Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-09-1998 Council Packetr f pIP^ AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,1998,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL 1.7:00 P.M. EDGEWOOD HILLS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT - PUBLIC HEARING A.Order Plans and Specifications for Edgewood Hills Sanitary Sewer Project - Resolution 2.CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES *3. RegularMeetingof Januar>'26,1998 y P£5 9 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS CITY OF ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Elizabeth Hawn Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS •< (T imit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 4.#2289 Jon Pendleton, 350 North Arm Lane - Conditional use permit to seasonally allow a horse in the LR-1A Zoning District - Resolution MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT ^ 5.Authorize Grant Application for I & I Sewer Repairs - Resolution CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 6.U. S. West Water Tower Lease Agreements 4 7.Seasonal Weight Restrictions - Resolution 8.Bid Award - 1998 Materials and Equipment 9.Planning Commission Reappointments 10.Appointment of Planning Commission and Park Commission Chairs and Vice Chairs 11.Appointment of Park Commission Member 12.Community Service Officer Work Schedule and Pay Adjustment, and Budget Amendment M3.Appointment of Mary Ann Johnson to Part-Time Customer Service/Data Assistant Position CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT *14. LICENSES *15. BILLS r ' AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,1998,7:00 P.M, ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS im 02/02 - Park Commission Meeting 7:15 p.m. 02/04 - Highway 12 Design Review Committee Meeting 5:30 p.m. 02/09 - Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. 02/12 - Council Work Session 8:00 a.m. n nn 02/12 - Informational Meeting - Sanitary Sewer Project along Shoreline Drive and Heritage Drive 7:00 p.m. 02/16 - HOLIDAY - Office closed in observance of President's Day 02/17 - Tuesday, - Planning Commission Meeting 6:30 p.m. 02/23 - Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. 03/02 - Park Commission Meeting - Friends of the Park Award 7:00 p.m. 03/02 - Park Commission Meeting 7:15 p.m. 03/04 - Highway 12 Design Review Committee Meeting 5:30 p.m. 03/09 - Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. 03/16 - Planning Commission Meeting 6:30 p.m. 03/23 - Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. «• fr 1 '■i t. I Public Attendance Meeting D ate A / ? / ^ iP ^ C ouncil □ Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other . • _4'. •' :^pLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION IdEQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. ■■. * ‘ . « *■- V - ■ v NAME (please print)ADDRESS 1 2. ■1a fira /<r'/ c h ^htQin{]\(iw__Asifuh^ '^jp Cy/S C/^/ 7 o y 4. ^ S "z. c)L ——————— i / 5.. 6. 7.. 8.. 9. 10. 11.. 12., 13.. 14. 15. mmu PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 7<Ar~9/69 ( r COUNCILMEEnNQ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION FEB 9 1998 DATE: February 9, 1998 cnvoponoNO^ ITEM NO.: / /f Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer's Report Item Description: Public Hearing and Order Plans & Specificaticns Edgewood Hills Sanitary Sewer Project The Edgewood Hills area, located off Woodhill Road, was included in the recent MUSA expansion for sanitary sewer installation. The project area residents have sent a letter requesting that the City begin the process for an assessment sewer project. It is proposed that a sewer project for this area will be funded by assessment of all the costs to the benefiting properties. A feasibility study has been completed and a public hearing will be held at this Council meeting Attached you will find letters from project area residents providing comments on this project. The next step after the public hearing is to approve a resolution ordering preparation of plans and specifications for this project. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve resolution ordering the preparation of plans and specifications for the Edgewood Hills Sanitary Sewer project. I : f (iil • * •* » t , Mr. & Mrs. D. ELDREOGE JACKSON III 1055 Edgewood Hill Road Wayzata, MN 55391 February 1,1998 Gregory A. Gappa Director of Public Services City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Day, MN 55323-0066 RE: Edgewood Hills Sanitary Sewer Project Dear Mr. Gappa, cSrCeBilg”"' "" to «tond th. City possible. Sins? Keith has had a stoke I was glad to see ihat your plan enabled all homes to be on a gravity system. WHI coUmd iTt’the mMtln^ ' *«re that • *0- -TAtt ■ r-*U“. Jiifch I I ^ r' U M r Ann L. Simonson P.O. Box €6 Crystal Bay, MN 5f323-0066 rgcsjvsd JAN 2 9 1998 January 27,1998 s/.i ) vr Mr. Gregoiy G. Gappa Director of Public Services 2750 KeUy Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Dear Mr. Gappa, I have reviewed your summary of the feasibility study and I would opt for Option A. I will be out of town on February 9th, but I would urge you to proce^ with the project as soon as it is possible. Yours truly. Anne L. Simonson r ♦ I ^! A RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR EDGEWOOD HULLS SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared a feasibility study to determine the feasibility of serving the Edgewood Hills neighborhood with sanitary sewer; and WHEREAS, on January 6, 1998 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 4018 receiving the feasibility report and calling for a public hearing for the Edgewood Hills sanitary sewer improvements; and WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 9th day of February 1998, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council does hereby direct the City Engineer to prepare plans and specifications for the installation of sanitary sewer for the Edgewood Hills neighborhood. Adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on February 9,1998 by a vote ayes and____nays. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk NOTICE OF MEETING CITY Of ORONO Notice is hereby given that the City Council of Orono. Minnesota will hold a public hearing in the Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, February 9.1998 to consider the installation of municipal sanitary sewer trunks and laterals pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 429.011 to 429.111. The area roposed to be assessed for the mprovement is generally known as the “Edgewood Hills* area described as follows; The following property in Hennepin County. Minnesota: A. Lot 2. Block 1, Edgewood Place Subdivision. Section 02. Township 117 North. Range 23 West. B. Lots B. C. 0. E. F. G. and H. Registered Land Survey No. 1098. Section 01.Township 117 North. Range 23 West The properties proposed to be assessed are alternatively described by the following property identification numbers: 02-117.23 13 0003 02-117-23 13 0005 02-117-23 14 0001 02-117-23 41 0002 02-117-23 41 0003 02-117-23 42 0002 02-117-23 42 0003 02-117-23 42 0004 The estimated cost of such improvemenu is $169,119.00. Suchf>ersons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvements will be heard at this meeting. Linda S.Vee, City Qerk (Published in The Laker and Pioneer, Jan. 24 and 31,1998) Affidavit of Publication State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. Bill Holm, being duly sworn on oath, says that he is an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as THE LAKER, Mound. Minnesota, and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below: A. ) The newspaper has complied with all the requirements constituting qualifications as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. B. ) The printed ■ Pu^lir hearing. .Qan■^^a*^y «qr t-runlcs which is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week for _2 ____successive weeks: It was first published Saturday the—24— day of .Tarmat»y_____ Q QQ ^ and was thereafter printed and published every Saturday, to and including Saturday. the —21 day of January____1 g Qfl . uthorized Agent Subscribed and sworn to me on this ( * 31 day of/ Janiiary By: . 19 9S. TOjjfyPillcKRISTI NOUnv PUBIC • IMNNESOTA MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JANUARY 31.2000 teinterma tlutf (1) Lowest dassifled rate paid by commercial users ‘ for oimparable space: $12.90 per inch. (2) Maximum rate allowed by law (or above matter: $12.90. (3) Rate actually charged for above matter: $7.19 pw inch. Each additional successive week: $5.14. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING OOUNCLMEEIM MINUTES FOR JANUARY 26,1998 _______ppp a 1998 ROLL CTTYOFORONO The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Council Members J. Diann Goetten, Charles Kelley, Barbara Peterson, and Richard Flint. Representing Staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Barrett, Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, Planner/Zoning Administrator Elizabeth Van Zomeren, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, Planning Intern Brad Bressler, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. (*#1) CONSENT AGENDA Items #20 and 22 were removed from the Consent Agenda. Items #5, 6,7, 8, and 19 were added to the Consent Agenda. Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (*#2) REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 12,1998 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meetingof January 12, 1998. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner McDermott referenced an article in The Laker regarding the opening of the golf course and warming house for sledding. Flint noted that the facility is receiving a large amount of use. Jabbour informed McDermott that a past Park Commissioner, Jim Gilbert, was recently sworn in to serve on the State Supreme Court. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Lili McMillan reported that the LMCD is discussing a possible code restriction on outlots related to boat storage. A moratorium is also being considered. McMillan felt the study could occur without the moratorium and suggested the LMCD review Orono's outlot code. No decision was reached at the LMCD meeting. McMillan said she would like to see ordinance information gathered from all lake cities. ^ f-f 111 in IT-1 -irii'minTTl^iirniilrl ITiimiilTii rl ii'mri m'iRi ~ i i in ■ i fma r rn ir raiiiwiiiiiiiifiiii imruii iii rinn Tliii'iBtn i~mf ■ ■uni iTTfcl^M-miidfcfJiiillilTrrMirtn ii ITII I i ■ ii «•MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 » *(LMCCJ Report - Continued) Jabbour asked what generated the discussion. McMillan confirmed that an application prompted the discussion, Jabbour noted that the LMCD was given information on dock Ss^e^howing Orono only allows docks as a secondary use on properties with a pnmary McMillan said the LMCD authorized their staff to submit an ^ from the UCMR for acquisition of additional public access to the lake. She ‘^at Jabbour had voiced concern regarding the LMCD's involvement in this activity. It felt the cities should work with the DNR on access. Jabbour noted that the initial $2.3 million grant amount was rais^ to $5 He briefed the Council regarding the grant money and LMCD's ‘"''olvement. LMCD does not have the authority or expertise m this matter and should P from cities The DNR should be made aware of the city philosophy acc Jabbour indicated that the DNR’s original plan for Maxwell Bay would not have Iwd positive results for the City. He believes the plans need to be site specific and design weighted to a community. Goetten asked how the LMCD got involved between the city and DNR. Kelley questioned where it states in the charter that the LMCD can ask for such funding. Jabbour said the LMCD is to be the lead agency but not get involved in the “<l“'S'';o" she agreed. McMillan reported that a tentative car/trailer space inventory is being created. Lord Fletcher’s on Febniary 12. He asked boat show that many who would consider attending that other dates be considered in the future as the conflict occurs y y. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Planning Commission Chair, Dale Lindquist, had no comments MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 PUBLIC COMMENTS Landmark Drive, Orono, reported that he lives on Stubbs Bay Casev IS installing np rap on his shoreline and is in the process of adding a beach vrith^he ap^oval of the Watershed District. He said he learned that he nLded a condUional use hfr^ ^ lakeshore. The contractors have been ^red, and the need to go through the CUP process will affect the time frame He asked for approval now to move the dirt and obtain an after-the-fact CUP. Jabbour informed Casey that it is not within the Council's power to grant approval laSo”"”""*'0“ “ «sul,i*„g ai.:Sf ,he G^n 8^“' «<<ininislrative approvalGaffron said he would submit a memo regarding such code changes. t^f^urina riprapping; yet. he finds it hard to believe requested ^ ‘’®^“*red, the Council should be able to grant such approval as that being ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT (#3) #2295 CONLEY BROOKS, 980 WEST FERNDALE ROAD - VARIANCES - REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Conley Brooks was present. Gaffron reported that Mr. Brooks is requesting reconsideration of a variance approval Tu ®*I 13 for a storage garage. The property is located on West Femdale Road the 12x15 garage received approval for location within the front street yard, but was ^ ^ ^ • The residence is located further to the east. The garage would meet the 26 wetland setback and be located T from the street. The applicant originally ® ’’'“"''8 Commission recommended approval of a 18x24 garage. The applicant is asking approval of a I6'x22'garage. A diagram of the Structure was provided. G^on sad the appUcant believes a 12’x 15' stnicture is too small to be functional. He indicated it would require a 4/5th vote in order for reconsideration of the application. Barrett said the Council can discuss the merits of the request and then take action or refer the application back to the Planning Commission. Jabbour noted that a motion from a Council member, who voted with the majority on the initial action, is required to open the application for reconsideration. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 Flint moved, to reconsider the application. The motion failed for lack of a second to the motion. Brooks said he felt the Council was being disrespectful and not .reasonable in failing to reconsider the application. He feels it is his right as a citizen to be given this reconsideration. Jabbour infer.ned Brooks that the 4/1 vote received previously for variance approval was passed after dit;>cult discussion on the issue. He expressed his thought process regarding the storage ga»age. Jabbour felt the beach users should not have to go all the way to the residence in order to obtain equipment for the beach. He did not view the structure as being storage or a location for trailers. He feels a 12'xl5' structure is adequate for beach use. He said the Council could be polled regarding their opinion, but he felt the applicant was given due consideration. Brooks said he felt too many issues were before the Council for discussion when the variance approval was granted and late on the agenda. Jabbour noted that the issue was the first for review at this meeting. Gaffron indicated the applicant can reapply in 6 month*' Brooks said he was disappointed in the Council's decision not to reconsider the application. Gaftron clarified that since the application itself was approved in October, it would not require a 6 month wait but another application could be submitted by Brooks. Brooks noted new information was submitted. Jabbour acknowledged receipt of the information. He asked Brooks if the facts fairly represent his view. Brooks said they did. (fW) #2308 BROOK PARK REALTY, 3760 SHORELINE DRIVE - PRD & CLASS HI PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Bill Gleason represented Brook Park Realty. Van Zomeren distributed pictures of the property and reviewed the proposal. The 9.93 acre parcel is located in the LR-IC-I Zoning District and includes 2.2 acres of wetlands and 7.7 acres of dry buildable. The proposal is for 30 townhome units requiring a Class 111 Subdivision and PRD approval. The density allowed for this property is 2 units per acre. The applicant is requesting a density credit to allow 3 units per acre. Van Zomeren reviewed the purpose of the PRD, #1 through #5, as noted in the information packet. She explained the PRD, noting variances to subdivision requirements can be allowed if the goals of the PRD are met. There were outstanding issues when the application was last discussed and are listed in the packet as "a-I" on page 2 and forward. r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 - #2308 Brook Park Realty - Continued) Van Zomeren referenced the plan for a hammerhead versus a cul-de-sac. She reviewed townhomes. Due to conflicting viewpoints over the hammerhead, a cul-de-sac is proposed that shifts four easterly units to the north. This alternative requires removal of some trees includmg 34 and 24" oaks. Van Zomeren said the appUcant is asking for direction on the cul-de-sac or hammerhead option. The cul-de-sac is required to be 50 ’ proposed at 30 ’. The applicant is asking for a change to the subdivision requirements. ^ ® Van Zomeren reviewed the setbacks. A 30 ’ front setback, 30 ’ rear setback, and 10’ side ^tback are required. The 30* front and 10’ side setbacks are met. The 30 ’ rear setback is from the edge of the nght-of-way from the railroad requiring an additional 25' from the rwiroad right-of-way. Consideration of this request is necessary. The units on Livingston Avenue would be 15 ’ from the road right-of-way but farther from the paved area because the right-of-way is 50' and the paved area is 30 ’. Density was previously discussed. Van Zomeren referenced a letter from City Attorney Barrett regarding this issue. With the TRD, there should be no need for a trade off with open space. Van Zomeren indicated that the adjacent property’s density is 24 units on 7.6 acres with no wetlands. Van Zomeren reviewed sprinklers versus looping. It was indicated that water pressure is not the issue but capacity is a concern. Looping destroys more trees. There are two plans proposed for road width; a 22' private drive with hammerhead or a 28' private drive with cul-de-sac. The subdivision ordinance does not recognize right-of- way or minimum paved road width standards for townhome developments. Van Zomeren noted City’s concern with the design of the individual units. Guests would have to f.iter the units through the garage or walk around to the courtyard side for entry. The City's consultant planner expressed concern with the functionality of the units, including the inability for a temporarily disabled person to climb the deck stairs. The maintenance concern for the deck and staircase, especially during the winter months, was noted. The narrowness of the garage for additional storage is also a concern. Guest parking is an issue for the development. The question has been raised regarding the need for gaining permission from other residents for guest parking if parking needs exceed that allowed in the driveway. No parking is allowed on the private roads. r f I . » i t MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26, 1998 (#4 - #2308 Brook Park Realty - Continued) Van Zomeren reported that Staff does not feel the number of trips into the development Van Zomeren said the applicant has provided a copy of the homeowner's association agreement for another development that would be similar to this development. It Is currently being reviewed by the City Attorney. Van Zomeren said no resolution is included In the packet. She asked Council to give foTws the?r dirw*t^^^^^ application; the Staff would draft a resolution that Bill Gleason said his company conducted two traffic studies, one through their own comply and the other through BRW. Their monitoring indicated 3.2 trips per day pi unit BRW monitor resulted in 5 trips per day per unit, which included deliveries garbage pickup, and mail delivery. Gleason expressed surprise regarding the road. The landscape architect recommended a narrow road and no hammerhead. The Planning Commission asked for a narrow road with a hainmerhead. The Council wanted a wider road with a cul-de-sac. The road as proposed is wider than originally planned. Gleason said he would comply with the Council s decision. He noted, however, that it would be unavoidable to take additional trees. Gleason compared the units with other developments. He felt the design met or exceeded what he found elsewhere. He expressed concern with the landscape architect giving direction on design of inside of the units. Jabbour asked how this occurred. Moorse said concern had been expressed over the limited 20' width of the units and advice was sought. He noted the concern for parking limitations and entry into the units. Gleason reported that the garage width is as wide or wider than at other developments and includes two garage stalls rather than one which is typical in other developments. Gleason said the units are not designed for handicap accessibility and other homes would have similar problems if temporary disability occurred. He said the deck is made of a maintenance free material with a longer life expectancy than wood. The parking is similar to that found in other developments too. Gleason noted good products being used, i.e., aesthetically and security-wise, and upgrades, such as siding and windows. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (#4 - #2308 Brook Park Realty - Continued) Gleason said the development’s market niche is people who are downsizing, working couples, and single workers He felt this type of homeowner would generate fewer tnps than families. Gleason also noted the importance of preserving views. He indicated that if the number of units are reduced in the development, the cost of the remaining units would increase. The original plan called for 45 units. He feels the PRD makes the land more usable, and the plan is sensible, allowing for concessions to be made on setbacks. Jabbour clarified direction being sought. Gleason noted the cost involved in each redesign. He asked for Council to clarify their requirements due to the opposing viewpoints of Council, Planning Commission, and landscape architect. Jabbour said a hardship would have to be shown to deviate from the cul-de-sac requirement. While he does not want to lose any more trees than necessary, this may be the case due to the need for the cul-de-sac and lack of any real hardship. Kelley said he is not in favor of the project. He feels the plan proposes more density than the site can reasonably accommodate. Goetten said she feels the project is appropriate to the area, though there are concerns to resolve. She asked for further clarification regarding direct access from CoRd 15. bhe was informed that the property to the west would have to be acquired and developed in order for access to CoRd 15. Discussions are underway with the owner but no commitments have been made. Gleason reviewed the plan for the road if the other property was developed. Sewer lines would be provided to CoRd 15 for future development of the western parcel. Jabbour asked Kelley to elaborate on his viewpoint. KeUey said be a PRD as a cluster-type development. He does not want to s« the ad moving to the east. Kelley cited the development to the east as being a well-ptoed development and asked the applicant to consider such a plaa He of the proposed units and their prominence from the road. Gleason the the 30’ hemht requirement. Kelley said the structures are massive, and he would not support 3 fevelsLated on the hillside Kelley indicated there were sin^e farmly dwellings to the east, and 30 units on this property would be too inuch density. He did not have any direction regarding the number of units per acre. Kelley is concOT^ wth 12 units being located off the driveway and feels the cul-de-sac is necessary. G1 noted the updated plan calls for a 28 wide road. Peterson said she agrees with Kelley that the development is too dense. She also ^ees with the need for a cul-de-sac. She feels the subdivision should be designed with the development to the east in mind. r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26.1998 (#4 - #2308 Brook Park Realty - Continued) Gleason said the density is the same as the development to the east. Kelley countered that it is different due to the amount of dry buildable land. Gleason said the development to the east is not what is being purchased in today's market. It is also a non-association development, which would be cost prohibitive. Gleason feels an association is vital for control in this type of development. Jabbour indicated that covenants are placed on most developments. Gleason said he feels there are benefits for this type of development. He does not believe the density level is too high and needs are shown for this type of housing and affordability. Gleason said he was confused in that he thought the zoning requirements were being met, yet the Council is asking for more. Jabbour said the code provides the City's prerogative regarding how the subdivision should be designed. He noted that people purchase properties with the understanding that the code will protect their properties. Flint said he favors saving more trees and would prefer a smaller cul-de-sac and road width. He does have a problem with the proposed density. Regarding egress to the east off of Livingston, Flint said the project could be further reviewed if the property to the west is developed. During public comments. Park Commissioner McDermott said the additional amount of 66 people for the area would equal that of development of 150 acres in the City's rural area. He noted the park in Navarre is in poor shape. As a resident, McDermott said he feels the visibility from the height of the townhomes would be an issue of concern. Gleason countered that the homeowners would most likely be singles with no children and would have little use of a park. He indicated a park land atmosphere would be created within the project area. Jabbour informed Gleason that the Council is reviewing different criteria. He suggested a plan using zero lot line, less density, less height, different design, and if the ordinance was changed, a narrower roadway. Gleason asked if the Council had any advice regarding the number of units. Jabbour suggested he review the neighboring development for ideas and indicated that massing and height are problems with the current plan. Gleason expressed his confusion over the differing guidelines. He thought the design was what was desired and now hearing that the Council does not like the look of the development. Jabbour responded that this was only one concern, but there were others as well. He noted the desire of access from CoRd 15 and differing concerns amongst the Council members. 8 nmiiT iStraiiarK rin i ~«iTTrg—k* ^ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 Flint asked how the cost of the units would differ if there were only two to a group. He noted the land cost was less than other land in the area. Gleason said the buildings to the east we generally split entrys and not one level living. The units in the proposed d^elopment are similar to walkouts. Gleason said the land is not economical and 75% of the project cost is for the infrastructure. He noted other cities would allow more density. Flint responded that the plan is incompatible with the philosophy of Orono and land use effiaency is not a consideration but best use of land is a consideration. He su^ested single level units be considered. Gleason said single level units require more land and would not be feasible for this project. Goetten said she was not against the project but is concerned with CoRd 15. She su^ested a^aduation in the type of units from twinhomes to townhomes. Jabbour added that the plan should not require sprinkling and include only one cul-de-sac. John Glea^n, the builder for the development company, questioned what alternatives would be favored. He asked if the product as proposed would be totally unacceptable with the proj^ed he#t. Kelley said he did not beUeve so. John Gleason felt the mixed use of smgle level with umts as proposed would make sense. Goetten noted the need to create a good transition in the housing but admitted not being aware of the cost effects. Jabbour ask^ that the applicant present sketches for submission to Council without ^uinng a full design and laying out several options for Council to give direction on Other Council members agreed with this proposition Bill Gleaiwn said he would explore this possibiUty. Density was still creating a problem for him Jabbour said there is no formula for density in the City. Jabbour noted that the code allows for leeway in its interpretation. Tom Barrett said the landowner has the right to build on 1/2 acre lots on the property without a density credit. The density credit is more of a legislative judgment. The appearwce of the development can be considered, as well as height, design, and recreational needs. Jabbour felt these comments were relevant. KeUey said the plan would be that of sketch plan given the discussion at this meeting. He prefeired a prel ininary sketch plan be presented to Council and options given for consideration before further development. Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to table Application #2308. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#5) #2310 DICK BURY, CLASSIC CAR SALES, 3850 SHORELINE DRIVE Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to accept withdrawal of the application. Vote Aves 5, Nays 0. ^ 'T j.:e%t-ivnv.uw.i.w«.u tr MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (•#6) #2315 C. DOUGLAS AND MARILYN HOLCOMBE, 1040 AND 1056 LOMA LINDA AVENUE - LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT AND VARUNCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4021 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Resolution No. 4021. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. {*»!) #2316 MIKE HILBELINK, 120 GOLDEN VIEW DRIVE - PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CLASS HI SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION NO. 4022 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4022. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#8) #2318 C.N. OSTROM & SONS, FOR JEANNE MITHUN, 755 FERNDALE ROAD NORTH - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 4023 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Resolution No. 4023. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#9) #2319 RON LAUER, 1040 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4024 Ron Lauer was present along with architect, Bruce Schmidt, and prospective homeowners, Mr. & Mrs. Bu-xton. Gaffron reported that the property is located in the LR-IB, one acre Zoning District. The 120' wide property meets 80% of the width standard for an existing lot. There is an existing house on the property with a total of 39.5% hardcover in the 75-250' setback, excluding plastic removed from landscaping, approved within the last ten years. The original proposal was for new construction with hardcover of 35%. The majority of the driveway and house is located in the 75-250' setback. The average lakeshore setback is met by the plan. The house will be located 120' from the lakeshore. The Planning Commission recommended approval on a vote of 3 to 2 subject to 75-250' zone hardcover not to exceed 30%. The applicant has revised his plan with more of the driveway located in the 250-500' setback and reduction in sidewalk and patio to result in 75-250' hardcover at 29.78%. The packet includes information regarding the new plan and hardcover calculations. Gaifron indicated that the minority vote in the Planning Commission recommendation stipulated that there was no hardship shown for hardcover to exceed the 25% maximum. Gaffron said Staff acknowledges the difficulty in meeting the 25% hardcover limitation on smaller lots. This lot is larger, however, and Staff finds it difficult to justify exceeding the limitation. The applicant is asking for approval of a 30% limitation and did receive some support for this request by the Planning Commission. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (#9 - #23 1 9 Ron Lauer - Continued) /s"93o “aiS 9«^al Shelon^f .h T't" xi.”® "•* '“kwide g«fupW^ r9s“ eleX'”' '“*• " •'’®" «" P«“ -« "“•'’ “'"-®" ' ‘ '• --h '25' “t lakeside Jabbour noted that when the Shoreland Ordinance was adopted, the City was asked to clu«enng of building wd decide to split the zone into two. GaflFron acknowledged that City s philosophy differed from that of the DNR. Jabbour said he feels the zone solit gives a imxed message to the Planning Commission. If the zone was 75-500’ a more massive house would have been allowed. This results in the need to make other considerations for long and narrow lots. Goetten said the steepness of the hill creates the hardship. Jabbour said building a small home on this lot could not be justified. Mre^ Edmunds 1030 Tonkawa, said she is 100% in favor of the house placement She is drSnaee W' PO®' being removed. She would be concerned with drainage if building was moved back into the hillside. Edmunds stated her architect built m swales to accommodate the drainage and would like drainage to remain as it exists. "“u “ “’® A relevant point toui m ^ h T * P"™ '’““‘"8 lo< “<l requires «suLantialhouse to be built on the expensive real estate. Assuming ecological reasons for the hiM a?H”’ P'“ "'eiu'les reducing the current hardcover and saving the andbuaXgreuhiTngwaor* P*"*™* hke toTee •h!”*'* "" io be moved back. He would He i 3 7“?".“ '“"8 ">'re is a need for parking driveway "" ““ *''® ®“S'ing gl5/-.A MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (#9 - #2319 Ron Lauer - Continued) Flint said he initially was not in favor of the proposed plan, but after hearing the discussion, he is undecided. Peterson cited a recent application where a building pad for the home was turned to accommodate the average lakeshore setback. In viewing this application as new construction and yet agreeing with the need for the large home size, Peterson said she finds it difficult to approve the variance. Goetten said she initially questioned the variance but has gained a better understanding of the grading changes and problems arising from moving the house back on the lot. She feels the hardship is the hill. If the concern is the hardcover, she suggested that the resolution stipulate no additional hardcover will be allowed in the future. Goetten noted that there is no hardcover proposed in the 0-75' setback and supports the application. Kelley said he supported the application. He did suggest the possibility of reducing the garage to two stalls and building another garage on the hill. Jabbour reiterated his concern with sending mixed messages. He noted the concern with building massiveness by the lakeshore would not be present in this case. He questions the benefit of meeting the requirements with no variance due to the circumstances with the hill. Jabbour feels the large amount of land can be reallocated into another zone. He supported the application. Jabbour noted he had not met the applicants prior to this meeting. Goetten moved, Jabbour seconded, to approve Resolution No. 4024 with the new rendering of the driveway portion out of the 75-250' setback for a 29.87% hardcover in the 75-250' setback. Additional hardcover is to be reallocated and reduce the amount allowed in the 250-500' setback. Gaftron reviewed the findings in favor of the application: hill, loss of trees, view, driveway, existing building pad, reallocation of hardcover being reused due to narrowness of lot. Gaftron said more findings from the discussion can be added. He asked if the application should be seen by Council again. Goetten and Jabbour agreed to add the findings to the motion without flirther review by Council. Kelley asked that the findings include the neighbor to the north's concern regarding runoff He assumed a grading plan will be required. Gaftron said a condition can be placed requiring the drainage and grading plan be submitted prior to issuance of building permit. This condition was added to the motion. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Peterson (A short recess was held.) r i’ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (#10) #2322 STEVEN N. FILIPS, 2570 THOROUGHBRED LANE - VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. 4025 Mrs. Filips was present. Gaffron reported that the request is for a temporary variance for a 6' privacy fence along Watertown Road. I he property is directly opposite i ruffula 1 rail resulting in glare from headlights being received in the residence. He noted that the applicant had received incorrect information, most likel> due to misunderstanding of the lot itself, regarding fencing requirements. Gaffron said a fence on a through lot requires 50' setback for a fence higher than 3-1/2 feet. The Council informed the applicant at a previous meeting that the variance process was necessary. Gaffron indicated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the temporary fence to remain as a barrier for a 2-1/2 year time frame until vegetative screening has matured. The fence would be required to be removed in June of 2000, or relocated to become conforming. Findings are included in the draft resolution. The uniqueness of the lot in relation to Truffiila Trail was noted. Addition of trees would be at the applicant's discretion. Mrs. Filips had no additional comments at this time. Jabbour was informed that the normal application fee had boen charged to the applicant, but based on the miscommunication, no after-the-fact fee was assessed. Jabbour felt if * the City played a part in the mistake, perhaps no fee should be charged. Kelle> asked if there were type 1 wetlands on the property. Gaffron said there were type 1 wetlands, but they were non-City protected. The covenants protecting these wetlands do prohibit neighboring properties to the east from building any type of a berm. MCWD and Corp of Engineer approval is required. Mrs. Filips said they originally planned on building a berm and were informed that they could not do so. Their goal is to block headlights fi’om shining into their home. Kelley said he would like to condition any approval on the fencing being in conformity if the residence is sold prior to the expiration of the time period allowed for the temporary variance. Mrs. Filips agreed with stipulation of this condition. Council also voiced their agreement. Peterson was informed that Staff would be responsible for enforcement. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution No. 4025 for a temporary variance with the condition that the fence be brought into compliance prior to closing if the residence is sold within the time period of 2-1/2 years. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. i MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (#11) #2330 ROBERT BEUTLER, 1331 NORTH ARM DRIVE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 4026 The Applicants were present. Bres.sler reported that the application is a renewal of a lot width variance which had expired. The lot is 83' wide at the 75' setback and 74.9' at the OHVVL, where 140' is required. No other variances are required. He reported a peculiarity to the application is the request to retain the existing residence for storage space af^er the new residence is constructed. This was previously approved with the caveat that the plumbing and heating facilities be removed to ensure that the structure was not used for rental property. The Planning Commission recommended approval. The applicants indicated their desire to maintain the heating facilities but have since said they would comply with the direction given. Mr. Beutler said he questioned the logic behind requiring removal of the heating facilities since he would be allowed to heat his garage. Jabbout reiterated the removal gives the City some assurance that the structure will not be used as a rental property. Goetten moved, Flint .seconded, to approve Resolution No. 4026. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#12) #2331 MARC GILLETT, 2160 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - FINDING OF SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR USE The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren showed information received from applicant regarding the go-carts and the floor plan of the inside of the building. The request is for finding of substantially similar use to enable the applicant to lease retail space within the Orono Mall to sell go-carts, parts, and accessories, which is not included in the permitted or conditional uses of the ordinance. The Planning Commission voted 4:1 that the use is not similar to that of a hobby shop or bicycle shop. Their concern was engine noise being incompatible with retail uses in the mall. The Council was requested to deny the applicant's request. Marc Gillett said he is interested in pursuing this retail operation with his sons as a family oriented sport. The sport is conducted in a safe, controlled environment. He noted another type of go-cart is sold in a business across the street in Long Lake. Gillett responded to concern regarding running the go-carts on the lot. Due to the need to maintain a 3/4" road clearance, it is not possible to run the carts in a parking lot. He would use a delivery service for customers, and testing of engines would occur at the Dakota County track in Rosemount. r t : { ' MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26, 1998 (#12 - #2331 Marc Gillett - Continued) Gillett said the property owner, Mr. Wear, has given approval for the engines to be run in the building. Gillett said any engine work could be done after hours or in the basement portion of the building. He noted the operation is not greasy. The engine is attached to the frame in the shop. Jabbour reported that there is no distinction between racing carts and 4-wheelers, and the City would be unable to specify this particular type of cart. Gillett responded that the concerns expressed about carts in the lot won't happen because of the cart design. Flint said he would not support an amendment to the ordinance and stood by the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial. Gillett noted the need to provide the opportunity for people to get involved in this sport requiring such a retail outlet. Goetten said she would be concerned with the noise from the engines. Gillett responded that he would follow any restrictions placed on the use. Gillett sud the go-carts come two to a box and are assembled in the shop. To test the go-cart, it must be taken to the Dakota Technical College track course. He would prefer to be allowed to start the engine on the property without disturbing the neighbors. He noted it is alcohol based and environmentally safe. Jabbour questioned if there was a better location for this business. Kelley noted that there are marinas where boats are repaired and gas stations where engines are repaired, and suggested a condition on the use restricting engine-starting to enclosed areas. Goetten did not believe the use was substantially different from that of a bicycle shop. Moorse said the difference is with the engine. He noted that if a finding of substantially similar use is made under permitted uses, then no conditions would be placed on the use. If a finding is made for being similar to a conditional use, such as garages, the code could be amended with specific conditions for the proposed use. Planning Commission Chair Lindquist was asked if the Planning Commission had a problem with comparison of the uses. Lindquist said he objected to the use in its entirety noting the difficulty in controlling the business. Gillett asked if there was any known problem with the use in Long Lake. No indication of any problems was known. 15 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 Mwrse said if the determination v. as made that go-carts are a substantially similar use whether other uses similar to go-carts would be considered similar; also, the conditional use could naiTowly defined. While agreeing with the need to narrowly define the use. ^bbour said Iw found it difficult to distinguish between other go-carts and 4-wheelers Gil ett noted that these uses are able to run on the road. He suggested having a retail outlet only with no hands on type of business. Kelley asked if there was any zoning district within the City where this use would be aUowed. Van Zomeren ^d go-carts are not listed as a permitted or conditional use in the code in any zomng district. She did note, however, that the proposed zoning district allows for a hardware, where repairs of lawnmowers could occur. Goetten asked for Staffs opinion. Van Zomeren said if it is not substantially similar, then no conditional use could be granted. A text amendment to add this use as a conditional use would be consistent with garage and repair work in the B-1 district. Gaflfron explained where the other B-1 locations are in the City. Flint said he stands by his position that there is no similar use. Goetten was informed that a used go-cart would run about $600 and could cost as much as $12,000. Flint moved, Goetten seconded, to deny the request for finding that a go-cart operation is similar to that of a hobby shop or bicycle shop. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 1, Kelley. Van Zomeren reported that to amend the ordinance as a conditional use would require a 4/5 majority vote. Kelley said he was not sure that this location was the best place for this use and asked if there was another appropriate location. He questioned how the jet ski sales operation obtained its conditional use permit. Jabbour indicated that this came into operation after the ordinance was adopted. Kelley noted the difficulty in limiting the use to just go-carts. He felt the use has the possibility of expanding into other vehicles. Jabbour asked Staff to come back with suggestions for uses within the B-1 . Kelley noted the changes occurring in society create the need to update the list for additions and deletions He stipulated that he was not stating whether the proposed use should or should not be included on the list of uses. t r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (#12 - #2331 Marc Gillett - Continued) Jabbour asked Staff to make a recommendation based on if the use were to locate in the Uty of Orono and determine the most appropriate location. Council agreed. He asked that the guidelines be presented for discussion at the next meeting. ««*» ■ Representing the Freshwater Foundation were Don Brown and JoEIIen Hurr. Van Zomeren reported that the request by the Freshwater Foundation is to update or ^end the conditional use permit. She presented the history behind the foundation and the building. The University of Minnesota did not need a zoning approval because it is the State that grants poUce power to the City to regulate land use. The University of Minnesota gave the facility back to the foundation in the early 1990's. A corporate tenant has been found to lease the lower level. The Planning Commission reviewed the application and were concerned with the lack of information on the tenant and their work. The lease was under negotiations at the time. Van Zomeren said Staff did not believe they could give approval without direction from Council. The Planning Commission recommended no action be taken as they found no change to the conditional use. Council was asked to provide direction to the applicant regarding the status of the conditional use permit and if the lease fit the use. JoEIIen Hurr, a Foundation board member, said the lease is with Cargill, who is interested in leasing the facility for research. In response to the City’s concern regarding the type of rese^ch, Hurr said the tenant must adhere to requirements of the permit. The permits require maintaining review and authorization. Hurr informed Flint that the reason behind the new tenant lease is economical. She noted the expense related to laboratories. Jabbour was informed by Don Brown that the type of research is biological in nature and includes water based processing. He said the research is compatible with the design and activities conducted by the University of Minnesota. The Council was to determine whether the CUP in place is compatible with the tenant's use and within the parameters of the CUP itself. The City needs to be aware of the State and Federal regulations guiding the use. Jabbour said he would like assurance that no hazardous materials are involved. L MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26, 1998 ■(#13 - #2338 Freshwater Foundation - Continued) Kelley noted that the University operated the building for 19 years. He asked if there was any change in the floor plan or hardcover during that time period. Hurr indicated a g^age was added. Brown said the garage is located in the comer of the property by the O Sullivan property and used as a storage facility. The original speciflcations and plans have been followed. Brown indicated that, at one time, there was the intention to constmct a channel from the "boat room" to the lake for scientists to bring samples directly to the labs by boat. This did not occur. Kelley asked if the garage would require a variance. Hurr said the garage was built legally by the University. Kelley said it should be included in the records for future reference. Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the use within the conditional use permit. Jabbour asked that the motion reflect no hazardous materials and put the tenant on notice regarding this exclusion. All chemicals in use are to be filed with the Fire Department. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#14) MOONEY LAKE ELEVATION CONTROL - INFORMATION UPDATE Douglas Dayton, 300 CoRd 6, reported that his intention is to solve the high water problem on Mooney Lake. The lake has continued to rise, causing the loss of trees. The lake has no outlet. Dayton indicated that the high water levels of the 100 acre lake has caused 115 of 6" diameter trees and 65 of 12" diameter trees to die. This is the second tree line that has been lost since he moved there in 1960. Dayton reported that the Watershed District is aware of the problem and agree that it should be solved. Dayton said it would be helpful if the City would ask the Watershed District to solve the problem. Gaffron indicated there were three issues of concern. One is the question of where the pump discharge outlet will be located and whether it would be tied in to storm sewers or with the Nortn Femdale Road improvement project. He thought the discharge may go to the Plymouth side to Hadley Lake. If it flows to the Orono side, the water would run through Spring Hill Golf Course or to Lydiard Lake. Gaffron said any additional water to Lydiard may cause problems to this sensitive area. Gaffron said he would recommend the outlet not discharge to either Spring Hill Golf Course or Lydiard Lake. Another issue is how the solution would be funded. Gaffron indicated that discussion has occurred regarding assessing the watershed. The property owners affected include Dayton, a few in Medina, and the majority in Plymouth. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (#14 - Mooney Lake Elevation Control - Continued) Gaffron suggested the Watershed District work with the homeowners association m solving the problem. Staff does not feel this is an issue for the City. He received a sample petition from MCWD that could be used to request the Watershed District to solve the problem. A letter from the homeowners association has suggested all three cities be involved in the solution. Gaffron reported that no resolution has been drafted. He is asking for any questions the Council may have and indication of conceptual support. The Watershed has performed a number of studies but no design has been created. They are looking for City support as well. Jabbour asked if the water increase is due to development in Plymouth. Gaffron said the higher development density in Plymouth has probably contributed to the fluctuation of a few feet along with the lack of an outlet. At the current water level, Gaffron said trees will be impacted but the houses should not be directly impacted. Dayton noted that he has lost the ability to walk along the shoreline. Jabbour said it was important for Mr. Dayton to understand that some Watershed District people would like the City to do the project and are divided on how to handle it. Jabbour said he is in favor of finding a solution. He questioned whether all three cities would have to initiate the project if the Watershed does not get involved. Dayton indicated that the City of Medina has agreed to the need to monitor the water level. Gappa said he has also discussed an outlet with the City of Plymouth. Jabbour clarified with Dayton that he is asking the Council to endorse a project to reduce the level of the water on Mooney Lake. Kelley said he did not believe the cities could solve the problem without a catalyst. He feels the problem is generated by the City of Plymouth, who should pay for correcting the problem. Gaffron informed Kelley, when asked, that he did not know if storm sewer empties directly into the lake from Plymouth. Jabbour said the Watershed District involvement is based on receiving City cooperation and feels a resolution should be pursued. He feels the Watershed should consider ways for all three cities to correct the problem. Flint said he would like Staff to study the issue and make recommendations. He does not want to give carte blanche to whatever needs to be done to solve the problem. Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to pass a resolution supportive of the Watershed District reviewing the problem and developing a solution and cost estimate with copies sent to Orono, Plymouth, and Medina with request for their ideas. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. r~iT-----1 liiar ~in BT in ~ir........ii------rtii—------n~TrTriM^Tr~rT im ~ r-irr MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (^15) GARY DESANTIS, SAILORS WORLD MARINA - LETTER OF REQUEST RE: SLIPS Gary DeSantis, owner of Sailors World Marina, was present Gaffron reported that DeSantis is requesting City support for a business plan regarding the number of slips allowed for use at his marina. The LMCD is requiring removal of 10 slips, which were allowed to be used for a ten year time period, based on an agreement reached in 1988 between LMCD and former owner, Toberman, when 20 buoys were required to be removed. The ten year period is due to expire. Gaffron said 1987 City action to approve a redevelopment of the site led to the boat sales operations being moved to the gas station across the street. This operation continued for some time, then discontinued. The marina eventually came under DeSantis’ ownership. Boat sales at the marina have never been sanctioned but apparently have been on-going off season for some time. This is a change that needs an amendment of the commercial site plan approval and a revision to the boat club CUP. There are no specific dock regulations in the City code. The LMCD requirement to remove 10 slips will result in a change in the business. Gaffron also noted that a storage module was allowed by the City a few years ago. The location of the module in Staffs opinion is too visible, and it should be moved to an area where it can be screened from the lake or with vegetation by the lake. DeSantis indicated that the use of the marina has been a concern since 1994. Activities include a boat club and off-season brokerage in addition to slip rental. The boat dub use has been reduced in volume resulting in his proceeding with the brokerage of up 26 length boats. He said he has worked with the City since 1977 when he took over Paul s Landing. DeSantis said the 79 water storage units is down from 170. He has made $500,000 worth of improvements to the property and needs to offset the change in business. If he loses these 10 slips, it would create a problem. DeSantis referenced a 5/3/95 detailed report regarding parking. He said he'S using 34 stalls with the business, although his CUP allows a 100 member boat club and dockage usage. The slip customers come in at varying times. DeSantis said the boat club pwple is a 7.1 ratio. With reducing this business, he has cut down on the number of stalls by 6. DeSantis said this has resulted in less intense use of the operation and with resulting improvement to the property and to the community. To lose the 10 slips would cau^ uZ Kowo mt^ncifv hk nthpr activities. Removal of 6 slips in the northeast portioi improvement to tne propeny ana lo me eunmiuiui^. . w ^ ^-r- - him to have to intensify his other activities. Removal of 6 slips in the northeast portion and 4 in the southeast portion of the slips will cause the loss of the natural brwkwater and jeopardize the complex. It is currently set up to protect the area,and jeopardize the complex. It is currently set up to proieci me aica, «..u would have to reconfigure the whole dock system if these slips are lost. DeSantis said he has not received any complaints from the neighbors and feels no benefit would be gained by the loss of the slips. He noted a letter sent by him to the Council. J r • . t MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26, 1998 (#15 - Gary DeSantis - Sailors World Marina - Continued) Goetten asked about the history behind the 10 slips. GafTron said the LMCD, in approving the dock reconstruction in 1988, recognized there were 20 buoys located outside of the 200' limit and informed the marina to come into conformity. Due to its impact on the business, an agreement was reached that allowed for the 10 slips to be added to the previous number of docks for a ten year time period to make up for the 20 buoy loss. Jabbour questioned whether it was only 10 docks. DeSantis said there were also other water storage units removed. This occurred when the property was owned by another person but the agreement is imposed on him as current owner. Gafiron read from the agreement that the ability to reconfigure the docks included these 10 slips. Goetten received confirmation from DeSantis that the time frame for the slips to disappear has arrived and he had been aware of this agreement. Goetten asked how many boats there were per running foot and how it applies to marinas. She was informed that there were 79 dock slips of which 76 are rented. Gaffron indicated with 250' of shoreline, it is about 1 boat for every 3'. Goetten asked how this compares to other marinas. Gaffron said the use is dense citing 1 per 30' at Minnetonka Boat Works, although Lakeside and North Shore Marinas have similar density to that found at Sailors World. Jabbour noted that the Boat Works special density license agreement was made with the City of Wayzata and the City did not agree to the terms. DeSantis responded that he felt the comparisons were not similar and noted his attempt to reduce the intensity of activity on his property. He has also borne the cost to clean up the soils. DeSantis said it would be difficult to continue to run his operation without the use of these slips. Jabbour indicated he would abstain from voting on the issue. Goetten chaired the discussion. Peterson asked what can be done about the brokerage sales. Gaffron said a commercial site plan review must take place for such a change to the operation and will require an additional 8 parking spaces. DeSantis already has a variance for parking and has shown how it works. He suggested a formal application be submitted by DeSantis for the amendment to the commercial site plan and for the parking variance. DeSantis indicated that his allowance of 100 boat clubs members is down 50%. He asked to continue the brokerage aspect of his business and maintain the lower boat club numbers. Peterson informed him that he has no permission to sell boats. DeSantis said he has done so since 1973. J r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26, 1998 (#15- Gary DeSantis - Sailors World Marina - Continued) Flint questioned why the City was becoming involved in this matter. Goetten said DeSantis would like support from the City for his reque.st that the LMCD grant permission to keep the 10 slips. DeSantis felt it was an issue of defining goals. His goal is to de-intensify the use of the site. One way to do so is by brokering. DeSantis said he has demonstrated by his improvements to the property and by cleaning up of the soils, regardless of City support, good faith in his operation and had thought the City was happy with his operation. He would like to show the LMCD that the City is satisfied with how his business is being run. He noted that the only condition he has not complied with is the landscaping plan, and that is due to the soil clean up. Gaffron agreed. Flint felt his question was not answered. He supported submitting a letter regarding DeSantis being a good business owner but does not feel the City should otherwise be involved. DeSantis said his goals are predicated on having the number of slips available. He would need to intensify the use to build up his operation if he loses the income from the slips. He felt this should be of interest to the City. He reiterated he would have to change the dock complex and increase rental activity. DeSantis said he believed the City was not in favor of this occurring. JoEllen Hurr, who is a past Council member and familiar with this operation, said she has trouble seeing a hardship to allow the 10 slips to continue. She feels the hardship is self- created. Hurr said DeSantis knew that he would loss these slips and should have responded to it sooner in his business plan. She noted he was also not in compliance as his approval did not include for the brokerage. She feels the agreement was made in good faith and the operator should follow it. DeSantis responded that the agreement was not made with him. Hurr said she understood that but he bought the operation. Goetten closed the discussion and asked for Council to consider what action should be taken. Peterson asked for clarification on what DeSantis is requesting from the Council. Gaffron said DeSantis would like a letter showing support of his business plan making use of the 10 slips in order to maintain a lower level of intensity. He indicated that an advisory should also be included that stipulated the brokerage was not sanctioned. Past approvals of the use of this site have not been based on a sales operation. Adding a sales operation will require an amendment. The letter of support is requested for the intensity of use as well. Goetten indicated that even if the Council supports the business by a letter, there are other issues that need to be resolved. Peterson felt that the City would be opening up the ability for other marinas to act in the same manner if a letter of support was given. Gaffron said he was unaware of a similar situation but supporting one operation may require supporting the other operations as well. Flint said his concern is with the request for more slips. 22 iu rMirr n—■■■ ii iniiM ■■ niiwiii Pii MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26, 1998 (#15 - Gary DeSantis - Sailors World Marina - Continued) Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to move that no action be taken. Vote: Ayes 4 Navs 0 Abstain 1, Jabbour. (The Engineering Report preceded the Mayor/Council Report.) ENGINEER REPORT (#16) REPORT ON FERNDALE ROAD NORTH PROJECT Gappa reported that the public hearing was held at the last Council meeting. The draft feasibility study proposed a 36' wide road, which was eliminated due to public respon.se and Council's input. Gappa indicated the Council asked for cost estimates for a 32' v. ide road project, a 28' wide road project, and a reclaim and pave option. Gappa indicated that Orono's projected cost for a 32' wide road is $743,200. A 28' wide road would cost Orono $700,763. These two options are eligible for State aid funding The reclaim and repave cost of $242,974 is not eligible for the State aid funding. Gappa reported that repaving is not recommended due to the existing problem with the subgrade drainage, which would not be corrected, the ineligibility for MSA funding, and the City of Plymouth's plan for a road project using MSA funding. Jabbour asked if Gappa investigated Plymouth's policy regarding assessing the cost. Gappa reported that Plymouth's policy is one where the residents of the road, based on road frontage, are assessed for the cost of the improvement. Gappa thought the assessment amount is less on a collector road. Jabbour said he would like the City to be proactive in this matter with determining some assessment guidelines for future use. Kellogg noted that only Plymouth residents will have direct access on North Femdale Road. Jabbour asked Gappa if he has discussed with Plymouth the fact that the Orono Council does not want a 36' wide road. Gappa said he met with representatives of Plymouth who were made aware of this fact. He informed them that the City of Orono would be reviewing other options. Gappa said the City of Plymouth has not yet approved a formal feasibility report. He asked for direction on the road width from the Council. Jabbour opened the meeting to public comments. Mary Wng, 142 Chevy Chase Drive, indicated that the 1993 guidelines stipulate if the speed is reduced to 30 mph, a 26' wide road would be eligible for MSA funding. Jabbour said he had asked Staff what the minimum road width is allowed in order to receive the funding and was informed of the 28' width. Gappa said he was unaware of a 26' road being eligible for the funding. Jabbour noted that there is the option of the bike path located off the roadway. IIJ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (#16 - Feradale Road North Project - Continued) King noted the difficulty with working between two cities. She said the residents would like to see trees saved and the character of the area maintained. These were reasons why people moved here initially, and King would like the road to be as close to what currently exists as possible. She asked if the design of Brown Road at 28' has proved suitable with the road and bike path. Gappa reported that the winter trail maintenance is an issue for the 28' width, which is too narrow for bikers and hikers to bike and walk on. Martin Gardiner, a Plymouth resident, said he asked the City of Plymouth about plowing the trail in the winter months. He was told that Plymouth would plow and pay for the expense. Jabbour informed him that the neighbors had indicated at the public hearing that it is dangerous to ride bikes on the road. Jabbour said the original intent of the City was to repave the road, and that is still an option. He referenced the cost differences for the options and pointed out that North Ferndale Road is not a primary road. Stuart Dietz, a Plymouth resident, asked if the Council has seen the citizen survey. Jabbour informed him that they have seen it and discussed it at the public hearing. Jabbour said the Council has no agenda regarding the road and are only reacting to the requests for repairing the road. King asked what the next step would be after the public hearing in Orono, cost information gathered, Plymouth notified of Orono's intent, and Plymouth's public hearing. Jabbour reviewed the history of the request for road improvement as it has transpired to date. Staff will bring the information to the City of Plymouth. Gappa indicated that the City of Plymouth wants to schedule another informational meeting and invite representatives of all three cities and meet with the Orono Council. Plymouth will then hold a public assessment hearing and a recommendation will be made. Jabbour said the City of Orono needs to make their position known regarding the road improvement. He asked whether the minimum road width for MSA funding eligibility is 26' or 28'. Kellogg said the State guidelines say 28'. He said cost figures could be calculated for a 26' road, but he did not believe the State would agree to that width. Gappa noted the measurements are metric. He noted the language also refers to the recommendation regarding the speed limit, which he thought could possibly allow for a 26' wide road if the speed limit was 30 mph. Goetten said her understanding is that the City of Plymouth usually builds wider roads. Gappa said their standard road is 32'. Gappa felt the Council needs to make a recommendation and forward it to the City of Plymouth. Jabbour suggested reviewing the City's road standards for subdivision development. r“i,t—tiiiTi ■[—nr ~ir------1' mi r~r i~iVi*h fc'i^'fTTT ai i iB [ i' iirniim i nTTJaT iT 'unrri—!■ ■rr"r~nr~imii~ii rm ~rirm«-n rrr ~i t itti^ laiainTirifc hiiiw 1 . L MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (#16 - Femdale Road North Project - Continued) Mr. Dietz asked whether an interchange at Femdale and Interstate 394 is being considered. Jabbour said the interchange was eliminated but the decision could change. Dietz said the possibility of this interchange is a reason behind a narrower roadway request. Mary King felt the 32* design with bike path and two lanes is a good design but would create a problem for this road. The residents would like to see the design approached in a conservative manner. Martin Gardiner asked if it would be helpful to gather input from the residents along the road by use of the available drawings. Jabbour indicated the Council has a good idea of what is desired by the residents. Flint felt the Council was coming to a consensus regarding the road design and should move forward. Mary King was informed by Gappa that the public information meeting in Plymouth would be held in February. The road improvement is projected for construction this coming summer but may be delayed until 1999. Goetten questioned why the City of Plymouth is taking so long. Gappa agreed that Orono is ahead of Plymouth in the process. Terry Knight, a Plymouth resident and co-president of the Hadley Lake Homeowners Association, noted there has been no addressing of the storm sewer runoff. Kellogg said the drainage areas are drawn out and sewer proposed. There are questions in the southern portion of the road. He indicated the drainage issue is in preliminary form and more information will be forthcoming in the next couple weeks. Jabbour asked if Orono will schedule another public hearing. Moorse said the residents were informed of this meeting at the last hearing. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the 28' width with the condition that the cost be split 50/50 with the City of Plymouth including the off-road bike trail. Kelley felt the City of Orono should not be participating in the cost of the bike trail. He felt the trail would only serve a finite group of Orono residents. With the location on the east or Pljmiouth side, Kelley felt it would be a waste of Orono taxpayer dollars to pay for the trail. 1 .• MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HtLD ON JANUA ki zo , (U]ft - FemHale North Project - Continned) Jabbour clarified that based on State guidelines Plymouth is paying for 100% of the tr^l. However, under this formula, Orono is paying $700,000 for the road, while Plymouth is only paying $515,000. If the bike path is added in to the cost, Orono would pay for half ^ that cost but Plymouth wouid be increasing their cost by picking up i/2 of the iuii cost of the road. With the even split in costs, Jabbour questioned asking Plymouth to pay for the trail too. Flint added that all of the residents voiced support of the trail. Goetten reported that she has received many calls over the years from residents of this neighborhood asking for a path on the west side of the road for their use. She is concerned that the trail is only for the east side. Flint said the larger portion of popuiaiion is on ihe east side but the trail wiii be used by aii. Jabbour asked if a path can be striped on the west side on a 28 ’ wide road, (hppa said no. A 4’ traii on both sides of the road wouid require 52 ’. Gappa indicated that the difference comes into play due to the curb reaction distance, which requires 2'. Kellogg elaborated that the dnving lane cannot be closer than 2' from the curb. Kelley asked how cost sharing can be discussed without seeing the design. Jabbour disagreed that the design is unknown. Kelley questioned what land is being taken on both sides of the road. Jabbour felt enough information has been gathered. He noted the road is staked at 36' and residents should be able to determine the change related to the 28' roadway. Jabbour noted there were two choices for the Council to consider, the 28' MSA road or the 28 ’ repavement. He thought that the cost was the only issue to resolve, and a decision is necessary in order to move forward. Kelley asked if the road will be centered on the right-of-way. Jabbour said it would be shifted toward the Orono side. Kellogg said the road center would be 4’ into the Orono or western side of the center line of the right-of-way. Kelley asked why this is occurring. Kellogg said the reason is to balance the road within the right-of-way, especially with the trail construction, and avoid destroying trees. The road will transition 2' to the east on the north end of the road. The road is staked in order for the residents to get a preliminary idea of where the road will be. Flint asked if the road was now coming in 4' on each side with the 28' design. He was informed that this is true, though the detailed layout has not yet been done. Jabbour noted that the detailed drawing of the 36 ’ width roadway was denied. He asked what the cost was for the drawing. Kellogg said he believed the cost was not wasted. Jabbour said the cost is wasted if the road is only repaved. J r t MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (#16 - Femdale Road North Project - Continued) Gappa said Staff is asking for a basic concept approval at this time for width and whether a rural or urban section should be considered. More detailed plans will require further approval. Direction is required on the concept before final plans are drawn. Jabbour added that the concept cannot be submitted to the City of Plymouth if the Council does not agree on the basics. He said the Council cannot continue to make changes on what is going to occur. Gappa said the recommendation for the road will be forwarded to Plymouth. Martin Gardiner informed the Council that the road layout is also due to the location of the power lines on the east side. He said he has walk^ the roadway and concluded that any improvement will affect the neighborhood with the exception of repaving only. He feels the 28' concept is a win-win situation for all. Jabbour noted that the storm sewer design received is a rural design. Jabbour said he had thought repaving would be appropriate and last 6-10 years. However, with the proposed split in cost and life expectancy of total reconstruction being 20 years with an overlay allowing for up to 40 years, it would be irresponsible to only repave the road. Repaving is half the cost of total reconstruction and the underlying problem would not be repaired. Jabbour said he also feels the bike path is not an issue as it has been determined that the trail will be built on the Plymouth side. Kelley asked what the position would be if the City of Plymouth does not agree to split the cost. Flint said the matter would be reassessed at that time. Terry Knight said the City of Plymouth would like to see the project move forward. He feels the plan is taking alot of time for what is considered a small project in Plymouth. Kelley asked what type of curbing would be used. Gappa said he would like to see a vertical curb in order to k*!cp people off the boulevard area. Flint noted the problems arise from motorcyclists iS well. Tom Lane noted that the kids ride up the curbs with their bikes, skate boards, and roller blades. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 2, Goetten, Kelley. The recommendation is for a 28 ’ wide MSA road, with an urban curb, and cost being split 50/50 between the Cities of Orono and Plymouth. * MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26, 1998 (#17) WINTER MAINTENANCE OF TRAILS Tom Lane, 915 North Brown Road, informed the Council that discussion has been held regarding winter maintenance of the trail. The question had been asked at two different meetings who will maintain the trails. Lane said the past Public Works Director, John Gerhardson, said the City would maintain the trails. Lane asked the Council why the trails are not being maintained. He noted weeds are plentiful during the summer months and snow has made the trail impossible to use over the winter. He said the snow is piled 6' high near Sugarwoods. Lane said the 28' wide road receives alot of use. He submitted a letter regarding the trail to 70 residents and received 35 replies. There are not alot of homes on the road indicating the trail is being used by other residents as well. Lane said the trail serves seven different neighborhoods. Safety problems are arising from attempts to walk the trail. Lane said the residents love the trail. He indicated he personally lost a major portion of his front yard when the trail was constructed but felt the trail would be a benefit to the residents. Lane said he is now being told the policy is that the trails are not maintained. He questioned this as the trail is a main access point for many people. He asked the Council to reconsider the policy and remove the snow from the trail. Lane felt a solution could be reached. Flint informed Lane that the problem is the cost in maintaining the trails. He noted the short trail system in the City does not justify buying the necessary equipment. F!»nt indicated that the trail on Old Crystal Bay Road will be tied in to Hennepin Parks trail system and maintained by Hennepin Parks in the future. This, however, does ii '*t solve the problem for Brown Road North. He suggested possibly contracting with the City of Plymouth. Flint said the City cannot afford to maintain the trails but would like to see an attempt made at maintaining it. He said he has been told that trails can become icy in the winter months. Flint asked Staff to consider other options. Jabbour informed Lane that it is the City’s policy not to plow roads in new subdivisions. The issue of trails and maintenance must be a City-wide policy Jabbour said he reviewed this issue with Moorse. It was noted that each community has different roads. There are benefits to narrow roadways. Jabbour noted that there are people in the City who pay high taxes but receive little benefit in service from the City. Lane asked if a wing could be added to a plow. Goetten informed him that a determination cannot be made for one trail only. She also questioned the issue of liability. Lane asked what the policy is if someone were to be hit on the roadway. Goetten said she would question what people did before trails were built. Jabbour asked Lane if he would be interested in a special assessment. Lane said he would have to discuss the matter with the other neighboring residents. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 (#17 - Winter Maintenance of Trails - Continued) Gappa indicated that the policy would have to be reviewed. He noted the difficulty in maintaining the grass in the boulevard area between the curb and the trail. One option is to pave from the trail to the road. Special equipment would be required and plowing cannot be done with the current equipment. Jabbour asked Staff to review this issue. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT No report was given. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#18) U.S. WEST - ANTENNA LEASE ON NAVARRE WATER TOWER Moorse reported that U.S. West would like to negotiate lease agreements for both the Navarre Water Tower and the North Water Tower at the same time. Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to table Agenda Item #18. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#19) TAX FORFEIT PROPERTIES - RESOLUTION NO. 4027 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4027 requesting conveyance of tax forfeit lands for public use by the City of Orono. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#20) PURCHASE OF POUCE SQUAD CARS Peterson reiterated the need to have 4-wheel drive vehicles. Peterson asked whether the transmissions were inspected on the vehicles and maintenance records reviewed. Kelley indicated he asked similar questions of Moorse. Peterson said she did not understand why the City of Champlin would sell these newer vehicles. Kelley asked if the vehicles had posi-traction rear engines. Moorse said he would have to check with the Police Department. Goetten noted that the purchases have already been made. Moorse indicated that the vehicles have 28,000 miles on their odometers and are in immaculate condition. The City of Champlin has a policy where they have take-home squad cars and turn them back in for resale prior to expiration of the warranty. Moorse said he is satisfied with the vehicles. f I fi MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 Gocttcn moved, Flint seconded, to confirm the authorization to purchase four used 1996 police squads fromthe City ofChampUn at a cost of$14,900 per squad. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Peterson. (#21) ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE CONTRACTS WITH SOUTH LAKE CITIES Moorse reported that the contract is a general form used to provide animal control services to the cities of Excelsior, Shorewood, and Tonka Bay for the year 1998. These cities received a short notice from their prior service provider, requiring them to seek service elsewhere. The contracts were negotiated with the cities, but they were mfoiroed to continue to seek other alternatives in the event the service does not meet expectations of Orono or these cities. Language is included in the contract where the contract can be reviewed at mid-year and 3/4 year for release or renegotiation of the contract. Peterson asked if these cities were paying the cost for half a person. Moorse said the amount was more than that and should result in no increase in costs to Orono and a substantial benefit to the City. Kelley voiced concern with taking on more responsibi when the work level is ^ready complex. He also felt the trip to Excelsior was a lai ^ ibr the personnel. Moorse felt the benefits outweighed the additional work load. Jabbour asked about problems with maintaining staff. Moorse said problems have not occurred recently. He did note that the longevity of part-time employees is lower th^ that of a full-time employee. With the ability to hire a full-time employee, this should benefit the City. Peterson asked if the employees are on patrol. Moorse said the service includes on-patrol duty and employees are also on-call. Moorse indicated that the City is stepping in to aid these other cities to assist in solving a problem. The service will not be continued if it creates problems. Jabbour noted the need for providing alternative impound facilities. Peterson moved, Goetten seconded, to approve, on a trial basis, the contracts with the cities of Excelsior, Shorewood, and Tonka Bay for the provision of animal control services for 1998. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 1, Kelley. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT City Attorney Barrett had no report. i MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 Goetten asked if the cigarette licensees were abiding by the newly adopted tobacco guidehnes and regulations. Moorse said they were in compliance. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the following licenses. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays Residential Kennel Licenses: 1) Wayne E. and Gayle D. Carrier 2) Jane Kline and Steve Bell 1376 North Arm Drive 4455 West Branch Road 3) Tracey Morrow 3026 Casco Point Road 4) John Redmond 2695 Casco Point Road 5) Kenneth B. & Karen S. Rolland 6) Judith A. Spinner 4119 Oak Street 940 North Arm Drive Cigarette Licenses: 1) Richard Bloomquist Rick's Super Valu 3333 Shoreline Drive 3) Jimmie Holtz Jimmie's Lounge 3380 Shoreline Drive 5) Richard Kohn Wayzata Country Club 200 Wayzata Boulevard 7) John O'Sullivan, O'Sullivans II (Convenience Store & Culver's) 3340 Shoreline Drive 9) Grant Wenkstem Lake^dew Golf of Orono, Inc. 405 North Arm Drive (*#23) BILLS Goetten moved. Peterson seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 2) Steven Corl Navarre Liquors, Inc. 3421 Shoreline Drive 4) LeRoy Koehnen Navarre Amoco 3360 Shoreline Drive 6) John O'Sullivan 2695 Casco Point Road 8) William Wear Orono Self Service 2160 Wayzata Boulevard HWiHiinn I ^A '■< COUNCLMEETINa FEB 9 1998REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: ITEM NO.:H- Department Approval: Name Brad Bressler Title Planning Assistant Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section; Zoning Item Description:#2289 Jon Pendleton 350 North Arm Drive Conditional Use Permit-Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IA One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acres) Lot Area:191,664 square feet (4.4 acres) Application: The applicant is proposing to keep one horse on his property during the non-winter months, approximately April through November. Two pasture areas are proposed. Pasture #1 is 1.14 acres and Pasture 02 is .67 acre, yielding 1.81 acres total. A conditional use permit is required for the keeping of a horse. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 4 to 0 vote to: 1.Approve a conditional use permit for the seasonal keeping of one horse on the subject property, utilizing both pastures as proposed. 2.Best management practices suggested by University of Minnesota extension educator Jeremy Geske should be followed by the applicant. His recommendations are attached as Exhibit B of the Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To approve or amend the enclosed resolution. iiafiittiiyuasuasuiiUBtiKiuaaUBiflti r ■ - t! P-'. 1: m Kj ■ fW t A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 3(M) FILE NO. 2289 WHEREAS, Jon M. Pendleton (hereinafter the "applicant") is the owner of the property located at 350 North Arm Lane within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as: Lot 2, Block, 1, Markoe Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a conditional use permit to permit the seasonal keeping of a horse on his property. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application v/as reviewed as Zoning File #2289. 2. The property is located in the LR-IA Zoning District. The property consists of 4.4 acres. 3.On January 20, 1998, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended approval based on the following findings: a.A University of Minnesota extension educator specializing in animal feedlots indicated the pasture sites will not negatively affect the waterways or neighborhood. b.Pasture #1 is not considered a feedlot as it allows more than 1 acre per animal unit. This pasture meets the 75' lakeshore setback. Pasture #2 is considered a feedlot as it allows less than 1 acre per animal unit. This pasture meets the 300' feedlot setback from waterways. Exhibit A is the survey depicting the location of the pastures. Page 1 of 7 i I I i 4. 5. c.The combined pasture area of 1.81 acres where 2 acres is required for 1 animal unit is sufficient as the horse will be rotated between pastures and will be provided additional feed. d.A 10' drainage easement separating the pastures inhibits the ability to have one contiguous pasture area. e.The horse would only be kept on the property during the non-winter months. f. No structure for the horse is required or proposed. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the seasonal keeping of one horse on the pro,«rty wilt not be detnmen^ to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will its use depreciate surrounding propeity values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the 2kming Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed conditional use permit on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, OHDER AND CONDITIONS grants a condiS uTpcmil'^ril^iS^S' fo permit the keeping of one horse on tlie subject property dun-,- the non-winter months, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 7 a ' nrr^niTiH ri"Tnfnii‘i Iiiinr ~rmni nTn-miinTiT-niii m I r 11 n'n-in ni i i wkiurAia 1. 2. 3. 4. ATTEST: The applicant shall follow best management practices as suggested in the attached letter dated February 6, 1998 from Jeremy Geske, University of Minnesota extension educator specializing in feedlots (Exhibit B). Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owner but are permissive only and must be exercised within one year of the date of Council approval or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (February 9, 1999). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of February, 1998. Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 7 ! 1 IK i^i 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of February, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public i M * M r I .J Page 4 of 7 J ' 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 of7 .Ui\ i It Ik ^ Mti ■ \ mnglmm w ^ •rino tfoamcn 2422 EnttfpHff Oriv« Mttf^doto MN 55120 (612) 681-1914 FAX:681-94e8 t2» MMOOV 10 NX. BMtt. MN 5S434 (612) 783-1880 FAX:763-1883 Certificate of Survey for: JON PENDLETON UO NOATH *mi LANC N89*48'39 ”W 231.80 1ft _____________ ■ 145.00 1N89*4a'30> N89*48'39 ’W ■■T N»rr=«-cocc or channel per plat S89*48'39 ‘E grain ACE A UT»UTY EASEMENT PER PLAT 101^60 HOTC HIOAOKO ORAOCS 9^0m P€M CNAOMC HAM ft} NOfC: MLOMC OMCNSO n S 9*0m ARC rOR NQRIIOMTAL AMO VCRIICAI. IOC a OON or SfRUCIURCf ONtr. ICC ARCMTCCfUAi PVAMS rOR OURiMG AND rOUNOAMN OMCNSQNS. RROROSCO IS Mor IX RCSRONS«urr or imc iurxvor . ppywxfn MQtitf rtrvATiQM LO^ST aOOR CUVAT10N: _______ TOP or BLOCK ELEVATION: ------------ CARACE slab ELEVATION: ----------- MOTt IMS OROnCATC OOCS NOT RURRORf TO Mi CASOCNTS OIXR IMAM 1MOX MM ON IX XCOROCO RUT. NOTC: contractor MUST 0M«AY OiPOt MTC: KARMCt MX ARC tASCO ON AM AtSUXO Oa TUM I 000 00 0CNO1CS CatlOlO aCXllCN ( oeaoo ) ocNOTct rrorood arcAnoN __ jS-S; 0CMO1CS ORAMACC AMP UlfJTV CAHMCMr ecMOTCf opARiAec fio« oaccMM »----OCNOICS MQMUMCNr o — OCMOTIS OmCT NUP VIE HEREBY CERTIFY TO JON PENDLETON THAT TMS IS A TRUE AND SURVEY OF THE BOUNDARIES OF: CORRECT representation OF A LOT 2, BLOCK 1. MARKOE ADDITION HOmCPM COUNTY. lANNCSOTA It OOCS NOT PONPORT TO SHOW MPROWiICNTS OR ENCHROACMMCNTS. EXCEPT AS SMOXW. AS SUR>CtCO BY HE OR under my CXRCCT supervision this I7TH OAY Of NOV.. 1997. SCALE : 1 INCH - 100 FEET 93109.00 WR y<CNCO^ PIONEER cyldc^^, /a ~~~ ^Jorm C. LorfON. L.S. R«fl. No.lM2i Dakota County DAKOTA COoFlTV CXTtUl^lON A CONSERVATION CCNTES 4|(K)-220SiruM V\ . Sliilu- lOI l-anniupton. MN 55o24 V5.iy PHONK (6l?)h^M 7700 TDD (6I2)K91-77.W MK ((i|2)46T-KcH)2 WCB htip;//www.pirtenilon umn,tdu/ '•dskotp/ C.MAIW dsHoiADaxipnAlon.umn.sdu UNivhkjjiTY OF Minnesota Extension February 6,1998 TO; Brad Brcssicr, City of Orono FR: Jeremy Oeske, Extension Educator, Livestock Syste RE: Jon & Mog Pendleton’s request to keep I horse... CC: Jon & Meg Pendleton The Pendleton’s wish to keep one horse, for approximately six months of the year, on their properly. The total amount of manure production from one for half a year is relatively minor. I have recommended a few management practices that should ensure that the manure will not be a pollution problem. ❖ When building the two lots where the horse will be kept, follow city (and/or county) required / recommended setbacks from shoreland and septic system. >* Three areas of concern were the lakeshore, the septic system and the small creek that cuts across the property and empties into the lake. I'he creek is basically only a concern during spring run-off from snowmelt. Since the horse will not be kept on the property over winter, this shouldn’t be a problem. *> Maintain a vegetation cover on the horse lots if possible. > Meg A Jon have expressed their willingness to provide supplemental forage (hay) to reduce grazing pressure on the lots. I would be happy to inspect the site at the end of the first summer to evaluate the vegetative cover. > If the lots become devoid of vegetation, there arc two things I would recommend: • It would be very cosy to design a clean water diversion that would keep r\in- off from flowing over the lots. • Set up a manure composting pile. If it is deemed that a compost pile is necessary , I would be happy to work with the Pendleton's to design a system for them. Compost piles quickly and efficiently convert manure into organic matter that can readily be used as fertilizer for gardens or fields, and they are relatively odorless. We can design a system that is not in tl»e path of run-off, and by putting a fence around it, we can keep Che area aesthetically pleasing. We’ve talked about this, and they are more than witling to do whatever is necessary. 1 can provide details on how oAen the lot needs to be cleaned, the compost pile emptied, etc. I would also like to add that Jon & Meg give me every indication that they are not only willing to, but also want to manage ihcir horse in a w'ay that is healthy for the horse and safe for the environment. They have made connections with a veterinarian, other horse owners. University of Minnesota Extension staff and other professionals to assist them as they care for this horse. They clearly have the resources and the desire to do things right, and 1 see no reason to deny their request. Jon & Meg may call on me to provide information or assistance in these areas. If you hove any question.s, 1 can be reached at (612)891-7704. lhii\ i r\ii\ ofMhwcM'to. V.^ Pi piitdimu oj ulum , unit Mmm \oUi Cmmtivs Coopemtin^ TO: FROM: Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Brad Dressier, Planning Assistant DATE:Jan ’-ir}’ 2,1997 SUBJECT: #2289-Jon Pendleton 350 North Arm Lane Conditional Use Permit-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1 A One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acres) Lot Area:1 91,664 square feet (4.4 acres) Application: This application was tabled at the October 20, 1997 Planning Commission meeting at the request of the applicant and pending the receipt of a certified survey per Planning Commission recommendation. The applicant is proposing to keep one horse on his property during the sunum", months (approximately April through November). A conditional use permit is required for the keeping of a horse in this zoning district. Two possible pasture areas are proposed. Attachment F shows where the pastures are proposed to be located. Pasture #1 is 1.14 acres and Pasture #2 is .67 acres yielding 1.81 acres total. The applicant had proposed the construction of a bam and the keeping of two horses year round on the property in a previous application in 1096. The application was withdrawn. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 9.13, Subd. 13; Regulation of Horses Section 10.02, Definition 5: Animal Unit Section 10.03, SuUJ. 15; Non-Encroachments Section 10.20, Subd. 3(M); LR-1A Conditional Uses, Animals Section 10.56, Subd. 3, Definition 1; Animal Feedlot Section 10.56, Subd 13; Conditional Uses in Shoreland Areas Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (N,2); Animal Feedlot Standard.s U2289 -Jon Pendleton 330 North Arm Lane Conditional Use Permit January 20, 1998 tge I Findings: 1. 2. 3. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan. Horses are allowed as a conditional use in the LR-1A zoning district. The comprehensive plan addresses the issue of keeping horses on pages 4-20, #2 and 4-29 "Rural Agricultural Land Use . According to these two sections, quasi-agricultural uses are permitted, but will be analyzed and reviewed on an individual basis to assure appropriate safeguards for the environment and the neighbors". That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. An inspection of the proposed pasture areas was conducted on September 8, 1997 by Jeremy Geske, a University of Minnesota extension educator specializing in animal feedlots. Mr. Geske has indicated that the proposed pasture sites will not negatively affect the neighborhood or waterways. Runoff containing manure should also not be a problem if the pastures are properly maintained. His recommendations are attached as Attachment G. The keeping of a horse on the property would not be out of character with the neighborhood as the horse is currently kept on the property across the road to the west from the subject property. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. According to City Code Section 10.56, Subdivision 3, Definition 1, a confined area allowing more than one acre for each animal unit is not considered a feedlot. Pasture #1 meets this definition, however Pasture #2 is subject to feedlot standards as it provides less than 1 acre per animal unit. The previous proposal was considered a feedlot as two animals were proposed to be kept on less than 2 acres of pasture. Pasture #1 is not subject to the 300’ setback requirement from the OHWL, while Pasture #2 is considered a feedlot and is subject to this setback requirement. Pasture ^1 has proposed a fence located 75’ from the OHWL, meeting the lakeshore setback requirement and Pasture #2 has proposed a fence located approximately 300’ from the OHWI, meeting the feedlot setback requirement. M2289^Jon Pendleton 250 Sorth Arm Lane Conditional Use Permit January'20, 1998 Pa^e 2 A minimum of 2 acres of pasture area is required for the keeping of one horse according to Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision (3,M). This code section also makes a provision that when pasture is not required for feed purposes, the two acre requirement may be adjusted at the discretion of the City Council. The applicant has indicated that additional feed will be provided on site for the horse. If both pastures are utilized, a total of 1.81 acres would be available, nearly meeting the two acre requirement. Mr. Geske has advocated in his letter (Attachment G) that the horse be occasionally rotated between pastures to relieve pressure on vegetation. Combining the two pastures is not possible as a 30' drainage easement separates them. The proposed fence would not exceed 6' or be located within the 75' lakeshore setback. Fences not exceeding 6' in height are considered non-encroachments and are not subject to zoning district setback requirements. There is no defined setback requirement for fences from property lines. The applicant is proposing locating the north fence for the pasture directly behind the property line. There are no codified setback requirements for pastures from drainage easements, structures or septic systems. The City Septic Inspector has noted a 10' setback from the septic system is the advisable guideline. Pasture #2, the nearest proposed pasture to the septic system, would be located 25' from the system at its closest point. An accessory structure to shelter the animal i'> not proposed, nor is it required for the seasonal keeping of an animal. Staff Recommendation: • Staff recommends both pastures being approved, with Pasture being the primary site as this is preferrt>l ?,y both the applicant and neighbor to the north. Pasture #2 should be used occasionally to relieve pressure on the vegetation of Pasture #1, as Mr. Geske has recommended. • Staff recommends approval of the proposed setbacks from the OHWL for both pastures. Pasture #1 meets the required 75' setback and is not considered a feedlot and Pasture #2 meets the required 300' setback and is considered a feeJlot. • Staff recommends approval of Pasture #1 at 1.14 acres and Pasture #2 at .67 acre for a total of 1.81 acres. . Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the application based on the findings of the extension educator subject to the manure being composted on site according to best management practices advised by Mr. Geske. H2289Jon Pundleton 350 North Arm Lane Conditional Use Permit January 20, 1 998 Page 3 CITY OF cfeONO 2£.S 9 Application # Date Received SA2 '2^/*i 7 Amount Paid vi) ICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address_______35^ A^or-H, _____________ Type of Application tc ’o Filed O<u6i*i>«v9( ^ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)it APPLICANT^ Name <> Phone (hom^ Address 3 6h/»-*. City orcAo y7i-5^cer fe Phone(workSi '7‘tc -cilO ^ S Zip OWNEU (if different than applicant) Name Address Phone (home). Phone (work)_ City Zip. Date Propert^cquired___________ ______________________ I (do) (4pno0^1so own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application y $175.00 Residential Accessory Use ■______$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetlai.d or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore _____PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule _____$150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) _____After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee (month/year) OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other “ see Fee Schedule i I PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District_____________ Present Use of Property X Residential Other (specify). H I02* I \ ^ O O r\\ / t—^/ •it! CD 1 O ( r.„j L_i 1___1 »____1 d> S|i*.« Or or o««« • rm^- 35t>£ PERMIT RECORD Permit No Date o Type of Permit '~~)lfi ^ y 5/^35 /O '/f-^3 V— /O V‘/-^3 n5"^c3’///-/7 y3 '^VurJ^ /53 /c^' /7 'fj' ■V nn -• I 1I-' I ** ** * PIONIMH LAtC ftMCvOM • cm. CWNCZn 2422 EntffprifM Oriv« Mcndoto Heights. MN 55120 (612) 681-1914 FAX681-9488 / ;■ ^ •ngmaaring uao avmkas * tJKnncn 625 Highaov 10 N.E Bloine. MN 55434 (612) 78S-1880 ^AX: 763-1863 f* Certificate of Survey for: JON PENDLETON 350 NORTH ARM LANE ^.2s..E0CE Of CHANNEL PER PLAT NOTt PnOHim CAAOCS SMOWi ACM t»kOm AUN »*OTt »*OTl iucOM« OAidisoits 9^om AMc rm NOftzoNrAL amo ^cmmcal location or sfMucnjNCs only vx amoatcctuai . alans fom ou «^mc and rOUNOAHON 0MC*T90NS NO SAConc SOA.S MvtsncADON has occn comautcd on n«s lot or i>c SUMVCfOM. THC SmTAOMjrr or %OL% TO SUAAONT TK SACOTlC NOirSC MOAOSCO IS NOT THC MCSA0<S«UTY OT TMf SUMvCtOM. PROPOSED HQU^f FlfVATlQii LOVICST aOOR ELEVATION: ______ TOP Of BLOCK ELEVATION: ______ GARAGE SLAB aEVATION: ______ NOTC TMS CCMimCATC OOCS NOT AUAAOMT TO »«0« C a SCMCNTS OTKM THAN THOSC »I0«N ON IK NCCONOCO AtAt NOTC; CONTMACTOM host 09M«Af 0C9CN NOTC KAMMCS »«0«M AMC MASCO ON AN ASSUMCO DATUM 1 00000 OCNOTCS OOSTINO CLCVATION ( ooaoo ) OCNOTCS amqaoscd CLCVAUQN u:: OC notcs OMamacc and umutv caomcnf ■ -r- OCNOTCS OMAMACC FLOW OMCCIION .....---------OCNOTCS MONUMCNT o • - OCNOTCS orr«T huo WE HEREBY CERTIFY TO JON PENDLETON THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF A SURVEY OF THE BOUNDARIES OF: LOT 2, BLOCK 1, MARKOE ADDITION HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA IT DOES NOT PURPORT TO SHOW IMPROVEMENTS OR ENCHROACHMENTS. EXCEPT AS SHOWN. AS SURVEYED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION THIS I7TH DAY OF NOV.. 1997. SCALE : 1 INCH - 100 FEET ilFI 9320i.00 SWK ytlCNED^ PIONEER ENOlflE^J^. P.A. ^ f/ — ^Mr\t\ C Lorton. L.S. No. 19^28 __ k Minnesota Extension Service Uni \ ERsi IY OF Minnesota D a KOI A C ounty G 4100 220th Street West Farmington MN 55024-9539 (612) 891-7700 TDD: (6121891-7749 FAX: (612) 463-8002 E-mail: dakota@mes.umn.edu Sept. 8, 1997 TO: Mr. & Mrs. Pendleton FR: Jeremy Geske, E.xtension Educator RE: Sept. 5 farm visit I wasn t sure who to address this to, so I’ll send it to you along with a copy for you to forward to the appropriate people. As I understand it, the Pendletons are hoping to build a smaP pasture and a riding arena (which could also serve as a second pasture) to keep their one horse during the summer months (approx. 6-7 months, April- Nov.). The horse would be boarded over winter. Currently, the horse is boarded year round. I assume the reason I was asked to inspect the site is because of the concern over manure, considering the proximity of the lakf a small creek and a septic system. I’m not familiar with the local setbacks for these regions, but the Pendletons will comply with regulations and build their fences accordingly. The plan would be for both the pasture and riding arena to maintain a cover of vegetation, which greatly reduces the potential for run-off to carry manure into the lake. In addition, one horse will not produce manure in large enough quantity to be a major concern. Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium from the manure should be utilized by the e.\isting vegetation. Their are plans for the lot to be cleaned occasionally, and the manure composted. I can ’t see manure building up in significant quantity to become a pollution hazard. If I understand correctly, there are about 4 and 1/2 acres of land; however, I would like to know how many acres will be available after the setbacks are taken into consideration. This would help us determine if supplemental feeding would be necessary. The amount of horse traffic on land also has an impact on the vegetation. Having two pastures, so the horse could be rotated every so often, would relieve some of this pressure. The Pendletons indicated that they have a very' good working relationship with a veterinarian, and with the family that sold the horse to them. They have given me every indication that the have the desire and the resources to take care of the horse, and are very anxious to comply with all regulations. Based on our visit and the inspection of the land, I do not see any reason to deny the permit. If the permit is granted, I would like lo visit the site late ne.xt summer to see if the pastures have maintained the vegetation. If the pressure from grazing and horse traffic reduces the vegetation too much, one could simply board the horse at another site. Since the horse is boarded part of the year anyway, this shouldn’t be a probfen.. When selecting a site for comnostlng the mnure, choose one that is not in the path of runoff, and preferably out of view from the public. If nece.'saiy', wr could .ilso look at diverting clean water runoff away from the pastures. I hope this letter meets your needs for this pennit process. Don’t hesitate to call me at 891-7704 If I can be of further assistance. 1 would N glad to provide information on such things as composting manure or horse management. UNIVERSIT/ OF MINNESOTA. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. AND MINNESOTA COUNTIES COOPERATING I L.. COUNCLMEETINQ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ DATE: February 9, 1998 Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer's Report Rem Description: Sanitary Sewer Grant for I & I Rehabilitation The Metropolitan Environmental Services is offering matching grants for correction of inflow and infiltration problems in sanitary sewers. The City of Orono has a significant I & I problem because of high groundwater and sewers near Lake Minnetonka. This > the second round of grants available. The City obtained a grant during the first round in 1996. Completion of the work for this lirst grant is substantially complete. Televising and manhole and pipe rehabilitation was completed in the Saga Hill area under the first grant. The intent of the MCES is to offer this program every two years. This application will be for work to be completed during 1998 and 1999 with the next grant application anticipated for the year 2000. Work in the Casco Point and the area between Navarre and Tonka Bay is being proposed for this grant application. This is a 50% matching grant program. The proposed program for the next two years is for $60,000 to be spent on manhole and pipe rehabilitation and $20,000 programmed for manhole and pipe inspection. This results in a required City contribution of $20,000 per year for the next two years, total City amount of $40,000. There are funds appropriated in the 1998 budget for this work and continued budgeting of this money will be necessary in 1999. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve resolution authorizing the submittal of an I/I reduction grant from the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services. r m A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR AN I/I REDUCTION LOAN OR GRANT TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (MCES) WHEREAS, the city of Orono currently experiences substantial infiltration and inflow (I/I) into its sanitary sewer system; and WHEREAS, Orono has initiated, in recent years, a comprehensive program to reduce I/I, and efforts. WHEREAS, liie MCES is offering a program of loans and grants for I/I reduction NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council does hereby authorize the submittal of an I/I reduction loan or grant application to MC^ and also does hereby authorize Gregory A. Gappa, Director of Public Services, and Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator, to serve as subject matter contacts related to the grant. Adopted by the City Council this 9th day of February, 1998. ATTEST: Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk 1 i COUNCIL MEET1NQ PEB 9 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTIONciTY OF ORONO DATE: February 5,1998 ITEM NO; ^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Hem DMcriplion: Lease Agreements with US West for PCS Antennas on the Navane Water Tower and the Highway 12 Water Tower The City and US West have reached agreement on the terms of lease agreements to enable US West to locate PCS antenna on both the Navarre water tower and the Highway 12 water tower. The annual lease amount is $12,000 for each tower. A draft form of the lease is attached for Council review. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve lease agreements with US West for the installation of PCS „n the Navarre water lower and the Highway 12 water tower, with annual lease rates of $ 12 000 for each lower; and to authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to sign the final lease agreements IhnhA* te: '-*ak ^ « «. ' i r DRAFT SITE LEASE AGREEMENT THIS SITE LEASE AGREEMENT ("Lease"), made this-----day of 199 between City of Orono ("Landlord"), and U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS WIRELESS GROUP, a division of U S WEST Communications, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Colorado ("Tenant"). For good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows: 1.t.4»ased Property and Premises. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Lease, Landlord hereby leases to Tenant and Tenant leases from Landlord certain space on Landlord’s north water tower (hereinafter referred to as the "Tower" or the "Structure"), and space adjacent to the Tower, subject to any and all existing easements located , (collectively referred to as the "Premises") together with a non­ exclusive easement for reasonable access to Landlord’s property and for adequate utility services, including sources of electric and telephone facilities on Landlord s property located at 2700 Kelley Parkway, Orono, Minnesota (the "Property") on a non­ exclusive basis. The Properly is legally described on Exhibit A.attached hereto. The Premises on which antennas, connecting cables and appurtenances will be attached and located, and on which an equipment shelter will be located, the exact location of each to be reasonably approved by the Landlord, are described on Exhibit B_attached hereto. The installation detail of the antennas, connecting cables and appurtenances, and of the equipment shelter/cabinets is described in Exhibit_C attached hereto. Exhibits A, B and C are made a part hereof. 2.Rent. (a) Amount. Adjustments. As a consideration for this Lease and in consideration of Tenant’s intention to install no more than 6 antennas. Tenant shall pay Landlord an annual rent in the amount of S^2,000.0 ^r the initial year, which shall be increased each year on January 1, commencing January 1,1999, by the greater of: (a) five percent (5%) of the previous year ’s annualized rental, or (b) by an amount equal to the increase in the Consumer Price Index ("CPI"). The CPI shall mean the "Consumer Price Index - for All Urban Consumers, All Cities, All Items (1982-84=100)" as published by the United States Department of Labor Statistics, or if such index shall be discontinued, the successor index, or if there shall be no successor index, such comparable index as mutually agreed upon by the parties. To determine the annual rental increase to be paid by Tenant under a CPI adjuster, the annualized rental for the previous year shall be multiplied by a percentage figure, computed from a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the CPI for the third quarter of the preceding year and the denominator of which shall be the CPI for the corresponding quarter of one year earlier. Such fraction shall be converted to a percentage equivalent. The resulting percentage figure shall be multiplied by the previous year ’s rent (annualized for the first year, see Paragraph 4 below). 082/22148474 11/14/97 (b) Time of Payment, Taxes. Landlord shall communicate all rental increases to the Tenant in writing by the preceding December 1 of each year. The annual rental shall be paid before January 1 of each year. For the first year, the rental shall be pro rated through December 31 and shall be paid to Landlord in full at the time Lease is executed. If the Tenant does not meet the requirements referenced in Subparagraph 3(a) below by March 15, 1998, and Tenant has diligently pursued such requirements, Landlord shall refund to the Tenant all rental payments made by Tenant and this Lease shall terminate. In addition to the annual rental. Tenant agrees to timely pay its pro rata share of any taxes or payment in lieu of taxes required as a result of this Lease. (c) If this Lease is terminated at any time other than on the last day of a month. Rent shall be prorated, based on a thirty day month, as of the date of termination, and in the event of termination for any reason other than nonpayment of Rent, or Tenant’s default, all prepaid Rent shall be refunded to Tenant. 3. Governmental Approval Contingency. (a) Tenant Application. Tenant’s right to use the Leased Premises is expressly made contingent upon its obtaining all the certificates, permits, zoning and other approvals that may be required by any federal, state or local authority. This shall include the engineering study specified in Subparagraph 3(b) below on the Structure to be conducted at Tenant’s expense. Landlord shall cooperate with Tenant in its efforts to obtain and retain such approvals and shall take no action which would adversely affect the status of the Leased Premises with respect to the Tenant’s proposed use thereof. (b) Interference and Engineering Study. Before obtaining a building permit. Tenant must pay its share for the reasonable cost of (i) a radio frequency interference study carried out by an independent and qualified professional selected by the Landlord showing that Tenant’s intended use will not interfere with any existing communications facilities and (ii) an engineering study showing that the Structure is able to support the Tenant’s Communications Facilities, as defined in Subparagraph 5(b), without prejudice to the City’s use of the Structure. If the study finds that there is a potential for interference that cannot be reasonably remedied or for prejudice to the Structure, Landlord or Tenant may terminate this Lease immediately and Landlord shall refund the initial rental to Tenant. (c) Non-approval . In the event that any application necessary under Subparagraph 3(a) above is finally rejected or any certificate, permit, license, or approval issued to Tenant is cancelled, expires, lapses, or is otherwise withdrawn or terminated by governmental authority so that Tenant, in its sole discretion, will be unable to use the Premises for its intended purposes. Tenant shall have the right to terminate this Lease and be reimbursed for the rental payment if made pursuant to Subparagraph 2(b) above. Notice of Tenant’s exercise of its right to terminate shall be given to Landlord in writing by certified mail, return receipt requested, and shall be effective upon 082/22 14«474 II/I4/V7 uillnfeuuLjn'w*- r»-Mi m iitiif-r rt-iT i 4. 5. receipt of such notice by Landlord as evidenced by the return receipt. Except as required under Paragraph 10 and Subparagraph 13(d) below, upon such termination, this Lease shall become null and void and the parties shall have no further obligations to each other. Term and Renewals. The term of this Lease shall be five years, commencing on January 1, 1998 (the "Commencement Date") and ending on December 31, 2002. The Commencement Date may be extended until the equipment listed in Exhibit C is installed. Tenant shall have the right to extend this Lease for three additional five year terms ("Renewal Term"). This Lease shall terminate automatically fifteen years from the termination date of the initial term. The Renewal Term shall be on the same terms and conditions as set forth herein except for rental adjustments as provided in Paragraph 2, Rent, above. Tenant shall have elected to renew this Lease for a renewal term unless it gives Landlord written notice of its intention not to renew at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the term, commencing on January 1 following the expiration date of the Initial Term or of any subsequent Renewal Term. Tenant^s Use. (a) User Priority . Tenant agrees that the following priorities of use, in descending order, shall apply in the event of communication interference or other conflict while this Lease is in effect, and Tenant’s use shall be subordinate accordingly: 1. 2. 3. 4. Landlord; Public safety agencies, including law enibrcement, fire, and ambulance services, that are not part of the Landlord; Other governmental agencies where use is not related to public safety; and Government-regulated entities including "Tenant" whose antennae offer a service to the general public for a fee, in a manner similar to a public utility, such as long distance and cellular telephone, not including radio or television broadcasters. (b) Purposes . Subject to the terms of this Lease, the Premises may be used by Tenant solely for the purposes of installing, removing, maintaining, and operating the Communications Facilities in accordance with Exhibit "B" including antennas, subject to such modification and alterations as may result from changes or improvements in technology or as maybe necessary to conduct business (collectively the "Communications Facility") and in accordance with the transmi.-'don and reception of wireless communication signals authorized for use by Tenant by the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC"). Tenant shall use the Premises only for the purpose of installing, maintaining, and operating a Landlord-approved communications antenna facility, equipment, cabinets and an accessory building, and uses incidental thereto for providing radio and wireless telecommunication services which Tenant is 082/22148474 11/14/97 r % legally authorized to provide to the public. This use shall be non-exclusive, and Landlord specifically reserves the right to allow the Landlord ’s Property and the Tow - '' be used by other parties and to make additions, deletions, or modifications to its own facilities on the Property and the Tower. Tenant shall comply with all applicable ordinances, statutes and regulations of local, state and federal government agencies. Tenant, its agents and contractors, are hereby granted the right, at its sole cost and expense to enter upon the Property and conduct such studies as Tenant deems necessary to determine the Property ’s suitability for Tenant ’s intended use. These studies may include surveys, soil tests, enviionmental evaluations, radio wave propagation measures, field strength tests and such other analyses and studies as Tenant deems necessary or desirable. (r) Construction. The placement of the equipment shelter and the manner in which the antennas are attached to the Tower shall be subject to the prior approval of the Landlord, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. Tenant shall bear a prorated share of the cost of any additions to the Tower necessary to enable the Tower to accommodate the location of antennas and appurtenances to the Tower. Jeraxni may erect and operate a communications antenna facility in accordance with Exhibit C. Any damage done to the premises during installation shall be repaired at Tenant s expense within 30 days after written notification of the damage. (d) Pmrftss for Additional Antennas . If Tenant seeks to increase the number of nntennas beyond m it must first pay for an evaluation cairicd oat by a qualified professional, retained by Landlord demonstrating that (i) each additional antenna will not interfere with existing antennas or with proposed antennas with a higher priority and that (ii) the Tower can structurally support the additional antennas. The cost ot each evaluation must be paid by the Tenant within 30 days after receiving written notice of the cost. Landlord consent is required for installation of additional antennas, such consent will not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed, taking into consideiation safety, adequate space on the Tower to accommodate additional antennas, and the structural capacity and integrity of the Tower. If Landlord consents, the parties will negotiate the amount of additional rental for the antennas. (e) Notice of Rppnir hv Landlord Landlord agrees to give reasonable advance notice of any major repair or maintenance activities related to Tower operations. In the case of an emergency, notification is not required; however. Tenant will be notified as soon as possible of a recognized emergency. In the event that use of the Tower for water service, or use of the Tower to perform any necessary maintenance or repair is interrupted or made impractical because of Tenant ’s antenna usage on the Tower, the City may interrupt Tenant ’s use of the Premises as reasonably necessary to prevent interruption of water service or interruption of maintenance and repair of tne 032/22148474 11/14/97 Tower. The City will use its best efforts to prevent or minimize interruptions to Tenant’s use. (f) Operation. Tenant shall have the right, at its sole cost and expense, to operate and maintain the Tenant’s Facilities on the Leased Premises. Tenant agrees to install and operate equipment (Tenant’s "Facilities" or "Communications Facilities") in compliance with all of Landlord’s Technical Site Standards set forth on Exhibit D alt FCC rules and regulations, and good engineering practices. Tenant’s installation of all Communication Facilities shall be done according to plans approved by Landlord, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Any damage done by Tenant to the Leased Premises or other Landlord property including the Tower during operations, shall be repaired at Tenant’s expense within 30 days after notification of damage. The Communication Facilities shall remain the exclusive property of the Tenant. (g) Maintenance. Improvement Expenses. All modifications to the Premises and all improvements made for Tenant’s benefit shall be at the Tenant’s expense and such improvements, including antenna, facilities and equipment, shall be maintained in a good state of repair, at least equal to* the standard of maintenance of the Landlord’s facilities on or adjacent to the Premises, and secured by Tenant. If Tenant’s Antenna Facilities are mounted on the Structure they shall, at all times, be painted, at Tenant’s expense, the same color as the Structure. (h) Updates. Before the Tenant may update the Antenna Facilities, Tenant must notify and provide a detailed proposal to Landlord. Tenant shall submit to Landlord a detailed proposal for any such update of facilities and any other information reasonably requested by Land.ord of such requested update, including but not limited to a technical study, carried out at Tenant’s expense. Landlord may not unreasonably withhold, delay or condition approval taking into consideration safety, availability of adequate space on the Tower, and the structural integrity of the Tower. (i) • Drawings. Umless identical to previous specifications or drawings submitted to Landlord, Tenant shall provide Landlord with as-built drawings of the equipment and improvements installed on the Premises, which show the actual location of all Antenna Facilities. Said drawings shall be accompanied by a complete and detailed inventory of all equipment, personal property, and Antenna Facilities actually placed on the Premises. (j) No Interference. Tenant shall, at its own expense, maintain any equipment on or attached to the Property and Premises in a safe condition, in good repair and in a manner suitable to Landlord so as not to conflict with the use of the Property and Tower by Landlord. Tenant shall not unreasonably interfere with the operations of any prior tenant using the Property and Tower and shall not interfere with the working use of the Tower. 082/22148474 11/14/97 6. 7. 8. 9. (k) Access. Tenant, at all times during this Lease, shall have access 24 hours a day, seven (7) days a week to the ground portion of the Leased Premises in order to install, operate, and maintain its Communication Facilities, including additional rights of access, ingress and egress to and from the Leased Premises. Tenant shall have access to the Structure only with the approval of Landlord. Tenant shall request access to the Structure twenty-four (24) hours in advance, except in an emergency, and Landlord’s approval thereof shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed or conditioned. In the event it is necessary for Tenant to have access to the Structure at some time other than the normal working hours of Landlord, Landlord may charge Tenant for whatever reasonable expense, including employees wages, that Landlord may incur in providing such access to Tenant. (1) Payment of Utilities. Tenant shall separately meter charges for the consumption of electricity and other utilities associated with its use of the Leased Premises and shall promptly pay all costs associated therewith. Emereencv Facilities. In the event of a natural or man made disaster, in order to ^ protect the health, welfare, and safety of the community. Tenant may erect additional antenna facilities and install additional equipment on a temporary basis on the Leased Premises to assure continuation of service. Such temporary operation shall not exceed 90 days unless Tenant obtains written approval from the Landlord, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Additional Maintenance Expenses. Upon notice from Landlord, Tenant shall promptly pay to Landlord all additional Landlord expenses incurred in maintaining the Premises and Property, including painting or other maintenance of the Tower, that are caused by Tenant’s occupancy of the Premises and Property. Advances in Technology. As consideration for the Landlord’s agreement to allow extensions of the lease for a total of fifteen years beyond the original term, the Landlord may require that as technology advances and improved antennas are developed which are routinely used by Tenant in Tenant’s business, the replacement of existing antennas with the improved antennas if the new antennas are more aesthetically pleasing or otherwise foster a public purpose, as long ^ the installation and use of the improved antennas are practical and technically feasible ana offers equivalent performance at this location. Additional Buildings. Tenant acknowledges that Landlord may permit additional buildings to be constructed on the Property described in Exhibit A. At such Ume as this may occur. Tenant will permit said buildings to be placed immediately adjacent to Tenant’s cabinet and will allow "attachments" to its building so as to g»ve the appearance that all buildings are a connected facility. Said attachments will be made 082/22148474 11/14/97 r .'•N at no cost to Tenant and will not compromise either access to or the structural integrity or interfere with the utility of Tenant ’s building. 10. Defense and Indemnification. (a) General . Tenant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Landlord and its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and representatives, from and against any and all claims, costs, losses, expenses, demands, actions, or causes of action, including reasonable attorneys ’ fees and other costs and expenses of litigation, which may be asserted against or incurred by Landlord or for which Landlord may be liable in the performance of this Lease, except those which arise from the negligence, willful misconduct, or other fault of Landlord. Tenant shall defend all claims arising out of the installation, operation, use, maintenance, repair, removal, or presence of Tenant ’s Antenna Facilities, equipment and related facilities on the Leased Premises. (b) Hazardous Materials. Tenant agrees that it will not use, generate, store or dispose of any hazardous material on, under, about or within the Property in violation of any law or regulation. Without limiting the scope of Subparagraph 10(a) above. Tenant will be solely responsible for and will defend, indemnify, and hold Landlord, its agents, and employees harmless from and against any and all claims, costs, and liabilities, including attorney ’s fees and costs, arising out of or in connection with the cleanup or restoration of the Premises and Property resulting from Tenant ’s use of Hazardous Materials. For purposes of the Lease, "Hazardous Materials" shall be interpreted broadly and specifically includes, without limitation, asbestos, fuel, batteries or any hazardous substance, waste, or materials as defined in any federal, state, or local environmental or safety law or regulations including, but not limited to, CERCLA. (c) Tenant ’s Warranty . Tenant represents and warrants that its use of the Property and Premises will not generate and Tenant will not store or dispose of on the Property or Premises, nor transport to or over the Property or Premises, any Hazardous Materials, unless Tenant specifically informs Landlord thereof in writing twenty-four hours prior to such storage, disposal or transport, or otherwise as soon as Tenant becomes aware of the existence of Hazardous Materials on the Property or Premises. The obligations of this Paragraph 10 shall survive the expiration or other termination of this Lease. (d) Landlords Warranty Landlord wairants that it has no knowledge of any hazardous materials which arc stored or disposed of on the property inconsistently with any state or federal law as of the date of this lease. 11. Insurance. 082/2214S474 11/14/97 (a) Workers* Compensation. The Tenant must maintain Workers Compensation by disease, each employee. (b) r.p.np.ral Liabilit/. The Tenant must maintain-an occurrence form comprehensive general liability coverage. Such coverage shall include, but not be limited to, bodily injury, property damage-broad form, and personal injury, for the hazards of Premises/Operation, broad form contractual and independent contractors. The Tenant must maintain aforementioned general liability coverage with limits of liability not less than $1,000,000 each occurrence; $1,000,000 personal; $2,000,000 general aggregate, and $2,000,000 products and completed operations aggregate.These limits may be satisfied by the general liability coverage or in combination with an umbrella or excess liability policy, provided coverages afforded by the umbrella or excess policy are no less than the underlying general liability coverages. Tenant will maintain Completed Operations coverage for a minimum of two years after the construction is completed. (C) Antnmnhile l.iabilitv. The Tenant must carry Automobile Liability coverage. Coverage shall afford total liability limits for Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability in the amount of $1,000,000 per acc.dent. The liability limits may be afforded under the Commercial Policy, or in combination with an Umbrella or Excess Liability Policy provided coverages afforded by the Umbrella Excess Policy are no less than the underlying Commercial Auto Liability coverage. Coverage shall be provided for Bodily Injury and Property Damage for the ownership, use, maintenance or operation of all owned, non-owned and hired automobiles. The Commercial Automobile Policy shall include at least statutory personal injury protection, uninsured motorists and underinsured motorists coverages. Failure to maintain the insurance as listed above will result in immediate termination of the Lease, and Tenant will be liable to the Landlord for 150% of the annual rent as called for in Paragraph 13(c). (d) Tpnnnt Property Insurance. The Tenant must keep in force during the term and any renewals of the Lease a policy covering damages to its properly at the Leased Premises. The amount of coverage shall be not less than 90% of the full replacement cost of the Communication Facility. 082/22148474 11/14/97 Hi; m 12. Adjustment to Insurance Coverage Limits. The coverage limits set forth herein shall be increased at the time of any Renewal Term by a minimum of the Consumer Price Index as calculated under Paragraph 2(a). If the increase would be less than 25% based on the consumer price index, the limits may be increased up to 25% based on the limits needed to provide adequate coverage. (8) i^ditional Insured - Certificate of Insurance. The Tenant shall provide, prior to tenancy, evidence of the required insurance in the form of a Certificate of Insurance issued by a company authorized to do business in the state of Minnesota, which includes all coverages required in this Paragraph 11. Tenant will name Landlord as an Additional Insured on the General Liability and Commercial Automobile Liability Policies. The Certificate(s) shall also provide the coverage may not be canceled, non- renewed, or materially changed without thirty (30) days prior written notice to Landlord. Waiver of Claims: Subrogation. Each of Landlord and Tenant hereby releases the other from any and all liability or responsibility to the other or anyone claiming through or under it by way of subrogation or otherwise for any loss or damage that may occur to the Property or any improvements thereto, or the Tower or any improvements thereto, or any property of such party therein, by reason of fire or any other cause which could be insured against under the terms of standard fire and extended coverage (all-risk) insurance policies, regardless of cause or origin, including lault or negligence of the other party hereto, or anyone for whom such party may be responsible. Each party shall cause each insurance policy obtained by it to state that the insurer waives all right of recovery by way of subrogation against either party hereto in connection with damage covered by such policy. The releases in this paragraph shall be effective whether the loss was actually covered by insurance. Tenant assumes all risk of loss or damage to Tenant’s property or leasehold improvements within the Property, including any loss or damage caused by water leakage, fire windstorm, explosion, theft, act of any other tenant, or other cause. Landlord shall not be liable to Tenant, or its employees, for loss or damage to any property in or at the Property, the Premises, or the Tower. Damage or Destruction. If the Premises is destroyed or damaged, without contributory fault of the Tenant or its agents, so as, in the reasonable judgement of the Tenant, to hinder its effective use of the Antenna Facilities(definition?), Tenant may elect to terminate this Lease upon 30 days’ written notice to Landlord. In the event Tenant elects to terminate the Lease, Tenant shall be entitled to reimbursement of prepaid rent covering the period subsequent to the date of damage to or destruction of the Leased Premises. 13. Lease Termination. 082/22148474 11/14/97 W Events of Terminaliofi. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Lease may l« terminated without penalty or further liability upon sixty (60) days written notice to the other party as follows: (i) by e.iher party upon a default of any covenant or term hereof by the other party, which default is not cured within sixty (60) days of receipt of written notice of default to the other party (without, however, limiting any other rights of the parties pursuant to any other provisions hereoO; (ii) by Tenant for cause if it is unable to obtain or maintain any license permit or other governmental ..pnroval necessary for the construction and/or operation of the Antenna Facilities or Te.^'ant’s business; (iii) by Tenant for cause if the Leased Premises is or becomes unacceptable for technological reasons including without limitation shadowing or interference under Tenant s Antenna Facilities, design or engineering specifications or the communications systems to which the Antenna Facilities belong; by Landlord in the event that as the result of an independent study, paid for by Tenant, it is determined that the use of the Tower for water service is jeopardized because of antenna usage on the Tower; (v) by Landlord, upon 180 day’s prior written notice to Tenant if its Council decides, for any reason, to redevelop the Leased Premises in a manner inconsistent with continued use of the Leased Premises by Tenant and/or discontinue use of the Structure for all purposes; (vi) by Landlord if it determines that the Structure is structurally unsound, including, but not limited to, consideration of age of the Structure, damage or destruction of all or part of the Structure on the Leased Premises from any source or factors relating to condition of the Leased Premises; (vii) by Landlord if it determines that a potential user with a higher priority under Subparagraph 5(a) above cannot find another adequate location, or the Tenant’s Facilities unreasonably interfere with another user with a higher priority, regardless of whether or not such an interference was predicted in the initial interference study that was part of the application process and Tenant is unable to correct the interference within the sixty (60) day notice period. (viii) by Landlord if it reasonably determines that Tenant has failed to comply with applicable ordinances, or state or federal law, or any conditions attached to government approvals granted thereunder, after a public hearing before the Landlord’s Council. 082A22I4S474 11/14/97 r 14. (b) Notice of Termination. The parties shall give Notice of Termination in writing by certified mail, return receipt requested. Such Notice shall be effective upon receipt as evidenced by the return receipt, or such later date as stated in the Notice. Except as otherwise provided herein, all rentals paid for the Lease prior to said termination date shall be retained by Landlord. (c) Tenant’s Liability for Early Termination. If Tenant terminates this Lease other than of right as provided in this Lease, Tenant shall pay to Landlord as liquidated damages for early termination, 150% of the annual rent for the year in which Tenant terminates, unless Tenant terminates during the last year of any Term under Paragraph 3 and Tenant has paid the annual rental for that year. Landlord agrees that liquidated damages under this paragraph shall be Landlord’s sole remedy for Tenant’s early termination. (d) Site Restoration. Upon termination of this Lease, Tenant shall, within ninety (90) days thereof, remove all of its equipment from the Premises, and its transmission lines and antennas from the Tower. Tenant, at its expense, agrees to return the property and Premises including the Tower surface where Tenant’s Communication Facilities have been to their original condition, ordinary wear and tear excepted. If Tenant fails to remove its property within such ninety-day period. Landlord shall have the right to remove the same and place it in storage. Tenant may notify Landlord that an entity or entities have an interest in the Communication Facilities and related equipment because of financing arrangements. If Landlord removes the Communication Facilities or related equipment. Landlord shall give written notice to the entities at the addresses provided by Tenant, if any, informing them that the Communication Facilities or related property have been removed and will be deemed abandoned if not claimed and the storage fees and other reasonable costs paid within ninety days. If the property is not claimed. Tenant shall pay Landlord’s storage, removal and moving costs. Any of Tenant’s property remaining on the Premises, the Tower or in storage, one hundred twenty (120) days after the expiration or the termination of this Lease shall become the property of Landlord free of any claim by tenant or any person claiming through tenant. Limitation of Landlord’s Liability. If Landlord terminates this Lease other than as of right as provided in this Lease, or Landlord causes interruption of the business of Tenant other than as of right as provided in this Lease, or for any other Landlord breach of this Lease, Landlord’s liability for damages to Tenant shall be limited to the actual and direct costs of equipment removal, relocation or repair, reimbursement of all prepaid rent and shall specifically exclude any recovery for value of the business of Tenant as a going concern, future expectation of profits, loss of business or profit or related damages to Tenant. In no event shall Landlord be liable for damages in excess 082/22148474 11/14/97 ' 15. of limits in State law on municipal liability. Nothing herein shall prevent Tenant from maintaining an action for injunctive or other equitable relief. Temporary Interruptions of Service. If Landlord determines that continued operation of the Communications Facilities would cause or contribute to an immediate threat to public health and/or safety (except for any issues associated with human exposure to radio frequency omissions, which is regulated by the federal government), Landlord may order tenant to discontinue its operation. Tenant shall immediately comply with such an order. Service shall be discontinued only for the period that the immediate threat exists. If Landlord does not give prior notice to Tenant, Landlord shall notify Tenant as soon as possible after its action and give its reason for taking the action. Landlord shall not be liable to Tenant or any other party for any interruption in Tenant’s service or interference with Tenant’s operation of its Antenna Facilities, except as may be caused by the willful misconduct of the Landlord, its employees or agents. If the discontinuance extends for a period greater than three days, either consecutively or cumulatively. Tenant shall have the right to terminate this Lease within its sole discretion for cause and without payment of any early termination fee or other damages.. 16. Tenant Interference. (a) With Structure. Tenant shall not interfere with Landlord ’s use of the Structure and agrees to cease all such actions which unreasonably and materially interfere with Landlord ’s use thereof no later than three business days after receipt of written notice of the interference from Landlord. In the event that Tenant s cessation of action is material to Tenant’s use of the Leased Premises and such cessation frustrates Tenant s use of the Leased Premises, within Tenant’s sole discretion. Tenant shall have the immediate right to terminate this Lease for cause and without payment of any early termination fee or other damages. (b) With Higher Priority Users and Pre-Existing Tenants. If Tenant’s Antenna Facilities cause impermissible interference with higher priority users as set forth in under Subparagraph 5(a) above or with pre-existing tenants. Tenant shall take all measures necessary to correct and eliminate the interference. If the interference cannot be eliminated within 24 hours after receiving Landlord ’s notice of the interference. Tenant shall immediately cease operating its Antenna Facilities and shall not reactivate operation, except intermittent operation for the purpose of testing, until the interference has been eliminated. If the interference cannot be eliminated within 30 days after Tenant received Landlord ’s written notice. Landlord or Tenant may at its option terminate this Lease immediately. It is further agreed that the Landlord in no way guarantees to Tenant non ­ interference to the operation of Tenant’s equipment; provided, however, that Landlord 082/22148474 11/14/97 1 will use its best efforts to notify other users of interference, and to coordinate elimination of interference among site users. If Tenant clearly demonstrates the primary cause of the interference to be the property of Landlord or another user, Landlord will notify the other user to eliminate the interference within 24 hours or cease using the equipment causing the interference. Prior to adding additional transmitter or receiver frequencies on the premises, Tenant agrees to notify the Landlord of the modified frequencies so that the Landlord can perform the necessary interference studies to insure that the modified frequencies will not cause harmful radio interference to other existing Tower leases. Tenant will be required to pay the reasonable costs for said study which will be performed by Landlord’s registered professional communications engineer. In the alternative. Tenant may perform the interference studies and submit the results to the City. However, the City, in its sole discretion, shall retain the right provided herein to submit the study results to its registered professional communications engineer for review at Tenant’s expense. (c) Interference Study - New Occupants. Upon written notice by Landlord that it has a bona fide request from any other party to lease an area including or in close proximity to the Leased Premises ("Leased Premises Area"), Tenant agrees to provide Landlord, within sixty (60) days, the radio frequencies currently in operation or to be operated in the future of each transmitter and receiver installed and operational by Tenant on the Leased Premises at the time of such request. Landlord shall then have an independent, registered professional engineer of Landlord’s choosing perform the necessary interference studies to determine if the new applicant’s frequencies will cause harmful radio interference to Tenant. Landlord shall require the new applicant to pay for such interference studies, unless the Landlord or other higher priority user requests the use. In that event, the Tenant and all other Tenants occupying the Leased Premises Area shall pay for the necessary interference studies, pro rata. (d) Interference - New Occupants. Landlord agrees that it will not grant a future lease in the Leased Premises Area to any party who is of equal or lower priority to Tenant, if such party’s use is reasonably anticipated to interfere with Tenant’s operation of its Antenna Facilities. Landlord agrees further that any future lease of the Property will prohibit a user of equal or lower priority from interfering with Tenant’s Antenna Facilities. Landlord agrees that it will require any subsequent occupants of the Leased Premises Area of equal or lower priority to Tenant to provide Tenant these same assurances against interference. Landlord shall have the obligation to eliminate any interference with the operations of Tenant caused by such subsequent occupants. If such interference is not eliminated, Tenant shall have the right to terminate this Lease or seek injunctive relief against the interfering occupant, at Tenant’s expense. If Tenant terminates this Lease because of such interference. Landlord shall reimburse all prepaid rent covering the period subsequent to the date of termination. 082/22148474 11/14/97 r • » 17. 18. 19. 20. Assignment and Sublettine. Tenant may not assign, or otherwise transfer all or any part of its interest in this Lease or in the Premises without the prior written consent of Landlord; provided, however, that Tenant may assign its interest to its parent company, any subsidiary or affiliate of it or its parent company or to any successor-in- interest or entity acquiring fifty-one percent (51%) or more of its stock or assets, subject to any financing Agreement upon written notice to Landlord, subject to the assignee assuming all of Tenant’s obligations herein, including but not limited to, those set forth above. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Lease, Tenant may assign, mortgage, pledge, hypothecate or otherwise transfer without consent its interest in this Lease to any financing entity, or agent on behalf of any financing entity to whom Tenant (i) has obligations for borrowed money or in respect of guaranties thereof, (ii) has obligations under or with respect to letters of credit, bankers acceptances and similar facilities or in respect of guaranties thereof. Utility Service . Tenant agrees to timely pay for and install all required utility services and meters. Payment for electric and/or telephone service for Tenant’s Antenna Facilities shall be Tenant’s responsibility without any adjustment to rent. The Landlord shall not be responsible for any damages which occur as a result of interruption of utility services. Installation of utility services are subject to City approval as to siting. Condemnation. In the event the whole of the Leased Premises is taken by eminent domain, this Lease shall terminate as of the date title to the Leased Premises vests in the condemning authority. In event a portion of the Leased Premises is taken by eminent domain, and such taking materially interferes with the ability of either party to meet its obligations or exercise its rights under this Lease, either party shall have the right to terminate this Lease as of said date of title transfer, by giving thirty (30) days’ written notice to the other party. In the event of any taking under the power of eminent domain. Tenant shall not be entitled to any portion of the reward paid for the taking and the Landlord shall receive full amount of such award. Tenant hereby expressly waives any right or claim to any portion thereof. Although all damages, whether awarded as compensation for diminution in value of the leasehold or to the fee of the Leased Premises, shall belong to Landlord, Tenant shall have the right to claim and recover from the condemning authority, but not from Landlord, such compensation as may be separately awarded or recoverable by Tenant on account of any and all damage to Tenant’s business and Tenant Facilities and any costs or expenses incurred by Tenant in moving/removing its equipment, personal property. Antenna Facilities, and leasehold improvements and Tenant shall receive the full amount of such reward. Default. Except as expressly limited hereby. Landlord and Tenant shall have such remedies for the default of the other party hereto as may be provided at law or equity 082/22148474 11/14/97 i: i 1 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. following written notice of such default and failure to cure the same within thirty (30) days. Notices. All notices hereunder must be in writing and shall be deemed validly given if delivered personally or if sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed as follows (or any other address that the party to be notified may have designated to the sender by like notice): If to Landlord, to: City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 If to Tenant, to:U S WEST Communications, Inc. c/o U S WEST Business Resources, Inc. 188 Inverness Drive West, Suite 420 Englewood, Colorado 80112 with a copy to:US WEST Communications Wireless Group 426 North Fairview Avenue, Room 101 St. Paul, Minnesota 55104 Attn: Regional Real Estate Manager Authority. Each of the individuals executing this Lease on behalf of the Tenant or the Landlord represents to the other party that such individual is authorized to do so by requisite action of the party to this Lease. Binding Effect. This Lease shall run with the Leased Premises. This Lease shall extend to and bind the heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Complete Lease: Amendments. This Lease constitutes the entire agreement and understanding of the parties and supersedes all offers, negotiations, and other agreements of any kind. There are no representations or understandings of any kind not set forth herein. Any modification of or amendment to this Lease must be in writing and executed by both parties. Governing Law. This Lease shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 26. Limitation of Liability. Nothing in the Lease shall be deemed a waiver of any limitation of liability or defenses under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 or any other provision of law. 082/22148474 11/14/97 ilfT i ilT~iriM lllll l■llll .rWaa-BTMH- I it — ••'•V 27. Severability . If any term of this Lease is found to be void or invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining terms of this Lease, which shall continue in full force and effect. 28. Memorandum . Upon request by either party, the parties agree to promptly execute and deliver a recordable Memorandum of this Lease in a form acceptable to both parties which may be recorded by the party requesting the Memorandum of Lease. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and affixed their respective seals the day and year first above written. LANDLORD:CITY OF ORONO By: Its Mayor By: Its City Administrator TENANT:U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS WIRELESS GROUP, a division of U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS, INC. By; U S WEST Communications, Inc, BY: ITS; Attorney in Fact STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF ) )SS ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______199____by day of ., the Mayor and City Manager respectively of the City of corporation. ., on behalf of the Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS 082/22148474 11/14/97 i COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ---------199 ____by day of WEST COMMUNICATIONS WIRELESS GROUP ,the on behalf of U S Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF ) SS ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ---------- 199 ___ by WEST Communications, Inc. ,the , on behalf of U S Notary Public «AWPOOCS\FORMSUrm£AS.ACR 082/22148474 11/14/97 I I « m COUNCIL MEETING FEB 9 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF 0R0^;0 DATE: January 26,1998 ITEM NO.1 Department Approval: Name Greg Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Public Works Item Description: Seasonal Weight Restrictions Attached is a list of the recommended axle weight limit restrictions for each City street. The streets will be posted from March 15 through May 15, 1998. The normal length of time that restrictions are in effect is related to weather conditions. In the past several years, we have allowed solid waste haulers to continue their normal operations, limiting them to gross weight on any single axle of seven tons or 14,000 pounds. If a street shows signs of severe breakup, we will limit the solid waste haulers to smaller vehicles. An axle limit exemption for public service vehicles to be used during emergency situations has also been included in this resolution. I have drafted a resolution for the 1998 weight limits for Council approval. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Proposed Motion: Moved by __, seconded by __, that Council adopt Resolution # establishing the 1998 Weight Limits for City streets from March 15 through May 15, 1998. Ayes nays X:\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\CAROLEUACK\WEIGHT.MEM - - ~ M I ~aii The City of Orono ordains that axle weight limits are restricted on the following streets in the City of Orono from March 15,1998 through May 15,1998 in accordance with regulations as provided in Chapter 6.11 of the Orono Municipal Code. An exemption is provided for refuse collection vehicles to exceed the listed limits except no refuse collections vehicles shall be operated during the seasonal restriction time where the gross weight on any single axle exceeds 14,000 lbs. The City also reserves the right to restrict refuse collection vehicles to the posted weight limits should conditions warrant. An axle limit exemption to public service vehicles namely Northern States Power Company, Wright- Hennepin Cooperative, Minnegasco, U.S. West Communication, Triax Cable and septic tank service companies that when responding to an emergency are hereby exempt from posted axle weight limit restrictions on City streets. An emergency response shall include but not be limited to power outages, gas leaks, emergency cummunication, line down or severed, etc. The following streets are limited to four ton axle limits: Arbor Street Cherry Place Elm Lane Baldur Park Road Chevy Chase Drive Elm Street Barrett Avenue Chippewa Lane Elmwood Avenue Bayview Place Concordia Street Ethel Avenue Bederwood Drive Corral Road Eagerness Point Road Birch Lane Country Club Road Fairview Cottage Blaine Avenue Crestview Avenue Farview Lane Bohn’s Point Lane Crystal Avenue Femdale Green Bohn's Point Road Crystal Bay Road Femdale Road West Brackett's Point Road Crystal Place Forest Arms Lane Briar Street Cygnet Place Forest Lake Drive Brown Road, North Dahl Road Forest Lake Landing Carman Road Dakota Avenue Fox Ridge Road Carman Street Dickenson Street Fox Street (S. Brown to Caroline Avenue Dickenson Street Alleys Orono Orchard ) Casco Avenue Dickey Lake Drive Fox Street (S. Brown Casco Circle Dunwoody Avenue to Willow Drive) Casco Cove Eastlake Street Fox Street (#84 to Casco Point Road East Long Lake Road Willow Drive) Cherry Avenue Eileen Street Frederick Street Page 1 of3 r Glendale Avenue North Arm Drive Watertown Road Grandview Avenue North Arm Lane Wear Lane North Hackberry Hill North Femdale Road Wear Circle Hanlon Avenue Northern Avenue Webb Street Heritage Drive Oak Street Webber Hills Road Heritage Lane Old Beach Road West Femdale Road High Lane Old Long Lake Road West Lafayette Road Highwood Road Olive Avenue Westlake Street Hunter Drive Orchard Beach Place Wildhurst Trail Ivy Place Orchard Park Road Willow Drive (Dickey Keene Avenue Orono Lane Lake Dr. to Sixth Kelly Avenue Orono Orchard Road Avenue) Kenwood Way Orono Townline Road Willow Drive (Sixth Lakeview Avenue Park Avenue Avenue to Medina Lafayette Ridge Court Park Drive City limits) Lakeview Terrace Park Lane Willow Drive (from Leaf Street Partenwood Road South Brown Road Lilac Lane Pheasant Lawn Road to Fox Street) Linden Avenue Prospect Avenue Willowbrook Road Linden Lane Railroad Avenue Windjammer Lane Livingston Avenue Rest Point Circle Woodhill Avenue Loma Linda Avenue Rest Point Lane Long Lake Boulevard Russell Avenue Lydiard Avenue Shevlin Drive Lydiard Circle Smith Avenue Lyman Avenue Spates Avenue Lyric Avenue Spring Hill Road M^ple Lane Spruce Place Maple Place Starkey Road Mapleridge Lane Stubbs Bay Road Minnetonka Avenue Tamarack Drive Minnetonka Highlands Togo Road Minnie Avenue Tonka Avenue Myrtlewood Road Tumham Road Navarre Avenue Union Cemetery Road Navarre Lane Vine Place Page 2 of 3 I i i 9 ! li - The following are nine-ton axle limit: Kelley Parkway Old Crystal Bay Road McCulley Road Tonkaview Lane Willow Drive (from Watertown Road to Long Lake) Willow Drive (from Fox Street to Watertown Road) Willow Drive (from Highway 12 375' north to Often Brothers driveway) Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono. Minnesota at a regular meeting held February 9, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 3 of 3 ~rr“<rrtiriii-iriinrfcrin mi ■>!!< I r i • - llII COUNCILMEETINQ FEB 9 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY or OROMO DATE: February 4, 1998 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Greg Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: 1 Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Bid Award - Equipment & Materials Bid 1998 The City of Orono advertised for two successive weeks for street materials and equipment rental, with bid opening at 10:00 A.M. Friday, January 30, 1998. The enclosed tabulation contains a complete accounting of all bids. For comparison purposes I have also included a copy of the 1997 bid tabulation. The accepted low bids for materials are determined by availability and location of materials. Traveling distance to a supplier is considered a cost factor when determining a low bid. When renting equipment with an operator, we are guided by the type, size of equipment, and an hourly rate. It is possible to award the low bid to more than one contractor when considering materials and equipment. In order to stimulate enthusiasm for the following year s work, we make sure to divide the work accordingly among these low bidders. In the event the low bidder is not available, the City reserves the right to purchase from the next alternate. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: I recommend that the City Council accept the bids as presented for the calendar year 1998. i n ' "V CITY OF ORONO 1998 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE CLASS 5 GRAVEL TON PIT DEL. CLASS 5 GRAVEL TON RECYCLED PIT DEL. FA-2 CLASS C (SEAL COAT) TON PIT DEL. FA-1 (WINTER SAND) TON PIT DEL. Wm Mueller & Sons 3.39 7.79 4.28 8.68 7.26*11.66 2.68 7.08 Barton Sand & Gravel Co.3.62 6.12*4.21* 6.71*3.30 5.50 Midwest Asphalt Corp.5.27 7.95 Fischer Aggregates, Inc.3.09*6.19 7.56 10.76*1.92*5.12* Buffalo Bituminous 3.14 4.50 ♦ Denotes low bid CITY OF ORONO 1998 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE 11/2" CLEAN CRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. 1 1/2" MINUS CRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. 3/4" CLEAN CRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. I 3/4" MINUS U CRUSHED LIMESTONE I TON i PIT DEL. MC 30,70, 250, 800 CRS- 1 & 2 RC 250-800 GALLON GALLON GALLON PLANT DEL. & PLACED • PLANT DEL. & PLACED PLANT DEL. & PLACED ------------------------------------------------- Wm Mueller & Sons 1.86* Buffalo Bituminous 1.00*1 ♦ Denotes low bid CITY OF ORONO 1998 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE PLANT 2331 AC TON DELIVERED PLACED PLANT 2331 MC TON DELIVERED PLACED Wm Mueller & Sons 18.97*23.67 27.17 Midwest Asphalt 25.00 26.55 26.55* Commercial Asphalt 23.00 Buffalo Bituminous 19.50 23.50*27.00 PLANT 2341 AC TON DELIVERED PLACED PLANT 2341 MC TON DELIVERED PLACED Wm Mueller & Sons 18.97*23.67 27.17 Midwest Asphalt 25.00 26.55 26.55* Commercial Asphalt 23.00 Buffalo Bituminous 19.50 23.50*27.00 ♦ Denotes low bid ■'1 .rmn ftfN* i -» CITY OF ORONO 1998 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPN ENT RENTAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER lOURLY RATE -------»-l /■' ■1MOD. FINE MIX 2341 AC TON PLANT DEL. PLACED MOD. FINE MIX 2341 MC TON PLANT DEL. PLACED 50-50 2341 AC/MC TON PLANT DEL. PLACED Wm Mueller & Sons 19.91*24.61*28.11 Midwest Asphalt 26.00 28.00 28.00* Commercial Asphalt 24.10 Buffalo Bituminous 20.65 24.65 28.00* 1 *.p' * Denotes low bid CITY OF ORONO 1998 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE * Denotes low bid ALL PRICES TO 12" CMP 15" CMP 18" CMP 24" CMP 24" CMP 36" CMP 48" CMP 60" CMP BE DELIVERED 16 GAUGE 16 GAUGE 16 GAUGE 14 GAUGE 16 GAUGE 14 GAUGE 12 GAUGE 10 GAUGE Johnston Fargo 9.00 10.00 12.00 22.00 17.00 32.00 60.00 90.00 All Steel Products 8.30 10.45 12.50 21.00 16.60 31.00 56.00 87.00 Contech 7.75*9.75*11.75*19.50*15.75*29.75* 54.50*85.50* ALL PRICES TO BE DELIVERED 12" APRON 15" APRON 18" APRON 24- apron 36" APRON 48" APRON 60" APRON Johnston Fargo 44.00 54.00 70.00 106.00 310.00 836.00 1460.00 All Steel Products 39.00 49.00 64.50 96.00 260.00*690.00 1105.00* Contech 38.25*48.50*63.00* 94.50* 280.00 670.00*1175.00 ALL PRICES TO 12"15"18"24"36"0060" BE DELIVERED BAND BAND BAND BAND BAND BAND BAND Johnston Fargo 9.00 10.00*12.00*17.00*32.00*60.00*90.00* All Steel Products 8.30*11.30 13.50 22.00 45.00 85.00 180.00 Contech 15.00 19.50 23.50 31.50 59.50 109.00 171.00 11 CITY OF ORONO 1998 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE TRUCK RENTAL PER HOUR CY RATE TRUCK RENTAL PER HOUR CY RATE TRUCK RENTAL PER HOUR CY RATE TRUCK R PER CY £NTAL 1 HOUR RATE Schoening Excavating 12 42.00* ♦ Denotes low bid X 1 CITY OF ORONO 1998 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE BACKHOE PER HOUR BACKHOE PER HOUR BACKHOE PER HOUR CY RATE CY RATE CY RATE Schoening Excavating 1/2 60.00*3/4 70.00* -- 3/4 TON PICKUP W/8 PLOW PER HOUR Schoening Excavating 45.00/hr* WHEEL LOADER PER HOUR WHEEL LOADER PER HOUR WHEEL LOADER PER HOUR CY RATE CY RATE CY RATE Schoening Excavating 2 60.00*3 65.00* * Denotes low bid ■ l' CITY OF ORONO 1997 BID TAiJULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE ♦ Denotes low bid , * CLASS 5 GRAVEL TON PIT DEL. CLASS 5 GRAVEL TON RECYCLED PIT DEL. FA-2 CLASS C (SEAL COAT) TON PIT DEL. F. (WINTO T PIT A-1 IK SAND) ON DEL. Wm Mueller & Sons 3.32 7.32 7.26 11.26 2.04 6.04 Barton Sand & Gravel Co.3.46 5.91* 4.21*6.71*3.04 5.43 1 Midwest Asphalt Corp.4.95 7.55 Fischer Aggregates, Inc.2.98 6.08 6.92*10.02*1.81*4.91* 1 1 Buffalo Bituminous 2.75*6.55 5.00 8.50 CITY OF ORONO 1997 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE I 1/2" CLEAN CRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. 1 1/2* MINUS CRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. 3/4" CLEAN CRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. 3/4* MINUS CRUSHED LIMESTONE TON PIT DEL. Bryan Rock Products 4.85*8.10*4.64*7.89*5.86*9.11*4.64* 7.89* Wm Mueller & Sons 4.95 8.95 4.95 8.95 6.02 10.02 4.74 8.74 •f MC 30, 70, 250, 800 GALLON PLANT DEL. & PLACED CRS- 1 & 2 GALLON PLANT DEL. & PLACED ] RC 250-800 GALLON PLANT , DEL. & PLACED Wm Mueller & Sons 1.98* ♦ Denotes low bid * ‘ It ^1* ffc V CITY OF ORONO 1997 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE - PLANT 2331 AC TON DELIVERED PLACED PLANT 2331 MC TON DELIVERED PLACED Wm Mueller & Sons 18.71*23.01*26.46* Midwest Asphalt 23.75 26.55 26.55 Conunercial Asphalt 23.00 Buffalo Bituminous 19.50 23.50 30.00 PLANT 2341 AC TON DELIVERED PLACED PLANT 2341 MC TON DELIVERED PLACED Wm Mueller & Sons 18.71*23.01*26.46* Midwest Asphalt 23.75 26.55 26.55 Commercial Asphalt 23.00 Buffalo Bituminous 21.70 25.50 31.50 ♦ Denotes low bid MOD. FINE MIX 2341 AC TON MOD. FINE MIX 2341 MC TON 50-50 2341 AC/MC TON PLANT DEL.PLACED PLANT DEL.PLACED PLANT DEL. PLACED Wm Mueller & Sons 19.64*23.94*27.39* Midwest Asphalt 24.60 27.60 27.60 Commercial Asphalt 24.10 i Buffalo Bituminous 23.45 27.25 33.501 V 4 I i * >1'mi HID TABULA'nONS FOR SI RFICT MA rRUIAL4S & liQUli’MENT RRN'IAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE HID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS HID PER HOURLY RATE 1 ALL PRICES TO BE DELIVERED 12" APRON 15" APRON 18" APRON 24" APRON 36" APRON 48" APRON 60" APRON Johnston Fargo 44.00 54.00 70.00 106.00 310.00 836.00 1460.00 All Steel Products 39.00 49.00 64.50 96.00 260.00* ^690.00 1105.00* Contech 38.25*48.50*63.00*94.50*280.00 670.00*1175.00 ■■■■m T * Denotes low bid « <\ I / ' •, CITY OF ORONO 1997 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE : h- CITY OF ORONO 1997 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE BACKHOE BACKHOE BACKHOE PER HOUR PER HOUR PER HOUR CY RATE CY RATE CY RATE Schoening Excavating 1/2 55.00*3/4 65.00* 1 i J/4 TON PICKUP W/8 PLOW PER HOUR Schoening Excavating 45.00/hr* 1---------. WHEEL LOADER WHEEL LOADER WHEEL LOADER PER lioUR PER HOUR PER HOUR CY RATE CY RATE CY RATE Schoening Excavating 2 1 55.00*3 65.00* * Denotes low bid \ \/ \ r*i i COUNCIL MEETING FEB 9 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DAT^"?ibVJ^"5?l998 ITEM NO:9 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Planning Commission Reappointments The ternis of two members of the Planning Commission will expire on March 31 of 1998. These are Sandy Smith and Liz Hawn. Sandy Smith was originally appointed to the Wanning Commission ^ApTof ^3 and has served one 2-par term and one 3-year term. Liz Hawn was originally appointed to the Planning Commission in July of 1995. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to reappoint Sandy Smith and Liz Hawn to additional 3-year terms on the Planning Commission expiring March 31,2001. r COUNCIL MEETING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION FEB 9 1998 ^ _ CITY OF ORONO DATE: February 5,1998 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Appointment of Planning Commission and Park Commission Chairs and Vice Chairs It has been the practice of the Council to rotate the Chairs of the Planning and Park Commissions on an annual basis. Generally the Vice Chair is appointed to the Chair position and a new Vice Omr is selected. The current Vice Chair of the Planning Commission is Sandy Smith. The current Vice Chair of the Park Commission is Andrew McDermott. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to appoint Sandy Smith as Chair of the Planning Commission, and to appoint Andrew McDermott as Chair of the Park Commission. Motion to appoint new Vice Chairs to both the Planning Commission and Park Commission. r.<d 1 COUNCIL MEETING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION FEB 9 1998 CUYOFORONO DATE: February 5, 1998 ITEM NO: f/ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Park Commission Appdfntment There is currently a vacancy on the Park Commission due to David Beal moving out of the City. The Council has determined it will make an appointment from the group of candidates who applied to swe on the Park Commission in the spring of 1997. Those applications were previously provided to the Council. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: ^ appointment to the Park Commission for a three year term expiring on December r COUNCIL MEETING request for council action FEB 9 1998 CITYOrORONO DATE; Februaiy 5, 1998 Department Approval: Nflme Ron Moorse Title City Administrator item NO; / X Administrator Reviewed- a ^ ^lewea. Agenda Section: ^ City Administrator ’s ervice .adjusunen., as we,i as rn\ received from the South Lake Citi#»c i? l <^iu^u witi oe covered COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: reflect the additional $26,000 of bothTx^2erMd° revenues.eneral Fund budget to » i ► COUNCIL MEETING FEB 9 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITYOFORONO DATE: February 6, 1998 ITEM NO: / 3 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Appointment of Mary Ann Johnson to Part-Time Office Support Position The retirement of Dorothy Hallin and the subsequent movement of three office support staff into new positions left a vacancy in the part-time office support position. The selection process to fill this vacancy has now been completed. The top candidate is Mary Ann Johnson. Staff is recommending Mary Ann Johnson be appointed to the part-time office support position at the pay rate of $9.90 per hour (Step 1 of Level 2 of the City's pay plan), effective February 17,1998. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the appointment of Mary Ann Johnson to the part-time office support/customer service position at a pay rate of $9.90 per hour (Step 1 of Level 2 of the City's pay plan), effective February 17,1998. r COUNCIL MEETING FEB 9 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO DATE: February 6,1998 ITEM NO:IH Department Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE Jayne Paasch 2150 Kenwood Way CIGARETTE LICENSE Don Scherven Navarre Lanes Inc. 3435 Shoreline Drive • SET-UP LICENSE Don Scherven Navarre Lanes Inc. 3435 Shoreline Drive -i. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the above listed licenses. • i..-■ >« SIMM'S’..J li KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION Effective January 1,19___to December 31, 19. Owner: UAVNIF Property Address: c^/6~79 UJAV u/aI7i, Ma/. -S^9/ Mailing Address (if different): (include city and zip) Phone; (home) ____________(work). RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Fee: S25.00 (payment must accompany application) Nfaximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time: (over 6 months of age) PisCt'ViiO IwTZ'rtw- C\TV OF OHONO Principal Breed: T'FR b 'i £7?--T Ajsr. 6ll!re.TPt 0 - j Purpose for more than 2 does: LfU/feT ____________________ Dogs normally kept: V inside____kennel structure COMMERCIAL Kennel License Fee: S150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: Business Activities: (example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name). (phone). Dog runs/exercise areas are:inside outside both The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigend hereby grants the City permisssion to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. Date 97 For City Use Only Kennel inspected by Recommends Approval Denial Dat e /^F r fi4 1 4. APPLICATION FOR LICENSE TO SELL TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND TOBACCO RELATED DEVICES (Ordinance No. 164, Second Series - A'dopted Make check payable to: City of Orono 2 5 ]99g Mailing address: P.O. Box 66 ui 1 y ur ORO(\'o Crystal Bay, MN 55323 FEE: $100.00 (February 1-January 31)A-^A-i^re 1. Applicant'& Full Name MIDDLE 'Cr LAST 2. Applicant's Home Address vr HOUSE NUMBER CITY i\yp___M (IV f\/u STREET . ^ HOME PHONE 3. App)Ucant's Business TYPE OF BUSINESS /A/ft LAtJe^ BUSINESS NAME MAILING ADDRESS -rf-^U BUSINESS^^NE SI STREET ADDRESS />Ae> OTY ZIP Describe how the actual physical exchange of the tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco related device between the customer and the licensee or employee takes place.__________________________ StCLL m f 4/ I HEREBY MAKE APPLICATION FOR LICENSE TO SELL TOBACCO. TOBACCO PRODUCTS. OR TOBACCO RELATED DEVICES AT THE ABOVE LOCATION SUBJECT TO THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AND THE ORDINANCES OF THE CITY Date Thn Issuance of a license under this ordinance ^aO be considered a privilege and not an absolute right of the applicant and shall not entitle the holder to an automatic renewal of Ihe ffcense. 121197 3 .'•v u4^.'- I nfii I -Ti I ~i~mmii'Tfifhi^‘TTm~nfnTTii riira a- - ■ -• —------------------------------------ - ■ ------—- pv^.ifMY^AJ nvi'fnritfk/iriAiirimAL9crwtiii.*nfe .. .> - ..J r r Date:February 3,1998 To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police Subject: Navarre Lanes - Set Up License I have reviewed past record history for Navarre Lanes and have no objection to the issuance of this license. ■ - i •> I — ^ ^ ~ - —-Ml iiirr» ■ I I Hn —in ■■ i < i n ir itilT i~rti ■ i T an i PiB a ii in — Mill ■ i THa 11 ■ *-----anai n l^ll■lill^ i^iii ■ Date:February 3,1998 To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police j Subject:Navarre Lanes - Set Up License COUNCIL MEETING CITYOFOBONO 1 ft'fel I. ^ 1« 1 ..’V. . 29 Jan 1998 Thu 10:05 AM Chech Number Check Number 55583 Check Register City of Orono Date Name 55583 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION 29-Jan-98 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Totals Check Number 55583 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Check Number 55584 55584 55584 55584 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OP LAKES 29-Jan-98 29-Jan-98 29-Jan-98 Totals Check Number FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES 55584 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Check Number 55585 55585 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. 29-Jan-98 Totals Check Number GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO 55585 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO, Check Number 55586 55586 HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT 6 COLL 29-Jan-98 Totals Check Number HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT k COLL 55586 HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT k COUs Check Number 55587 55587 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT k COLL 29-Jan-98 Totals Check Number HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT k COLL 55587 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT k COLL Check Number 55588 55588 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 29-Jan-98 Totals Check Number ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 55588 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Check Number 55589 55589 LAN ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 29-Jan-98 Totals Check Number LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 55589 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Check Number 55590 55590 MN DEPT OP REVENUE 29-Jan-98 Totals Qieck Number MN DEPT OP REVENUE 55590 W DEPT OF REVENUE Check Number 55591 55591 MN MUTUAL LIFE 29-Jan-98 Totals Check Number MN MUTUAL LIFE 55591 MN MUTUAL LIFE Transaction Amount 6,459.00 6,459.00 3.744.09 3.744.09 9,500.00 16,983.18 1,079.68 1,079.68 174.50 174.50 184.50 184.50 225.00 225.00 462.00 462.00 3,781.20 3,781.20 396.30 390.30 Page 1 Comments SAVINGS W/H & TRANSFERRED PICA k MEDICARE W/H FICA,MEDCR CITY SHARE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING DEFERRED COMP W/H THOMTON 8C0266780 SKREEN SC0262310 DEFERRED COMP W/H UNION DUBS W/H STATE TAX W/H DEFERRED COMP W/H I 29 Jan 1998 Thu 10:05 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Oieck Number 55592 55592 MN STATE RETIRBMBNT-DEP COMP 29-Jan-98 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Totals Check Number 55592 MN STATE RETIRETiENT-DEF COMP Check Number 55593 PEBSCO/OBRA 55593 29-Jan-98 PEBSCO/OBRA Totals Check Number 55593 PEBSCO/OBRA Check Number 55594 PEBSCO/US CONP OP MAYORS 55594 29-Jan-98 PEBSCO/US CONP OP MAYORS Totals Check Number S5594 PEBSCO/US CONP OP MAYORS Check Number 55595 PERA 55595 55595 29-Jan-98 23-Jan-98 PERA PERA Totals Check Number 55595 PERA Check NUodber 55596 UNITED MAY 55596 29-Jan-98 UNITED MAY Totals Check Number 55596 UNITED HAY Grand Total Transaction Amount 315.00 315.00 31.64 31.64 1«835.37 1,835.37 4,384.27 5,674.05 10,058.32 30.00 30.00 42,020.69 Page 2 Comments DEFERRED COMP M/H OBRA DEFERRED COMP M/H USCM DEFERRED COMP M/H PERA EMPLOYEE M/H PERA CITY SHARE CHARITY DONATIONS M/H r 29 Jan 1998 Thu 9:28 AM Check Register City of Orono Check NUirher Employee Hame Check Itunber 043925 043925 QBMAR, JAMIE L. Totals Check Number 043925 Check Number 043926 043926 HALLIN« DOROTHY M. Totals Check Number 043926 Check Number 043927 043927 KASBMAN« CAROLE A. Totals Check Number 043927 Check Number 043928 043928 HOORSB, RONALD J Totals Check Number 043928 Check Number 043929 043929 VEE, LINDA S Totals Check Number 043929 Check Number 043930 043930 KUEHN, THOMAS M. Totals Check Number 043930 Check Number 043931 043931 OLSON« RONALD J Totals Check Number 043931 Check Number 0^3932 043932 ANDERSON, BRUCE L. Totals Check Number 043932 Check Number 043933 043933 BOBZIEN, SUB A. Totals Check Number 043933 Check Date 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 Page 1 Check Amount 372.49 372.49 812.98 812.98 711.91 711.91 1,465.47 1,465.47 1,002.94 1,002.94 1,263.33 1,263.33 851.13 851.13 445.56 445.56 644.28 644.28 emti ^ ■ r rTi~n~~i[ n 11 ■■“***‘*^'^ -• *. . ‘ - f— iri'i II ■ ar ~■ M t J, '* i,^A* AM ■ J VI. S J 29 Jan 1998 Thu 9i28 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number HRployee Name Check Number 043934 043934 BORIS. SCOTT W. Totals Check Number 043934 Check Number 043935 043935 CARLSON. MICHAEL B Totals Check Number 043935 Check Number 043936 043936 CHESNICK. GARY B. Totals Check Number 043936 Check Number 043937 043937 CORNICK. JAMES L. Totals Check Number 043937 Check Number 043938 043938 DBMBOUSKI. JAY C. Totals Check Number 043938 Check Number 043939 043939 ENGLISH III. IRVING H Totals Check Number 043939 Check Number 043940 043940 ERICKSON. KURT R Totals Check Number 043940 Check Number 043941 043941 FARNIOK. CORREY L. Totals Check Number 043941 Check Number 043942 043942 FISCHENICH. DAN T Totals Check Number 043942 Check Number 043943 Check Date 28-Jan-98 2S-Jan-98 28-Jan>98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 Page 2 Check Amount 884.07 884.07 321.61 321.61 1*553.22 1.553.22 1.155.17 1.155.17 1.178.66 1.178.66 91.48 91.48 1.175.67 1.175.67 1,123.08 1,123.08 1.251.96 1.251.96 S .'.V ' r . J r 29 Jan 1998 Thu 9:28 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Humber Bit^loyee Name Check Number 043943 043943 HANSINO. CAROL J. Totals Check Number 043943 Qieck Number 043944 043944 JOHNSON, BRADLEY P Totals Check Number 043944 Check Number 043945 043945 KNOLLBNBERG, KRISTIN L. Totals Check Number 043945 Check Number 043946 043946 MCNALLY, STEVEN A, Totals Check Number 043946 Check Number 043947 043947 MCNICHOLS, DAVID L, Totals Check Number 043947 Check Number 043948 043948 MORONCZYNSKI, JAMES Totals Check Number 043948 Check Number 043949 043949 PBISELL, WILLIAM R Totals Check Number 043949 Check Number 043950 043950 SCHOENHOFF, JOHN B Totals Check Number 043950 Qieck Humber 043951 043951 THOKTON, MARK R. Totals Check Number 043951 Check Number 043952 Check Date 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan>98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 Page 3 Check Amount 376.25 376.25 987.07 987.07 632.13 632.13 433.00 433.00 531.65 531.65 1,516.07 1,516.07 195.04 195.04 1,175.16 1,175.16 793.04 793.04 -- - - - -- -- --- - - - - - -.ttMik.fl ' - • MTtXl ■ li I 'Mil IIII 111— ■ ■ II Vfw wMtdflttJTJRktt 29 Jan 1999 Thu 9:28 AM Qieck Register City of Orono Check Humber Enqployee Name Check Humber 043952 0^3952 TOMCHBCK, LAWRENCE P. Totals Check HUmber 043952 Check Humber 043953 043953 tomczyk, mark M Totals Check Number 043913 Check Number 043954 043954 FISCHER. CHRISTOFF K. Totals Check Number 043954 Check Number 043955 043955 WITTKB, ANTHONY A, Totals Check Number 043955 Check Number 043956 043956 BRESSLER, BRADLEY J. TotJ^ls Check Number 043956 Check Number 043957 043957 GAPPRON. MIOIABL P Totals Check Number 043957 Check Number 043958 043950 GAPPA, GREGORY A. Totals Check Number 043958 Check Number 043959 043959 OMAN, LYLE E. Totals Check Number 043959 Check Number 0439C0 043960 VAN ZOMBRBN, ELIZABETH Totals Check Number 0439C0 Check Nundber 043961 Check Date 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan 98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-.T' 98 Page 4 Check Amount 253.29 253.29 1.243.14 1.243.14 164.38 164.38 261.56 261.56 480.20 480.20 1,115.61 1,115.61 1,508.26 1,508.26 1.088.75 1.088.75 1.101.81 1,101.81 ««>• 9 29 Jan 1998 Thu 9:28 AM Check Register City of Orono Qieck Number Employee Name Check Number 043961 043961 VANG, BRUCX L. Totals Check Number 043961 Check Number 043962 043962 HECKMAN, STEPHEN J Totals Check Number 043962 Check Number 043963 043963 BRINKHAUS, JOHN P Totals Check Number 043963 Check Number 043964 043964 DBBAERB, DONALD L. Totals Check Number 043964 Check Number 043965 043965 GREGORY, JAMES D Totals Check Nundt>er 043965 Check Humber 043966 043966 HANSEN, STEVEN C. Totals Check Number 043966 Check Number 043967 043967 OBERAIGNER, SCOTT G Totals Check Number 043967 Check Number 043968 043968 OBRIEN, RANDY L. Totals Check Number 043968 Check Number 043969 043969 PALMER, GREGORY A. Totals Check Number 043969 Check Number 043970 Check Date 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 Page 5 Check Amount 976.33 976.33 42.78 42.78 1,048.80 1,048.80 1.031.29 1.031.29 795.56 795.56 985.84 985.84 1,137.14 1,137.14 477.97 477.97 710.60 910.60 i ! 29 Jan 1998 Thu 9;28 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number En^loyee Name Check Number 043970 043970 RATHBUN. BARRY J. Totals Check Number 043970 Check Number 043971 043971 SKREEN. DALE S. Totals Check Number 043971 Check Number 043972 043972 ROSS, JOHN A. Totals Check Number 043972 Check Number 043973 043973 STEPFENKAGEN, RONALD B Totals Check Number 043973 Check Number 043975 043975 HALLIN. DOROTHY M. Totals Check Number 043975 Check Number 043977 0439Vf GREGORY, JAMES D. Totals Check Number 043977 Grand Total Check Date 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-98 Page 6 Check Amount 1,041.33 1,041.33 1,011.60 1,011.60 98.63 98.63 1,054.36 1,054.36 3,045.05 3,045.05 342.10 342.10 44,160.80 ii*ii 5 Feb 1998 Thu 5:54 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 55598 55598 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR 04-Feb-98 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR Totals Check Number 55598 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR Check Number 55599 ALL STAR ELECTRIC 55599 55599 21-Jan-98 05-Feb-98 ALL STAR ELECTRIC ALL STAR ELECTRIC Totals Check Number 55599 ALL STAR ELECTRIC Check Number 55600 AMERICAN MEDICAL SECURITY 55600 05-Feb-98 AMERICAN MEDICAL SECURITY Totals Check Number 55600 AMERICAN MEDICAL SECURITY Check Number 55601 ASLET 55601 05-Feb-98 ASLET Totals Check Number 55601 ASLET Check Number 55602 ASPLUNDH COFFEE 55602 04-Feb-98 ASPLUNDH COFFEE Totals Check Number 55602 ASPLUNDH COFFEE Check Number 55603 AT a T - 55603 05-Feb-98 AT a T - Totals Check Number 55603 AT a T - Check Number 55604 AT a T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV 55604 05-Feb-98 AT a T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV Totals Check Nuc^ber 55604 AT a T CONSUMER PROnuCTS DIV Q\eck Number 55605 BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP 55605 04-Feb-98 BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP Totals Check Number 55605 BENEFITS DESIOf GROUP Check Number 55606 BONESTROO ROSENE a ASSOC. 55606 05-Feb-98 BONESTROO ROSENE a ASSOC. Transaction Amount 309.93 309.93 204.73 340.00 544.73 785.68 785.68 60.00 60.00 288.95 288.95 27.86 27.86 19.55 19.55 1.508.80 1.508.80 827.50 Page 1 Comments CELLULAR PHONE BILL SIREN BATTERIES 1997 CB POST OFFICE-1996 FEBRUARY DENTAL 1998 MEMBERSHIP COFFEE LONG DISTANCE 1ST QUARTER PAYMENT ADM FEE FEBRUARY CC MTGS NOV %I t . 5 Feb 1998 Thu 5:54 PN Check Register City of Orono Check Number D«te Name Check Number 55606 55606 55606 BONESTRCX) ROSENE fc ASSOC. 05-Peb-98 BONESTROO ROSENE & ASSOC. 05-Feb-98 BONESTROO ROSENE k ASSOC. Totals Check Number Qieck Number 55606 BONESTROO ROSENE k ASSOC. 55607 BUDGET PRINTING a 55607 55607 55607 SS607 22-Jan-98 04-Feb-98 04-Feb-98 04-Feb-98 BUDGET PRINTING BUDGET PRINTING BUDGET PRINTING BUDGET PRINTING Totals Check Number 55607 BUDGET PRINTING Check Number 55608 BURTON EQUIPMENT 55608 05-Feb-98 BURTON EQUIPfENT Totals Check Number 55608 burton equipment Check Number 55609 CHAPIN CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN rheck Number S5611 CITYVIEW PLUMBING k HEATING SS611 SS611 C5-Feb-98 OS-Feb-98 CITYVIEM PLUMBING k HEATING CITYVir-f PLUMBING k HEATING Total* Check Number 55611 CITYVIEN PLUMBING k HEA'ING Check Number 55612 CONNELLY INDUSTRIAL ELTC. 55612 05-Peb-98 CONNELLY INDUSTRIAL ELEC. Transaction Amount 74.25 690.00 1,591.75 5.10 6.19 3.73 84.89 99.91 159.58 159.58 286.36 420.65 707.01 359.38 Page 2 Comments EASEMENT LL BLVD PART PREP-ROOF REPORT SHIPPING FOR TRAINING KAT SHIPPING FROM CART RET CT LAMINATING #10 ENVELOPES PARTS RACK 55609 05-Feb-98 CHAPIN CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN 95.70 STREET MAINTQIANCE Totals Check Number 55609 CHAPIN CONS'iHUCTION BULLETIN 95.70 Check Number 55610 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 55610 05-Feb-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 174.71 BRAKE PADS 55610 05-Feb-98 C^SeiKS LAKESHORE AUTO 144.51 BATTERY 55610 05-Feb-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 25.19 CONNECTOR 55610 05-Feb-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 272.61 OIL, TIE ROD 55610 OS-Feb-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 296.32 ALTERNATOR 55610 05-Peb-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 75.57 DOOR LOCK SWITCH 55610 05-Feb-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 29.89 LUBE WINDOW CHANNELS 55610 OS-Feb-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 31.98 OIL CKAIIGB 55610 OS-Feb-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 45.48 OIL CHANGE 55610 OS-Feb-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 297.87 OIL CHANGE. PLUG HIRE 55610 OS-Feb-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 53.69 OIL CHANGE, BULBS 55610 OS-Feb-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 160.73 HEAD LIGHT SWITCH Totals Check Number 55610 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 1,608.55 TOILET-MENS ROOM N PERMIT k GAS LINE-PD GEN ALTERNATOR r^P r .. 5 Feb 1998 Thu 5:54 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 55612 CONNELLY INDUSTRIAL ELEC. Totals Check Number 55612 CONNELLY INDUSTRIAL ELEC, Check Number 55613 CRYSTEEL 55613 C4-Feb-98 CRYSTEEL Totals Check ^'’imber 55613 CRYSTEEL Check Number 55614 CUMMINS DIESEL SALES INC. 55614 05-Feb-98 CUMMINS DIESEL SALES INC. Totals Check Number 55614 CUMMINS DIESEL SALES INC. Check Number 55615 CYS UNIFORMS 55615 04-Feb-98 CYS UNIFORMS Totals Check Number 55615 CYS UNIFORMS Check Number 55616 DAKOTA CO. TECHNICAL COLLEGE 55615 05-Feb-98 DAKOTA CO. TECHNICAL COLLEGE Totals Oieck Number 55616 DAKOTA CO. TECHNICAL COLLEGE Qieck Number 55617 DNR-DIVISION OF WATER & MAIL 55617 06-Dec-95 DNR-DIVISION OF WATER & MAIL Totals Check Number 55617 DNR-DIVISION OF WATER i MAIL Check Number 55618 E-Z RECYCLING 55618 05-Feb-98 E-Z RECYCLING Totals Check Number 55618 E-Z RECYCLING Check Number 55619 EARL F. ANDERSON k ASSOC. 55619 55619 04- Feb-98 05- Feb-98 EARL P. ANDERSON k ASSOC EARL F. ANDERSON k ASSOC. Totals Check Number 55619 EARL F. ANDERSON k ASSOC, Check Number 55620 FROST, SHERRY R. 55620 55620 05-Feb-98 OS-Feb-98 FROST, SHERRY R FROST, SHERRY R Totals Check Number 55620 FROST, SHERRY R Check Number 55621 G & K SERVICES Transaction Amount 359.38 13.49 13.49 59.08 59.08 134.00 134.00 80.00 80.00 50.00 50.00 5,583.48 5,583.48 668.13 433.16 1,101.29 745.00 58.80 803.80 Page 3 Comments COTTERLESS PIN BUILD UP r -:lay RED WINGS - TOfKTZYK ETHICS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT WATER PERMIT JANUARY RECYCLING STREET SIGNS MO TUR14 AROUND SIGNS PARK COMMISION PLANNING COM 1/20 r .F ■LH 5 Feb 1998 Thu 5:54 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 55621 55621 55621 55621 55621 55621 55621 55621 55621 55621 55621 55621 G k 05-Peb-98 05-Feb-98 05-Feb-98 05-Feb-98 05-Feb-98 05-Feb-98 05-Feb-98 05-Feb-98 05-Feb-98 05-Feb-98 05-Feb-98 K SERVICES G a K SERVICES 0 & K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES Totals Check Number 55621 G a K SERVICES Check Number 55622 GALL'S INC. 55622 55622 05-Feb-98 05-Feb-98 GALL'S INC, GALL'S INC, Totals Check Number 55622 GALL'S INC. Check Number 55623 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC, 55623 55623 05-Peb-98 05-Feb-98 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. GOPISR STATE ONE-CALL INC. Totals Check Number 55623 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. Check Number 55624 GRAPIX SHOPPE 55624 04-Feb-98 GRAFIX SHOPPE Totals Check Number 55624 GRAFIX SHOPPE Check Number 55625 HANKINS CHEMICAL INC. 55625 55625 04- Feb-98 05- Feb-90 HAWKINS CHEMICAL INC, HAWKINS CHEMICAL INC. Totals Check Number 55625 HANKINS CHEMICAL INC. Check Number 55626 KENN COUNTY TREAURBR / 55626 21-Jan-98 HENN COUNTY TRBAURER / Totals Check Number 55626 HENN COUNTY TREAURER / Check Number 55627 RQINBPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 55627 05-Feb-98 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF Totals Check Number 55627 HENTJEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF Transaction Amount 198.48 318.47 13.13 13.12 26.25 1,299.80 1,299.80 101.38 30.00 131.38 2,177.20 2,177.20 110.58 110.58 rage 4 Comments 116.61 UNIFORMS 1/26 12.15 UNIFORMS 1/26 5.93 UNIFORM 1/26 62.55 UNIFORMS 1/19 12.15 UNIFORMS 1/19 5.93 UNIFORMS 1/19 70.07 MATS 1/6 54.69 MATS 1/6 54.69 MATS 1/6 95.37 MATS 1/6 5.93 STEFFKAGEN 496.07 119.99 SECURITY SCREI MISC SQUAD EQUIP DECEMBER 97 LOCATES DECEMBER 97 LOCATES GRAPHICS FOR NEW SQUADS HYDROFLUOSILICIC ACID DQfURRAGE ROOM a BOARD NOV 1997 DECEMBER BOOKING 5 Feb 1998 Thu 5154 PM Check Register City of Orono Page 5 Check Number Date Name Check Number 55628 55628 55628 HINZB BUSINESS MACHINES 04-Feb-98 HINZB BUSINESS MACHINES 04-Feb-98 HINZB BUSINESS MACHINES Totals Check Number 55628 HINZE BUSINESS MACHINES Check Number 55629 HYDRO SUPPLY CO. 55629 04-Feb-98 HYDRO SUPPLY CO. Totals Check Number 55629 HYDRO SUPPLY CO. Check Number 55630 INT'L ASSN OF CHIEFS OF POLICE 55630 04-Feb-98 INT'L ASSN OF CHIEFS OP POLICE Totals Check Number 55630 INT*L ASSN OF CHIEFS OF POLICE Check Number 55631 INT'L ASSOC OF PLUM,MECH OFFIC 55631 05-Feb-98 INT'L ASSOC OF PLUM,MECH OFFIC Totals Check Number 55631 INT'L ASSOC OF PLUM.MECH OFFIC Check Number 55632 INTOXIMETERS Transaction Amount 414.29 67.10 481.39 113.24 113.24 360.00 360.00 150.00 150.00 Comments SANYO TRANSCRIBER TRC8800 TONER LANIER FAX HOUSING BOTTEMS CRIM INV TECH I 1Q98 DUES 55632 05-Feb-98 INTOXIf«TERS 355.71 MN ALCO SENSOR III Totals Check Number 55632 INTOXIMETERS 355.71 Check Number SS633 KOEHNEN’S AMOCO 55633 04-Feb-98 KOBHNEN'S AMOCO 18.95 WIPER BLADES Totals Check Number 55633 KOBHNBN'S AMOCO 18.95 Check Number SS634 LAXESHORE WEEKLY NEWS 55634 05-Feb-98 LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS 73.25 PR/UTILITY 55634 05-Feb-98 LAXESHORE WEEKLY NEWS 72.25 CS ASSISTANT Totals Check Number 55634 LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS 145.50 Check Number 55635 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST 55635 05-Feb-98 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST -875.00 1997 INS DELETES 55635 05-Feb-98 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST 1.154.00 1997 INS ADDITIONS 55635 05-Feb-98 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST 480.00 1ST HALF WC INSURANCE 55635 05-Feb-98 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST 1.156.00 1ST HALF WC INSURANCE 55635 05-Feb-98 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST 609.00 1ST HALF MC INSURANCE 55635 05-Feb-98 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS. TRUST 10.975.50 1ST HALF MC INSURANCE Totals Oieck Number 55635 LEAGUE OP MN C'^TIES INS. TRUST 13.499.50 I V. %: 5 Peb 1998 Thu 5:54 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 55636 55636 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT 04-Feb-98 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT Total. Check Number 55636 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT Check Number SS63T MACQOEEN EQUIPMENT 55637 05>Peb-98 MACQUEEN EQUIPMQIT Totals Check Number 55637 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT Check Number 55638 magic cleaners 55638 04-Feb-98 MAGIC CLEANERS Total* Check Number 55538 MAGIC CLEANERS Check Number 55639 MAMA-LMC LABOR RELATIONS SERV 55639 05-Peb-98 MAMA-LMC LABOR RELATIONS SERV Total. Check Number SS639 MAMA-LMC LABOR RELATIONS SERV Check Number 55640 MEDICA CHOICE 55640 55640 04-Feb-98 04-Feb-98 MEDICA CHOICE MEDICA CHOICE Total* Check Number 55640 MEDICA CHOICE Check Number 55641 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS 55641 SS641 OS-Peb-98 05-Peb-98 MET CX)UI;CIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS Total. Check Number 55641 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS Check Number 55642 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SER 55642 05-Feb-98 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SER Total* Check Number 55642 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SER Check Number 55643 MINN STATE TREASURER 55643 OS-Feb-98 MINN STATE TREASURER Total* Check Number 55643 MINN STATE TREASURER Check Number 55644 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY S5644 04-Peb-98 Totals Check Nunbcr MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 55644 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Transaction Amount 27.01 27.01 45.26 45.26 10.65 10.65 2,515.00 2,515.00 202.25 10,043.00 10,245.25 3,500.00 35,976.00 39,476.00 9*405.00 9*405.00 4*237.30 4,237 ju 13.50 13.50 Page 6 Comments CHAIN SAW CHAIN OIL PRESS GAUGE BLANKET CLEANING SUBSCRIPTION JANUARY PREMIUM JANUARY PREMIUM MCBS PROJ 86-51 PY 1988 CVC REDUCTION 1995-97 DECEMBER 97 SAC CHARGES DECEMBER SURCHARGE OXYGEN m »■ 5 Feb 1998 Thu 5:54 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 55645 55645 55645 55645 MINNEGASCO 05-Feb-98 MINNEGASCO 05-Peb-98 MINNEGASCO 05-Feb-98 MINNEGASCO Total* Check Number 55645 MINNEGASCO Check Number 55646 MINNESOTA SUN PUBLICATIONS 55646 05-Feb-98 MINNESOTA SUN PUBLICATIONS Total* Check Number 55646 MINNESOTA SUN PUBLICATIONS Check Number 55647 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION 55647 05-Feb-98 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION Total* Check Number 55647 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION Check Number 55648 MN CHAPTER OF lAPMO 55648 05-Feb-98 MN CHAPTER OF lAPMO Total* Check Number 55648 MN CHAPTER OF lAPMO Check Number 55649 MN CHIEFS OF POL. ED. FOUNDATI 55649 05-Feb-98 MN CHIEFS OF POL. ED. FOUNDATI Total* Check Number 55649 MN CHIEFS OF POL. ED. FOUNDATI Check Number 55650 MN GOLF ASSOCIATION INC. 55650 05-Feb-98 MN GOLF ASSOCIATION INC. Total* Oieck Number 55650 GOLF ASSOCIATION INC. 55652 05-Feb-9B OBRIEN. RANDY Total* Check Number 55652 OBRIBI, RANDY Transaction Amount 69.70 473.00 3.551.26 4.093.96 161.20 161.20 74.32 74.32 30.00 30.00 255.00 255.00 100.00 100.00 66.24 66.24 Comments GAS SERVICE GAS SERVICE GAS SERVICE CS ASSISTANT INSURANCE - BORIS 1998 DUES 1998 TRAINING INST 1998 DUES Check Number 55651 NSP 55651 04-Feb-98 NSP 122.63 JANUARY BLECTICAL 55651 04-Feb-98 NSP 845.73 JANUARY ELECTICAL 55651 04-Feb-98 NSP 2.289.94 JANUARY BLECTICAL 55651 04-Feb-98 NSP 1.906.77 JANUARY BLECTICAL 55651 04-Feb-98 NSP 19.94 ELEC SERVICE 55651 05-Feb-98 NSP 44.39 EI.ECTRICAL SERVICE 55651 05-Feb-98 NSP 19.55 SEWER LIFT 55651 05-Peb-98 NSP 23.16 ELECT SERVICE Total* Check Number 55651 NSP 5.272.11 Check Number 55652 OBRIEN.RANDY Page 7 MILEAGE SEWER SCHOOL i-il ^ * t ^1^ fcrn- 5 Feb 1998 Thu 5:54 PM Check Register City of Orono Check NVufiber Date Name Check Number 55653 55653 OLSON. RON OS-Feb-98 CLSON. RON Total* Check Number 556S3 OLSON, RON Aeck Number 55654 OMAN, LYLE :• 55654 55654 f. 05-Feb-98 OS-Feb-98 OMAN. LYLE OMAN. LYLE Totals Oieck Number 55654 OMAN. LYLE Qieck Number 55655 PERA LIFE INSURANCE Totals Check Number 55659 POMP & METER SERVICES INC, Check Number 55660 RADISSON SUITES OS-Feb-98 RADISSON SUITES55660 Transaction Amount 40.82 40.82 24.18 22.86 47.04 55655 04-Feb-98 PERA LIFE IKSCRANCE 156.00 Totals ^^vmber 55655 PERA LIFE INSURANCE 156.00 Iheck Number 55656 PERRYS TROCK REPAIR 55656 04-Peb-98 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR 51.125565604-Feb-98 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR 25.27 Totals Check Number 55656 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR 76.39 Check Number 55657 PIONEER 55657 05-Feb-98 PIONEER 104.2655657OS-Feb-98 PIONEER 409.8355657C5-Feb-98 PIONEER 61.655565705-Feb-98 PIONEQt 37.755565705-Feb-98 PIONEER 43.165565705-Feb-98 PIONEER 35.953565705-Feb-S8 PIONEER 23.375565705-Feb-98 PIONEER 93.475565705-Peb-93 PIONEER 39.55 Totals ChecK Number 55657 PIONEER 848.99 Check Number 55658 PRAIRIE OFFSET 55658 05-Peb-98 PRAIRIE OFFSET 298.35 Totals Check Number 5S6S8 PRAIRIE OFFSET 298.35 *heck Number SS659 PUMP S. METER SERVICES INC. 55659 OS-Feb-98 POMP It METER SERVICES INC.250.00 250.00 297.71 Page 8 Cofoments MILEAGE MILEAGE MILEAGE FEBRUARY PR»«IUM TOW REPAIR HINGES 8172 1998 BUDGET ORDINANCE 167 SANITARY SEHAR ISARING ODINANCE 168 BIDS ZONING COD AMENDMENT PC PUBLIC HEARING PC AOKNDA ZONING AMEND INSPECTION NOTICE* LH PARTIAL REFUND §8442 ACCOMODATIONS r S':'s::i 5 F .S 1998 *i:54 PM Check Pegister City of Orono Cieck Number Date Name Check Number S5660 RADISSON SUITES Totala Check Number 556co RADISSON SUITES Check Number 55661 REED VENDING 55661 05-Feb-98 REED VENDING Totals Check Number 55661 REED VENDING Check Number 55662 RICKS SUPERVALUB 55662 05-Feb-98 RICKS SUPERVALUE Totals Check Number 55662 RICKS SUPBRVALUE Check Number 55663 RITZ CAMERA 55663 55663 55663 05-Feb-98 05-Peb-98 05-Peb-98 RITZ CAMERA RITZ CAMERA RITZ CAMERA Totals Check Number 55663 RITZ CAMERA Oieck Number 55664 SCHOENHOFP, JOHN 55664 05-Peb-98 SCHOENHOPP, JOHN Totals Check Number 55664 SCHOENHOPP, JOHN Check Number 55665 SRP CONSULTING GROUP INC. 55665 ••5665 05-Peb-98 05-Peb-98 SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC SRF CON'^ULTING GROUP INC Totals Check Number 55665 SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC, Check Number 55666 STAR TRIBUNE 55666 05-Feb-98 STAR TRIBUNE Totals Check Number 55666 STAR TRIBUNE Check Number 55667 STS CONSULTANTS LTD. 55667 05-Feb-98 STS coNsiTiTArrrs ltd Totals Check Number 55667 STS CONSULTANTS LTD Check Number 55668 TEMPORARIES-TO-GO 55668 05-Fcb-90 TEMPORARIES - TO - GO Totals Check Number 55668 TEMPORARIES-TO-GO Transaction Amount 297.71 35.40 35.40 16.43 16.43 32.94 11.79 6.34 51.07 316.51 316.51 386.40 2,839.55 3,225.95 26.00 26.00 1.964.40 1.984.40 48.00 48.00 Page 9 Comments CANDY CUPS a NAPKINS FILM, DEVELOPING DEVELOPING DISP CAMERA MEALS TH12 RELOCATION II OCT TH12 RELOCATION II NOV 13 WEEK SUBSCRIPTION SOIL TESTING TEMP-H/XLIN RETIREMENT flMTflTi^i-tJnurw-rrmm^amir u iwtim-tr t¥■k'n-BA«r Feb 1998 HlU 5:54 PM Check Number Check Number 55669 Check Register City of Orono Page 10 Name 55669 THE SIGN AGE 05-Feb-98 THE SIGN AGE Transaction Amount Comments STREET SIGNS Totals Check Number 55669 THE SIGN AGE Check Number 55670 TRACY TRIPP FUELS 55670 05-Fcb-98 TRACY TRIPP FUELS Totals Check Number 55670 TRACY TRIPP FUELS Check Number 55671 ULTRAMAX 55671 04-Feb-98 ULTRAMAX Totals Check Number 55671 ULTRAMAX Check Number 55672 UNITED SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, INC 55672 04-Feb-98 UNITED SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, INC Totals Check Number 55672 UNITED SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, INC 55673 US WEST COMMUNICATIONSCheck Number 04-Feb-98 04-Feb-98 04-Peb-98 04-Feb-98 04-Feb-98 04-Feb-98 04-Feb-98 04-Feb-98 US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS :OMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS Totals Check Number 55673 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Check NUmbei 55674 VAN ZOMEREN, ELIZABETH 55674 05-Peb-98 VAN ZOMEREN, ELIZABETH Totals Check Number 55674 VAN ZOMEREN, ELIZABETH Check Number 55675 WARNING LITES OP MN 55675 05-Feb-98 WARNING LITES OF MN Totals Check Number 55675 WARNING LITES OF MN Check Number 55676 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE 55676 04-Pcb-98 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE Totals Check Number 55676 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE •t *• p-----soa Resources One West Water Street Suite 200 Si. Paul, MN 55107 612) 296-3767 Fax (612) 207-5615 ^eld Offices Nerttiem Region: 394 S. Lake Avenue Room 403 Oulutti, MN 55802 (218) 723-4752 Fax (218) 723-4794 3217 Bemidji Avenue N. Bemidji, MN 56601 (218) 7564235 Fax (218) 7554201 217 S. 7th Street Suite 202 Brainerd, MN 56401-3660 (218)828-2383 Fax (218) 828-6C36 Southern Region: 261 Highway 15 S. New Ulm, MN 56073-8915 (507) 359-6074 Fax (507) 359-6018 40-16th Street SE Suite A Rochester, MN 55904 (507) 285-7458 Fax (507) 280-2875 Box 267 1400 E. Lyon Street Marshall. MN 56258 (507) 537-C060 Fax (507) 537-6368 Metro Region: One west Water Street Suite 250 St. Paul. MN 55107 (612) 282-9969 Fax (612) 297-5615 ■Vi equal opportunity employer “noted on recycled paper COUNCIL MEETINQFEB 9 1998 CfTYOFORONO January 26, 1998 Board of Hennepin County Commissioners A-2400 Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487-0240 Dear Commissioners: The Board of Water and Soil Resources has completed the enclosed report on the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as requested by resolution no. 97-9-624R3 which was adopted by the County Board on September 23, 1997. Also enclosed IS a memorandum from the office of the state auditor. Although no violation of applicable statutes, rules and regulations was found, the rejport offers several recommendations. The Board of Water and Soil Resources will continue to work with the District, and cities, to implement these recommendations. It is evident that the District has made some significant changes over the past ^veral months. We are also aware that the District is presently in the process of implementing some of the recommendations brought forth in the report. Cities have been generally satisfied with the progress made by the stormwater task force dealing with Rule B. It is our intent to keep the momentum going and foster better working relationships with the District, cities and the county. Please feel free to contact Jim Haertel of my staff at 297-2906 should you wish to discuss this matter further. Enclosures cc’s on attached page I ! Report to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners on the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District January 26,1998 INTRODUCTION The Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources provides this report in response to a request, passed on September 23,1997, in the form of Resolution No. 97-9-624R3, by the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners. The resolution requested the Board of Water and Soil Resources to; (A) determine if the activities of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (district) are in compliance with statutes, rules, and regulations; (B) facilitate dialogue between the district and affected municipalities; (C ) determine if the cost effectiveness of capital projects proposed by the district is in compliance with statutes, rules, and regulations; and (D) request the State Auditor to audit the district to address issue (A) or (C), if necessary. In addition to addressing these concerns, this report will also present various guidelines and perspectives on the roles and responsibilities involved in watershed district management. Although reports of this type inevitably focus on recommended improvements, the Board of Water and Soil Resources recognizes and commends the district for the dedication and commitment of its board of managers, staff and consulting engineers and attorneys. The district is highly professional and is justifiably proud of its accomplishments. District staff and managers were cooperative and accommodating throughout this study. The Board of Water and Soil Resources gathered information several different ways for this report. Interviews were conducted with various staff members from several cities in the district. 1 Past and present district staff were also interviewed. Interviews were conducted with citizen and environmental groups, non-district consulting engineers and attorneys, other metro watershed district managers and staff, and select state agency staff. In addition, many district records were reviewed, including an exhaustive review of the Long Lake project and reviews of the Gray’s Bay Dam Outlet, Gleason Lake, Painter Creek, and Langdon Lake projects. Staff from the Board of Water and Soil Resources also reviewed the 1994 Management Study and the 1997 Draft Strategic Plan, both of which the district commissioned. Lastly, the State Auditor reviewed the audited financial statements of the district for fiscal years 1994, 1995, and 1996. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Based on all the information gathered, the Board of Water and Soil Resources concludes that the district has not violated any applicable statutes, rules and regulations. In addition, the district has shown significant leadership in comprehensive water management. However, a number of concerns did arise during our research for this report, primarily in two areas: micro management by the Board of Managers and lack of District commumcation with stakeholders or constituents, especially cities. Additionally, the issue of accountability for expenditure of public funds was raised as a concern by some interviewees. Although some of these concerns are already being addressed through recent administrative changes, including hiring a new administrator, our review suggests improvements focused on district management; district operational procedures; district outreach, commumcation and coordination; and financial accountability. DISTRICT MANAGEMENT The board of managers for the district had a history of being dedicated and running the operations “hands-on” during the first 25 years. The district had no staff, choosing instead to use engineering and legal consultants. In 1992, two staff positions were established, a full time administrator and a half-time clerical. Since then, the board of managers has not completely shifted its focus and priorities from day-to- day management of operations to that of being a policy and oversight body. Too many and lengthy meetings result. Too often managers function individually and give administrative direction to staff, or opinions to constituents, without full board awareness and approval. Further, the district administrator and staff should be working directly with the constituents wdthout excessive oversight from individual managers. Oftentimes constituents are uncertain who to contact at the district level. Members of the district staff are generally seen as not empowered to make decisions, except the most simple or basic types, so district consultants or managers are contacted directly. District staff have been pulled in many different directions by individual contact from managers, resulting in conflicting direction and overworked situations. Certainly the practice undermines employee morale; turnover rate of district staff has been hi eh. Two recent management studies the district commissioned corroborate this finding and point to the need for correcting micro management by the board of managers. In fact, the 1997 draft strategic plan shows six of the seven managers spoke of micro management and the problems it created. This also underscores the need for strong leadership by county boards in choosing managers that will cooperate together and work as a team. COMMUNICATION, OUTREACH, COORDINATION District communications with stakeholders, especially the member cities, needs to be improved. Communication would likely improve if the board of managers will step back and allow district staff to conduct routine communications with constituents. The district would speak with a more uniform voice, reduce the likelihood of sending mixed messages, and reduce false expectations among constituents. Nevertheless, it takes two parties openly communicating to make the situation work. Constituents, such as cities, ohentimes do not put enough effort into the process. This was very evident when the district actively solicited comments from member cities during the development of the second generation watershed management plan. Most substantial comments from cities only arose during the very final stages of plan review by the state agencies, resulting in a reactive, rather than proactive, approach. It is also evident there are some situations where cities attempt to downplay water resources management concerns such as erosion control measures or on-site water detention. This may occur in commercial projects as the result of pressure from developers or in cities’ own public works projects as they try to complete them in a timely and cost-effective manner. In those cases, the district is unfairly criticized for monitoring non-compliance and refusing to relax its standards. The Board of Water and Soil Resources has proposed using the services of a state mediator to help facilitate a dialogue among the cities and the district. This option will continue to be explored and assessed along with the adoption and implementation of these recommendations. We understand that the district administrator and a manager are in the process of meeting individually with staff of all cities in the district. While generally viewed by constituents as a step in the right direction, there is some concern about the need for, or desirability of, having a manager present. Again, city staff do not see district staff as being empowered by the board of managers to carry out their assigned duties, or what most would agree should be a staff duty. L... CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Another area of concern revolves around capital improvement projects and taxation to cover the planning and implementation of the projects. Comments from all people interviewed varied regarding the taxation issue, but the need for the projects, or similar projects, goes largely unchallenged. The Board of Water and Soil Resources found no evidence that the cost effectiveness of capital improvement projects is not in compliance with statutes, rules, and regulations. The issue of who should pay for the projects, or where taxes should be levied and to what extent, is the subject of considerable debate and a primary focus of concern for some cities. Opinions on solutions span a vast range and include: (a) fund all projects by an ad valorem district-wide tax as is presently the case; (b) fund major projects of regional importance by an ad valorem district­ wide tax and ftmd smaller projects on a subwatershed district basis; (c ) divide the district into two tax districts divided at Gray’s Bay dam; (d) continue as is presently the case but spread the projects around so many cities have a project in their area; and (e) fund projects by a combination of an ad valorem disirict-wide tax and create a subwatershed district or stormwater utility district for the area directly benefitting or contributing, e.g., 70 percent of the project cost levied over the area directly benefitting or contributing and 30 percent ad valorem over the remainder of the district. Defining the appropriate funding option is a district responsibility and a matter of policy. Greater proactive participation by city and county policy makers and staff in the plan development process would create greater awareness and understanding of the options. FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY The cost of capittil improvement projects is an area of concern, specifically the cost of engineering and, to a lesser extent, legal services for the projects. The expense of engineering consultants and legal consultants for other district activities is also an area of concern raised by several people interviewed. It does appear that the district could reduce net operating expenses by hiring some professional staff. A staff engineer and a staff attorney or paralegal could reduce expenses in the areas of pennits and planning and a staff engineer would be helpful in monitoring engineering consultant costs. In addition, since the district does not have a staff attorney or engineer, individual managers are assigned to implementation of individual capital improvement projects, furthering the problem of board members performing tasks that should be done by staff. Several interviewees also recommended using different engineering firms to design capital improvement projects. Under this scenario, the district would still maintain a single consulting engineering firm for district activities, but would vary the engineering firms used for capital r ' ‘ f m’ * ! !*. I If t improvement projects, either through a bid process or by rotation within a pool of firms. Other sugpstions include relying more on the Hennepin Conservation District; and using the city engineer as the project manager, instead of an engineering consultant. This latter suggestion would also address the cities’ perception of a lack of coordination and information dissemination at the project irnplementation stage. While we don’t know if these suggestions would decrease costs, they would defimtely decrease the risk of communication breakdowns. study stated the need for the district administrator to monitor consultant costs. 1 ms has been implemented over the past few months. Reviews of the Dhtricl's I994.'l995, and 1996 financial statements by the State Auditor recommendations In summary, the Board of Water and Soil Resources recommends the following: 1. A. The bo«d of managers should shift their management style from being involved in many details of dis^ct operations towards being a policy and oversight body as presented in the “District Management’’ section on pages 2 and 3. B. The bomd of manaprs should assign district staff and empower district staff to carry out most of the operational fimctions and administrative services, as presented in the Uistnct Management’’ section on pages 2 and 3. C The dis^ct should rely more on staff in the areas of permits and planning, which may requne additional staff, as presented in the “Financial Accountability’’ section on pages 4 II. A. The district should improve communications with constituents, especially cities, as presented m the “Communication, Outreach. Coordination’’ section on page 3. B. The district should hold an annual meeting with the cities and counties to discuss capital improvement projects on line for the coming year and try to achieve broad agreement among the parties on sources of funding for the projects. f III. The district should consider using additional engineering firms or the Hennepin Conservation District on capital improvement project design, as presented under the “Financial Accountability” section on pages 4 and 5. rv. The district should consider using city engineers as project managers, as presented in the “Financial Accountability” section on pages 4 and 5. V. Hennepin County should establish “guiding principles and standards” for selecting managers and judging performance. VI. Cities that have not already done so should designate a technical and policy representative to act as liaison with the district. CONCLUSION Managing water resources in a responsible and effective manner is extremely challenging. In today’s urban setting this challenge is made even more complex by the many political boundaries that are crossed. The large population center of the Minneapolis area, the wealth of water resources, including such regionally significant ones as the Chain of Lakes, Minnehaha Creek, and Lake Minnetonka, coupled with the primarily agricultural nature of the upper reaches of the watershed combine to make the district’s job very complicated and yet extremely important. The district has shown innovative leadership. While the Board of Water and Soil Resources hais made some recommended changes, the overall job the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has done in the management of such important waters has been, for all purposes, quite satisfactory. In conclusion, the Board of Water and Soil Resources offers assistance to work with Hermepin County, the district, and the cities towards establishing a strong framework for watershed management within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. ------rk’* r - ■: -• - V V■; » >: ^ y:4i m■\y - is iji : • “ ■av A M interoffice MEMORANDUM ®fC 2 2 Qgy To:Jim Haertel From:Tom Karlson Subject:Minnehaha Creek Watershed• •• • Date:December 19,1997 Finally, I have completed some notes on my review of the 1994,1995, and 1996 audited financial statements for the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. I did some comparison of revenues, expenditures, and fund balances over the years. Attached are my observations from reviewing the reports and some schedules comparing the years. The notes are not arranged in any particular order. Please call if you have any questions.1 r I Review of Minnehaha Watershed District Financial Statements for 1994,1995 and 1996 Annual Audit: The District was audited by CPA firms for each year reviewed. In 1994 the firm was Larson Allen Weishair & Co. In 1995 and 1996 the firm was Babcock, Langbein and Company. My personal e.xperience has been that I have been more impressed by the quality of reports issued by Larson Allen Weishair & Co, than the latter firm. Independent Auditor's Report: In all three years the District received an unqualified “clean" opinion on their financial statements. In other words it was the auditors’ opinion that the financial statements were fairly presented in all material respects. There were a couple minor errors in the wording for the 1995 and 1996 opinions. Other Auditor Reports: The audits were conducted under Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the US. These standards require reports on internal control and compliance to be issued. For all three years these reports were issued. These reports indicate that the auditor’s had no issues of noncompliance that were required to be issued and no material reportable conditions. In the 1996 Babcock, Langbein actually erred by stating they noted no reportable conditions. This^actually a violation of auditing standards. (Codification of Statements on Auditing Standards AU § 326.17). What all the above means is that the firms reported no findings or recommendations related to their audits of the District. In some cases CPA firms issue separate management letters directly to mangement. There is.no indication that they have done this, but you may want to ask the District if they have received separate letters. Financial Statements: A few minor presentation errors noted in the 1995 and 1996 financial statements. However, nothing too critical. The one curious item is that the General (Administrative) Fund in 1995 had a $3,000,000 certificate of deposit that it did not have in 1994. The revenues of the General Fund were roly $265,000 so they were not the source of this investment. It came fi-om the Special Revenue Funds, in particular the tax revenues of the Management Planning Fund. The General Fund does have a liability to the Special Revenue Funds, but the interest earned on the project revenues are being used to eliminate the General Fund ’s deficit. I t ■! I I ii^i im IIP I ^‘ «V. iirrir J r i» 1 k; Fund Balances: From the schedule of fund balances you can see that the financial condition hit a low in 1994. At that time the District had an overall deficit of $115,494. The overall deficit was due to the large $324,004 in the General Fund. The condition of the General Fund has improved over the last two years. Two other funds also had deficits at the end of 1996. The project revenues of the Management Planning Fund are responsible for the healthier looking total fund balance. The deficits result firom expending funds without current revenue sources. Revenues: No major observations on revenues. Property taxes are their primary source of revenue. Total revenues of course increased due to the large projects started in 1995. Expenditures: As was the case with revenues, expenditures have increased in the last two years due to the large projects. The largest expenditure has been for engineering, which is probably understandable due to the nature of their purpose. Possibly more unusual is the large amount of legal expenditures, which have ranged firom about 10% of total expenditures to a high of 26% in 1994. On the issue of managers’ per diem, they have increased each year from $22,436 in 1993 to 560,42 j in 1996. On the flip side coordinator ’s expense has dropped firom $79,620 in 1993 to $11,201 in 1996. An unusual item was a negative expenditure in 1995 labeled “Returned Wayzata Check" for $175,540. Generally should not have negative revenue or expenditure amounts. Summary: Reviewing financial statements will not necessarily address the concerns raised about the District. Based on no findings and clean opinions on the financial statements there are no major red fl^s that were noted firom our review of the financial statement reports. There are just some areas identified above that may require additional information to determine if there is anything to be concerned about. 1 •i r Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Review of Financial Statements Fund Balances 1993 to 1996 t 1t1♦ • Fund Balance • December 31 Total t •1 i 1996 ! 3.528.7031 1995 3.042.164, 1994 (115.494) . 1993 236.804 i 1992 i 192.346! 1 0! i fTi General Management Water Survey Administrative Planning Maintenance and Data Fund Fund_____and Repair Acquisition Gleason Creek Fund (192.578) (261.242) (324.004) (277.597) (239.530) 3.845.363 84,913 (1.420)(207.575) 3.427.604 79.503 3.875 (207.576) 106.504 70.970 24.200 6.836' 459.385 73.626 41.594 (60.204) 441.515 112.790 881 (123.310) \ ■ .in ll ini %•f fatal!;W .7-1’M**■--------Atli.; iw'?.«»•«?!.!?*.: lift7 ■ JJft00. .. . m flMVI ItN %%IMIIm %Itfl ffija 1tl4 Chff Iclalm.m 3II.4M sifts «4m 24 4tSCM MS •M4li tss.Mc fSSttS 4SM1S * * ISSti. (»<.»*» ts.si*i.tii •fifii'US •IS HiSI sisCRM ii^si ' W.411 - laS.M1 i ERM 4,sti *«Il.tM 4St4»1441 ERR *r ifi”(Sill •aAsu•ssi«M.lltIS.Ii«SISSSSin sis i.sisI4.SI4 . .. ....MIS EWI •* CRM(is.ais •iMn lists EMM -iif fftsCtsMilinns•i?s osts(IS.SM •ISStH (14.114 4SStS •Ofts(•.Ml ‘ SMU I.SII 4 Its ssisii ists•fiw ' •ERM ‘ I.m ss,4sa IS • ' • ERR ERR iMSi SI.MS i.:?U ___(?« •‘■“iSi (441 •Nits ’•IMOti -------------®dSti I- (!•.»* (4.ISS •tSfSU '•4%H }»••.iss ■ ss% 4111 Its ----------SIS.. ^ ifti ' (t.SM •1MS1&ins Sll Iti s ---------octi ■ i,i«i MS sis MIS EMM .. ^ * bW ■"•••.tss SIMS S4S% . MSS I14II 'fl4tS iMlSftS 1I4II SMSS •EHH *0 ERR ISf.lSI •iitS •i.m ' EfUi 0 ERR I4M4I sits (*.MI •tatMs ..........I.S1I ERR S>ll 3,M2 * IMMS SIS NttS ss.sh 4iis S lEWI ............•ERR ni>si ........I ;i.^iiii “ ssi 1S4 Its ‘ fMSS sits . .fiss ‘ EIM (I.sss •IMftS 0 • its •M Irai •ERR 0 fits * (IIS.IM CRM s ERR f ffti SI4.MI CRM •ERR S4SS41S lifts (liis •S4 1%M4S4 ERR f •fti (lll,IM •ISMS (Sll,t4S • 1 Its •• ftS k\§sa®?cr'^aiar^ssk;'SKiaasr**rMiati m»WtepMU duo 1004 %•ITal^T«UI020400 41 1«M)4)0 nn0040044«))4)0 2i%00%00«l.)4l 04%)74)2 ll«t)«11.011 i.i«1014 04U11.001 I0»4I4M !•*00 00»0 00*10,111 01*•MO --------*0*04i4 - ;0 0ii147001*I04M . ** 11**•.«•..........1.1*0 1 00*14121400 ...1.714 01*0 00*0 00*0 00*0 00*304)0 IT*140.071 • 7*0«Mi«l#««4ltu«f4IJFS2untfjii1441J1.4M Mawifi >i MitKMIimisI4SIf4MI MilMilUMil E« M40«U m4 lUfMi441.114N4.I4IniHtl4tl1.7Uitait04ltll1410M1414704.7IS1417III 11402 1047104102470 Ilf) *. . .OlsMan *C4«a •IT*MF«m4Toil). ••2 M2 ~ ‘ 24 )*01.0)0 iis.iio12410. ^*.M0 ioii141111,4M 14*00*00*■ 0 0^vr 0)*00*i • 0*•i:^4)0 i*: *70 30** ? 7»...........00*’. 17404 li*Vi ---------00*4.017 io*Hi• * —00*.........•00*HI . ..'.!^7 *01*000 '711 00*. 7.11S 01*••H69%204)0 !...........0 ,i00*1)0.140 700 Oli 41)*Mwt liiiwiMMICt Ac^Jian QcmmC««tfcfm41)4.00 1 41441 10440 1440101.71401.04)I.ISOIII•I)0 100.10240.001204404.00107)740400041.100)I404U)).04l00III*^WL. ..?M,0)| fO.MI {1^010 00.7)00140410.140).47041.110 10.1011701421 4.101142701. mn.. .!.!!i«5f:. : |00 0%|.,.^ |1J.}J} jimI!___HJji vun__iHjtt •.«