple trees. Is it appropriate to ask for replantings with variance approval? Any condition of approval should contain the following conditions: 1.Grading and drainage plan must be submitted with building permit for new improvements? 2.All hardcover scheduled tor removal must be completed at the time of the footing inspection for the new garage. L r Zoning Memo 11750 July 16, 1992 Page 3 3. Applicant to obtain a demolition permit for removal of dejtached garage. 4. Planting schedule to be submitted with building permit as a result of the loss of two mature maple trees within street yard? To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: Subject August 1)f 1992 #1750 Charles & Shirley Pyle, 3548 Ivy Place Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing Review of Amended Plan Pertinent Ordinances 1. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 75-250* setback area ■ 8,150 s.f. Allowed - 2,037.5 s.f. or 25% Existing ■ 5,870 s.f. or 72% Originally proposed at 4,425 s.f. or 54% Amended proposal ■ 4,253 s.f. or 52% (removal of 172 s.f. landscape area underlain with plastic northwest side of house) 1 2. Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) - Review of lot coverage. Total area » 12,225 s.f. Allowed lot coverage * 1,833.7 s.f. or 15% Existing ■ 1,810.2 s.f. or 14.8% Originally proposed at 2,929 s.f. or 23.9% Variance ■ 1,095.3 s.f. or 8.95% Amended proposal at 2,640 s.f. or 21.5%* Variance ■ 806.3 s.f. or 6.5% Originally, roof structure proposed at 663 s.f. and has been reduced to 374 s.f. (50 s.f. of trellis area has been removed from total roof structure area). Planning Commission had originally requested structure be reduced to 400 s.f. Breakdown of Structures Credited Against Lot Coverage Existing house • 1,273 s.f. or 10.4% Proposed garage • 612 s.f. or 5% Addition " 381 s.f. or 3.1% Roof structure ■ 374 s.f. or 3% Total - 21.5% List of Additional Exhibits G - Planning Commission Minutes 7/20/92 H - Planning Commission Action Notice I - Daryl E. Hansen Transmittal Letter J - Revised Plan K • Applicant's Addendum/Planting Schedule (Original packet for Planning Commission Meeting 7/20/92 has also been included) Zoning File #1750 August 11, 1992 Page 2 Discussion At the July meeting of the Planning Commission, the application was tabled providing applicant with additional time to submit a revised plan reflecting the following directives of the Planning Commission: 1. Reduce roof structure to a minimum 400 s.f. Applicant has reduced roof structure to 374 s.f. The trellis area has been excluded. Remove additional hardcover used in landscaping. Applicant has reduced 172 s.f. of landscape hardcover along the northwest side of existing structure within 75-250' setback area. Refer to amended hardcover facts above. 3.Replanting schedule for two large mature oak trees to be removed as a result of the pro. :ed improvements. Refer to Exhibit J. Applicant pi.'eposes planting in northwest landscape aiea 1-1/2 to 2'* diameter Sunburst Locust or green/white ash tree and a 5-6' Black Hills or Colorado Spruce in rhe southwest landscape area. Although not specifically noted in the Planning Commission recommendation, it was the unanimous concurrence of the Planning Commission that a replanting schedule be considered with this variance application. Applicant has complied with this suggestion. At the meeting, applicant advised that one of the large oak trees on the property is diseased and would require removal in the near future. Per the review memo for July 20th, the hardship statement can be found in exhibit A. A recommendation of approval should contain the following conditions: 1.Grading and drainage plans must be submitted with building permit for new improvements. 2.All hardcover scheduled for removal must be completed at the time of the footing inspection for the new garage. 3.Applicant to obtain a demolition permit for removal of detached garage. 4.Final planting schedule to be submitted with building permit. Planting to be confirmed at the time of the final inspection for new construction. Isv 6To;Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Pron: Date: Subject: Jeanne A, Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrat^rf^ September 3, 1992 #1757 Albert D. Hanser, 1685 Fox Street, ^ Conditional Use Permit - Resolution ^ Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.28, Subd. 3 (A) - Conditional use permit required for continued guest house use of second residential structure on proposed Lot 1, proposed the A. Manser's subdivision. A condition of preliminary subdivision approval required that applicant file a conditional use permit for the continued use of a guest house structure on the property. The City's files revealed that no former conditional use permit had ever been issued for the use of the structure as a guest house. All regular lot requirements must be met by guest house. a.Area. Required Proposed 4 acres 4.02 acres b. c • Setback from existing side lot line. Required • 30' Existing ■ 10' Variance ■ 20' Structural setback from recreational development lake. Required ■ 100' Existing ■ 75'^ Variance ■ 30 Sections of the code dealing with the septic issue: Section 10.56, Subd. 17 (C). Nonconforming Sewage Treatment Systems. A nonconforming sewage treament system as defined in Section 12.30 and located within the Shoreland Overlay District must be upgraded and made conforming, at a minimum, at any time a permit or variance of any type is required for any improvement on, or use of, the property. Further, the nonconforming sewage treatment system provisions of Section 12.30 shall apply to all shoreland areas. It is consistent for the City to review the current septic capacity of a property whenever the property is involved in a lard use application review. This section calls for the enforcement of the septic code when properties are located within the shorelands of the City. Zoning File #1757 September 3, 1992 Page 2 Section 12.30, Snbd. 2 (C) iii. Definition Non-conforming System - A prohibited system; a system located within a designated 100-year floodplain; any system which may or may not meet all the location, design or construction standards of the current City Codes and which is failing for any reason; and any system with less than 3 feet of unsaturated soil or sand between the distribution device and the limiting soil characteristics. Subd. 6 (B). Owner's Responsibility. It shall be the responsibility of each property owner to demonstrate that the on-site sinitation device or system in use or existing on his property is in conformance with all requiremr' ♦•s of this Section; It is the responsibility of the owner or owner's representatives to prove the system is in compliance not the City of Orono. As of this date, applicant and applicant's septic contractor confirm system is not leaching to surface and that a regular maintenance program of system has been followed. Section 12.30, Subd. 8 (B). Inspection Program. For purposes of insuring continued proper use and maintenance of all existing onsite systems, the City shall periodically inspect each existing system and shall classify each system as Code, Conforming, or Non-Conforming. 4. Owners of Non-Conforming Systems shall be issued orders requiring maintenance, repair, alteration or replacement. Systems found to be non-conforming shall be brought up to conforming status per Subdivision 5 (c) within one calendar year from the date of the order. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Survey of Lot 1 E - Memo of 7/15/92 F - Septic Sketch G - Sullivan's Septic Letter 7/30/92 H - Jack Taylor Letter of 8/28/92 Description of Request The subject guest house will be formally recognised as a non­ conforming structure in the approval resolution of the final plat for the applicant. Based on the information submitted with the preliminary subdivision the guest house is located within the 100* setback from the recreational development. Any major structural repairs or any expansions of the structure located within the Zoning File 11757 September 3, 1992 Page 3 protected area will require variance approvals. Note that the non- conforming setbacks did not result from the lot lines created with the three lot subdivision. The guest house shall continue to be used by applicant, guests or hired help. Applicant's septic evaluator has provided test information confirming that there is adequate area for both principal and alternate septic sites to serve guest house, review Exhibit P. Based on the code sections noted above, the City asks that the non-conforming septic system be replaced and a conforming system installed within one year of the date of Council's approval of the conditional use permit. At the Planning Commission's August 17th meeting (please review the August Planning Commission Minutes) both applicant and applicant's attorney questioned the need to install a new system when there is no obvious sign of fai lure as confirmed by Ed Sullivan in his letter of July 30, 1992, Exhibit G. Hanser advised that the septic tanks are pumped twice a year and that the current system was never found to be failing under the current maintenance program. Jack Taylor, Mr. Hanser's attorney, has advised that his client would be willing to execute a covenant whereby the current and future owners would be required to maintain the system and that if the system was found to be failing, it would be replaced within a reasonable period of time. Planning Commission members questioned the precedent setting aspect of such an action. Staff advised that the septic matter is in the hands of the On-Site Septic Manager who is obliged to follow the directives of the code. The code requires an upgrading of a system whenever a permit, variance or other land use application is sought by an owner. The septic review information is presented as part of the comprehensive review information always provided to the Planning Commission and Council. If applicant seeks special consideration, it must be presented to the Council as an appeal of an administrative decision. in the approval recommendation of the conditional use permit, the Planning Commission voted in support of the staff recommendation. Please review Exhibit H. Jack Taylor has presented his client's position concerning the requirement to install a new septic system for the guest house within a year, Mr. Taylor will be present tc present his appeal to the Council. The On-site Septic Manager has had an opportunity to review Mr. Taylor's letter of August 28th and has the following comments! Meckman notes that prior to the 1992 amendment of the C site Sewage Treatment Coda the existing system would have been nen-conforming based or its substandard setback from the then thought adlacent wetland now lakeshore. He takes issue with the statement that the system is in a perfectly good working system. The site Zoning 4 le #1757 September 3, 1992 Page 4 characteristics with the assumed location of the septic tanks, steep slopes to adjacent lake and age of septic system presents major concern. The most severe form of contamination is the underground contamination with adjacent water tables that is never apparent with a site inspection. Surfacing or leaching problems are less objectionable as the effluent can still run over adjacent soils for treatment. If the current system is failing, the drain would outlet into adjacent lake. Per Section 12.30, Subd. 6 (B), the applicant has not provided confirmation that the guest house is served by a conforming septic system. It is not the City's responsibility to confirm conformance cr non-conformance of the system. At the time of the land use application, it is the applicant's responsibility and to this date we have received no confirmation as to design, location or size system. of Weckman's final comment was how would you proceed with the request from the next applicant? What is unique about this system or property? It was noted that at your last meeting you approved tt 2 lot subdivision and a requirement was that a r.on-conforming system was to be replaced within one year of the final subdivision approval. This system was deemed non-conforming because of a 6' setback from a t*'*veled road and because of the age of the system, the required separation setback was not met. The applicant could also not provide information that the system was conforming and therefore was required to Bieet current code standards. IPlanolnq Coasiisaion Recomaendation To approve the conditional use permit for the continued guest house use of the second residential structure on the property located at 1605 Fox Street finding that all area requirements for the guest house use have been met. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Guest hoMSt. structure is considered a non-conforming structure. Baaed on its substandard side setback at 10* and substandard lakeshore setback at approxisiately 70', any major structural repair of this structure or expansion of the structure will require variance approval of the City of Orono. 2. The guest house is for the exclusive use of applicant, guests or hired help and may never be used for rental purposes. 3. Applicant must Install a conforming septic aystem to serve the guest house within one year of Council's approval of the ccnditional use permit. Zoning File #1757 September 3, 1992 Page 5 The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's recommendation and will be amended based on Council's final decision concerning the appeal of the On-site Septic Manager's recommendation. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL OSB PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 3 (A) FILE #1757 • MHBRBAS, Albert D. Hanscr (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of property at 1685 Fox Street located within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Refer to Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "property"), and NHBRBAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the continued use of a second residential structure on the property for guest house use per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 (A). Minnesota: NOW, TBBRBPORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1757. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres of dry buildable area. The subject property consists of 4.2 dry buildable acres. 3. On August 17, 1992 the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended approval based upon the following findings: a) The property has 4.02 acres of dry buildable area and is able to support a second residential unit bas^d on the 1 per 2 acre density standard. b) There is adequate area to meet the septic needs of both principal residence and guest house structure. Page 1 of 5 4. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the continued use of the second residential structure on the property for guest house use 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. 5. The City Council has considered this applicacion including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the affect of the proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 (A) to permit a guest house use at the property subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant and future owners are placed on notice that the guest house structure has been classified as a non- conforming structure based on its substandard setback from the side lot line at 10' and from the adjacent Tananger Bay lakeshore at approximately 70*. Any major structural repair of this structure or expansion of this structure will require variance approval of the City of Orono. 2. The guest house is for the exclusive use of applicant, applicant's guests or hired help and may never be used for rental purposes. 3. Applicant or future owner shall install a conforming septic system to serve the guest house within one year of the date of Council's approval of this conditional use permit (September 14, 1993). Page 2 of 5 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, 7. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereoy agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of September, 1992. ATTEST j Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of September, 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson t 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 3 of 5 EXHIBIT • I TV H -:r ... * LEGAL! DESCR I PTION oK PKKMISES SUPVEYKI): ••w •• Tht? Kflsf h«T 1 f of the Sou * !u;»i s t iju.Trt«-*r of rho Southeast Quarter, e^cepr the West M4 foot rhorcof , in Section ...T. Township n? N'lvrth , Rami, /i W.>sr of th. ">th Princ:f/al Me riH;a n . _ ALSt' Th.1t p.irt ot Govci nrr...>nt :..a 4, S- <•* :on Township 1/ .. ........—^ North , - Ranye 2 3 Wosr of t!i.' ' t h Pt inci{>al MotuJian; described as follows: Rt^uinninq at t ho Northwest c. i ner of said Government Lot_4 ; Muncc.. Easr-a I oi.«| • t he Nor'-h 11 no of ’s.iid Lot a distance of 4‘M foot; thonce S<-utherlv, — deflecting to the right. HH dt^groes a distance* of 6S«,.9 .at.. ../2 ^feer ; thonci* Kasttrlv, deflecting to the left 8 8 degrees ^ minutes-a d i stance of “1 2 3‘.'8 ' f cet‘; thence SouthorjyT! ' ”'** “T'** t '■w.--*oct ing to th^ r,ight. 8H .legre.'s OS minutes a dist'ance ' of ^.4 feet; thcr.ci' Southwesterly, deflecting to"the’right' -i c T • 1.. ■ /. c 1 . .... - .. . . . -*•*. . -. S7 - dog r ees 05 minutes a l^l^;t.»nc•o .»f 48.*. feet; tln.*nce " J -.T- Southeaster 1V, defloctin.j to the left 40 floqrees 06 minutes — —f ^^ ^^.fJL*illtight., of -w.ny l ine of t .ho Gn af.T"Nd'rl hern-. —-jv -..- Ran way- ( now__known.- as-Dakot .i TRa i I ,• f nc . ) t h.‘ncc*^s*7tuf ,;T-,Ndrth along s.aid W fst-rl tno . tol the point~of ’ beqinninq'f . - • ■ = . . ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ >• *■ ••; - - ■ ■ _ - #» '• -4MI - *♦ > ' • — •^ • rm0 » • ^ ^ ------ • • r r*" • _ t ^ ' ■■ j • - »* • - . . ------------ . • V..-« ■* ^*3- * Page 4 of 5 •mOi STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) 8S. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC RTATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, 199 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, persona fly appeared! known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they' executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of S I .Cl i’Y OP. ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address WTTQ 7a Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 03-//7^l3 -OOo / ^ £?i-//7-Z3 -ii. Please attach legal description to application if not Included on required survey. APPLICANT Name _ Address A LA r Phone (home) Phone (wor)c) /ri’5' STxecr city Cc^/YTiT/^ zip SS3‘^/ OVfNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Niime Address Phone City Zip Date Property j^cauired ____________________________ (month/year) I (do) ^o n^o'-'Aalso ovm the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _ _ _ _ $ fiO.OO For each variance request with CUP application $123.00 Residential accessory Use _ _ _ $175.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) v/" $150.00 Guett House/Guest Apartments crn OF OFFICE $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration rucr-k' ui IfCfl iSVmOO 11 f u 150.00 i-tOEm-rHA^K rOU ;:04t7^0 COC'i fiOl JC6:t Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75* of la)ceshQre PRD/PID - see fee schedule Renewal Fee - $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS $200.00 $250.00 $175.00 $ 75.00 $300.00 $300.00 $100.00 other - Commercial Site Plan Review (♦ consultant fees) Vacation Easement Vacation Easement Vacation With Subdivision Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Appeals see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District ^ % Present Use of Property C^esidentia^ Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe request in detail: 2. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obta this list from Hennepin Coui ty Department of Finance A-603 Governme Center 348-3271). Plat Map. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if laud alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (ll* X ly* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete Initials of Clerical Staff: Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true a-3 correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Ccmtmission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building a Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. mJN 0*n Of/25/91I • *.iATCH ooi •.MEfirinpiN* *•t •;•tPROP ADDR Q»f«ER NAtC 'TAXPAYER tUnC/AOOR sa 02-117-<S 12 0002 01520 FOX ST KATHARINE S TEARSE KATHARINE S TEARSE1520 FOX sr HAYZATA m 65191 *>•A PROP AOOR CXaCR NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 18 02-117-21 11 0002 01A65 FOX ST 0 A L CAPP GEORGE 0 t LYNOA H CAPP 1A45 FOX ST HAYZATA >t4 5S19I ' t • ■r 9I.f PROP ADDR OFtlER NAHE TAXPAYER ' NAIC/AOOR la 02-117-21 11 0005 OOOia ADDRESS UNASSiGNED,. ALBERT 0 lUUISER ALBERT 0 MANSER ■ • 1400 IDS CENTER HPLS m 55402 I •' J PROP ADDR 0»t«R NAME TAXPAYER NAIft/AOOR i.' 18 01-117-21 41 0004 01420 FOX ST THE NAKEFIEIO ORONO PTNRSHP THE HAKEFIEID ORONO PTNRSHP C/0 ROBERT J THEILER • • * P 0 BOX 9100 DEPT 28 l»LS FM B5440 . > • % PfKMP AOM OmtU NAHi tAXPAYEn NAtC/AOM IS 10-117*21 II 0001 000 la AooiiEsa UHAsai»4E0 SUAO II AZiUm SUAO H AZIUlll 17^5 FOX sr HAYZATA m S5191 } I ' % . , COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY atlERS LIST18 02-117-21 12 000101540 FOX STJ A NOLAN • J A NOLANJOHN A FKILAN I JOAN A NOLAN1540 FOX STHAYZATA Ml 55191 *18 02-117-21 IS 0001 ' 00018 ADDRESS UriASSlGtlEO ALBERT D HANSER ALBERT D HANSER 1400 IDS CENTER i' hPLS MN 5S402 18 02-117-21 11 0010 01410 SHORELINE DR A HARRISON AIL HARRISON ALFRED A INGRID L HARRISON 1410 SHORELINE DR HAYZATA M4 55191 58 01-117-23 44 0001 01485 FOX sr SALLY 0 HANSER SALLY 0 HANSEN 1485 FOX sr HAYZATA Ml 55191 la 11-117-21 22 0009 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED BURLINCI0t4 t40RTHERN RV BURLl»4CrOi4 l40RIHErU4 RY REPORT NO PAGE■ .■ '•/ J •NO. P14S5401 ■ i: : '1*58 02-117-23 33 000101485 FOX sr RICHARD H PERKIF4S RICHARD H PERKINS 1405 FOX ST HAYZATA Lt4 55391 18 02-117-23 IS 0004 - 00018 ADDRESS MUSSIS4ED ! ALBERT 0 HANSER ALBERT 0 HANSER ■ 1400 IDS CENTER MPLS Ml 55402 I ‘ • *• -I ( • I 18 01-117-25 41 OOOjt • . . 01700 FOX ST CRAIGBAm ASSOCIATES CIUIG8ANK ASSOCIATES PO BOX 9300 DEPT 28 HPLS M4 55440 %4 • * . • • • I • 38 03-117-23 4^ 0C02 01745 FOX ST SUAO II AZHAUt SUAO II AZilARI 1745 FOy ST HAYZATA M4 5S191 .1 TOTAL BATCH 001 00014 . . . • * "**‘.f. • • * 1 ». • ^ li • • • •. t f • . • •* •m• • y. ! • 1 * *. • * A t t Y .*. I * . «1 0 * • p • ' t t • »-■-1 \ • • • • V . . V • • t • t * ^fa f . • • • /. I ^ ' • *.•*#/* • • ^ . *. J,. •. . • A • *4.1 TO:Jeanne A. Mabusthr Building & Zoning Administrator PROM;Stephen Weckman, On-Site System Manager DATE;July 15, 1992 SUBJECT: #1757 CUP - A. Hanser - Septic Review Septic testing is required for this parcel indicating alternate sites for both the guest house and the main residence. During the review of this subdivision by Jean Mabusth, it was determined that the ordinary high water level of Lake Minnetonka encroachea within 75' of the existing guest house as well as the septic system for the residence. This encroachment makes the septic system non-conforming based on the shoreland regualtions and revised spetic code requirements. Jean noted in her March 12, 1992 review for the subdivision request that additional testing must be submitted indicating a second alternate drainfield site for the guest house as well as the abandonment of the existing septic system with the installation of the replacement system using one of the alternate site for the guest house within one year of the final subdivision. In order to be consistent with Orono Septic Code Section 12.30 however, the septic system for this guest house must be replaced within 90 days of the approval of a CUP. Mark Gronberg has been contacted regarding this issue and indicated that the two alternate drainfield sites for the guest house as well a'j the alternate site for the main residence should be feasib'^e and will submit an addendum identifying these sites on the property survey. As per our discussion, best way to acheive adequate sites for sewage treatment would be to have one alternate site for the guest house while extending the other alternate site already designated to make i. large enough for both the main residence as well as the guest house. Based on the soil testing information already provided and previous inspections of the property in question, the drainfield sites should have no problem in treating septic effluent affectively. 1^. \ TO tor 1 ... t / Of //fr to" \ \ X / —\ l-^ZLf»o •• .# • *,i •• ^ -^s wCn IT. .-A / >/ ^ ■’ % 0 • / • •> / / / / 9 T \ t \ \ rw^ iS^K V ^ /' '^1 \ / / ■\ f / / / >o .... / > 1 « i r.i O . ‘« k 1 ' > JJo ^ |o> * ^ \ \ • AV-^\x ^ i-.'i 4* -t^ yA y I <9 ULLIVAN ’S UTILITY ERVICES, INC. 3660 HWY 101 SOUTH WAYZATA, MN 55391 473-4300 July 30, 1992 Albert Hanser 1685 Fox Street Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 ftEi Cottage House 1685 Fox Street Orono, Minnesota We have pumped and serviced this Septic System for the past 20 years and visually inspected it on July 30, 1992. We find this Septic System to be in good working condition at this time. There is no Sewage running out into the Wet Lands. Sullivan's Utility Services, Inc. Edward P. Sullivan D orsey cjic Whitney A FASraiaasir Im iudimu ro»rnB*f J^U PAM* AVEMVR fflV TUU. YOU 10088 1330 COKMICTICUT AVEMLE. » W WAMMUfOTOH. D. C 8OOU0 ( 308 ) «nr - OfOO 'JJOO FIRST HANK PLAC E EAST M I N N K.\ POM S , MI N N ESC) TA !i!S-U )'J - i V »H (r>IJ) J iO- TELEX PAX 1 613 > J Ul * 3«6« 801 fIMAT AVFMfB 8 W. SflTE 340 BOCa88TB8.MIXMS80TA 98908 ( V>r ^ 2M1-3196 1300 ET89T IKTP89TATF CPXTE* BILLtMOB. MOXTAXA 9910:i I 40#H 393 - 3000 3 OBACBCHtTVCH STMfET L08D08 BC3V OAT.BMOLAXD 44 • 71 - 989 • 3334 9or D a V1D!*OM pTTlLmXO oil AT PALL8, NOXTAJfA 9940t k* >6 ) 737 - 3633 30 arP TBOMCHET 78009 FAEIS, P8A8C8 33-l-4a*00-99 49 JOHN J. TAHjOR (612) 34a2e00 :i9 sgUAlB D1 MPPEA 8-1040 8Br88BUI. 88tOiril 38 • 3*904 40 - II rDa j-,r.A!iT ^ ‘ ' < AlJl*ClCNC J JUiUNT 9T8EET * aiiL^rr- r:i AJfA 99808 44129 ! 1 IIB 3900 ^MiOWA 90809 ) dtiJ-lOOQ August 28, 1992 City of Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Attn: Ms. Jean A. Mabusth, Zoning and Planning Department f,UO 3 1 1992 Re: Zoning File No. 1757 Albert D. Hanser, 1685 Fox Street - Application for Conditional Use Permit - Recommendations of Planning Commission at Meeting Dated August 17, 1992 Ladies and Gentlemen: I am writing this letter at the request of Mr. and Mrs. Hanser to suggest an alternative to Condition No. 3 of the Recommendations of the IManning Comn\ission resulting from their August 17, 1992 meeting in connection with the Conditional Use Permit application of Mr. and .Mrs. Hanser. Briefly, Mr. and Mrs. Hansi'r are requesting a Conditional Use Permit be issued for their guest house structure located on Iaj I 1 of the proposed new plat of HANSER ADDITION which has received preliminary approval from the Council. The obtaining of such a Conditional Use Pc * :it is a condition to the approval of the plat. Condition No. 3 for issuing the Conditional Use Permit is as follows: “Applicant must install a conforming septic system to serve the guest hou:>e within one year of the date of Council's approval of the Conditional Use Permit." The facts resj^>ecting the guest house septic ivstem are as follows: 1. The septic system WAi constructed at the same time as the guest house was amslfuctet.1, over tw-enty' years ago. 1 Ii J DonsEV ik Whitney City of Orono August 28, 1992 Page 2 2. 3. 5. At the lime of construction, both the septic system and the guest house were validly constructed and not in violation of any City ordinances. Since that lime the passage by the City of various ordinances has caused the guest house to become a nonconforming structure by reason of the fact that it is within a side yard setback of the property, as well as within a setback from the shore of Tanager Lake, as provided for in the 1992 shoreland ordinance revision, and the septic system is also within the prohibited setback area. It is quite clear that prior to the 1992 revision of the septic code requirements, the septic system serving the guest house was not "nonconforming" -- it was merely "substandard" under the definition in the 4-1-84 version of tb -Site Sewage Treatment Code, Section 12.30, Subd. 2.1.(j). The only cnange in the 1992 septic system ordinance which would cause the system to be deemed nonconforming is a change which requires a three-foot separation of the distribution system from saturated sands or soils. Although no one knows exactly where the septic system distribution is serving this guest house, it is being assumed by the City on-site system manager that this septic system violates this requirement, but no one to date has given the ! lansers any proof that that is the case. The only statement in Mr Steven Weekman's report dated July 15, 1992 is that "This encroachment" (and presumably thereby referring to the encroachment within 75 feet of the high water level of Lake Minnetonka) "makes the system nonconforming based on the shoreland rt*gulations and revised septic code requirements." Ba.sed on a letter addressed to Albert Hanser by Edward F. Sullivan of Sullivan's Utility Services, Inc. dated July 30, 1992, which letter is based in part upon the visual inspection of the septic system which occurred on July 30, 1992, the Mansers’ septic system serving the guest house was on July 30, 1992 in good working conation and there was no sewage running into the wetlands. This sys^‘*m has been very carefully maintained, including pumping of the Initial stage of th_e system, no less than twice a year D orsey ifc Whitney City of Orono August 28, 1992 Page 3 8. 9. Being a guest house, and being intermittently occupied, the system receives minimal usage. Very little cooking is done in the guest house, and on the average the system is utilized for one or two flushes a day at the most, which in terms of the sewage disposal capacity of the system is absolutely minimal. The Planning Commission has required as a condition to its approval that a perfectly good working system be torn out and eliminated and a new system installed within a year. The Hansers feel that this request is unfair and unreasonable for the following reasons: A. The fact that the septic system is located within either the side yard setback or the setback from Tanager Lake is no reason to declare this system nonconforming unless the system is also failing for any reason. See Section 12.30, Subd. 2(c)(iii) on page 491 of the Code. The facts indicate that the system ij not failing at all but is properly working. The system literally falls within the classification of a "conforming system." Sgg Section 12.30, Subd. 2(c)(ii) on page 491 of the Code. The only factor that can make this system be nonconforming is the issue of whether or not there are less than three feet of unsaturated soil or sand between the distribution device and the limiting soil characteristics. The City has not produced any evidence on that point whatsoever. The only thing that is being said is that the system is nonconforming and its use should be terminated because of its location near the lake. That is not a sufficient reason to declare the system nonconforming even under the changed Code. Further, it is not a sufficient reason under the changed Code to say that a new system if it were being built would not be built now in this location, so that this old system should not be allowed to remain there, even if it is working. We all understand that a new* system w'ould not be allowed to be built here. What W’c should all be striving to reach, both the private property owners and the City of Orono, is to have a system which under its existing use does not pollute the environment. Certainly there is ample evidence with respect to this system that that is the case. B.It is unfair and inequitable to enforce this ordinance <mly as against those persons who by reaM>n of nevvssity ot complying with H D orsfy ik Whitney City of Orono August 28, 1992 Page 4 subdivision or other codes relating to real estate in the City of Orono must come to the City of Orono for consent and/or approval. There may be many other owners in the City of Orono who live on single family lots who should be affected by this revised septic system ordinance, but who will probably never be affected by this particular ordinance and never have to make a correction due to lack of inspection, time, expense of enforcement, etc. If what the City is trying to do in its septic code revision is to eliminate as much possible contamination of soils and groundwater as possible, then the City should focus not on guest house systems which are very minimally used and which are adequately maintained, but should focus on systems serving dwelling houses located in areas close to lakeshore and wetland areas potentially within prohibited setback areas and/or soil separation areas. Forcing this property owner to remove and replace a well maintained, minimally used septic system, which is properly working and is not polluting the environment, does not further the purpose of the ordinance whatsoever. What will further the purpose of the ordinance is an inspection of all septic system users, including those on smaller lots, who may never subdivide their property or come to the City for any permission, and an investigation of whether or not those systems are "nonconforming" under your ordinances Until some sort of a reasonable plan has been demonstrated by the City to adequately enforce the provisions of this septic code, selective, hit or miss, enforcement bast\l on who has to come to the Council for approvals is, in our view, discriminatory. It is our position that not only will the property be served by a requirement of continued giH>d maintenance practices with respect to the system, but also the City and the environment will be served. Future property ovsmers can be made aw^are of the condition of this gutrst house and its septic system by placing of record a declaration and by including in the declaration requirements of continued careful maintenance, and inspection of the system at reasonable times lo insure that the system continues ti) operate prop>erly. In that way rcspx)nsibility can be dearly designated, the property owners can be relieved from having to incur unreasonable and unnecessary expense to replace a perfectly good, working system, and the City can be benefitted by providing for better than average maintenance and inspection of the system. If it is known that the system is faulty and is leaching fxillutants into the environment, or if the system needs more than normal and ordinary maintenance, obviously the system should be replaced immethately on a 90-day lime schedule. However, in our view, to require the replacement t>f a perfectly D owsicy »S: \V'hitni :y City of Orono August 28^ 1992 Page 5 good, minimally used, well maintained, operating, and non-polluting system merely on the suspicion that it may not meet separation standards, but with no adequate proof that it does not meet separation standards, is a waste of resources and an abuse of governmental authority. We would suggest that it is a reasonable method of administration of this new septic code when dealing with well maintained, minimally used, working and nonpolluting systems, to give the prop)erty owner the reasonable benefit of the nonconforming structure philost)phy. If the City cannot demonstrate that the septic system is polluting, or that it is not operating properly, but that it may be suspect, due to location, the City it should impose upon that system, by a declaration placed of record, reasonably strict maintenance standards (in this case, we suggest pumping and maintenance at least twice a year), reasonably strict inspection standards (in this case we suggest inspection by an Orono licensed servicer who performs the pumping, at least once a year, supported by a certificate delivered to the City on-site system inspector), and an undertaking that in the event any repair other than ordinary maintenance is required, or in the event that there is any evidence that the system is leaking pollutants into the environment, that there be an immediate requirement of replacement of the system on the alternate site within a 90-day period. In our view, this type of a declaration would serve both the City well by mandating careful monitoring and careful maintenance of "suspect" sites and would yet not burden the property owner with unwarranted and discriminatory expenses in order to rc'place a system which is not in fact polluting anything. We would hope that the Hanning Commission staff and Council would, in this case, consider the utilization of a restrictive covenant against the land of the type described above as a reasonable alternative to the one-year replacement requirement now set forth in the IManning Commission Conditions to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit passed on August 17, 199? Very trulv yours, » \ JJT/id cc; Mr and Mrs S Albert D Hanser John J. Taylor 1 To: Prom Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members ^ Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administratrat 7 Date:August 11» 1992 Subject:#1758 James F, Lawrence^ 1550 Sixth Avenue North - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance Section 10.28, Subd. 3 - Conditional use permit required for continuation of guest house use. List of Exhibits - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map 1) - Septic Report E - Septic Map F - Survey Description of Request During the review of applicant's two lot preliminary plat (Application #1749), the applicant was advised of the need to file a conditional use permit if the secondary structure on Lot 1 was to continue to be used for guest house purposes. The septic testing submitted for the preliminary subdivision confirms the existing septic system conforms to the new setback standards of the Shoreland Regulations for protected tributaries meeting the 75* setback. New septic testing confirms adequate and suitable area for an alternate site serving both principal structure and guest house. As was noted in the review of the preliminary subdivision application, staff advised that a building permit was issued in 196'7 for the guest house. The conditional use permit was not required even though the code clearly at that time would have required a conditional use permit. There was mention of a future subdivision that would relocate the guest house structure on a separate lot. Note guest house is located 25* from principal residence. Principal residence was installed in 1960. Staff would recommend that if this property is to ever be subdivided in the future that the guest house structure could be converted into an accessory structure that could now be located 10' from a future division line (structure less than 750 s.f. in area). Total lot area at 4.42 acres meets the area standard required for guest house use. Zoning File 1758 August 11/ 1992 Page 2 Staff Recoimiendation To approve a conditional use permit for the continued guest house of a secondary structure on the property locatea at 1550 Sixth Avenue North finding the area and septic standards of the code have been satisfied. Approval is conditioned on the struct ire never being used for rental purposes but may be used for the excl sive use of guests and employees. Zoning File 1758 September 2, 1992 Page 3 Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recomnendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the conditional use permit as proposed. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's approval recommendation. ch A RESOLOTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL DSB PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 3 PILE 11758 NHEREAS, James F. Lawrence (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1550 Sixth Avenue North within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as: Lot 4, Bloc)c 1, Tanglewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"), and flRBREI J, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a Conditional l e Permit to allow the continued use of a second residential st. .cture on the property for guest house use per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council o£ Orono, Minnesota: 1. 2. 3. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning Pile #1758« The property is located in the w...-- -- - - - - - Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres of dry buildable area. The property consists of a total of 4.42 acres. RR-IB, Single Family Rural of dry On August 17, 1992 the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended approval based upon the following findings! )The guest house use on the property was established in 1967 with the construction of the second residential structure. The City has received no negative comments based on the twenty-five year history of the use of the structure for guest house use purposes. Page 1 of 4 4. 5. The subject property consists of 4.42 acres and therefore meets the 2 acre per one residential unit standard as required by code. Stephen Weckman in his report cf July 14, .1992 confirms that the existing system has been found to adequately serve the existing house and guest house structure. Additional septic testing submitted has confirmed that there is an alternate site available for future use that would be able to serve both principal structure and guest house. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the continued use of a second residential structure on the property for gv<4St house use 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 othe’' 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 per the fiinr'lngs and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by Cicy staff, «om?ents by the applicant and the effect of the rroposed v%iiances on the health, safety and welfare of the community, COHCLUSIOMS, QKDEB AWb COWDITIOWS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 to permit the continued use of a second residential structure for guest house use on the property located at 1550 Sixth Avenua North, subject to the following conditions t 1.The structure defined as a guest hou i on the property shall never be used for rental purposes but may be used exclusively for the use of nonpaying guests and employees. Page 2 of 4 JL ! i 2.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning ^'ode, shall automatically terminate ai.y authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a micdemeanor. 3.The undersigned owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereoy agrees to the recording of thif resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on thi«: 14th day of September, 1992. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Haliin, City Cleric Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor iProperty Owner (s) STATE OP MINNESOTA ) )S3 . COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of September, 1992, by Barbara A, Peteson ( Dorothy M. Haliin, Mayor i City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared kno^^n to me to be the pers^(8) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OP MINKESOTA ) )S8. COUNTY OP HENNEPIF ) On this day of 199 » before me a Notary Public within and for said County, pe^'^'^nally appeared known t» me to be the per8on(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBITC Pace 4 of 4 CITY OP ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATIO PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address / <-?o Property Identification Number (T? ,1 ,D • )//J - > >- Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name Phone (home) ^3 ^_ _ _ Phone (work) _ Address Ao^yih _________Citv6><^ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Address Phone (home) Phone _ _ _ _ City _ _ _ Zip Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land PEES - CONDITIONAL USB PERMITS - $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP F ukiCE OFFICE $125.00 Residential accessory Use ::i502000v0 01 CEH $175.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) v.-vi lit ctA* #J* i itrifm / L"u $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments 150.00 150.00 • f • V $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more , w Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule Renewal Pee - $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Pee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS $200.00 $250.00 $175.00 $ 75.00 $300.00 $300.00 $100.00 Coomercial Site Plan Review (* consultant fees) Vacation Easement Vacation Easement Vacation With Subdivision Resoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Appeals Othar * see fee schedule •i PRESENT USE OF PROPERTYPresent Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST j t - Desc^be request in detail: C <i>^ • r /-fo REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obta this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governme Center 348-3271). Plat Map. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). Topograpf>ic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARZ REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (ll* X 17* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this apolica^ion, and^,..ceTiEifies that the information supplied is true and correct^^t^-"^^J Applicant's signature^^!^^^^ her knowledge. Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto thp-^roperty by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, ^(3(Zouncil members for purposes of investigation and vj^irficati'Cfrpti^AlTls request Owner's signature Date V- Applicant must '^ave all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building s Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. MM DATEBATCH 001PROP AODR OtlEP NAME TAXPAYER tUm/AOOII PROP AOOR OitSR NAHI TAXPAYER tUHC/AOOR PROP AOOR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NATIC/AOINI PR{» AOOR OtMCR NAHI TAXPAYER NAm/AOQR PROP AOOR OHNER HAM TAXPAYER NAHIVAOOR I PROP AOOR l»MIR NAHE TAXPAYtR NAHI/AOSR IIEdlEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY IHTORMAnOtt SYSTEM PROPERIV 0II4ERS LISTSO 11 0002ooosa AOORESS UmSSK^TEO DUNCAN N DAYTON OUNCAN N DAYTON A30 ITTOIAN HOUND NAYZATA rOI SSSTl 30 Ei-118-23 32 0003 01S70 SIXTH AVE N JOHN E NHITHAN JOlWI E THIITHAN 1S70 ATH AVE N lONO LAKE TM 5535A 38 EA-118-23 32 0007 01350 SIXTH AVE N JAMS F LAHRCHCE I HIFC JANES F LAIOTETCE 1550 ATH AVE N LONG LAKE W S5S5A 38 2A-118-23 32 OOll 01530 TANCLCHOOO RO A J CECIH toe CECIN AHTGI410 J t DIANE C CECIN 1330 TANSLEinOO ROAD OPQNO ItT 5SS3A 38 2A-118-2S 32 OOIA OlAAO TANGLEHOOO RO J H 80LTC a J SIHONTON BOLTE JERRY M BOiTI lAAO TANCLEHOOO LONO LAKE TtT 5515A IS Z7-118-ES A1 OOOA 00038 ADDRESS UNASStICHEO STATE OF HlftJESOTA STATE! Of MlN»«SOfA 38 2A-118-23 31 0011010/5 KNOLL MANOR RD 6 0 CLEVELAND I K CLEVELAND GEORGE a KATHLEEN CLEVELAND 1075 KTIOLL HATTOR RO LONG LAKE Ttl 5535A SB 2A-118-2S 32 0005 01540 SIXTH AVE N ALBERT R MlllTMAN A HIFE ALBERT R HHintAN 1540-ATH AVE NO LONG LAKE (ft 55356 38 2A-118-23 32 0008 OlAOO TAIICIEIOOO RO R G MAUSER t S E HAUSER ROOERT C a SALLY E HAUSER 1460 TAIKLEHOOO RO S LWIO LAKE TfT 5535A 38 2A-118-2S 32 0012 015A0 TANGLEIOnO RO J r AND P 8 DOUGLAS JOHN T DOUGLAS 1560 TANCLEMOOO RD LONG LAKE TtT 5535A 38 2A-118-2I 52 0015 01A50 TANGLEHOOD RD L E KEttiEDY A J KETtiEDV lEHlS E a JEAN r.CTtSOY 1450 TATIGIETIOOO RO LONG LAKE Ttl 5535A 80 2A-1T8-2I 23 0001 00080 ADDRESS LAI ASSIGNED DEPT Of NATURAL RESOURCES DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 1200 HARNER RO ST PAUL Hlltl 5510A REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 138 76-118-23 51 001201100 KNOLL TUNOR RO D E KINGMAN A R R KINGMAN D E KINGNAN t R R KITTCNAN 1100 KNOLL MANOR RO LONG LAKE TtT 5535A 38 2A-118-23 32 OOOA 01540 SIXTH AVE N ALBERT R WHITMAN I WIPE ALBERT R NHITHAN 1540-ATH AVE NO LONG LAKE TtT 5535A 30 2A-118-23 32 OCIO 01520 TANCLEHOOO RO R C JR A J S THONPSON ROBY C THOTTPSOM JR 1520 TATIGLEMOOO RO LONG LAKE TIT 5535A 38 2A-116-23 32 0013 D1550 SIXTH AVE N J F ANO A M LAURENCE JAMES F LAHRETCE 1550 ATM AVE N LONG LAKE TtT 5535A If 58 2A-118-23 32 OOlt 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIONEO NAYNE A HILLER ET AL TANCLEHOOO H0ME0»8«RS ASSOC 1520 TANGLEHOOO RO LONG LAKE Ttl 5S35A TOTAL BATLH 081 00017 SO^KT'" -^3 — / (f »*w fr #1749 ’■' y/- ^ syuX^m&A TO: FROM: DATE: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Stephen Weckman, On-Site System Manager July 14, 1992 SUBJECT: Subdivision #1749, Jim Law^rence - Septic Review I have reviewed the proposed septic system testing and design for this property and would make the following comments. LOT 1 This lot has an existing residence with an on-site sewage treatment system. The system is listed as a substandard system which includes two 800 gallon concrete block septic tanks and approximately 300 s.f. of drain field trenches. The septic system was installed in 1960 and no problems have been noted to date. Soil testing has been provided indicating alternate drainfield site suitable for a four bedroom and a one bedroom guest house. Specific septic system details are included below: Depth of seasonal saturation (mottling) is 1*, requiring a mound. - Slope is 0%, — The percolation rate averages 8.1 minutes per inch at 12 inches. Topographic location and site drainage is adequate. All setbacks meet city code LOT 2 Soil testing and septic design have been approved for a five bedroom homo including primary and alternate drainfield sites. Both sites meet MPCA rules Chapter 7080 as well as Orono City Code Section 12.30 requirements. Specific septic system details are included below: Depth of seasonal saturation (mottling) is 1* to 2’ for both primary and alternate drainfield sites. Slope at the primary and alternate drainfield sites is 3% and 3% respectively. - Percolation rates average 8.5 minutes per inch at 12 inches. D Septic Review July 14, 1992 Page 2 of 2 - #1749 b Both sites require mound drainfields. - Topographic location and site drainage is adequate. - All set backs meet city code, ***Note that th^ alternate drainfield site lies directly between the access road and the primary drainfield site. Snow fencing must be placed around the alternate drainfield site prior to issuance of a buidling permit to assure that construction activities for both the house and the primary drainfield do not compact this site. 4 o CL OC o LU 1*1 Q O O UJ .J O < u o •--»• rn o M L- ' O >, Q. 4-» L. L- r tv Cla. O 4-J t- o c TTi \y) o a> o o -4 T? e u w tn •—I a* •o •c o> o > a; o u JD 0) TJ JC 4-J d; -c d; • cn V) ro 4-> L. C 'U <u C7> E jrr 0; x; — c c 'O L. X3 C <T5 O L- Ol u to C 13 Z3 o; o o JD JZ L, C d) C7) r: c 4-J —^ ^ c ^ to <D O - E n K di uO 0; > oecu 4-> 03 Q. E ^ X3 c QJ w c O u c a; o -c — *-j c 'tJ ♦^3 >‘ *J (V o > • - U 3 33 3C r: o <•-> jz to iO — e x: c o ^ A—‘ i To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council '. •> <S> >a Prom: Date: Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building s Zoning AdministkJljtors' \ August 12, 1992 Subject:#1759 P.Proft/R. Wells, 60/70 Myrtlewood Road - ^ Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Public Hiring Pertinent Ordinance 1.Section 11.03, Definition 65 - Subdivisions involving an adjustment of a lot line by the relocation of a common boundary are exempt from the subdivision regulations as long as each of the two resulting lots meets the requirements of the Zoning Chapter of the City Code. Property is located in the RR-IB zoning district requiring 2 acres of dry buildable area. Parcel 1 (60 Myrtlewood Road) consists of a total of 4.832 acres. The property is intersected by a designated wetland but does contain 2 acres of dry contiguous land in the homestead portion of the property. Parcel 2 (70 Myrtlewood Road) consists of 1.61 acres, approximately .4 acres consists of wetlands. As e result of the proposed subdivision. Parcel 2 will consist of a total 1.362 acres, .25 acres wet. 2.Section 11.41, Subd. 3 (B) (4) - Applicants shall grant conservation and flowage easements over designated wetlands withing both Parcels 1 and 2. List of A < B C D E F • G Exhibits Application Applicants Addendum Plat Map ■ Property Owners List - Wec)cman Memo ■ S-P Testing Report Dtd 7/14/92 ■ Sept:j Map '‘-A Review of Application The purpose o^ the subdivision is to allow ti»s Profts to acquire a quarter c parcel from their neighbor to secure the site line to the souunwest from the Proft house. Per the factual findings noted above, the Proft parcel meets the required area standard of the RR-lB zoning district. Tract A of RLS 446, the Wells property, at a total of 1.6 acres with approximately .4 acres of wetland is substandard. ■ Zoning File #1759 August 12r 1992 Page 2 The .259 acre parcel consisting of half dry and wetland areas has been confirmed as area unsuitable for septic use because of its proximity to the designated wetland. Upon a site inspection of the property, Mrs. Wells advised that based on the location of the houses and the existing landscaping, the quarter acre parcel belongs more with the Proft property and is in fact maintained by the Profts. Please review Exhibits E, F and G, reports of Weckraan and Schirmers and the septic map for the Wells property. The Wells property provides no additional areas suitable for septic development based on the water table and steep topography. The existing septic system appears to support the three bedroom residence at the current level of use. Issues for Consideration Definition 65 calls for a subdivision when lot line rearrangement involves properties that do not meet the standards of the zoning code. As the subdivision does not involve the creation of a new buildable lot, the City need not address the issue of variances. Issues for the Planning Commission 1.Should there be an objection to reducing a rural lot that is already substandard? 2.How do we deal with the issue of the Wells property where there is no ability to expand for septic needs? This subdivision will require notice to both current and future owners of the septic limitations of the parcel. Any recommendation of approval must include the following conditions; 1.Parcel to be acquired by Profts must be legally combined with the homestead property (this should include parcel with 6' wide corridor along west side of Tract B), 2.Applicants to execute conservation and flowage easement over designated wetland areas. 3.Notice to current and future owner of Parcel 2 that property does not contain suitable or adequate area to expand septic capabilities if required as a result of a proposed improvi-^ent involving greater water use. Isv Jj rr Zoning File #1759 September 10, 1992 Page 3 Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission members questioned whether there was a need to address a variance with the proposed subdivision application since the lot line rearrangement would result in a substandard lot being reduced further in area. The Planning Commission concurred that it would be appropriate in this review to address the need for an area variance. The applicant's attorney, Robert Mitchell, was asked to provide the hardships. Mr. Mitchell noted the following findings and lardships: 1.The property to be divided from the Wells parcel is approximately .259 acres. More than half of it is wetland area. The City does not include wetlands area in the dry buildable calculation. 2.Because of the location of the wetlands, the dry buildable portion of the property to be divided from the Wells homestead is not suitable for septic development. 3.Based on the location of the existing houses and improvements, the subject property appears to belong more with the Proft property than with the Wells homestead parcel. 4.A hardship is also created by of the unusal shape of the lot and the location of the wetland. Mr. Mitchell also commented on the septic capabilities of the Wells property as the on-site evaluator has confirmed that there is no other area suitable for the development of an alternate site. Mitchell advised that the evaluator has determined that there is enough room on the Wells property to repair the present system ii the* system had to be expanded in its current location at some time in the future. He also noted that this condition was common with other developed lots within the Myrtlewood Subdivision of similar size. Planning Conmlssion Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed lot line rearrangement subject to the conditions set forth by staff. The minority opinion of one felt that a substandard lot should not be reduced any further in area. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commissions approval recommendation. J o; o CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.________________ A RESOLDTION APPROVING A METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE RE7VRRANGEMENT FOR INVOLVING THE PPOPERTIES LOCATED AT 60/70 MYRTLEWOOD RO.A ,> FILE NO. 1759 WHEREAS, che City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota* and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter "City Council") has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision by Patrick Proft and Ray J. Wells, Jr. (hereinafter the subdividers") of a property legally described on the Certificate of Survey by Sathre-Berquist, Inc. dated July 22, 1992 revised September 2, 1992 and attached to this resolution as Exhibit "A"; WHEREAS, the subdividers have completed all requirements of the City for metes and bounds subdivision for division and combination purposes by dedicating to the City a Flowage and Conservation Easement over designated wetlands areas within Parcels X, Y and Z as shown on the survey noted above. WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the subdivision of a lot line as proposed whereby the area of one property that does not meet current area standard is reduced further in area based on the following findings: 1.The .259 acre parcel consisting of half dry and wetland areas has been confirmed as area unsuitable for septic use because of its proximity to the designated wetland. 2.Location of house and turn around on Proft property has created a need to require the additional dry buildable land to the southwest of the house structure. 3.The unusual shape of the Proft property and the location of the wetlands. Page 1 of 4 •« ^'O. O'-:. ' CITY of ORONO // RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the of Orono hereby approves the metes and bounds division for Patrick Proft and Ray J. Wells, Jr. according to the legal description shown on the Certificate of Survey by Sathre-Bergquist revised September 2, 1992 and attached to this resolution subject to the following conditions: 1.Upon approval of this subdivision by the City Council of Orono, the owner of Parcel X as described in the Certificate of Survey referenced above must apply to the City for legal combination for tax purposes with Parcel Y as described in that same survey. 2.This resolution, the attached Certificate of Survey and the above referenced document shall be filed with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles Offices on or before March 14, 1993. The subdividers are hereby advised that in order to fulfill the intent of this subdivision, that additional documentation must be created to provide for the legal transfer of fee title and granting of easements. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the division has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a now application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota, this 14th day of September, 1992. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 2 of 4 •r n1 foT o C// CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of September, 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 3 of 4 p) vQ (0 o hh I ^ V A"\ y 1 </"o *,' ».*'^ -»' ^\0 ^ -■•'•V'i ’••Nvc./ ^.T* ' '\%\t. C) O - 3. a I i r r 5 :[1i. i 1 V 1 1 <c If ? 33 O P 5 J3 O P -< 5 33 Omr i :*:*l ^i il'jl!*l'‘h; if^p«r ft t !iii*h'! i; ■ i ;fiiafil:|c fu!.<; f‘ I 'I iiif j hi; Ih! Ki'HHifH [iilfiiliSl mmm if* 1' |lM|iiihi ijf‘ I 'jlfiis^; I u; I i.;!fS- f?; hsillijii liLi i-fl 1“* ?n : ». • i nh!^! t« -^!ih hi [ '■ hhhli'iiillillii: il iil'iijlilr 'i!i*:ii I S0 8 !.?i»jii;t • ! i h ji lift !|i!‘!fi|i|l!ii j ‘[ii-U i U|l l‘f|f* ? 4 I f !S » a : If «{ ii I : W X tJC H CD H ' CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION . / f « PROPERTY LOCATION "7^60 Myrtlewood Road (Proft) g g Site Address 70 Myrtlewood Road (Wells)_ _ _ _ _ 36-118-23-33~0002 & 36-118-23-33-0005 (Prof t) qc QfjQj^Q Q Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 36-118 -23 - 33-0004 „X^-Jells) ctm-c Qccjrc W'vvv Please check one - Property X abstract or __x— torrens. 300.0^ Attach legal description to application APPLICANT Name Karen Proft & Patrick Proft Address: 60 Myrtlewood Road 300. CPhone (hce, ^49-0975^/^^1 i'YbV iVOlPhone (work) .. ../1WV.C.4J city: Wayzata (OronoEip: 55391 OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)—473-65^ Name Rav J. Wells. Jr. and Bettv J. WellEhone (work)_ _ _ _ Address: 70 Myrtlewood Road Citv: Wayzata (Orono) Zip; 55391 (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size N/A Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check)X Residential; no. of units Other (specify)_ _ _ _ __ Present Zoning District PROPOST^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: Units per Acres Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use: (check)X Residential Other (specify) MINIMUM MATERIAL NECBSSARY FOR COMPLETB PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey, Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350’ (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). As an addendum to this applicationf please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 2. 3. 4. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. Payment of fees (par)c fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FEES S)cetch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) $200.00 300.00 300.00 Preliminary Review (Class III S all non-residential) 325.00 + 25.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application Renewal of Final Subdivision Application 175.00 150.00 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature / Date/ Dat ^ ^ ( A •-r Owner's Signatur^^ AluA l.v)Date W_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _1_ _ _ _• ^_ _S _ S M _ .1_ _^ 1Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please ma>;e arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. r t'* Proposal for Lot Line Rearrangement o The Profts presently own and occupy the house at 60 Myrtlewood Road legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto. The Wells presently own and occupy the house at 70 Myrtlewood Road described on Exhibit B attached hereto. The Profts wish to purchase from the Wells a small (0.259 acre) parcel and attach such parcel to the Proft land for the purpose of securing to the Profts their view to the southwesterly and over the balance of their land. The proposal is therefore for a lot line rearrangement with no new buildable parcels being created. Exhibits C and D attached hereto reflect the legal descriptions of the properties after the lot line rearrangement. There is a site evaluation report on the Wells parcel. To the best of our knowledge the Wells septic and drainfield system is working at the present time. The 0.259 acre parce] proposed to be sold by the Wells to the Profts and combined with the Profts* land is largely wetland and, given the need for setbacks from wetland and steep slopes, the land to be conveyed is not usable land for the Wells parcel for septic and drainfield purposes. Therefore there is no diminution in the quantity or quality of the Wells property after the lot line rearrangement with regard to septic system purposes. The augmentation of the size of the Proft parcel is minimal (0.259 acres) and does not change the Proft parcel except to secure to it the site line to the southwesterly from the Profts* house. till I f» J^'\\>y.y / \ -tf"'' N. L/ N 'IIS' ■13^1"!»!* M? % 0 -fit? —srirL AKrVi f f i«> t-J\ n m*•*' J ' _w —J M •* \ %\ \ (3) (I 1 (It) » 'f T7-*r-f-.-^ \ nrimcoo f (16) /#/ 2 m ’%tm\ •I i« n / (14)A\ '<y JPU- ’•* a >i 11 —mj -n\C ,.u AO 2-oo</>•• • V os^'iii' as r: /y, \<33'(S)< C3J N RUN DATE 07/1A/92BATCH 001PROP AOOR Ol'MER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP AOOR OIMER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR 0IA4ER NAME TAXPAYER NA»K/AOOR PROP AOOR 0MT4ER NAME TAXPAYER NA>«/AOOR PROP AOOR OIMER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR •1 « HEftJEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATIOfI SYSTEM PROPERTY 0HT4ERS LIST38 35-118-23 41 0009 00805 OLO LONG LAKE RD •. BRUCE 8 DAYTON *OKABENA COMPANY 5140 NORHEST CENTERMPLS MT4 55402 38 36-118-23 32 0005 ’ 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO BRUCE 8 DAYTON OKABENA COMPANY 5140 rJORMEST CENTER r«>LS MN 55402 38 36-118-23 33 0001 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO M A V HAGENER ET AL MAURICE J HAGENER 850 HAYZATA BLVD LONG LAKE HT4 55356 38 36-118-23 33 0004 00070 MYRTLENOOD RD R J hells JR ETAL RAY J HELLS 70 MYRTLE»«00 RO HAYZATA rw 55391 38 36-118-23 33 0011 00030 MYRTLEHOOO RO 0 H ROGERS A J S ROGERS 0 N A J S ROGERS 30 MYRTLEHOOO RO ORONO MN 55391 38 36-118-23 33 0014 00025 MYRTLEHOOO RO 00(4AL0 H LU408ERG ETAL DONALD H LUtJODERG 25 MYRTLEHOOO RO HAYZATA m 55391 38 35-118-23 44 000400850 HAYZATA BLVO H M A V HAGENER ETA L MAURICE J HAGENER 850 HAYZATA BLVO H HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 32 0006 00705 OLO LONG LAKE RD A A M GOPINATH ANANO A MARIAN GOPINATH 705 OLO L0f4C LAKE RO HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 33 0002 00038 AODRESS UNASSIGNEO P H PROFT SR A K J PROFT PATRICK A KAREN PROFT 738 TOVOPA DR PACIFIC PALISADES CA 90272 38 36-118-23 33 0005 00060 MYRTLEHOOO RD P H PROFT SR A K J PROFT PATRICK A KAREN PROFT 738 TOVOPA OR PACIFIC PALISADES CA 90272 38 36-118-23 33 0012 00040 MYRTLEHOOO RO P 8 DUBOIS A 0 C DUBOIS PETER 8 OUDOIS OENISt DUDOIS 90 MYRTLEHOOO RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 33 0015 00045 MYRTLEHOOO RD A ANDERSON A R DULTMAN ANITA J ANDERSON 45 MYRTLEHOOO RO HAYZATA rrfl 55391 REPORT NO. PI43540I PAGE 138 36-118-23 32 0004 00645 OLO LONG LAKE KRISTIANNA BAIN ET AL PHILIP V MCCLELLAN 645 OLO LONG LAKE RO HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 32 0007 00685 OLO LW4G LAKE RO H F MARTIN ASP COTTRELL HARRY MARTIN/SUSAN COTTRELL 685 OLO LONG LAKE RO HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 33 0003 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO STATE OF MINN STATE OF MINN (DNR) (LUCE LINE TRAIL I 38 36-110-23 33 0006 00050 MiRTLETKK)0 RO SAM CHAMPLIN STEVEN K CHAMPLIN 50 MYRTLEHOOO ROAD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 33 0013 00015 MYRTLEIKXIO RD DARREL T HIEL DARREL T HIEL 15 MYRTLEHOOO RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 33 0016 00038 AODRESS UNASSIGNEO STATE LAND DEPT CITY OF ORONO DRAINAGE A CONSERVATION 5-18-90 ST DEED 8173562 1 '^I C:.} CI3 U RW DATE 07/14/92* iBATCH 001 HEWEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LISTPROP AOOR OI-MER NAME TAXPAYER NAhC/ADOR SB 56-118-25 55 0017 00056 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO^ M T JOHNSON JR ETAL H T JOHNSON INC P O BOX 635 IHAVZATA HN 55591 « . t J. t : t l.i t 9 t , f f 9 S 9 9 0 1 <■ 4i‘- ' 'It ■ 5 ■ A • f’} > r * m m r * f V .• .> i f' I >• . 1 .. . * - ♦ M f. ■ • I .* •t. t 9 • ■> I } ♦ * ‘ t’I- »-„■ :: r . t.: , .» fv \. I .t ‘ > \ i f I h* J- ••I M.% -.r. ♦ • i * ‘ 4 i • . » I . I i % •} • \ I • t * • %• • « • I REPORT NO. PI455401 PAGE 2TOTAL BATCH 001 00019 \ 4 • I , \ 'E?. ir,nj» 1 certify that THE FACTS REPPESENTEO ARE AN ACCURATE ANO TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORtUTION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS DATE i * * ■ 1 ^ 4 . To; Prom; Date Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager July 29, 1992 Subject; Subdivision #1759, Karen & Patrick Proft Septic Review The purpose of this review is to determine whether the lot line rearrangement will adversely affect the siting of an alternate drainfield for future use for 70 Myrtlewood Road as the proposed change will decrease the size of this lot. Steve Schirmers' report dated July 14, 1992 indicates that no conforming alternate septic site is available for the parcel in question. Soil borings indicate that a mound system would be required but property size, wetland setbacks and steep slopes limit this lot and no site is available which would meet state and city codes. The report also indicates that the lot line rearrangement would not adversely affect future septic siting due to the proximity of this area to the wetland. Site inspect n confirmed that the land to be divided off from 70 Myrtlewooa Road would not be suitable for drainfield siting. This area is mostly wetland with the remainder lying within 70* of the wetland and therefore would not be suitable for future drainfield siting. To summarize, 70 Myrtlewood Road is already too small to contain an alternate drainfield site. The proposed land sale does not change this situation. Obviously this property would benefit by acquiring land suited for an alternate drainfield site if such land exists along its boundaries. Isv S-P TEiy TING, INC.rSteven B. Schirmers — MPCA Cert. No. 627 • ; 951 Katydid Lane NE « St. Michael, MN 55376 • (612) 497-3566 /f /’ I L.' •.» • ' * • ' y »- / i / July 14, 1992 Karen Proft #70 Myrtlewood Rd. Orono, Henn. Co., MN This letter is in reguard with future expansion for this p’-operty for a Type 1, three bedroom home (450 gal/day) On-Site Sewage Treatment System. A site evaluation was completed. Soil Borings indicate a seasonally nigh water table less than 36" below the ground surface. To adequately treat septic effluent, a Pressurized Mound System would need to be installed. The available area for an On-Site Sewage Treatment System is limited due to the size of the property, setbacks from the wetland & steep slopes. This site has no area for replacement of a treatment system which will meet State & local Codes. Mrs. Proft. would like to purchase a portion of this property in northwest corner. Due to the setbacks from the wetland area, it would not affect future development of #70 Myrtlewood for a possible sollution to the septic problem. Steven B. Schirmers ps SBS?ds i Is ^ ,1 Kr 8 1 II MI hi l!5 < ^ ^ IJ!? d’ i!] fi '■ 31 ■ o li SI >l’l I V’ 3 e K • <i • I nl ll!l X >• m «4 N ido —fr* uJo ul - f \u* S 1 woc tJI a 8s i •> w » JS •» •% •4 I •» }i 0 ::io o A-- -V'V.'' \ c \ •-'i. \ ;ii r Chairman Kelley and Planning Cotiunission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator y Prom: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Ofjf September 3, 1992 Zoning District ^ 'f t RR-IB, Rural residential, 2 acre minimum Subject: #1760 Eric Nielsen, 2140 Prospect Avenue - Variances - Resolution Pertinent Ordinances 1. Section 10,28, Subd. 5 A.Area variance. Required = 87,120 s.f. or 2 acres Existing = 16,101.6 s.f. or .37 acres Variance = 71,018.4 s.f. or 1,63 acres B. Width variance. Required = 200' Existing = 93' Variance = 107' or 53.5% C.Setback variances. East side. Required = 30' Proposed = 20' Variance =10' or 33.3% West side. Required = 30' Proposed = 17* Variance =13' or 43.3% Rear. Required Proposed Variance 50' 18' 6" 31' 6" or 63% 2. Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C). Lot coverage. Total area = 16,101.6 s.f. Allowed = 2,415.24 s.f. or 15% Proposed = 2,133 s.f. or 13.2% No lot coverage variance required 1 kdi'.n viwrvfiii List of Exhibits A - Application • Property Owners List • Plat Map ■ Survey ■ Site Plan • Elevations ■ Floor Plan - Lower Level • Floor Plan - Upper Level B C D E F G H Description of Request Applicant proposes to construct a splir level residence on the now vacant property. The original house was razed in May of 1991 as a result of a hazardous building action. The property has been assessed for sewer and a SAC payment was made in 1988. There is no record of the location of the original house on the property but it was approximately in the same alignment of the existing residences which would appear to be within 10 to 15' of the street/front setback line. The proposed house will meet the front 50' setback but will not meet the required side or rear setbacks. Note the irregular east side lot line places deck approximately 18+' from rear lot line. The principal structure at that point is located 22'. The property is not subject to hardcover regulations of the City as property is not located within 1,000' of a protected lake or tributary. The improvement plan meets the lot coverage requirements as noted above. Staff has reviewed the files to see if expenses charged against the property for the hazardous building action have been paid. The files reveal that the amount of $2,181.39 still remains to be paid to the City. Applicant must make payment of the full amount upon application for a building permit. The property consists of two independent parcels and must be legally combined upon approval of the variance application by the City. The lot is a through lot. All future accessory structures to be installed on the property will require a conditional use permit. Access to the property will remain via Prospect Avenue where lot is at its widest width at 93'. Hardship Statement Please review Exhibit A. Applicant notes that lot is less than 1/2 acre in area and subject to 2 acre development standards. The lot is typical in size of the surrounding developed Crystal Bay neighborhood. A residence had existed on the property before and the property is served with sewer and has been assessed a single sewer unit. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the variances as proposed basing their approval on the hardships • rr % hI-I' i ••,y h i.. and findings noted by applicant. Approval was based on the following conditions: 1.Applicant is placed on notice that lot is a through lot. If accessory structures are planned in the future, they will require conditional use permits and be subject to lot coverage controls. 2.Upon application for a building permit, applicant must provide the following to the City: a.Payment of $2,181.39 to cover previous hazardous building costs against property. b.Provide an updated survey confirming location of proposed structure on residential property. c.Approval by Public ^’orks Director of proposed new curb cut onto Prospect Avenue. 3.Applicant shall apply for the legal combination of parcels 10-117-23 31 0014 and 10-117-23 31 0013 within ten days of Council's approval of the variances (September 24, 1992). The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's recommendation. Isv i .r CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ __ A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) PILE #1760 WHEREAS, Eric Nielsen (hereinafter "the applicant") has an interest in the property located at 2140 Prospect Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter C-ty ) and legally described as follows; Refer to Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit construction of a residence structure on a property that contains 16,101.6 s.f. or .37 acres where 87,120 s.f. or 2 acres is required and a lot width of 93' where 200 is required. Proposed construction will require the following setbacic variances: a. b. East side. Required = 30' Proposed = 20' West Side. Required = 30' Proposed = 17' c.Rear. Required = 50* Proposed =18' 6" NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota;FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File (M760. 2 The property is located in the RR~1B, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres of dry buildable land. 7 Page 1 of 5 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 17, 1992, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A. The property is approximately one-third acre in area and subject to 2 acre development standards. « B. The lot is typical in size of the developed surrounding Crystal Bay neighborhood properties. C. A residence has existed on the property since the early 1940's. D. The property is served with sewer and has been assessed a single sewer unit. 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to t and do not apply generally to other property n this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of tne above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a new residence structure that will require a^i area variance of 71,018.4 s.f., 1.63 acres or 81%, a width variance of 170' or 53.5%, an east side setback variance of 10' or 33.3%, a west side variance of 13' or 43.3% and a rear setback variance of 31' 6" or 64%. Approval is subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 4 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __ 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Applicant and future owners are placed on notice that the property is considered a through lot. If accessory structures are planned in the future, it will require conditional use permit approvals and the property is subject to lot coverage controls. Upon application for a building permit, applicant must provide the following: A. B. Payment of $2,181.39. Applicant to provide an updated survey confirming location ofresidence structure as finally approved by the Council. C.Curb cut onto Prospect Avenue to be approved by Public Works Director. Applicant to apply for the legal combination of parcel PID# 10-117-23 ‘31 0013 and 10-117-23 31 0014 within ten days of this variance approval (September 24, 1992). Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant^ but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the^ date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 14, 1993). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of September, 1992* ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City CJerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OP MINNESOTA ) )s. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of September 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. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 1 H CQ H 5: Xw o •• •: Irpn roatker • 1 . • ‘ ' '•> *i ’'’ ' . Dealings.'shown afe baitorf n.-i. '■ • . ;• ' ;.. • . ® on assumod datum. ■ ■ • • I • (■> • ^ ^* *• ' * 'i i '. . •*’ •i '• • , «. •; \. •• • • • • .t .o CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance^ Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) fe; r\-f r-TTv nr nc-min UX I $ Ul Ut\UllU L VA/^;;rr nccTrct U*l I XLrU f V-ViCvVVVV''c^VA.wvv/v PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address "PAO-CAii- /W rry m *JX ItL^l X,4^%Jm\/V CHtCK R 225.00 0ZTCrrjT^ruMii(- ynnMi.i.k.1/ I i t innn f uu U24S110 cool ROi T09:. 07/24/ Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _(month/year) I T^)(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: _ _residential _ _ _other(specify) Zoning District:_ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT Phone (home) _ _ Phone (wor)c) jX Name l C_ _ _ _ _ _ Address: i-0, City: Zip: OWNER (if diffeflC|CT X Name ,^han;vapR-:j^iSP0D:.) chfiald, f.iiRnpta Phone (home) e Address: XxP. • Persona Tru^ Phone (work) City:Zip : DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $. Describe request in detail: VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback: / Lot Width Lot Coverage Front Side Hardcover _ _ Rear Average Lakeshore I Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNDSD/VL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirem^ents:------------ lA is Mi// ^ -------- •I “c: <w.w*« W/nnuuT09:iV24/':(attach additional sheets if necessary)required submittals ^ -I • 4.* „^ . . - . , - -jjg giihmi tted by the applxcationAll of the following information mustdeadline date in order for your lication to be considered complete1. Completed Application Form ^ .2 Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150 (you must obtain* this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center348-3271).3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). . , ^4. -----Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include‘----hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8%"xll'’ for reproduction). . , u 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%'’xll ). 6. Slcetches or plans of floor s elevation views (provide 1 copy 8^5 xll ). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour variance application is not complete—if—the—abo^ information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by originAl^f’ee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of thia/i^ij^^ion, and certifies that the information supplied is true and coriject/best of his/her Icnowledge. Applicant’s Signature Date 7- Z4 -7 OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby aclcowledges and agrees to this application and further auth'>rizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staf , consu a agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga­ tion and verification of this request. Date rty Owner's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ __— re/iew meetings of the Planning Connaission and Council. If an applicant unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the ui g Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 07/21/92 BATCH 002 HEf^lEPIN COWTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM • PROPERTY ONNERS LISTPROP ADDR OI«IER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADDR (MCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OFMEft NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 10-117-25 51 001502190 PROSPECT AYE RICHFLO BNK-TRUST CO TRUSTEE RICHFLO BNK-TRUST CO TRUSTEE 6625 LYNDALE AVE S RICHFIELD MN 55923-2389 38 10-117-23 51 0016 02150 PROSPECT AVE MIT WIITE mark a I TINA M MUTE 2150 PROSPECT AVE CRYSTAL DAY HN 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0028 01290 ARBOR ST STEVEN R BENSON ET AL STEVEN R BENSON AND JILL T DANIELS-BENSON 1290 ARBOR ST NAY2ATA FM 55591 38 10-117-23 51 0055 01295 ARBOR ST A L HOPPE ET AL H/L EST ARLENE L HOPPE 1295 ARBOR ST CRYSTAL BAY HN 55325 38 10-117-23 31 0052 01555 ARBOR ST C C PETERSON I J H PETERSON GREGORY I JULIANNE PETERSON 1355 ARBOR ST HAY2ATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI955901 PAGE 538 10-117-23 51 001902195 CRYSTAL AVE RICHFLO BNK-TRUST CO TRUSTEE RICHFLO BNK-TRUST CO TRUSTEE 6625 LYNDALE AVE S RICHFIELD MF 55925-2589 38 10-117-25 31 001500038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO A L HOPPE ET AL H/L EST ARLENE HOPPE 1295 ARBOR ST CRYSTAL BAY MN 55523 38 10-117-23 31 0017 02160 PROSPECT AVE PATRICIA D DRW»10ffl) PATRICIA 0 ORUFtlONO . 2160 PROSPECT AVE CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0018 02170 PROSPECT AVE BOOBY D JOHNSON I HIFE BOOBY 0 JOHNSON BOX 123 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55525 38 10-117-23 31 0029 01270 ARBOR ST MARK E LAMONTAGNE mark E LAMONTAGNE 1270 ARBOR ST NAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 51 0059 01285 ARBOR ST JIB NOOO JAY I BARBARA HOOD BOX 93 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55525 1 1 3B 10-117-23 31 0036 02160 CRYSTAL AVE M I J BLUE MARCUS J I JUDY A BLUE BOX 62 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-25 31 0051 01335 ARBOR ST BARBARA J GARCIA BARBARA J GARCIA BOX 119 1155 ARBOR ST CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 f y- 't V * 'cv TOTAL BATCH 002 00013 t. n -----L«o. ; 5 MO MO ; ‘ « '* / MO *• MO ^ « 'V __ MO ■^ * fl 'f75» ?3®.■ i« '^1 T> T74) "^(7ITT« lAij*kpJZii'V, 140 liJ^CK^TAL' v« O vf II * ^ a -IMI /n;) *’(•)«)«2;\ 33) « (37) ^•WWIF*-® ■ 9 « '«»o.'CW) Jj? CRYSTAL I6)g TTTT ■^jM);i (57)?» ST IM * Ecr ( 19) ' f€0-f^)-H O 50 * (sS^ 175 * 3.' 1 i (54)a v' *(53)*: (55)8 1 75 *7 5 3 « 8 ’ 8(56)- •7 5 «7 5 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA I I I I • s&)‘>io'3o"e.^92.50 Ves^ Hfte. o^A/£4/ 5tV } See. fO’ll 7- 25. by fruc » 1 seeft'on st/ddiWiilon We9^/mof^£y4.Sb/h .-5ec.fO-ff7'Z3, iy fvofrt^'ffcnfaf/on and occt^pcih'on y <fr-fV • * *V-- I • I : I I \ vr> I N » 5; k: ro <^ Crystal A venue «o O'" 72.50 Lines parallelwifh Southhline 0fN£'/4.,5Wy4: Secio-in-t^ Line * porolkl *fiih dtsf lint iy occupation J - ' Wi^ aS 5 § / 2.00 5/300 ?! Prospeci Avenue LEGAL DESCRIPTION OP PREMISES SURVEYED; The North 66 feet of the East 72.5 feet of the Wes' property, to-wlt; That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwes' Range 23, described as followst Beginning at a poi 0\ 1 l%_r± «_r_of__thA_flln__CUjL8LrJt_r»jr__Ol€_______________J j O___ 3vA 1311(1 I ■ JM T—;mmci :ayi. Xf • ^-f _l^la:i3. 'fr« J-r^XT-ilCS ^»f cutvflTiori 1 ,1 t ^ I U\pu 0M z,\Ao \\-:L........ • I i!il IfFu > • • ■? . f' ’ r i 1 »? e‘^-r- 111, 1 n “—; NORTH EUnVflTlOW '■i' m ,. V 1 . ?■ ill11 ^1 iniiji m 1 M I ~9 tv » tjrsMurn »*ar% xtrnea fpgsg-"(1 1* r=i L=J L -iM WrST* TlUtVA Tiora m i. tm iiii —>’v I .V LEII3 flMIIE £31 rEH'^C EZZ! XU fl.,BuawLi!rjjixc :3JL Tc; From: Date: Subject: lairr.an Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council ^ Ron Moorse, City Administrator vSV> % } Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning AdministJ^^>pr^^ - *<V September 2, 1992 Op ^ \ #1732 Joan Sweetser, 845 Old Long Lake Road - *^A/~ Amendment of Easement Filed with Original Plat Document*'^ List of Exhibits A - Plat of Hilltop Farm B •• P? *k Commission Minutes 7/6/92 C - Consent Form D - Drainage and Utility Easement At the June 22nd meeting of the Council, the Sweetser subdivision received final approval. Applicant at that time questioned Council as to possible adjustment in the park dedication fee to reflect a monetary value for the trail easement being granted over the 10' drainage and utility easement adjacent to roadway. Council concurred and directed staff to refer the matter to the Park Commission for further study and final recommendation to the Council. At the July 6th meeting of the Park Commission, refer to Exhibit B, the Park Commission voted to take the full park dedication fee and to not request a trail easement over the drainage and utility easement as originally required. Members may remember that Mrs. Sweetser was very anxious to complete the filing and all documentation approving the final plat were filed and the property sold to an adjacent property owner, Bruce Dayton. The enclosed documentation will allow the trail easement to be extinguished over the drainage and utility easement. All parties with an interest are in the process of executing the newly amended easement. The City Attorney's office has prepared the necessary consent form (Exhibit C) to accompany the amended easement at the time of filing. Staff Recomendation Tc approve the filing of an amended drainage and utility easement for Hilltop Farm and to direct the Mayor and Clerk to execute the consent form. ch HI 0 FARM O ^ J1a#* V • L. tvL: / |.rurLrLrLrt. Scak £JO I • XWa«^ w« 0''« %%%vm9j </#/w«vT anduiihff h fmmt% i^imt 4r A____i'll.----- 1 At$m Qaim0Wtt tdtrwr id H^nlf )U)0/*£^ m m>4*H 00^ kf mmIj klurmtnm tnOietfad mv em ^f«/. MINUTES OF THE PARK COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 6, 1992 (#6) SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS: ' A. 1550 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH It was moved by Vongries, seconded by Wilson, to request a park dedication fee for the subdivision appiication at 1550 Sixth Avenue North. Ayes 4, nays 0. B. 3060 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH Gerhardson stated that the property owner did not mind having the bike trail cross his property. The applicant is required to give up an additional 7 feet of right-of-way per a condition of subdivision approval. He Is also required to set aside a 10 foot utility easement. Chair Flint said he recommended that the Park Commission request the trail easement immediately north of the utility easement. The fair market value of the easement would reduce the park dedication fee. He noted the City Council decided that the trail easement would need to be paid for regardless of another underlying utility easement. He said the Park Commission should adopt some guidelines as to when it will take land in lieu of Park Dedication fees. It was moved by Wilson, seconded by Ilse, to recommend the City request a 10 foot easement for a bike trail north of the County Road 6 utility easement, the amount for which to be dedicated from the park dedication fee for the subdivision application at 3060 Sixth Avenue North. Ayes 3, nays 1, abstention 1. Vongries voted nay; McMillan abstained. C. 845 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD Chair Flint explained that the Park Commission at their last meeting had agreed to request that the utility easement be expanded to include a trai' easement and that a park dedication fee also be requested. The property owner appeared at the Council meeting and stated that was an unfair practice. Chair Flint said he and Gerhardson reviewed the property. There is a 66 wide right-of- way, and the paved road is 21 wide. He noted there is over 20 of additional right-of-way on each side and felt they may not need to request the easement. It was moved by Vongries, seconded by Wilson, to request park dedication fees for the subdivision at 845 Old Long Lake Road. Ayes 4, nays 0. CONSENT The undersigned Mayor and City Clerk for the City of Orono/ Minnesota hereby consent to the filing of the attached Easement for Drainage and Utilities, dated _ _ _ _, 1992 from Joan Sweetser, Bruce Dayton and Ruth A. Dayton for the purpose of retaining the drainage and utility easement, but terminating the trail easement, as originally created by an Easement document dated June 22, 1992 and filed with the Hennepin County Recorder on July 16, 1992 as Document No. 59^2053. CITY OF ORONO Its Mayor Its City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) On this appeared day of 1992, before me and me known to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation, and who signed the above instrument on behalf of the municipal coroporation.4 NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission Expires on: ----------------- tAAAA/UVM DRMNACE AND ITriLlTlES EACEMENT this indenture, made this day of by and between Joan Swaotser, a single person, and Bruce Dayton and Ruth A. Dayton, husband end wife/ hereinafter referred to as "Grantors", and the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Grantee." WITNESS, that Grantors, in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration given by Grantee, the receipt of which is acknowledged by Grantors, do hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey to Grantee, its successors and assigns, a perpetual easement for public ingress, egress, and access, for drainage and utility purposes and uses, over, under and across the land in the State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin legally described as: The northeasterly 10 feet of Lot 1, and 'he most northerly 10 feet of Lot 2, all in Block 1, HILLTOP FARM. including, but not by way of limitation, a full and free right and authority to enter upon said land to construct, install,^ maintain, operate and repair a sanitary sewer interceptor, lift Station, main or line, a water main or line. Including drainage control structures, incidental and related thereto, (all of which are hereinafter referred to collectively as the Improvements). The Grantee shall have the right to make use of said land as Is reasonablS^' necessary and advisable to the construction. Installation, maintenance, operation and repair of the Improvements. This document shall supersede the terms of the Drainage, Utilities and Trail Easement from Joan Sweetser to the City of Orono, dated June 22, 19 , and filed on July 16, 1992 with the Hennepin County Recorder ts Document No. 5942053. The purpose of filing this document is to terminate tha grant of a trail easement over the property legally described herein. All other terms as stated in this document remain as granted by the parties hereto and witnessed by their execution hereon. Attached to and made a part of this document is a Consent from the City of Orono, consenting to the termination of the trail easement as originally granted. /: i '''***'“-------riMWMimn iiilUhi In addition to any oth«r remady the Grantee may have/ the covenants and restrictions contained herein may be enforced by Injunction« The Grantors certify that the land herein described Is free and clear of oil encumbrances except: IN WITNESS WHEREOF/ the Grantors have executed this easement on the day and year written above. Joan Swcetser Bruce Dayton Rutl) A. Dayton STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: This instrument is drafted by: City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minn. 55323 Iwill rt CiiM11■! STATE OF . COUNTY OF ) On this day of 19_, before me personally appeared Bruce Davton and Ruth A. Davton. husband and wife, to me known to be the persons described in and who signed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledge that they executed the same as their free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission Expires on _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1444/NCH J Bonestroo Rosene AnderlikA Associates Engineers & Architects Ct- G ?C''*‘Tf'C?C PE Sccf't X r Pc * Jcifpri C ArxJer ’ PE L Scn.aia PE P'C*^4V c3 E Tu^rr' PE G’frn R CcXJ*i P£ Thomas E No>rs PE Rctea G Schuricnt. PE Suwn M ECrr\'* C PA •Scror Consutart ^cv.r;3 A PE •e:*' A PE Pc!>?»T R PE R c^ar^ VV Fcsrr PE Dj.kJ O Los^cta PE Roce'T C Russek A i A Jerry A SotifdOh PE Va'« A Hanson, PE V chaei T Rauf-T’-arn PE TeJ < Pr'J P£ The mas R AnOerson A I A DengkJ C BurgaoST, PE Thcmas E An^uS PE Ga'v P Ry'ar»de^ PE i'*'de ’ ‘.'a!!' f2. PE M<hae< P Rau PE AgrviS M R rvj A ? C p 7nomas W PrtffSon PE M chad C Lynch PE James R Maiand PE Jerry o fVrt/sch PE •Crr'neth P A.PcJerson PE Var» R Refs. PE Mar« A Se'O PE Gahy W Monen P£ Daref J EJeje^on PE Ph.i-0 J CasvNe-T PE Va * D '.*.3 ; PE Mks 0 Jensen PE L Phii[*o G'a.'*i at PE Karn L VV e'^e^i PE P Toco Fcs:er P£ ice<n R Yaop PE Shas^n D Gustafson f Cecrio O rvef PE Char'es A Erckson Leo M P^A^sky Mahan M Oson James F Enge'hanJt // August 31, 1992 City of Orono P.O.Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Re: Mr. John Gerhardson Orono Lift Station No. 9 Our File No. 13964 Dear Mr. Gerhardson: %/ Attached is Pay Request No. 1 for Lift Station Number 9 Renovation. Tliis Pay Request covers work completed through August 31, 1992. We recommend the City pay the contractor the amount due. If you have any questions about this Pay Request, please call me at 636-4600, Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOC..INC. Daryl L. Kirschenman DLK:rsb End: 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul. Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 \4 ^ • 1/1 Bones troo gLg Aosene Owner C'ity of Oiono, lb).x 66, rrysl;.l Ray, MN Date .August 31, 1992 m « Anderlik A |\j| AssocJjtei For Period Slarl to August 31, PJ92 Request No. I • A#CMMTU (^)ntraelor New Meeh ('ompanies, Ib33 Fuslis St, St. Paul, ,MN .S.*? 108-1288 lUiOUIiST I-OR PAYMI-NT Lilt Station No. 9 Renovation L'ilc No. I.VJ{>4 SUMMARY 1 Original Contract Amount 2 Change Order - Addition 3 Change Order - Deduction 4 Revised Contract Amount 5 Value Completed to Date 6 Material on Hand 7 Amount llarncd 8 Less Rctainage 9 Sub-Total 10 Less Amount Paid Previously 11 AMOUNT DUI- n IIS RI-OUPST l OR PAYMIINT NO, $ $ $ 8,200.00 Recommended fi»r Approval by: HONI-S'nUX), ROSIiNP; ANDI-IU-IK A ASSOCIAITIS. INC. WVvi r Approved by Contractor: NIiW MIZCII COMPANIIZS Approved by Owner: CTIY OF ORONO, MN Specified Ctintract Completion Date: Si Kii Mni i< 30, IW2 D.ile: I »W.4 HI I* 46,800.00 $S.^OOO.OO $11,.‘5.S0.00 $0.00 $11,.*550.00 $577..-50 5 10,972.50 %0.00 $I0,072..*!0 '-i Item Unit (4intnict Qtianlily Uall l*rkc Ouaiitity To Date AroounI To DjU: I Lift Station Renovation inci removal of existing equip., piping, controls, &, accessories; iustallaliou of cone, toj) slab w/access hatch; site iiuprvs., elec, work painting; & inisc. - LUMP SUM Total Rase Hid LS 46.S00.00 15%iliTLOa S7.150.00 Chaime Order No. I Install byp;tss pump system LS 1 8.200.00 53.66%4,400 00 * Fotal Change Order No. 1 S4.400.00 Total ILlsc Hid 7,150.00 Total Change Order No. 1 -4.4QQJK] Total Work Coni))leted to Date SI 1,550.00 13*;64 HI P RPl A IICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT To (OWNER): CityofOrono PROJECT: Lift Station 09 Renovation APPLICATION NO; 1FROM (CONTRACTOR): NewMech Companies, Inc 1633 Eustis Street SI. Paul. MN 55106 CONTRACT FOR: Mechanical Work PERIOD TO; 8-31-92VIA (ARCHITECT):Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik 4 Assc 2335 w Hwy 36 SI. Paul, Mn 55113 ARCHITECTS PROJECT NO:Ct ITRACTDATE;CONTRACTOR S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT Change Order Summary Change Orders approved in previous months by Owner total Approved this Month CO # I Dale Approved 1 ADDITIONS I DEDUCTIONS! Application is made for Payment, as shown below, ir with the Contract. Continuation sheet. AIA Documeitl attached •.nnecllon ’02Ais I I I I $8.200 00 I 1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM....................... I 2. Net change by Change Orders..................... -3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE(Line 1+2)....... I 4. TOTAL COMPLETED 4 STORED TO DATE. I (Column G on G702a) I 5. RETAINAGE. $46,8^0.00 $8,200.00 $55,000.00 $11.550.00 I I I I TOTALS Net change by Change Orders $8,200 00 I $8.200 00 The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief the Work covered uy this Application for Payment has been compleled In accordance with the Contract Documents, that all arrxxjnts have been paid by the Contractor for Work for which previwjs Certificates for Payment were Issued and payments received from 8ie Owner, tnd that current payment shown herein is now due. contractor . NewM^h Companies, Inc Bv: ^ •------ I 5% of Completed Work I (Column D+E on G702a) I of Stored Materials I (Column F on G702a) I Total Retainage(Line 5a+5b or -• Total in Cloumn I on G702a)...................... I 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE........’ - (Line 4 less Line 5 Total) I 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR - PAYMENT(Line 6 from prior certificate)..... 8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE...................... P BALANCE TO FINISH.PLUS RETAINAGE. (Line 3 less Line 6) $577.50 $577.50 $10,972,50 $10,972.50 $44,027.50 State of: Minnesota County of: Ramsey Subscribed and sworn to before me this ^ 7'*’^ day of Notary Public: ^ My Commission expires: Wayne Hen4umeirTrea< Date 8-27-92 XAA A. ■ DIANE L. ROLLEFSON NOTARY PU8L1C-MINNE$0TA ramscy county Mr Comm. Caplrtt Mor. 31, 1994 ■ VVVVVVVVVV'^Vvy v'W. . vwvV*/VY'eW'/WV ■ ARCHITECrS CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accordarwe with the Contract Documents, based on on-site observations and the data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies to the Owner that to the best of the Architect's knowledge, information and belief the Work has progressed as Indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. AMOUNT CERTIFIED........................ (Attach explanation if amount certified differs from the amount applied for) ARCHITECT By:Date; This Certificate is not negotiable The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only to the Contractor named herein Issuance payment and acceptance of payment are without prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. 1 it Tot^ ITEM 11 DESCRIPTION OF WORK 1 SCHEDULEDNo.1 1 VALUEA1 B11 1 c111 Demolition 1 $1.650 00211 Sitework 1 $750 00 3 1 1 Concrete & Hatch 1 $7.900 00 4 1 1 Alum Ladder 1 $1.500 00 5 1 1 Pumps & Control Panel 1 1 $26,000 00 6 1 1 Piping & Valves 1 $7.500 00 7 1 Eletilcal 1 I _______ 1 $1.500 00 1 Sub-total 1 _______ 1 $46.800 00 1 1 CO#1 Temp Pumping 1 $8.200 00 I WORK COMPLETEDPreviousApplicationsDI $55,000.00 ThisApplicationE$1.650 00 $5.300 00 $200 00 $7,150.00 $4,400.00 $11,550.00 STOREDMATERIALSF TOTAL COMPLETED AND S i ORE D TO DATEG(D+E+F) _____$1.650 00 $5,300.00 $200.00 $11,550.00 %100 00 67.09 13.33 $7,150.00 15 28 $4,40000 53.66 21.00 BALANCE TO FINISH H(C-G) $750 00 $2,600.00 $1,500.00 $26,000.00 $7,500 00 $1,300.00 $39,650 00 $3,800.00 $43,450.00 . ^m Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects September 8, 1992 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Mr. John Gerhardson Otto G Bonestnx; PE w PE * Joseph C ' ticrtik. PE Marvin L . va<a PE R<hanp E Turrer PE G'fnn R Cook PE Tfiomas E No>rv PE Rcoerr G Schun<m. PE Sown M E&erJm C PA “Senor Cornu'tant Movsa^ A Virfc'J PE A GcMon Pc Ret: eft R Pfefferte. P£ R*cnancJ W Fofler PE Dav>J O Loskofa PE RoOfT C Ruisek A f A Jerry A BourOon. PE Mark A Hanion. PE M<haei T Raurrrarn. PE Ted K PfiJ PE Thomas R Ancerson AIA Oonaid C Borgarot PE Tho'has E Angus. PE Gaf> P R^’arvJef PE iv’^ae Mart fie/ PE M<haei P Rao. PE Agnes M Ring. A JC P Tr‘om.is W Pffef^son PE M<nae' C Lynch PE Ja-Tiei R Maiand PE Jerry O fyrtzscn. PE kerreth P ArvJefSon PE Mark R Ro.fs. P^ Mark A Sep Gary W Monen . Dar«e< j EcJgerron p^ *"^'0 j Cas.-.e;i PE Maf^ D Wa..s PE a Jensen. PE L Pn*p^ G'a-.ei ill PE M'en L W<emef!. PE E ToXJ Poster P£ ketn R vapp PE Sha%vn D Gustafson. PE Cec '•o O h ier PE C.haries A Enckson ^ Leo M Pawveisky Hanan m O'son Jam^s P EngeinaftJt /n 5^ S % Re: Stubbs Bay Sanitary Sewei Project File No. 13937 Dear John: Enclosed please find three (3) copies of Request for Payment No. 2 for the above referenced project. Tliis portion of the work has been satisfactorily completed and we recommend payment at this time. If you have any questions, please contact me. Yours very truly, BONE^ROO. JROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.BON^TOOO. ftOSBM Harlan M. Olson HMO:pah Enclosure 13937.COR 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 i *i Bents If oo AndtrUk ft Ivil •* • A0€*mrt\$ U fftMi Owner (’Hy of Qrono, im Hrowii KuaJ, Crystal Hay. MN 55132 I’^f Auj;ust 7, Vm In ScpIciiilHr S. mi Dale ScpJcmt'.T 8, I‘J92 C^ml.»:l.„ l»r„e,c«ivc Cu,il,«l.i,s. Inc.. S7.1ft /..ohw l.,nc. Os., ,, MM RI’QUIuST I.-QK rAYMI'NT Stubbs Hay Sanitary’ Sewer Intproveinciits I’ile No. 1.39.37 SUMMARY 1 Original 0)ntraet Amount 2 Change Order - Addition 3 Change Order - Deduction 4 Reviseil Contract Amount 5 V'alue Completed to Date 6 Material on Hand 7 Amount liarned 8 I.ess Retainage 5% 9 Sub-Total lU Less Amount Paid Previously 11 AMOUNT DU1-: I IKS Rl iOUli.S^P FOR PAYMFN K NO. $ s 9,.3‘X).nO Ueeommem»”d for Approval by: DONiiSTKO(>j/1<OSI’:Nli, ANDl’RLIK & ASSOTIATliS, INC. Approved by Contractor: PROORIuSSlVIi CON I RAf'rORS. INC./\p; roved by Owner: CTIY Ob' ORONO, MN Specified Contract (\>mnletion Dale: OcTOIII U |5. 1992; JUl.Y .3|, 199.3 Dale:. 1.480..33I.95 5 1,489,721.95 $444,245.11 S 0.(K) S 444,245.11 $22,212.26 $422,0.32.85 S 116,155.77 $305,777.08 3 13937 lU-T Item Unit C >nUa<4 Ou.tiiiiiy Unit Trice Ouaniiiy 'To Dale Amount To Dale HASH HID • SluMis H.iv Noriliwcst, Sl~iM>s May Norllic.i-st. :intl HavMilc I'.ist T.irt A • S.iiiil.irv Sewor 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 •vj 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 8" I’VC. SDK 35. 0 ‘-8’ deep iu place 8" PVC, SDK 35. 8’-l0 ’ deep in place 8" PVC. .SDK 35. I O’-1 2' deep in place 8" PVC. SDK 35. 12 ’-14 ’ deep in place «" PVC. SDK 35. 14 ’-16’ deep in place 8- PVC. SDK 26. 8’. I O’ deep in place 8" PV(\ SDK 2(). I0 ’-I2’ deep in place 8" PVC. SDK 26. 12 ’-14 ’ deep in place 8" PVC. SDR 26. I4’-16’ deep in place 8” PVC. SDK 26. 16’-18’ deep in place 8* PVC. SDK 26. l8’-20’ deep in pl.ice 8" PVC. SDK 26. 20’-22’ deep in place 8“ DIP. 8’-10 ’ deep in place 8* DIP. I O’. 12 ’ deep in pl.icc 8* DIP. 12 ’-14 ’ deep iu place 10" PVC. SDK 35. 0 ’-8’ deep in pl.ice 10" PVC. SDK 35. 8’. 10 ’ deep in place 10* PVC. SDK 35. 10 ’-I2’ deep in place 10* PVC. SDK 35. 12 ’-14 ’ deep in place 10" PVC. SDK 35. 14 ’-16’ deep iu place 10" PVC. SDK 26. 12 ’-I4’ deep in place 10" PVC. SDK 26. 14 ’-I6’ deep in pl.ice 10" PVC. VDK 26. 16’-I8’ deep iu place 10* PV(", SDK 26. 18’-20’ deep iii place 10" DIP. 14 ’-16’ deep in place St Mil 8’ dp.. 4’ dia., W/K1642M csl)?. Mil dcpili grealer lli.iii 8' deep 8* DIP. oulside droj) 6" PVC', SDK 21. lorte uiaiu JaeL or auger 6" PVC'. SDK 21 lorce ui.iui 4" PVC'. SDK 21. I.uce iii.iin Air lelc.ise uianliole Kuck st.ilnli/atioii Dvt7 HI T LI-615 14.00 400 5.600.00 LI-'1.775 14.00 1.174 16.436.00 IF 1.175 15.00 945 14,17.5.00 I.F 225 16.00 186 2.976.00 - F 230 17.50 230 4.015.00 LF 55 L5.00 40 600.00 LI-125 16.00 100 1.600.00 LI-355 17.00 .332 5.()44.00 LF 300 18.50 2S6 5.291.00 LI-310 20.00 291 5.820.00 LI-315 23.00 288 6.624.00 LI-115 27.00 •0 2.4.30.00 LI-120 2100 60 1.320.00 LI-30 23.00 40 920.00 LI-35 24.00 LI-415 i5..50 483 7.486.50 LF 130 15.50 120 1.860.00 LI-105 16.50 98 1.617.00 LF 340 18.00 307 5..526.IX) LI-'1.15 19..50 131 2.5.54..50 LF 245 19.00 222 4.218.00 IJ-440 20.50 391 8.0I5..50 LF 405 23.00 376 8.648.00 LI-4L 27.00 LI-30 31.50 i-:a 36 1.350.00 28 37.800.00 LF 140 90.IX)lll.l 9.‘“W.00 LI-25 250.00 19.2 4.800.00 LI-900 11.00 LI ()0 110.00 1.1 2.800 10.00 2..*'00 25.000.00 l-A 1 2.000.00 IN 5(K)11.10 191.26 2.I22.9«J Kl'-I 4 1 Kv 34 Conned 6” PVC into existing iiniiiliote 35 8^4" VVe service wye branch 36 4 ” PVC service pipe m place 37 4" PVC service riser pipe in place 38 Iin|)roveJ pipe fdn. in 6” increment depth 39 Mechanical trench u)tiipaction 40 Detour iK*r detail 41 ItLsulatioii 42 Sanitary sewer television inspection 43 Access manhulc (Addendum 2) Total Part A - Sauit iry Sewer Part H » Restoration 44 Uituniiuous surfacing removal 45 Common excavation 46 CL 5 aggregate base (lOO'JJ* crushed) 47 CL 2, aggregate shouldering 48 Type 31 bituminous bitse course 49 1 y|>e 41 bituninious binder course 50 lype 41 bituminous wearing course 51 AC-1 bituminous material for mix 52 nitiiminous material for lack coat 53 Ilitumuious material jt seal coal 54 FA-3 seal coat aggregate (CL A; in pi. 55 Bituminous material for patching 56 I2”RCP. CLLss3inplacc 57 I8MU:P, CLLss3iiiplace 58 24" kCP, Class 3 in place 59 36" RCP, Class 3 in place 60 12" RCP dared cud in pLice 61 JtS" R('P Hared end ill place 62 24" R('P dared end w/trash guard tii pi. 63 36" R(‘P dared end w/trash guard in pi. 64 Mechanical trench compaction 65 Imp?. pi|>e fdn. in 6" increment detith 66 Remove extsting CMP culvert 13917 k IT RP 2 Unit (Contract Ouanlily Unit 1*1 iix Ouanlily To Dale Amount lu Dale • i:a 1 400.00 1£A 85 60.00 60 3..5CO.OO LF 2.100 11.50 1.480 17,020.00 IJ-too II..50 78 897.00 IJ-24.(X30 1.40 9.600 13.440.00 I.F I4.H75 1.00 82590 8;590.00 I 6.000.00 1 6,000.00 SY 300 20.00 U-8.075 0.60 FA 1 usuo.oo 1 _____1.500.00_ $244,155.49 SY 11.000 1.75 10.000 17.500.00 (Y 6,000 3.70 4.950 18.31.5.00 IN 7.800 8.50 8.001 68.008.50 TN 400 12.50 IN 1.400 14.50 552.46 8.010.67 IN 450 15.00 313.49 4,702.35 TN 1.000 16.00 23 368.00 'IN 167 120.00 40.23 4.827.60 OF 1.200 1.30 100 130,00 HL 1.400 3.00 TN 70 50.0C SY I.OOU 22.00 U-150 17.50 IJ*75 20.50 I.F 50 25.90 u-40 48.45 i:a 10 365.00 FA 4 410.00 i:a •)1.005.(XJ l-A •*1,660.00 IF 3i;.1.00 l.l ■VJO 2.00 II-315 3.00 260 780.00 J Item 67 Filler blankel in place 68 Riprap. CL 111 in place 69 'Free removal 70 Sod with 4** topsoil 71 Seed w/to|)soil. mulch it fertilizer 72 Hrosion control fence 73 Wood fiber blanket 74 Furnish and plant livergrccn tree (Blue Spruce) 6 ’ high 75 I'urnish and plant shade tree (Sugar Maple) 4* diauietcr 76 Remove it rcpi. wemd or chain link fence 77 Remove it transplant bushes 78 Remove <t transpLint tree • Oesiduous 79 Remove & transplant tree - Coniferous 80 Geotextile fabric (Addendum 2) I'olal Fart I) • Restoration Fart C • I ill Station ^1 - West I ake St. 81 IJft Station No. I Fotal Fart C - Lift Sla. #1 - W Uke St. Part D * Lift Station #2 * Tonka Avenue 82 Lift Station No. 2 Total Fart D - Lift Sla. # 2 - Fonka Av 1‘olal Part A - Sanitary Sewer Total Fart H - Restoration T otal Fart C - ! S. # I - West Uke St. Total Fart D • LS. #2 • T onka Avenue TOT AL 1LVSI-: niD AI.H‘FNAII- NO. I - hi ni RWOOl) Fart A • Sanitary* Sewer 83 H- FV( \ SDR 35. (K-H* Jeep in place 84 H” FVr. SDR 35. 8*. 10* deep in place IJ937 HI l» Uuit (x>iilracl Ou;inlily Unit l*rkx SY 200 2.50 SY 200 45.00 i:a 175 115.00 SY 14.000 2.00 AC 4 800.00 u-4250(J 2.00 SY 1.500 UO i:a 6 350.00 l-A 6 350.00 u-600 lO.CO l-A 12 50.00 IIA 12 100.00 l-A 12 100.00 SY 15.000 1.50 l-S 1 60.400.00 Fi>1 .50.350.00 IJ* LF RF3 615 405 13.00 13.00 Ouantity To Dale 6.500 515 320 Amount Tu Date 8,000.30 .1/J5CL0Q. 5140.39112 $0.00 SO.OO 244.155.49 I40J9112 0.00 ______Q.0Q_ $384,547.61 6.695.'J0 4.160.00 M Item 85 8* PVC. SDR 35. lO’-IZ' deep in place 86 8' FVC. SDR 35. ir-l4’ deep in place 87 8“ FVC. SDR 35. 14--16’ deep in place 88 S* FVC. SDR 26. 0’*8 ’ deep in phice 89 8" FVC. SDR 26, 8'-10’ deep in place 90 8" FVC. SDR 26. I0’-I2’ deep in place. 91 8" FVC. SDR 26. I2’-14’ Jeep in place 92 8" FVC. SDR 26. 14’-16‘ deep iu place 93 8" FVC. SDR 26. 16’. I S’ deep in place 94 8“ FVC. SDR 26. l8’-20’ deep in place 95 8” I'VC. SDR 26. 20’-22* deep iu pl.ice 96 8" DIF, 8’-10’ deep in place 97 8' DIF. 10’-12’ deep in place 98 Sid. MM 8’ dp., 4’ dia.. w/RI642H csig. 99 M.^nhole depth gicuter than 8’ deep 100 4“ FVC, SDR 21. force niaiu 101 8" X 4" FVC service wye branch 102 4" FVC service pi|>e in place 10.1 4" FVC service riser pipe in place 104 Mechanical trench compaction 105 Improved pipe fJn. in 6" increment deptli 106 Rock stabili/.aliun 107 Sanitary sewer television inspection Total Fart A • Sanilarv Sewer Fart H • Restoration Unit LI- U- I.F 1.1- LI- LF I.F I.F I.F I.F I.F 1.F I.F FA IF 1.1- FA IJ- 1.1- LF LI- IN LI-' (ainiract Ouantily 170 25 20 25 50 30 25 165 215 30 50 20 20 10 28 70 13 460 40 2.415 4.000 I (Ml 1.888 Unit I “rice 14.00 L5.50 17.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 15.00 16.50 18.00 2100 2h.00 20.00 20.00 U50.00 90.(K) L5.00 60.00 L5.00 15.00 1.00 1.50 11.00 0.65 108 nituiniiious removal SY 1.100 2.00 109 Couunou cxcavalioii CY 500 5.70 110 5 aggregate base (lOO^.*? eru:»lieJ)IN 700 9.00 111 lype 31 bituminous base course IN 200 19.00 112 type 41 bituminous binder course IN 10 23.00 1 n lypo 41 bituniiaous wc.ir»ag course IN 1.50 20.00 114 AC'-1 bilumiiious material for » •:<IN 19 120.00 115 Hituirunous material for tack C.L 250 1.50 116 Tree removal FA 50 12.5.00 117 nilummous material for patching SY 500 2100 niVilV RF-4 Ouantily To Dale IhO 10 10 6 12 6 1.30 1.015 1.015 950 50 Ainuuni To Dale 2.240.00 155.00 170.00 8.100.00 1.080.00 360.00 1.950.00 1.015.00 1.522.50 S27.447.50 1.900.00 6.2.50.00 i f No. Ilcni Uuil (^inlracl Ouaiilily Unti Price Quanllly Aimiunl *l‘o n.ile To Dale 118 Sod with 4" tops.iil SY 32500 2.00 119 Seed w/(opsoiK mulch iVc fcrlili/cr AC 1.0 800.00 120 Gcolextilc fabric (AJdcuJuui 3)SY LI 00 1.50 4'olal Part U - Rcstoratiou SH. 150.00 Par! C - I .if! Slalion #3 121 Lift Station No. 3 LS 1 40.450.00 Total Part C • Lift Sta. #3 SO.OO 1 ulal Part A - Sanitary Sewer 27.447.50 Total Part B • Kestoraliou 8.1 SO.OO Total Part C - Lift Sta. 3 - Bederwood II00 TOTAL Aim-RNA n- NO. 1 • MI DI ; <\VOOI>S352i97.50 Ai;n:RNAi i- no. 2 - HAV.sii)i- nor i ii Part A - Sanilarv Sewer 122 8- PVC SDK 35. 0’.«' deep in place LI-140 1.3.00 113 8- PVC, SDK 35. 8*. 10’ deep in place LF 21S 1.3.00 124 8- PVC. SDR 35, lO’-tl deep in place LI-.S.S I4.(K) 125 8** PVC, SDR 35. 12*-14* deep in place LI-225 I5..50 126 SuL MU 8* dp.. 4* dia.. wdU642B c%\g.liy\3 1 J50.00 127 Manhole depth greater than 8* deep LF 6 00.00 128 8** 1)11\ outside drop L'-6.5 250.00 129 8" X 4" PV'C service wye hrancli liy\6 60.00 130 4" PVC service pi(>c in place LI-105 1.5.00 131 4“ PV'C service user pipe in place LI-10 L5.00 13 ’mproved pipe fdii. in 6" increment depth LF .500 2.00 133 M 'jhaiiical trench compaction 134 S.initary sewer television LI-810 1.00 inspeclion (Addendttni 2)1.1-67.5 0.65 lotal Part A • Sanitary Sewer $0.00 Pari B - Resloralioii 135 'free removal i;a 50 115.00 136 Sod with 4" topsoil SY 2.000 2 00 LVJ»7 HI I'm* 5 No.Ilcm 137 Seed wiih topsoil, mulch & fertilizer Total Part B • Kcsloratioii 'Fotal Pari A - Sauilary Sewer Total Part B - Ucstoratiou TOTAL AL'PERNA I H NO. 2 - BAYSIDE NORTH ai.ternatp: no. 3 ■ rvciNirr pi ac^i-: Part A * Sanitary Sewer 138 8" PVC. SDR 35. 0*.8 ‘ deep in place 139 8" PVC. SDR 35. 8*-l0 ’ deep iu place 140 8" PVC. SDR 35, 10*-12* deep in place 141 S'* PVC, SDR 35, 12'-14* deep in place 142 8" PVC. SDR 35. I4*.16* deep in place 143 8** PVC, SDR 26, 0*-8* deep in place 144 8" PV'C, SDR 26, 8*-10* deep iu place 145 8- PVC. SDR 26. 10 ’.|2* deep in place 146 8** PVC. SDR 26. 1 2*-14* deep in place 147 8** PVC, SDR 26, 14*-16* deep in place 148 8" PVC. SDR 26. 1 6*-18* deep in place 149 8- PVC. SDR 26. 18 ’-20* deep in plaee 150 8** PVC. SDR 26. 20* 22* deep iu place 151 8" PVC, SDR 26. 22*-24* deep in place 152 8" PVC, SDR 26, 24*-26* deep in place 153 8** PVC. SDR 26. 26*-28* deep in place 154 8** I*V'C. SI vR 26, 28*-30* deep in place 155 Std. Mil 8* dp.. 4* dia., W/R1642U csig. 156 Manliole depth greater tlian 8’ deep 157 8" DIP. outside drop 158 8" X 4" PVC* service wye branch 159 4" PVC* service pi|>e in place 160 4 ” PVC service riser pipe in place 161 Improved pipe fdii. 6" incremeiit depth 162 Mccii.inical trench compaction I6t Sanitary sewer television iiispcdion I'olal Part A • Sanitarv Sewer Unit AC (oolracU Ouanlily 0.5 1 Unit IVicc Ouanlily ‘lb Dale Amount *lb Dale 800.00 $0.00 0.00 ^0.00. so.oo LI-400 12.00 LI'225 12.00 LI-3.LS 13.00 LI-255 I4.(K) LI-.SO L5.50 IJ-2.S 13.00 LI-(*5 13.00 u-75 14.00 LI-'2X0 15.00 LI-735 16.50 IJ-885 18.00 II-440 20.00 U-120 23.00 Ll-135 26.00 LF 145 29.00 LI-175 32.00 LF 170 .38 00 I-A 18 1.3.50.00 U'138 90.00 LF 5.2 250.00 liA 34 60. (K) LF 1.050 12.00 LI-LSO 12.00 LI-7JS00 1.75 LI-5.545 1.00 LI-4.405 0.(.5 \ $0.00 \3')M Kl I'UP 6 r llcm Part H • l^cstoratioii 164 Remove existing bituminous 165 Commuu excavation 166 CLiss 5 aggregate base (100% crushed) 167 Pype 31 bituminous b;ise course 168 Ty|>e 41 bituminous wearing course 169 AC-1 bituminous material for mix 170 Bituminous material for «aek coal 171 Bituminous material for pateliing 172 13’*R(:P,rhiss5iuplace 173 15" KCP, Class 4 in place 174 18" RCP. Class 4 ill place 175 33" RCP. Chiss 3 in place 176 48’ RCP, Class 3 in place 177 12" RCP flared end in place 178 15" RCP Hared end in place 179 18" RCP flared end ill place 180 33" RCP Hared end w/tr;ish guard in pi. 181 48" RCP Hared end w/trasli guard in pL 182 Mechanical trench compaction 183 Inipr. |)ipe fdii. in 6" increment de))th 184 Remove existing CMP culvert 185 Tiller lilaiiket m place 186 Riprap in place 187 'Prec removal 188 Sod with 4" topsoil 189 Seed with tofisoil. mulch &, fertilizer P>() Cieotextiic fabric (AdJcuduni 2) I Dial r*arl B - Restoration I’otal Part A - Sanitary Sewer I'otal Part B - Restoratmn 10IAL ai;ii:rna it; no. 3 - cvcNirr plah: I3937.uri* Uoil RP-7 C'onl/aci Ouanltiy Unit l*rioc OuaDtiiy To Date Aiuuuul l a Date SY 10.800 1.80 CY 4.500 4.40 IN 6.000 8.50 IN 1.500 14.50 IN 1.200 L5..50 TN lf)0 12:j.oo CJI.750 IJO SY .KHJ 22.0(J II-.300 17.50 I.I-30 10.00 U-75 21.00 I.F UK)33.00 U-80 81.00 I-A I2 36.5.00 I-A 300.00 I-A 4 410.00 i:a 1 2.500.00 I-A 2 2.665.00 LF 405 1.00 LF 4(H)2.00 LI’405 3.00 SY 25 2.50 C'Y 50 50.00 li/\15 115.00 SY 7.500 2.00 AC 2.0 800.00 5.500 1.50 9.500 17.100.00 Sl7.l(K).00 0.00 _17.I00.00 $I7.I(M).00 Itcin ALTliKNA i Li NO. 5 - OXFORD ROAD Pnrt A ■ Sanilary Sewer 191 8" PVC. SDR 35. lO’-ir deep iu place 192 8- PVC. SDI 35. 12*. 14* deep m place 193 8" PVC. SCR 35, I4’-I6* deep iu place 194 8- PVC, SDR 35. 16*. 18’ deep iu place 195 SitL MU 8’ dp.. 4* dia.. wmi642n csig. 196 Mil deplh greater than 8’ deep 197 8"x4" PVC serv'icc v^yc braucb 198 4" PV'C serv ice pi|>e in place 199 4" PV'C service riser pipe iu place 200 Improved pipe fdii. iu 6** iucrcineul depth 201 Mechanical trench coinpactinu 202 Sanitary sewer television inspection Total Part A • Sanitary Sewer Part H - Restoration Total Part II • Restoration Unit Contract Quantity Total Part A - Sanitnr)’ Sewer Total Part B • Restoration 'TCTT.M. Ai;n:UNA I T: no. 5 . Q.XI-ORI) ROAD n'M7|UP RP.S f Unit lYice Quantity To Date Amount To Dale IJ^675 13.00 LF 400 14.50 I-F L50 17.00 U'200 20.00 Ii/\5 1350.00 U-2X 90.0(J lly\12 60.00 U-500 12.00 LI-40 12.00 LI-2.000 2.00 LI-1.915 1.00 LI-1.415 0.65 SO.OO 203 Bituuiiuous surfacing reuioval SY 4.100 2.00 204 Conunon cxcavatiou CY I.MH)4.60 205 CL 5 aggregate h.cse (100% crushed)IN 2300 8.50 206 Type 31 hituniinous bicse course TN 400 16.00 207 Type 41 bitumuious wearing course TN 300 18.00 208 AC-1 biiuminouH material for mix IN 42 120.00 209 Bilutntnous material lor tack coat (11.235 1.50 210 Bituminous material for patching SY 1.50 2100 211 'Tree removal i-:/\3 115.00 212 Sod with 4" topsoil SY 4.000 2.90 213 Seed w/to|>soil. mulch & fertilizer AC 0.5 800.00 214 l:rosk)u control fence LI-2(M)2.00 215 (jcolextile fabric (Addeiuluni 2)SY 2300 I..50 3.50^J 7.000.00 •f1 S7.00U.OO 0.00 - JiJOO.OO .. i 7.000.00 • 4 No.Item Uuil (ronlract Ouanlily Unit l^ioc Ouanlily To DaU: Amount *lb Date Cliaimc Order No. 1 216 Modify I.ift Slaiioii No. 3 'lolal Change (3rdcr No. I IS 9J90.00 SO.OO 'lolal Ihisc Hid Tola! Allcrti.ilc No. 1 • Uedenvood rolal Allcruatc No. 2 - Haysidc Norlli I'olal Allcruatc No. 3 - Cygnet Place Total Alternate No. 5 - Oxford Road l olal C'hange Order No. I TOI'AL WORK COMPLirriiD TO DATE 3^i4J>47.6l 35.597..50 0.00 17.100.00 7.000.00 ____0.00- S444.245.ll l.v>37 Ki r RP.9 l»ROJF.(7r PAYMI-NT S^I’A'IIJS Owner City of Orono Project Stubbs Bay Sanitary Sewer Project No. File No. 13937 Contractor Progressive Contractors, Inc. CIIANGF. ORDl ilS No. Date I 7-8-92 Modify Lift Station #3 Amount $9,3‘X).00 Total Cliangc Orders - Add $9,390.00 PAYMnbTT SUMMARY No. 1 Period Start 8-7-92 8-7-92 9-8-92 Pa)incnt $116,255.77 305,777.08 Rctuinagu $6,118.73 22,212.26 Completed $96,918.04 444.245.11 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total Payment to Dale RelaiiKige, Payment No. 'Total Amount Famed $422,032.85 22,212.26 $444,245.11 Original Contract Change (frders Revised Contract 1,480,33! 95 ‘>.3'XJ.OO 1,489,721.95 UP 10 Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Ono G Bonriiroo P£ Kocrr w ifaer^ P£ • C Arvjf^f » P£ Va'vin L Sfn'\jj PE ff^njfa E Tur'^f Pt Gienr R Cook PE Trvxrvjs E Ncvfv PE G PE SoWT W Et*rr C P A *Serjof Cor'twia'i! Engineers & Architects A Srfrfc^j PE •kr : n A ''•cOc p £ R P^rffr*X PE W PE Drfvid O Losucti PE Koo^fl C A i A Je»ry A BOtrOon P£ W'fc A PE T R4j^?*n4nn P£ Tfj *k ?.ekJ P£ TfxyrwS P Afxje^so^ A : A Dcyu ‘J C BirgjfC! PE Tr>c'^Ji E An^: p £ G^ry p PvSjrxXf PE fvnje V^T-nc.’ P£ P Rau P£ A^*^s V R*ng A IC P Tr>orrjs W PPtefson PE C Lv»x*^ PE Jjmri R Maund P£ jfrr, C Pnr>ch Pf fcrnnrth P AncJe^ic' PE P RoPs P£ War* A Sr*r P£ Gaa W Mcyi^ PE Ds ’^-e' j Eao^non pe P^i“<? J CaiA^* PE \ta»» D P£ M^s B Jpn^en P£ L PhAp G?av^l Hi PE Mm L VW t^'i PE f locXJ Eour' P£ Antn 1 Yapp PE D GuHa'so^ I Cfoio O'vi^' PE C^a'f*s A Ef'«so'^ Ifc V PaAnsay Hartan M Oson Ja'TVi P En^etnjrJf September 9, 1992 City of Orono Box 66 Cr>'stal Bay, MN 55.?»23 CITV C= ORONC Ifl Attn; Mr. John Gerhardson crp 1 4 ^ i. . » Re; 400,000 Gallon Eleva;ed Tank Our File No. 13954 Dear John; Enclosed herewith are three signed copies of Request for Payment No. 2 for the above referenced project. Tlte request is in the amour; of $130,492.00 and includes payment primarily for the tank fabrication. We have reviewed this request and find it to be in order. We therefore recommend pa\Tnent to PDM, Inc. in the amount of $130,492.00. Please give me a call if you have any questions. Yours veiy- truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCL\TES, INC. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 6I2-636-A600 J J/li •oneilfoo ftoAcnc \ S AnatrUk L 1 AssoclJtes twprwn A A#0«UC1B U f Owner C'iiy ol Orono, Itrown ltd S, 1*0 66, Crystal, MN 55323 Date August 21, 1002 l*or Period May 5, 1992 to August 21. 1992 Request No. 2 C3on tractor Pill-Dcs Moines, Inc., PO Box 15%, Des Moines, lA 50306 UIiQUIii>r I’OR I’AYMMT'Jr 400,000 Galli.n Iflcvalcd Water Storage Tank l ilc No. SUMMARY t Original Contract Amount 2 Change Order - Addition Change Order - Deduction Revised Contract Amount 5 Value Completed to Date 6 Material on Hand 7 Amount Earned 3 4 $ $ 8 Less Retainagc 5% 9 Sub-Total 10 Less Amount Paid Previously 11 AMOUN'P DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO Reuimmcnded for Approval by: MONliS'lRCK), ROSENli, ANDliRUK & ASSOCIA'IliS, INC. Approved by Contractor: I*m* DES MOINES, INC Approved by Owner: Cri*Y OF OkONO, MN °i fZ Specified Contract C'onipletion Date: NOVI-MUI R 30. 10^2 t Date; I3954.H11* 595,150.00 $595.150.0t $23^,445 ,0( s 0.0. $236.445.0 $11,822.2. $224,622.75 $94,130.7, $130,492.00 /3 TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator i September 11, 1992 a %'V - 'c - ■%- SUBJECT: Fire service Contract With the City of Long Lake The City of Long Lake initially proposed a one year contract for 1993 fire service protection at a cost of $76, 193. This proposal did not include any funding for capital equipment replacement. The City of Orono accepted this proposal with the condition that the City of Long Lake provide $28,500 for the equipment replacement fund. In response the City of Long Lake proposed a 3 year contract with a 50/50 split of the funding for capital equipment replacement. The capital equipment replacement funding issue has raised a nu.aber of concerns including; control of the capital fund, investment of the capital fund and ownership issues concerning the equipment purchased using the fund. These issues are complex and possibly controversial and will require additional discussion. Because we are near the deadline for a fire agreement, it is staff's recommendation that the initial Long Lake proposal for a 1 year agreement at a cost of $76,1 93 be accepted . Council Action Requested: Motion to approve the initial City of Long Lake one year fire service proposal, and to authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to sign a contract reflecting the initial proposal. Ji TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council r •Ron Moorse, City Administrator 'I September 11, 1992 r>.X.' SUBJECT: Special Event Permit for Fishing Tournament at North Shore Marina The Viking Bass Masters Association has made application for a special event permit for a fishing tournament to be held at the North Shore Marina on October 4, 1992. The Council recently took action to deny the marina license for the North Shore Marina. The Council has indicated that approval of these types of activities may be withheld due to the lack of a marina license. Council Action Requested: Motion to approve/deny the Viking Bass Masters application for a special event permit for a fishing tournament at the North Shore Marina on October 4, 1992. Permit =;_Fee: $50.00PARADES & SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Phene Nu.mber; U V o V. V a D 3. ^ ~^V\.o ^ _ _ _ ___Name: Address: Ho^lo g.gt.oos<^\<SL.<l City, State, 2 Id : Stv-ows.*cwO Location of Parade or Event: pTTV ijC nc-nkin LfJl I I Uf Jl\Ut%xJ L'T'^h\^rc nccTrcI Ui I iui. f 7AnnnnA 1 w*l fc.Z-fWVV'V 01 i:£V rijcri' 71 "A Miuun tu ^\/»vv rjLTLT(yr^ruAytk‘ vnnni.V4.ai f 11 innt\ i \ju •“ rnn 1 On i TA• r«//V wva iwa i v*r*v. AO/• A/C • VVP/ / “A%J\/ • vv u>‘.t i«\.i h ;0/19/92fcERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE ______^ _____----- ----------Viitc rroTinm?nrTsslO A HAflER OF IliEOWIATIOfI ONLY AW) iwM KO niciiis'upun ijEDOES nor N^no, extehu or alter the coverage afforded by the POLICIES DELOW. loilifi INRIGin - TURljER INSURANCfl, INC. .0. OCX 23030J ONTGOMERY, ALl-361 23-0308 05-272-1200 = OURB) l.A.S.S. IIATIO IINNESOTA B.A. ►.0. Box 17900 jAL FEDERATION AND i.S. FED., ETAL COMPANIES affor ding COVBR AOE CC'l-AMf Ainerican National Firs Insurance Co. llTUtl ^ cdiPAir p uniR o CCITAHf f lEms cernwy n iVim ^ CCWTANY c LEHER ^ «,,0nt0 BV it C IS MSCSIBEO IIEKEM Is SBBJrCI to AU IHE TEAMS. fg,'ys!SfeyAM%° m %{M^^ouci6s!"fiHn ”s!l& U iiA.Ej!EE!!mn;c^^ me or knekm . liabrity mncftciAL oenenk ClAIliJ HAOr OWfWJ 4 CCHIMY c R'I '’ROt. LIASUIT y _^OCCWA. TOLlCt WMBE* GLP2441606 wtiw trr£ai« WtE (IH/UO/YY) 1/1/92 rot ICY OTDWTICH □Alt (m/C3/HY) tmns 1/1/93 ;>tR$OYAL . APV. INJURY Aimmiu iiABitm ANY AUTO t All OW**rO AUTOI I SCHtOUUO AUTOS I Hinto ''ijTcs W)N-O<Y<T0 AUTOS I CA.AGC IIAAUITY; UCtSS IIMIIITY UrWlUAfORN J OTHM 1HM UH0r 4.U tow Po»Mt" brancl lax trg^fTsmiua' mei}\o 7671 » oT p ' ;«• *nil! nu/itm 0«pt.-ww 205-2THillij CtHtRAL AUOKtOAU rtiooucis-cuii ’/uP Ado. £ACH OCCURRfACt » 1.000.OOP. l^QQlLilljO. 1_LMIy .UJQ._ TIRE O-Wl0E(Anir on Mf) ^s 1.000.000. IliOuiL_ HEO.tXfIHSt(An/ OT« Mrion) t . QQQ. CaiRINID SINGLE IIHII BOOIIY INJURY (Rir ptrion) «>PILY INJURY (Per ecclrient) PRCfERIY 0AH«I£ EACH OCCURRENCE ACGRE&AR StAlUIOOY LIMITS fACH ACCIlfNI OISEASE-POllCY IIMII DISEASE-EACH EMPlOTtE iiPiiM(ToroiAiiSiittcATi»«i/ywiditi/mciAL ittjb B.A.S.S. National Federation Insurance Program. Jl^tlFICATF. HOITJES' MG UASSMASlrERS OF MINNESOTA troy NELSOl 1 PIONEER nOAO , MN 5534P CAMCECTTTibrj ----------------------------—------------------ ' SHOULD AMY CF THE AU'JVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CAHCEl* Er OEruRf THE CMlBAllOll OAll IHEREOT. THE ISSBIMC COMMIT “"-C » mil JUHATS MAIITEII IIOTICE lO Tllt CrAIIMCAIC irfT mu FAILURE 10 MAIL SUCH NaUCE SHALL IMPOSE HO CTLIGAMOH ORn»lim Brr«]°£™ J »< r.EPncsT.jAU^ AUDOli^EfRUUfflVE/yy \ :s-S (F/90)(JW^-LT-tWe Afc/rcy /uU': jnrct^ p 16th Annual Lake Minnetonka Viking Invitational Bass Tournament Sponsored by North Shore Dr. Marina, Coca-Cola Bottling, and Viking Bassmasters r iZr ^ Attention Minnesota Bass Fishermen You arc cordially invited to participate in the 16th Annual Viking Invitational Bass Tournament. This event, held on Lake Minnetonka, is a year-end tradition. This tournament is a fun tournament that gives flshermen a chance to spend a day Ashing with a son or daughter or friend in a friendly, low-pressure tournament. When: • Sunday, October 4, 1992 Where: Cost: • Registration at North Arm Landing from 4:30 to 6:30 a.m. • Boat check-in at North Shore Marina from 4:30 to 6:4S a.m. • Pre-tournament meeting at North Shore Marina at 6:45 a.m. • Ease off at approximately 7:00 a.m. • Weigh-In at 2:00 p.m. at North Shore marina Notr. Launch boat at North Arm. Register at North Arm, then Idle over to the docks at North Shore for boat check-in and pre ­ tournament meeting. S30 per boat; 2-person teams 6-fish iimit per boat; optional $2 toothy pot Trophies awarded to 10th piace (? trophies per team), and Lunker Trophy for "Laroest Bass of the Day." ' ^ Door prizes also awarded at weigh-in. Sandwiches and pop provided for all after weigh-in. 150 horsepower limit will be enforced Prior to entering Lake Minnetonka, all watercraft that have been In waters known to be infested with zebra mussels, which presently Include the Mississippi, St. Croix, and St. Louis Rivers and St. Louis Bay on Lake Superior, must be thoroughly dried, or washed down with hot water at least 140 degrees F, Inside and out. Also, participants must clean all take weeds from watercraft Including wet wells and other internal locations, as well as external locations. Including trailers, upon leaving the lake. Any questions, call Ted or Todd at 890-2292. f/O o\\ ^ mI 2 ' ir iC- r.A- CITYof ORONO Municipal Offices Post Office Box 66 Cr>^ Bav, MinnesoU 55323-0066 September 1, 1992 Thomas A. Nelson 4086 Brookside Avenue St. Louis Park/ Minnesota 55416 Re; Viking Bassmaster Tournament Dear Mr. Nelson, This letter is to put you on notice of Council action taken May 26, 1992 regarding North Shore Marina. At that time the Marina was notified the Council may not approve any special events at their location if their 1992 Marina License is not approved. (See enclosed letter page 3.) At the August 24, 1992, Council meeting the 1992 marina license for North Shore Marina was denied. The next Council meeting will be September 14, 1992, and your special events permit application will be on that agenda. It is suggested that you, or a representative of your organization, be in attendance to discuss your permit application. If you have any questions regarding this, please call. !\ copy of the September 1 4, 1992, Council agenda will be mailed to you on Friday, September 11th. rely, Dorothy City Cle Enclosure TKLKmONK-475-7357 • FAX-473-0510 J CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices PostOf5ccBox66 Crvsxal Bay, MinnooU 55323-0066 May 28, 1992 North Shore Drive Marina 3222 North Shore Drive >/ayzata r Minnesota 55391 ATTENTION: Mark and Debra Breneman Re: Licensing Update Dear Mr. and Mrs. Breneman: Thank you for submitting your check in the amount of 5604.00. The City in its past , licensing :5/-Ac\%^liprJr ^ ^ rental slips, 6 transient b Jts-boats in the water, exclusive of dry stackea ooa settlement of stacked" for lake use.more than 20 boats would be dry stacJcea The 86 boat slips referred to and ^4^5 ^"other boats" permitted you 106 boats for ^®^ave been permitted for a totalon land for servicing, sale, etc. have oeen p density of 151 boats. are apparent. You propose 93 i^y^Q use, contrary uO the 86. You propose 72 bcau.s dry stacK Court settlement. ♦->,« ritv cannot license your marina for S9-:fiSrtiFfff TELEI-HOSE - 47.VT357 • EEX - 473-0510 North Shore Drive Marina May 28, 1992 Page 2 consequently, you s^°i/^/t "e\c"eIdr^hirnumbl^l''aidr^lTl ??rsrstep°% obtIin?ng a license, snbmit a revised application form. _______ t: n /^T-v Xirsx. -------- - While the LMCD has lltVrorrabeVse,"tL^a2ty nas uu ^ In addition to stored bo°^^^^^ iJf|lace of the h “=trL^ c iat/r^ drrn%^ Cit/rs So? pr°ey;^“ fo VlL^n?^ winter stored boats. At ^ wil^ be willing to discuss this more than 82 i'f -here is justification for such an Tn%^\\^sr.^^Bur for"no more than 82 winter stored boats. It does appear for various reasons that you tS anyoyd: ^/nd r?^-eive a refund checb for tne difference. During my inspection tour of |h‘ligh^^^leld^ll''tht City'l JILsa? tf yn?\*licensef but which I am aware you are making plans to resolve: 1.Lack of required screening along west side of service building. 2.Vr"inl^y- site plan). 3.Substantial apparent ^"epllcld'^lith^la^corative 4. ,p which VOU acknowledged and which General upkeep of the ^ite, - cleaning uo.you noted you are in the process o- clean- g . 5.I also mentioned to you a number discussion, including: x: ^future items for a. Establishing a grass buffer area along whe shore-i b. Future hardcover reductions should be an. c_pa i North Shore Drive Marina May 28, 1992 Page 3 c. d.Review of your signage allowances is in order. runoff control In addition, you Saring°th”*r«:ent'^sewe’r reconstruction, r wou°ld“ref°e1c ®yo^\o Public' Works Coordinator John Gerhardson regarding this matter. you also mentioned you a- ---f ating a marina, including a |o meet with you in your early Jeanne Mabusth and ^ ^i^-ipated coning code conflicts can beplanning stages so tha.- unanticipac avoided. - a _ Sales" as a orincipal Your aoolication indicates^ Ch-Tstmas tree sales'is not an business activity. As we ^ under certain conditions it allowed use in the B-2 rone, a reasonable seasonal use. The could be argued that Christmas tree sales on your property orooer way to pursue approval However, I must reiterate would be to request a f , Lraonroved use in the 5-2 that, until Christmas tree rnr " rone, we cannot allow such sales .o occur. AS you arc aware, Che City is reviewing fi^^’JevtSiin^ in the City/ including North Shore Dri , . -c-^ual effect uoon the iSe v\rioJ;s general ^^f^comml^ee, which'is the marinas. It may be w.ha * _tte-^s will make recommendations about committee invesrigating these j^^os, especially in regard changes of one sort or another in .he ordin - "charter boat to on demand launching, "boat clubs , a^y 5- operations. ^ 1 would further note that while f f 28th°and Septe^er 20th of this year, future aPP—to vour licensing have been until such time as issues relating .o yo resolved. North Shore Drive Marina May 2 8 f 1992 Page 4 This letter represents the ooen^to y'^ur ^«mments.^ Please llirlre^ to° contlSr»e "'a't 473-7357 if you have any questions. MPG/ch 2) 1992^License Application Submitted 3) Application Blank Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Adm. Ron Moorsc/ City Administrator City Council ^ a. • 4-Lake Minnetonka Consarvatron District cc: TO; FROM; DATE; SUBJECT Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator September 11, 1992 % S>> %a ■V. Mr. Donald Gronberg Stubbs Bay Sewer Assessment Appeal The City Council early in the Stubbs Bay sewer project assessment process determined that any unbu i l«-;ble lots made buildable by the provision of sewer service would V'e charged 100% of the sewer unit cost. Two property owners, who have been assessed the full unit cost, have appealed the assessment. One is Don Gronberg the other is Greg Ehalt. The Council has directed staff to try to negotiate a settlement with these two property owners. The specific direction to staff was to ask each property owner to provide a proposed settlement amount. Staff has met with the attorney representing Mr. Groi:berg to discuss the assessemnt. The attorney indicated he would review the issue with Mr. Gronberg and provide a proposed settlement amount. After several weeks, the attached letter was provided to the City. The letter does not include a settlement proposal, but rather indicates the assessment should be similar to the other Cygnet and Leaf assessments. Mr. Gronberg has requested that he be allowed to review this issue with the Council. Note: Mike Gaffron will be available to review the issue of the buildability of the lot. r 65 North Willow Drive Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 (612) 473-5796 September 1, 1992 Dear Honorable Mayor and Council Members: I am writing this letter to help explain why I did not build and some of the circumstances. I do not feel that I should have to pay $6,560 more than my neighbors and others in Cygnet and Leaf as their systems are polluting and I have never'polluted on my oresent Orono home or on my lot. The property north of my lot has a shallow trench system dating back to 1958 and is 34 years old. It has been added on to once and is functioning now, but for how long? A mound system could not be used over existing trenches. The property south of me, built in 1962 has been leaking into the creek for several years 'd the end of the drainfield is covered with a concrete slab and building 5 feet from the creek. It was built in 1987-88. I have stepped in sewage in the winter. A mound system could not be installed on this property. These properties and several others on the creek would positively not meet setback reguirements. They would require holding tanks. with the added 22 feet along Leaf Street which my title shows that I own, I could install a mound system and alternate site and it would adhere to Orono's code of 20 feet setbacks from the road and side lot lines and less than a 6% slope. A house could be built 26 to 50 feet from the creek prior to the new shoreline regulations adopted in February. 1992. I have a site plan of a lot that was allowed a building permit for an addition in 1991. The side slope setbacks were proposed at 10 feet for that mound system and v;ere actually constructed closer. Even the ex-mayor's lot line rearrangement is proposed with a 10 foot setback. There are also other sites where construction was approved on greciter than 6% slopes. Thus, I am meeting the very strictest application of the code, ev'en though others are not. 1 9 ^ Honorable Niayor and Council Members September 1/ 1992 Page Two Listed below are some of ray personal service contributions as well as some of my personal hardships that I've gone through which have delayed my building on this lot: Two (2) years U.S. Navy—V/orld War II, 15 months overseas in the South Pacific. Ten (10) years employment--no retirement benefit. Thirty-three (33) years employment-$5,740 total sum of retirement pay. Fifteen (15) years work of overtime hours, which totals 48 years of v;ork calculated at 2,000 hours per year, 10-13 hours daily and Saturday and occasional Sundays and holidays. Fifteen (15) years part-time Licensed Site Evaluator, State of Minnesota No. 852. Four (4) years Cub Scout Treasurer. Two (2) years Little League North Shore Baseball coach. Five (5) years Pee Wees and Bantam's Traveling Hockey Team coach. 1978--Daughter became ill with Leukemia—sophomore at University of Minnesota. Died one (1) year later at St. Louis, MO, after receiving bone marrow transplant. Total bill $197,000 plus a few minor bills. Yes, I had a health insurance policy, but there were co-payments and deductibles to be paid before major m dical started. There were travel expenses and living expenses in St. Louis, also. This has been paid in full with no charity. 1975--Residents of Willow Drive and Hackberry were bunched in with three (3) other sewer projects to help pay for the costly project on Tonkawa Road--3 lines--lift stations — force mains and 16-18" trunk lines. Vacant lots were assessed the same as homes in this 1975 project. No one else in Stubbs Bay Sewer Project assisted in any monies, yet they are getting a 30% reduction, plus negotiation lawsuits for approximately $1,595. Honorable Mayor and Council Members September 1/ 1992 Page Three The current council and previous councils have passed ordinances and regulations cnat reduce the buildable area of my lot. Therefore, they are responsible for downgrading "said lot," in violation of the Fifth Amendment and current courts are acting favorably to these situations. The lots in this subdivision were never required to have any variances before 1975. It was just after that date that they were required. I believe this lot should be grandfathered in to be built on like the others in the subdivsion. I think it is wrong to asess me an outrageous price and then transfer the excess to homes with values up to $750,000 or more. I don't think it is fair to have one of the two highest assessments in the Stubbs Bay Sever Project. I have paid my dues and done my share for my country, government and community. Therefore, I do not want to be burdened with this inequity, especially in my retirement years. Sincerely, Donald R. Gronberg ^ iirih TO: FROM: DATE; SUBJECT: Ron Moorse, City Adt ’ listrator Tom Kuehn, Finance Director September 10, 1992 , /-. ' ^ **o. Set Public Hearing Date for Hazardous Building Assessments Attachment: A. Public Hearing Notice The City has settlement agreements for hazardous building actions on 1949 FagernessPoint Road, 2405 Dunwoody Avenue, 3865-75 Shoreline Drive, and 3877 Shoreline Drive. The settlement agreements resolve the outstanding hazardous conditions on the buildings and provide that the legal fees incurred by the City to enforce the hazardous building actions be paid one-half by the property owners and one-half by the City. The settlements provide for collection of the principal amounts over three years at 8% interest per year. The property owners have waived their rights to appeal the special cssessments, however the City still must set a public hearing date to consider adoption of the proposed special assessment roll for the subject properties. The properties and costs to be assessed are: 1949 Fagerness Point Road 3865 & 3875 Shoreline Drive 3877 Shoreline Drive 2405 Dunwoody Avenue 4,575.00 2,825.50 1,412.75 1,412.75 TOTAL $10,226.00 I have attached a copy of the public hearing notice for your informa tion. PROPOSED MOTION — Moved by _, seconded by hearing for October 12, 1992 at 7:00 P.M. at the Council Chambers to set a public to consider the special assessmsne roll for the 1992 hazardous buildings. Ayes , Nay 1 1 CITY OF ORONO PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The City Council will hold a Public Hearing in the Council Chambers at 1275 Brown Road South on Monday, October 12, 1992 at 7:00 P.M, on the proposed assessment in the total amount of $10,226.00 for hazardous buildings actions on properties legally described as follows. 1949 Eagerness Point Road - Lots 23 and 24, Fagerness $4,575.00 P.I.D. 18-117- 23 14 0016, Addition 42220 3865 and 3875 Shoreline Drive - Part Lots 1 and 2, Townsite of Langdon Park $2,825.50 P.I.D. 20-117-23 22 0007, Addition 42420 3877 Shoreline Drive - Part Lots 1 and 2, Townsite of Langdon Park $1,412.75 P.I.D. 20-117-23 22 0006, Addition 42420 2405 Dunwoody Avenue - Part Lot 2, Townsite of Langdon Park $1,412.75 P.I.D. 20-117-23 22 0008, Addition 42420 The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk at the Administrative Offices, 1335 Brown Road South. Written or oral objections will be considered. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the City Clerk prior to th. hearing or presented t > the presiding officer at the hearing. An appeal to the District Court may be made by serving notice upon the Mayor or the City Clerk within 30 days after adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or City Clerk. The City has adopted a special assessment deferment ordinance based on the applicant meeting age, ownership, occupancy, and income guidelines. By Order of the City Council /s/ Dorothy M. Hallin City Clerk Publish the weeks of September 28 and October 5, 1992 in the Laktr/Pioneer newspaper. 1 i •n TO: FROM: DATE Ron Moorse, City Administrator Tom Kuehn, Finance Director September 10# 1992 SUBJECT: 1993 Budget and Proposed Tax Levy Attachment: A. Proposed Resolution - Tax Levy Collectible in 1993 ISSUES ^ ^ x.1. •1, Establish a maximum proposed 1993 Tax levy for the truth in taxation budget hearing(s), 2. Establish a preliminary budget for the truth in taxation hearing(s). DISCUSSION The Council has previously established the truth in taxation public hearing for Tuesday, December 1st at 7:00 p.m., and Wednesday, December 9th at 7:00 p.m. as the reconvened hearing if necessary. As required by state law the City must adopt, by September 15th, a proposed property tax levy maximum for collection in 1993 which will be published for the truth in taxation hearing. The levy can be reduced during the public hearing but cannot be increased. We are also required to establish a preliminary budget before September 15th and to adopt a final budget during the public hearings. The budget amount may increase or decrease from the original proposed and may remain flexible throughout the year. The proposed General Fund budget is adopted by motion, but the proposed tax levy must be adopted by resolution. The 1 993 budget reflects an effort to hold the line on overall expenditures while absorbing increased costs due to the imposition of the 6.5% sales tax and the first year operating costs for the new city facilities. The total general fund budget amount is $3,163,715. This is a $1 38,825 or 5.0% increase over the 19*^2 budget. The operating levy to fund the general fund budget is $1,725,915. This is an increase of $81,084 or 4.9%. Due to increases in levies for past year tax abatements and for the HRA city facility bonds, the total 1 993 tax levy has increased $109,454 or 5.6%. Durinq the budget worksession the Council discussed increasing the tax levy to provide for a reserve against a reduction in state Homestead Aid (HACA). The city receives $291,000 of HACA aid which enables the city to reduce the tax levy. Due to the State's budget problems there is a strong possibility that this aid will be reduced during 1993. The following is an indication of the tax levy impact of various reserve levels: r Reserve Amount $■ 0 20,000 40.000 50.000 75.000 125,000 Total Levy Amount 2.070.835 2.090.835 2.110.835 2.120.835 2.145.835 2.195.835 % Increase Over *92 5.6% 6.6 7.6 8.1 10.7 11.9 The tax levy resolution is presented with a zero state aid reduction reserve. The resolution will be amended to reflect the reserve amount approved by the Council. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, to adopt Resolution #__ approving the proposed maximum 1992 tax levy collectible in 1993 of $___; and to establish the proposed 1993 General Fund expenditure budget in the amount of $3,163,715. Ayes , Nays r A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROPOSED 1992 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 1993 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the following suras of raoney be levied for the current year, collectible in 1993 upon the taxable property in the City of Orono, for the following purposes: General Fund Special Assessraents against City property for the City's share of 1985 sanitary sewer- project (G.O, Sewer Irap Bond 1985) $1,775,915 5,350 Lost Tax Receipts Due to Abatements - 1991 18,970 TOTAL GENERAL FUND LEVY $1,800,235 G.O. Sewer Iraproveraent Bond 1985 G.O. Sewer Improvement Bond 1980 50,000 16,100 G.O. Sewer, Water, Street Improvement Bond 1982 5,500 Bonds of Other Government Units H.R.A. Building Bond 249,000 TOTAL SPECIAL LEVIES 320,600 TOTAL ALL LEVIES $2,120,835 The City Cleric is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held September 14, 1992. ATTEST;Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Dorothy M. Halim, City Clerk /? TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator September 4, 1992 a/ /f Ofi0:" Lee and Julie Harren Request for Exclusion From Stubbs Bay Sewer Project Attachment: A, Letter to the Barren's Dated 8/17/92 Lee and Julie Harren have filed an appeal concerning the Stubbs Bay project related to the issue of exclusion from the project. They believe they meet all the exclusion criteria and have asked for an opportunity to make their case to the Council. Exclusion Criteria Background Initially there were no exclusion criteria related to the project. All properties in the project were included. When property owners began calling CounciImembers with assorted arguments for exclusion. Council asked staff to develop criteria for exclusion. One criterion indicates that if a sewer line which serves an upstream property abutts a property which otherwise would be excluded, that property is then included. This is the criterion the Harrens believe has been incorrectly applied to them. The Harrens believe that because the sewer line, as currently proposed, does not directly abut their property they technically meet the exclusion criteria. It has been staff's position that this technicality does not invalidate the inclusion. In addition, based on the intent and spirit of the exclusion criteria and based on the relationship of this property to the project area, the property should be included in the project. From the standpoint of serving this property with sewer the exclusion issue is not critical because it would be relatively easy to serve this property at sometime in the future. However, from the standpoint of consistency in applying the exclusion criteria, providing the exclusion to the Harrens could generate additional exclusion requests. It may be difficult to convince other property owners that this is a valid exclusion. 1 fo:, o\,CITYofORONO M*inicipa] Offices Post Office Box 66 Cn slaJ Bay, Minnesota 553234)066 August 17, 1992 Mr. and Mrs. Lee Barren 175 Landmark Drive Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 Re: Municipal Sewer Dear Mr. and Mrs. Barren: This letter is to clarify the City's position regarding your sewer service . During the initial sewer project planning, it was determined that the Kyle property (185 Landmark Drive) was less than 2 acres and liad a failing septic system. Tliat fact and the mere geographical location in relation to the entire project area, led to an early conclusion to serve your immediate neighborhood. In the normal situation, a sewer lateral would have been constructed within Landmark Drive, with stubs to serve your property, the Evans' vacant lot, and an extension along Kyle's driveway outlet to serve their property. This lateral would have served your property at the southeast boundary but would have been extremely expensive to construct due to replacement of your private road. Further, the extension to the Kyle's along their outlot would be similarly expensive due to the extreme depth. In order to reduce the cost of the project (and therefore the cost to the property owners) it was determined that the lateral would be constructed along the old driveway along the west side of Evans' building site. This lateral would end at Kyle's property line and stubs would be placed to serve all three properties. Your stub v;ould have been at the southwest boundary of your property. Subsequent to this plan, you initiated discussions with various City staff and consultants regarding the extreme expense of connection to a stub at this location on your property. The main problem factors included having to follow a connection route northwest around the existing pool, then south through the hill to get to the southwest corner. The location of your well was a factor which forced tlie TKI.tI’llONE-47jej57 • KVX-473-0SI0 Mr. and Mrs. Lee Harren August 17, 1992 Page 2 connection to go around the pool, but which was not otherwise a ; limiting factor. The State Health Department requires that the setback between a well and an air tested sewer line must be a minimum of 20', You suggested that a more feasible and less expensive connection route would be around the east side of your driveway to the southeast corner of your property. It appears your connection could take either a southwest or southeast route and not affect your well or neighboring wells. City staff and consultants then investigated the feasibility of extending a stub to your southeast lot corner, and found that such a connection was very feasible, via an additional 120' extension of a lateral already proposed within Gardner's driveway which served Gard.ner and Anderson. A stub would be extended from that lateral to your southeast property boundary. In your April 29th letter you suggested an alternate route along the portion of Outlot D located west of Landmark Drive, but there is no 30'-40' clear out lot/easement along the west side of Cutlot D. In fact, as the attached road plan indicates, the pavement abuts the west line of Outlot D for a good distance and there is a 20' clear area t of the road in which sewer might be constructed, but this still leaves the problem of having to replace a large portion of the cul-de- sac and cutting through the hill to serve Kyle's. The City would be responsible for obtaining all necessary easements across adjacent properties to bring a stub to your property boundary from the east. The cost of providing service to your southeast boundary would be absorbed within the general sewer project and would not increase your assessment. During an executive session at their July 27th meeting, the City Council reviewed your concerns and the various connection options. Council directed that staff proceed on the basis that your property will be served by a stub extended to the southeast boundary of your property, A copy of the staff memo from that meeting is attached. I hope this helps to clarify the City's position on providing sewer service to your property. We can discuss these issues further at our meeting on the 26th. Sincerely^ Ron Moorse City Administrator RM/ch TO: FROM: DATE: Ron Moorse, City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director September 11, 1992 SUBJECT: Dedication Kelley Parkway %• U/>. V Recently the City of Orono designated the name of the frontage road of Highway 12 as Kelley Parkway. The frontage road will serve the new City facilities and properties to the east. Kelley Parkway was named to honor Les Kelley, a lifetime Orono resident who served the City and the area throughout his lifetime. It was determined that the City would conduct a "ribbon cutting" ceremony when the road was complete. The road is complete and we should pick a date for the ribbon cutting ceremony. I" I Li. To* Px . I Date* Subject* Ron Moorse, City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director September 9, 1992 1993 Recycling Contract Extension ■% For 1992 the City of Orono entered into a one year agreement with E-Z Recycling Services of St. Paul to provide curbside recycling services. I have been advised that there will be no increase in the recycling costs for 1993 and that E~Z Recycling will include an additional product to be picked up, that being magazines. I recommend we extend the recycling agreement with E-Z Recycling for 1993 and that E-Z will add magazines to the items already being picked up for an amount not to exceed $63,180, Isv 1 i <^1 TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator September 10, 1992 9 ' •> SUBJECT: Police Chief Compensation Adjustment and Performance Review Stephen Sullivan completed his first year as Police Chief on August 19, 1992. On the basis of his commendable performance during the past year, it is recommended that his salary be increased from Level 12, Step II to Level 12, Step III of the 1992 Compensation Plan. It is also recommended that when the compensation plan is adjusted effective January 1, 1993 his salary be adjusted accordingly. % TO: FROM DATE Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator September 4, 1992 % JOf. ' '‘O SUBJECT: Police Service Contract with the City of Long Lake In dicussions with the City of Long Lake's representatives concerning the police service contract, no major issues were raised. It appears that the current contract will be reapproved with few changes. The two issues raised by Long Lake to this point are as follows: 1.They requested justification/documentation concerning the police department expenditures on budget. This information has been provided to them. 2.They asked whether two supplementary officers are needed. We outlined several reasons for the supplemental officers. The Police Chief is preparing a further analysis concerning the need for the supplemental officers. It is staff's understanding that the Long Lake City Council in preliminary action concerning their proposed 1993 budget did included sufficient funding for two supplementary officers. Staff has not received an indication from the City of Long Lake concerning approval of the 1993 police contract. There is no action required of the Orono Council at this time. 4 TO; PROM: DATE: SDBJ: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director % <>4 eJack Brinkhaus, Street Department Foreman <% September 10, 1992 Fall Cleanup Day - October 17, 1992 The City of Orono Public Works Department is planning Fafl^ Cleanup Day on Saturday, October 17, 1992 from 8:00 a.m* to 4:00 p.m. The collection point will be behind the long, gold equipment shed at Brown Road South and Spates Avenue in Crystal Bay, next to the Administration Building. The following items will NOT be accepted: newspaper or corregated cardboard garbage trees brush, leaves and grass chemicals truck loads barrels, drums, chemical containers, petroleum products and their containers newspapers and other items normally picked up by recyclers construction materials Construction materials consist of, but are not limited to, concrete, lumber, doors, wood moldings, boards, railroad ties, landscape timbers, sheetrock, tile, etc. Leaves, grass and brush will not be accepted this weekend because of severe space limitations. Appliances will be accepted at our site by a company called ARCA Inc., who removes the harmful PCB's from them and then recycles the steel. An $8.00 fee will be charged per appliance. Televisions, video recorders, stereos, etc. will be accepted by another company and a $6.00 fee will be charged for the disposal of each of these. We will also accept tires. A private company will be here to accept them for a fee. The residents will be required to pay about $2.00 per car tire. ORONO RESIDENTS ONLYl It is recommended to designate October 17, 1992 as the Fall Cleanup Day with the above guidelines. i TO: FROM: DATE: Ron Moorse, City Administrator Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk September 10, 1992 SUBJECT; Appoint Additional Election Judges ^'S % Vk,>* 57 ":s Attachment: A. Proposed Resolution Appointing Additional Election Judges The Council adopted Resolution #3152 on August 10, 1992 appointing election judges for the upcoming elections. Since that time some of those appointees have indicated they are unable to serve as election judges for the Primary Election on September 15, 1992. The following persons have indicated their willingness to work as election judges for the September 15, 1992 Primary Election: R. William Toward Stephanie Powell Monica Navratil It is recommended that Council adopt the attacued resolution appointing these persons as election judges. A RESOLOTION APPOINTING ADDITIONAL ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE PRIMARY ELECTION TO BE HELD SEPTEMBER 15, 1992 AND THE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 3, 1992 BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to Minnesota Election Laws 204B.21 Subd. 2 the following persons are additionally appointed as election judges for the Primary Election to be held September 15, 1992 and the General Election to be held November 4, 1992. R. William Toward Stephanie Powell Monica Navratil Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held September 14, 1992, Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk q < • V ^ A # 08/30/92 PR: CB PRREGOR 144 IS- EMP i NAME 471688060 474563339 476921819 47i840871 475443862 476663143 472503991 469526026 476643387 47598972 I 471963129 468821018 468622840 472529007 468701868 507585424 469686562 468420832 469087884 474667812 475380151 477500666 475444249 477463877 472745694 388625358 471569863 473141624 475604753 504260307 472500574 121262417 475344512 480843542 476018974 477700023 334506281 477028779 473108428 468909535 476783251 470700901 469848107 475382983 473746173 470566529 469629194 475569177 267460042 472563051 474663296 470704904 475505292 468629488 500403152 477881539 ANDERSON. BRUCE L BOBZIEN. SUE A BORIS. SCOTT W BOSMA. JAMIE L BRINKHAUS. JOHN F CARLSON, STEPHEN C CHESWICK. GARY B CORNICK. JAMES L DELANEY. JANE E DEMBOUSKI. JAY C DRESSEL. ROBERT P ENGLISH III. IRVING ERICKSON, DOUGLAS J ERICKSON. KURT R FISCHENICH. DAN T FRIT2LER. JOHN M GAFFRON. MICHAEL P GERHARDSON. JOHN R GOMAN. DAVID J GREGORY. JAMES D HALLIN, DOROTHY M HANSEN. STEVEN C HANGING. CAROL J HASEMAN. CAROLE HEUER, JOHN C JENSEN. ROONEY W JOHNSON. BRADLEY P JOSTROM. FOREST J 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 MOROWC2YNSKI. JAMES NELSON. DAVID D OAS. DANIEL 0 OBERAIGNER. SCOTT G OBRIEN. RANDY L OMAN. LYLE E PALMER. GREGORY A OUAST. WAYNE A RATHBUN. BARRY J SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B SKREEN. DALE S STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD SULLIVAN. STEPHEN X THOMTON. MARK R TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F TOMCZYK. MARK W VANG. BRUCE L VEE. LINDA S WALTERS. LINDA G WECKMAN. STEPHEN J DPT YTD CURRENT GROSS GROSS 31 29804.54 16b9.503118038.47 987.51314365.14 144.201210555.91 609.834228202.19 1568.57612992.50 525.003130746.74 1680.963132351.20 2020.26933110.67 270.383125683.45 1705.3193302.50 117.503130563.98 1551.9293474.00 78.003127419.64 1526.403131553.87 1689.673129750.48 1646.963325783.07 1434.014236140.93 2120.68352786.05 120.194223584.81 1128.801222209.89 1235.284220680.98 1013.223110160.01 550.831215169.61 839.36614509.00 640.00932052.50 207.503128571.17 1497.84931832.28 165.38314349.28 245.131517755.11 987.521537929.78 2109.603332288.55 1795.85931312.51 215.253114859 55 1258.80932255.00 209.001238491.20 2238.403130370.00 1806.76353507.81 189.87931293.78 138.004219181.58 948.889221004.34 1054.333325782.95 1434.014218954.88 1001.609225279.78 1329.759221061.64 1311.33314622.64 247 204220276.29 1165.20 93 22211.08 1235.283134702 61 1941.123126683 74 1469.283127908.99 1469 283127231.18 1497 833322209.85 1235.281216692.65 964.461520098.70 1145.283318705.01 1088.00 60.477.35 1992 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE258005258008 258010 258020 258020 258020 258030 258030 258030 258030 258030 258030 258037 258037 258039 258039 258039 258065 258065 258065 258065 258065 258068 09/09/9209/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 AMOUNT 29.50 29.50 •1.233.27 1.233.27 • 14.22 14.22 • 50.00 89.56 87.47 227.03 • 26 26 26 40 26 26 171 16 16 16 45 16 16 25 09/09/92 43.04 09/09/92 40.10 83.14 * 09/09/92 34.24 09/09/92 2.612.00 09/09/92 3,398.00 6.044.24 • 09/09/92 146.97 09/09/92 43.25 09/09/92 10.00 09/09/92 175.73 09/09/92 58.58 434.53 • 09/09/9?270.00 CHECK REGISTERVENDORALL STAR PRO GOLF COALL STEEL PRODUCTS AT4T INFO SYSTEM AMERICAN NATL BANK AMERICAN NATL BANK AMERICAN NATL BANK AUGIES MOBILE CHEF AUGIES MOBILE CHEF EARL F EARL F EARL F ANDERSON ASSC ANDERSON ASSC ANDERSON ASSC BLACKOWIAK & BLACKOWIAK & BLACKOWIAK & BLACKO'.VIAK & BLACKOWIAK & SONS SONS SONS SONS SONS BIFFS INC ITEM DESCRIPTION SPIKESPARTS TELEPHONE PAYING AGENT FEE PAYING AGENT FEE PAYING AGENT FEE AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC AT T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC SANDWICHES SANDWICH SIGNS NAVARRE SIGNS SIGNS TRASH TRASH r.^ASH TRASH TRASH HAUL HAUL HAUL HAUL HAUL 6 BIFFS 09-14-92 PAGEACCOUNT NO. INV. i P.O. # MESSAGE 74-4801-591-94 101-4233-249-42 72-4320-549-91 44-4630-907-00 72- 4630-909-88 73- 4630-910-89 01-4340 01-4340 01-4340 01-4340 01-4340 01-4340 059-14 069-15 129-31 129-31 174-33 249-42 74-4802-591-94 74-4802-591-94 01-4233-249-42 01-4233-249-42 12-4530-000-00 01-4343-099-17 01-4343-129-31 01-4343-129-31 01-4343-290-61 74-4343-590-93 01-4331-290-81 «»«*-CKS-CKS « • •-CKS ••*-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS ( u 1992 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE 258068 09/09/92258085258085258098 258124 258143 258143 258143 258143 258143 258143 258143 258143 258143 258143 258143 258143 258198 258213 258220 258256 258256 258256 09/09/9209/09/9209/09/92 09/09/92 09/f^/f2 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 rCHECK REGISTERAMOUNT46.82 316.82 *VENDOR BIFFS INC ITEM DESCRIPTION 1 BIFFS12.78 8.24 21.02 «BUDGET PRINTING BUDGET PRINTING COPIESPOSTAGE918.93 918.93 ' CARGILL SALT SALT 357.50 357.50 • COCA COLA VENDING POP 5,265.00 82.37 82.37 • FEED RITE CONTROLS FLOURIDE 397.17 21.76 3.20 GENUINE PARTS CO GENUINE PARTS CO GENUINE PARTS CO PARTS PARTS PARTS ACCOUNT NO INV 74-4331-590-9301-4210-129-3172-4321-549-9172-4234-'49-91 74-4815-591-94 09/09/92 1.95 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP SEPT INS 01-3872-000-0009/09/92 16.99 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP SEPT INS 01-4152-039-1209/09/92 32.05 CONWERCIAL LIFE/GRP SEPT INS 01-4152-069-1509/09/92 59.78 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP SEPT INS 01-4152-129-3109/09/92 7.00 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP SEPT INS 01-4152-129-3109/09/92 6.99 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP SEPT INS 01-4152-174-3309/09/92 20.19-COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP SEPT INS 01-4152-249-40 09/09/92 20.19 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP SEPT INS 01-4152-249-4009/09/92 20.19 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP SEPT INS 01-4152-249-4209/09/92 2.02 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP SEPT INS 72-4152-549-9109/09/92 2.63 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP SEPT INS 73-4152-569-92 09/09/92 .85 COMMERCIAL l:fe/grp SEPT INS 74-4152-590-93150.45 • 09/09/92 491.35 ELMER J PETERSON CO REPAIR LS9 73-4344-569-92 491.35 • 09/09/92 5.265.00 E-Z RECYCLING AUG FEE 01-4392-295-65 72-4234-549-91 01-4232-249-42 73- 4234-569-92 74- 4232-590-93 09-14-92 PAGE 2 8 P 0 i MESSAGE» «-CKS*»*-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS ■M •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •**-CKS §1992 CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTERCHECK NO.DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV422 13 A25825825825809/09/9209/09/92 46.35 28.80 75.15 A GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD WATERCUPS 01-4324-099-1774-4324-590-9325826609/09/92 964.40 964.40 A GOPHER OIL CO SUPPLY’S 01-4220-249-42 258267 258267 258267 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 1.000.00 1.000.00- 1.000.00 1.000.00 A GOLF CAR MIDWEST GOLF CAR MIDWEST GOLF CAR MIDWEST CART RENTAL CART RENTAL CART RENTAL 74-4331-590-93 74-4331-591-93 74-4331-591-93 258272 258272 258272 258272 258272 258272 258272 09/09/92 00/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 294.61 90.06 15.17 45.51 10.24 10.24 10.24- 455.59 A G A K SERVICES G A K SERVICES G A K SERVICES G A K SERVICES G A K SERVICES G A K SERVICES Q A K SERVICES UNIFORMS RUGS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS 01-4221-249-42 01-4343-129-31 72- 4221-549-91 73- 4221-569-92 7.1-4221-590-93 7^-4221-591-93 74- 4221-591-93 258275 258275 258275 258275 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 1.265.52 130.76 502.00 251.00 2,149 28 ■ GROUP HEALTH INC GROUP HEALTH INC GROUP HEALTH INC GROUP HEALTH INC SEPT INS SEPT INS SEPT INS SEPT INS 01-4151-129-31 01-4151-174-33 01-4151-249-42 74-4151-590-93 258278 258278 09/09/92 09/09/92 96.00 144.00 240.00A GOPHER STATE ONECALL GOPHER STATE ONECALL AUG FEE AUG FEE 72- 4306-549-91 73- 4306-569-92 258284 09/09/92 2.96 2 96 A HAPPYS POTATO CHIP CHIPS t 74-4802-591-94 258291 258291 258291 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 8.00 4.50 9.27 21.77 A HALLIN/DOROTHY HALLIN/DOROTHY HALLIN/DOROTHY MTG MTG MILEAGE 01-4356-039-12 01-4356-040-13 01-4381-039-12 09-14-92 PAGE«»*-CKS-••-CKS •••-CKS •*«-CKS •**-CKS »••-CKS ***-CKS •••-CKS 1992 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE258295* H * * Ife258303258304 258308 258337 258337 258337 258337 258337 258337 258337 258337 258370 258385 258385 258395 258397 258397 258397 258402 09/09/9209/09/9209/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 U9/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 AMOUNT 256.34 * 3.32 .95 4.27 * 10 00 10.00 • 50.37 6.30 18.90 75.57 * 7.541.25 CHECK REGISTERVENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION KtAVENYS DRUG KEAVENYS DRUG SUPPLIES SUPPLIES KOEHNENS STANDARD OPART kuehn-thomas KUEHN-THOMAS KUEHN-THOMAS MILEAGE AUG MILEAGE AUG MILEAGE AUG LAKEMTKA CONS DIST 4TH QTR 09-14-92 PAGE 4 ACCOUNT NO. INV. • P.O. • MESSAGE25.02 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEFD GRASS SEED 74-4343-590-9325.02 •415.25 HENN CTY FIN DIV JULY ROOM/BOARD 01-4358-080-16415.25 •27.83 DEPT PROPERTY TAX POSTAGE 01-4321-040-1327.83 • 495.33 HENN CTY SHERIFF DPT JULY BOOK FEE 01-4358-080-16 495.33 91.50 IMS/MN MAIN! POSTMCN 01-4340-039-12 91.50 IMS/MN MAIN! POSTMCN 01-4340-059-14 61.00 IMS/MN MAINT POSTMCN 01-4340-069-15 183.00 IMS/MN MAINT POSTMCN 01-4340-174-33 30.50 IMS/MN MAINT POSTMCN 01-4340-249-42 30 50 IMS/Mfl MAINT POSTMCN 01-4340-295-65 30 50 IMS/MN MAINT POSTMCN 72-4340-549-91 91.50 IMS/MN MAINT POSTMCN 73-4340-569-92 610.00 • 256.34 JIM HATCH SALES CO PARTS 01-4232-249-42 01-4210-039-12 01-4210-249-42 01-4341-129-31 01-4381-069-15 01-4381-174-33 73-4381-569-92 01-4380-020-11 o •••-CKS•••-CKS ***-CKS •••-CKS •ui^-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS H «l ft -CKS 1992 CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTERCHECK NO.DATE AMOUNT7,541.25 A VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV25840409/09/92 58.40 THE LAKER AD 01-4323-039-1225840409/09/92 29.20 THE LAKER AD 01-4323-174-332^ *4 09/09/92 67.16 154.76 A THE LAKER AD 26-4323-408-00 258406 09/09/92 90.00 90.00 A LAMBERT SOD SOD 74-4343 -590-93 258426 09/09/92 288.00 288.00 A LETN TRAINING 01-4241-129-31 * A * A ft A 258437 09/09/92 13.72 CITY OF LONG LAKE FLASHER 01-4325-249-4225843709/09/92 68.33 82.05 ft CITY OF LONG LAKE FLASHER 73-4344-569-92 258439 09/09/92 4.15 4.15 A LONG LK FORD TRACTOR PART 01-4232-249-42 258445 09/09/92 59.94 LYMAN LUMBER LUMBER 01-4231-290-6125844509/09/92 12.80 72.74 A LYMAN LUMBER LUMBER 01-4232-249-42 258459 09/09/92 40.17 MACOUEEN EQUIPMENT PART 01-4232-249-4225845909/09/92 128.00 168.17 A MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT PART 01-4342-249-42 258474 09/09/92 643.50 643 50 A METRO WASTE SAC FEE 01-2226-000-00 251477 • 09/09/92 19.22 MIDWEST BSNS PROD SUPPLIES 01-4210-039-1225847709/09/92 49.87 MIDWEST BSNS PROD SUPPLIES 01-4210-039-1225847709/09/92 19.23 MIDWEST BSNS PROD SUPPLIES 01-4210-059-1425847709/09/92 28.51 MIDWEST BSNS PROD SUPPLIES 01-4210-069-15.258477 09/09/92 17.97-MIDWEST BSNS PROD SUPPLIES 01-4210-129-3125847709/09/92 19.23 MIDWEST BSNS PROD SUPPLIES 01-4210-174-33 »09-14-92 PAGE•••-CKS •■•-CKS •»*-CKS ■••-CKS ■‘•-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS H • A -CKS V- 1992 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NU. DATE25847709/09/92 AMOUNT 19.22 137.31 •CHECK registerVENDORMIDWEST BSNS PROD ITEM description SUPPLIES o09-14-92 PAGE 6 ACCOUNT NO. INV. i P.O. • MESSAGE 01-4210-249-42253480258480258480 258485 258485 258486 09/09/9209/09/92CS/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 187.99 922.09 843.55 1.953.63 • 13.50 31.50 45.00 * 17.55 17.55 • MIDWEST ASPHALT MIDWEST ASPHALT MIDWEST ASPHALT AH*. MPLS OXYGEN CO MPLS OXYGEN CO STAR TRIBUNE ASPHALTASPHALTASPHALT CKS DEMURRAGE DEMURRAGE NEWS PAPER 01-4233-249-4201-4233-249-4201-4233-249-42 01-4232-129-31 01-4232-249-42 01-4240-039-12 K Jl .CKS 258498 258498 C9/09/92 09/09/92 175.38 27.50 202.88 CELLULARONE CELLULARONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE 01-4320-129-31 01-4320-249-42 a » » •CKS 258500 09/09/92 15.65 10.65 •MINN COMM TELEPHONE 01-4320-129-31 •••-CKS 258534 09/09/92 195.76 195.76 •MOTOROLA INC REPAIR 01-4342-249-42 « H A .CKS 258545 258548 258548 258548 258548 258548 258548 258548 258548 258548 258548 258548 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 13.95 13.95 • 102 36 83.68 28.10 71 12 2 6 16 27 44 79 37.5217.29 130.08 44.42 536.11 NAVARRE AUTO REPAIR NAVARRE NAVARRE NAVARRE NAVARRE NAVARRE NAVARRE NAVARRE NAVARRE NAVARRE NAVARRE NAVARRE HARDWARE HARDWARE HARDWARE HARDWARE HARDWARE HARDWARE HARDWARE HARDWARE HARDWARE HARDWARE HARDWARE REPAIR ***-CKS SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 74-4341-590-93 01-4210 01-4231 . 01-4231 01-4232- 01-4232- 72-4231- 72-4232- 72-4234- 72- 4343- 73- 4234- 74- 4232- -129-31 -099-17 -290-61 -249-42 -290-61 -549-91 -549-91 -549-91 -549-91 569-92. 590-93 •■•-CKS •••-CKS o 1992 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE258562258562258562258562258562258562258562258562258562 258562 258562 258565 258590 258597 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258628 258G46 .». 09/09/9209/09/9209/09/9209/09/9209/09/9209/09/9209/09/9209/09/9209/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 AMOUNT376 . 296.3. 175. 97. 91 . 950. 831. 10. 178. 132. 143. 461214207109301194 38 57 02 1.074.05 1.074.05 ‘ 73.32 73.32 • 4.436.25 4.436.25 • 1.168 76 272 212 119 700 35 400 76 592. 588. 109 2,130 434 4.380. 698 . 698 . 12.691. .06 .50 .00 .50 .00 .00 . 10 .00 . 50 .50 .50 20 71 30 . 10 .25 .25 47 • 305,777 08 305.777.08 ‘ CHECK REGISTERVENDORNSPNSPNSPNSPNSPNSPNSPNSPNSP NSP NSP NSP OTTEN BROS PUBLIC EMPL RET ASSN POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM POPHAM HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK HAIK L & A & A A A A A A A A A A A A ASSOC ASSOC ASSOC ASSOC ASSOC ASSOC ASSOC ASSOC ASSOC ASSOC ASSOC ASSOC' :soc ASSOC ASSOC ASSOC ASSOC PROGRESSIVE CONST ITEM DESCRIPTIONUTILITIESUTILITIESUTILITIESUTILITIESUTILITIESUTILITIESUTILITIESUTILITIESUTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES ST LITES PART PERA 8/17-30 LEGAL RETAINER MY/JN DNR MAXWELL BAY LEGAL CONSULT MY/JN LEGAL-MARINA LIC LEGAL-MARINA LIC legal-g nelson LEGAL-G NELSON LEGAL CONSULT-MAY LEGAL CONSULT-JUNE HWY 12 CORRIDOR LEGAL APPLIC MY/JN LEGAL CONSUT-JN LEGAL CONSULT MY/JN LEGAL LAND ACQ JUNE LEGAL CONSULT MY/JN LEGAL-EASEMENTS LEGAL-EASEMENTS STUBBS BAY #2 ACCOUNT NO. INV01-432401-432401-432401-432401-432401-432472- 432473- 4324 73-4324 73- 4324- 74- 4324 -099-17-129-31175-34-249-42-249-42290-61549-91569-92569-92 569-92 590-93 01-4325-249-42 01-4233-249-42 01-2031-000-00 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 23 24- 25- 26- 72- 73- ■4301 -4303 -4303 -4303 -4303 -4303 -4303 •4303 •4303 •4303 4303 4303 4399 4303 4303 4303 4303 -080-16 -080-16 -080-16 -080-16 -080-16 -080-16 -080-16 -129-31 -174-33 -299-72 -840-71 -359-00 -455-00 -480-00 -408-00 -436-84 -434-82 26-4531-408-00 09-14-92 PAGE 7 # P.O. • MESSAGE i •••-CKS •••-CKS • * *-CKS « »fi -CKS nn^-CKS •••-CKS ■1992 CITY OF ORONO ftCHECK REGISTERCHECKNO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV25866109/09/92 16.90 SCHARBER 4. SONS INC PART 01-4232-290-6125866109/09/92 27.18 SCHARBER & SONS INC PA/?r 74-4232-590-9325866109/09/92 36.3180.39 81 SCHARBER & SONS INC PART 74-4232-590-9325866209/09/92 59.40 REED VENDING CANDY & CIGS 74-4802-591-9425866209/09/92 99.60 REED VENDING CANDY CIG 74-4802-591-9425866209/09/92 49.20 208.20 81 REED VENDING CANDY/CIG 74-4802-591-94 258664 09/09/92 103.85 RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS CASH REG MAINT 01-4340-039-1225866409/09/92 103.85 RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS CASH REG MAINT 01-4340-069-1525866409/09/92 103.85 RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS CASH REG MAINT 01-4340-174-3325866409/09/92 72.70 RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS CASH REG MAINT 72-4340-549-9125866409/09/92 135.00 519.25 ft RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS CASH REG MAINT 73-4340-569-92 258665 09/09/92 16.17 16.17 ft RICKS SUPERVALU ^ '.lES 74-4232-590-93 258669 09/09/92 93.63 RITZ CAMERA FILM 01-4210-129-3125866909/09/92 4.26 RITZ CAMERA FILM DEVELP 01-4210-129-3125866909/09/92 25.60 RITZ CAMERA FILM PROC 01-4210-129-31 258669 09/09/92 12.67 RITZ CAMERA FILM/DEVLP 01-4210-129-3125866909/09/92 106.76 RITZ CAMERA FILM/DEVLP 01-4210-129-3125866909/09/92 4.25 RITZ CAMERA FILM 01-4210-174-3325866909/09/92 46.75 293.92 ft RITZ CAMERA CAMERA CASE 01-4540-129-31 258675 09/09/92 2,010.80 2.010.80 A ROLLINS OIL CO GASOLINE 01-1260-000-00 258693 09/09/92 6.720.00 6.720.00 ft SCHOENING EXCAVATING EQUIP RENTAL 01-4331-249-42 258697 09/09/92 \ * 5.90 5 90 ft SCHARBER & SONS PART « 01-4232-249-42 258740 09/09/92 55 17 STREICHERS MACE 01-4232-129-31 258740 09/09/92 887.65 942.82 ft STREICHERS CONVT CHIEF SOD 01-4550-129-31 o09-14-92 PAGE 8 •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •**-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS Q O o 1992 CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTERCHECKNO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO IN25874309/09/92 21.86 %STRINGER BUS SYSTM FAX PAPER 01-4210-039-1225874309/09/92 21.85 STRINGER BUS SYSTM FAX PAPER 01-4210-069-1525874309/09/92 21.85 STRINGER BUS SYSTM FAX PAPER 01-4210-069-1525874309/09/92 21.85 STRINGER BUS SYSTM FAX PAPER 01-4210-069-1525874309/09/92 21.85 STRINGER BUS SYSTM FAX PAPER 01-4210-174-3325874309/09/92 21.85 STRINGER -^lUS SYSTM FAX PAPER 01-4210-249-4225874309/09/92 21.85 STRINGER bUS SYSTM FAX PAPER 72-4210-549-9125874309/09/92 21.85 STRINGER BUS SYSTM FAX PAPER 73-4210-569-92131.11 • 258754 0*1/09/92 375.00 SUBN RATE AUTHORITY DUES 01-4380-039-12375.00 tk 258815 09/09/92 57.22 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 72-4320-549-9157.22 ft 258821 09/09/92 212.62 VILLAGE CHEVROLET PARTS 01-4232-249-4225882109/09/92 391.83 VILLAGE CHEVROLET REPAIR 01-4342-249-4225882109/09/92 181.07 VILLAGE CHEVROLET REP/IR 72-4341-549-91785.52 * 258832 09/09/92 321.00 VANG BRUCE CLASSES 01-4356-174-33321.00 ft 258845 09/09/92 45.37 WECKMAN STEPHEN H'TLEAGE 01-4381-174-33 45.37 ft 258875 09/09/92 8.69 WRIGHT HENN ELECTRIC UTILITIES 01-4324-249-428.69 ft 258894 09/09/92 774.41 YOCUM OIL CO INC DIESEL * 01-4220-249-42774.41 ft 258901 09/09/92 68.36 MN CORRECTIONAL FAC PO LICEGRAM 01-4322-129-3168.36 ft 258902 09/09/92 11.00 MAMA MTG m 01-4356-039-1211.00 ft 09-14-92 PAGE # P.O. i MESSAGE 9 •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS J.. Q f J 1992 CITY OF ORONO "4. r: CHECK REGISTERCHECKNO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV25890309/09/92 261.60261.60 n RUTTGERS LODGE CONF 01-4356-129-3125890409/09/92 261.60 261.60 m RUTTGERS LODGE CONF 01-4356-129-31 258905 09/09/92 120.00 120.00 A ENGFER AUTOMOTIVE TEST RADARS 01-4342-129-31 258906 09/09/92 8.142.00 8.142.00 * MN PLAYGROUND INC PLAYGROUND EQUIP 12-4560-392-00 258907 09/09/92 396.21 396.21 A CT SYSTEMS REPAIR 72-4345-549-91 258908 09/09/92 193.27 193.27 A EULLS MANUF CO INC PARTS 73-4234-569-92 258909 258909 258909 258909 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 09/09/92 2.00 17.00 29.00 2.074.00 2.122.00 A MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE AUG SALES TX AUG sale: 7X AUG SALES TX AUG SALES TX 01-3500-000-00 01-3516-000-00 72-2222-000-00 74-2222-000-00 258910 09/09/92 55.55 55.55 A VESFCO INC PART 72-4232-549-91 258911 09/09/92 130.492.00 130.492.00 A PITT DESMOINES WTR TOWER 72-4531-438-86 258912 09/09/92 128.67 128.67 ft RIGS A SOUAADS PART 01-4232-129-31 258913 09/09/92 239.88 239.88 A GALLS INC 2 CAMERAS 01-4540-129-31 258914 09/09/92 364.23 364.23 A INTOXIMETERS INC BREATH TESTER 01-4540-129-31 258915 09/09/92 28.76 28 76 A V & S JEWELRY & GIFT PEN SET 01-4210-020-11 258920 09/09/92 489.25 489.25 A NORTH STAR TURF INC REPAIR f 74-4342-590-93 n n II «i a n .. ^ 2?t930 09/09/92 4.200 00 4.200.00 A MOOOYS INVESTORS BONO RATING 26-4306-408-00 52.150 57 FUND 01 TOTAL GENERAL FUND o 09-14-92 PAGE 5i i •••-CKS ••*-CKS •"‘-CKS o LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL^ C>, C» vO > SeDtember 14, 199^^^ <Cy.^ \ FOR MEETING OF ClTYof OKONO (612) 473-7357 Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLERS LICENSE APPLICATION All questions must be answered. License fee, 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. Business or trade name Business address y/ 'I/) Business phone Residence phone y yy~ 4.Name of applicant yO’r company representative holding MPCA certification 5.Type of certification held: ^..^^■^''^nstaller Certificate expiration date /^- Pumper 6. 7. Have you ever held a Septic System Ir^taller license in Orono before? ]/ IL/jy Most recent year y/ ^ Have you ever had a license revoked? _ _ _ _ _ When? ^ i-. 8. Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes No 9. Do you pump out septic tanks? Yes No / 4 SUBMITTALS REQUIRED:cm if OROh'Q y 1. iC 2. a/^3. $50.00 License application fee. $2000.00 license and permit bond naming City^of c,-. q obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be accepte^i- r^'* r^*^, $50-100-300,000 m.i nimum Certificate of Insurance. '’'r’CrcTijr'yuiiiK'X'nir txuLimAI I I iintfiS t v\Jy 4, Copy of current MPCA Certificate.t\uLi.AI I inntfiS t V\J ,vVW nrii JnC I rr<Lw'Vw'c'v ow'x iWi ivw LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED f »C* ‘"7V'U*r c I / List persons other than applicant who are authorized by you to apply for permits under your license ______________________________________________ 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 City of Orono. Date y Applicant's Signature .■^r CITY USE ONLY Staff recommendation Approval Reason for denial: Denial Date City Council Action Date Date license mailed Approved Denied Permit; s»; PAPvADES & SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF ORONOf MINNESOTA Fee: $50.00 Phone Number; _________ Name; H IV I r\ Vi Ov Tn Q^S Arlclraafl: C(1Cl>^\x<1'yfjlQ o City# State, zip; p rCQtj , r~t •Location of Parade or Event : *7^VKT^c- CITf OF omo FirnHCE OFFICE 1313400000 01 CFN 50. CHECK . . JL 50, yt^ LWi KVi n- 09/0 Person(s) and/or Organization(s) Handling the Event; S»<er>lA:- /_ ,Oi <CS^Or-^ k >^o.rvflo^ vjL':>CiLQS^ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Data o£ Event; _ Hours of Event; ^ ^ Z Reason or Purpose; _____U.v^ ----------------------- Insurance Company; Amount; ^ ^ OcJiyD —. Copy of insurance certificatesto besubmitted with this application. I 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 Cxty of ,o harmless from all liabilities that may arise directly or indirectly the parade or special event approved by the granting of this permit. Sxgnatur ) Date Approved : _ Remarks; •N, Permit #; PARADES & SPECIAI* EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Fee; $50.00 Name; •" HL/cttOOO^ Address: 3c.'’/^ City# state# 2iPi . fk'^ 'SS'Sf/ Location of Parade or Event t 2^$S~ • person(s) and/or Organization(s) iiandling the Eventt /‘TSA$t >/*f^g^s/ 7?f^ 7^/AJ C/¥C^_________________________________________ Date of Event: SCpi ^ /? ^Hours of Event t E. fm - £» >. r>r Insurance Company :fSafc>///'CZjCr7i^<S Amount:__^_^Ui4r4^ . Copy of insurance certificates to be submitted with this application. I am aware of all apollcable State and other laws regarding parades and special events and w'ill abide by same. I also agree to hold the City of Orono harmless from all liabilities that may arise directly or indirectly from the parade or special event approved by the granting of this permit. Date y-ZcrP-'f^. ;■ j Approved:Denied:By; Remarks: Perniit PARADES & SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF ORONOr MINNESOTA Fee; $50.00 Phone Number; ^ S B _ Name;_ _ _ _t_ ._ _ _/L VM. ^ ^_ _ _ ^ CP !^ tup£>^ Dp>j:cjc_ Address; ^ ^ O & {_— C Q ^ ^^ - - City, State, Zip; NO. p / 0. /Vl A/- --a ^ ^ ^ Location of Parade or Event:_ /IXo I i.c<I^ t* 1 ^ Cu\______oc2 Person(s) and/or Organization(s) Handling the Event;------------------------------------- /. hA 2- t'L ^ C~^C-C\ S\yy rS/2- / "tW—r "T7/ Osp-Tf^ __/h^ ^ r , Date of Event; S/ph • _2. /V^ICe-AJ 3 ~ jr Hours of Event; / C/» r <^of~4 , z- Reason or Purpose; Insurance Company;Amount; Copy of insurance certificates to be submitted with this application. I am aware of all applicable State and other laws regard^ing parades and special and will abi^e-rby srme. I also agree eUlnlesaOrono heirlnles^a ’ from all from phe paMc3e or soeci t JX r._ _ _^ f li^ilities that may arise directly or indirectly a*! event approved by the granting of this permit. Approved; Remarks; PARADES & SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Perniit =: Fee: $‘^50.00 Phone Number; Name: /^»_ _ _ \-^V2^ W/rvyy-, ^7^Address:_^ Citv, State, Zip; 4rv . Location of Parade or Event; IYX£'1 —QH ------- m « m p_I ijf\c?^ i Sf C^l COb'iyCIL MEETING SEP 1 4 1992 CITY OF ORONO I nil CITY 0= i Westonka Area Chamber of Commerce 5600 Lynwood Eioulevard. Mound. MN 55364 • 472-6780 DATE: TO: September 10, 1992 Community Leaders FROM:Paul Huber, 1993 President-Elect SUBJECT: October Annual Planning Conference We need your help! In order to be as productive as possible at the Annual Planning Conference on October 8th, we need to identify the major issues, areas of concern and suggestions or changes regarding the Chamber. Please take a few moments to note your ideas on this page, and return it by mail by September 18th. Many thanks for your help ?nd cooperation! Major Issues: Areas of Concern: Suggestions for Change: Return to:Paul Huber, Huber Funeral Hone, 520 Second Street, Excelsior, MN 55331. "Working Ji-gcllwr"^ X. • 0 ' . % L Serving the communitlci of Minnetonkj Beach, i'ltiv.etrlsla. yound. Orono (Nji arre). Spring Park, and S; B:~:.'acius September 10, 1992 To the Orono City Council: I'm writing in response to the ban recently placed on building materials for Cleanup Days. I called Mr. Gerhardson to express my thoughts on the letter he sent to Orono residents dated September 2nd and he suggested I write to the City Council. I understand and agree with the provisions regarding fees for dropping off certain materials since the city does not have funds to support the event through its normal operating budget. However, I would urge you to reconsider the complete ban on all building materials; roofing materials, concrete, even boards. I accumulate some of this material nearly every year from normal home improvement projects as most of my neighbors do. l^'ese days there are very few options available to us to get rid of this stuff. Burning permits are difficult to obtain. To take it to a commercial dump also poses problems. They are frequently too muddy to get through with a car, their hours are inconvenient for working people, they are farther to travel and are expensive for small loads. I believe that even with residents paying their full share for materials dumped at Cleanup Days our charges would be less collectively than individually. I am aware that there have been considerable abuses of cleanup days regarding the dumping of building materials in the past. Last fall when I was there, a fully loaded dump truck was allowed tc dump a whole load and I saw other commercial vehicles with nearly as much material. While complete regulation would be difficult, I believe there should be some restrictions regarding commercial dumpincf, way to do this might be to charge for all dumping but with a graduated fee schedule where large loads would be cha»*ged proportionately more than smaller ones and the number* of loads delivered by any one person or vehicle restricted. One I would appreciate anything you would do for future i. leanup Days to allow building materials to some extent, even with appropriate fees. Sincerely, oj Mju John Hardin 1496 Park Drive Mound, Mn. ClTYO*onoNt C: Mr. Gerhardson SEP 111902 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO: Lake Minnetonka Sun-Sailor for Excelsior, Minnetonka, Wayzata, and Westonka editions FAX: 896-4754 FROM: Eugene R. Strommen Executive Director PHONE: 47 -7033 DATE; September 2, 1992 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE HALSTEDS BAY QUIET WATERS AREA Notice is hereby given that the Lake Minnetonka Conservation, District will hold a public hearing at the Tonka Bay City Hall, 4901 Manitou Rd, Tonka Bay, on Wednesday, September 23, 1992 at 7 pm for the purpose of determining the need for establishing a Quiet Waters Area (5 mph speed limit) in part of LHCD Area 1, Halsteds Bay, near Kings Point, Lake Minnetonka. Eugene R. Strommen, Executive Director Lake Minnetonka Conservation District CITY 0= ORONC"iiH____ j^rKSBO'^d □ SEP lO i092 jij ll I * •i' Ir.* ^ i- >' . L. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO: Lake Minnetonka Sun-Sailor for Excelsior, Minnetonka, Wayzata, and Westonka editions FAX: 896-A75>; FROM: Eugene R. Strommen Executive Director PHONE: 473-7033 DATE: September 2, 1992 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE HALSTEDS BAY QUIET WATERS AREA Notice is hereby given that the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District will hold a public hearing at the Tonka Bay City Hall, 4901 Manitou Rd, Tonka Bay, on Wednesday, September 23, 1992 at 7 pm for the purpose of determining the need for establishing a Quiet Waters Area (5 mph speed limit) in part of LMCD Area 1, Halsteds Bav, near Kings Point, Lake Minnetonka. Eugene R. Strommen, Executive Director Lake Minnetonka Conservation District LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Environment Committee agenda 8:30 AM, Tuesday, September 15, 1S92 Norwest Bank Bldg., Conference Room 135 900 E. Wayzata Blvd., Wayzata (LMCD Hq.) (please note change of location due to primary election activity at Wayzata City Hall) 1. Welcome and introductions. Committee Chair JoEllen Hurr 2. Review and amendment or acceptance of 7/14/92 minutes as mailed 7/20/92. 3. Lake Monitoring Subcommittee organizational progress, Chair Dick Osgood and assistant Carolyn Dindorf. 4. Independent evaluation of LMCD's Eurasian water milfoil harvesting and control program, evaluation status report by Chair Hurr on behalf of Consultant Bob Pierce. 5. Review of committee objectives Introduced at 5/12/92 meeting as identified in the Management Plan for Lake Minnetonka and recommendations for further action on objectives per target dates. 8. Agency reports on environmental activities. 7. Additional business. 8. October meeting date, proposed for Tues., Oct. 13. 9. Adjournment ANNOUNCEMENT:The Water Quality Monitoring training program for Lake Minnetonka volunteers, in cooperation with the Freshwater Foundation and LMLOA, will be held: 10:00 am, Saturday October 10, 1992 Lord Fletchers of the Lake, Spring Park Environment Committee members are encouraged to attend. ► Hffinnegasco A I)i\ isior, of Arkla, Inc. September 4, 1992 rzr\ ,tlj C'^VC- li'lj. G S ili l5rwr' Dorothy Hallin Orono City Clerk Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 SEP 8 i092 Dear Ms. Hallin: I am writing to inform you that Minnegasco has filed a rate increase request with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) that would raise a typical residential heating customer ’s bill by about $3.50 per month. This request, Minnegasco ’s first general rate increase request in Minnesota since 1982, would increase overall revenues by about 5.5 percent. The MPUC has approved a 2.63 percent interim rate increase, effective September 1. An official notice of this filing is enclosed. Please share this information with your Mayor and City Council members at your earliest convenience. There are four major factors affecting Minnegasco ’s need for a rate increase: The need to invest continually in the gas distribution system Costs associated with old manufactured gas plants The effects of inflation over several years Growth of conservativ'n programs designed to help customers save energy and money. The rate increase will help us meet the significant increases in our costs of doin^j business, and enable us to continue providing a safe, reliable supply ot natural gas. Although we have been able to improve productivity and manage expenses effectively over the past several years, we’re at a point where those efforts aie no longer enough to offset rising costs. Even with this proposed increase in rates, Minnegasco ’s residential natural gas rates will still be the lowest offered by the five largest natural gas utilities in Minnesota. If you have any questions about this r ; increase request, please don ’t hesitate to contact me at (612)342-4821. Sincerely, Kim Roden, Director Local Government & Community Relations 201 South Sewnth S*nH*t %f. . Notice to Counties and Municipalities Under Minn. Stat. § 216B.16 Subd. 1 BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION - STATE OF MINNESOTA )In the Matter of the Application of Minnegasco, Minneapolis, ) Minnesota, for Authority to Change ) Its Schedule of Natural Gas Rates ) for Retail Customers Within the ) State of Minnesota ) NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR RATE INCREASE MPUC Docket No. G-008/GR-92-400 On July 2, 1992, Minnegasco, a division of Arkla, Inc., (Minnegasco) filed a request with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (Commission) for a general rate increase of $24.8 million or 5.5 percent. In accordance with Minn. Stat. § 216.16 Subd. 3 (1990), the Commission shall order an interim rate schedule into effect no later than September 1, 1992. The Commission has approved an interim rate increase of $11.8 million or 2.63 percent. Below are examples of the effect of the proposed and interim increase on typical bills. Individual changes may be higher or lower depending on actual natural gas usage. Rate class Average monthly usage CCFs Average monthly bill: current rates Interim rates Proposed rates Residential 108 $ 47.00 $ 48.20 S 50.40 Commercial and industrial 561 $ 236.40 $ 242.60 $ 250.00 Small volume interruptible 5,878 $ 1,389.80 $ 1,426.40 $ 1,511.40 Large volume firm 25,000 $10,357.00 $10,629.00 $10,677.00 Large volume interruptible 100,000 $22,128.00 $22,710.00 $20,650.00 The Commission will determine the amount of the final rate increase on or before May 3, 1993. If the final approved rates are less than the interim rates, the difference will be refunded to the customer, with interest. The Department of Public Service will conduct an investigation of Minnegasco's books and records. A public hearing will be scheduled by the MPUC. Public notice of the hearing dates and locations will be published in local newspapers in Minnegasco's Minnesota service areas. (over) L The proposed rate schedules, and a comparison of present and proposed rates, may be examined by the public during normal business hours at their nearest Minnegasco office, or at the Department of Public Service, 790 American Center Building, 160 East Kellogg Boulevard, St. Paul, MN. A public hearing will be scheduled by the Commission. Public notice of the hearing dates and locations will be published in local newspapers in Minnegasco's Minnesota service areas. Persons who wish to intervene or testify in this case should contact the Administrative Law Judge, Richard C. Luis, Office of Administrative Hearings, 100 Washington Square, Suite 1700, Minneapolis, MN 55401, 612-349-2542. 65 North Willow Drive Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 (612) 473-5796 September 1, 1992 Dear Honorable Mayor and Council Members: I am writing this letter to help explain why I did not build and some of the circumstances. I do not feel that I should have to pay $6,560 more than my neighbors and others in Cygnet and Leaf as their systems are polluting and I have never polluted on my present Orono home or on my lot. The property north of my lot has a shallow trench system dating back to 1958 and is 34 years old. It has been added on to once and is functioning now, but for how long? A mound system could not be used over existing trenches. The property south of me, built in 1962 has been leaking into the creek for several years and the end of the drainfield is covered with a concrete slab and building 5 feet from the creek. It was built in 1987-88. I have stepped in sewage in the winter. A mound system could not be installed on this property. These properties and several others on the creek would positively not meet setback requirements. They would require holding tanks. With the added 22 feet along Leaf Street which my title shows that I own. I could install a mound system and alternate site and it would adhere to Orono's code of 20 feet setbacks from the road and side lot lines and less than a 6% slope. A house could be built 26 to 50 feet from the creek prior to the new shoreline regulations adopted in February, 1992. I have a site plan of a lot that was allowed a building permit for an addition in 1991. The side slope setbacks were proposed at 10 feet for that mound system and v/ere actually constructed closer. Even the ex-mayor's lot line rearrangement is proposed with a 10 foot setback. There are also other sites where construction was approved on greater than 6% slopes. Thus, I a.m meeting the very strictest application of the code, even though others are not. Honorable Mayor and Council Members September 1# 1992 Page Two Listed below are some of my personal service contributions as well as some of my personal hardships that I've gone through whifh have delayed my building on this lot: Two (2) years U.S. Navy--World War II, 15 months overseas in the South Pacific. Ten (10) years employinent--no retirement benefit. Thirty-three (33) years employment-$5,740 total sum of retirement pay. Fifteen (15) years work of overtime hours, which totals 48 years of work calculated at 2,000 hours per year, 10-13 hours, daily and Saturday and occasional Sundays and holidays. Fifteen (15) years part-time Licensed Site Evaluator, State of Minnesota No. 852. Four (4) years Cub Scout Treasurer. Two (2) years Little League North Shore Baseball coach. Five (5) years Pee Wees and Bantam's Traveling Hockey Team coach. 1978--Daughter became ill with Leukemia--sophomore at University of Minnesota. Died one (1) year later at St. Louis, MO, after receiving bone marrow transplant. Total bill $197,000 plus a few minor bills. Yes, I had a health insurance policy, but there were co-payments and deductibles to be paid before major medical started. There were travel expenses and living expenses in St. Louis, also. This has been paid in full with no charity. 1975 — Residen'.s of Willow Drive and Hackberry were bunc.ied in with -’.ree (3) other sewer projects to help pay for the costly ^..roject on Tonkawa Road--3 lines--lift stations—force mains and 16-18" trunk lines. Vacant lots were assessed he same as homes in this 1975 project. No one else in Sti .-s Bay Sewer Project assisted monies, yet they a . getting a 30% reduction, plus negotiation lawsuits for approximately $1,595. in any Honorable Mayor and Council Members September 1, 1992 Page Three The current council and previous councils have passed ordinances and regulations that reduce the buildable area of my lot. Therefore, they are responsible for downgrading "said lot," in violation of the Fifth Amendment and current courts are acting favorably to these situations. The lots in this subdivision were never required to have any variances before 1975. It was just after that date that they were required. I believe this lot should be grandfathered in to be built on like the others in the subdivsion. I think it is wrong to asess me an outrageous price and then transfer the excess to homes with values up to $750,000 or more. I don't think it is fair to have one of the two highest assessments in the Stubbs Bay Sever Project. I have paid my dues and done my share for my country, government and community. Therefore, I do not want to be burdened with this inequity, especially in my retirement years. Sincerely, Donald R. Gronberg ^ r = I Cet »:.i r of Survcv for Dt^nnld M. Gronhorq or Trnct: M, No. 74 4 llonnooin (.’ounhv, Mi nnor.oh«T (!7 1 i • ^k !••»• . • • y 4 . • k ' 1 k i% k \ • •* •*• ( ■ • •\ • ' • 1 w % *4 •• i • 'k • \\ \ Ui \ i-" > • « «• • • •.. • : , \ >cr' I I (toi -------C^.4j /. / ' 0 I ' I llll ' / / ' I I/I/ ' / ' / III r Ttrf / / I (/Ol f/M/J / C ' / / t 2«4/r/ J ' ^ ' / /y f.r^P S. ; ■ • •p- i Bi>i^9S^gRrvi5wJtt5 /■ > I i / / Q $^.•9 / //<v 7 £"^ry 3oe.OO Notes: •1. Septic Systems meet city, codes and were agreeable to Mike Gaffron. 2. The proposed house and garage could have been con structed 6 months ago with a greater than the 26 foot setback from the pond at 50 feet as shown, which is more than a lot of the adjoining struc­ tures. ' Kxintinn Legal Description Tract li, Reqistorod Land Survey No. 744 , fiJos of Ronvj-.trar of TiH»‘f., C’ounty of Hennepin. 'I'hiR survey shows the location of the l)oundaric's and tr>|»o<ir<i|>hy of the above described property. It does not purport to r.how any r • Ar ••____4_ Allirw^t il Law ROBtlT A. AL50P Ronald H. Batty STEPHEN J. Bl It i John a D ean Ma BV G. DOBiCN» STETANIB N. Ga LEY CoRiiNE A. Heine James s. Holmes D avtd J. Kennedy John R. Laeson WILUNGTON H. La W CHARLES L. IXmERE Holmes & Graven CHARTERED 470 PUbburj CtoCtr. Miimcapalif. MinnatoU 55402 (412) 337-9300 Faalmilc (612) 337-9310 John M. leFevre. jr ROBERT J. UNDALL Laira K. MOLIXT Barbara L Portwood Ja %ces m. strommen James J. Thomson , jr. La BBY M. WERTHnM Bonnie L wilrins Gaby P. winter WRITER’S DIRECT DUL 337-9233 MEMORANDUM David L. okaven oFror»isn. RouiT c. C aiuon Rdkit L. OAvn»«)>« TO; FROM: RE: DATE: SRA Board, Alternates, and City Managers Jim Strommen, Holmes & Graven /i/y J Final US West Uniform Telephone Rates - Savings Calculation September 2, 1992 Introduction This is a "final" written report regarding the SRA's long and ultimately successful battle to eliminate the tiered rates for US West telephone service in the metro area. Information in this memo is definitive in that it is derived from finally agreed upon US West uniform rates scheduled to become effective November 1. The collective revenue shift and savings to outer tier residents and businesses resulting from the new uniform rates is significant. Uniform rates are guaranteed as a rate design for at least three years. Coupled with an SRA spearheaded reduction in tier ratios in 1984, the net result of SRA efforts on this issue by 1995 will be millions of dollars of rate savings to tier II, III, and IV customers. The final 3RA accomplishment was completed in the context of US West's uniform rate filing of July 2, 1992. With the able assis­ tance of our expert, Basil Copeland of CRC, the SRA engineered a Commission-approved settlement with US West on a revised schedule of rates, saving tier I, II, III, and IV residential customers an additional annual $541,201 (explained below). Total annual savings to tier II, III, and IV residents and businesses beginning Novem­ ber 1 will be approximately $3,270,100 ($2,005,269, residential; $1,264,831, business). Since US West has no data on customers per municipality, it is impossible to measure the savings per SRA member. f Recent Events As you know, on December 20, 1991 the Commission issued an order finding the tiered rates without basis in cost or policy. The Commission ordered uniform rates to be implemented on a revenue- neutral basis to US West, meaning that tier I rates would rise modestly, tier II rates would stay the same or decrease slightly. r and tier III and IV rates would drop significantly. The Attorney General (and SRA) favored reduction to tier I rates. The Conunis- sion did not adopt that position and delayed (unnecessarily) US West's filing to July 2, 1992. US West's July 2 filing included a surprise increase of $.03 per month for tier II residential customers. The Department of Public Service ("DPS") endorsed the rate schedule and the rates undoubted­ ly would have been accepted by the Commission. Our expert reviewed the schedule of rates and noted a favoring of business rates over residential, and a deviation from the Commission ordered 3-to-l ratio for business-to-resldential rates. The SRA then submitted an alternative schedule of rates to the Commission. The SRA alterna­ tive rates reduced tier II residential r^.tes and reduced the increase to tier I residential and the largest class of business customers. The SRA proposal shifted the revenue ratios oack to 3- to-1 and derived additional revenue from certain business classes, without raising tier II rates. After review, the DPS and Attorney General endorsed the SRA proposal. Having reviewed the SRA proposal, US West prepared a revised schedule superseding its original filing. The revised schedule followed and refined the SRA proposal. On August 27, the SRA, US West, DPS, Attorney General, and Commission staff met and settled on the US West revised schedule. It is very acceptable to SRA Interests. All tier II rates are reduced and tier I residen­ tial and single line business increases are lowered. US West has agreed to implement these rates as soon as possible. Due to procedural requirements and appeal periods, the earliest date for implementation is November 1. Even this date could be jeopardized if a party conunenced an eleventh hour appeal when the rates are made public. The Commission staff has represented that it will make every attempt to obtain the required consent of the Commission to this stipulation in time for a November 1 effective date. Notwithstanding the stipulation of all interested parties, the SRA had to lobby the Commission staff and US West considerably to get an implementation date as "early" as November 1. Schedule of Uniform Rates and Savings New Rates (monthly) Business (single line) Residential (single party) Tier I Present New 42.48 43.75 (3% inc.) 14.16 14.58 (3% inc.) Tier II Present New 43.83 43.75 (.2% red.) 14.61 14.58 (.2% red.) Tier III Present New 46.98 43.75 (6.8% red.) 15.66 14.58 (6.8% red.) Tier IV Present New 53.67 43.75 (18.5% red.) 17.89 14.58 (18.5% red.) Annual Savings (Increase) by Tier Business (all classes) Residential (single party) Tier I Tier II Tier III Tier IV $(1,800,367)$(1,466,998)* 145,881 125,489** 858,821 1,244,419 260,129 635,361 * $209,571 less increase than under US West original proposal. **$250,978 net savings from US West original proposal. If you have any questions regarding particular aspects of this change, please contact me. If you plan to disseminate any of the information regarding the original US West proposal and adjust­ ments, please also contact me. Some of the specific information was derived from proprietary data. I would want to be advised if any of it were used publicly. r vw. ■ ■ , • V ■ •kv ■> ‘ V*b: &'■ Sif ■•<- K-.:. m ;v''ii0 .1m f ■' ’ '^: - i' ;-*:i i- i S'-i t:-. 'i-: h’i'i '•V..V Lake Minnetonka Cable Communlcattone Commission 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 • (612) 474-5539 VI. VII. LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 1992 5:00 P.M. ROOM 204, EXCELSIOR COMMUNITY CENTER AGENDA I. II. Ill. uaii to vra«r Approvaj. or Auguar 1992 Minutas .’:®por~3 Officara: Tr«aaurer -August l’.-‘92 Cheo: Reorater b* AdiBinistraror/Production Cocrrinatora cj Trxax Caol-iviaion IV. Un£ini3h«d Buainaas •) Channal 6 Updata: Incroductron or Naw Diractor Cnucic Slccum b) O££xc«/Studio Ralocation - Staff V.Maw Buaxnaaa a) Raport on Cxty Councxla Approval of 1993 Budgat * Staff b> Raport on 1992 NATOA Confaranca - Olda, Salasar, Stanga Mattara From Tha Floor Adjournaant CTTYO* ORONC SISdO'^^E SEP 9 iO® iliir-rfitirf af nil'll 4 ■^5 i Alack I im<riiiiii^r-1^ f- fy k- %; I ri' LAKE HINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FULL COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 18, 1992, 5:00 PM EXCELSIOR COMMUNITY CENTER AUDITORIUM 443 OAK STREET, EXCELSIOR I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Brincai called the neetina to order at 5:03 ?.M. OTHERS PRESENT Jim Daniels/Administrator Colleen Lindakoog/Adain Aast. Jim Schindler/Proauction Coord. Paul Nazaroe/Triax Cableviaion DIRECTORS PRESENT Barb Brancel/Shorewood, Chair Jim Olda/Exceiaior, V. Chair Tim Pattrin/Orono, Treasurer Lesley Kuones*Seamans/TonKa Bay, 3’tary Tim Salazar/Minnetrista, At Larqe Dennis Stance/Deepnaven, At Large Robert Murony/Exceisior; David Stanr*/Exceisior; Jan Gray*/Greenwood Pat Shultz/Long Laxe; Ann Thies/Meaina; Bobbi Abdo/Minnetonka Beacp Paul Pond/Minnetrista; Andrew Weinzierl, Jr./St. Boniiacius Harlyn Dili/Spring Parx; Gerald Scnmieg/Victoria; Sidney Wear/Woodland (* denotes alternates^ II.APPROVAL OF MINUTES Brancel asxed for discussion July 21, 1992 meeting. Motion 6.18.92.1 Stanga moved or motion to approve tne minutes of tne seconded. Notion pesmed unaninously to approve the minutes. Weinzieri ni. REPORTS n) Treemurer*s Report Pattrin described financial transactions for the nontn. Motion 8.16.92.2 Thies noved to approve the Checx Disoursements for tne period of 7/1/92 through 7/31/92. Stanga seconded. Notion passed unanlsously. Fattrin then explained the second quarter of 1992 financial report. Motion 8.18.92.3 Stanga noved to approve secona quarter report. Thies seconded. Motion passed unaniaousiy. b*l) Adelnlstrator*s Report Daniels spoxe of his luncheon with Congresssan Sikorski, who wanted the Coenission to know that he would continue to watch the H.R. 4850, as it is in a Conference Coaaittca. Staff IS currently in the process of developing a show similar to the *Tonka Report*, but would include more cities . Daniels distributed an example of a *Cubscriber Complaint* fora and explained that it is filled out and forwarded to Triax for action. Daniels then distributed the September stuffer for the Triax billing. He thanked Nazarow and Triax as it is done at no charge to the Commission. b*2) Production Report Schindler stated that 11 new programs have been created since the April 1992 meeting. So far this year, there have been 105 progress created, which eoapares to 69 for the entire year of 1990. Schindler stated that the Volunteer Recognition Awards has begun to be organized for this year. o> TriiN Nazarow distributed the programaing summary and the subscription July 1992: Homes Passed 11,916 Basic Suos 128 Expanded Basic Subs 6,175 report for ■ i- V I :.-r: V>. ‘i .' : 'f-T f • M: . t:’ r I 0. .#• LMCCC - August 1992 Meeting Page Tuo Total r'ay Units Total A/O's Total itemotes 1,632 4.230 ^,25;* Nazarow static tnac premium services are currently oeing otterec trom a tele-marKeting company to “Basic Only* auoscribers. The door-to-aoor marketing to non-suoscribers tnat was plannea was relayed and is oniy now oeginning. Triax will be introducing Digital Cable Radio, whicn will allow stereo broaocasting oi premium cnannels. Nazarow stated tnat a compxaint tnat Triax nas received is a litt.e more incepth tnan usual, as it is trom a non-subscriber, however it is oeing investigated ana nopeiully taxen care ot as socn as possible. Brancel cnangec agenca ana moved item V,c. d) Award Video Program of the Quarter Brancel presented cne award to Jan Cray for "Seniors Corner IV. UHFIMISHED BUSINESS a) Update on Channel 6 Reception Concern Daniels stated tnat the suo-standard service is still an ongo.ng situation, however Channel 6 nas just appointed a new Oeneral Manager, Chucx ilocum. Daniels then asked Nazarow for nis report. Nazarow explained tne route the signal is received and intormea tne Coeeission that Triax pays 0200/month to carry Channel 6. He recommended a revision to the distribution route. Equipment costs tor this would oe approximately S6615 and I-net reconstruction would be an estimated sie.OOO. Thu would be with no guarantees ot better reception. Daniels stated that he feels that there are two options open to the Commission: 1. Forcing Triax to repair it. 2. Not forcing compliance and listing it "commercially impracticable". However, Daniels said that with tneir new General Manager the situation should be put on hold so that he can make contact and initiate a discussion. Pattrin asxed how soon this will take place. Daniels stated that he feels a couple of weeks should be given to then to become acquainted with tne situation. b) Status of Studio Equipment Replacement Daniels stated that Triax has complied with the direction of the Commission. Brancel then asxed tnat the original notion be rescinded. Motion 8,18.92.4 Salazar moved that motion 6.16.92.4 be rescinded. Olds seconded. Motion passed unanieously. c) Task Force Report on Office/Studio Relocation Pattrin explained that the function of the Task Force was to assist Xriax finding an acceptable location. He then stated that the Committee recommends the site of the old building in Excelsior. Nazarow concurred with Pattrin as to the idealness location. The costs would be approximately S2,200 to connect the the rent and operational expenses (including heat and electrical) with a five year lease. Triax will redo the studio area and is lease the office portion to the Commission with an exact copy lease. Nazarow then asxed what footage the Commission was willing to pay for. Daniels stated that out of the 2100 square feet the Commission would like office space, however, feels that the Commission will have to put a ceiling on the costs that the Commission will pay for rent. Daniels then aaxed Nazarow wnat tne rent would be. to assist Triax in the old US West idealness of this I i-net.However, ) are Sl600/month willing to sub- of tne original ’>1 ‘’'•1 ■K.: iTi iii'ini Tiir mirtfiifflii-fewi -i(i1ii'iiit ViA,I hi lA’iti • I I 111II iii> I iii'irifii’ii ¥S S-' LMCCC - August 299^ Meeting Page Three Nazarow saia tnat tna Commisaion vill nave to expect a suostantiai increase. Brancei directed Danieia and Nazarow to ^et together, get eeasureaenta and the exact costa, then, it necessary, a special meeting of the Coemission will oe called. Olds asxec tne footage of tne current studio. Nazarow said it is 750 square feet. Salazar asxed Daniels if no agreenent is reacned on rental costs how would It be handled and if it taKes anotner Coaausion meeting, that will leave only a couple of weexs for moving, will that be enougn time? Daniels stated that the office can be relocated relatively quicx, however, the studio is a major move and should be of the most concern. Brancei stated that the amount of office space available at the new site is less than half of the footage. Olds asxed tnat if tne Commission put a cap on the dollar amount availaole for rent, would it soive tr.e problem? Motion B.18.92.S 'Jlas moved to autnorize up to s750 per montn maximum for rent. Stanga seconded. Gray asxed wno's responsibility it is to proviae and pay for area neecea for increased storage. She a4.so asxed wny tne relocation can't oe be done as soon as possible. Brancei stated tnat tne responsioility of storage space depends on t.ne location of the actual space tif it is in tne studio side or tne office side). Daniels stated tnat the storage for studio supplies would oe in tne studio. olas stated that Triax is responsible for wnat props it owns and their storage. Brancei called ror tne vote. Motion passed unanlsously. d) Daniels Six Month Review Report Brancei stated that she feels that Daniels nas done an excellent joo and increased the LHCCC's visic'lity greatly. Pattrin stated that he concurs witn Brancei and feels ne nas done outstanding job as well. nas V.MEM BUSIMESS a) Coaeittee Report for 1993 Budget Pattrin gave a brief overview of the proposed 1993 budget. He hi-lig..ted the proposed purchase of a Video Toaster, wnich is a computer that allows you to put titles on screen, grapnic ennancements and animation. Daniels explained that the money used to cover the difference between incoae and expenses will be taxen from the unallocated funds reaaining froa 1992. Daniels also explained that the city council meetings that are proposed to be televised would be 10-12 per month and that he feels they will be a great asset to the Coeaission. Gray asked why there is an increase of 433 X for Ad/Proao. Daniels explained that it is aainly the cost of the newsletter. Gray then asxed if advertising the newly televised council aeetings would be an additional expanse. Daniels stated that the news'*tter would be used for that. Daniels explained that the Commission would be paying someone to videotape the aeetings. He also stated that the Coaaission has a governaent access channel available to cablecast the council aeetings, so in ess««nce, it would start local channel. Gray asked why Tape Stock has no budgeted funds. Daniels stated that Triax's responsibility to provide any tapes necessary. Salazar stated that ne feels coafortable with presenting this budget city councils. Daniels said that ne feels, ratner tnan mail tne ouuget out, ne would to go to the council meeting witn one or both Commissioners and present it so that any questions can be answered and justified at that time. He distributed a list of the council meetings in the order they would be scheduled and attended by staff. new It IS the prefer 'A A l^> i;* .f,u; LMCCC ” August ii)9J Mseting Psgs Four Brancel concurred exth Daniels and feels xc xs a good idea tnat will lessen the confusion usually involved with the budget. Brancel then asicec for a eoticn. Hotion 8.18.92.6 Olds aoved to accept tne proposed 1991 budget eitn a provision for revisions. Hughes-Seaaans seconded. Gray asKed where tne difference in incoae and expenses would cone froa. Daniels restated that it would cone out of unallocated funds froa 1992. Hurpny asked what that figure would be. Daniels said approxiaately d40«000. Scnnieg asxed why the increase in Acct/Audit. Daniels stated tnat tne financial reports are no longer done by staff. Olds stated that we have to budget out ail of the francnise fees ana as our incoae increases we can aod to certain funds that we have previously deprived. Brancel concurred with Olds in that the Conaission has accounted for all the aoney. Brancel called for tne vote. Gray and Scnnieg abstained. Hotion passed. Prospective Change in Coaaission Voting Structure Daniels asxed that tnis iten be taolea until tne next neeting. VI.MATTBPS FBOH THE FLOOB Brancel asxed for natters iron tne floor. VII.ADJOUBHMEtIT Motioa 8.19.92.7 Gray aoveo to adjourn. Veinsierl seconded. Hotion passed unaninously. The nesting was adjourned at 6:15 p.m. Bespectfully subnitted. Adeinistrative Assistant /cl Ittt'rt li I H imSli iiBIt'liilfif irtMiiftt rr iiiiiiil-iiiri <ir nrtiriirinrr «li lehiufi i'ini1iii'inriy r i ■‘t ■ ■-r 9/02/92 12:38 pn 8/03/92 8/04/92 8/04/92 8/04/92 8/04/92 8/07/92 8/07/92 8/07/92 8/07/92 8/07/92 8/11/92 8/14/92 8/20/92 8/20/92 8/20/92 8/20/92 8/20/92 8/20/92 8/20/92 8/21/92 8/31/92 8/31/92 8/31/92 8/31/92 I 8/31/92 r 8/14/92 ^ 8/14/92 ; 8/14/92 ? 8/14/92 i 8/14/92 V 8/14/92 8/14/92 8/14/92 8/14/92 L 8/14/92 8/31/92 8/31/92 i 8/31/92 8/31/92 8/31/92 8/31/92 8/31/92 i/31/92 8/31/92 [ 8/31/92 8/31/92 ■ ’ ■ . I f#' t .y LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMISSION Cli«nt: LMCCCCHECK REGISTER Period ending 8/31/92 Page 1 R^f > ^Descriution I^em Arat. 8 2659 514 JAMES DANIELS 26.81 26.8182660530MAINLINE TRAVEL 1,608.00 1,608.0082661530NATOA/NLC 1,160.00 1,160.0082662205NORWEST BANK 844.0582662511NORHEST BANK 392.31 1,236.3682663508PAYCHEX INC 50.35 50.3582664207P.E.R.A.93.6182664511P.E.R.A.99.14 192.7582665520BERNICK 6 LIFSON 93.75 93.7582666526SPARKS & CZERHONKA 360.00 360.0082667542POSTMASTER79.83 79.8382668514JANES DANIELS 22.07 22.0782669523P.E.R.A.12.00 12.0082670207P*£eR«A#87.26 8 2670 511 P.E.R.A.92.42 179.6882671630QUALITY QUICK 8 2672 PRINTING 833.87 833.87 553 MTKA COMMUNITY SERVICES 430.00 430.0082673517JAMES DANIELS 200.00 200.0082674542POSTMASTER11.22 11.2282675517JAMES SCHINDLER 100.00 100.0082676539U S WEST 141.63 141.6382677645AUDIO VISUAL WHOLEJALERS 199.97 199.9782678533UNICOPY118.68 118.6882679533LAKE BUSINESS SUPPLY 33.45 33.4582680514JAMES DANIELS 40.24 40.24810420205JAMES H DANIEIiS -278.12810420207JAMES H DANIELS -55.52810420500JAMES W DANIELS 1,312.50 978.86810421205JAMES M SCHINDLER -169.63810421207JAMES M SCHINDLER -31.74810421505JAMES M SCHINDLER 750.40 549.03810422205COLLEEN L LINDSK006 -11.56 8 10422 505 COLLEEN L LINDSKOOG 105.13 93.57810423205NAKi A PETERSON -13.26810423505MARY A PETERSON 173.44 160.18810424205JAMES DANIET.S -322.64810424207JAMES DANIELS -61.86 8 10424 500 JAMES DANIELS 1,462.50 1,078.00810425205JAMES DANIELS -213.83810425500JAMES DANIELS 1,050.00 836.17810426205JAMES SCHINDLER -191.32810426207JAMES SCHINDLER -34.92810426505JAMES SCHINDLER 825.44 599.20810427205COLLEEN LINDSK006 -24.03 8 10427 505 COLLEEN LINDSK006 148.63 124.60810428205NARY PETERSON -16.62 J iitjTiinniViiiirrir .. 9/02/92 12:38 pm LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMISSION Cllmnt: LMCCC CHECK REGISTER Pmriod ending 8/31/92 Page 2 Account Deecription 8/31/92 8 10428 505 NARY PETERSON 217.19 :!• 31 31 Checks for Ref # 2509 to # 10900 Checks for the Period WJi... mm ■ -V. - f ■ ■ , ^ t. / . - r A - N;."- r.V ,; vv‘: ^ :■ V'. hmy-: '■ :!J:V ' ■ :•■• Total of Checks 13.17S.89 Cr -1.425.05 A/C Hash J.9.585.000 All check information is complete. No diagnostic report is necessary. CHECKING ACCOUNT Beginning Balance CD matured 8/4/92 Claims Dub Pees Interest CD's Interest Checking A/C Service Charge Ending Balance NORWEST ACCOUNTS CD matures ll/S/92 CD matures 11/5/92 SCCU ACCOUNTS Balance Share Acet Balance Preferred TOTAL FUNDS $ 189.48 20000.00 -11750.84 40.00 1692.85 27.83 -18.30 $10181.02 $25000.00 25000.00 $50000.00 $17408.31 55124.82 $72533.13 $132714.15 20IU7 •^^■750.84 .jUStii ......... iiirillMtiaiiii J # '4i •i • ■ ' '-t ■4 b'I n ■i'. =;v ’> "'Sd ’a ■m t- «* j; 11 L Friday Wednesday Saturday Tuesday Friday Monday Tuesday Wednesday 8-26-92 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 900 E. Wayzata Blvd, Suite 160 Wayzata MN 35391 A73-7033 L.M.C.D. MEETING SCHEDULE September 1992 Staff Floating Holiday Standards Subcommittee, Lake Access Task Force 7:30 pm, #133 Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata Water Structures Committee 7:30 am, #135 Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata Envi^'onment Committee 8:30 am, #135 Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Foice 8:30 am, #135 Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata Lake Use and Recreation Committee 4:30 pm. #135 Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata Technical Review Committee 8:00 am, #135 Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata 7:00 pm, Public Hearing: Halsteds Bay Quiet Waters 7:30 pm, LMCD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Tonka Bay City Hall I1 J1 Y I i •j • ‘ji ■■■I * ■h r. •V,. s;'' y"-' K',. ■f Thu 3 6:15 pm WYC Main Sat 5 2:00 pm UMYC East Sun 6 10:30 am UMYC West ' K ‘ 1:30 pm WYC Main -L Mon 7 10:00 am MYC Main 12:00 pm UMYC East Thu 10 7:00 am Lake Minnetonka Conservation District U12-7Q33 lOtOO am 2:00 pm Prl 11 7:00 am to 4 pm 10:00 am 2:00 pm Sat 12 7:00 am to 4 pm 10:00 am 2:00 pro 2:00 pm Sun 13 7:00 am to 4 pm 10:00 am 1:30 pm Sat 19 10:00 an 2:00 pm 2:00 pm Sun 20 10:00 am 1:30 pm Sat 26 10:00 am 2:00 pm 2:00 pm 2:00 pm Sun 27 10:00 am 11:00 am 8-28-92 EVENTS SCHEDULE September 1992 MYC Main MYC Main Shelby Invitational, Minnetonka Boat Works, Wayzata Bay MYC Main MYC Main Shelby Invitational, Minnetonka Boat Works, Wayzata Bay WYC Main MYC Main UMYC West Shelby Invitational, Minnetonka Boat Works, Wayzata Bay MYC main WYC Main WYC Main MYC Main UMYC West MYC Main WYC Main WYC Main MYC Big Island WYC Main UMYC East WYC Main SYC Big Island . U 1*. m ■l-VvJ r •; -i I ' Si- > r m—- SEP A REGIONAL BREAKFAST MEETINGS FOR LOCAL OFFICIALS IN HENNEPIN COUNTY Metropolitan Council Chair Mary E. Anderson invites you to her annual regional breakfast meetings for local officials in Hennepin County, The meetings provide an opportunity to talk about the regnal issues the Couru^ is dealing witk They also are a chance for you to tell us more about the impact of regional issues in your part of the Metro Area. Chair Anderson will discuss the CounciTs priorities. Included are our New Ventures project to develop more effective ways to deliver government services, and our proposed vision arul goals for the region in the year 2015. Council members are also interested in hearing what you think the Council is doing right, what it*s doing wrong and what it shi^uld be doing in the future. Meeting details follow: HENNEPIN COUNTY (NORTH) HENNEPIN COUNTY (SOUTH) WHEN: Wednesday, Sept. 23 7:30-9 a.m. WHEN: Tuesday, Sept. 29 7:30-9 am. WHERE: Day*s Inn Mpls. North 1501 Freeway Blvd. Brooklyn Center WHERE: Boston Subway 1019 Main St. Hopkins RSVP BY: Sept. 18 RSVP BY: Sept. 25 The cost per meeting is $6, which includes breakfast, tax and gratuity. TO RSVP, please call the Community Services Department at 291-6447. 1 i ^ . .. r f crr'0« onoNCOIL____JUBEdO^ LAKE MINNETONKft CONSERVRTION DISTRICtSEP ^ 199^ Mater Structures Committee Aoenda 7;30 AM, Saturday, September 12, 1992 Norwest Bank Bldp, Rm 135, 900 E Mayzata Blvd <Elevator handicapped access, west entrance, Mayzata Blvd.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Public Hearing Report review for recommendation to the board, Minnetonka Dock Services, Inc. for Chapman Place Marina docks. Cooks Bay, Mound, variance for additional 26*, total dock length of 15S*. Draft ordinance Relating to the Effect on Licenses of Failure to construct Licensed Docks within a Specified Time, amending LMCD Code Sect. 2.05, subject to Water Structures Committee direction for a sub-committee to study various possibilities for addressing this problem. Draft of ordinance amending definitions of permanent and seasonal docks adopting DNR definition as directed by the Board. Draft of ordinance authorizing executive director to issue deicing licenses with provisions subject to Board approval. (copy to follow week of September fl) City of Orono ordinance regulating the use of styrofoam in dock construction, for committee review, discussion and recommendation. Staff report on follow-up of multiple dock license violations discovered during annual boat storage inventory and/or annual multiple dock ,inspect ions. 7. Additional business recommended by the committee 8. Adjournment imab -- ;■ V * ■V LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT DaLa Gathering and Standards Subcommittees SEP 1 AGENDA 7:30 PH* Wednesday* September 9* 1992 Norwest Bank Wayzata Conference Room 135 1, Introductions and welcome* Task Force Chair Grathwol 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Review and approval of 8/12/92 meeting report as presented or amended: Analysis of 8/26/92 Current and Potential Car/Traller data as updated from 7/15 and 8/12 data summaries for recommendation to the Lake Access Task Force; Review of 2nd draft of proposed Parking Standards for Lake Minnetonka Public Accesses as amended 8/26/92 per copy provided; Consideration of a resolution to the Lake Access Task Force to incorporate 7/15 Supplemental Recommendations per copy provided: Progress report on Maxwell Bay access site development concepts in light of LCMR grant allocation recommendation for 4944*000; Recommendation for a Steering Committee meeting* 8:00 am* Thursday* Sept. 17* to review need for sub-committee appointments to consider other prospective public access sites on Lake Minnetonka* as well as the possible need for any other sub-committee study; 8. Establish meeting date for full Lake Accesa Task Force; '■i \ f«ii isiiiiifiiiasimsufeiiasaii m t r r.. r r' Lake Minnetonka Conservation District LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE REPORT OF DATA GATHERING SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING OF AUGUST 12, 1992 PRESENT:Chair Jim Grathwol, Excelsior (LMCD); Scott Carlson, Minnetrista (LMCO): JoEllen Hurr, Orono (LMCD); Gordon Kimball, Mike Markell, and Martha Reger, DNR; Gabriel Jabbour, Orono; Bev Blomberg, Maxwell Bay; Dave Dotzenroth, Orono citizen; Gary Larson, F.A.I.R.; and Gene Strommen, LMCD. On April 15, 1992 Gene Strommen, LMCD, and Martha Reger, MN DNR, Inventoried car/trailer (C/T) parking available or potentially available by interviewing each of the lA cities on Lake Minnetonka. Excelsior, Greenwood, Minnetonka Beach, Shorewood, Tonka Bay, Victoria and Woodland have no public boat launch access. Other forms of access are not included in this report. On July 15, 1992 Gene Strommen, LMCD, and John Llnne, LMCD intern, reported on a survey of street parking available or potentially available for C/T parking within 2000' of public boat launch sites. The 1983 Lake Minnetonka Task Force identified a maximum of 1172 C/T parking spaces available at Lake Minnetonka. Preliminary staff reports to the committee identified 845 C/T parking spaces available within 2000' of existing public launch ramps. The committee and staff edited the reports submitted, reducing the total to 755 consistently available C/T parking spaces in lots and on streets. Car parking available today In parking lots meeting all proposed standards totals 148. Currently available parking, in addition, is 300 C/T parking spaces, but these do not all meet all criteria. Completion of development of additions now planned will add 88 C/T parking places. Information collected suggests an additional 219 C/T parking spaces can be made available provided agreements can be arrived at, to make the parking both open and long term. To Improve the quality of C/T parking, support is required by the Task Force, Interested government agencies, and by the participating public. The committee did not include acquisition of new boat launch sites in this report. No effort was made at this point to determine whether or not the parking spaces meet standards of acceptability. The Intent was to recommend further review to assure acceptability by encouraging governing authorities to provide needed ownership or formal agreements. Some sites Included are not presently built but are to be developed, some sites counted may be closed before or at the time others are developed. Quality of available C/T parking varies greatly. No effort is made to describe the quality of the parking at this time. The next meeting was set for Wednesday, September 9, 1992, 7:30 p.m., at Room 135 in the Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata. 8-26-92 Grays Bay Causeway 37 17 0Grays Bay Dam 20(2)20 0Wayzata Bay 101 0 64Subtotal1583764 Carsons Bay 93 0 30 Subtotal 93 0 30 Spring Park Bay 148 16 70 Phelps Bay 10 0 4 Subtotal 158 16 74 Kings Point 32 32 0 Williams Street 40 0 28 Reg Park: W Upper Lake ;(3)0 0 Halsteds Bay 28 y ^0 0 Cooks Bay 110 0 73 Si'btotal 250 32 40 TOTAL 755 148 300 Lake Min.ietonka Conservation District PROPOSED PARKING STANDARDS LAKE MINNETONiOX PUBLIC ACCESSES (Amended 8-26-92) The Lake Minnetonka Lake Access Task Force Data Gathering/Standards Subcom- mittee recommends the goal of 700 long-term reliable spaces for car/trailer parking in the vicinity of present and future access sites at Lake Minnetonka. The Tnak Fofoo Subcommittee further rocomme«4e<i- recommends that the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) establish an acceptable set of standards for identifying and counting of these spaces and monitor progress toward the goal on a continuing basis. The following set of standards 4m8-heen-aden>&^ is recommended by the -hblGB- 3nd th? Minngffor? nf Matural-Re&our:c»ft-Subcommittee for applica­ tion to Lake Minnetonka: 1.All spaces must be within 1,50»^ 2,000' of a public access point. Fo£ boats stored between 1,500' and 2,000', a temporary boat mooring facili^ —- - - - - - - - - - - -—- --- - --- - - - - -—-- -T- - - - - -I I _ _ _*1 - 1 onar'OQat the ramp site for a number of boats equal to 107. of the parking spaces^ must be povided. 2.All off-site parking locations away from the access site should be provided with a long-term agreement, five- three year minimum, with—five years_ more desirable, on file with the LMCD. Within that time availability,. if any designated spaces need to be removed, they must be replaced wit_ comparable spaces. 3.The location of off-Bite-parking spaces, either off-street or on-street away from the access site, must be identified by clear, permanent-type- aesthetically attractive, consolidated, capable of being inexpensivelx updated , signage-,—at—t-he—access—po-int. 4.All off-street spaces must be 4aved-out- illustrated on a plan on fi e with the LMCD. The plan shall clearly indicate each car/trailer space and adequate ingress, egress and maneuvering space. Parking space minim.^ size standards (in feet) : Vehicle only 9 X 19 (HDCP 12 X 19) Car/trailer 10 X 40 J 5 Aa. On-lot designated trailer parking on grass is acceptable if vchicle_i_s parked on graded/paved surface. ./a 5.All spaces must be available on an unrestricted, first-come-fIrst-served basis! as a minimum from 5 pm on Friday until midnight Sunday, and on holidays, from April 15 to October 15. (continued) r Lake Minnetonka Conservation District PROPOSED PARKING STANDARDS LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC ACCESSES (/\mended 8-26-92) - Continued - 5a. Vehicle-only spaces (no trailer) on public access parking lots can be counted toward the total goal of 700 car/trailer spaces provided that the number of such spaces counted for any given lot does not exceed 10% of the total number of spaces on that lot. (Example; Out of 50 total parking spaces on a lot, seven are for vehicle only. Only five of the seven may be counted toward the goal of 700 [i.e., 107. of 50 ~ 5).) 6. All on-street spaces should meet the following additional standards: 6.1 Minimum length of 50 feet per space. 6.2 Adequate shoulder width to preclude door opening into a traffic lane and to provide a safe route to the access point. —Regularly -opaee4—permanefrfr—s-tgnag e stating —ransirant car/trai'ler -parking only .-— 6.3 Of the total non-designated (non-signed) on-street parkinr spaces, only 75% are considered to be reliable in order to account for non access related oublic parking. 6.4 Designated and signed on-street car/trailer parking spaces will be counted 100% for car/trailer use. 6.5 On-street car/trailer parking spaces must be illustrated on a plan by street name on file with the LMCD. 8-26-92 • I 1 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT k Data Gathering and Standards Subcommittee 8/31/92 SUBJECT: Draft Resolution to the Lake Access Task Force In light of the car/traller parking space data gathering and analysis prepared by the Data Gathering and Standards Subcommittees of the Lake Access Task Force for Lake Minnetonka, the following supplemental recommendations are offered In which the subcommittee finds and recommends: a. Continuing the goal of 700 car/traller spaces and the allocation of those spaces by zone b. The current allocation and distribution of car/traller parking spaces for the lake Is not equitable. Cities are urged to make a concerted effort to provide their share of lake access car/traller parking spaces, and further encourages coordination and cooperation among cities to meet zone goals. f------~ ------•:::?-•-=^-» ?r—- r/if Ti i-«--».»»y ^:,<m H v»W ’*! h*^^'."'fTfr** \. ■mSSSiX'TcrfSlT^i^ y ^r^4CXKM' ,v. *:. -::z::j‘:z.":i2:^. pi i~'m:u..';.4 '? 1 Irji r~r-^—i F .1 rmr* r** .••**.. •!. tv*r»TiL *.^'-.. •rf . «> y> ■ ^ >.r,; V * tr» >•■ • . »«• •• -• /' ■ • ^.■-*f»'-^5 -;&4..4ia 7 A Efimi i •*^.vt:,';;?;:;4-?srrr:a^aTrX- R. :«• .-» •^ -'Y* * ^ .^rr m*’- •'*-rfl,-.*' -y ,*V •,•-•■ > •^ • ■, >.w'> ♦ /•'•»'-. rfTtrr— ytc- ‘■.o**‘-’y^***r»,*~-T-*‘ >M» '.V~ ^ «--• - 1 .t *. : T tj* - - , *\ •• V*^>-:r ./::■ ii^J^J<*tcV.'i*-,>A» ■ • ■ 1. »;^ •' '^'**.-j‘ WH »vi,. >!nS^v ^»*^' :H-,i D J5>i-'^??ii-s ^'ia /-'T*'ST ' -‘ )‘-'jJ^ M»il "•• KkfJk± ;v^.ii^ i • ~. vIJ i i: r^-:A i:4 ,L '^•—v~- Results for Citizens, Options for Officials R eport Summary Public affairs research and education in the Twin Cities metropolitan area hjia A.i r Citizens league Report Results for Citizens, Options for Officials Report Summary Prepared by: 'i Committee on Organization of Local Government Services: Goals and Structures Bill Blazar and Larry Bakken, co-chairs Approved by the Citizens League Board of Directors June 16, 1992 Citizens League 708 South 3rd Street Suite 500 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 612/338-0791 FAX: 612/337-5919 " V I *. f ' /.* • • • i . a ■■ II ■ I 'd R eport Summary Local governments in Minnesota aic under piessure. Dem;uids for public service continue to grow, while their primary sources of revenue have not kept up. Local governments have often responded by cutting services and raising taxes and fees, thus giving citizens less for more. At the same time, citizens are more concerned about the effectiveness of local services. What is die value received for dollars spent? For the past 20 years, the Citizens League has been among the voices suggesting Uiere is an alternative, namely to redesign service delivery and government structures. In 1991, die Citizens League convened a study committee to revisit public service design and to examine how local govemmenLs organize and deliver their serv'ices. Over a four-month period, we heard from many people who offered their thouglitful perspectives on how local governments organize and deliver services. We saw many good e.xamples of local governments doing things well. Talented man­ agers and far-sighted elected ofFicials work together to launch innovations, create incentives for employees and managers and provide choices to consumers and officials. Iridividuals and neighborhood groups make smart choices and help guide officials in designing services. Clearly, though, these tilings are not happening every where. What are the impediments to local governments doing things differently and better? Kcrc arc some kev barriers: Misplaced incentives and motivation. Local officials often work in a system of motivation and reward in which incentives arc absent or encourage the wrong result. For example, if officials don't spend their entire budgets by year end, they may not carry over the surplus to future years or invest it to improve service. In .some cases, diey may see their budget cut. Lack (*<■ flexibility. Local officials often lack flc:v!bility in identifying their responsibil ­ ities and how to best cany them out. This is seen when the state delegates service rc.sponsibilitics to local govemmenLs in a way that emphasizes complying with a detailed prescription for how things are to be done, rather than a shared vision of what should be accompli.shcd. Lack of evaluation. They may often lack a foriT:.al way of measuring and evaluating tlic outcomes of their services and sharing that information with citizens. Luck of opportunities for citizen involvement. Citizens, in turn, lack tools and opportunities to hold their local government accountable and to encourage innovative approaches to service delivery. RECOMMENDATIONS CREATE NEW OPTIONS FOR MANAGING SERVICE BUDGETS We recommend: □ Local governments, neighborhoods and individuals should have addi­ tional opportunities to manage service budgets as a means of improving service delivery. Our premise is that, in many cases, dollars now spent for services can be spent in different ways tc .uiprove the delivery of services. We assume that tile changes would have to be budget-neutral. In cur view, introducing these options, even if they were rarely exercised, would create signifi­ cant incentives for local officials to improve services because they will want to keep people satisfied within the system. '.ihc.*^ new opponuRitics can uJee place on several levels. For example: -n .T«.a RKPOKl SUMMARY Local governments should be given increased options for managing funds now designated for a certain service and controlled by other units of government. The local government, working closely with citizens, would design the service, select the vendor and manage the service budget. Tlic transit programs developed by Maple Grove and other suburbs provides a good example of how local governments can develop a new rela­ tionship with a regional operating agency such as the Metropolitan Transit Commission. The close involvement of citizens helps make the approach successful. Another example might involve cities receiving a budget with which to buy certain criminal justice services now provided by their local county. Cities might continue to use the local county as the vendor. But, maybe they would see if other counties could provide the services on a more effective or more economical basis. Neighborhood-level organizations should be given options for managing the funds designated for a certain service, including the authority to design the service and select the vendor. In past reports, the League has recommended that cities foster the development of neighborhood service delivery models. Now we propose that neighborhoods should be able to petition a local government for the opportunity to manage part of a local service budget. The issue here is whether neighborhoods could provide the service better or could buy it better than the city is already doing. Our committee heard from the Whittier Alliance (of Minneapolis) about its ideas for taking the money now spent on Whittier Park and using it to desi^ and provide park programs. Perhaps the neighbors would develop a contract with the Park Board or consider other vendors. Perhaps volunteers would take some responsibilities for organizing programs and mainuining the park. Creating opportunities for such neighborhood- based initiatives requires some rules or structure; obviously not Ju.st anyone can cone in to scoop up some money. However, if this option will be useful, then the local government can't be a gate­ keeper with all authority for approving or rejecting the neighborhood's proposal. One approach would be for the Legislature to identify ground rules for a viable proposal. Individuals should be given options for taking funds designated for a certain .service and managing a budget where the individual has designed the program and selected the vendor. An example of this approach is the Dakota County account management program for larnilics of persons with developmental disabilities. DEVELOP PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES One of the mo.si significant ways of expanding choices for elected officials is to reinforce the fundamental distinction between local govern­ ments deciding and doing. Wc propose to create new opportunities for local governments to shed some of their operating responsibilities and operate as sophijeticated buyers of ser\'ices. Wc recommend: □ Local governments should be autho­ rized and encouraged to transform their operating bureaus into enterprises. A local government unit, such as a city or county public works department, could be transformed into a public service enterprise. In turn, city councils or county boards could enter into a contract for services with the new entities. In addition, the new entcrpri.se could market its services to other cities, counties or school districts in tlx: area. Transforming government departments into enterprises builds on examples already in place of governments buying services from each other. For example, the city of Roseville maintains the grounds at the schools in the Roseville district. This is a very good example of how schools could use different approaches to organizing those administrative and support services that are outside .'icircorv rcspc.isibiliiy ofir.sircciion. The purpose of creating this contracting option (or any contracting option) is not to pay less for services but to provide serv ices more effectively. In setting up enterprises, local governments should give them .additional flexibility and signifi­ cant responsibility. Thus, to the extent th.at civil service systems or procurement requirements RESULTS FOR CITIZENS, OPTIONS FOR OFFICIALS create obstacles to effective operation, enterprises should be freed from those constraints. In developing contracts, the local governments should set performance measures and provide incentives for superior results. Our goal is that local governments could choose from several competing enterprises (or other local govern­ ments) in carrying out their functions. There are several interesting examples in Great Britain and the United States of transforming govenuTient operations into enterprises. During the 1980s, the Conservative government in Great Britain began to transform large ponions of the public service bureaus of government into self- contained agencies. These new agencies are to be headed by strong executives with broad discretion over staffing and budgets, and arc given clear performance targets. We sec several advantages of this approach: Creating thc.se enterprises would allow city councils and county boards to shed some of their operating responsibilities and focus their work on policy making. At the same time, they would have a choice of competitive providers. Because they have to earn their budget, managers and employees of these enterprises would have stronger incentives to adopt a customer-service orientation. ALLOW LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO CHOOSE RESULTS-BASED REGULATION In many ce»vicc areas, local govcmmc; is arc the final delivery point in a state-local service system. Over the years, a complex system of mandated procedures has been instituted in some of these areas. For example, if a county is providing .services to a child with developmental dfsabMities ;uid severe behavior problems, it will go through a scries of planning processes and assemble intcrcisciplinary teams to develop different indivic lali/.cd plans for the child's special needs. 3ccause of this focus on process -- doing things right, less attention is paid to results - doing Uk right thing. In cases where local government is carrying out those shaied responsibilities (including mo.st mandates), we propose giving those units significant flexibility to craft a new kind of relationship with the state. We recommend: □ Local units of government and state agencies should develop contract relationships that focus on results. Such agreements would give the local unit significant flexibility for how it reaches those goais. The local unit and the responsible state agency could negotiate a contract (or a scries of contracts) which would specify performance standards ar.u expected results. Our recommendation is very similar to the social services contracting proposal included in H.F. 2420, introduced in 1992 by Representative Wayne Simoneau and Senator Don Samuelson. The Legislature passed that bill, an initiative of ArK)ka Countv. Social services provide the clearest example of where results-based regulation might apply. However, there are many other possible examples in areas such as education, licensing and inspec­ tion functions. For a variety of service areas, local government should be given a choice. Either they can work under the current regime of adminisu^tive rules or a more "entrcprcneurially- friendly" system based on performance standards and results. CREATE A "VALUE FOR MONEY" AUDITING FUNCTION FOR LOCA! GOVERNMENTS The state should fill a gap in its performance auditing capabilities. No office is charged to evaluate the performance of local govcmmeni.s. The State Auditor conducts or supervises financial audits of local governments. The Legislative Auditor evaluates programs of stare agencies and audits their books. We recommend: □ The Legislature should direct the Legislative Auditor or the St:ite Auditor io develop and implement a program of performance auditing of local governments. REPORT SUMMARY GOVERNMENT AUDITING RESPONSIBILITIES Local State govemmenLs government Financial audiLs Slate Auditor Legislative Auditor PerfonnanaV 9 Legislative program Auditor evaluation # This office would assemble data produced by local units and develop comparative statistical profiles. These would make "Truth in Taxation" hearings a much more meaningful exercise because citizens would have reliable information comparing their local uniLs with others. The office would also conduct in-depth studies. For example, one year it might examine how well local governments are operating their hospitals and nursing homes or diversion programs for juveniles. We think that directing an existing office to expand its role into local government performance reviews would provide invaluable assistance to the Legislature, local governments and the citizens of the state. The Audit Commission of Great Britain provides a model for how a program of performance auditing can be valuable. The Commission’s philosophy is to help local units improve "value for money." Each of our recommendations for redesigning services assumes that citizens and their local officials will have good information about what services arc provided, the costs of services and the quality of the outcomes, and are able to compare that information with what is done in other cities or counties. For example: local governments maintain thousands of miles of streets, and their crews patch thousands of potholes each year. Information will be needed to determine when a neighborhood-based propos.il to manage street maintenance should be approved, or to help a local government compare proposals from pothole patching enterprises. We recommend: n The Legislature should direct devel­ opment and implementation of a performance accounting system to be used by local governments. Soon after a local government performance auditing function is launched, we expect that Uic auditors will find that the information generated by local governments on how they pcrfoim ilicir functions is inadequate to make the useful comparisons that we want to sec. School districLs and counties have long used uniform, multi­ dimensional financial accounting and reporting systems with a standard chan of accounts. Thev now need to build on to that stmciure i standard method of measuring spending on inputs (labor, tracks, blacktop, etc.) and linking that informa­ tion with results (500 square feet of potholes patched) and quality - the patches lasted six months. We think that citizens ha\e a basic right to know how public funds arc spent, to have measures of the quality of local services and to be able to compare local government performance. When progra.m results are known, the public won't have to"wait for sporadic invc.stigative repons in tlie n.?ws media to find out liow well treatment programs for sex offenders arc working, or whether job training programs are placing clients in well- paying jobs. Programs that are demonstrated to be effective should have an easier time getting their budget requests approved. Turning the quality spotlight on local govem- .Tients means identifying problems but also celebrating .successes. We suggest that Minnesota establish an award for local govern­ ments that achieve excellence in delivering or arranging local services. Like the Malcolm Baldridge award given for excellent quality in private industry Firms, a state award could be a powerful external incentive for local governments to excel. In addition, it would be desirable for the state to actively disseminate information about high- quality operations. Working with the various associations of local govemments, it could c.stab- lisb a clearinghouse for sharing ideas and for providing technical assistance to help local goyemmenLs improve their u.se of comraciinv options, develop better outcome me;Lsurcmcnt and evaluation systc.ms. RECENT CITIZENS LEAGUE REPORTS These reports are the product of the League's unique program of citizen-based research. To order copies, use the form in this report. Results lor Cilizens, Options for Officials Reform ilic filcctoral Process, Restore the F\iblic Trust The Party Caucus; An Inquiry New Regional Approaches to Library Services: Long Overdue Large Trucks: A Small Piece of A Larger Problem Remaking liie Minnesota Miracle: Facing New Fiscal Realities Because That's Wlicrc the Money Is: Why the Public Sector Lobbies EX)cs the System Maltreat Children? Wiring Minnesota: New State Goals for Telecommunications Losing Lakes: Enjoyment of a Unique Metropolitan Resource is Threatened Access. Not More Mandates: A New Focus for Minnesota Health Policy Community: A Resource for the '90s The Metropolitan Council: Strengthening Its Leadership Role Building Tomorrow by Helping Today's Kids Chartered Schools = Choices for Educators + Quality for All Students Cut Tax Exemptions. Boost Equity and Accountability Stopping AIDS: An Individual Responsibility The Public’s Courts: Making the Governor's Nominating Process Statutory Make the Present Airport Better-Make A New Airport Possible Cooperatively-Managed Schools; Teachers as Partners The New Weigh to Recycle First Class Property Tax System Start Right with "Right Start": A Health Plan for Minnesota’s Uninsured New Destinatioas for Transit Commitment to Focus: More of Botli State Civil Service: People Make the Difference It’s Only a G;une: A Lottery in Minnesota Adapiability-The New Mission for Vocational Education A Strategy for the Waterbcit Power to the Process: Making Minnesota’s Legislature Work Better Accountability for the Development Dolhir Building on Strength: A Competitive Minnesota Economic Strategy A Larger Vision for Small Scale Agriculture Tlic Metro Council; Narrowing the Agenda and Raising the Stakes The Region’s Infrastructure: The Problem Isn't What You Think It Is Meeting the Crisis in Institutional Care; Toward Better Choices, Financing and Results A Farewell to Welfare Homegrown Services: The Neighborhood Opportunity Use Road Revenue for the Roads That Are Used Workers' Compensation Reform: Get the Employees Back on the Job Thought Before Action; Understanding and Reforming Minnesota’s Fiscal System Tlie CL in the Mid-80s Making Better Use of Existing Housing: A Rental Housing Strategy for the 1980s Rebuilding Education to Make It Work A Positive Alternative: Redesigning Public Service Delivery Paying Attention to the Difference in Prices: A Health Care Cost Strategy for the 1980s Keeping the Waste Out of Waste Cluinging Communications: Will the Tw'in Cities Lead or Follow? Siting of Major ConiroversitU Facilities Enlarging Our Capacity to Adapt: Issues of tlie '80s Next Steps in tlie Evolution of Chemical Dependency Care in Minnesota Linking a Commiunent to Desegregation with Choices for Quality Schools Initiative and Referendum..."NO" for Minnesota For titles and availability of earlier reports contact the Citizens League office, 338-0791 6-16-92 5- 28-92 4- 5-91 2- 25-91 1- 24-91 10- 8-90 6- 28-90 4-3-90 11- 16-89 11- 8-89 9- 21-89 7- 25-89 3- 23-89 12- 16-88 11- 17-83 10-20-88 5- 09-88 1-28-88 12- 17-87 8- 05-87 5- 22-87 4- 27-87 2- 24-87 10-28-86 8- 27-86 6- 12-86 2-11-86 1-08-86 11-22-85 9- 19-85 6-20-85 11- 28-84 9- 25-84 6-07-84 5- 30-84 4- 24-84 2- 07-84 11-03-83 3- 02-83 12- 15-82 10- 26-82 9-22-82 5- 19-82 5-04-82 3-24-82 9-29-81 5- 27-81 12-17-80 10- 22-80 8-27-80 6- 13-80 12-12-79 2-28-79 RECENT CITIZENS LEAGUE STATEMENTS These statements update tfie League s position on key issues. To order copies, use the form in this report. Health Care Access for All Minnesotans Testing Health-Care Workers for the AIDS Vims Light Rail Ti^ansit: The Regional Transit Board’s Proposal to the 1991 Minnesota Legislature 1 -24-91 Letter to Legislature from Community Information Committee re: Financing at the University of Minnesota Statement on Changing the Fiscal Disparities Law Statement to the Governor & Legislature on Transportation Financing in 1988 Statement to Le^slative Commission re: Road Financing Statement to University of Minnesota Regents re: Commitment to Focus Staternent to Governor and Legislature on Innovation and Cost Control Selection of a New State Commissioner of Transportation Letter to Regional Transit Board re: Metro Mobility Price Competition Ideas Testimony to Legislature on Bloomington Stadium Site Bill Letter to Regional Transit Board re: Policy Committee’s Study of Metro Mobility Statement to House Tax Subcommittee on Fiscal Disparities Statement to Legislature on Preserving Metropolitan Tax-Base Sharing Statement to Legislature & Metro Council on Bloomington Development Proposal Statement to Metropolitan Council on Organized Collection of Solid Waste Statement to Metropolitan Council on Long-Term Care Statement on Transit Alternatives Statement on Solid Waste Disposal Statement to Tax Study Commission Statement on Light Rail Transit Statement to Legislative Study Committee on Metropolitan Transit Statement to Governor's Tax Study Commission Statement to Minnesota's Highway Study Commission Statement on the Metropolitan Council's Proposed Interim Economic Policies Statement to Mirtneapolis. Charter Commission: Proposal to have Mayor as non-voting member of Council Statement to Metropolitan Council & Richard P. Braun, Commissioner of Transportation on Preferential Treatment in I-35W Expansion Statement to Members. Steering Committee on Southwest-University Avenue Corridor Study Statement to Commission on the Future of Post-Secondary Education in Minnesota Statement to the Metropolitan Health Board Appeal to the Legislamre and the Governor Citizens League Opposes Unfunded Shifts to Balance Budget Longer-Term Speriding Issues Which the Governor and Legislature Should Face in 1982 Statement Concerning Alternatives to Solid Waste Row Control Amicus Curiae Brief in Rscal Disparities Case.fded Statement to the Minnesota State Legislature Regarding the Reconstruction Project Letter to the Joint Legislative Commission on Metropolitan Governance Statement to Metropolitan Health Board on Phase IV Report Statemeni to Metropolitan Council on I-35E Statement to Miraieapolis Charter Commission Letter to Metropolitan Council re CL Recommendations on 1-394 Statement to the Governor and Legislature as They Prepare for a Special Session Statement to the Minnesota State Legislature Regarding the University of Minnesota Hospitals Reconsuuction Bill, as amended Statement to the Governor and Legislature Concerning Expenditures- Taxation for 1981-83. Issued by Tax & Finance Task Force 2-20-92 12-11-91 4-07-89 1-15-88 1- W-88 10-12-87 7-7-87 4-8-87 10-30-86 6-12-86 2- 20-86 12-6-85 10- 31-85 9-6-85 8-15-85 4-24-85 3- 8-85 1-23-85 I- 21-85 8- 22-84 4- 6-84 12-15-83 11- 22-83 9- 29-33 8-29-83 8- 11-83 7-21-83 7-19-83 6-22-83 6- 20-83 4- 26-83 12-1-82 1-18-82 1-12-82 12- 17-81 12-14-81 11-13-81 II- 4-81 9- 24-81 7- 6-81 6-23-81 5- 26-81 5-8-81 4-28-81 For Ibt of earlier statements, contact the League office, 338-0791 Now Available: New Research from the Citizens League Minnesota Homestead Property Tax Review 1992 Minnesota Managed Care Review 1992 Two new research reports from the Citizens League provide useful, objective information about two topics that almost everyone thinks about; property taxes and health care. Minnesota Homestead Property Tax Review 1992 builds on the annual property tax survey done by the League for the past 26 years. It includes data and trend analysis on residential property taxes in the Twin Cities area and in cities around the state. Minnesota Managed Care Review 1992 provides valuable information about Minnesota ’s health coverage marketplace, including health maintenance organizations, preferred provider arrangements, and Blue Cross/Bluc Shield. The report, now in its third edition al.so analyzes key trends in enrollment, self-insurance, and management arrangements and costs. Minnesota Managed Care Review 1992 is a valuable reference for people who need to keep up with Minnesota ’s dynamic healtli care marketplace. League members can buy cither rcpwit for $10.00; the nonmember price is $15.00. Discounts arc available for multiple copy orders. To order your copies, please use the enclosed form or call the Lc,ague at 612/338-0791. Do you like your data in large doses? The computer data sets developed by the League staff in preparing its analyses are also available. The property tax data set includes fdes of multi-year data on property tax rates. valiuttions. and calculations I of taxes on homes of deferent values. The managed health care files include data on health plan I enrollment, finances, utilization, etc. The sets can be used on your PCs and Macintosh computers. Orders placed by September 15.1992 get a $20 discount. Call the League office for details. Public Affairs Directory 1991-1992 Now Available The Citizens League Public Affairs Directory is a handy guide to the people and organizations in the public, private, and nonprofit sectors that infiucncc and implement public policy in die state. The 1991- 92 edition is now available. Call the League office to order your copies. School Shopper Help for Parents THE SCHOOL BOOK: A Comprehensive Guide to Elementary Schools in the Twin Cities Minnesota parents who arc selecting schools now have a concise source of comparative information. The School Book. A Comprehensive Guide to Elementary Schools in the Twin Cities, a new publication from the Citizens League, is now available. The book profiles M9 public and private elementary schools in the metropolitan area. The book features information about each school's curriculum, forc'cn languages, building and facilities, extracurricular activities, number of students and teachers, class si.tc, use of tcchno ’ogy, grading svstem. parent organizations and communications, and services such as latchkey and breakfas*. Each sch(’x)l profile includes a self-description of the school's teaching philosophy and strengths. The School Book also includes information about what to consider when choosing a school, an explanation of Minne.sota's school choice law. an application for the open enrollment program, and a Metropolitan Council map of public schools .md di.stricts in the region. You can get a copy of The School Book by calling the Citizens League at 612/338-0791 or by using the enclosed order form. League membere can buy the book for $10.00; die nonmember price is $12.95. CITIZENS LEAGUE PUBLICATIONS PRICE LIST MEMBER PRICE NON-MEMBER PRICE CITIZENS LEAGUE RESEARCH • Minnesota Managed Care Review 1992 • Minnesota Homestead Property Tax Review 1992 1st copy 2 - 10 copies, each 11 copies or more, each THE SCHOOL BOOK (Call for discounts on quantity orders) STUDY COMMITTEE REPORTS 1st copy 2 - 10 copies, eac/j 11 copies or more, each $10.00 $15.00 $8.00 $12.00 $6.00 $9.00 $10.00 $12.95 FREE $10.00 $5.00 $9.00 $4.00 $8.00 ‘i CITIZENS LEAGUE PUBLICATIONS ORDER COUPON Quantity Publication Cost S___ S___ $______ TOTAL AMOUNT OF ORDER $. Name Address City, State, Zip. Phone□□Make checks payable to Citizens League OR Charge to □ Visa □ Master Card Account# Signature.. □ Discover .Exp. Date_ □ Send Citizens League membership information Mail this form to: Citizens League. 708 South 3rd Street. Suite 500, Minneapolis, MN 55415 Or FAX your credit card orders to 612-337-59I9 rtk rmerd • it i i *..2*.- . . A. J WHAT THE CITIZENS LEAGUE IS 'rhc Ciiizcas League has been an active and effective public affairs research and education organization in the Twin Cities metropolitan arca for 40 years. Volunteer research committees of League members study policy issues in depth and develop informational reports that propose specific workable solutions to public issues. Recommendations in these rcpons often become law. Over the years. League reports have been a reliable source of information for governmental officials, community leaders, and citizens concerned with public policy issues of our arca. The League depends upon the support of individual members at .a contributions from businesses, foundations, and other organizations throughout the metropolitan arca. For membership information, please call 6121338-0791. OFFICERS 1991-92 President Eliza'oetli Malkcrson Vice President John Brandi Secretary Beverly Propcs Treasurer Daniel Peterson STAFF Executive Director Lyle Wray Associate Director Allan Baumgarten Research Associate Jody Hauer Finance Director Philip Jenni Legislative & Communications Director Peter Vanderpoel Administrative Staff Dawn Latulippe Joann Latulippe Interim Editor, Minnesota Journal D;uia Schrcteder DIRECTORS 1991-92 Judith E. Alnes Peter Bell Ellen Brown John Cairns Carl "Buzz" Cummins David Dobrotka Jim EX)rsey Ann Sheldon Duff Kent Eklund Bruce Erickson Robert Erickson Russell Ewald Fred Finch Sara Gavin Jane Gregerson Milda Hedblom Karen L. Himlc Bill Johnstone Bill KeUy Jay Kiedrowski Jean King Stephen Wuz Wendy McDowall Dick Moberg Vivian Jenkins Nelsen David Rodboume Laurisa Sellers Th >mas H. Swain Caiol L. Thacher David Ziegenhagen Nancy 21ingale PAST PRESIDENTS Charles S. Bellows Francis M. Boddy Alan R. Boyce Ronnie Brooks Charles H. Qay Eleanor Colbom Rollin H. Crawford Carl "Buzz" Cummins Waite D. Durfee John F. Finn Richard J. FitzGerald David L. Graven Walter S. Harris, Jr. Peter A. Heegaard James L. HeUand, Jr. Terry Hoffman B. Kri.stine Johason Verne C. Johnson Jean King Stuart W, Leek, Sr. Greer E. Lockhart John W. Mooty Arthur Naftalin Charles Neerland Norman L. Newhall, Jr. Wayne H, Olson Leslie C. Park Malcolm G. Pfundcr Wayne Popham James R. Pratt Leonard F. Ramberg John A. Rollwagen Charles T. Silverson Archibald Spencer Thomas H. Swain Peter Vanderpoel Frank Walters John W. Windhorst 1 Citizens Leaguen.708 South 3rd Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 612/338-079! MEMBERSHIP AFPLICATION .Name Home Phone Address City Slate Zip Employer Work Phone Position FAX# Employer's Address Send Mail to: Q Home *Spou»e Information Q Office Name Employer Position Work phoue I will join at this level: DONOR $1,000 or more SUSTAINING $500 • 999 CONTRIBUTING $75 -199 •FAMILY $50 INDIVIDUAL $35 FULL-TIME STUDENT $20 BUSINESS $150 Referred by;________ □ □ □□ Q Q □ Membership is tax-deductible and includes a one-year subscrfption to the Minnesota Journal •Family membership entitles you to a second Minnesota Journal. Please indicate the natne and address of the recipient Work Address IMPACT Join the Citizens League and help make things happen Being a member of the Qtizens League means you care about what happens in Minne­ sota and believe that good public policy depends upon an informed citizenry. League members can join citizen research committees that help to shape public policy. Memoer- ship also offers these additional benefits: PUBLICATIONS Minnesota Journal — 22 issues a year of timely public affairs news, analysis and commentary, including the League's aiuiual property tax sijrvcy. Minnesota Managed Care Review 1991 — Important information and analysis for people woricing in Minnesota's dynamic health care marketplace. • Minnesota Homestead Property Tax Revic'v 1991 — The t^eagii e's .'annual analysis of residential property taxes in the Twin Cides area and other Minnesota cides. Publi: Affairs Directory—a handy listing of agencies, organizations and officials involved in making and implementing public policy. • The School Book — a comprehensive guide to elementary schools in the Twin Cides. • Citizens League reports — full reports and statements on topics studied — free copies arc a benefit of membership. .MEETINGS Mind-Opener breakfast meetings — every Tuc.sday from Labor Day to Memorial Day, public officials, community and business leaders discuss and debate timely issues. iai August 24, 1992 CITY O® oronc ggso'^s Mayor and City Council City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 MQ ZT Re: Resignation from Park Commission Effective immediately, I hereby resign my position on the Orono Park Commission. My reasons for resigning are varied, but the most important one is trying to find additional time for my family. After commitments to my business, there is very little time to spend with my family and even one evening per month for another meeting is more than I am willing to spaie. I also wish to comment on a number of things that I was disappointed in during my time on the Park Commission. First of all, I am a person who likes to accomplish things. I felt too much time was spent talking about and rehashing the same issues and not enough time was spent actually accomplishing tasks for the betterment of the City ’s park system. One reason for this is a lack of financial resources. As you know, the general fund only provides enough money to maintain the existing facilities, .^ny capital expenditures need to come from the park dedication fund which because of the land use patterns in Orono, grows at a "snails" pace. As I’ve pointed out before, the Commission could recommend building two miles of trail, one quality ballfield complex or perhaps purchase 10 acres for an interpretive park and the entire park dedication balance would be wiped out with little opportunity to replenish it. Unless the City is willing to allocate additional funds for park development, the fine people who donate their time to the Park Commission, are wasting that time. The Park Commission has been talking about a Comprehensive Park Plan from the first day that I joined the Commission. A Comprehensive Park Plan could identify citizen priorities and needs of the park system as well as identifying potential funding sources for those improvements. The Commission icif’’.ested Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) money for the purpose of prepr^ir,.' ihu plan. Rather than allocating sufficient funds for the study, the Council practically begged for other groups to come forward to take the money. Fortunately for the residents of the cities of Independence and Medina, their elected officials choose to use the CDBG funds for the good of the entire community, by using them for park plans. When I mentioned my dissatisfaction regarding the CDBG allocation to Mary Butler, she stated that the need for a Comprehensive Park plan was not adequately conveyed to the Council. Maybe the Council members should attend Park Commission meetings to understand the Commission’s goals, objectives and priorities. The only time during my tenure that a council member attended one of our meetings was during discussion of the Old Crystal Bay Road Trail. Apparently this subject was political enough to be of interest. The City Coun^ finds time to argue with Long Lake about fire service and the development of tw' nty lots. You find the time and money to obstruct the Highway 12 upgrade process and build a new city hall without putting either issue before the citizens of the Community for a vote. For your information, as a resident I don’t care where Highway 12 is built as long as the least number of people are directly affected (whether they live in Long Lake or Orono) and the road is adequately designed to handle the traffic volumes without delays in excess of those experienced today. As far as the new city hall is concerned, I would have voted yes on a tax referendum to pay for it, but I’m angry that the City was able to skim enough tax money to build the facility without a vote of the citizens, while I have to drive to Mound, Medina or Plymouth to find i playground with updated equipment and swings for my son. The Park Commission is not a high priority for City staff. I don’t blame individual staff members. Their priorities are set by the Council. I am aware of only one meeting our City Manager has attended. The parks are always the last priority with public works. Be it flooding for ice skating or grading for playground equipment, any other project will take priority. When I decided to resign, I did not intend to make all of my dissatisfactions known. I was just going to leave quietly. The straw that broke this camels back was when John Gerhardson mentioned in passing that the City Council and Planning Commission were going to meet jointly to discuss the proposal for the hockey arena. If anything showed me the total disregard that the Council and Staff have for the park commission this was it. How can you possibly discuss a proposal for the biggest recreational facility in the community, one that I have invested over $3,(XX) worth of my companies time studying and not even notify the Park Commission. If I have misjudged you, prove it. Make a commitment to fund a Comprehensive Park plan, provide additional staff resources and send a representative of the City Council to the Park Commission meetings. The Park Commissioners and your constituents deserve it. Sincerely, cc: Ron Moorse John Gerhardson Park Commission Members J , HENNEPIN DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 417 North Fifth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1^^ Phone: (612] 348-6846 FAX: (612] 348-8532 CITYOc ORQNC 1[ I August 26, 1992 2 8 1092 Mr. Ronald Moorse City of Orono P 0 Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mr. Moorse: Hennepin County is sponsoring a total of five household hazardous waste event collections this fall. Each will be held on Friday and Saturday from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM both days. The dates and locations are as follows: September 11 and 12 Two Minneapolis locations North Site Mir.nadpolis Public Works facility 1809 Washington Street Northeast South Site Minneapolis Public Works facility 3607 East 44th Street September 25 and 26 Three suburban locations Bloomington 1400 West 96th S' '“et (96th and Humboldt) Orono County Public Works facility 3880 Shoreline Drive (County Road 15) Hopkins/Minnetonka County Public Works facility (Hopkins) 320 Washington Avenue South HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer "3J i,. August 26, 1992 page 2 Items that will be accepted are as follows: oil-base paint; pesticides; paint thinners and solvents; cleaning solvents; automotive chemicals; photographic and hobby chemicals; wood preservatives; car batteries; household batteries; rechargeable appliances; auto tires ($1.00 per tire without rims and $2.00 per tire with rims); electronic goods; pool chemicals and latex pains’s. Items n^ accepted are radioactive materials, compressed gas and explosives. The County’s permanent collection site for household hazardous waste is open six days a week. Hours of operation are 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM, Monday through Friday, and 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM on Saturdays. This site accepts all materials that will be collected at the event sites. Only residents of Hennepin County are welcome to use these collections. If you have any questions, please call me at 348-2311. Sincerely, Michael K. Brandt Conservation/Protection Unit Manager \ :\corr\br«ndt\ftv«not*:nif ^'4 -u. ilfcif r CITY OP ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 1992, 7:00 P.M. 1275 BRONN ROAD SOOTH - COUNCIL CHAMBERS f ■illli)I®5 MINUTES OF THE PARK COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 1992 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Park Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairperson Dick Flint, Susan Wilson, Alex Vongries, Sherokee Use, Li Ii McMillan, Robert Howells, Phil Bradley and Stephen Johnston. The following represented the City staff: John Gerhardson, Public Works Director; and Shawn Gustafson, City Engineer; and Teri Naab, Recorder. (#1 & #2) APPROVAL OF MINUTES • • •Vongries requested Page 6, paragraph 4, be changed to read, talked about the future development of Highwood Nature Trail," and the additional sentences form a new paragraph. Chair Flint recommended combining paragraphs '.1, 12 and 13 of that page. Vongries requested that Page 6, paragraoh 13 be changed to read, "there were a number of conflicts between bikers and joggers on the Luce Line Trail during the MS bike-a-thon". He requested that Page 8, paragraph 7, be changed to read, "to recommend the taking of whatever land is needed for a bike trail, and if not within the drainage. . ." It was moved by WiIson, seconded by Bradley, to approve the minutes of the June 2, 1992 Park Commission meeting as amended. Ayes 8, nays 0. It was moved by Wilson, seconded by McMillan, to approve the minutes of the July 6, 1992 Park Commission meeting. Ayes 8, nays 0. (#3) BIKE HIKE TRAIL REPORT - CITY ENGINEER Gerhardson handed out an updated report from the City Engineer which incorporates the suggestions of the Park Commission from the last meeting. He reported that they have met with Hennepin County to discuss the report anr he cost of the project. He introduced Shawn Gustafson of Bonestroo. Gustafson explained that the appendix has been split into two carts showing the cost of both options, within the right-of-way and outside the right-of-way. He stated they have added an option to oring the trail off the right-of-way along the north side of County Road 6 which wouId eliminate the need for large amounts of fi 1 I i n that area. 4 Hr' MINUTES OF THE PARK COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 1992 BIKE/HIKE TRAIL - CONT. Gerhardson noted that under Option A, the portion of the tra'II north of County Road 6 and immediately west of Old Crystal Bay Road would be built along the side of the ditch and not at the grade of County Road 6. Accordingly, there would be less impact on the adjacent property. Chair FI int noted that this option would reduce the cost. Gustafson stated the road would be improved only where the trail Is within the right-of-way. He clarified that Option A in this area would reduce the cost by approximately $45,000. Chair Flint clarified that the costs included in the report do not include land acquisition costs. Gustafson stated that was correct. He stated the easement needed for the slope or for the trail for Option A would be approximately the same along County Road 6, which would be paid for by Hennepin County Parks. He added that Hennepin County Parks typically des'res to maintain a buf"^er between the roadway and bike trail. Regarding the portion of the trail south of County Road 6, Chair Flint said that the Commission had decided to offer Option A for property owners willing to grant a bike easement along their property if they wished to save the trees that are now in the right-of-way. He noted that more trees would be saved if the trail were removed from the right-of-way in many areas. He explained that the letter to Hennepin County Parks requests that the County pay for costs which are non-el igible for the use of MSA funds. The Hennepin County Park Board will be meeting soon to vote on this issue. Gustafson stated that they can assume that where the trail Is built off the right-of-way, MSA funding cannot be used. Gustafson reviewed the maps included in the report. Vongries asked why sto^^m sewer is not proposed for the entire route. Gustafson stated it is only proposed for the low areas along the trail. He explained that the right-of-way plan allows for a il’ driving lane, 8’ parking shoulder with curbing, 4’ of grass buffer, 8’ of trail, and 2’ of additional sod. He addea that only the half of the roadway affected by the trai I wi I I be upgraded with curbing at this time. Howell asked why the trail is not proposed for the west side of Old Crystal Bay Road. 2 i 1? r MINUTES OF THE PARK COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 1992 BIKE/HIKE TRAIL - CONT. Chair Flint explained there is an utility easement along the west side which would impact the trail. He added the impact to residential properties would be about the same on either side of the road. He stated that the majority of development is to the east of Old Crystal Bay Road, so it was felt that children would have to cross Old Crystal Bay Road at some point to get to the school. It seemed better to keep them all on the east side until they arrive at the formal crosswalk to be provided between the church and the school. Use noted it was felt that traffic entering the school may be a problem for bikers along the western side. Howell asked if it was feasible to continue the trail along County Road 6, cross Highway 12 and connect to the railroad track and back to Old Crystal Bay Road. Bradley stated there is a problem with wetlands in that area. Chair Flint explained that it was felt the City needed a north/south trail system where our population is located. The Luce Line already provides an excellent east/west trail. Bradley stated that the rebuilding of the bridge across the railroad at Old Crystal Bay Road would provide for a safer trail. Wilson asked about maintenance of the trail. Gerhardson noted it would be the responsIoI Iity of either the County or the City, but felt it may be best 'fof* City to maintain in order to retain control over the trail. Howell asked about the use of the trail by others. Gerhardson stated use of the trail will be restricted to non- motorized transportatI on. Chair Flint explained that to the extent that the property owners are willing to grant an easement, the CIty may be willing to p.ant screening along the trail on private property, if the property owner is willing to maintain the plantings. Gustafson noted that 150 trees greater than 4" in diameter have been identified in the report to be removed, if the right**o wa/ option is foil owed. Wilson noted that the cost in the report only provices for replanting of trees to be removed. I; b MINUTES OF THE PARK COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 1992 BIKE/HIKE TRAIL - CONT. Gustafson felt that MSA funding would only pay for rep I acement--of existing trees, not additional screening. Chair Flint explained that the County is proposing to extend the Baker Park Trail just west of Homestead Trail to connect to this tralI. Howell asked about signage at the Intersections. Gustafson said there would be painted crosswalks. 11se suggested marking the crossing at the Luce Line Trail also. Chair Flint asked about the Commission Members’ preference along County Road 6. He felt it would be safer outside the right-of-way. Howell asked about the grade of the trail as it goes back up to County Road 6. Gustafson said that the County has required standards for bike trails that they would need to follow. Gerhardson noted that it may be necessary to go off the right-of- way on the south side of County Road 6 between Old Crystal Bay Road and Willow Drive because of the steep grades. Bradley suggested a street light be installed at Old Crystal Bay Road and County Road 6. Gustafson said that there would be advanced signage along County Road 6 of the trail and a painted crosswalk. He added stop signs would be placed on the trail at the crossings. Wilson felt that the portion of the trail near the County Road 6 crossing should not be difficult to maneuver. Vongries asked about running the trail under County Road 6. Use said she would prefer that option because of the steep grade in the area. Wilson asked if Option A along County Road 6 would be viable for roller bIaders. Gustafson assumed the requirements would be the same as for bikers. He said they could study the cost of an underpass to go under County Road 6. Bradley felt that would eliminate their safety concerns. ■i 1 ,'Ti & ^Tr) I MINUTES OF THE PARK COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 1992 BIKE/HIKE TRAIL - CONT. Gerhardron stated the underpass would need to be lower than'^the drainage ditch and may create a water problem. Johnston stated he has been Involved in the installation of a crossing such as this In another county, and explained how it was done. He stated that the cost could be less than $20,000 if County Road 6 could be closed briefly to allow excavation for the tunnel rather than tunnelling. Bradley asked about the road easement extending north of Old Crystal Bay Road. Gerhardson noted it Is a platted right-of-way but may not be public. He said he would find out who owns the easement. McMillan asked if there would be additional costs if the abutting land owners do not grant an easement for the trail. Gerhardson reported that the Dickeys are interested in granting an easement for the traiI because they are very concerned about tree loss. He said that some of the other owners were not as receptive. It will be up to the owner whether he wants to grant the easement to save the trees. The owner wi I I not be compensated for the easement south of County Road 6 because granting it is optional with the owner. McMillan expressed concern about the grade north of Watertown Road if the trail follows the right-of-way in that area. Gustafson said they can go Into more detail after they review design requirements of the County. the Chair Flint asked that the costs be separated by section on the trail so we will know how much our costs are increased if Option A is elected. It was moved by Wilson, seconded by Bradley, to recommend approval of the bike/hike trail following the right-of-way, except in areas where the abutting land owners agree to grant an easement to construct the trail off the right-of-way, contingent upon the County paying the additional costs not covered by MSA funding. Ayes 8, nays 0. Bradley asked if they are anticipating for trail shifts due to land owners not granting an easement. MINUTES OF THE PARK COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 1992 BIKE/HIKE TRAIL - CONT. Chair Flint stated unless it Is feasible from an engineering standpoint, the trail will not be shifted, and if an easement cannot be obtained, the trail will follow the right-of-way. Chair Flint stated that the total cost of a trail off the right- of-way is less expensive, but the impact of the Inability to use MSA funding for such a trail makes this option more expensive for the City/County. Chair Flint clarified that this motion does not recommend extension of sewer and water to the school property. He stated this item Is a matter for the City CounciI and the SchooI District to work out. Bradley asked that the cost of an underpass be determined prior to CounciI review. Chair Flint stated that if an underpass special meeting of the Park Commission wi the option. is a viable ootion, a I be called to aiscuss (#4) RESPONSE TO LETTER - CANOE RACK SUMMIT PARK Chair Flint explained he received a letter from Orono resident, Thomas Caswell, requesting canoe racks be placed at Summit Park for rental. Vongries stated there are "no boating' signs posted at all Orono Parks. He felt that canoes were included in the interpretation. McMillan felt that they would be allowing space for number of individuals to gain access to the lake. a limited Vongries felt that they have come this far without allowing boating. He stated the canoe racks are ugly and noted there are other accesses to the lake. He felt this would open up the door for other types of watercraft launching. He stated that the Summit Park swimming beach should be expanded. Gerhardson explained that years ago. Long Lake and Orono agreed that Orono would open a swimming beach on east end of Long Lake to alleviate over crowding at the other swimming beach in Long Lake. Part of that agreement was that there would not be boat launching provided. He stated that this may be viewed as private use of pub lie I and. 4 J ff! U, aliJ 'uu W b cr MINUTES OF THE PARK COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 1992 CANOE RACK SUMMIT PARK - CONT. It was moved by Bradley, seconded by Vongries, to recommend denial of the request because it is a policy of the Park Commission to maintain Summit Beach for the sole use of swimmers w thout boat launching facilities provided. Ayes 6, nays 2. Chai Flint and Johnston voted nay. Chair Flint said he opposed the motion as he felt it was good to encourage less motorized watercraft on Long Lake. He felt it would be good to enlarge the beach and noted some of the additional area could be used by canoes and sailboards. Johnston felt that canoes could be launched further down from the swimming beach and not conflict with swimming activities. Gerhardson reminded them that the parking lot has been enlarged once, and to enlarge again may encourage additional traffic In the area. Gerhardson felt that a letter explaining the Park Commission’s position should be sent to the requestor on Orcno stationary. (#5) OTHER ISSUES Chair Flint asked about the status of Bederwood playground equipment. Gerhardson said the equipment is scheduled to be shipped August 11th. He stated that the sub-committee has met to decide locations and will meet again on site with the contractor to determine final location of the play equipment and the skating rink. Chair Flint asked about the signs and benches for the parks. Gerhardson said they should be delivered any day. Chair Flint asked Wilson/McMillan about a report on half court basketbal I . There was no report at this meeting, but it will be submitted for the next meeting. Chair Flint reported that the Park Commission still is net receiving the Planning Commission agendas. Mabusth statea mat this may be a way for tne Park Commission Members to be apprised or upcoming aopiications. MINUTES OF THE PARK COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 1992 OTHER ISSUES - CONT. Gerhardson suggested that a Park Commission representative attend the Planning Commission meetings if there is an issue of potential park dedication requirements to be discussed. Bradley stated that a staff person deal ing with zoning appi ications should be representing the Park Commission’s Interests in these matters. Chair Flint asked about Bederwood baseball field. Use reported that she talked with Dr. Mich from the Orono schools, and he was confused as to how the hockey arena and the basebal I fields were tied together. She stated the school has offered the land to OBA to lease for $1.00 per year for the use of baseball fields. Mich stated the fields have been leased to a farmer through this fall, and OBA has not requested to lease the land for the upcoming year. It was moved by Bradley to invite Gary Larson to the next Park Commission meeting. There ‘-as not a second and the motion failed. Wilson felt they need to decided if they intent to donate money for the construction of such fields. Ilse felt that should not be a factor for the OBA to move further with their plans. Johnston understood that OBA stiI I owes Larson $10,000 for the Bederwood Park. He felt that a private organization should not have to build these types of facilities, and that it should he the responsibility of the City. He said he wouId like the City to build the entire complex on the site. He noted he would recommend the ball fields be built for multi-users. He said that the fees charged by OBA probably only cover the administration costs of running the program and do not Include capital expenditures. Bradley noted that in the past the school districts have been the providers of recreational faciIities. Vongries felt that there shou.d be cooperation with communities. He felt that they should try to satisfy the Community. surrounding the needs of Johnston stated that he does not believe we should expend funds for dug outs or concossion stands. He felt we should help pay for the grading, drainage and ag lime on site. 8 1 nillij b ► minutes of the park commission meeting of august 4, 1992 OTHER ISSUES - CONT. It was moved by Wilson, seconded by Howell, to appoint Vongries, 11 se and Bradley to a sub-committee directed to meet with Larson to discuss the issue prior to the next meeting. Ayes 8, nays 0. Johnston announced that he was resigning from the Park Commission effective that evening. Chair Flint expressed the appreciation of the Park Commission for Johnston’s many contributions while being on the Commission. He asked Johnston to reconsider his decision. to toChair Flint stated that anyone that has an issue they wish discuss at the meeting, should contact Gerhardson or himself have it put on the agerJa. 11 se suggested adding ' ^ther business” on each agenda. Johnston suggested discussing the issue of the basebalI f i eIds and other upcoming planning issues with surrounding communities, such as Medina and Indeoendence. He asked that they also remember the other school districts that are a part of Orono. He felt it important to explain to these communities that if OBA does not come to a resolve, they will not have a ball field in the upcoming year. Bradley stated, that as a part of the sub-committee, he would be willing to meet with these communities to discuss the issue. ADJOURNMENT 9:50 P.M. It was moved by Ilse, seconded by McMillan, to adjourn the regular meeting of the Park Commission at 9:50 p.m. Ayes 3, nays 0. The next meeting will be Tuesday, September 1, 1992 at 7.00 p.m. Richard Flint, Chair Person ,L MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 17, 1D92 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date witn the foilowing members present: Planning Commission Chair Charlie KeI ley, Maureen Bel lows, Charles Schroeder and Stephen Pe* s^ The following were absent: Ed Cohen, Candace Rowlette, and Jeff Johnson. The following represented the City Staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, and City Recorder Teri Naab. Chair Kelley called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. (#1) #1759 P. PROFT/R. WELLS, 60/70 MYRTLEWOOD ROAO - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 - 7:10 P.M. The Affidavit of Pub Iication and Certificate of MaiIing were noted. Robert Mitchell was present to represent the applicants. Mabusth explained that this is a lot line rearrangement for properties located in the RR-1B zoning district, 'ne Profts’ property consists of 4.3 acres and tne Wells’ property consists of 1.6 acres. At the I me the subdivision is completed, the Wei - » b property would cont.;in approximately 1.3 acres. She noted that a portion of the property to be attached t*"' Profts’ pa^'cel consists of wetlands. She added th«t both Steve Schirmers and Steve Weckman confirmed that the area considered tor acquisition by the Profts is not suitable for septic development to serve future needs of the wells’ property. She stated the current and future owners of the Wells’ property should be alerted of the septic limitations of the property. She added there is no land adjacent to the Wells’ property that they cou d acquire for septic purposes. Chair KeMey asked if variance appr-val is needed. Mabusth explained that the Wei Is’ property is a substandard lot and the request further decreases the area of the lot. Chair Kelley asked the applicants’ hardships. Mitchell stated that if the triangular parcel Is not acquired by the Profts, it may affect the driveway turnaround on their property and their views to the southwest. He added that the parcel in question is of no benefit to the Wells. He said there is rio diminution of the Weils’ property, but the benefit to th'^ IS enormous. He stated tne narusrno i created Lecause of the unucual shape of the lot and the location ot the wetlands. Bellows askea property. if the Profts have a di i veway easement over tne -ve! is f MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 17, 1992 ZONING FILE #1759 - CONT. Mitchell noted the Wells have agreed to deed a 6’ wide driveway easement to the Profts after completion of this subdivision process. Sch-oeder asked what will happen if the Wells’ septic system fails. Mitchell reported that Schirmers has determined that there is enough room on the Wells’ property to fix their present system. He added the Wells’ septic situation is not markedably different than others on Myrtlewood Road. It was moved by Schroeder, seconded by Peterson, to recommend approval of Application #1759 for P. Proft/R. Wells, 60/70 /rtlewcod Road, for preliminary subdivision, including a variance for 70 Myrtlewood Road to reduce a substandard lot area. Ayes 3, nays 1. Bel lows voted nay. (#2) #1737 RICHARD HOLLANDER, 680 NORTH ARM DRIVE - .AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING The applicant requested that this issue be tabled until the next Planning Commission meeting. (#3) #1748 ROBERT 4 RITA HOVLAND, 1245 NORTH ARM DRIVE - VARIANCES - REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FURTHER REVIEW Rita Hovland was present. Mabusth explained that the applicants have revised their proposal to a 900 s.f. garage, which will still require a 15 setback from the side lot line. The garage is proposed at 25’x36’. She noted with the revised proposal, a lot coverage variance is not necessary. She advised the applicants prefer Option A, which would require a side setback variance to only one side. She stated this lot is a through lot and would need conditional use approval for any accessory structure. were asked to fidb been donePeterson noted at the last review the applicants reduce the structure into a smaller envelope which He stated it was also suggested that the gravel parking area o.. North Arm Drive be aoannoneJ. NUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 17, 1992 ZONING FILE #1748 - CONT. Hovland stated they intend to plant vegetation on one side al low one parking space to remain as a convenience to guests, also noted the property does not have a hardcover problem questioned the need to remove the parking area. and She and Chair Kelley felt that since the building is so large, it should conform to all standards. Hovland explained that they have two antique cars which they have inherited from her father-in-law and that they need to store them inside to preserve them. They also have a boat that they wish to store inside. She added that if tne garage were moved further back on the lot, it would destroy several mature trees not to mention the magnitude of the excavation needed because of steeoer topography. Bellows stated she agreed with Chair Kelley and felt the buiiding should conform to alI standards. Hovland explained that their contractor has proposed a 25’ wide garage to allow for some support s+ructure on either side of the garage doors. Peterson stateo he was concerned aoout eliminating the grave, drive because of safety reasons. He asked if the Hovlands Iived at the r«»s i dence. Hovland said the house is currently vacant but her step son would be living there Sf on. Schroeder suggested storing the cars off site. HovI and felt property. the vehicles would be more secure on their own It was moved by Bel lows, seconded by Chair Kelley, to recommend denial of Aoplication #1748 for Robert and Rita Hovland, 1245 North Arm Drive, because the applicants have not oroved sufficient hardships for the request, the vehicles could be housed in a smaller soaca. and there should not be exceptions to the ord nance for oversized accessory structures. Ayes 3, nays 1. Peterson /oted nay. 1 i 's r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 17, 1992 (#4) #1750 CHARLES & SHIRLEY PYLE, 3548 IVY PLACE - , oe r, iljVARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:20 - 7:36 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mr. Mrs. Pyle and Daryl Hanson were present for this appiIcavI on. Mabusth explained that the applicants were asked to reduce tne roof structure at the last Planning Commission review. Thi applicants now propose a root structure of 376 s.f. A lot coverage variance i • still reo’'ired for the proposal. She added 172 s.f. of existing hardcover along the northwest side of the house has been proposed for removal. The result is a total reduction of 20* hardcover, from 72* in the 75-250’ setback area to approximately 52*. Lot coverage is proposed at approximately 21*. Mr. Pyle felt that the garage located closer to the house wou i a aod to the aesthetic value of surrounding properties. He added the hardcover along the northwest side of the house has already been removed. He requested that if the plan is approved, tne existing until the new garage is built.gara96 b6 al lowed to rerriain Chair Kelley stated that is typically allowed. Mr Pyle noted there are two oaks trees that would need to be removed and replaced, but added because of other existing trees on the property, they may have to look at other options. Schroeder clarified the hardcover removed is non-structuraI hardcover. Chair Kelley stated he has a problem with the excessive lot coverage. Hanson advised that the existing residence is a two bedroom home, with a two car garage, and already exceeds the lot coverage standards. He indicated the roof structure was proposed to unify the two structures. He added the roofed area wi I I serve as an outside covered patio area. Chair Kelley explained that the ict coverage ordinance is relatively new. but i t provides that lots ao nor ger over-bui i t oti. He added the ordinance is aimed at smaller lots, in order to protect the visual impact of the pioperty. L MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 17, 1992 ZONING FILE #1750 ~ CONT. Bellows noted she does not favor applications substandard circumstance and make it worse. that take Mrs. Pyle felt they were improving the property. Bellows said their proposa. intensifies the use of the property. Mrs. Pyle said the neighbor to the north is in favor of the request. Hanson stated he was under the impression that if they changed the proposal as the Planning Commission requested at their last meeting, the request would be approved. Chair Kelley asked what type of addition is proposed for the existing house. He noted al lowable lot coverage is anc asked the applicants to demonstrate hardship. Hanson reiterated that the property is filled to allowable lot coverage with the existing two bedroom home. Mrs. Pyle stated the addition to the house is a family room and a foyer. It was moved by Chair Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to recommend approval of Application #1750 for Charles and Shirley Pyle of 3548 Ivy Place, to allow a lot coverage variance for an addition to the existing residence and a detached garage, and approval to remove mature trees on the property, subject to removal of hardcover identified, and lot coverage is not to exceed 18%. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#5) #1757 ALBERT 0. HANSER, 1685 FOX STREET - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:45 - 7:51 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing v^ere noted. Albert D. Hanser, Jack Taylor and Merridth Howell were present for this aopI I cation. %i .mi.. .... m , MINUTES OF THE OHGNO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 17, 1992 ZONING FILE #1757 - CONT. Hanser explained it has been determined, because of recently adopted shoreland regulations, that the septic system for the guest house does not conform to current standards. He noted the system works and is cleaned out twice a year. He submitted a letter from Ed Sullivan verifying this and attesting to the functioning system. He requested that he be allowed to maintain the system as he has in the past, and if in the future it is deemed that the system needs to be repaired or replaced, he be allowed to do so at that time. Mabusth stated that staff has found an error in the interpretation of the septic code. The system was classified as a non-conforming system as it appears to be located within the required lakeshore setback and the owner is given one year to replace ihe system. She added there is adequate area on the property for both a new and alternate system. Bellows stated she has no problem with the request as long as the property remains under current ownership, but it should be required to be upgraded if there is a new owner of the property. Taylor suggested executing owner to do so. Be I Iows fe11 they appIications. may a restrictive covenant requiring the setting a precedent for future Mabusth felt the issue involves technical sections of the code administered by the On-site Septic Manager and if an administrative variance is to be considered, Weekman must make final recommendation. Schror ‘er clarified that the system is only non-conferming by virtue of a change in law. He felt this property does not pose a problem as there is an alternate site on expressed his concern about future requests. the property, but It v-as moved by Peterson, seconded by Bellows, to '•ecommend approval for Application #1757 for Albert D. Hanser, 1685 Fox Street, for a conditional use permit for the guest house use, with the condition that a conforming septic system be installed within one year from the date of approval. Ayes 4. nays 0. 6 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGHELD AUGUST 17, 1992 (116) #1758 JAMES LAWRENCE, 1550 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING 8:03 - 8:04 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mr. Lawrence was present for this application. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Peterson, to recommend approval of Application #1758 for James Lawrence of 1550 Sixth Avenue North, for a conditional use permit to allow the continued use of the guest house. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#6) #1760 ERIC NIELSEN, 2140 PROSPECT AVENUE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:15 - 8:15 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted John Drucker was present for this application. Mabusth explained that the property is typical of the developed sites in the neighborhood. The former residence was removed through the hazardous building procedure. The property has been assessed one sewer unit and the SAC charge has already been paid. She indicated that because of a jut in the rear property Iina, a 50 setback is required instead of a 10’ setback. Staff has suggested that the deck be moved to the west to allow a greater setback in this area, and the applicant has submitted a revised proposal moving the deck and allowing for an 18’ setback. Drucker reiterated the difficulty in building on this shape cf lot. He noted a long, narrow house- could have been built on the prooerty, but the garage would have been the front of the house. Mabusth stated Parcel 15 is owned by a property owner across the street, and there is a small shed on the property. Bellows asked the difference between the proposed house and the former residence. Mabusth stated the former residence was smaller and did not meet any of the required setbacks. Chair Kelley asked how tnis application compared to variance request in the same neighborhood. f MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 17, 1992 ZONING FILE i»1760 - CONT. Mabusth stated the other property was slightly larger and has also been involved in a hazardous buiIding action. She noted this request does not require lot coverage variance approval. It was moved by Chair Kelley, seconded by Peterson, to recommend approval of AppIication #1760 for Eric Nielsen, 2140 Prospect Avenue, for variances to construct a new residence, subject to conditions noted by staff. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#8) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE There was no report. (#9) REPORT BY THE LAKE USE COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVE There was no report. (#10) OTHER ISSUES Scott Larson, Scott Larson Homes, explained he is a builder and currently constructing a parade of homes model in Sugarwoods. He requested special consideration for the driveway. He explained that the delay for this request was due to so much happening, and it was overlooked. He said the original site plan showed the requested driveway configuration, but was approved with a driveway straight into the home. He indicated a view of the garage would be lessened if the driveway is approved as proposed, and noted the 6’ grade change at the road which wi I I create drainage problems if the drive is built straight in to the property. Bellows reiterated that he was told from the beginning that the driveway configuration was not approved. She stated the buiIder has known for a long time about the parade of homes and the requirements of the City. Larson noted the home was designed for the grade on the lot, and they just overlooked the importance o^ the driveway requirements. He stated the proposed driveway site the best location. Schroeder felt that the proposed drive Iocation. is no doubt the preferred Bellows felt tnat unless they start to deny driveway requests, builders will continue imoortance of this issue to the City. these late to over look spec ia! the 8 iue tasu MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 17, 1992 OTHER BUSINESS - CONT. It was moved ty Bellows, seconded by Peterson, to recommend denial of the special driveway request for Scott Larson Homes, for 2112 Sugarwoods Drive. Ayes 3, nays ^ Schroeder voted nay. Chair KeI ley advised the appi icant that the request wl I I be considered by the Council. (#11) APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Bellows, to approve the minutes of the July 20, 1992 Planning Commission meeting. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#12) REPRESENTATIVE TO THE COUNCIL MEETING Chair Keiley volunteered to attend the Seotember 14, 1992 meeting. ADJOURNMENT Chair Kelley adjourned the regular Planning Commission meeting ai 3:30 p.m. Charlie Kelley, Chair Perse:- /a * Boneztroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Onj G Bof^itroc PE RoC^rt \A Rosens PE ’ Jcvrpfi C Anoefik PE L So^vj j PE K<naoJ £ To^n^' PE Gierm R Coo*. PE Trxxnas E fvovrs PE Roorr G CM P£ SoSJ-^ V £0«^:fr! C P-A •irriO' Engineers & Architects HcrkVd^J A PEA Go'Jot' P£ Rooef! R Ptrfitttc PE R<f)jrt; W Eosiff PE D^^kJ O louo:-» PE RcOcrr C RuiiC*, A I A Jtrry A BounXXi P£ Vark A Hjin\or PE M-c'-df' T Kdutmanrt P£ >j k r-e-J P£ Thomas R Anj^rjoT! A A Donato C Bufoa'O: P£ E An^j% P£ Ga^ P SVjnJrr PE •V'nar' Maritf^ir/ Pf M<nar< P Rau P - Ac^'^'S R*ng AtCP Thomas W Prre'Non P£ KKr^ar C Lynch P£ Jjmn R Maiaro PE jr»s D P£ P Andf»vf*n P£ Vj'k P S P£ Vaf. A P£ Gary VI' Monen P£ Da*''-et J EOq^fTc^ PE PhKip j Casv/^’ P£ Mdfk D P£ M<«ev 6 Jenvpn P£ L Ph4*i.p G^avri Hi PE Mfrn L a PE f TuOJ fcvtff P£ iLrth R vaoo PE Sh^AH D Gutia^on Cpokj Ofvier P£ Chjfi^l A £f<*xr Leo M Pawseiwv Ha»tan M 0*V5r ja'hAs P Engeira-O! p: September 9. 1992 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 CiTV C= OROt'JC 1 "i t y 1 1 Attn: Mr. John Gerhardson SEP 1 4 i09? Re: 400,000 Gallon Elevated Tank Our File No. 13954 Dear John: Enclosed herewith are three signed copies of Request for Payment No. 2 for the above referenced project. The request is in the amount of $130,492.00 and includes payment primarily for the tank fabrication. We have reviewed this request and find it to be in order. We therefore recommend payitient to PDM, Inc. in t'.ie amouiit of $130,492.00. Please give me a call if you have any questions. Yours very ’ truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC, 4 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 1 J/jJ Bon€itrou Owner City of Orono, l.'v^5 Hrown Ud S. PO Ho\ 66, Crystal, MN 55323 Date Augusl 21, 1902 Andedik & lyi AsiocJjtei A AttrmmnM For Period May 5, 1992 to Augusl 21, 1992 Request No 2 Contractor Pill-Dcs Moines, Inc., PO Box 1596, Des Moines, IA 50306 UliQUIil?!’ I'OR l*AYMliNI 400,000 Gallon lilcvalcd Water Sloragc Tank l ilc No. 1.^9.S4 SUMMARY 1 Original Contract Amount 2 Change Order - Addition 3 Change Order • Deduction 4 Revised Contract Amount 5 Value Completed to Dale 6 Material on Hand 7 Amount Earned 8 Less Retainage 5% 9 Sub-Total 10 Less Amount Paid Previously 11 AMOUNT DUE TI US REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. $ $ $595,150.0 s 595,150.0 ’ $2'»o,445.t $O.f $236.445.0( $11.«22.2 $224,622.7 $94,130.7: $130,492.(X ’ Recommended for Approval by: HONIiSTROO, ROSENIi, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIA'IliS, INC Approved by Contractor: Pi ri’ - DES MOINES, INC. 7_ Approved by Owner: CTIY OF ORONO, MN Specified Coiilracl Complelion Dale: Novlmmi K 30, 1992 Dale; I t.ro.'54.kr I* 9 t MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON JULY 21, 1992 A special meeting of the School Board of Orono Independent School District No. 278 was held on Tuesday, July 21, 1992 at 4:30 p.m. Present: Dave McKown Don Anderson John Maresh Peg Swanson Thomas Mich Neal Lawson Absent: Jim Franklin Martha Van de Ven UPON MOTION by John Maresh, seconded by Peg Swanson, the consent agenda was approved as follows: - approved the appointment of Mary Lou Doherty as a fourth grade teacher at Schumann Elementary School for the 1992-93 school year; - approved the appointment of John Avaloz as a teacher in the ungraded area at Schumann Elementary School for the 1992-93 school year; - approved the appointment of Paul Sladek as a fourth grade teacher at Schumann Elementary School for the 1992-93 school year; - approved the appointment of Sherri Jenkins as a teacher in the ungraded area at Schumann Elementary School for the 1992-93 school year. Motion carried. Dr. Mich reported that summer maintenance projects are on schedule as well as work on the PER report, calendar, policy books, and curriculum; that four new elementary teachers were approved in the consent agenda, selected from 980 applicants; that Or. Carl Shutts, high school principal, arrived on July C; that District Office staff will be at an all day computer training class on July 29; that the administrative retreat will be held on August 18 and 19; that on August 20 the annual picnic ••'ll be held for summer workers and he invited Board mem­ bers to attend; that on August 28 there will be an orientation day for new teachers and workshop begins on August 31. UPON MOTION by John Maresh, seconded by Peg Swanson, the Board of Education adopted the following resolution regarding the School District cafeteria plan: WHEREAS, Indepe-'cent School District No. 278 (Orono) (the "School District") adopted the Orono School District Cafeteria Plan (the "Plan") effective July 1, 198S; the Plan; WHEREAS, the Srhool Dis. t desires to make certain amendments to NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Plan is hereby amended and restated effective July 1, 1992 to read as set forth in the document titled 1 "Oro^o School District Cafeteria Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective July 1, 1992)", a copy of which shall be fileo with the record of this resolution. RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Superintendent of the School District, or his designee, is hereby delegated the power under Sec. 5.5 of the Plan to adopt such amendments to the Plan as the Superintendent, or his designee, deems appropriate in light of changes in law or of a necessity to bring the Plan into compliance with the law. 7-20-92 ORONO SCHOOL DISTRICT CAFETERIA PLAN (As Amended and Restated Effective July 1, 1992) t # J ARTICLE I Sec. 1.1 Sec. 1.2 Sec. 1.3 Sec. 1.^ ARTICLE II Sec. 2.1 Sec. 2.2 Sec. 2.3 Sec. 2.A Sec. 2.5 Sec. 2.6 Sec. 2.7 Sec. 2.8 article III Sec. 3.1 Sec. 3.2 Sec. 3.3 ARTICLE IV Sec. ^.1 Sec. 4.2 Sec. 4.3 Sec. 4.4 Sec. 4.5 Sec. 4.6 Sec. 4.7 Sec. 4.8 article V Sec. 5.1 Sec. 5.2 Sec. 5.3 Sec. 5.4 Sec. 5.5 Sec. 5.6 APPENDIX A APPENDIX B 5109 ORONO SCHOOL DISTRICT cafeteria flan (As Amended and Restated Effective July 1. 1992) OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Name of Plan Employer Purpose Effective Date DEFINITIONS Election Election Period Medical Care Expense Account Medical Plan Participant Plan Year Qualified Employee Termination of Employment PARTICIPATION Participation Enrollment Procedure Cessation of Participation CREDITS AND ACCOUNTS Salary Reduction to Pay Premium Contributions Changes in participant's Cost for Health Insurance Salary Reduction Credits to Medical Care Expense Accounts Allocation to Accounts Payments Charged Against Accounts Termination of Participation Payments Following a Participant's Death Discrimination Prohibited PLAN ADMINISTRATION Duties of the Employer Plan Not a Contract of Employt'ent Plan Benefits are Unsecured Plan Benefits May Not Be Assigned Amendment or Termination Rules of Construction MEDICAL BENEFITS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING UNITS lAge. 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 7 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 10 4 ORONO SCBOOL DISTRICT CAFETERIA PLAN (As Amendsd *nd Restated Effective July 1, 1992) ARTICLE I Q£Ii£BAL 1,1 fiamg of Plan. The name of the plan set forth herein is the "Orono School District Cafeteria Plan". It is sometimes herein referred to as the "Plan". Sec. 1.2 Purpose. The purpose of the Plan is to furnish from the Participant's gross income under Section 125(a) of the Code. Sgg, 1,3 Employer. The "Employer" is Independent School District No. 278 (Orono). Sec. 1.4 pffurtive Date. The "Effective Date" of the Plan is July 1» 1985, the date as of which the Plan was established. i ARTICLE II DEFINITIONS Sec. 2.1 Election. During each applicable Election Period, a Participant may file an Election designating the insurance premiums to be paid and the Medical Care Expense Account allocation desired by an eligible Participant, subject to the following: (a)The Election shall be in writing and shall specifically indicate the insurance premiums to be paid and the amounts to be allocated to the Medical Care Expense Account of an eligible Participant. An Election meeting the requirements of the Plan and not inconsistent with its terms shall become irrevocable on the last day of the Election Period in which it is filed with the Employer. (b)An Election filed in an Election Period prior to the beginning of a Plan Year shall be effective for each paycheck issued to the Par­ ticipant in the Plan Year (unless a new Election is made in an Election Period resulting from a change in the Participant's family status, as described in Sec. 2.2(a)). (c)An Election filed in an Election Period during a Plan Year pursuant to Sec. 2.2(a) shall be effective as soon as administratively fea­ sible following the date the Election is filed, but not sooner than the first day of the payroll period coinciding with or following the date the Election is filed. An Election filed in an Election Period during a Plan Year pursuant to Sec. 2.2(b) shall be effec­ tive on the first day of the month following the date on which the individual becomes a Qualified Employee, or on the first day of the payroll period coinciding with or following the date the Election is filed, in the case of an Election filed on or after said first day of the month. (d)If no Election is filed during an Election Period, the Participant will be deemed to have filed the same Election as was in effect for the Participant before the Election Period. If there was no prior Election in effect for the Participant, it shall be deemed that the Participant elected not to participate in the Plan. Sec. 2.2 Election Period. The "Election Period" for a Plan Tear is the period designated by the Employer that ends prior to the first day of such Plan Year. The following are also Election Periods: (a)If any of the following events occur with respect to a Participant, then the 31-day period immediately following the date the event occurs shall also be an Election Period for said Participant with respect to the remainder of said Plan Year: -2- III (1) The Participant ■arriea (b) The Participant divorces his or her spouse. (3) The spouse or dependent of the Participant dies. (M A child is bom to or adopted by the Participant, a child of the Participant becomes married or divorced, or a child of the Participant ceases to be or becomes a dependent of the Par­ ticipant. (5) The Participant’s spouse becomes employed or ceases to be employed. (6) The Participant or the Participant's spouse changes from part time to full-time status or vice versa, or takes an unpaid leave of absence. (7)A significant change in health coverage attributable to the spouse's employment occurs. (8)Any other event occurs that allows a new election under appli cable Internal Revenue Service regulations. The Employer may in its sole discretion extend the Election Period under this subsection upon presentation by the Participant of evi­ dence showing that the failure to file the Election prior to the deadline was for good cause which was not the fault of the Partici­ pant. Any such Election made during the Election Period provided by this subsection (a) must be consistent with the change in family status resulting from the event described above. The Employer shall not accept any Election during said Election Period which it deems to be inconsistent with the change in family status. In addition, any such Election may not reduce the total amount to be credited to an eligible Participant's Medical Care Expense Account for the Plan Tear to less than the amount of eligible expenses incurred by the Participant prior to the effective date of the new Election. With respect to an individual who becomes a Qualified Employee during the Plan Tear, the Election Period for said Plan Tear shall be any period established by the Employer which ends prior to the first day of the month following the date the individual becomes a Qualified Employee. The Employer may in its sole discretion ettwd the Election Period for such an individual, but the extended period must in all events end not later than 31 days after the date the individual became a Qualified Employee. Sec. 2.3 M*»dlcal Care Expense Account. A "Medical Care Expense Account" for reimbursement of medical expenses under Appendix A shall be -3- In thm Enolovar*! books and records for each Participant who is T, ,t,t » luefSiurJ Eduction credit, to .uch en .ccount under Sec. I Expense Account .hell be credited .. provided In Articl^IV "Ind .hell be decree.ed by benefit payment. dl.trlbution. to ^M«e Acc^t. are for bootteeplng purpo.e. only and are not required to be set aside from the Employer's other assets. g 2e4 Plan. The Employer’s "Medical Plan is any incnrihnr® or‘similar prograffl. health maintenance organiaation, trust fund, insurance arrant ement maintained by the Employer for the purpose of providing ?e‘rtaln specified medical benefits for emplov^ea (and their depen dents). Sec. 2.5 Participant. A "Participant" is an individual described as such in Article III. See 2 6 Plan_XfiAr. The "Plan Year" is the period on which the .A. J the Plante kept. The Plan Year is the 12-consecutive month period beginning on July 1 and ending June 31 of the following year. Sec 2.7 OuaLLtifii-EmplfiJtfifi. "Qualified Employee" means a regular employee of the Employer who is employed to work at least 20 hours per week. subject to the following. (a) Btl eligible to participate in this Plan are listed in Appendix B to this Plan. (b) change in employment status takes place. (c) tions for coverage under this Plan, he shall not become a Qualified Employee again until the following July 1st. s»c 2 8 of Employmenb. The "Termination of Employ­ ment" of an imjioyee for purposes of the Plan shall be deemed to occur upon the employee's resignation, discharge, retirement, death. to active work at the end of an authorised leave of absence or the -4- 1 ::i!:t':i^:trroii:-: :.\tzX p^uc, * tj. ^.r. r..uu. i» the tenninatlon of the employer-employee relationsh p. 1 -5- 'i. ARTICLE III participation g 3 I pn i-Mripation . Each person who becomes a Qualified g 3 2 En rol Indent Procedure . To become a Participant, an eligi- 3 3 rffifiiiriffn Participation. A person shall cease to be a p.rticipant It of the ..rll.r of (i) the last day o' the payroll period 1» uK4rh th» Participant's Termination of Employment occurs, or (-1) the last d« of Jhe wroin«iod in .hich the Participant cea.e. to be a Qualified t^ilovee Caseation of participation shall not prevent a fonser Participant f^Sl fuin. rclalS^^for “elmbursenent relatin, to the portion of a Plan Year Inhici ^Se InMvTdual was a Participant for Medical Expense, incurred n [hat option of the Plan Year to the extent a balance exists in the Partici- pi ‘ -riidUat C«: Expense Account. Such a '“i" ro;": same rule, as apply under this Plan to claims submitted after the end of a Plan Year by Participants. 6- f j article IV ^apniTS AND ACCOUNTS _ g«iMrv ReHiirtion to PflY Prcpium-CQnUibutioni» During an ^ V i A PArtlcioant may elect to have the Employer pay the Election ° ^ premium required fcr coverage of the Participant o^the Participant'* family^^under an Employer-sponsored Medical Plan. The plrticipanfs Compensation shall be reduced by an amo,^t equal to the addi­ tional Cmount paid by the Employer on the Participant a behalf. Sec. U.2 in Cost for Health If P«rticioanfe coet for health insurance coverage under a Employer-spon- C Plan increases or decreases during the Plan Year, the amount Crthe ^ductiCn of the Participant's compensation pursuant to Sec. A.l will hi litoroatically adjusted to reflect the change in cost. In the event of a I £2 ¥ in the Participant’s cost for health insurance cover*- irJlrtrcHa” iill ^ to file . n.. El.otioo .. provided In Sec! 2.2(e) revoUng the election of coverage under that Medical Plan. Sec 4.3 s.i.rv »eductloii_CifiU~J-ta-Wftll<^«l Care Eiipeiiit . ^.!lne an Electl^ Period, each eligible Participant nap elect to P™5o«r credit a^unt. to the Participant'. Medical r,re Expen.e iTclJi. hrent«lng Into an Election on a tom pre.crlbed by -.u tiled with the Employer, subject to the following: (a) Each Participant .hall be eligible to elect .alary reduction ere- dits under this section; provided, however, if a J, member of a collective bargaining unit, he or she shall be eligible "relect salary reduction credits under this section ^e applicable collective bargaining agreement expressly provides that the Participant shall be allowed to elect salary reduction credits to a Medical Core Reimbursement Account. The bargaining wit* whoce members are eligible to elect salary reduction credits under this section are listed in Appendix B to this Plan. (b) The Election shall specify the dollar amount by ^he panf* compensation will be reduced to provide credit* to the Participant's Medical Care Expense Account for the Plan Tear (or the remainder of the Plan Year). (c) No more than $3,000 may be credited in any year ^ JHilcl- to the Participant's Medical Care Expense Account. If t^ pant becomes eligible to participate in the Plw Year the $3,000 limit specified in the preceding sentence shall be reduced proportionately based on the number of day* remaining in such Plan Year. -7- (b) (d) No amount thall be credited, and the Election be deemed void, under subsection (a). e 4 4 anncetlpn to Accountfi. In accordance with the Partlci- nant'e Election filed during an Election Period, the Employer shall record a S!dLal Car^Lpense Account for each eligible Participant, to which amounts c«duH S5« S«. «.3 .. by the EUctloo, subject to the following: (a) Amounts attributable to salary cire that the Participant elects to have credited to the Wejical Care Expense Account shall be credited to that Account as of the first day of the Plan Year. Amounts credited to the Medical Care Expense Accounts are for book­ keeping purposes only. A Participant's claim against the oyer for*^bencfltrfrom his or her Medical Care Expense Account is that of a general creditor and is not secured. No assets relating to such Accounts are segregated from the Employer's interest or other earnings shall be credited to any Medical Care Expense Account# (c) If any amounts remain credited to a Medical Care Expense Jocount ^ after^the last day of the Plan Year, the credit balance shall be cancelled; provided, however, that benefit payments for reimburse­ ment of expenses incurred on or before the last of the Plan Year may be charged against amounts credited on said • claim for reimbursement is filed with the Employer on or before the October I next following the end of the Plan Tear. Sec. A.5 pj.vmenta Charged Against Accounil. Payments wder ADoendix A to the Plan shall be charged against the amounts credited to the Medicil Care Expense Account for the Plan Year in which the reimbursable expense is incurred, subject to the following: (a) (b) *.l-bur.«i«»t. with r..i«ct to .li.lble bMOflt cl.l« will be paid to the Participant on October I, February 1. and June 1 of the Plan Year and October I of the following Plan Year. The Employer may require the Participant to verify expenses for which he or she is seeking payment or reimbursement that the Employer deems appropriate. The Employer shall have the authority to review expenses submitted for re^ursement and to make the^final decision whether a particular benefit claim is ell Bible for reimbursement by the Plan. However, the Employer may also delegate such questions to an independent review agency such as an insurance company or other service provider. -8- Sec. *.6 T#nBination of Participation. Any balance refflaining in a Participant's Accounta after he or she ceaaee to be a Participant and after all benefits to which the Participant is entitled have been paid shall be forfeited. Sec. 4.7 Piivmgnts Following a Participant's Death. The Employer shall apply amounts credited to a deceased Participant's Medical Care Expense Account for the Plan Year in which the Participant's death occurred to pay eligible expenses incurred during the portion of the Plan Year prior to the Participant's death. Any amount remaining in the Medical Care Expense Account after such reimbursement shall be forfeited. Sec. 4.8 Dlacrimination Prohibited. The Plan shall not be oper­ ated in such a manner as to discriminate in favor of highly-comp-s sated individuals or Participants and shall be operated in cMpliance with any applicable Internal Revenue Service regulations regarding such discrimi­ nation. K ii'i -9- ARTICLE V ADMlNISTRAII ia Lployees of the Employer, or to individuals or entities independent of the Em^oyer. The Employer shall establish a claims procedure. Sec 5.2 Plan N^t a Contract of Emplovipeat. The Plan Is not an employment agreement and does nut assure the continued employment of any emploiee or Participant for any time or period. Sec. 5.3 plnn Benefits AreJJD£&^t£d. No Participant shall, by virtue of the Plan, have any interest in any specific asset or assets of the Employer. A Participant has only an unsecured contractual right to receive payments in accordance with the Plan. actual receipt thereof• Sec. 5.5 Amendment or,lermin.tiffll. The Employer moy emenn ^ terminete the Plan (Includln, any Appendix) at any tlma by action of the or termination applied to pay expenses Incurred during which the amendment or termination occurs, but the fora and timing of the payment of said benefits may be modified. Sec. 5.6 Rules of Construction. The Plan is intended ^ be a cafeteria plan under Section 125 of the Internal Revenue Code. The PIm is time to tlM amended. The Plan shall be administered and construed consis­ tent with said intent. It shall also be construed and administered according to the laws of the State of MinnesoU to the extent are not preempted by the laws of the United States of America. All contro­ versies, disputes, and claims arising hereunder shall be submitted to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, except as other­ wise provided in any trust agreement entered into with a Trustee. All hJral. tl th. ••Tnt.m.l Pavenu. Cod.” or ‘t- "Co«." «. .o h. Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as from time to time amended. The Plan shall be construed in accordance with the following ruless -10- 'j ¥ (•) (b) (c) (d) (e) Heading# at the beginning of article# and aectiona hereof convenience of reference, shall not be considered a part of the text of the Plan, and shall not influence its construction. Capitalited terms used in the Plan shall have their meaning as defined in the Plan unless the context clearly indicates to the contrary. Any references to the masculine gender include the feminine and vice versa. Use of the words '‘hereof’, "herein", "hereunder", or similar com- pounds of the word •*here** shall mean and refer to the entire Plan unless the context clearly indicates to the contrary. The provisions of the Plan shall be construed as a whole in such manner as to carry out the provisions hereof and shall not be con strued separately without relation to the context. -11- appendix a f^pprCAL BENEFITS A-1 BenfiiiJtl. A Participant is entitled to reimbursement from the Participant's Medical Care Expense Account for Medical Expenses incurred d^^lng the Plan Year on behalf of the Participant, the Participant's Spouse, or the Participant's Dependents, subject to the following. (a) L. (b) (c) (d) (e) tledical Expenses" mean expenses for medical care (Including dental care) as defined in Section 213 of the Internal Revenue Code, but only to the extent auch expenses are not reimbursed or reimbursable by the Employer's Medical Plan, by insurance, or from some other source. As a condition to receiving benefits under the Plan, a Participant shall make every reasonable effort to obtain reimburse­ ment of medical expenses from other available sources. Medical Expenses covered by the Plan include ambulance or other transporta­ tion costs essential to medical care but do not include other transportation costs. Medical Expenses covered by the Plan do not include insurance premiums owed by a Participant's spouse for any insurance provided through the spouse's employer, or any other insurance premiums other than premiums for coverage under the Employer's Medical Plan. Also. Medical Expenses covered by the Plan do not include any expenses in a category of expenses excluded by the Employer on a nondiscriminatory basis. "Spouse" means the legal spouse of a Participant. Benefits with respect to a Spouse shall cease upon the dissolution of marriage to the Participant. "Dependents" r^ean persons defined as such in Section 152 of Internal Rew .ue Code, unless the Employer adopts a narrower defi nition by an administrative rule. Medical Expenses incurred during the Plan Year by the Participant, the Participant's Spouse, or the Participant's Dependents prior to the date the individual becomes a Participant under the Plan shall not be eligible for reimbursement under the Plan. Expenses are considered to be "Incurred" when the service giving rise to the expense is rendered. A Participant shall not be entitled to reimbursement for Medical Expense Account for that Plan Year against which benefit payments may be charged pursuant to Sec. 4.5. In any event, no more than i3,000 BMiy be reimbursed to a Participant for any Plan Year. -12- (f) Claims for reimbursement of Medical Expenses Incurred during a Plan Year must be submitted to the Employer on or before the Ocr. er 1 next following the end of the Plan Year. (g) Claims under this Appendix shall be made in accordance with rules established by the Employer. APPENDIX B rm.T.RCTlVE BARSAU>.llji?-IflmS Plan: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Orono Education Association Orono Principals' Association ji.|\ School Service Employees Local 284 (Custodial) School Service Employees Local 284 (Food Se^ice) School Service Employees Local 284 (Paraprofessional School Service Employees Local 284 (Secretarial) elecr«l«y eduction credit, to a Medical Care Expense Account under Sec. 4.3(a) of this Plan: (a) Orono Principals' Association. 51081/51101 -14- Motion carried.UPON MOTION by John Maresh, seconded by Don Anderson, the meeting was adjourned. Motion carried. ohn Maresh, Clerk Approved: Dave McKown, Chairman b MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278HELD ON JULY 1, 1992 The annual nieeting of the School Board of Orono Independent School District No. 278 was held on Wednesday, July 1, 1992. Present: Dave McKown Don Anderson James Franklin John Maresh Peg Swanson Martha Van de Ven Thomas Mich Neal Lawson The meeting was called to order and nominations for chairperson were requested by Dr. Mich. Peg Swanson nominated Dave McKown for chairperson. UPON MOTION by John Maresh, seconded by Don Anderson, nominations were closed and Mr. McKown was elected by unanimous ballot. Motion carried. John Maresh nominated Don Anderson for vice chairperson. Peg Swanson moved, John Maresh seconded that nominations cease and that Mr. Anderson be elected by unanimous ballot. Motion carried. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Peg Swanson, the yearly salary for Clerk was established as S500 and for Treasurer as $100. Motion carried. Jim Franklin nominated John Maresh for clerk. Martha Van oe Ven MOVED, Jim Franklin seconded that nominations cease and that Dr. Maresh be elected by unanimous ballot. Motion carried. John Maresh nominated Jim Franklin for treasurer. John Maresh MOVED, Martha Van de Ven seconded tnat nominations cease and that Mr. Franklin be elected by unanimous ballot. Motion carried. UPON MOTION by Jim Franklin, seconded by Don Anderson, the Board of Education authorized the signature plates of officers for 1992-93. Motion carried. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Jim F-^anklin, the consent agenda was approved as follows: - approved the minutes of the J:;ne 8, 1992 regular meeting; - approved the appointment of Helene Wise as a one year (1992-93) replace­ ment teacher of English 7 & 8 and Spanish 7; - approved the appointment of Ramona Cesare as a special education teacher ^or the 1992-93 school year; - approved the appointment o* Barbara Danger as the media specialist/librarian at Orono High School for the 1992-93 school year; - accepted the resignation of Zoe Ann Palmer, middle school librarian, effective June 30, 1992; - approved continued membership in E.C.S.U. for the 1992-93 school year; - approved continued membership in AMSD for the 1992-93 school year; - approved continued membership in the Minnesota State High School League according to the following resolution: Approved by Board of Education - 7/1/92 RESOLVED, that this Governing Board of Schoo! District Kumber —uq— , ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT____________________, County pf HENNEPIN-------------------- (Name of District/School) ' Su.e of Minn^. Stale Comnussionir of Education aa provided for by Minnesott Statutea, Section 129.121. FURTHER RESOLVED, that the high schoolfs) Ujted below (name aU high schools in the district); ORONO HIGH SCHOOL is (are) authoriied by this, the Governing Board of said school district or school to: A. Make new application for membership in the Mn State1. (Check one)High School League, and . ., ^X B. Renew Its memberehlp in the MN Stote High School League, and 2. Participate in the approved inter-school activities sponsored by said Uague and its various subdivisions. aiBTHFR RESOLVED that this Governing Board herdiy adopts the Con**'*)'?®"’ of such activities arc assigned to the official rq>rcscntativc. • • - adopted the following Pupil Staff Ratio Policy for the 1992-93 school Approved by Board of Education - ll\l92 \ PUPIL STAFF RATIO POU^ VHBICAS, Ml«n«ioti 0#p»rtM«t of Cdueatieo luloi 3500.1*00 lUMoUry School St.ff .«< 3500.3700 Sooood.rr School surf proclO# •• followo: «uhB 2 PuDll-toaohor rotlo. Tht ioooptablo ;;;o2i;iio.rp5ju-?.5eh^ f*r*;«.?o jus;?! i«o?S5!;« ■«•«« cpccuiuti it •• iUrtiC of 200 pupllt tor Otp per ttok It gradti B to I or 1 to o. Sutp. t. M»i!ou« nuobjr of pupilo. Tbo ■•iIbub ftoobor of pupilo por day.for osr:; ^ aduoatiofi ahall oot oiooad tO pupIlOo Tho Jacoootndfd avorafo ouabar day por weak for o aecondary teacher of perforoiog ouslo groups Is loO.\ 1 THBkBfO^Bi BB IT RESOLVED:i IndcpcnOett School Olotrlot ho. _i2L- *• •dhcrc to the .bo»c HItnooott Ocptrtteot of Iduottloo guide llnot rcUttng to pupll-tctchcr ratio#. the thot# goldellnot tap b# oceeded It toy on* or tor# Of the Mlowlog olrcuBStancea: At CUaarooo, facility and supply conatraiotaj B. funding and financial conslderationoj r C« CurrlottluB antf inttruoitonal oonaldoraitona;0. Ifatliblllty of lieenaed ataff and otbar ataff oonaldoratlona; I. Studant anrollnent and dtaofraphloas f. Location of atudanta and tranaportaiton oon •t4*r*tton«. Vh«nev*r th« r«tle» *xo««d th« iboT* |uld« s«p«rli>Ui>d*ot of ochoolt «h«U otk* • wltto# roport to tho oohool boord doscMbloi tho oiro»o»tMe«o whlok iibko oxebbtlono to tho luldolUos noooaaarp. This poiloy will bo adopted and flltd vltb tho Stoto Board of Education by Aujuai 1 of each year. Any aaondaont Bodo by tho achcol board ulU bo fllod uith tho Stoto Board of Education vlthln ton (10) daya of Ita adoption* 4 agreed to participate in Chapter I and authorize an LEA representative in conjunction with the District Advisory Committee and School Advisory com­ mittees of the District to execute and file application for the school district and to otherwise act as authorized representative in all Chapter I related activities; declared its intention to develop projects which expand and improve the educational programs of the District, and said Board authorized Dr. Thomas B. Mich, Superintendent of Schools or his designee, to execute and file application for and in behalf of the school district, and otherwise to act as its authorized representative in state and federally funded programs and thot the Board declared its intention to comply with all of the requirements set forth in the "Applicant Statement of Assurances"; directed administration to certify to the State Demographer the following population estimates for Orono Independent School District No. 278 which will serve as the basis for the Community Education levy for the Early Childhood program: Age 0 1 2 3 4 121 142 144 174 171 Total 752 designated the Assistant Superintendent as the administrator to review all collateral obtained from financial institutions to cover investments and bank deposits; directed the Superintendent to approve teacher contracts from July 1, 1992 to September 14, 1992 in ordo'- to help assure a full component of qualified teachers for the 1992-93 school year; approved Activity Fund Renort for third quarter, 1992 approved the Treasurer's Reports for August, 1991 - January, 1992 approved the bills as cove'^ed by vouchers 074493 through 074716 approved the call for bids on two vans; approved the call for bids on milk and related dairy products and authorized the Assistant to the Superintendent to approve the bid subject to budget limitations. Dr. Mich stated that this meeting marks the start of the 1992-93 school year season and this provides the opportunity to reflect on the past year and its accomplishments which were many an^ he expressed appreciation to the Board of Education for their dedication and support, to the parents for their willingness to become involved, to the students, to the facultyAtaff and to administration; that a special Board meeting may be called for July 21 at which time the Board will be presented a revised plan document for the "cafeteria plan" that exists in various employee contracts which will incorporate specific changes according to Internal Revenue code; thai a breakfast seminar will be reld on July 2 at 8:00 a.m. to honor Marge Gasch for her twenty-two years of service to the Hennepin Technical Board and to congratulate her on her retirement; that he wanted to express appreciation to Zoe Ann Palmer for her twenty-seven years of d6dicdt6d service to our District 3od conQr^tulflte her on her retire*nent which the Board approved tonight; that all eleven of the District vans have passed inspection by the State; that 980 applications have been received for four ele­ mentary positions at Schumann Elementary with twenty-one of them to be inter­ viewed; that the summer school program has been enormously sue “^^sful and he expressed appreciation to Melanie DeLuca and her staff; that Dr. Carl Shutts, new high school principal, will arrive on Monday, July 6; that he will be recom­ mending that a cormiittee be established this fall which will research the spacing needs for the District and develop an intermediate solution in order to alleviate some of the crowding because of increasing programs in early childhood/family education; that he was distributing an updated chart on the bond referendum projects monies and he explained the process that will be followed in order to assure accurate records for dollars expended; that work on all the summer projects rontinues to move ahead. Dave McKown, on behalf of the Board of Education, expressed appreciation to Dr. Mich and Mr. Lawson for their leadership and work during this past year. Mr. Neal Lawson introduced Mr. Ron Langness from Springsted who presented the tabulation of the bids for the sale of the general obligation school building bonds, provided an overview of the bids received ^nd recommended that the Board of Education accept the "ow bid from Smith, Barney, Harris, Upham, Inc. and Associates. Board member Jim Franklin was called from the meeting. The Board of Education waived the reading of the following resolution and Member Don Anderson introduced the resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING OFFER ON SALE OF $4,015,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION SCHOOL BUILDING BONDS, SERIES 1992A, PROVIDING FOR THEIR ISSUANCE, AND LEVYING A TAX FOR THE PAYMENT THEREOF A, WHEREAS, on May 19, 1992, pursuant to an election held on that date, a majority of the voters in Independent School District Number 278 (Orono) Minnesota (the •’District") approved the issuance of general obligation bonds in the principal amount not to exceed $3,975,000 to finance the acquisition and betterment of school facilities in the District (the "Project"); B. WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.56(a) authorizes the District to issue obligations in an amount not to exceed two percent of the amount otherwise authorized to be issued; and C. WHEREAS, the School Board has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue its General Obligation School Building Bonds, Series 1992A (the "Bonds") in the aggregate principal amount of $4,015,000 to finance the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the School Board of Independent School District Number 278 (Orono), Minnesota, as follows: 1. Acceptance of Offer. The offer of Smith Barney. Harris Upham & Co.. Inc._ _ _ _ _ _ _ (the "Purchaser") , toliU ^ .Je J Wi^i*W**i* >■ 9 M ¥_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ % w-ww ^ — w w purchase $4,015,000 General Obligation School Building Bonds, Series 1992A of th« District (the "Bonds'*, or individually a "Bond"), in accordance with the terms of proposal, at the rates of interest hereinafter set forth, and to pay therefor the sum of $3.987.256.35 pius interest accrued to settlement, is hereby found, determined and declared to oe the most favorable offer received and is hereby accepted, and the Bonds are hereby awarded to said Purchaser. The Business Manager is directed to retain the deposit of said Purchaser and to forthwith return to the others making offers their good faith checks or drafts. 2. Title: Original Issue Date; Denominations: Maturity. The Bonds shall be titled "General Obligation School Building Bonds, Series 1992A", shall be dated July 1, 1992, as the date of original issue and shall be issued forthwith on or after such date as fully registered Bonds. The Bonds shall be numbered from R-1 upward in the denomination of $5,000 each or in any integral multiple thereof. The Bonds shall mature on February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: Ygar Amount Amount 1994 $ 215,000 1999 $ 415,000 1995 345,000 2000 440,000 1996 360,000 2001 460,000 1997 380,000 2002 490,000 1998 395,000 2003 515,000 3.Purpose. The Bonds shall provide funds for the acquisition and betterment of school facilities (the "Project"). The total cost of the Project, which shal} include all costs enumerated in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.65, is estimated to be at least equal to the amount of the Bonds. Work on the Project shall proceed with due diligence to completion. The District covenants that it shall do all things and perform all acts required of it to assure that work on the Project proceeds with due diligence to completion and that any and all permits and studies required under law for the Project are obtained. 4. Interest. The Bonds shall bear interest payable semiannually on February 1 and August 1 of each year (each, an "Interest Payment Date"), commencing August 1, 1993, calculated on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months, at the respective rates per annum set forth opposite the maturity years as follows: 219368 Maturity Interest Rate ■ Maturity Interest Rate 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 3.75% 4.00 4.40 4.50 4.75 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 4.90 % 5.10 5.25 5.40 5.55 5. No Redemption. The Bonds shall not be subject to redemption and prepayment; prior to their maturity. 6. Bond Registrar. National Association . in Norwest Bank Minnesota, Minneapolis Minnesota, is appointed to act as bond registrar and transfer agent with respect to the Bonds (the "Bond Registrar"), and shall do so unless and until a successor Bond Registrar is duly appointed, all pursuant to any contract the District and Bond Registrar shall execute which is consistent herewith. The Bond Registrar shall also serve as paying agent unless and until a successor paying agent is duly appointed. Principal and interest on the Bonds shall be paid to the registered holders (or record holders) of the Bonds in the manner set forth in the form of Bond and paragraph 12 of this resolution. 7. Form of Bond. The Bonds, together with the Bond Registrar's Certificate of Authentication, the form of Assignment and the registration information thereon, shall be in substantially the following form: 219368 — rr- wr. — . UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NUMBER 278 (ORONO) R- GENERAL OBLIGATION SCHOOL BUILDING BOND, SERIES 1992A INTEREST RATE MATURITY DATE DATE OF ORIGINAL ISSUE CUSIP July 1, 1992 REGISTERED OWNER: PRINCIPAL AMOUNT:DOLLARS KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS that Independent School District Number 278 (Orono), Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "Issuer"), certifies that it is indebted and for value received promises to pay to the registered owner specified above, or registered assigns, without option of prepayment, in the manner hereinafter set forth, the principal amount specified above, on the maturity date specified above, and to pay interest thereon semiannually on February 1 and August 1 of each year (each, an "Interest Payment Date"), commencing August 1, 1993, at the rate per annum specified above (calculated on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months) until the principal sum is paid or has been provided for. This Bond will bear interest from the most recent Interest Payment Date to which interest has been paid or, if no interest has been paid, from the date of original issue hereof. The principal of and premium, if any, on this Bond are payable upon presentation and surrender hereof at the principal office of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Minnesota (the "Bond Registrar"), acting as paying agent, or any successor paying agent duly appointed by the Issuer. Interest on this Bond will be paid on each Interest Payment Date by chec)c or draft mailed to the person in whose name this Bond is registered (the "Holder" or "Bondholder") on the registration boo)cs of the Issuer maintained by the Bond Registrar and at the address appearing thereon at the close of business on the fifteenth day of the calendar month next preceding such Interest Payment Date (the "Regular Record Date"). Any interest not so timely paid shall cease to be payable to the person who is the Holder hereof as of the Regular Record Date, 219368 I * 1 and shall be payable to the person who is the Holder hereof at the close of business on a date (the "Special Record Date") fixed by the Bond Registrar whenever money becomes available for paynnent of the defaulted interest. Notice of the Special Record Date shall be given to Bondholders not less than ten days prior to the Special Record Date. The principal of and premium, if any, and interest on this Bond are payable in lawful money of the United States of America. REFERENCE IS HEREBY MADE TO THE FURTHER PROVISIONS OF THIS BOND SET FORTH ON THE REVERSE HEREOF, WHICH PROVISIONS SHALL FOR ALL PURPOSES HAVE THE SAME EFFECT AS IF SET FORTH HERE. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to happen and to be performed, precedent to and in the issuance of this Bond, have been done, have happened and have been performed, in regular and due form, time and manner as required by law, and that this Bond, together with all other debts of the Issuer outstanding on the date of original issue hereof and the date of its issuance and delivery to the original purchaser, does not exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Independent School District Number 278 (Orono), Hennepin County, Minnesota, by its School Board, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile signatures of its Chair and its Clerk. Date of Registration:Registrable by: Payable at: BOND REGISTRAR'S CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This Bond is one of the Bonds described in the Resolution mentioned within. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NUMBER 278 (ORONO), HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA /s/ Facsimile Chair Bond Registrar /s/ Facsimile Clerk Authorized Signature 219368 ON REVERSE OF BOND No Redemption. The Bonds of this issue (the "Bonds") are not subject to redemption and prepayment prior to their maturity. Issuance; Purpose: General Obligation. This Bond is one of an issue in the total principal amount of $4,015,000, all of like date of original issue and tenor, except as to number, maturity, interest rate, denomination and redemption privilege, which Bond has been issued pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota and pursuant to a resolution adopted by the School Board of the Issuer on July 1, 1992 (the "Resolution"), for the purpose of providing money for the acquisition and betterment of school facilities. This Bond is payable out of the General Obligation School Building Bonds, Series 1992A Fund of the Issuer. This Bond constitutes a general obligation of the Issuer, and to provide moneys for the prompt and full payment of its principal, premium, if any, and interest when the same become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the Issuer have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. Denominations: Exchange; Resolution. The Bonds are issuable solely as fully registered certificates in the denominations of $5,000 and integral multiples thereof and are exchangeable for fully registered Bonds of other authorized denominations in equal aggregate principal amounts at the principal office of the Bond Registrar, but only in the manner and subject to the limitations provided in the Resolution. Reference is hereby made to the Resolution for a description of the rights and duties of the Bond Registrar. Copies of the Resolution are on file in the principal office of the Bond Registrar. Transfer. This Bond is transferable by the Holder in person or by his, her or its attorney duly authorized in writing at the principal office of the Bond Registrar upon presentation and surrender hereof to the Bond Registrar, all subject to the terms and conditions provided in the Resolution and to reasonable regulations of the Issuer contained in any agreement with the Bond Registrar. Thereupon the Issuer shall execute and the Bond Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in exchange for this Bond, one or more new fully registered Bonds in the name of the transferee (but not registered in blank or to "bearer" or similar designation), of an authorized denomination or denominations, in aggregate principal amount equal to the principal amount of this Bond, of the same maturity and bearing interest at the same rate. 219368 Fees upon Transfer or Loss. The Bond Registrar may require payment of a sum sufficient to cover any tax or other governmental charge payable in connection with the transfer or exchange of this Bond and any legal or unusual costs regarding transfers and lost Bonds. Treatment of Registered Ovmers. The Issuer and Bond Registrar may treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the owner hereof for the purpose of receiving payment as herein provided (except as otherwise provided on the reverse side hereof with respect to the Record Date) and for all other purposes, whether or not this Bond shall be overdue, and neither the Issuer nor the Bond Registrar shall be affected by notice to the contrary. Authentication. This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security unless the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been executed by the Bond Registrar. Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligation. This Bond has been designated by the Issuer as a "qualified tax-exempt obligation" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code cf 1986, as amended. 219368 Jk. i e \ T f fWii -- -- --- -- ABBREVIATIOHS The following abbreviations, when usud in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable lav** or regulations: TEN COM - as tenants in common TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties JT TEN - as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common as custodian for _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _UTMA - (Cust) under the (Minor) Uniform (State) Transfers to Minors Act Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. 219368 8 -- — ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ the within Bond and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the Bond on the books kept for the registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Notice:The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or any change whatever. Signature Guaranteed: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a national bank or trust company or by a brokerage firm having a membership in one of the major stock exchanges. The Bond Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the information concerning the transferee requested below is provided. Name and Address: (Include information for all joint owners if the Bond is held by joint account.) 2193M .1 \ 8. Execution; Temporary Bonds. The Bonds shall be executed on behalf of the District by the signatures of its Chair and Clerk; provided, however, that both of such signatures may be printed facsimiles and the seal of the District, if any, may be omitted on the Bonds as permitted by law. In the event of disability or resignation or other absence of either such officer, the Bonds may be signed by th«> manual or facsimile signature of that officer who may act on behalf of such absent or disabled officer. In case either such officer whose signature or facsimile of whose signature shall appear on the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of the Bonds, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if he or she had remained in office until delivery. The District may elect to deliver, in lieu of printed definitive bonds, one or more typewritten temporary bonds in substantially the form set forth above, with such changes as may be necessary to reflect more than one maturity in a single temporary bond. Such temporary bonds may be executed with photocopied facsimile signatures of the Chair and Clerk. Such temporary bonds shall, upon the printing of the definitive bonds and the execution thereof, be exchanged therefor and cancelled. 9. Authentication. No Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under this resolution unless a Certificate of Authentication on such Bond, substantially in the form hereinabove set forth, shall have been duly executed by an authorized representative of the Bond Registrar. Certificates of Authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same person. The Bond Registrar shall authenticate the signatures of officers of the District on each Bond by execution of the Certificate of Authentication on the Bond and by inserting as the date of registration in the space provided the date on which the Bond is authenticated, except that for purposes of delivering the original Bonds to the Purchaser, the Bond Registrar shall insert as a date of registration the date of original issue, which date is July 1, 1992. The Certificate of Authentication so executed on each Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this resolution. 10. Registration; Transfer; Exchange. The District will cause to be kept at the principal office of the Bond Registrar a bond register in which, subject to such reasonable regulations as the Bond Registrar may prescribe, the Bond Registrar shall provide for the registration of Bonds and the registration of transfers of Bonds entitled to be registered or transferred as herein provided. 219366 Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond at the principal office of the Bond Registrar, the District shall execute (if necessary), and the Bond Registrar shall authenticate, insert the date of registration (as provided ^n paragraph 9) of, and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of any authorized denomination or denominations of a like aggregate principal amount, having the same stated maturity and interest rate, as requested by the transferor; provided, however, that no Bond may be registered in blank or in the name of "bearer" or similar designation. At the option of the Holder, Bonds may be exchanged for Bonds of any authorized denomination or denominations of a like aggregate principal amount and stated maturity, upon surrender of the Bonds to be exchanged at the principal office of the Bond Registrar. VHienever any Bonds are so surrendered for exchange, the District shall execute (if necessary), and the Bond Registrar shall authenticate, insert the date of registration of, and deliver the Bonds which the Holder making the exchange is entitled to receive. All Bonds 'jurrendered upon any exchange or transfer provided for in this resolution shall be promptly cancelled by the Bond Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the District. All Bonds delivered in exchange for or upon transfer of Bonds shall be valid general obligations of the District evidencing the same debt, and entitled to the same benefits under this resolution, as the Bonds surrendered for such exchange or transfer. Every Bond presented or surrendered for transfer or exchange shall be duly endorsed or be accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, duly executed by the Holder thereof or his, her or its attorney duly authorized in writing. The Bond Registrar may require payment of a sum sufficient to cover any tax or other gover-'To^ierstal charge payable in connection with the transfer or exchange of any Bond and any legal or unusual costs regarding transfers and lost Bonds. Transfers shall also be subject to reasonable regulations of the District contained in any agreement with the Bond Registrar, including regulations which permit the Bond Registrar to close its transfer books between record dates and 219368 li payment dates. The Clerk is hereby authorized :o negotiate and execute the terms of said agreement. 11. Rights Upon Transfer or Exchange. Each Bond delivered upon transfer of or in exchange for or in lieu of any other Bond shall carry all the rights to interest accrued and unpaid, and to accrue, which were carried by such other Bond. 12. Interest Payment. Interest on any Bond shall be paid at maturity either upon presentation and surrender of the Bond at maturity or by check or draft mailed to the person in whose name the Bond is registered (the "Holde -••) on the registration books of the District maintained by the Bond Registrar and at the address appearing thereon at the close of business on the fifteenth (15th) day of the calendar month next preceding such Interest Payment Date (the "Regular Record Date"). Any such interest not so timely paid shall cease to be payable to the persoi who is the Holder thereof as of the Regular Record Date, and shall be payable to the person who is the Holder thereof at the close of business on a date (the "Special Record Date") fixed by the Bond Registrar whenever money becomes available for payment of the defaulted interest. Notice of Uhe Special Record Date shall be given by the Bond Registrar to the Holders not less than ten (10) days prior to the Special Record Date. 13. Treatment of Registered Owner. The District and. Bond Registrar may treat the person in whose name any Bond is registered as the owner of such Bond for the purpose of receiving payment of principal of and premium, if any, and interest (subject to the payment provisions in paragraph 12 above) on, such Bond and for all other purposes whatsoever whether or not such Bond shall be overdue, and neither the District nor the Bond Registrar shall be affected by notice to the contrary. 14. Deli^'erv; Application of Proceeds. The Bonds when so prepared and executed shall be delivered by the District Treasurer to the Purchaser upon receipt of the purchase price, and the Purchaser shall not be obliged to see to the proper application thereof. 15. Fund and Accounts. There is hereby created a special fund to be designated the "General Obligation School Building Bonds, Series 1992A Fund" (the "Fund") to be administered and maintained by the Treasurer as a bookkeeping account separate and apart from all other funds maintained in the official financial records of the District. The Fund shall be maintained in the manner herein specified until all of the Bonds and the interest thereon have been fully paid. There shall be 219368 S«igni?ed the‘"Sons2?uc?ion^icloSnt"*'Inr-S^St®Se^^i« Account", respectively. M) rnnstruct^on Account. To the Construction Account there shall be credited the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds, Jeiraccrued interest received thereon, and less paid for the Bonds in excess of $3,975,000. From the Const^ction Account there shall be paid all costs and e^enses of the Proiect, including the cost of any construction contracts heretofor^let and all other costs incurred and to be incurred of the kind authorized in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.65; and the moneys in said account shall be used for no other purpose except as otherwise provided by law; provided that the procee s of the Bonds may also be used to the extent interest on the Bonds due prior to the ionmencement of the collection of taxes herein levied or covenanted to be levied. (ix) Debt Service Account. There are hereby irrevocably appropriated and pledged to, and there shall be credited to, the Debt Service Account: (a) all accrued interest received upon delivery of the Bonds; (b) all funds paid for the Bonds in excess of $3,975,000; (c) any herein or hereafter levied for the payment of the Bonds and interest thereon; (d) all funds remaining in the Construction Account after completion of the Project thereof; (e) all investment earnings on funds held in the Debt Service Account; and (f) any and all other moneys which properly available and are ^the District to the Debt Service Account. The Debt Service Account shall be used solely to pay the principal and interest and any premiums for redemption of the Bonds and any general obUgation bonds of the District hereafter i®®)J®d by the District and made payable from said account as provided by law. No Dortion of the proceeds of the Bonds shall be used directly^^or indirectly to acquire higher yielding investments or to reolace funds which were used directly or indirectly to acqSi?e higher yielding investments, except (1) for a reasonable tomoorarv neriod until such proceeds are needed for the purpose ^«'^2S!ch the ^nS2 were issSed, and (2) in addition to the above IraraSSunt not greater than the lesser the proceeds of the Bonds or $100,000. To this effect, any proceeds of the Bonds and any sums from time to time held in the construction Account or Debt Service Account (or any District account which will be used to pay interest t-o become due on the bonds payable therefrom) in excess of amountrwhich under then-applicable federal arbitrage regulations 219368 may be invested without regard to yield shall not be invested at a yield in excess of the applicable yield restrictions imposed by said arbitrage regulations on such investments after talcing into account any ap> licable **temporary periods" or "minor portion" made available under the federal arbitrage regulations. Money in the Fund shall not be invested in obligations or deposits issued by, guaranteed by or insured by the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof if and to the extent that such investment would cause the Bonds to be "federally guaranteed" within the meaning of Section 149(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"). 16. Tax Lew; Coverage Test. To provide moneys for payment of the principal and interest on the Bonds there is hereby levied ^n all of the taxable property in the District a direct annual ad valorem tax which shall be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part of other general property taxes in the District for the years and in the 2unounts as follows: Year of Tax Lew Year of Tax Collection ^Amount 1992 1903 $550,825 1993 1994 559,094 1994 1995 560,354 1995 1996 564,722 1996 1997 562,517 1997 1998 563,816 1998 1999 568,715 1999 2000 566,153 2000 2001 572,295 2001 2002 570,762 The tax levies are such that if collected in full they, together with estimated collections of other revenues herein pledged for the payment of the Bonds, will produce at least five percent (5%) in excess of the amount needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds. The tax levies shall be irrepealable so long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the District reserves the right and power to reduce the levies in the manner and to the extent permitted by Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, Subdivision 3. 17. General Obligation Pledge. For the prompt and full payment of the principal and interest on the Bonds, as the same respectively become due, the full faith, credit and taxing powers of the District shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. If the balance in the Debt Service Account is ever 219344 14 insufficient to pay all principal and interest then due on the Bonds and any other bonds payable therefrom, the deficiency shall be promptly paid out of any other funds of the District which are available for such purpose, and such other funds may be reimbursed with or without interest from the Debt Service Account when a sufficient balance is available therein. 18. Certificate of Registration. The Cleric is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota, together with such other information as may be required, and to obtain the County Auditor's certificate that the Bonds have been entered in the County Auditor's Bond Register, and that the tax levy recpaired by law has been made. 19. Compliance with Reimbursement Bond Regulations. This paragraph shall apply if the actual date of closing and settlement of the Bonds (the "Closing Date") is after March 2, 1992. The provisions hereof are intended to establish and provide for the District's compliance with United States Treasury Regulations Section 1.103-18 (the "Reimbursement Regulations") applicable to the "reimbursement proceeds" of the Bonds, being those portions thereof which will be used by the District to reimburse itself for any expenditure which the District paid or will have paid prior to the Closing Date (an "Expenditure"). The District hereby certifies and/or covenants as follows: (a)On or before the date of payment of each Expenditure, the District (or person designated to do so on behalf of the District) made or will have made a written declaration of the District's official intent (a "Declaration") which effectively (i) states the District's intention and reasonable expectation to reimburse itself for the payment of the Expenditure out of the proceeds of a subsequent borrowing; (ii) gives a general and functional description of the property, project or program to which the Declaration relates and/or identifies a specific fund or account of the District and the general functional purpose thereof from which the Expenditure was to be paid (collectively the "Project"); (ill) states the maximum principal amount of debt expected to be issued by the District for the purpose of financing the Project; and (iv) states specifically that the Declaration is a declaration of official intent under Treasury Regulations Section 1.103-18; provided, however, that no such Declaration shall necessarily have been made with respect to "preliminary expsnditures" for the 219368 (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) 2193M Project, defined in the Reimbursement Regulations to include engineering or architectural expenses and similar prefatory expenses, which in the aggregate do not exceed 20% of the "issue price" of the Bonds. Notwithstanding the foregoing, with respect to Expenditures made by the District prior to March 2, 1992, the District hereby represents that there exists objective evidence, within the meaning of the Reimbursement Regulations, that at the time the Expenditure was paid the District expected to reimburse the cost thereof with the proceeds of a borrowing. As of the date of each Declaration, there were not and were not thereafter expected to becoms available sources of District funds which were or were expected to be dedicated or otherwise available on a long-term basis to provide financing for the Expenditure or Project. Each Declaration was made a part of the publicly available official books, records or proceedings of the District and was continuously available for inspection by the general public at District offices during regular District hours beginning not later than 30 days after the making of the Declaration and continuing through the date of issuance of the Bonds, as required by the Reimbursement Regulations. Each Expenditure, other than the costs of issuing the Bonds, is a capital expenditure, that is, a cost of a type that is properly chargeable to a capital account (or would be with a proper election) under general federal income tax principles. The "reimbursement allocation" described in the Reimbursement Regulations for each Expenditure shall and will be made forthwith following (but not prior to) the issuance of the Bonds and in all events within the period ending on the date which is the later of one year after payment of the Expenditure or one year after the date on which the Project to which ' • Expenditure relates is first placed in service. Each such reimbursement allocation will be evidenced by an entry on the official books or records of the District maintained for and in connection with the Bonds and will specifically identify the actual prior Expenditure or Project or, in the case of the reimbursement of a particular fund or account described in the applicable Declaration, the fund or account from which the Expenditure was paid. (g)The District is unaware of any facts or circumstances which would cause it to question the reasonability or accuracy of the content of this paragraph or of any of the Declarations, or its compliance with any of the covenants herein or therein, including without limitation the District's failure to issue qualifying reimbursement bonds for costs for which it has made declarations of official intent, absent extraordinary and unforeseeable circumstances of the kind described in the Reimbursement Regulations. 20. Records and Bonds. The officers of the District are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser, and to the attorneys approving the legality of the issuance of the Bonds, certified copies of all proceedings and records of the District relating to the Bonds and to the financial condition and affairs of the District, and such other affidavits, certificates and information as are required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds as the same appear from the books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the District as to the facts re ited therein. 21. Negative Covenant as to Use of Proceeds and Project. The District hereby covenants not to use the proceeds of the Bonds or to use the Project, or to cause or permit them to be used, or enter into any deferred payment arrangements for the cost of the Project, in such a manner as to cause the Bonds to be "private activity bonds" within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of the Code. 22. Tax-Exempt Status of the Bonds; Rebate. The District shall comply with requirements necessary under the Code to establish and maintain the exclusion from gross income under Section 103 of the Code of the interest on the Bonds, including without limitation (1) requirements relating to temporary periods for investments, (2) limitations on amounts invested at a yield greater than the yield on the Bonds, and (3) the rebate of excess investment earnings to the United States if the Bonds (together with other obligations reasonably expected to be issued and outstanding at one time in this calendar year) exceed the small-issuer exception amount of $5,000,000. 219368 1 r For purposes of (qualifying for the exception to the federal arbitrage rebate requirements for governmental units issuing $5,000,000 or less of bonds, the District hereby finds, determines and declares that (1) the Bonds are issued by a governmental unit with general taxing powers, (2) no Bond is a private activity bond, (3) ninety-five percent (95%) or more of the net proceeds of the Bonds are to be used for local governmental activities of the District (or of a governmental unit the jurisdiction of which is entirely within the jurisdiction of the District), and (4) the aggregate face amount of all tax-exempt bonds (other than private activity bonds) issued by the District (and all subordinate entities thereof, and all entities treated as one issuer with the District) during the calendar year in which the Bonds are issued and outstanding at one time is not reasonably expected to exceed $5,000,000, all within the meaning of Section 148(f)(4)(D) of the Code. 23. Defeasance. When all Bonds have been discharged as provided in this paragraph, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the registered holders of the Bonds shall, to the extent permitted by law, cease. The District may discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds which are due on any date by irrevocably depositing with the Bond Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full; or if any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the Bond Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued to the date of such deposit. The District may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions of law now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a suitable banking institution (qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities described in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.67, Subdivision 8, bearing interest payable at such times and at such rates and maturing on such dates as shall be re(quired, subject to sale and/or reinvestment, to pay all amounts to become due thereon to maturity. 24. Designation of Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. T;i order to (qualify the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations” within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, 219368 L th« District hereby makes the following factual statements and representations: (a) the Bonds are issued after August 1, 1986; (b) the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" as defined in Section 141 of the Code; (c) the District hereby designates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code; and (d) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds, treating qualified 501(c)(3) bonds as not being private activity bonds) which will be issued by the District (and all entities treated as one issuer with the District, and all subordinate entities whose obligations are treated as issued by the District) during this calendar year 1992 will not exceed $4,015,000; and (e) not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the District during this calendar year 1992 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code. The District shall use its best efforts to comply with any federal procedural requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designation made by this paragraph. 25. No Contest. No notice of contest of the election held on May 19, 1992, with respect to the question of the issuance of the Bonds was filed with or served on the court administrator of the Hennepin County District Court or the District Clerk within 7 days after the School Board canvassed the results of the election. 26. Severabiliy. if any section, paragraph or provision of this resolution shall be held to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason, the invalidity or unenforceability of such section, paragraph or provision shall not affect any of the remaining provisions of this resolution. 27. Headings. Headings in this resolution are included for convenience of reference only and are not a part hereof, and shall not limit or define the meaning of any provision hereof. 219368 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member John Maresh and, after a full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Anderson, Van de Ven, Maresh, Swanson, McKown (Board member Franklin was previously called from the meeting and was not available to vote) and the following voted against the same: None Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Martha Van de Ven, the Board of Education established the regular School Board meeting time at 7:00 p.m., (except the July 1, 1992 meeting will begin at 5:00 p.m. and the May 18, 1993 meeting will begin at 9:30 p.m.) to be held in the Orono Education Link, Room 107L on the following dates: July 1, 1992 August 10, 1992 September 14, 1992 September 28, 1992 October 12, 1992 October 26, 1992 November 9, December 14, January 11, January 25, February 8, February 22, 1992 1992 1993 1993 1993 1993 March 8, 1993 April 12, 1993 April 26, 1993 May 10, 1993 May 18, 1993 June 14, 1993 The Board of Education has determined that Columbus Day is not designated as a holiday, therefore public business can be conducted. Motion carried. Board member Franklin absent. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Martha Van de Ven, the Board of Education designated the State Bank of Long Lake and the Bank of Maple Plain as depositories for the regular funds of this school district and the officers of the Board of Education are hereby authorized in the name of and on behalf of the Board of Education to open or cause to be opened or to continue or cause to be continued accounts with said banks and to execute and deliver to said banks, signature cards supplied by said banks containing said banks usual customer agreement applicable to such accounts and the signatures of the officers or other persons hereinafter named are hereby authorized to act for und on behalf of the Board of Education or otherwise to endorse or cause to be endorsed, to negotiate or cause to be negotiated, or to deposit or cause to be deposited in such accounts any money, checks, drafts, orders, notes or other instruments payable or held by this Board of Education. Said officers are: Dave McKown, Jim Franklin and John Maresh. Motion carried. Board member Franklin absent. UPON MOTION Don Anderson, seconded by Martha Van de Ven, the Board of Education approved the following investment depositories and authorized George Stubbs and 1 Neal Lawson to transfer funds among these financial institutions for investment purposes: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Marquette Bank Norwest Bank of Minneapolis First Bank of Minneapolis Minnesota School District Liquid Asset Fund Plus State Bank of Long Lake Bank of Maple Plain Eaton Vance Investors Fund, Inc. Motion carried. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Martha Van de Ven, the LAKER/PIONEER was designated as the official publication of the Orono School District. Motion carried. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Jim Franklin, the official office of the clerk of the School Board will be the District Office in the middle school building. Motion carried. UPON MOTION by Martha Van de Ven, seconded by Jim Franklin, the renewal of surety bonds for all employees was approved. Motion carried. UPON MOTION by Jim Franklin, seconded by John Maresh, Board members were appointed to the following committees for 1992-93; Teachers Meet & Confer Minnesota State H.S. League A.M.S.D. E.C.S.U. P.E.R. TIES Community Education M.S.B.A. Local Legislative Liaison Chapter I Continuing Education Negotiations Pare'ts Meet & Confer Dist.ict Staff Development 50o0 Policy Series Review 6000 Policy Series Review Chemical Health Awareness Long-range Planning Steering Committee Don Anderson, Peg Swanson Jim Franklin, alternate Don Anderson Jim Franklin, Martha Van ci? Ven alternate John Maresh Martha Van de Ven, John Maresh, alternate Dave McKown Peg Swanson, John Maresh, alternate Martha Van de Ven Jim Franklin, Peg Swanson, alternate Don Anderson Jim Franklin, John Maresh, Martha Van de Ven Don Anderson, Martha Van de Ven Peg Swanson Dave McKown Martha Van de Ven Peg Swanson All Board Members Motion carried. UPON MOTION by Martha Van de Ven, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education approved the appointment of Mr. Marvin Johnson to serve a two year term on the Intermediate District #287 Board of Education as the representative from the Orono Schools. Motion carried. UPON MOTION by Martha Van de Ven, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education approved the appointment of Mrs. Peg Swanson to serve a one year term on the Intermediate District #287 Board of Education as the representative from the Orono Schools. The Board of Education expressed appreciation to Mr. Johnson and to Mrs. Swanson for their willingness to serve on the HTC Board. Motion carried. UPON MOTION by John Maresh, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education called for bids on the middle school tennis court repair and authorized the Assistant to the Superintendent to approve the bid subject to budget limitations. Motion carried. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by John Maresh, the meeting was adjourned. Motion carried. John Maresh, Clerk Approved: Dave McKown, Chairman