Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-11-1998 Council PacketAGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, MAY 11,1998, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA REMINDER: 6:30 P.M. - RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW 6:45 P.M. - INFORMATION MEETING REGARDING TOWNLINE ROAD (*) 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. ^ay ^ ^ APPROVAL OF MINUTES Cm, ROLL CALL 1. CONSENT AGENDA * 2. Regular Meeting of April 27, 1998 * 3. Joint Work Session with Park Commission of May 4,1998 ^99S ^0 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Dale Lindquist, Representativ PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 4. #2308 Brook Park Realty, 3760 Shoreline Drive - PRD & Class III Preliminary Subdivision 5. »'-354 Konrad Kruger, 520 Hanlon Avenue - Variances - Resolution 6. #2357 Kent Whitworth, 1425 Bay Ridge Road - Conditional Use Permit and Variance - Resolution 7. #2358 Randy & Marie Staffanson, 1422 Park Drive - Variance - Request to Go Directly to Council on May 26,1998 V 8. Adult Use Moratorium - Extend to September 15, 1998 - Ordinance ^ 9. Partial Refund of Application Fees to LGA Investment Group, Inc. 10. Moratorium on Development in the LR-lC-1 Zoning District - Ordinance MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT ^11. Authorize Advertisement for Bids for Navarre Water Treatment Plant - Resolution y 12. .Authorize Advertisement for Bids and Schedule Assessment Hearing for Shoreline/Heritage and Edgewood Hills Sewer Projects - Resolutions 13. Request Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to Complete Study for Mooney Lake OuUet - Resolution CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 14. Schedule Meeting with Highway 12 Property Owners and Business Owners, and Schedule Work Session re: Comprehensive Plan Update /l 5. Authorization of the Installation of Signs Prohibiting Boat Tiailer Parking on Bohns Point P,oad and Bohns Point Lane - Resolution J r \ AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, MAY 11 1998,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORO^O, vHNNESOTA 16. Appoint City Recorder 17. Appoint Assistant Zoning Administrator /18. Budget Adjustments CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT * 19. LICENSES * 20. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 1998 05/09 - Joint Orono/Long Lake Cleanup Day-Construction Debris Only, 8:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. 05/11 - Reconvened Board of Review, 6:30 p.m. 05/11 - Townline Road Information Meeting, 6:45 p.m. 05/11 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 05/13 - Planning Commission Work Session, 8:00 a.m. 05/14 - Orono Orchards Neighborhood Information Meeting for Sanitary Sewer Project, 7:00 p.m. 05/18 - Plaiming Commission Meeting, 6:30 p.m. 05/19 - Webber Hills Neighborhood Information Meeting for Sanitary Sewer Project, 7:00 p.m. 05/25 - Holiday - Observance of Memorial Day 05/26 - Council Meeting, Tuesday, 7:00 p.m. 06/01 - Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. 06/03 - Highway 12 Design Review Committee, 5:30 p.m. 06/08 - Assessment Hearing for Shoreline/Heritage and Edgewood Hills Sewer Project, 6:30 p.m. 06/08 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 06/15 - Plaiming Commission Meeting, 6:30 p.m. 06/22 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. J 1i r 11^ Public A ttendance Meeting D ate y C ouncil Planning C ommission i^gPLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION Park C ommission Other ,;„MQIJESTED B OUR CITY RECORDS. > :.-.v \ ■ V ■ •• •". .-v-.v, NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 1.(Vi^cy. font? f^r<\ Me?; Md 3.. 4. 5.. 6.. 7.. 8.. 9. 10., 11-. 12.. 13.. )4. 15._ tfUM.4 t "I* "•‘.1 a ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 MAY 11 1998 ROLL cmr cr ono\o 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, City Engineer Tom Kellogg and Recorder Lin Vee. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. (#1) CONSENT AGENDA Item #2 was removed from the Consent Agenda. Items #5, 6 and 11 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 APRIL 13,1998 Flint requested a change in Item #9 concerning Brook Park Realty. Flint stated that he had requested that there be a tolling of any dates that might be running during this period of time. Mr. Keane, the applicant's attorney, agreed that there would be a tolling of dates during this time, i.e. that no dates would run against either the developer or the City during that period of time. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to appro\ e the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of April 13,1998 as amended. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Sherokee Use reported on the March for Parks event. There was great cooperation from the sponsors and staff. Approximately $500 was raised with about 30 people participating., including some Orono City Council members. Most of the participants were from the Environmental School with a few from Mound and Long Lake. Goetten commented that the event was well organized. There was a large number of sponsors with much good will shared. Volunteers were stationed along the Luce Line who encouraged those who weren’t already participating in the March for Parks to support the area's parks. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE LILI MCMILLAN, McMillan reported that the LMCD Board voted 9 to 5 to allow the temporary docks to stay at Sailors World. This was a surprise since at last year's July meeting the Board told Mr. DeSantis to be prepared to lose the 10 docks. McMillan stated it is difllcuit to interpret the LMCD codes and much time is spent in interpretation. This de-emphasizes other activities more important to protecting the lake. She expressed her frustration and concern about what the organization is trying to do. Jabbour respi.'nJed that there were several things he had asked the Board to do before Orono sent a representative, including: 1) recodify their oruinances since only two people really understood it, and 2) refocus on conservation of Lake Minnetonka. He was also concerned with the amount of time spent on one particular dock in Mound. He questioned why several Board members were participating as they had not even reviewed iheir packets. Orono huS 40% of the lakeshore and should have a proportionate amount to say about decisions. He was concerned about the liability of Orono participating in this organization. He cited an incident where a member of the LMCD Board had a personal application for his own dock in which he participated in the discussions £uid voted. In another instance, there was litigation about one of the Board members. After an Executive Session concerning this, one of the Board members came out of the meeting and told of the discussion that had taken place. McMillan expressed he - appreciation for Jabbour ’s support when a personal attack was directed at her by a Board member. It appears the Board i:- not working as a group for the good of the lake. However, she does not believe the LMCD shot la be dismantled, but should deal less with code and more with conservation issues facing the lake. Jabbour asked McMillan if there were any conservation projects planned. McMillan responded that a water management sub-cornmittce formed, but only ?. or 3 people came to the meetings. Goetten noted that low participation has been a problem for some time, even when JoEllen Hurt was a representative. She thought it was unfortunate that members were appointed and were then unwilling to work. McMillan thought some radical changes should be made to the LMCD. She is willing to work on those as an Orono representative. She felt enfoicement of dock structures should be given back to the cities. 80% of tlieir meetings are tied up with interpreting the code, with the Chairman of the Board being the only one who really understands the code. Dock square footage is an ongoing and time-consuming issue. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27, 1998 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District - Lili McmiUan, Representative - Continued McMillan stated that she attended a shoreland volunteer workshop. Orono already incorporates many of the practices that the shoreland workshop promoted such as low density of development. One future issue is the banning of phosphorus from lawn fertilizers. She felt this may better be controlled metro-wide rather than city-by-city. Jabbour asked Gaffron to check with the Department of Agriculture about this. She added that native aquatic vegetation fights milfoil and people should be educated about aquatic vegetation. McMillan reported that the financial audit showed the milfoil fund balance was over the targeted level. The Board is going to bring that back into proportion. Kelley asked about the second issue from the workshop. McMillan responded that shoreline buffering with vegetation w'as another idea to promote. People should be educated about native grasses and plantings. Kelley expressed his support for McMillan's willingness to work on changes at the LMCD. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - LILI MCMILLAN, REPRESENTATI\^ McMillan suggested a "fast track" for certain variance applications that would normally be approved, They could go directly to Council w ith staff recommendations. Jabbour thought Orono's code requires a public hearing at Planning Commission, ile suggested an administrative variance process. Council agreed. This would involve less staff time. Flint agreed that much time is spent on small items which could be handled in other w'ays. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT (#3) #2308 BROOK PARK REALTY, 3760 SHORELINE DRIVE - PRD & CLASS III PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Jabbour reported that the applicant had sent a letter formally asking the Council to continue discussion of this item to the May 11, 1998 meeting. Flint assumed this would be a continued tolling of any statutoiy' periods. Moorse noted that a fa.\ was received from Bill Gleason agreeing to this, which is copied on the back of the letter from Attorney Timothy J. Keane. Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to continue consideration of this item to the May 11, 1998 meeting of the Council. Vote: Ayes 5, nays 0. 3 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 (#4) #2325 LAKE COUNTRY BUILDERS ON BEHALF OF JOHN & CINDY OLSON, 950 NORTH ARM DRIVE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4065 The applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported that the application is for a top of bluff setback variance. She projected a topographic map showing 2' intervals. The house was constructed prior to shoreland regulations for bluff setbacks. The applicant has submitted a revised plan based on Planning Commission concerns. The current proposal is for an upper deck that extends 8' from the residence to be screened in beneath. The Planning Commission voted 6 to 0 to approve the application. Goettcn noted that in Van Zomeren's initial report that the deck and porch were not to become living area, but that condition was not included in the resolution. Van Zomeren agreed to make that addition as Item F on Page 2 of the resolution. Jabbour asked if the applicant had reviewed the resolution and agreed with the addition. The applicant agreed. Kelley asked the applicant if he understood why the City has the ordinance regarding the bluff impact zone. The applicant responded that he did. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4065 granting a variance to the bluff setback, with the condition that the deck and porch are not to become living area. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#5) #2350 KEVIN & LISA OLSEN/JAMES & JUNE TOUVE, 4196 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - PRELIMINARY CLASS I SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION NO. 4066 Moved by Goetten, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution No. 4066 granting approval of a Class I subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for properties located at 4196 North Shore Dive. Vote: Ayes 5, nays. 0. (*#6) #2352 RICK FREDRICKSEN REPRESENTING WOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB, 200 WOODHILL ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTIv'»N NO. 4067 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4067 amending a conditional use permit to allow construction of 14' x 22' pump house over a well located 189-193' from the northeast judicial marker of Edgewood Place. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 (#7) #2354 KONRAD KRUGER, 520 HANLON AVENUE - VARIANCE The applicant was not present. Jabbour suggested returning to this item later in the meeting. Review of this item follows #14. (#8) #2356 JON AND DIANE RAPPAPORT, 3067 FARVIEW LANE - VACATION OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT - RESOLUTION NO. 4068 The applicant was present. Kelley explained that he wanted to discuss this item because sewer has been considered for this area. In some sewer projects, the City has allowed residents in the project to "opt out" of tlie improvement ui..il they want to connect. The City then assumes their share of the cost. Kelley wanted the applicant to be aware of the situation. Jabbour responded that he had talked with the applicant. Mr. Rappaport explained that when he bought the property, he knew he would have to put in a new septic system, therefore this is an anticipated expenditure. Because of the proposed improvements he wants to make to the property, the septic system is required to be upgraded. Kelley questioned how the City would handle areas where sewer is planned but the 10-year period to upgrade had expired. Jabbour did not think the City would require a new septic system if sewer was planned relatively soon. However, there would be other factors to consider such as what other agencies might be monitoring the situation and the requirements they might have. Goetten noted another criteria to be considered was Met Council approval for a sewer project. Kelley added that the problem of a non-confomiing septic system because of the 3' separation exists throughout Orono. Many properties may not have additional sites available for septic upgrades. Rappaport's property is fortunate to be within the proposed MUSA line. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4068 as proposed granting approval of the vacation of a drainage easement, subject to granting a new easement. Vote: Ayes 5, nays 0. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 (#9) #23 "8 RANDY AND MARIE STAFFANSON, 1422 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4069 The applicants were present. Van Zomeren explained the application is for a side yard variance to construct a new 24' x 30' garage. The previous garage was 630 s.f. and was destroyed by fire. A hardcover variance is also required although they are slightly reducing the hardcover amount. The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval. The applicants had no additional comments. Goetten questioned the garage setback, noting the former garage was 6.16' while the proposed setback is 5.72'. Van Zomeren explained that because of the shape of the lot, several inches are lost as you move forward. The garage will be attached to the house. Kelley asked about the accessory shed. Van Zomeren responded that the Planning Commission discussed the shed but agreed to allow the shed to remain in its current location because of the shape of the lot, and it is on a concrete pad. Kelley also asked about allowing only 630 s.f for replacement of the new garage since that is what previously existed. Van Zomeren responded that it had not been discussed as the applicants were requesting a 24' x 30' garage. Goetten asked if the accessory structure would be considered legal, non-conforming. In the future, if it came down, a new accessory structure would be required to meet 10' setbacks. Van Zomeren agreed to add this condition to the resolution. Kelley asked if there was anything written from the neighbor to the south. Van Zomeren confirmed that signatures were on file from both neighbors. Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4069, granting approval of side yard setback and hardcover variances for construction of a new 24' x 30' garage located at 1422 Park Drive for Randy and Marie Staffanson, with the addition of the condition that replacement of the accessory structure would be required to meet setback standards. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. 6 . ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 .1 (#10) #2359 HESTIA HOMES, INC. ON BEHALF OF MATT & KAREN PARKS, 825 FOREST ARMS LANE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4070 The applicant was present. Van Zomeren explained the application was for an average lakeshore setback. The applicant has provided topographic infomiation which shows how the grade changes from the shoreline to the house. Originally staff thought there was a bluff. Planning Commission had concerns that it may not be a bluff Staff reviewed the information again and determined that it is technically a steep slope and not a bluff Because the Planning Commission did not want to grant a bluff setback, they requested that the applicant reduce the size of the deck. Since the bluff issue is no longer a consideration, staff would suggest allowing the deck as originally requested. The average lakeshore setback is still an issue. Van Zomeren noted the resolution had been drafted for an average lakeshore setback with no reference to a bluff impact setback. The applicant had no additional comments. Goetien commented that the resolution did not state the size of the deck. Van Zomeren explained that the deck was before the Planning Commission because of the bluff impact issue. However, it also requires a \ ariance for the average lakeshore setback. She agreed to add the size of the deck at 526 s.f. to the resolution. Peterson asked if there would be a double fee charged because of the after-the-fact garage. Van Zomeren responded that there would not be because it was not the applicant's problem. The deck has not been constructed. She explained that the building permit for the garage was processed while the Building Official was out of the office for medical reasons. When the Building Official reviewed the plans, he discovered there had been some miscommunication about the review process and a variance was required. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4070 granting approval of Application #2359 for an average lakeshore setback variance, with the inclusion of the size of the deck in the resolution, for the property located at 825 Forest Arms l ane. Vote: Ayes 5, nays 0. (#*11) #2360 ANTHONY KMETZ, 640 ORCHARD PARK ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 40? 1 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4071 granting a variance to permit construction of a three stall garage addition to be located 71.7' from the front lot line where a 100' seiuack is required for the property located at 640 Orchard Park Road. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 (#12) #2362 BOB HOWARD, 1300 SHORELINE DRIVE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 4072 Mr. and Mrs. Howard were present. Van Zomeren explained that the property is approximately .4 acres in the RR-IB zoning district. Several vari?r.ces are required to rebuild a residence including lot area, lot v/idth, front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks. She referred to the sur\'ey showing the encroachments. A topographic map shows ther^ 'j'e wetlands that encroach the property in the northeast corner requiring a 26' setback for structures. She also had sketches of the proposed residence. The Planning Commission voted in favor of granting all requested variances. Properties with fire damage are allowed 6 months to remove the debris. After variances are granted, a year is allowed to apply for the building permit. Since no accessor)' structures are allowed when there is no principal structure, the accessory structure will be required to be removed. Goetten asked who would monitor the setback when a new accessory stmcture built. Van Zomeren replied that a building permit would be required, and the structure would have to meet hardcover, structural coverage and setback requirements or a variance would be required. The applicants had no additional comments. Jabbour questioned the use of a 1985 survey. Van Zomeren explained that a final grading plan would be required with the building permit. The application was allowed to move forward because insurance companies do not pay for application fees, surveys, architect fees, etc. The 6-month time limit and vandalism on the property are immediate issues. Jabbour asked that all debris on the property be removed, not just the fire damage. Since this is a substandard lot, a limited amount of activity is allowed. Goetten reiterated that all of the property needs to be cleaned up because some of the debris is not a result of the fire. Van Zomeren confirmed that all debris would be removed, based on discussions with the Building staff Jabbour asked if the applicant understood the conditions being required. Howard asked if it all had to do with the variance. Jabbour responded that the City wants to take this opportunity to be sure there is an appropriate residence and improve the property. Van Zomeren added that she had volunteered to work with Mr. Howard's insurance company. The cleanup must be complete within 6 months from the December date of the fire. 8 r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 (U12) U2362 Bob Howard, 1300 Shoreline Drive - Continued Kelley suggested the City look at vacating Hanlon Avenue which would add property to the lot making it more conforming. He did not think the City would build a road there. Jabbour asked statV to investigate the possibility of vacating a portion of Hanlon Avenue. Van Zomeren explained that the property owners of a triangular piece of the property in the area want to sell that piece to Mr. Howard. They had accidentally bought the property in a tax forfeit sale. Jabbour asked why the City didn't buy it for mitigation of wetlands. Gaffron responded that it wouldn't help mitigation because it is already a wetland. The County also owns some lots in the area. Moorse asked for clarification of access to the property. Van Zomeren responded that the proposed garage faces south and County Road 15 and would use the current access. Jabbour suggested approving the application to expedite tearing the house down, assuring the buildability of the lot and collecting from the insurance company. Staff will look into vacating the road and its implications. Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4072 granting lot area, lot width, front, side and rear yard setback variances to allow construction of a new residence on the property located at 1300 Shoreline Drive; and directed staff to implement cleanup of the property Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#13) #2353 LEN BUSCH, 1265 SHORELINE DRIVE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 4073 Mr. Busch was present. Van Zomeren reported that the property is 1.22 acres in a 2 acre zoning district. The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance to construct a hobby room. The original proposal was for a 25' x 30' structure. The Planning Commission recommended a size of 25' x 25' with an additional 300 s.f. of hardcover allowed. The residence has a pool and patio, constructed prior to current regulations, that encroaches into the 0-75' zone. A wetland exists on the northeast side of the property. The applicant has previously received land alteration permits to shore up the drivew-ay. A retaining w-all exists on the other side. The survey did not show the location of a well. Sewer comes to the property in the driveway area and structure cannot be placed over those lines. J ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27, 1998 (U13) U2353 Lett Busch, 1265 Shoreline Drive - Continued Mr. Busch commented that the Planning Commission asked if the structure would have to be that large. He stated it did not have to be that large but he preferred a 25' x 30' staicture. Goetten asked if he understood that the recommendation was made because he was over on hardcover. He responded that he understood. However, in the building permit application, the hardcover information stated that the intent of the ordinance is to ensure that rainfall or runoff is cleansed by filtering through grass before entering the lake. He noted that two-thirds of his property runs into the wetland. He felt the intent of the law was being met. Jabbour agreed with the applicant's comment. However, as small structures are added the wetlands are being overburdened. Kelley commented that he was not in favor of the application because the statement of hardship does not clearly delineate what the hardships are if the variance is not granted. Busch responded that the hardship is there is no basement. He added that he is near retirement, has been very active and does not plan to go south. He wants to be able to do woodworking on his property. The 3-car garage is not sufficient. It is a nice home but he has no place to pursue his retirement hobby. He could reduce some of the driveway but because of the shape of the lot, backing out onto County Road 15 is a safety issue. The architecture of the proposed structure would be similar to the residence. Kelley commented that only 25% hardcover is allowed and the applicant iii proposing 40%. The applicant noted that he is already at 39.4%. Flint moved, Jabbour seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4073 approving the Planning Commission recommendation to allow an additional 300 s.f. of hardcover on the property located at 1265 Shoreline Drive to permit the construction of a 25' x 25' hobby room. Jabbour suggested staff assist the applicant if they have difficulty stating hardships. The hardships for this application were summarized as the wetland, traffic on County Road 15, the shape of the lot, no basement, and the house was located prior to current ordinances. Kelley noted the importance of listing the hardships so that the record could show unique conditions for granting a variance. Goetten asked if removal of some hardcover from the driveway would create an unsafe condition. Busch explained where the hardcover was to be removed and stated that the removal would be satisfactory. 10 . ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27, 1998 (^13) U2353 Lett Busch, 1265 Shoreline Drive - Continued Jabbour expressed his concern that the hardships be stated in the resolution and that the driveway be safe after any hardcover removals. Kelley asked how the City could be sure the next owner would not install a paved driveway up to the structure, which would add more hardcover, and make it a 2-car garage. Goetten expressed her concern about the size of the structure, indicating it was very large. Busch explained that woodworking requires a large area to work, up to 24' when planing a board. Several pieces of equipment are used in making cabinets. Peterson asked what the net effect of hardcover would be. Van Zomeren responded that it would be 300 s.f. She suggested that if garage doors were not allowed, a building permit would be required to install them at a later date. Kelley commented that garage doors would be needed to do the type of woodworking Mr. Busch was proposing. Van Zomeren added that the surveyo*' did not show any easements for the sewer. In talking with the Public Services Director, these easements should be recorded. The applicant agreed to do so. Flint ^ked if there were no other possible location on the property for the structure. Van Zomeren explained that a well on the other side of the garage limits that area. Goetten suggested that no more hardcover be allowed in the future if the motion passes. Flint moved, Jabbour seconded, to amend the motion adopting Resolution No. 4073 to include the condition that no additional hardcover is to be allowed. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. Kelley and Peterson voted against the motion. (#14) JOHN DALBEC REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DETERMINATION REGARDING THE KEEPING OF HORSES AT 30 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD NORTH Moorse explained that Dalbec made a complaint about the keeping horses of 30 Orono Orchard Road North and questioned the legality of it. Staff researched the issue and prepared a letter to Dalbec listing the findings and concluding that two horses should be allowed to remain on the property. Dalbec has asked that Council reconsider the conclusion. Jabbour asked Dalbec to comment on his position. Dalbec distributed a letter to Council and the owner of the residence. Dalbec stated the lot size is too small, the pasture doesn't meet the minimum size, and the building doesn't meet the setbacks. r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 (U14) John Dalbec Request for Council Determination Regarding the Keeping of Horses at 30 Orono Orchard Road North - Continued Jabbour explained how the ordinances work. Prior to ordinances being adopted, property owners could do whatever activities they wanted legally. When they continue to do these activities after they are no longer allowed by ordinance, it is considered legally non-conforming. If the activity began after the ordinance was adopted, then it is illegally non-conforming. When an activity is legally non-conforming, it is referred to as "grandfathered in". Gaffron agreed that the keeping of horses on this property is legally non-conforming. Dalbec asked for clarification of legally, non-conforming. Jabbour explained that when horses were on this property many years ago, it was legal to have horses there. Gaffron referred to the staff review represented in a 6 page letter to Dalbec. Staff concluded that there has been a continuous existence of horses on the property, and therefore the use should be allowed to continue. No pollution problem exists as indicated in the report from Jeremy Geske of the University of Minnesota. After two site inspections, Gaffron also concluded that no environmental problems were created as a result of the horses. The fact that the property is less than 4 acres is not a factor in the decision to allow the horses to remain because they have been there continuously. Nothing in the information in the City's files suggest that there was any intent on the City or the property owner's part to not have horses. The horse bam and corral were allowed to remain when there was no house on the property. Horses have been on the property since at least the mid-1950's. Jabbour asked how many hours staff has spent on this issue. Gaffron responded that he had spent at least 25 hours, and probably another 10 or 15 hours with other staff members and the City Attorney. No members of the Council or Planning Commission have been involved in researching the issues. Jabbour informed Dalbec that the City has concluded that the horses are a legally, non-conforming use of the property. Many taxpayer dollars have been spent to reach this conclusion. There has been no interference from the Council or Planning Commission. If there is any bias, it is toward Dalbec since so much time has been spent to research the issue. Flint questioned the ownership of the property. Gaffron confirmed that Murphy/Smith own Lots 10 and 13, and Dalbec owns Lot 12. Flint noted a supportive letter from Mrs. Bordson, a neighbor to the north. He also asked what would happen if one of the lots were sold off Gaffron responded that Lot 10 is 3.7 acres and Lot 13 is 1.5 acres. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 (U14) John Dalbec Request for Council Determination Regarding the Keeping of Horses at 30 Orono Orchard Road North - Continued Dave and Barb Struyk, 40 Orono Orchard Road North, share a common driveway with Murphy/Smith. Mr. Struyk stated they had lived in the residence since 1979, prior to Murphy/Smith. There were horses boarded there at that time; they like the horses and find it unfair that the Murphy/Smiths are being questioned about the keeping of their horses. Jabbour noted he had received several letters supporting the continued use of horses on the property. Kelley asked if the property were limited to 2 horses, not 3. Gaffron responded that in 1987, the City limited the use to 2 horses in a response to the prior owner. Jabbour added that if the horses were removed for more than 1 year, the use would become non-conforming and no longer be allowed. Attorney Barrett commented that in the current circumstances, the use is allowed. If the property were to lose its legal, non-conforming status, a variance could be applied for to consider the previous use of the property. Council has discretion to address the issue of pasturage. Flint moved, Goetten seconded, to affirm staffs conclusions which allow the keeping of horses at 30 Orono Orchard Road North as outlined in the letter of July 25,1997. Murphy stated they felt this was an unfortunate set of circumstances and would like to have the same relationship with Mr. Dalbec as they had the first five years of being neighbors. He commended staff on a well done report. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#7) #2354 KONRAD KRUEGER, 520 HANLON AVENUE - VARIANCE The applicant was not present. Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to table Application #2354, providing the application be e.xtended an additional 60 days by letter to the applicant. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (A short recess was held.) J r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Goetten stated she had discussions with Gaffron regarding the update of the Comprehensive Plan and suggested scheduling a work session to continue working on it. She also suggested a work session with the Park Commission to discuss the direction in which they should be moving. Jabbour agreed that there should be discussions as to the Park Commission ’s focus. Included in the focus would be acquiring and identifying land in areas that have not yet developed. Flint agreed the Park Commission was going in too many directions. A work session was scheduled on May 4 at 6:30 p.m. prior to the regular Park Commission meeting. Jabbour requested Council support of "No Parking" signs for boat trailers on Bohns Point Road. Kelley was not in favor of posting signs. He suggested posting when an event is planned for Maxwell Bay. Jabbour noted that 4 residences had requested signs. Peterson suggested monitoring how many people are parking on Bohns Point and on what dates before posting signs. Moorse w'ill have the Police Department follow-up and report on the situation. Kelley asked about Gaffron's memo regarding lot area credit for wetlands when the property is served by sewer. Gaffron did not feel discussion was necessary but wanted Council to be aware that an amendment would be coming. Kelley stated that he had talked to the Chair of the Long Lake Planning Commission regarding Orono's Highw'ay 12 resolution. The Long Lake Chair was happy that Orono was reaffirming their position that there would be no access at Willow Drive. Kelley informed the rest of the Council that he was reconsidering the future use of the property at the southwest comer of Old Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12. He questioned if commercial use was the best use. He has observed housing developments along major highways throughout the metro area. One acre residential with sewer could be another option. The tax base would be another issue to consider. Jabbour did not think tax implications should be considered in land use planning. Kelley questioned if commercial/industrial use was considered because the property is located between two major roads. He wants to be sure there is a balance with what is in the code and what exists in other areas. Goetten stated she did not like to see housing along major highways, but has not made a final determination on what is appropriate for that property. McMillan asked if the school across the street has any impact. An industrial use would create a lot of truck traffic which wouldn't be good next to a school. Jabbour responded that discussions had been about a high tech industrial use. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 Mayor/Council Report - Continued Flint requested that staff look at the second house in from Old Crystal Bay Road on the Dickey property. What appears to be a creek is being filled with boulders. If this is a drainage easement, there could be a major impact. Kelley noted there were Uvo retention ponds in the development with drainage easements running to them. Flint also referred to GalTron ’s wetland memo. He wanted to look at the 1/2 and 1 acre zoning. In new subdivisions, the wedand credit has been used to create greater density. Jabbour asked if the wetland credit could be eliminated from the subdivision ordinance without making other sites non- conforming. Gaffron thought it was possible. There may bf ome property owners who may think they are losing something if the wetland credit is taken away. Flint made the point that if the goal IS to protect wetlands, you don't just do so in the 2 and 5 acre zones. Other members agreed. The Council directed that the amendment eliminate the wetland credit all zoning district. Gaffron thought the provisions for density credit came in 1970 but was unsure why. Possibly the City thought they were giving somebody, who thought they were losing something through a rezonine something back. Kelley asked w'hat would happen if the wetland credit were removed from the code. Gaffron responded that it could be done and thought the risks would be low of having someone who thought they could get that credit and then would not be able to do so. Council gave direction to staff to eliminate the wetland credit. Gaffron stated he would look at the code to see if there were any major problems and publish for a public hearing for such an amendment. McMillan asked if this helped septic areas. Gaffron responded that the credit was only available if the property was sewered. Kelley asked if the City had gotten any comments back from property owners in the proposed sewer project for the golf course area. Gaffron had not received any, but thought the Public Serv'ices Director would probably be the one to receive those comments. Gaffron discussed one of the benefits of a wetland credit. Brook Park is a situation where the City has the ability to grant additional density which is a positive in the eyes of some other agencies. ORONO cm' COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27, 1998 ENGINEER REPORT (#15) COUNTY ROAD 15 CO-OP AGREEMENT RIGHT-OF-WAY PAYMENT Moorse explained the request for partial payment of the City's share of right-of-way costs for the County Road 15 project. In the agreement, the City is responsible for $104,000. Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the Request for Payment of $55,447.50 to Hennepin County for the County Road 15 reconstruction project. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1. Goetten was opposed. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#16) SCHEDULE PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING REGARDING TO\VNLCSE ROAD Jabbour had requested the meeting and would like the property owners in Orono and Independence notified. The meeting was scheduled for May 11, 1998 at 6:45 p.m. prior to the regular Council meeting. (#17) SCHEDULE MEETING WITH HIGHWAY 12 PROPERTY OWNERS AND BUSINESS OWNERS This meeting will be scheduled at the May II, 1998 Council meeting. (#18) PART-TIME POLICE OFFICER CHRISTOPHER K. FISCHER PERA RESOLUTION NO. 4074 Moorse explained that this resolution is a formality that allows the City to contribute to the Police and Fire portion of PERA rather than the regular portion. Peterson moved, Goetten seconded, to appoint Christopher K. Fischer to the position of part-time police officer, effective April 13,1998, at a siarting rate of $12.25 per hour; and to adopt Resolution No. 4074 establishing his eligibility for coverage in the PERA Police and Fire Fund. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 (*#19) LICENSES Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the following licenses: Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Special Event Permit Freshwater Foundation Clean Water Festival Location: Gray Freshwater Center, 2500 Shadywood Road May 16,1998 10:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. Garbage & Refuse Collector ’s License Frank Blackowiak Blackowiak & Son Sanitation & Rolloff Service 1195 Sunny field Road North Mound, MN 55364 (*#20) BILLS Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve payment of tlic All Funds Account. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:43 p.m. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT Attorney Barrett reported that the Supreme Court declined the review of Christopher Fields vs. MPRS. ATTEST: Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk 17 : i-ar: COO'^ MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COM^M^I4I4 ^996 JOINT WORK SESSION HELD MAY 4,1998 CfTV OF Onc.\u ROLL I. Members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour and Councilmembers J. Diann Goetten, Dick Flint, Charles Kelley and Barbara Peterson; Park Commission Chair Andrew McDermott and Park Commission Members Irene Silber, Peter Welles, Jim White and Sherokee Use; City Administrator Ron Moorse and Public Services Director Greg Gappa Members absent: Park Commission Members Susan Wilson and Van Erickson Mayor Jabbour opened the meeting by indicating that everyone is here because they all care for Orono. He indicated it is important that everyone work as a team. The members of the Park Commission need to work together as a team, and the Park Commission and City Council need to work together as a team. Three of the Councilmembers have served on the Park Commission, including Councilmember Flint who served as Chair. Mayor Jabbour indicated Councilmember Flint has shared with him that he never realized the full implications of the decisions made at the Park Commission level until he became a member of the City Council. Mayor Jabbour indicated the Council very much appreciates the dedicated efforts of the Park Commission, but would like the Park Commission to make a 10 degree mid-course correction to be more in sync with the priorities and direction of the Council. The Park Commission should regularly review with the Council plans and proposals related to trails and other park issues. One area in which it is important the Council and Park Commission are moving in the same direction is the area of trails in relation to the Highway 12 corridor. The Council does not want the issue of trails to drive the Highway 12 corridor design process. Mayor Jabbour indicated the Council has changed its philosophy regarding parks and park planning to give higher priority to parkland acquisition. This should also be the top priority of the Park Commission. Mayor Jabbour indicated it is O.K. to have disagreements bet\veen the Park Commission and the City Council, especially if the Park Commission has been working on an issue for a long time and has developed a greater level of expertise than the Council. However, the disagreements need to be addressed in a straightforward manner so that the Council can be educated about an issue by the Park Commission, and so that the Council can explain to the Park Commission its reasoning behind its position. Mayor Jabbour indicated the way the trail issue related to the Anderson (Carpenter property) subdivision was handled was distasteful to him. Although the Council's decision regarding a trail on the Carpenter property did not determine the location of the trail to the north on Old Cry'stal Bay Road, one family was convinced that if the Council did not designate a trail on the Carpenter property, the trail would go through their home. This caused the trail issue to overshadow all other issues during discussion of the subdivision at two different Council meetings. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION HELD MAY 4,1998 Mayor Jabbour suggested that as Commission members serve on subcommittees to address specific issues, these subcommittees need to come together with the other Commission members periodically to keep all members up to speed so that the positions taken by the subcommittees are the positions of the Park Commission as a whole. Jim White agreed that communication, both within the Park Commission and between the Park Commission and the City Council, is the key issue. Councilmember Goetten indicated that the issue of the use of the Bederwood ballfield by the Orono Baseball Association is an issue best addressed by the City Council, since there is a wxitten agreement between the City and the OBA regarding the use of Bederwood ballfield. Councilmember Kelley indicated a key concern is future funding to support parks. Councilmember Goetten suggested the Park Commission identify the top two or three priorities the Commission wants the City Council to fund. She indicated the Council and Park Commission will need to talk to the community if the accomplishment of the top priorities will require an increase in taxes. Councilmember Goetten indicated she admires the Park Commission for taking the initiative on a number of issues, but the Commission needs to refocus on a smalt number of key priorities. Mayor Jabbour suggested that it is important that the City identify and engage the owner of property identified as a top priority for parkland acquisition early on rather than at the time a subdivision is being proposed. Councilmember Kelley indicated he sees twxi parcels as top priorities for parkland acquisition. One is the residential parcel in Hackberry Park; the other is ^e Eisinger property west of the Dumas Orchard property. Mayor Jabbour indicated that at the same time as the Park Commission is developing a plan for trails, many of which would be located on the side of roads, the City Council is having a very difficult time making existing roads wider. He indicated that a trail project that he would see as a priority would be the Dakota Rail line if it became available for acquisition. The City would want to partner with Hennepin Parks for a project of this magnitude. Chair McDermott indicated the Park Commission is w’orking on three priority items currently. These are Dickey Park, the renovation of Navarre Park, and the identification of large parcels for future acquisition. Chair McDermott asked whether the Council is considering the acquisition of parkland for a community play field park. Mayor Jabbour indicated a community play field park is beyond what the Council has envisioned. He sees the need for a neighborhood park with one ballfield, similar to Bederwood Park. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION HELD MAY 4,1998 Councilmember Kelley indicated that if, as part of the Highway 12 project. Long Lake's Holbrook Park is moved to property adjacent to Willow Drive, Orono should plan a park adjacent to the new Holbrook Park so that the park can be provided as cost effectively as possible, i.e. the two parks could share a parking lot. Councilmember Goetten suggested that the Park Commission members and subcommittees need to be careful what they commit to in relation to the Highway 12 corridor. The Highway 12 preliminary design process is a delicate, complex and fluid process. Orono needs to be careful to maintain a positive working relationship with the City of Long Lake. Councilmember Kelley indicated that getting Highway 12 located on the currently proposed corridor with no access except at the two ends is his highest priority. Once this is done, other issues can be brought forward. Chair McDermott indicated the Park Commission began its work related to trails along the Highway 12 corridor with good intentions. The Commission did not want to be without answers if someone asked for their input about trails in relation to the Highway 12 corridor. Commission Member Use indicated there is no funding now for parkland acquisition. The park survey completed several years ago indicated residents would be willing to have some tax increase for parkland acquisition. It was suggested that specific parcels for parkland and specific uses of the land to be acquired need to be identified. Criteria should be established for "significant" parkland. Councilmember Flint suggested the Park Commission identify three priority parcels, but also identify other parcels, so that the City can be opportunistic about acquiring other parcels such as when a developer comes in for a subdivision. Councilmember Flint also suggested that having a trail plan is important so that the City can acq .ire the right-of-way for trails when opportunities arise. Commission Member Silber indicated the probability of tlie City being successful with its Saga Hill grant application looks very high. She suggested the City should be submitting applications for other grants, such as for ballfields, etc. Mayor Jabbour reiterated tliat if the Park Commission disagrees with the Council about an issue, it is important the Park Commission be straightforward about bringing this to the Council's attention so that the two groups can address the issue. r MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION HELD MAY 4,1998 Councilmember Kelley indicated that if the school district goes ahead with a new building, the City should work with the school regarding potential cooperation in relation to park facilities as they relate to the building project. Councilmember Goetten questioned how the Park Commission agendas were developed. The Commission Chair, tlie Public Services Director and the City Administrator should determine the Commission meeting agendas versus individual Commission members independently placing items on the agenda. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor COUNCIL r/^:. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MAY 1 1 1998 DATE: May 8, Ifi^CFORONO ITEM NO: ^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Brook Park Realty, 3760 Slioreline Drive - PRD and Class III Preliminary Subdivision The Brook Park Realty application was continued to provide an opportunity to work with the owner of the property to the west in relation to providing an additional access from the proposed development to County Road 15. Mayor Jabbour, Councilmember Flint, and the City Admimstrator have met with the property owner to determine his interest in selling the proj^rty or providing for an access to County Road 15. At the meeting, the property owner indicated he is interested in selling the property. However, his initial price was well beyond what the City is willing to pay for the property as parkland. Staff has updated Bill Gleason of Brook Park Realty regarding the City's progress related to the property to the west. Mr. Gleason indicated he would talk to his property owners to determine where they want to go from here. At the time of this memo, staff had not heard back from Mr. Gleason. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to continue action on the Brook Park Realty application for a PRD and Class III preliminary subdivision at 3760 Shoreline Drive. COUNCIL M!£5Ti:'.'Q May 11 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CfTYOFORCNO DATE; April 22, 1998 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Elizabeth A. Van Zomeren Title Planner/Zoning Adntinistrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2354 Konrad Krueger 520 Hanlon Avenue Wayzata MN 55391 Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres) Lot Area: 4,853.9 sq. ft. (.11 acres) Application: The applicant is proposing to rehabilitate the existing residence by adding a second floor and a one car tuck under garage. Variances are required for front, side and rear yard setback. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: To unanimously approve on a vote of 6-0. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To approve the enclosed resolution. r A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.27 SUBD. 5 (B) FILE NO. #2354 WHEREAS, Konrad Krueger (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 520 Hanlon Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter the City ) and legally described as follows: Lot 17 and 18, Block 15, "Minnetonka Bluffs, Hennepin County, MN (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subd. 5 (B) to rehabilitate the second story and a tuck under garage. Variances for front, side and rear y required. Minnesota: 1. 2. 3. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2354. The property is located in the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres in area. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on April 20, 1998 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: The lot size is .11 acres (4,853.9 sq. ft.) in the RR-lB District where the minimum lot size is 2 acres. A. B. The lot width is 75.01* where 200* is required. Page 1 of 5 r C. The front yard setback is 28.3' where 25.1’ is proposed and 50' is required. D. E. F. G. H. I. The side setback from the north property line is 9.5' where 30’ is required. The side setback from the south property line is 30.6' where 16.5 is proposed to allow the construction of a 14’ x 24' one-car tuck under garage. The property is located in the 500' - 1,000' shoreland setback. Hardcover in the setback exists at 65 sq. fl. (3.35%) and 406 sq. ft. (20.93%) is proposed. The amount of hardcover proposed is less than 679 sq. ft. (35)% and does not require a hardcover variance. The total amount of structural coverage is 695 sq. ft. (14.3%). Tlie proposed amount of structural coverage is 1,140.44 sq. ft. (23.5%). A structural lot coverage is not required because total lot coverage is less than 1,500 sq. ft. Second floor additions to structures that do not meet required setbacks are required to obtain variances. Overhangs that measure 18" or less are non-encroachments in required setbacks. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preser\'e a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 5 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 APPLICATION NO. #2354 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: April 28,1998 TO: KONRAD KRUGER 4831 MANITOU ROAD TONKA BAY MN 55331 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: 04/28/98 COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST To continue the public hearing to May 11, 1998 and hereby extends the 60 day limitation due to applicant not being present at the City Council meeting. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they arc available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. jig r i? 5.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a front yard setback variance to allow the residence to be 25.1' from the front property line where 50' is required; a side yard setback variance to allow the residence to remain 9.5' from the north side property line where 30' is required; a side yard variance to allow a 14' x 24' addition to the south property line to be located 16.5' from the property line where 30' is required; and rear yard setback variance to allow the residence to remain 14.5' from the line rear property line where 50' is required per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subd. 5 (B) to permit a second story addition and a one car tuck under garage, subject to the following conditions: 1.Applicant to provide drainage plan prior to construction to correct and improve the existing drainage on the site as approved by the Building Official and City Engineer. 2.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 11, 1999). 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 3 of 5 1 ANALYSIS » Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard RR-IB requirement 2 acres 200'50'30’50' subject property . 11 acre 75.01'28.3' existing 25.1' proposed 9.5’ (16.5 ’ for addition) 14.5' (16 ’for addition) The subject property does not meet requirements for lot area, width, or front, side and rear setbacks. Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 4,853.9 s.f.695 s.f. existing 1,140.44 s.f proposed 23.5% Structural coverage is not an issue with this application as lots are allowed a minimum of 1,500 s.f. of structural coverage. The proposed figure includes the 3.2' of overhang on the front of the house not reflected on the survey. The proposed structural coverage is 1.031 s.f. or 21.24% exclusive of the overhang. Hardcover Distance fion Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 500'-1,000'1,940 s.f 3.35% ;S.5 S.f) 35% (679 s.f) 406 s.f (20.93%) none Hardcover is not an issue with this application. U2354 Konrad Krueger 520 Hanlon Avenue I driances April 20, 1998 Page 2 STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant's statement of hardship is noted on the application fonn (Attachment A), Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. 4. 5. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The zoning lot would be unbuildable if held to the zoning district standards. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The zoning lot was platted and rearranged prior to current zoning district requirements. Many of these substandard lots have been combined to form larger, more conforming parcels, while the subject property has not. The variances, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variances for front, side and rear setback will not change the character of the area. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. An attached garage is allowed in this zoning district. The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. Lots in the immediate neighborhood were platted prior to current zoning district requirements and do not meet current standards for area or width. Furthermore, the adjacent residences are larger, have attached garages and are located closer to the front lot line than the subject property. H2354 Konrad Krueger 520 Hanlon /I venue Variances April 20. 1993 Page 3 r 6. I! 7. 8. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The lot depth is 64.72' where 129.48' is existing for most lots in the area. This makes meeting the front and rear setbacks for the subject property impossible. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The existing residence could not be improved by expanding it upward or outward without the granting of the necessary yard setback variances. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessar)' to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The existing one story residence has a footprint of695 s.f with no garage. By adding a second story and one stall attached garage, the livability of the residence will be greatly improved. Issues 1. The property does not meet lot area or width requirements. 2. The existing residence encroaches into the required front, side and rear yard setbacks. 3. 4. 5. There is currently no garage on the property. The one stall attached garage as proposed has the minimal footprint to be functional as it would not be feasible if its footprint was reduced. The sur\’ey shows the garage addition encroaching 3.2' closer into the front setback than the existing residence. The elevation drawings show the front overhang of the garage even with first level overhang of the residence. The applicant should note that all other overhangs extending beyond 1.5' will count as further encroachments on required setbacks. It is unclear how much the awning will further encroach on the front setback as the elevation drawings are not scaled. While Hanlon Avenue is platted as 60' wide, the actual maintained street is approximately 18' wide and it will likely not be wid'jned in the future. Therefore, the actual proximity to the street is not as great as is appears based on the survey. 1*2354 Konrad Krueger 520 Hanlon Avenue Variances April 20. 1998 Page 4 6. It appears that constructing the tuck under garage will require the construction of a retaining wall that will likely exceed 4' in height. The applicant should be advised this will require an engineered grading plan at the time of the building permit application. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the necessary variances to allow the construction of a second story over the existing residence and a attached one stall garage. Staff recommends approval of a front setback variance of 24.9' to allow the nearest portion of the residence to be located 25.1 ’ from the front setback where 50' is required and 28.3' is existing. This approval also includes the front awning. This overhang shall be even with the front overhang of the garage which shall not extend more then 1.5' beyond the exterior wall, nor should any other overhang of the residence with the exception of the front awning. Staff recommends approval of a side setback variance of 20.5' to allow the 9.5' setback to remain where 30' is required. Staff recommends approval of a rear setback variance of 35.5' to allow the 14.5' setback to remain where 50' is required. Attachments A B C D E F G H I Application Plat Map Property Owners List Location Map Topographic Map Permit Record Survey Elevation Drawing Hardcover Worksheet U2554 Konrad Krueger 520 Hanlon Avenue Variances April 20. 1998 Page 5 r •• / - H •-. .y .*!•.* '• f * # u . i J. * > Wk o •. j j^r 7JWApplication U Date Received ~S/Z^ Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewed Variance Fee $150.00 (no cheinge from original application) * Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION ^ iA\rC^ SiteAddress________________S ZD Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)______Cb'2-. \ V ~7 2. (00^8 A •« •« •• ^ riopcny lucniiiitatiuii iNuiauci y^r.i.u.j_________vj^\v v Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired________t^\ ,\A \ ^ ^ \ _______^(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential ___pother (specify)___________________ Zoning District:______/T/f- } f\_________________________________________— APPLICANT ^ Name \Lt\W 2-A-T^ C* . AHrIroee* --id I • i ‘"TTv-i N. ( Phone (home)_J^j7 Phone (work ) Zip: *=TS~ ^ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name S>ut^9___________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ___ Estimated Construction Cost S (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback: Front Vs Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) A HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: ^ PC-Ar^T^«N ___ O jo CU:^ST fVlW). \ (attach additional sheets if necessary) , ______ .crm\5€_^TVK-' 7 RUN DATE 03/19/98BATCH 501PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDRPROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAf^/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OmERS LIST38 02-117-23 31 001300500 HANLON AVE P A a N M BENNETT PAUL A a MEGAN M BENNETT 500 HANLON AVE NAY2:ATA MN 5539138 02-117-23 31 002701255 DICKENSON ST MARION J DETTLOFF MARION J DETTLOFF 1255 DICKENSON ST NAYI!ATA MN 55391 38 02-117-23 31 0036 00038 ADDRESS UNAS3IGNE0 HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND 1027-NC 90 DAYS ENDS 3-30-98 38 02-117-23 31 0039 01295 DICKENSON ST R S MILLER/K E STENSO MILLER RICK S MILLER 1295 DICKENSON ST ORONO MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 138 02-117-23 31 001500537 HANLON AVE R V a M E KOEJiNEN ROBERT a MICHEL KOEHNEN 537 HANLON AVE WAY2ATA MN 55391 38 02-117-23 31 001600565 HANLON AVE HADASSAH YEHUDIT ZOHARA HADASSAH YEHUDIT ZOHARA 565 HANLON AVE HAYZATA MN 5539138 02-117-23 31 002800539 KEENE AVE 0 HARALD ERIKSEN 0 HARALD ERIKSEN 6219 ZEALAND AVE N MPLS MN 55^20 38 02-117-23 31 003500038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND 1027-NC 90 DAYS ENDS 3-30-98 S I 38 02-117-23 31 0037 00530 HANLON AVE L W THIES ET AL TRUSTEES LUCILLE WOODVILLE THIES 530 HANLON AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 38 02-117-23 31 0038 00520 HANLON AVE G D a C M TANGEN RODIN ARNOLD BODHAINE 520 HANLON AVE HAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 501 00010 02-117-23-31-0014 521 Hanlon Ave • E S & A J Welch Eric S Welch 521 Hanlon Ave Wayzata MN 55391 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. . DATE <J (7 r\ I I I I jir ^ V\ Ji jfvi L. ^‘40l f* 250-500 Width J ■. ■% ^ ‘V A • • Qj ^'>1 'uy X =S.F. X —S.F. X =S.F. B. Garage X __S.F. C. Driveway X __ 1 S.F. X =S.F. • D. Sidewalk X S.F. X S.F. E. Patio/Deck X S.F. X •S.F. F. Landscape X —S.F. Underlain X S.F. By Plastic X =S.F. G. Other X —S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE .cs S.F. TOTAL PROPER IT AREA IN ZONE -/9 9o S.F. A ^5 •i- B X 100 ==j>. ?5T % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X =S.F. . Length Width X z=S.F. X S.F. X =S.F. B. Garage X S.F. X 3S S.F. X =s S.F. D. Sidewalk X S.F. X S.F. E. Patio/Deck X _S.F. X ss S.F. F. Landscape X r=:S.F. Underlain X =S.F. By Plastic X =S.F. G. Other X _S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE S.F. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -/9 9o S.F. A ^0€-r B /9 X 100 =s 2 0.93 % A B A B i ‘ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MAV 1 1 J99Q Department Approval: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Administrator Reviewed: DATE: JanuSfl^^^r ITEM NO.: Agenda Section: Zoning Item Desc/intiof*: mSl Susan and Kent Whitworth 1425 Bay Ridge Road _____________________Conditional Use Permit and Variances--PubUc Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA, One Family Lakcshore Residential District (2 acres) Lot Area:________53,400 sq. ft. (1,22 acres)_______________________________ Application: The applicants are requesting a hardcover and lakeshore variance to construct a retaining wall along their rear property line adjacent to County Road 15 (Shoreline Drive). A conditional use permit is also required to alter the grade within 5’ of the rear property line. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On a 6-0 vote the Planning Commission recommended approval of the hardcover and lakeshore variances and a conditional use permit. The Pianning Commission had the following concerns: 1. The applicant is to provide City staff with an accurate survey and drawing of the retaining wall along with hardcover calculations. 2. The materials used for the wall shall be consistent with the area. 3. Trees that over 6 ” in diameter shall be preserved or otherwise replaced. 4. Applicant is to obtain the appropriate approvals from Hennepin County before construction of the retaining wall. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Review the enclosed resolution. Attachments r A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 (B) AND 2 AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19, FILE NO. 2357 WHEREAS, Susan T. Whitworth and Kent Whitworth (hereinafter the "applicants’) are owners of the property located at 1425 Bay Ridge Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: TRACTS A, B, Q and R, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NUMBER 192, Hennepin County, Minnesota, also that part of TRACT U, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NUMBER 192, lying easterly of Hennepin County Road Number 15. and southerly of a line parallel with and 75.00 feet south of the north line of TRACT S of said Registered Land Survey (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 (B) and 2 to permit the construction of a three tiered retaining wall located____from the Ordinary High Water Level of Lake Minnetonka where a 75' setback is required. The proposed improvement will result in an increase of hardcover of _______of________% where _______or_______% exists resulting in an increase in hardcover of_____or______% where none is allowed. Applicants have also applied for a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19, that would allow for the installation of a three tiered retaining wall at a maximum height of______'. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File ftliSl. 2.The property is located in the LR-1 A Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. Page 1 of 5 r 3. 4. 5. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on April 20, 1998, and recommended approval of the variance and conditional use permit as proposed based on the following unique findings and hardships: A. There is a section of an existing wood wall that is in poor condition. B. The adjacent property installed a two-tiered wall to maintain the bank adjacent to tlie County Road in 1996 per Resolution #3707. C. There are visual signs o'/ erosion of the bank that are unprotected. D. The engineer has ___________the engineering plans for the retaining wall construction per engineering report by _____________ dated The Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the installation of a three tiered retaining wall will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property, nor will its use depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Pace 2 of 5 i CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grante variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 (B) and 2, and a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 to permit the installation of a three tiered retaining wall at a maximum height of___’ and grants a lakeshore setback variance of a hardcover variance of ' or ’ and %, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. Prior to the City issuing a building permit for the construction of the retaining walls, applicants shall provide the following information to the City: A. B. C. Permit from Hennepin County Department of Transportation for any work conducted within the County right-of-way. Applicants contractor to submit information on structural capacity for review by the City Engineer. Permit application to include planting schedule for plantings to be installed on tiers of the retaining wall. Applicant ’ contractor shall contact City staff at least 48 hours before installation of retaining walls. Applicants shall also be responsible for installing erosion control prior to construction and until walls are constructed and ground cover restored. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owner, but 3re permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council's approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (May 11, 1999). Violation of or non-compliance with any of J e 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. Page 3 of 5 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. ATTEST: Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 11th day of May, 1998. Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 11th day of May, 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 Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this a Notary Public within and day of ♦ 199___, before me for said County, personally appeared —-—r-______________________________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 ) ) 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. I Notary Public Page 5 of 5 TO:Mayor Jabbour and Orono City Council Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:May 7, 1998 SUBJECT: #2357 Susan and Kent Whitworth 1425 Bay Ridge Road Conditional Use Permit and Variance-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1 A, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acres) Lot Area:53,400 sq. ft. (1.22 acres) Application:The applicants are requesting a hardcover and lakeshore variance to allow construction of a retaining wall along County Rd. 15. A conditional use permit is also required for grading within 5' of the property line. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.23.6(B) LR-1 A Setback Requirements Section 10.02, (35) Definitions, Comer Lot Section 10.03, Subd. 19-21, Grading and Land Alteration Section 10.22, Subd. 1-3, Lakeshore Hardcover Regulations and Tree Removal Section 10.56, Subd. C. (5), Subd. G. I, L, Shoreland Management, Steep Slopes and Hardcover H 2357 Kent and Susan Whitworth 1425 Bay Ridge Road 4/20/98 page—I ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IA District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside Yard 2 acres 200'50'30'minimum of 75' and average lakeshore setback Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area 1 Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside 2.13 acres contingent: .02 acres in Tract U 215'250' from house to Bayside Road 15.4'120'-140'from Cty. Rd. 15 ''he subject lot meets the lot area and lot width requirements. The residence encroaches into the required side yard. 1 his lot is a comer lot, surrounded by Bayside Road, County Rd. 51, and County Rd. 15. The setbacks for front/rear yards are 50'. Side yards adjacent to streets also have a greater setback requirement The proposed retaining wall will encroach into the required 75' setback from the lakeshore. A lakeshore variance is required. i « i! # 2357 Kent and Susan H ’hihvorth 1425 Bay Ridge Road 4/20/98 page--2 Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0’-75 ’1,480 sq. ft. (note Tract U is across Cty. Rd. 15) no calculations provided NONE no calculations provided unknown 75 ’-250’38,384 sq. ft.5,61 o sq. ft. (14.6%) 9,708.5 sq. ft. (25%) No change None The applicant has provided a survey which inventories the existing hardcover in the 75'-250' setback. There is existing hardcover (stairway and partial walls)in the 0'-75' setback, however, no information was provided. The proposed retaining wall will encroach into the 0'-75' setback. A more detailed drawing is needed to determine the amount of hardcover. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant has noted on the application thai the topography and county road is a hardship. He has also informed staff that he is concerned about i)is children playing in the backyard near the steep slope. The adjacent properties have retaining walls that were rebuilt after erosion damage from 1987 storms. The applicant wants to build a wall similar to the adjacent walls. (SEE EXHIBITS). This property is a comer lot that meets lot area and lot width requirements. The area where the retaining wall is proposed is partially located within the lakeshore setback and adjacent to Hennepin County right-of-way. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The property can continue to be used for a reside, nee. The applicant has stated his concern about safety for his children and the desire to have a wall similar to the adjacent properties. U 2357 Kent and Susan Whitworth 1425 Bay Ridge Road 4/20/98 pages 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The need for a variance is created by the location of the steep slope near the roadway. Some erosion has occurred. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The hardcover variance will allow the construction of a retaining wall that is aesthetically compatible with the adjacent property's walls. However, the purpose of the shoreland ordinance is to encourage natural vegetation and ground cover instead of retaining walls along the shoreland and in the lakeshore setback. 6. 8. 9. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The properties in this area have lakeshore yards that are separated by County Rd. 15. Stairways are needed to access the lakeshore. The question of a retaining wall vs. a natural steep slope with vegetation needs to be discussed. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The standards apply to all other lots in this zoning district that have lakeshore yards with steep slopes that are separated by roads. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicant shall provide the Planning Commission with testini >ny to the necessity of having a retaining wall to protect his property rights. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. No hardship exists due to the lot configuration or setback requirements. However, the topography along the rear property line and erosion is a concern. I I 2357 Kent and Susan V/hitworth 1425 Bay Ridge Road 4/20/98 page--4 ISSUES The survey does not precisely indicate where the wall will be located, its overall height, or total amount of hardcover. Grading within 5' of the property line requires a conditional use permit. If the wall is located on the County right-of-way or if the wall needs to be constructed from the County Rd. 15 side, Hennepin County must review and approve it. The applicant has been in commumcation with the County. The Zoning Code is clear in its purpose and intent in dissuading vegetative cover and tree removal in the .shoreland setback. The applicant will need to prevent further erosion during construction and provide a landscaping plan. Attachments A Application B Plat Map C Topo map D Survey D1 -2 Hardcover Worksheets E Sketch of Retaining Wall F Photos G Permit Record H Notice of Incomplete Application a 2357 Kent and Susan Whitworth 1425 Bay Ridge Road 4/20/98 page-^5 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 TO: Kent Whitworth 1425 Bay Ridge Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: DATE OF MEETING: 4/20/98 Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Additional information is requested, as follows: Provide staff with accurate survey and drawing of wall and hardcover, use materials cor.sistent with area, preserve trees greater than 6" in diameter or mitigate/replace, receive proper approvals from Hennepin County before construction. Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confirmeJ. as: City Council May 11, 1998, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approv •! by the Planning Commission. X:\APPS\WPWlN60\WPDOCS\CAROLE\PCACriON\2357 I' ‘ i • DATE: TO: City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55323 Phone: (612) 473-7357 Fax: (612) 473-0510 MEMORANDUM May 6, 1998 David Crook—Surveyor Erin O’Brien-GME Consultants FROM: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Kent Whitworth's proposal for a retaining wall along Cty. Rd. 15 at 1425 Bay Ridge Road I am in the process of reviewing Mr. Whitworth's proposal for a retaining wall and find the information submitted to date to be inadequate. I need a survey that shows the existing topography along the rear property line at a scale that is reproducible for overhead projection. I also need a scaled drawing of the retaining wall in plan, cross-section, and front elevation to determine the height and length. Since retaining walls are considered hardcover, I need to know the amount of hardcover that will be located in the 0'-75' setback from the shoreline. Unfortunately, I need this information as quickly as possible because the report has to be delivered to the City Council on Friday, May 8th. Please call me at 473-7357 to let me know if you have plans or further information regarding this application. Mdlooy) r 'r -----^JU^:rr~ JT i A > iJ Application # g^.3js~7 Date Received . Amount Paid -^6~Q- CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address_____I H Z5 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.1 lo IJV OQ/'l ------------ Attach legal description to application if not included on requiredc^^e^ Date PropertyAcquired _____Ma V '9*4________________________^(month/year) I (do) ^ not}) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential ___pother (specify) Zoning District: L^- I fit___________________________ APPLICANT Phone (home) 3^ __ Name ^ kfiviT \V h y-rw^ofg^r Phone(wDik ) ~~ nS7^_ Address: l*“f2.U 3AV ptoc^g "Pp Citv: VAA vza TV^^ a A td Zip: I I t OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home)_ Phone (work)„ Address:City:.Zip:. Estimated Construction Cost $DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: X (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: V ^ Cc-uA/rV /^o9/) (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete: 1. t rs 2. IX ■ ^ ^ 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completet ..lication Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy SVi" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy BV2" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/a" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Properly Owner must sign this application. Please remember that yfiur variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included^ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Date OLIVER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner ’s Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 J V OOn40 “J tie.9 CRYSTAL (17) i 90 s% */ 5( i5)S C4 ' ^ C4 V •? to (100) V in lO 90 i S3 19.5 -(15) /(97) / /^ ^ / ••’ J ^ /^; »<5 -i/ ROSPECT ) 175 (51) ^ 1^5 ii I ,2 1 (5«>? S3)*, (55)S I7I5 37.5 67.5 AVE 1 '*> (60)^/ / " Ae>)y(84)/ Ve V (1 -»4A '(49)i ’(48) (7) ' y '^'v / \ \ *r 15 /kz^y T3l‘?.iH0Z/U>:^V /•iy (21) 7 '-;:'i(22)'-/'’'a:\' (3)• • "fj: ' ='■•%■ A ho (4)' /I // •NE aR? OK VAO R05A.NC'J SE CORNER Cf VACA* R0SA7jDER5 LANT)INC. 5^1.24 .-4—/. r / t- ^ (3) 4(f/^ - / ->/S' 7 . E^hk:-- (3 / vT f "y r i.. /^:. 2 ri .2. 24; (2^2) ■59' / 7./' 7 37.05 % (7) k LM 3 /" / <^* 47.05 104.63 * 'c* • - • i£:ho »• I* V •'jr 1. -' ^ • • ‘.A «. r X ■'“v/ f----------L 3 0 9 Xo 443.1 0 f»4.| «42.0 inrK *43.• 444.t 443.9 '..../ czr^ GIID CZD 433.4 Or 00 "t* teW* Ciii:) ROAD NO. 51 • • ••. .. _________ i £jfm 77Z il5T“ • * ‘v*^! .: ! / iw I • • • \ y nea^‘fn>c¥‘S'^ '•k\^ *V. / «St.( SWI !1 HENN Or on 0«l« *• a|>IH •••«• !•••• •rv»i »•••• Homi A47./0-\^ ^ » I /•# '/,4.eo \ '"'PyZiPf' 'CoP. > V «k S. %. V m <9^l* /» i *967 V 7'/r ■un kj. -j.... /. ^ ( iiS> > \Aor^> / PosMt* Fax Note 7671 °*“4|2b TO W.From -siMiCf Co/Utpl.jlSMAe** Phone t '^•* ^^^fpos Fw* <7SI-04'l©FSi TJPMCr j) - T/s*^cr ^ - 7;f3^<rr <i/ - Jpi^. r^//aarcs> ffsa s^Ay. /^cajta^AA) ar-J* ^ H *4. Mi :v N I <A s1z ao z H :o a P cn HARDCOVER CALCULATIOfI WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ome) 0-7S* (^-250^ 250-500' 500-1000 Existing Hardcover in Zone A. H ouse X S3 3,069 f LENGTH WIDTH ___ X 0 • •• X • «• X _ X •B. Garage X c. D riveway X S3 i7!9 •X ____ D. Sidewalk X S 3SS X •X 440 1 E. Patio/ D eck X ** • F.Landscape X SS • { AREAS UNDERLAIN BY X j PLASTIC SHEETING X • I 1 1 X G. Other X S.F. Total H ardcover in Zone Total Property A rea in Zone S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. Vo a ' L "7 L 3 7 1 r> /oa cV . \ V .' ■4v" :^a %(• ••>V‘^4 ''1 - :..Kte. Ji •• . * —r I ■■ .wSSie fe/-- ki- .*■!*''' • SIB^Sbk J" ' l/^vrv\y;twO/(,\ jcili'c fiy-VV^ of <fml,\M'' ^ >’ % • • ,.•*. •Ov./, V*V' \ ..•.«,' i ^ , I - - 15]* •■ • **" •" .vi<’-v<vv ;■ .• Wfe: ^ * - « -i< « j 1^7 Cr PERMIT RECORD Permit No. AA^__ Date fS-ZZ-^g Type of Permit r ’ l?a i \.i ,Aoa'v fO .i^idL v3 - lO -rp 5^ '??>-2>f /yrt f/^C::.D>. '7^/5^- /S- ^6 _________ S3 <■/ c/^0.{X^-42i^ r^' V 7^ 1XS.TL\L . .. •• ■• .^J r f March 27, 1998 Susan and Kent Whitworth 1425 Bay Ridge Road Wayzata, MN 55391 ________ RE: Land use application #2357 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Whitworth; Staff has reviewed your variance application #2357 and it has been determined that to insure accuracy, an updated survey completed by your surveyor must be provided showing; • the entire lot . the 75* and 250' setbacks from the 929.4' ordinary high water level • all hardcover as existing and proposed . existing and proposed topography Hardcover w’orksheets for each lakeshore setback zone must also be completed by your surveyor on the enclosed hardcover worksheets reflecting all hardcover as existing and proposed. An engineered grading plan and retaining wall elevations must also be provided. These submittals must be received by City staff no later than April 6,1998 to remain on the April 20,1998 Planning Commission agenda. Staff notes that if the following criteria are met, a variance and conditional use permit are not necessary. These are: • no land alteration or hardcover within 75' of the ordinary high water level • no land alteration within 5' of any lot line • land alteration in an amount less than 500 cubic yards • no intensive vegetation clearing within 75' of the ordinary high water level While the requested information noted is required for a permit whether or not a conditional use permit and variance are required, by designing your plan to meet the above criteria, the process can be expedited and would not be subject to Planning Commission and City Council review. If you have any questions, please call me at 473-7357. Sincerely, Liz Van Zomeren Planner/Zoning Administrator I enc. r HC51J6(12<’97> PERMIT FEES MUNICIPALITY = $50.00 ALL OTHERS = $75.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Transportation Division - Permit Office 320 Washington Avenue South - Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 Phone:(612)930-2550 FAX: (612)930-2727 County • Municipality __________________Road No.' LOCATION AND/OR DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Application Is hereby made for permission to place, construct and thereafter maintain a /{T 5vK.>^cy / yz (^aion^or across County Highway No__/(from, at)_______________________________________________________ to______________________________________________________________________________ Applicant Address . Phone _Phone (Emergency) FAX No. 1. TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION - Submit two copies of detailed print showing type and location of installation. □ Underground □ Aerial □ Other 2. TYPE OF UNDERGROUND CONDUIT Size Depth □ Multiduct ____________ ____ □ Plastic ______________ _____ □ Concrete ______________ ____ □ Steel_____________________ Size Depth 3. METHOD OF INSTALLING UNDER ROADBEDS □ Iron □ Copper □ Cable□ __ (Other) □ Boring - Jacking - Pneumagopher (48" minimum depth) □ Casing > Carrier Pipe required for all installations exceeding 4 inches in diameter. □ Open Cut - Explain why necessary_____________________________________ 4. AREA TO BE DISTURBED TRAVELED SURFACE □ Concrete □ Bituminous STRUCTURES □ Curb & Gutter □ Sidewalk □ Signals SHOULDER □ Bituminous □ Gravel □ Culverts □ Road Signs □ Other____ BOULEVARD □ Sod □ Field Grass □ Trees □ Shrubs 5. All work done under this permit, including restoration, will be completed on or before Oait If work cannot be completed within dates specified, a written request for permission of extension must be made to Hennepin County Department of Public Works. If a request for extension is not made prior to the expiration of the Permit, the Permit shall become null and void on the expiration date. Except for negligent acts of the County, its agents and its employees, the Utility or Permittee shall assume all liability for and save the County, its agents and its employees, harmless from any and all claims for damages, actions or causes of action arising out of the work to be done herein and the continuing uses by the Permittee, including but not limited to the placing, constructing, reconstructing, maintaining and using of said utility under this application and Permit for construction. (I, We) the undersigned, herewith accept the terms and conditions of the regulations as laid down by the County of Hennepin and agree to fully comply therev/ith to the satisfaction of the Hennepin County Department of Public Works. PRIOR TO STARTING CONSTRUCTION, CALL 930-2550 Organization By (Print Name) Signature____ Date r COUNCIL MLCTi:-:a REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MAY 1 1 1998 DATE: ITEM NO.: "1 Department Approval: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2358 Randy and Marie Staffanson 1422 Park Drive Reconsideration of a Previously Approved Variance Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:14,383 sq. ft. (.33 acres) BACKGROUND At the April 20, 1998, City Council meeting, variances for side yard setback and hardcover were granted to this property to allow a double garage to be constructed on site and attached to the existing residence. The proposed garage was to replace a detached garage damaged by fire. The applicants have indicated to staff that they may not be able to proceed with their proposed garage because the estimates they have received for the proposed garage far exceed the insurance proceeds. The applicants are currently considering building a double garage in the former location. To build a new garage in the previous location, a side yard variance and a variance to the 10' separation between the residence and the garage would also be required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that reconsideration of this variance be "fast-tracked" to the City Council meeting on Tuesday, May 26,1998. Staff would renotify the property owners within 150 feet ten days prior to the May 26th meeting to meet state laws regarding notification. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To direct staff to prepare the proper legal notices and place this item on the May 26, 1998 City Council agenda for reconsideration. Attachments r BOUNDARY SURVEY OF LOT 1. BLOCK 14, SAGA BILL REVISED CITY OP ORONO, HENNEPIN COUNTY. lONNESOTA LEGEND A mMTtT LM0 wmm a, 0A«D 9/am AS POI (•O • COC, &«•) (Mfic com)(womtm) A oaocmd aooHC.MAtO If. JATt * I/. r fVL Aju Sui mSS^tMAV A/. A A/.A WTAl 1DTA1 M ac A«AM m %mL9* HJAlflO A/. A A/.t / tOAiOO X lOB • JL7A A 19 / lOn«a I tOB • 9Lt« B LQ « . w7 ;4/iMNi ttmt%m Pim AC locAApi or omm m nrncAg m «r 1I4J* A/. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY AA A KEMPER <c ASSOCIATES INC. / LAND SURVeYMC«ENaNCERMC 'SS5 ft MIA. IMOftt Wnt r L ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#8 - #2357 Susan and Kent Whitworth - Continued) Whitworth indicated that upon further study it might be best to extend the wall further than the proposed 60' and continue it to the north property line. Berg agreed with the proposal but would like some continuity with the appearance and materials used in the retaining walls of the adjacent property owners. McMillan stated tree replacement is necessary if trees over 6" in diameter are removed within the 0-75' shoreline setback area. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2357 to construct a retaining wall to the north property line keeping the overall appearance consistent with the neighboring retaining walls with an effort to preserve trees 6" in diameter or greater and/or mitigate the trees. This api^lication is subject to approval from Hennepin County. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Whitworth asked for clarification if he needed approval from Hennepin County prior to obtaining a building permit. Schroeder said the Council would probably make it a condition of approval. Van Zomeren also asked for a determination of the actual amount of hardcover. (#9) #2358 RANDY AND MARIE STAFFANSON, 1422 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES - 8:10 8:20 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren stated a fire destroyed applicants' garage. A 24'x26' garage is proposed by moving it forward of the previous footprint approximately 5-7'. The triangular shape of the property presents a hardship for the location of the new accessory structure. The previous garage encroached in the 10' side yard setback area by 6.16'. The new garage will encroach slightly more than that because it will move forward and the distance between the garage and side lot line decreases as the garage moves towards the front lot line. The property is located in the 250-500' setback area. The hardcover currently exceeds 30% but the applicant is proposing less hardcover because the proposed addition would move forward and be located over a portion of the existing driveway. Staffanson noted a discrepancy in the size. The garage is proposed to be 24'x30', ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#9 - #2358 Randy and Marie Staffanson - Continued) Smith mentioned the shed could be taken out of the side setback area. Van Zomeren indicated it would be difficult to move because of the concrete pad. There were no public comments. McMillan moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2358 to replace the g^ge that was burned granting side yard and hardcover variances with the condition that proposed hardcover not exceed 31.18%. Vote; Ayes 6, Nays 0. Van Zomeren informed the applicant that the building official specified the need for frost footings. (#10) #2359 HESTIA HOMES INC. ON BEHALF OF MATT AND KAREN PARKS, 825 FOREST ARMS LANE - VARIANCES - 8:20-8:45 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted, The Applicants were present. Van Zomeren explained the property is 1.26 acres and meets the lot size reqmrements for the LR-IB zoning district. The application has two parts. First, the applicants are requesting approval to allow a garage addition that was constructed in March 1998 to remain by granting vanances for bluff setback and average lakeshore setback. The second part is to allow construction of a new 526 s.f. lakeside deck where a smaller deck was previously located. Because a miscommumcation within the building department occurred, the builder was given premature approval to construct the garage. A 30' setback is required from the top of the bluff which limits where improvements can be made currently and in the future on this property. Staff recommends an after-the-fact vanance be granted for bluff setback and average lakeshore setback for the garage addition. There were no comments from the public. Smith stated the Planning Commission was in consensus with an after-the-fact variance for the garage, Van Zomeren estimated that the new deck comes out 12' further than the old deck. Lmdquist s a e the new deck is approximately 28 ’xl4'. In reviewing the site elevations, Van Zomeren stated the the old deck came out 2 ’ from the farthest lakeside wall. She was unable to find any records showmg the exact dimensions of the old deck. COUNCIL MEEHNQ MAY 11 1998 cmroFORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: January 21, 1998 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Request to Extend the Adult Use Moratorium to September 15, 1998 On May 12, 1997, on a vote of 5-0, the Orono City Council adopted a moratorium on adult uses in all commercial and industrial districts. The moratorium expires on May 12, 1998. The Orono City Council recently adopted a moratorium on industrial uses. Staff has obtained copies of other adult-use ordinances in the metropolitan area. Typically, adult-use ordinances include spacing requirements from such uses as schools, churches and day care centers. Some ordinances limit the number of adult uses through spacing requirements established by limiting the number per block face. Other ordinances choose to cluster them in one area, a "red-light" district. Neither of these approaches is regarded as appropriate for Orono because it is largely residential with very little land zoned for commercial or industrial uses. Staff Recommendation: To request an extension of the moratorium to run concurrently with the industrial district moratorium which expires on September 15, 1998. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. Attachments ORDINANCE NO. , SECOND SERIES c ' i S Ul/ AN ORDINANCE EXTENDING AN INTERIM MORATORIUM ON THE GRANTING OF BUILDING PERMITS, LAND SUBDIVISIONS, REZONING APPLICATIONS, CONDITIONAL OR SPECIAL USE PERMITS, VARIANCES, OR OTHER AUTHORITY RELATING TO ADULT USES IN ALL COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS IN THE CITY OF ORONO The City Council of Orono does ordain: SECTION 1. Statement of Policy. The purpose of Orono Municipal Code Chapter 10 is to provide for the orderly development of commercial and industrial activity so as not to unreasonably conflict with the primary residential and agricultural character of the City. SECTION 2. Extension of Interim Moratorium. To facilitate the purpose stated in Section 1 the City Council imposed a 120 day moratorium, pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 469.355, Subdivision 4, on the granting of building permits, land subdivisions, rezoning applications, conditional or special use permits, variances, or other authority relating to adult uses in commercial and industrial districts in the City of Orono. This moratorium was to enable the city to study the issues relating to adult use and to make any necessary changes in its current ordinances. The initial moratorium is set to expire on May 12, 1998. Because the city has not yet completed the changes to its ordinances to reflect the results of its studies of adult uses and industrial districts, it is necessary to extend the moratorium to September 15, 1998. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective after publication. Adopted by the City Council of Orono on this 11th day of May, 1998, by a vote of ayes and ____nays. ATTEST: Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. ^158 , SECOND SERIES xm moratorium on DISTRICTS IN THE CITY OF ORONO THE CITY OF ORONO DOES ORDAIN: t>i*» r*t,, • tif Authprity. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.355 Subd 4 the Qq, ,s authored to establish interim ordinances to regulate, restrict, or prolubit airr^e m clteSv“ lno71:T cr‘LnendL“lL of the !« M- u f controls. The City declares that this interim ordinance is established pursuant to the aforementioned statute and City ordinance. comprehenriveSnTfi^^^ • ^ • 1 Council is concerned about the effects of adult uses in commercial and industrial distncts ne^ residential areas, parks, and schools. The City Council is concerned that adult uses may contribute to instability through increased nighttime noise and traffic community levI/’co^eSisiricr'"’''^ ^ «« .1 t K j- and zoning issues cited above the Citv will conduct studies for the purpose of consideration of possible amendments to the comprehensive plan uLs The aw of oCo fi d “c expansion of alltuses. The CiW of Orono finds that this interim ordinance should be adopted to protect the plannina process and the health, safety and welfare of the citizens. planmng districts of the®Chy™f htet'^SSto^be ’’ establishment or expansion of aMt .^!^ “ herein shall haveSovlf^l^^- Page 1 of 3 Adults - only gift store or bookstore: An establishment having as a substantial or significant portion of its stock in trade, books, magazines, films for sale or viewing on premises by use of motion picture devices or other coin-operated means, and other periodicals which are distinguished or characterized by their principal emphasis on matters depicting, describing or relating to nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement or sadomasochistic abuse, as defined below, or an establishment wth a segment or section devoted to the sale or display of such material, for sale to patrons therein. Adults - only motion picture theater or video arcade: An enclosed building used regularly and routinely for presenting programs, material distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on matter depicting, describing or relating to nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement or sadomasochistic abuse, as defined below, for observation by patrons therein. » Nuditv: The showing of the human male or female genitals, pubic area or buttocks with less than a fully opaque covering, or the showing of the female breast with less than a fully opaque covering of any portion thereof below the top of the nipple, or the depiction of covered male genitals in a discemibly turgid state. (4) Sauna: An establishment or place primarily in the business of providing (i) a steam bath and (ii) massage services. (5) Sexual conduct: Acts of masturbation, homosexuality, sexual intercourse, or physical contact with a person's unclothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks or, if such person be a female, her breast. (6) Sexual excitement: The condition ofhuman male or female genitals when in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal. (7) Sadomasochistic abuse: Flagellation or torture by or upon a person clad in undergarments, a mask or bizarre costume, or the condition of being fettered, bound or otherwise physically restrained on the part of one so clothed. Adult entertainment center: An enclosed building or a part of an enclosed building, wherein an admission is charged for entrance into the facility, or for food, alcoholic beverages or other beverages intended for consumption within the facility, wherein may be observed or which permits a customer to view one or more live persons unclothed or in such attire, costume or clothing as to expose to view any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola, or any portion of the male or female pubic hair, anus, cleft of the buttocks, vulva or genitals. SECTION 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective May 12, 1997 and shall expire on May 13,1998. Page 2 of3 r Ordinance shall be published in THE PIONEER and THE LAKER and shall be effective immediately. Adopted by the City Council ofthe City ofOrono on the 12 day of May 199 Tt by a vote of g ayes and n navs. ~ ------------’ ATTEST: Gabri« Jabbour, May(^ Publish in the Laker & Pioneer newspaper the week of May 24, 1997. t 4> i Page 3 of3 r COUNT fVT- REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION may 1 1 IVI / cnvcroRONO tCnVcr wi%w*w I* ■ «*•, «>« • ^ Date: May 8,1998 Item No.; Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title: Senior Planning Coordinator Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description; Authorize Refund, LGA Investments, Application #2239/2240/2293/2294 In January Jim Waters of LGA Investment Group, Inc. formally withdrew his applications for the Saga Hill subdivisions, prior to preliminary plat review by the City Council. He requested a refund of any unexpended portions of the application fees. The fees collected reflected certain Special Improvement Fees which would normally cover the costs of engineering review and inspections during construction of roads, sewers, stormwater ponds, etc. Since the project did not go forward, those related costs were not incurred. Based on the attached analysis a refund of $2,040.16 would be in order. The analysis reflects the fact that staff time and incurred engineering pass-through costs have been covered. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Authorize a refund of excess fees collected in relation to applications #2239/2240/2293/2294 to LGA Investment Group, Inc. in the amount of $2,040.16. ___, to authorize a partial application fee refund to LGA Investment Group, Inc. in the amount of $2,040.16. Vote:__ayes,----nays. Proposed Motion: Moved by____, seconded by Analysis of Fees/Payments/Costs Incurred: Application #2239/2240/2293/2294 Fees Paid: Applic #Item Fee Paid 2239 Sketch Plan Review $ 250.Expended in staff time 2240 Sketch Plan Review 250.Expended in staff time 2293 Subd. Base Fee, 12 Lots 675.Expended in staff time If Proposed Public Road 1,475.Refundable* II Proposed Sewer Extension 550.Refundable* II Comp. Plan Amendment 350.Partially refundable** It Rezoning 350.Partially refundable** 2294 Subd. Base Fee, 7 Lots 525.Expended in staff time II Proposed Public Road 1,500.Refundable* II Proposed Sewer Extension 425.Refundable* II Proposed Storm Sewer 200.Refundable* II Street Vacation 300.Partially refimdable** II Overpayment 25.Refundable $ 6,875. These fees are collected at the time of application to cover the costs of engineering review and inspections of the project as it progresses. They are normally not refundable if a project goes forward, but should be refunded, less actual unpaid engineering expenditures, since this project did not go forward. **These fees covered ancillary aspects of the application for which a limited amount of staff time was expended, and should be partially refunded (50% in my opinion). Summary of Payments Base Fees Ancillary Application Fees Special Improvement Fees Refund Calculation 50% Ancillary Fees Special Improvement Fees $ 1,725.00 1,000.00 4.150.00 $ 6,875.00 (expended in staff time) (50% expended in staff time) Unused Less City Engineer Fees Incurred Proposed Refund Amount $ 500.00 4.150.00 $ 4,650.00 - 2.609.84 S 2,040.16 /4^Quest Real Estate. Inc. Quest Development, Inc. V&C0-'5.0 V b Wednesday, January 14,1998 Mike Gaffron Orono City Offices 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55323 CXV< Dear Mike: After considerable review on the subject, it has become apparent that our proposed development projects In Orono are not economically viable, under the present conditions. Therefore we are withdrawing both applications as of this date. Please refund to us any unused portion of the fees already collected by the city for these project applications. While the process has been difficult at times. It has been good working with you and other city staff, as we were always treated fairly and courteously. Good luck in the future. Sincerely, Jim Waters COO 10700 Old County Road 15 • Suite 150 • Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 • Tel. 612-595-0511 • Fax 612-505-0512 C0UNC1LW££7/.\'g WAV 11 J95J REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CrVOPCflOTO DATE: May 8, 1998 ITEM NO : 10 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Ordinance Enacting a Moratorium on Development in the LR-lC-1 Zoning District The City's LR-lC-1 zoning district currently allows, as an additional permitted use, a credit allowing a 50% increase in dwelling unit density over the LR-IC district. The City has found that the current Code language regarding Ae density credit does not provide the City with the ability to adequately protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Therefore, it is necessary that a study be conducted to determine Code changes that would provide for adequate protection of health, safety and welfare. To provide a time period during which the City can accomplish the study and ordinance changes, it is necessary to enact a moratorium on development in the LR-lC-1 zoning district. Staff recommends a six-month moratorium expiring on November 16,1998. An ordinance enacting a moratorium on development in the LR-lC-1 district will be provided at the Council meeting. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt an ordinance enacting a moratorium on development in the LR-lC-1 zoning district, expiring on November 16,1998. r ’ I .OUNGIL M^HTINO may 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CFTYCFORONO DATE; May 11, 1998 ITEM NO Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer’s Report Item Description: Authorize Bid Advertisement for Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation Plans and specifications have been completed for this project. We are requesting approval of the resolution authorizing advertising for bids. The bid opening is scheduled for 11:00 a.m. Tuesday, June 16th. A proposed project schedule is listed below. June 16th, Open bids June 22nd, Approve resolution scheduling assessment hearing. July 13th, Assessment hearing at Council meeting. August 13th, End 30 day assessment appeal period August 24th, Award construction contract September- January 1999, Equipment Delivery November, Begin Construction April 1999, Complete Construction COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the resolution approving the plans and specifications and authorizing advertising for bids for the Navarre Water Treatment Rehabilitation. RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution number 3979 passed by the Council on October 13, 1997, the City Engineer (consulting engineer retained for the purpose) has prepared plans and specifications for the Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation improvement project and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO, MINNESOTA: 1.Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby approved. 2.The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper (and in the Construction Bulletin) an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for 21 days, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be received by the Clerk until 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, June 16, 1998, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of the City Hall by the City Clerk and Engineer, and will then be tabulated. An assessment hearing will then be held and after the assessment appeal period ends the bids will be considered by the Council at 7:00 p.m. on August 24, 1998 in the Council Chambers. Any bidder whose responsibility is questioned during consideration of the bid will be given an opportunity to address the Council on the issue of responsibility. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or certified check payable to the Clerk for 5 per cent of the amount of such bid. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 11th day of May, 1998. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk t 1' — DATE: May 11, 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ITEM NO, COUNCIL MEETING MAY 11 1998 CnYOFORONO IZ Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer’s Report Item Description: Authorize Bidding and Schedule Assessment Hearing for Edgewood Hills and Shoreline/Heritage Sanitary Sewer Project Plans and specifications have been completed for the sewer project to serve the Edgewood Hills and Heritage/Shoreline areas. We are requesting approval of the attached resolution approving the plans and specifications and authorizing advertisement for bids on this project. The bid opening is scheduled for 11:00 a.m. Friday, June 5th. To save time, we are also requesting approval of the attached resolutions ordering preparation of the proposed assessment roll and scheduling of an assessment hearing for this project. The costs listed in the resolutions are the estimated project costs from the feasibility study. These cost estimates are conservative, so the bid prices should be less than the estimated costs. Bid prices received for recent area projects have been very favorable. The assessment hearing is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. Monday, June 8th before the regularly scheduled City Council meeting. The contract can be awarded at the July 13th Council meeting, after the end of the 30-day assessment appeal period. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of the resolution to approve the plans and specifications and order advertisement for bids for the Edgewood Hills and Shoreline/ Heritage Sanitary Sewer project Approval of the resolution ordering preparation of proposed assessment roll for the Edgewood Hills and Shoreline/ Heritage Sanitary Sewer project Approval of the resolution scheduling an assessment hearing for the Edgewood Hills and Shoreline/ Heritage Sanitary Sewer project at 6:30 p.m. Monday, June 8, 1998 ETINQ1998 OMO A RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the improvement of sanitary sewer in the Edgewood Hills and Shoreline/Heritage areas and the estimated contract price for such improvement is $421,970 and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making of such improvement amount to $167,349 so that the total estimated cost of the improvement will be $589,319. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO, MINNESOTA: 1. The total cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $589,319. 2. Assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 15 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1999, and shall bear interest at the rate of 7.5 per cent per annum from the date of the adoption of the assessment resolution. 3. 4. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the clerk's office for public inspection. The Clerk shall upon completion of such proposed assessment, notify the Council thereof. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held May 11 1998. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk A RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT EDGEWOOD HILLS AND SHORELINE/HERITAGE AREA SANITARY SEWER WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council on May 11,1998, the City Clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessment of the cost of the Edgewood Hills and Shoreline/Heritage area sanitary sewer, and WHEREAS, the Clerk has notified the Council that such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in the Clerk's office for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO, MINNESOTA: 1. A hearing shall be held on the 8th day of June, 1998 in the Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, at 6:30 p.m. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by such improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. The clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accmed to the date of payment, to the City, except that no interest may be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the assessment. He may at anytime thereafter, pay to the City the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with the interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held May 11,1998 Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS teen VO, :lley ning such ntto Dtice each ment ite of from merit Such jding WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution numbers 4028 and 4049 passed by the Council on February 9, 1998 and March 23,1998, the City Engineer (consulting engineer retained for the purpose) has prepared plans and specifications for the Edgewood Hills and Shoreline/Heriatge Sanitary Sewer improvement project and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO, MINNESOTA: 1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper (and in the Construction Bulletin) an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for 21 days, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be received by the Clerk until 11 :00 a.m. on Friday, June 1998, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of the City Hail by the City Clerk an'^ Engineer, and will then be tabulated. An assessment hearing will then be held and after the ;ijsessment appeal period ends the bids will be considered by the Council at 7:00 p.m. on July 13 1998 in the Council Chambers. Any bidder whose responsibility is questioned during consideration of the bid will be given an opportunity to address the Council on the issue of responsibility. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier’s check, bid bond or certified check payable to the Clerk for 5 per cent of the amount of such bid. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 11th day of May, 1998. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk COUNCIL Mht I iNGREQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MAY 11 1998 cmi'croRCNo DATE: May 1, 1998 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer's Report Item Description: Outlet for Mooney Lake ary 9, plans ;t and )NO, f, are n the under days, 11:00 tuncil . An s will , Any en an dered k,bid d this BACKGROUND. The cities of Orono, Medina, and Plymouth and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District have been approached by residents living on Mooney Lake co.ocemed about high water levels. Mooney Lake does not have a surface outlet and is therefore a landlocked water body. The surface water elevation of landlocked water bodies tends to fluctuate more greatly than if the water body has an outlet. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District prepared a Mooney Lake water level evaluation in December 1995. The lake level was recorded between May and November 1995, and hi.storical information from 1958 to 1995 was reviewed. Very little historic lake elevation data exists for Mooney Lake. In the 37 years prior to 1995, there are seven lake level readings ranging from approximate low elevation of 983.1 to approximately a high elevation of 988.6. In 1995, the water level ranged between 988 to just over 989. The DNR ordinary high water which is generally considered to be the highest elevation that the lake spent sufHcient time to leave physical evidence upon the land is elevation 988.0. Information in the Mooney Lake water level evaluation indicates that the likelihood of damage to structures around Mooney Lake for a 100 year frequency storm event is very low. There is however potential for damage to trees, yaids, and landscaping and damage to trees has already occurred. Preliminary di;;cu.'..:?ons indicate that the most likely configuration for a Mooney Lake outlet would be a pumping station discharging to the storm sewer proposed to be constructed with the Femdale Road reconstruction. 1impact or capacity of the discharge to the downstream storm water system has not been determined. An engineer feasibility study needs to completed for this proposed outlet. The study should determine: 1. The Feasibility of the project. 2. The preferred route and configuration for the outlet. 3. The estimated cost of the project. 4. The impact on the downstream storm water system. 5. The benefits of the project. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Recommend that ihe City Council adopt the attached resolution petitioning the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to prepare an Engineering Feasibility Study for construction of an outlet for Mooney Lake. r I ■ - — /•••UO -^ ■!:> - J - r ^ • \ ’•P" I _ c cs Nis r>.- V <;i^*CSt' A -L»1 \ o\ -V ’Hi ra MfE^A 25 • 4 :< e i5£ • •• •-! 2 ‘.'k H ^jbs ! -■ \.1. “ ^ r- — ./ / ?f> ‘ ; lL]7-i — *• -1 PdAIMA^e AR.fA l3ou/a0Aft.y Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Mooney Lake Drainage Area Wenck Wenck Assodatea, Inc. 1800 Pioneer CrwkCtr. Envlronrr>ental Enqlneera Maple Plain. MN 55399 .•0'•:v DEC. 1995 Fgure 1 r RESOLUTION NO. PETITION MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT TO PREPARE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR MOONEY LAKE OUTLET WHEREAS, Mooney Lake and its tributary drainage area is located within the cities of Medina, Orono, and Plymouth; and WHEREAS, Mooney Lake does not currently have an outlet and is therefore landlocked; and WHEREAS, The water level of landlocked bodies fluctuates to a greater degree than water Vjvlics with outlets; and WHEREAS, In recent years Mooney Lake has been experiencing relatively high waf, < Cfivcb. (Causing damage to trees, yards, and landscaping. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY ^ .Sv OF THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA: Petitions the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to prepare an Engineering Feasibility Study to determine the feasibility of constructing an outlet for Mooney Lake. The study should determine: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The feasibility of the project. The preferred route and configuration for the outlet. The estimated cost of the project. 1 he impact on the downstream storm water system. The benefits of the project. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 11th day of May, 1998. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk r i : COUNCIL Meeting REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ 1 1998 CITY cr grono DATE: May 7, 1998 1 ITEM NO: /U Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Scheduling of Council Work Sessions At its April 27 meeting, the City Council discussed the need to schedule a number of work sessions to address a number of priority goals and issues. One work session was to be a meeting with the owners of properties/businesses along Highway 12 to review the preliminary design of the upgrade of Highway 12 as it relates to access to the Highway 12 properties, and to review the City's general concept plan for land use along Highway 12. Another work session was to continue to move forward in relation to the update of the City's Comprehensive Plan. An issue that was raised at the initial Comprehensive Plan work session, but needs further clarification and discussion, is the Council's vision regarding, the development/redevelopment of lakeshore properties. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: A. Motion to schedule a meeting with the owners of properties/business along Highway 12. Motion to schedule a work session regarding the update of the City's Comprehensive Plan.B. SCH12-CO.MTO << - -~ryv I J COUNCIL Mi-I. MAY 11 19yB REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY cr onoNo DATE; May?, 1998 ITEM NO: jh Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description; Authorization of the Installation of Signs Prohibiting Boat Trailer Parking on Bohns Point Road and Bohns Point Lane - Resolution i At the April 27 Council meeting, Mayor Jabbour indicated 4 residents of the Bohns Point neighborhood had requested the installation of signs prohibiting boat trailer poking on Bohns Point Road and Bohns Point Lane to address problems caused by the roads being used for overflow parking from the Maxwell Bay access. The Council directed staff to monitor the boat trailer poking in the neighborhood to determine if the problem was ongoing and significant enough to require the signage. The Police Department had been monitoring this situation and has continued to monitor the extent of the boat trailer parking in the neighborhood. Chief Cheswick has indicated this is an ongoing problem. Bohns Point Road and Bohns Point Lane are the last local roads relatively close to the Maxwell Bay access that are not signed to prohibit boat trailer parking. Chief Cheswick recommends the signs be installed. A resolution authorizing the installation of signs prohibiting boat trailer parking in the Bohns Point neighborhood is attached for Council consideration. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the adoption of a resolution authorizing the installation of signs prohibiting boat trailer parking on Bohns Point Road and Bohns Point Lane. I NOPARK.BPT r A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE INSTALLATION OF SIGNS PROHIBITING BOAT TRAILER PARKING IN THE BOHNS POINT NEIGHBORHOOD WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal organization under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, requests have been received from residents in this area for signs prohibiting boat trailer parking to address problems associated with vehicle and boat trailer parking. This parking is the result of overflow from the Maxwell Bay boat landing. Problems include safety of children in the area, damage to lawns, trash, and noise; and WHEREAS, the street widths in this area are substandard for on-street parking of numerous vehicles with trailers; and WHEREAS, the County Roads and other City Streets in the vicinity of the North Arm and Maxwell Bay boat landing areas are posted for No Parking thus intensifying the parking problems in the Bohns Point neighborhood. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council does hereby authorize and direct the Orono Public Works Department to install signs indicating "No Parking for Vehicles with Trailers" along Bohns Point Road and Bohns Point Lane for the entire lengths of these roads. Approved by the Orono City Council at a regular Council meeting held on May 11, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 1 of 1 r V !: may i i iJd-6 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION cuvcroROi^o DATE: Mays, 1998 ITEM NO: j (p Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Appointment of City Recorder The City has advertised for proposals for the provision of City Recorder services on a contractual basis. The City received a number of proposals, and three persons have been interviewed. Based on the results of the interview process, staff is recommending Lauren Nordseth be appointed as the City Recorder at a fee of $150.00 per meeting. Lauren has three years of experience video taping City Council meetings in the lake area and currently prepares the minutes of the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to appoint Lauren Nordseth as the City Recorder at a fee of $150.00 per meeting, and to authorize staff to prepare a contract to reflect the appointment. xTr:~:rr..n:'rr*—r •J r REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL r/.tSTl.w MAY 1 1 1998 CITY Cf ORCNO DATE: May?, 1998 ITEM NO: / Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Appointment of Assistant Zoning Administrator The selection process for the newly created Assistant Zoning Administrator position has now been completed. The top candidate is Paul Weinberger. Paul has worked as a Planning Intern for nine months at the city of Inver Grove Heights dealing with variance applications, as well as a broad range of land use related issues. Other than getting up to speed regarding the City's land use regulations and philosophy, Paul will come to the City with the knowledge and experience to handle the heavy workload of variance applications. Staff recommends Paul Weinberger be appointed to the position of Assistant Zoning Administrator, effective May 20, 1998 at a starting salary of $30,000, which is Step 1 of the Level 6 pay range. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the appointment of Paul Weinberger to the position of Assistant Zoning Administrator, effective May 20, 1998 at a salary of $30,000. council L '- CTf 'C MAY 1 1 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ClTV'Or ORONO DATE: May 11, 1998 ITEM NO: / 5^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: 1997 General and Special Revenue Funds Budget Amendments, and Capital Projects Funds Cash Advance General Fund Budget Amendments The total General Fimd revenues for 1997 are $3,717,917, compared to the total expenditures of $3,489,896. Total revenues exceeded total expenditures by $228,021. The year-end revenue for the General Fund is $3,717,917, compared to the budget of $3,447,605, a favorable variance of $270,312. Part of the variance is due to certain items which were not included in the original budget. Those items include the federal grant for an . .Iditional police officer, $30,000; and state grants or aids for increased PERA expense, $3,610, and snow removal aid, $9,625. The 1997 General Fund revenue budget should be amended to reflect these additional revenues. After the amendment the revenue budget will be $3,490,840, and the actu'’! revenue will exceed the amended budget by $227,077. * The General Fund operating expenditures at year end are $3,489,896, compared to the budget of $3,447,605, or $42,291 over budget. The majority of the items causing the expenditure overages were specifically approved by the City Council, and/or were offset by revenues in excess of budgeted amounts. The following is a listing of those departments which require budget amendments due to expenditures exceeding budgeted amounts, and those departments with expenditures significantly below budgeted amounts. Department Original Amendment Amended Budget City Council $ 51,970 $ 410 $ 52,380 Administration 197,295 3,410 200,705 Elections 20 510 530 Assessing 78,065 690 78,755 Legal 97,700 (14,950)82,750 Human Services 16,155 (2,100)14,055 Central Services 168,430 •14,400 182,830 r Department Police Protection Fire Protection Building & Zoning Emergency Preparedness Animal Control Public Works Engineering Recycling Parks Special Services Contingency Original $1,308,170 218,600 314,870 2,500 15,135 495,170 14,420 73,805 52,555 42,050 147,755 II II Amendment $33,360 2,460 42,850 1,190 (3.000) (26.150) ( 1,200) (5.000) (2,250) 4,780 8,350 (15.150) Amended Budget $1,341,530 221,060 357,720 3,690 12,135 469,020 13,220 68,805 50,305 46,830 140,955 Total $3.447.605 $ 42.610 $3.490.215 A brief explanation of the significant overages follows: Administration The amendment is to fund overages in the personnel services as a result of the June position adjustment of the Secretary/Deputy Clerk to Deputy Clerk/IS Assistant retroactive to January 1; and the adjustment to the City Administrator's salary effective September 9. Central Services The amendment is to hind higher than anticipated buildings and grounds maintenance costs, and to fund the LOGIS permit tracking system expense. Police Protection The amendment is to fund the increased personnel services costs, primarily as a result of adding one full-time patrol officer; and higher than anticipated squad car maintenance and repairs due to several transmission failures and an engine replacement. The personnel service costs are offset by the $30,000 federal grant received. Building an<* Zoning The amendment is to fund the increased personnel services cost. The increased costs were a result of severance pay in connection with the retirement of the Planning & Zoning Administrator; the hiring of the Planner/Zoning Administrator prior to that retirement; the reclassification and resulting salary adjustment of the Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator to Senior Planning Coordinator; and the creation of a planning intern position. The planning intern was funded from the Contingency account in the amount of $7,000. Special Ser\ ices The Special Services account expenditures exceeded the budgeted amount due to higher than anticipated activity for police special duty r L assignments and higher than anticipated engineering costs related to development activity. These increased costs are offset by increases in related revenues. Transfers Out Council approved a transfer of $8,347 on 11/24/97 to create the Drug/Felony Forfeiture Fund, a Special Revenue Fund. The amount transferred was equal to the funds on hand in the General Fund at 1/1/97. Special Revenue Funds Budget Amendments The 1997 expenditures in the Special Revenue Funds, i.e. Park Fund, Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund and Building Outlay Fund, include expenditure items that were approved by the Council but were not formally reflected in amendments to the budget. The City's auditor recommends formal budget amendments for these items be approved by the City Council. The amendments follow: Special Revenue Funds Budget Amendment Park Fund: Old Crystal Bay Road Bike/Hike Trail C ystal Bay Park Irrigation and Seeding /vntoine Park Playground Equipment Total Park Fund $ 72,750 (a) 1,766 (b) 1.194 (c) $ 76.240 Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund: Orono Share of Long Lake Fire Rescue Vehicle -0- (d) Building Outlay Fund: Public Works Building Entrance Canopy Safety Improvements for Fuel Tank Island Council Chambers Audio System Total Building Outlay Fund $ 3,000 (e) 1,780 (0 __m (g) $ 4.974 Drug/Felony Forfeiture Fund: (h) Drug Forfeitures Transfer from General Fimd Total Revenues $ 3,435 8.350 .$ 11.785 Expenditure Budget Miscellaneous Charges $ 81D Notes: In 1996, $200,000 was budgeted for the Old Crystal Bay Road Trail but only $52,200 was expended, leaving a budget balance of $147,800. This budget surplus was not carried over to the 1997 budget. In 1997 the budget for the trail is $102,500, however, a larger portion of trail was completed than originally planned. The amendment is required to fund the portion of trail completed up to the school property. Council authorized the improvement on 9/8/97. A budget amendment was not requested at that time. Council authorized the project and approved a budget amendment of $33,266 on 4/14/97. The additional budget amendment of $1,724 is to fund pea gravel, engineering and miscellaneous expenses. Council authorized the expenditure and approved a budget amendment of $32,240 on 6/23/97. Council authorized the project, approved a budget amendment of $19,480, and awarded the contract in that amount on 12/8/97. However, the project contractor costs will be incurred in 1998, therefore the budget amendment of $19,480 should be carried forward to the 1998 budget. The 1997 budget amendment of $3,000 is for engineering costs. The 1997 budget includes $3,800 for this project. The amendment is to fund miscellaneous parts and supplies required to complete the project. The 1997 budget includes $6,000 for this project. When the contract was awarded. Council increased the budget to $7,321. The amendment is to complete the project. Council authorized the fund on 11/24/97. The amendments are required because the revenues and expenditures were not specifically budgeted in the General Fund before the reallocation of the related revenues and expenditures to the new fund. Temporary Cash Advance from the PIR Fund to the MSA Fund During 1997 the City had several Municipal State Aid Fund (MSA) construction projects in process which are being funded in whole or in part by municipal state aid However, until the projects are closed out and the final revenues from state aid, other funds, or other funding sources, such as the collection of special assessments levied for the Highway 12 - Willow Drive project, are completed, it is necessary to advance $4,000 cash from the PIR Fund to the MSA Fund to eliminate the temporary cash deficit in the MSA Fund at December 31, 1997. Certain amounts will be received in 1998 for Watertown Road, Brown Road North, County Road 15/Femdale Marsh, and County Road 6 projects. Some amounts will be collected over a longer period, such as the special assessments, and some costs not eligible for MSA reimbursement will need to be covered by other City funds. The advance will be paid back as soon as possible. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of the 1997 budget amendments for the General and Special Revenue Funds as presented; and approval and authorization of the cash advance of $4,000 from the PIR Fund to the Municipal State Aid Fund, to be effective December 31, 1997. Further, that the 1997 Building Outlay Fund budget amendment for the public works building entrance canopy project, approved 12/8/97, in the amount of $19,480, be transferred to the 1998 Building Outlay Fund budget. r Request for Council Action continued Page 2 May 7, 1998 Licenses HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE continued 2.Kezar, Inc. (Phoiography) Mitch Kezar 3050 Sixth Avenue North Long Lake, MN 55356 3.L.A. Pilgrain, D.C. (Chiropractic Office) LeRoy A. Pilgram, D.C. 1795 Shadywood Road Navarre, MN 55392 4.Nails by Ginger (Nails) Ginger Scott 2620 Kelly Avenue Excelsior, MN 55331 5.Norum & Pearson, PA (Legal Services/Attomeys) Russell Norum 3264 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 6.Small Parts Manufacturing, Inc. (Machining Parts) Charles and Ann Anderson 1295 Loma Linda Avenue Orono, MN 55364 7.Waldron Law Offices, Ltd. (Law Practice) John B. Waldron 1951 Concordia Street Wayzata, MN 55391 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; Motion to approve/deny the above listed licenses. r CITY OF ORONO ^6124730510 04/15/98 10:35 0 :02/03 NO:128 RECEWSD m 1 5 W98 & SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT AP CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA CO ^aJJLLi- ^iLoeuJ UJ^ (doru- Phone Numb8r:_^73r-3St3i Name : cA^dSl ^ ---- Address: i"7P>C>^ o^r . — Permit tt: Pee: $60.00 Date Received: C jyn ^ (.. __ ide or Event: OgpOvO QLA-aOO ci Date of Event: ^/-? ^Hours of Event: ^ 'CDC)(Q^ . TyneofEvent: &t.A if a- Amount:Insurance Company; *^T. -------------------- .—-—- fCopy of Insurance certificatemust I > submitted with this application) 1 am aware of all applicable State and other laws regarding parades and eniarjol.events and will abide by same. I also agree to hold , from the parade of special event approved by the granting of this permit. I understand some events may reguire off-duty or reserve officers and a fee may be required for these services. Date Approved: □ Denied: CJ By: Remarks: oiom^ fAm 4 SKHglKE'll WCMDilO OAfi/i^ fiiiHpe&i liMdte.! CITY OF ORONO ^6124730510 04/13/98 10:35 0 :02/03 N0:128 received ftPR 1 5 »98 & SPECIAL EVENTS PER jVHT AP: " CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA CO -3<X4ULft- UJ^ civxue Permit #: Pea: $50.00 Date Received: Name:__.Sg£x.r~ ca\is1 ^ 5^C jl_i— Address: i~7PiC--> (a^. . jiAn K SjSStS^^.__City, State, Zip: CoT v^ f ___________ Location of Parade or Event: QPopvQ SP^A.O0-P" Date of Event: ^In (Hours of Event: ~~7^QQ>4M I >OQfQi^. Insurance Company: ~ (Copy of Insurance certificata _..........................................--------nr^ |4oca3Cjua.c(Amount: ./-n) must be submitted with this application) I am aware of all applicable State and other laws regarding parades and crtArJai events and vyiH abide by same. I also agree to hold the City of from the parade of special event approved by the granting of this permit. I understand some events may require off-duty or reserve officers and fee may be required for these services. a ________G Date Approved: □ Denied: □ By: Remarks: OlOJM 9 J I_______jgr4>4ikL ^ J M <aocev^AuW^p -171^ esv. r Date:April 17, 1998 To:Lin Vee, City Clerk From:Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police Subject:Special Event Permit I have reviewed the appUcation from Gear West Ski and Bike to hold their annual Run, Bike, Run event on Sunday, June 7, 1998. I have no objection to the issuance of this permit providing the following conditions are met: • Organizers must provide traffic control. • Flow of traffic cannot be impeded by volunteers. • If police reserve officers are needed, arrangements must be made, and a fee of $50 will be imposed. .1 PARADES & SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Permit #: Fee: $50.00 Date Received: Phone Number: (Sol) jU ,5o^ / Name: f —* Address: 4o'7 CpoiAr jU/^ City, State, Zip: ^ ryj/^i Location of Parade or Event: /i/nAj/Ji=^T7>Ai/^A A i. 'Date of Event: /ojioj^?Hours of Event: 6> /hn ~ ^ P/y\ Type of Event: C.u,iS Toct/^/U Insurance Company: 7/v^/<^^r Amount: /, <rr-o, c-r^_____ (Copy of insurance certificate must be submitted with this application) I am aware of all applicable State and other laws regarding parades and special events and will abide by same. I also agree to hold the City of Orono harmless from all liabilities that may arise directly or indirectly from the parade of special event approved by the granting o* this permit. I understand some events may require off-duty or reserve officers and a fee may be required for these services. Signatureture / ^ Approved: □ Denied: □ By: Remarks: 010396.3 Date y/yo/f^ APR 1 3 >99? CITY 0;= OSOriO r Date:April 17,1998 To:I m Vee, City Clerk From:Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police Subject:Special Event Permit I have reviewed the application of the Zumbro Valley Bassmasters to hold a tournament on October 10,1998. I have no objection to the issuance of this permit. • ** i CITV OP ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 r **" ■' w * Al^fi 'i 9 m License Year Date Received Fee Paid Initials GARBAGE & RM^6Sti"'COT^CT0R'S LICENSE APPLICATION The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City of Orono and herewith makes application for a license to do so. Business/Firm Address ^/0/U / r^T7(?/J .'X/ (Street) (City) Business Phone Number 0> /z^/ y 5 (State)(Zip Code) Appliccunt' s Name Address (Street) Phone Number (City) O/L/ ^^3 (State ) (Zip Code) Check One:Individual Number of Vehicles to be used in Orono Partnership / Corporation Description of Vehicles (attached list if more); Loaded Loaded Year Hfqr. Gross Wt. Rear Axle Wt. Siae/Yards License Number / 990 /=^0- 0 7 b V /) Soo c> General area Schedule of Collection charges/ dates Approximate number of customers in Orono Location of dumping area ^ il/wIN ORDER FOR THIS APPLICATION TO BE COMPLETE, YOU MUST ENCLOSE THE FOLLOWING Surety bond in the amount of $1,000. Proof of insurance in the amount of $100,000-$300,000-$50,000, and 10-day cancellation clause. Annual fee is a $30.00 flat rate fee, plus $15/truck, and a $30.00 transfer fee (if applicable). I am the owner and operator of the above business and I have paid all license fees and “^xes required by law. The above information is correct. larft 'TApplie Date FOR ^TY USB ONLY; After review of application, staff recommends: Approval _ _ _ _ _ _ Denial_ _ _ _ _ _Other (specify)' Date I APPLICATION FOR ANNUAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE CITY OF ORONO 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 NAME: JPHOqE: .7/^ c? <7 ADDRESS: (i ZX* ^ ^ '3'' IZ ci^state i z5street BUSINESS NAME: TYPE OF BUSINESS TO BE OPERATED: Number of Employees Within Operation:_ Check. One: Initial Review Fee $50.00 (Provide names of employees on back of application) Annual Review Fee $30.00 License may be revoked if any violation occurs. City staff shall have five (5) business days in which to investigate and make a recommendation pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.02 & 5.03. If a site inspection is required by City staff, the review time will be extended to ten (10) business days. The license application with staff recommendation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regularly scheduled meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month. ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 4 t,C) Prohibited Home Occupation Practices 1. It is unlawful for any business operating as a home occupation to engage in operation without proper licenses. 2. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dw- . ^ 3. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permittee ^ re-sidential zone. 4. No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises. 5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. 6. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from within the structure. The undersigr.-d hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional conditions the City may require. S ignatur e o f Appl icanticant:2^.-A /?Date FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends the following: Approval of application _________Denial of application Signature of Zoning Official:__[ * L ((ij ___Signature of Building Official: ^ Application Date:________^Date License Approved: Date: Date: Y • 2 7 *7 1 Date License Expired:_ *-• • • • APS 1 0 199/ Cffv Or- o.-;o;;o r LISTING OF EMPLOYEES: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME.: ADDRESS: CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY&ZIP; DATE OF BIRTH: APPLICATIOiN FOR ANNUAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE CITY OF ORONO 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 ) 1 NAME: N[ iTCfi ADDRESS: “30^0 Co./Zl Q U __ PHONE: ^7^-S^23 y street BUSINESS NAME: /<PTa4^. TT/Jc. city/state TYPE OF BUSINESS TO BE OPERATED: i\o1o6^ Check One: Initial Review Fee $50.00 (Provide names of employees'on back of application) Annual Review Fee $30.00 License may be revoked if any violation occurs. City staff shall have five (5) business days in which to investigate and make a recommendation pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.02 & 5.03. If a site inspection is required by City staff, the review lime will be extended to ten (10) business days. The license application with staff recommendation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regularly scheduled meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month. ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO SECHION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 4 (C) Prohibited Home Occupation Practices 1. It is unlawful for any business operating as a home occupation to engage in operation without proper licenses. 2. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dwelling. 3. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permitted in the residential zone. 4. No e.xcessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises. 5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. 6. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from within the structure. The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional conditions the City may require. Signature of Applicant: 7 Date 7' : yM'S' FOR CITY USE ONLY; "After review of applji^ation, staff recommends the following: _________Approval of application_____Denial of application ial: -______Date: V :iall ---- Date: y-7 7-fi^ Signature of Zoning Official Signature of BuildingOfficial Application Dare:Date License Approved:Date License Expired: r-» ^ - IJ APR 0 7 199) on 1' u.- APPLICATION FOR ANNUAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE CITY OF ORONO 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 NAME: /) * ^ -y ADDRESS: i9^ A/a. PHONE: C> I> street . I ^ / /V BUSINESS NAME: L > k* r)}(h> U^Q ■ TYPE OF BUSINESS TO BE OPERATED: OU/Cnpf^ACTlCl OP^/___— Number of Employees Within Operation: -f^^-<Provide names of employees on back of application) Check One: Initial Rtview Fee $50.00____Annual Review Fee $30.00 License may be revoked if any violation occurs. City staff shall have five (5) business days in which to investigate and make a recommendation pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.02 & 5.03. If a site inspection is required by City staff, the review time will be extended to ten (10) business days. The license application with staff recommendation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regularly scheduled meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month. ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 4 (C) Prohibited Home Occupation Practices . • u 1. It is unlawful for any business operating as a home occupation to engage in operation without proper licenses. 2. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dwelling. 3. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permitted in the residential zone. 4. No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises. 5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. 6. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from witlun the structure. The undersigned hereb)^grees-to4iie conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional conditions thfcity may r^re. city/state Signature of Applicant: V Date FOR CITY USE ONLY; After review of application, staff recommends the following: Approval of application _________Denial of application -------------------------Date:V-f^'^^ ~~ Date:Signature of Zoning Official: Signature of Building Official Application Date:________^Date License Approved:________Date License Expired: APR 0 7 1997 CiV Y u.- URC.VO APPLICATION FOR ANNUAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE ____ - CITYOFORONO 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 66 9 A i CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 PHONE: y"7ANAME: ADDRESS: BUSINESS NAME: TYPE OF BUSINESS TO BE OPERATE Number of Employees Within Operation: I (Provide names of employees on back of application) Check One: Initial Review Fee $50.00 Annual Review Fee $30.00 ~7 License may be revoked if any violation occurs. City staff shall have five (5) business days in which to investigate and make a recommendation pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.02 & 5.03. If a site inspection is required by City staff, the revie«v time will be extended to ten (10) business days. The license application with staff recommendation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regularly scheduled meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month. ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 4 (C) Prohibited Home Occupation Practices 1. It is unlawful for any business operating as a home occupation to engage in operation without proper licenses. 2. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dwelling. 3. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permitted in the residential zone. 4. No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises. 5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. 6. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from within the structure. The undersigned hereby agrees;knthe conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional conditions the City4navr require. Signature of Applicant:Date: ^ FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends the following: ____y Approval ot application _________Denial of application Signature of Zoning Official: ^ Signature of Building Officiall iL Date: V- 27- Application Date:Date License Approved:Date License Expired: r APPLICATION FOR ANNUAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE CITY OF ORONO 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 • * • * > .1 I. APR 0 9 199/ NAME: Russell Norum PHONE: 612-471-0568 ADDRESS: 3264 North Shore Drive. Wayzata. MN 55391 street city/state BUSINESS NAME: Norum & Pearson, PA_______________________________________ TYPE OF BUSINESS TO BE OPERATED: Legal Services/Attornevs______________ Number of Employees Within Operation: ^ (Provide names of employees on b^ck of application) Check One: Initial Review Fee $50.00____Annual Review Fee $30.00 X License may be revoked if any violation occurs. City staff shall have five (5) business days in which to investigate and make a recommendation pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.02 & 5.03. If a site inspection is required by City staff, the review time will be extended to ten (10) business days. The license application with staff recommendation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regularly scheduled meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month. ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 4 (C) Prohibited Home Occupation Practices 1. It is unlawful for any business operating as a home occupation to engage in operation without proper licenses. 2. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dwelling. 3. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permitted in the residential zone. 4. No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises. 5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. 6. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from within the structure. The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional conditions the City ma^equire. Signature of Applicant:_____y/1 'Yli ____________Date: V ^ FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends the following: Approval of application __________Denial of application Date: ^ —- Date: H‘ z~i 0 ------------------------------------------------------rr-------------- -----------------------------------------------1 Signature of Zoning Official: — Sienature of Building Official! ^Signature of Building Official Application Date:_________Date License Approved:Date License Expired: r LISTING OF EMPLOYEES: NAME: Russell Norum AODRESS: 3264 Nort~h Shnri> Drlyf* CITY & ZIP: Wayzata. MN SS3Q1 DATE OF BIRTH: 3 '7 NAME: ADDRESS: CITY&ZIP; DATE OF BIRTH: NAME:Gale Pearson ADDRESS: 455 Highcroft Road CITY & ZIP: MW DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: 235 Nathan T.anA, ill 03 CITY & ZIP: Plymouth, MN 55441 DATE OF BIRTH: 7/26/61 NAME: ADDRESS: CITY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: APPLICATION FOR ANNUAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE CITY OF ORONO 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 NAME: ^ ADDRESS: d. ________ PHONE: street.city/state BUSINESS NAME: ^ TYPE OF BUSINESS TO BE OPERATED: Number of Employees Witliin Operation: / (Provide<immes of employees on back of application) Check One: Initial Review Fee $50.C0 ____Annual Review Fee $30.00 _c^ Q±.■ License may be revoked if any violation occurs. City staff shall have five (5) business days in which to investigate and make a recommendation pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.02 & 5.03. If a site inspection is required by City staff, the review time will be extended to ten (10) business days. The license application with staff recommendation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regularly scheduled meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month. ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 4 (C) Prohibited Home Occupation Practices _ • 1. It is unlawful for any business operatinga home occupation to engage m operation witnoui proper license -. 2. All persons engaged in Uie business must reside in the dwelling. 3. No commercial signs permitted other tl»an signs permitted in the residential zone. 4. No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premise."'. 5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. 6. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from within the structure. The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional conditions the City may require. , .Signature of Applicant: ^ FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends the following: ^___Approval of application __________De.nial of application ^ Signamre of Zoning Official: U:^.\/>c<J--------------------—S c, Signature of RuildineOfficial: 0 ^ ‘ Application Date:Date License Approved:Date License Expired: 1^-7'A-------- APR ? 3 m env ^riOi\o LISTING OF EMPLOYEES: NAME: ADDRESS: Q. CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: 0-7 ADDRESS: CITY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME; ADDRESS: CITY&ZIP; DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS; CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME; ADDRESS: CITY & ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY&ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH: APPLICATION FOR /JSfNUAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE CITY OF ORONO 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 NAME: John B. Waldron PHONE: A71-09A0 ADDRESS: 1951 Concordia Street Wavzata. MN street city/state BUSINESS NAME: Waldron Lav/ Offices. Ltd._____ TYPE OF BUSINESS TO BE OPERATED: law practice Number of Employees Within Operation: l (Provide names of employees on back of application) Check One: Initial Review Fee $50.00___ Annual Review Fee $30.00 l License may be revoked if any violation occurs. City staff shall have five (5) business days in which to investigate and make a recommendation pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.02 & 5.03. If a site inspection is required by City staff, the review time will be extended to ten (10) business days. The license application with staff recommendation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regularly scheduled meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month. ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 4 (C) Prohibited Home Occupation Practices 1. It is unlawful for any business operating as a home occupation to engage in operation without proper licenses. 2. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dwelling. 3. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permitted in the residential zone. 4. No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises. 5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. 6. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from within the structure. The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional conditions tl/e Citj^may reqmrt. \ Signature of Applicant: j^, Date: k/2/SS FOR CITY USE ONLY: jC Approval of Application After review of application, staff recommends the following: Denial of application Signature of Zoning Official: Signature of Building Official: C^.L(Vy(>t^^ ^ Date: 3jL (\} A a ^_ Application Date:Date License Approved: ________Date: Date License Expired:____ rpr:r:r;vr=ri APR 0 3 1997 CITY tir Qr\OKO J r 8 May 1998 Fri 12:28 PM Check Number Check Number 56209 Date Name 56209 A.T.O.M. ll-May-98 A.T.O.M, Totals Check Number 56209 A.T.O.M Check Number 56210 56210 56210 56210 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR Check Register City of Orono ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 Totals Check Number AIRTOUCH CELLULAR AIRTOUCH CELLULAR AIRTOUCH CELLULAR 56210 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR Transact iofi Amount 50.00 50.00 28.79 28.78 <97.36 554.93 COUNCIL * MAY 1 1 1^98 C?fTO^&RONO MEMBERSHIP/JOHNSON CELL PHONES CELL PHONES CELLULAR CHARGES Check Number 56211 ALL STAR PRO GOLF 56211 ll-May-98 Totals Check Number ALL STAR PRO GOLF 56211 ALL STAR PRO GOLF Check Number 56212 56212 AMERICAN MEDICAL SECURITY ll-May-98 Totals Check Number AMERICAN MEDICAL SECURITY 56212 AMERICAN MEDICAL SECURITY 273.54 273.54 701.42 701.42 SUPPLIES DENTAL INS Check Number 56213 ASPLUNDH COFFEE 56213 ll-May-98 Totals Check Number ASPLUNDH COFFEE 56213 ASPLUNDH COFFEE Check Number 56214 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF 162.00 162.00 i 56214 ll-May-98 Totals Check Number AUGIES MOBILE CHEF 56214 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF Check Jurober 56215 56215 BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP ll-May-98 Totals Check Number BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP 56215 BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP Check Number 56216 56216 56216 BIFFS INC. ll-May-98 ll-May-98 BIFFS INC BIFFS INC Totals Check Number 56216 BIFFS INC Check Number 56217 BUDGET PRINTING 55.18 55.18 1,700.50 1,700.50 113.56 146.52 260.08 CONCESSION STAND BENEFITS FEES BIFF RENTAL APRIL SERVICE 56217 ll-May-98 BUDGET PRINTING 69.80 DARE CERTIFICATES 8 May 1998 Fri 12:28 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 56217 56217 56217 56217 BUDGET PRINTING ll-May-98 BUDGET PRINTING ll-May-90 BUDGET PRINTING ll'May-98 BUDGET PRINTING Totals Check Number 56217 BUDGET PRINTING Check Number 56218 BLRTON EQUIPMENT 56218 ll-May-98 BURTON EQUIPMEJrr Totals Check Number 56218 BURTON EQUIPMENT Check Number 56219 CARGILL SALT 56219 ll-May-98 CARGILL SALT Totals Check Nu^Jaer 56219 CARGILL SALT Check Number 56220 CRYSTEEL 56220 ll-May-98 CRYSTEEL Totals Check Number 56220 CRYSTEEL Check Number 56221 CYS UNIFORMS 56221 56221 56221 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 CYS UNIFORMS CYS UNIFORMS CYS UNIFORMS Totals Check Number 56221 CYS UNIFORMS Check Number 56222 D.M.J. CORPORATION 56222 ll-May-98 D.M.J. CORPORATION Totals Check Number 56222 D.M.J. CORPORATION Check Number 56223 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 56223 ll-May-98 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO Tocals Check Number 56223 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO Check Nun^er 56224 DEMBOUSKI. JAY 56224 ll-May-98 DEMBOUSKI. JAY Totals Check Number 56224 DEMBOUSKI, JAY Check Number 56225 E-2 RECYCLING 56225 ll-May-98 E-Z RECYCLING Transaction Amount 9.85 14.85 67.39 161.89 41.59 41.59 1,412.45 1,412.45 49.89 49.89 16.94 46 95 156.80 220.6.- 2.00 2.00 112.00 112.00 40.07 40.07 5,583.48 Page 2 Comments AIRBORNE EXP PACKAGE SENT PLAQUES BIN DIVIDERS BULK SEAL KIT CLEAN CONCRETE 10 CASES PREMIUM MEALS AT SCHOOL RECYCLING r 8 May 1998 Fri 12:20 PM Check Number Date Name Check Register City of Orono Check Number 56225 E-Z RECYCLING Totals Check Number 56225 E-2 RECYCLING Check Number 56226 EARL F. ANDERSON & ASSOC Transaction Amount 5.583.48 Page 3 Comments 56226 ll-May-98 Totals Check Number EARL F. A:TDERS0N & ASSOC 56226 EARL F. ANDERSON & ASSOC 396.57 396.57 ST SIGNS Check Number 56227 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 56227 ll-May-98 Totals Check Number EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 56227 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 277.00 277.00 25 CS BEER Check Number 56228 FARNIOK, CORREY 56228 56228 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 Totals Check Number FARNIOK, CORREY FARNIOK, CORREY 56228 FARNIOK, CORREY 32.05 10.31 42.36 MEALS FOR SCHOOL FRAMES FOR RESERVE AWARD Check Number 56229 G fit K SERVICES 56229 56229 56229 56229 56229 56229 56229 56229 56229 56229 ll-May-98 ll-May-90 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 Totals Check Number G fit K SERVICES G fit K SERVICES G fit K SERVICES G fit K SERVICES G fit K SERVICES G fit K SERVICES G fit K SERVICES G fit K SERVICES G fit K SERVICES G fit K SERVICES 56229 G fit K SERVICES 5.93 113.69 54.69 54.69 62.55 12.15 70.07 5.93 90.61 12.15 482.46 UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNIFORM RUGS UNIFORMS UNIFORM UNIFORM Check Number 56230 GE CAPITAL 56230 ll-May-98 Totals Check Number GE CAPITAL 56230 GE CAPITAL 222.00 222.00 EMULSTION CARD STATE COMP Check Number 56231 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 56231 56231 ll-May-98 li-May-98 Totals Check Number GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 56231 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 15.75 15.75 31.50 LOCATES LOCATES Check Number 56232 GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSN 56232 ll-May-90 Totals Check Number GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSN 56232 GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSN 125.00 125.00 MEMBERSHIP/FINANCE DIRECT 8 May 1998 Fri 12:28 PM Chock Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number Check Number 56232 GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSN 56233 HAWKINS CHEMICAL INC. 56233 ll-May-98 HAWKINS CHEMICAL INC Totals Check Number 56233 HAWKINS CHEMICAL INC Check Number 56234 :.'->LTHPARTNERS 56234 56234 56234 ll-May-i*C ll-May-98 ll-May-98 HEALTHPARTNERS HEALTHPARTNERS HEALTHPARTNERS Totals Check Number 56234 HEALTHPARTNERS Check Number 56235 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 56235 ll-May-98 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASl’RER Totals Check Number 56235 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Check Number 56236 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN 56236 ll-May-98 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN Totals Check Number 56236 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN Check Number 5623? KENOSHA JOINT SERVICES 56237 ll-May-98 KENOSHA JOINT SERVICES Totals Check Number 56237 KEN0SH7 JOINT SERVICES Check Number 56238 LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS 56238 56238 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS Totals Check Number 56238 LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS Check Number 56239 MALEFI 56239 ll-May-98 MALEFI Totals Check Number 56239 MALEFI Check Number 56240 MICRO AGE 56240 56240 56240 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 MICRO AGE MICRO AGE MICRO AGE Totals Check Number 56240 MICRO AGE Transaction Amount 40.00 40.00 328.50 163.77 5,589.47 6,081.74 50.00 50.00 1,489.2? 1,489.29 500.00 500.00 72.50 72.50 145.00 90.00 90.00 380.36 21**.75 3,433.52 4,027.63 Page 4 Comments W/CONTAINER CHG MAY HEALTH INS MAY HEALTH INS MAY HEALTH INS PERMIT CSAH 15 ROOM fitBOARD 3/90 BAIL COLUMN 4/23/98 COLUMN AD 4/16/90 98 SPRING CONF/BJ VGA VIDEO PRTABLE SUPPORT 2 CPQ- COMPUTERS 8 May 1990 Fri 12:20 PM Check Number Check Number Check Number 56250 Date Name 56249 MOORSE, RON 56250 MOROWCZYNSKI, JIM ll-May-90 MOROWC2YNSKI, JIM Totals Check Number 56250 MOROWCZYNSKI, JIM Check Number 56251 MR AUGIES COFFEE SERVICE 56251 11-May-98 MR AUGIES COFFEE SERVICE Totals Check Number 56251 MR AUGIES COFFEE SERVICE Check Number 56252 MTI DIST CO. 56252 ll-May-90 MTI DIST CO, Totals Check Number 56252 MTI DIST CO. Check Number 56253 NORTH STAR TURF 56253 56253 ll-May-90 ll-May-98 NORTH STAR TURF NORTH STAR TURF Totals Check Number 56253 NORTH STAR TURF Check Number 56254 NSP 56254 56254 56254 56254 ll-May-90 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 Totals Check Number 56254 NSP Check Number 56255 OBERAIGNER, SCOTT 56255 56255 ll-May-98 ll-May-90 Totals Check Number OBERAIGNER, SCOTT OBERAIGNER, SCOTT 56255 OBERAIGNER, SCOTT Check Number 56256 OMAN, LYLE S62S6 ll-May-98 OMAN,LYLE S6256 ll-May-98 OMAN,LYLE 56256 ll-May-98 OMAN,LYLE 56256 ll-May-98 OMAN,LYLE Totals Check Number 56256 OMAN,LYLE Check Number 56257 56257 PAGENET ll-May-98 PAGENET 35.15 57.60 92.75 MILEAGE MILEAGE MILEAGE MILEAGE 74.24 23.82 PAGING 8 May 1998 Fri 12:20 PM Check Number Check Number 56266 Totals Check Number Check Number ll-May-98 Totals Check Number Check Number 56268 THORPE DIST CO. ll-May-9B Totals Check Number 56268 THORPE DIST CO Check Number 56269 TRACY TRIPP FUELS ll-May-98 Totals Check Number TRACY TRIPP FUELS 56269 TRACY TRIPP FUELS Check Number 56270 56270 56270 56270 56270 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 Totals Check Number US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 56270 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Check Number 56271 VAN ZOMEREN, ELIZABETH ll-May-98 Totals Check Number VAN ZOMEREN, ELIZABETH 56271 VAN ZOMEREN, ELIZABETH Check Number 56272 WECKMAN, STEPHEN ll-May-98 Totals Check Nutnber WECKMAN, STEPHEN 56272 WECKMAN, STEPHEN Check Number 56273 56273 56273 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC O5-Mar-90 04-Feb-98 Totals Check Number WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC 56273 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Check Number 56274 YOCUM OIL CO INC. ll-May-98 YOCUM OIL CO INC 64.02 117.40 r 6 May 1998 Wed 12:19 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 044363 044383 PETERSON, BARBARA A. Totals Check Number 044383 Check Number 044384 044384 MOORSE, RONALD J. Totals Check Number 044384 Check Number 044385 044385 FLINT, RICHARD Totals Check Number 044365 Check Number 044386 044386 GOETTEN, J. DIANN Totals Check Number 044386 Check Number 044387 044387 JABBOUR, GABRIEL E Totals Check Number 044367 Check Number 044388 044388 KELLEY, CHARLES Totals Check Number 044388 Grand Total Check Date ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 ll-May-98 Page 1 Check Amount 269.36 269.36 184.70 184.70 269.36 269.36 269.36 269.36 323.22 323.22 269.36 269.36 1,565.36 J I 6 May 1998 Wed 11:14 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 56192 56192 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION 06-May-98 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Totals Check Number 56192 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Check Number 56193 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES 56193 56193 56193 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL P* (K OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL ANK OF LAKES Totals Check Number 56193 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Check Number 56194 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. 56194 06-May-98 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO Totals Check Number 56194 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO Check Number 56195 HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT & COLL 56195 06-May-98 HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT & COLL Totals Check Number 56195 HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT & COLL Check Number 56196 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT & COLL 56196 06-May-98 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT & COLL Totals Check Number 56196 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT & COLL Check Number 56197 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 56197 06-May-98 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Totals Check Number 56197 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Check Number 56198 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 56198 06-May-98 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Totals Check Number 56198 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Check Number 56199 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 56199 06-May-98 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Totals Check Number 56199 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Check Number 56200 MN MUTUAL LIFE 56200 06-May-98 MN MUTUAL LIFE Totals Check Number 56200 MN MUTUAL LIFE s^^Clk&itsseszcsK Transaction Amount 5,604.00 5,604.00 3,308.55 3,308.55 7,761.29 14,378.39 1,150.68 1,150.68 0.00 0.00 179.51 179.51 225.00 225.00 0.00 0.00 3,326.60 3,326.60 475.30 475.30 Page 1 Comments SAVINGS W/H & TRANSFER.RED FICA & MEDICARE W/H FICA,MEDCR CITY SHARE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING DEFERRED COMP W/H THOMTON #00266780 SKREEN #0010755723 DEFERRED COMP W/H UNION DUES WH STATE TAX W/H DEFERRED COMP W/H r I 6 May 1998 Wed 11:14 AM Check Hu^er Check Number Check Number 56201 Check Register City of Orono Date Name 56200 KN MUTUAL LIFE 56201 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP 06-May-9B Totals Check Number MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP 56201 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Check Number 56202 56202 PEBSCO/OBRA O6-May-90 Totals Check Number PEBSCO/OBRA 56202 PEBSCO/OBRA Check Number 56203 56203 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS 06-May-98 Totals Check Number PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS 56203 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS Check Number 56204 56204 56204 PERA 06-May-98 06-May-98 Totals Check Number PERA PERA 56204 PERA Check Number 56205 56205 UNITED WAY 06-May-98 Totals Check Number UNITED WAY 56205 UNITED WAY Transaction Amount 265.00 265.00 227.91 227.91 1,887.65 1,887.65 4,343.05 5,308.77 9,651.82 30.00 30.00 Page 2 Comments DEFERRED COMP W/H OBRA DEFERRED COMP W/H USCM DEFERRED COM? W/H PERA EMPLOYEE W/H PERA CITY SHARE CHARITY DONATIONS W/H Grand Total 37,401.86 r / t 5 May 1998 Tue 8:08 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 044320 044320 JOHNSON, MARY ; NN Totals Check Number 044320 Check Number 044321 044321 GEMAR, JAMIE L Totals Check Number 044321 Check Number 044322 044322 HASEMAN, CAROLE A Totals Check Number 044322 Check Number 044323 044323 MOORSE, RONALD J Totals Check Number 044323 Check Number 044324 044324 VEE, LINDA S Totals Check Number 044324 Check Number 044325 044325 KUEHH, THOMAS M Totals Check Number 044325 > Check Number 044326 044326 OLSON, RONALD J Totals Check Number 044326 Check Number 044327 044327 PETTIT. SANDRA K. Totals Check Number 044327 Check Number 044323 044328 ANDERSON, BRUCE L. Totals Check Number 044328 Check Date 06-May-98 06-May-98 O6-May-90 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 Page 1 Check Amount 415.44 415.44 470.03 470.03 750.47 750.47 1,470.03 1,470.03 1,005.33 1,005.33 950.79 950.79 664.96 664.96 781.95 781.95 724.08 724.08 J r 5 May 1998 Tue 8:08 AM Check Number Check Register City of Orono Employee Name Check Number 044329 044329 BOBZIEN, SUE A, Totals Check Number 044329 Check Number 044330 044330 BORIS, SCOTT W, Totals Check Number 044330 Check Number 044331 044331 CARLSON, MICHAEL B Totals Check Number 044331 Check Number 044332 044332 CHESWICK, GARY B. Totals Check Number 044332 Check Number 044333 044333 CORNICK, JAMES L, Totals Check Number 044333 Check Number 044334 044334 DEMBOUSKI, JAY C Totals Check Number 044334 Check Number 044335 044335 ERICKSON, KURT R Totals Check Number 044335 Check Number 044336 044336 FARNIOK, CORREY L Totals Check Number 044336 Check Number 044337 044337 FISCHENICH, DAN T Totals Check Number 044337 Check Date 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-9B 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 Page 2 Check Amount 644.28 644.28 523.81 523.81 439.14 439.14 1,532.67 1,532.67 1,359.61 1,359.61 1,287.02 1,287.02 1,250.82 1,250.82 1,243.66 1,243.66 1,144.21 1,144.21 Check Number 044338 r 5 May 1998 Tue 8:06 AM Check Number Check Register City of Orono Employee Name Check Number 044338 044338 FISCHER, CHRISTOPHER K Totals Check Number 044338 Check Number 044339 044339 HANSING, CAROL J Totals Check Number 044339 Check Number 044340 044340 JOHNSON, BRADLEY P Totals Check Number 044340 Check Number 044341 044341 KNOLLENBERQ, KRISTIN L Totals Check Number 044341 Check Number 044342 044342 MCNALLY, STEVEN A Totals Check Number 044342 Check Number 044343 C44343 MCNICHOLS, DAVID L Totals Check Number 044343 Check Number 044344 044344 MOROWeZYNSKI, JAMES Totals Check Number 044344 Check Number 044345 044345 PERSELL, WILLIAM R. Totals Check Number 044345 Check Number 044346 044346 SCHOENHOFF, JOHN B Totals Check Number 044346 Check Number 044347 Check Date 06-May-98 06*May~98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 Page 3 Check Amount 664.51 664.51 357.79 357.79 1,134.41 1,134.41 632.13 632.13 1,035.13 1,035.13 1,151.84 1,151.64 1,508.29 1,508.29 493.56 493.56 1,166.88 1,166.88 H' r 5 May 1998 Tue 8:00 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 044347 044347 TOMCHECK, LAWRENCE F Totals Check Number 044347 Check Number 044348 044348 TOMCZYK, MARK W, Totals Check Number 044348 Check Number 044349 044349 JOHNSON, JEFFREY D Totals Check Number 044349 Check Number 044350 044350 WITTKE, ANTHONY A Totals Check Number 044350 Check Number 044351 044351 GAFFRON, MICHAEL P. Totals Check Number 044351 Check Number 044352 044352 GAPPA, GREGORY A Totals Check Number 044352 Check Number 044353 044353 OMAN, LYLE E Totals Check Number 044353 Check Number 044354 044354 VAN ZOMEREN, ELIZABETH Totals Check Number 044354 Check Number 044355 044355 VANG, BRUCE L Totals Check Number 044355 Check Number 044356 Check Date O6-May-90 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 06-May-98 Page 4 Check Amount 442.42 442.42 1,235.37 1,235.37 594.05 594.05 228.95 228.95 1,116.97 1,116.97 1,513.87 1,513.87 1,057.15 1,057.15 1,114.04 1,114.04 976.33 976.33 INFORMATION council l......... may 1 1 1993 CITY or C'RONO ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL MAY 11 1998 CtTYOFOnONO OF r COUM';:l • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 May i 1 I'jjo CiT> ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Sandra Smith, Janice Berg, Charles Schroeder, Dale Lindquist, Elizabeth Hawn and Lili McMillan, William Stoddard was absent. The following represented the City Staff: Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, City Planner Elizabeth Van Zomeren, Public Services Director Greg Gappa and Recorder Carole Haseman. Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS (Agenda item #1 follows item #2) (#2) #2340 ROBERT WAADE, 3280/3290 NORTH SHORE DRIVE SUBDIVISION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 6:30-6:32 P.M. - PRELIMINARY Smith announced that Application #2340 was tabled at the request of applicant, (#1) #2325 LAKE COUNTRY BUILDERS ON BEHALF OF JOHN AND CINDY OLSON 950 NORTH ARM DRIVE - VARIANCES - 6:32-6:50 P.M. The Applicant was present, Van Zomeren reported that the Planning Commission previously reviewed the application at the January meeting and application was tabled at the request of applicant on March 16, 1998. The property is zoned LR-IB and meets all of the minimum zoning requirements for the district except bluff setback. The existing residence was constructed before the Shoreland Regulations were in place and is located between the 75' lakeshore setback and the top of the bluff Hardcover is not an issue. The revised plan proposes to replace a deck with a lakeside upper level deck extending f from the existing residence and IT in length with a stairway to the ground. The area underneath the deck would be enclosed for a screen porch. Staff recommends approval of the revised plan with the condition that in the future the deck and screened porch cannot be converted into enclosed living areas. Olson ’s builder from Lake Country' Builders stated the original plan included an upper level screen porch on the deck area but that plan was revised because it obstructed the lake view. r ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#1 - #2325 Lake Countty Builders - Continued) Hawn asked if the screened porch could be entered from inside the house. Lake Country Builders explained the screened porch design is similar to a walkout with entry from the stairway. Smith asked if applicant was comfortable with the recommendation that the area could not be converted into an enclosed liveable area. Olson said the present deck needs to be replaced and understood what the Planning Commission was recommending. There were no public comments. McMillan asked for clarification if improvements could be made to the house on the side facing the road. Van Zomeren said the building pad was limited and would not meet the 30' setback. Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2325 for the construction of an 8'x27' deck with a screened porch area underneath upon the condition that the deck and screened porch cannot be converted into future enclosed living area. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (Agenda item #3 will be heard at 7:00 p.m. NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS (#4) #2352 RICK FREDERICKSEN REPRESENTING WOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB, 200 WOODHILL ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 6:50-6:52 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren explained the applicant is proposing to construct a 14'x22' pump house over a well currently being installed. The country club is a conditional use and any additional structure on the property requires an update of its conditional use permit. It does meet the setback requirements. The accessory structure will not be visible or have a negative impact on adjacent property owners. Staff recommends that the structure be included into the conditional use permit application for Woodhill Country Club. No public comments. Schroeder moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2352 to approve Woodhill Country Club to build a pump house as submitted. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. I ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (U5) #2353 LEN BUSCH, 1265 SHORELINE DRIVE - VARIANCE - 6:52-7:05 P, The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The applicant was present. Van Zomeren said the property contains 1.22 acres and is located in the LR-IA 2 acre minimum zoning district. The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance in the 75-250* setback area to build a 750 s.f. hobby room. There is a large wetland area in the northeast section of the property. Hardcover numbers are high because of the driveway design, and construction of the pool and patio took place prior to the Shoreland Regulations being in effect. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss the application with the intent of reducing hardcover. The structure is proposed to be located 10’ off the property line which meets the setback requirements making use of the existing driveway and a comer of the existing hardcover. Busch explained the driveway is odd and difficult to turn around in. It is too dangerous for cars to back out onto County Road 15. One car in the driveway can block all cars. Although he does not like the driveway and would like to get rid of some of it on the side, he needs the space for parking as several family members visit often. The proposed free standing building needs no driveway. The installation of a garage door would allow access of storage items and would result in a 5-6* pad in front of the door. He suggests cutting off about 350 s.f. of driveway with a lawn area in front of it. The building is 725 s.f. which would only add 395 s.f. to the total square footage. Staffs alternate proposal is not an option because it is located over the well on his property. Van Zomeren apologized for the misrepresentation but the surveyor did not indicate placement of the well on the survey. Busch said his property is unique and secluded from neighbors. There would be no increase in water mnoff to the lake because drainage flows to the wetland area on his property. He is looking forward to retirement and needs to find space for his hobbies. The proposed building would meet his woodworking needs. No sewer or water would be installed in the building. Smith asked if there would be adequate turnaround space. Busch felt it would. Lindquist indicated the building size was excessive. Busch said the 25'x30* size makes it symmetrical with the garage. Smith asked if he had existing living space to use as a hobby room and/or other area to give up. Busch said the house does not have a basement and lacks storage room. Van Zomeren said adding 300 s.f. of hardcover represents a 3.2% increase for that setback area. Hawn suggested reducing the driveway. Smith recommended reducing the building size to 25'x20*. She inquired how the building would be heated. Busch intends to install a gas furnace and wood stove in the proposed building. Hawn suggested approval be based on the condition that only a limited amount of hardcover be added. r ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#5 - #2353 Len Busch - Continued) Lindquist moved, Havvn seconded, to approve Application #2353 for construction of an accessory building no larger than 25'x25' with the condition the driveway be partially removed so the total hardcover added not exceed 300 s.f. and the understanding that there will be no future approvals of additional structures or hardcover on the property. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Van Zomeren indicated she would obtain a survey with the well and sewer lines marked. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS: SUBDIVISIONS (#3) #2355 SUSAN AND DOUGLAS VAN MOORLEHEM AND KEN TURNHAM, 4490 WATERTOWN ROAD - CLASS III PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - 7:05-7:30 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants were present. Gaffron explained approval is requested for a 4-lot plat at the intersection of McCulley Road, County Road 6 and Watertown Road with part of it adjacent to Tumham Road. The property contains 35.6 acres and is split into 3 pieces by existing roads. The existing house is located in the northerly portion which is 22 acres in area but contains only 4.8 acres of dry buildable land as extensive wetlands are located on the property. The area south of County Road 6 and west of McCulley Road contains 5 acres and is proposed as a separate lot. The third piece is located in the southeasterly area and is approximately 8 acres in area and is proposed to be split into 2 pieces. The zoning district is 5 acres. When the City created McCulley Road in 1980, there was a condemnation of property from this parcel in order to have a corridor for the road. As part of the condemnation proceedings, the City agreed to allow the 8 acres to be divided into two 4 acre parcels. The City is obligated to allow that split. In the future, the intersection will be undergoing significant changes by the County resulting in the loss of 2 acres to the 8 acre parcel. The County in its acquisition realized that the taking of 2 acres would probably reduce this to a one lot situation and financially settled accordingly with the owners. Presently the City is looking at this as a 3 lot plat and applicants are in agreement. Because of the reduction in size and loss of a second drainfield site, staff recommends the platting of Lot I, Block 3 as a single 6 acre lot. The result would be a 6 acre single building site that has tested septic sites with driveway access from Turnham Road. The second parcel would be approximately 5 acres with access 400-600' south of the new intersection. This lot has two septic sites tested and approved. The 22 acre parcel with the existing house contains approximately 4.8 acres of diy' buildable land and because of the unique circumstances, a variance is likely justified to allow less than a 5 acre requirement of dry buildable area. The applicants' wetland delineator needs ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#3 - U2355 Susan and Douglas Van Moorlehem - Continued) to confirm the wetland area. The Class III subdivision is subject to park dedication fees and requires an easement and covenant over the wetlands. The City Engineer's report states the need for drainage area calculations and a grading plan. In summary, the dry buildable acreage needs to be confirmed for Lot 1, Block 1. A lot combination is recommended for Lots I and 2, Block 3 to be combined as a single 6 acre lot. Also applicant needs to provide stomiwater/drainage calculations to confirm that there is no need for stormwater ponding. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat as described. Douglas Van Moorlehem said there are no immediate plans to build on the southern lots. Gaffron explained a park fee would be due with the application. The park dedication fee could be delayed if some of the lots were platted as outlots now but eventually a future platting process would be required to change the status of the outlots into buildable lots. Lindquist mentioned the possibility of the lots not meeting future zoning requirements if the rules change. Gaffron suggested the option of paying the park fee at the time the building permit is issued as long as the lots are not going to be immediately built on. Van Moorlehem asked the amount of the park fee. Gaffron stated it is calculated at 8% of the undeveloped value of the land or a minimum of $2,900 per lot or a maximum of $4,900 per lot. If the property is platted with lots, the park dedication fee is determined now. Van Moorlehem agreed to have the lots platted as buildable lots. Smith asked for public comments. Norbert Johnson of 4520 Watertown Road expressed a concern that a change in the topography would cause a drainage problem on his property. Gaffron stated there are no plans to change the topography. Schroeder moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2355 for a 3 lot residential subdivision as outlined in staffs memo of April 13, 1998 stating the need to confirm the amount of dry buildable acreage. If it is not 5 acres, a variance will be recommended. Lots 1 and 2, Block 3 will be platted as a single 6 acre lot. Driveway access locations to be subject to approval of the Public Services Director. Confirmation is needed that there will be no drainage changes. The standard plat conditions apply along with the usual assessment of park dedication fees. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Gaffron explained the Park Commission will be reviewing the City's trail plan along McCulley Road. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS - CONTINUED (#6) #2354 KONRAD KRUEGER, 520 HANLON AVENUE - VARIANCES - 7:30-7:40 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted, The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren explained the property consists of 1.1 acres in a 2 acre zone. Applicant proposes the construction of a second level addition over the existing residence and an attached, one car tuck under garage that encroaches into the required yard areas. Variances are required for front, side and rear setbacks. A 200' lot width, 50' front yard, 30' side yard and 50' rear yard setbacks are required for the RR-IB zone. Staff does recommend a 24.9' front setback variance to allow the nearest portion of the residence to be located 25.1' from the front setback where 50' is required and 28.3' exists. The approval includes an overhang for front awning which shall not extend more than 1.5' beyond the exterior wall. Staff also recommends approval of a side setback variance of 20.5' to allow the 9.5' setback to remain where 30' is required and a rear setback variance of 35.5' to allow the 14.5' setback to remain where 50' yard is required. A variance is needed to add the second story and to build on the existing foundation. Krueger indicated the house is small and asked if the second floor was an issue. Van Zomeren explained that a variance is required whenever a non-conforming structure increases in massing or bulk. Krueger said tn.;; neighbors had no objections to his proposal. Smith inquired if ht ‘ju l lived there long and suggested that the debris be cleaned up. Krueger responded he bought the property two months ago and on Sunday he cleaned up the yard. Hawn asked if the shed was on his property. Krueger said it is actually on the other lot. HawTi questioned if the footings would be able to support a second story. r ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#6 - #2354 Konrad Krueger - Continued) Krueger responded that would be the first thing to adjust. The walls will come in slightly and the side walls will be reinforced. If the garage is allowed, then the walls between the basement and garage will be taken out and replaced with a wood foundation. All the masomy' will be reworked. Smith inquired as to the timeframe. Krueger intends the project to be completed in 3 to 4 months. There were no comments from the public. Hawn was concerned about drainage on the neighbor's property. Van Zomeren explained consideration of the drainage issue would be part of the building application plan review by the Building Department. Lindquist moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2354 to allow the construction of a second story over the existing residence and an attached one stall garage per staffs recommendation and that applicant work with the City Engineer to ensure proper drainage. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#7) #2356 JON AND DIANN RAPPAPORT, 3067 FARVIEW LANE, i'ACATION - 7:40-7:55 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron summarized the request was for a vacation and rededication of a new drainage easement to allow construction of a replacement septic system. Currently the septic system is non-conforming and needs to be replaced by the end of 2001. The property abuts Lake Minnetonka and contains a pond which is considered a wetland. The area to the west is the only suitable location for a septic replacement syste.m. A portion of the proposed mound location would encroach in the drainage easement originally created in 1977. The actual drainageway is w'est of the casement and the new septic system can be constructed in the proposed location. The Septic System Inspector has given approval to allow a setback of approximately 55' in one comer and 65-70' in the other corner where a 75' setback from the wetland is normally required. In the future, applicant would like to build a sport court in the abandoned septic system area. The new' area has been tested as a feasible location and staff recommends approval. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#7 - /^2356 Jolin Rappaport - Continued) Smith questioned the availability of sewer to the area. Gaffron explained it is Orono's goal to bring sewer to all the property along the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. Council has directed staff to make an application for an amendment of the MUSA boundary to incorporate the northeast shore of Maxwell Bay and the southeast shore of Stubbs Bay which remain unsewered. There is no estimated schedule when this might occur. Applicant is willing to construct a new system rather than wait for more than two years. Rappaport explained at the time of purchase the seller gave special consideration for replacement of the septic system. There were no public comments. Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to approve vacation of the existing easement and rededicate a new easement per staffs recommendation. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#8) #2357 SUSAN AND KENT WHITWORTH, 1425 BAY RIDGE ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE - 7:55-8:10 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomcren explained a hardcover variance is requested to allow construction of a retaining wall along County Road 15 and a conditional use permit would also be required for grading within 5' of the property line. Topography is an issue. The proposed retaining wall would be partially located within the lakeshore setback and on Hennepin County right-of-way. Permission from Hennepin County is needed. The roadway divides applicant’s back yard and the lake. He proposes to neatly tie the retaining wall into the neighboring property and to provide safe access to the lake. Applicant has a concern for his children playing in the back yard by the top of the slope. Whitworth voiced his concern for safety of his children and access to the lake. He plans to have 3 terraces with a drop shorter than 5'. Berg asked if there would be a loss of mature trees. Whitworth said he would lose a couple of immature trees. There were no public comments. 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (US - #2357 Susan and Kent Whitworth - Continued) Whitworth indicated that upon further study it might be best to extend the wall further than the proposed 60 ’ and continue it to the north property line. Berg agreed with the proposal but would like some continuity with the appearance and materials used in the retaining walls of the adjacent property owners. McMillan stated tree replacement is necessary if trees over 6" in diameter are removed within the 0-75' shoreline setback area. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2357 to construct a retaining wall to the north property line keeping the overall appearance consistent with the neighboring retaining walls with an effort to preserve trees 6" in diameter or greater and/or mitigate the trees. This application is subject to approval from Hennepin County. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Whitworth asked for clarification if he needed app: • al from Kennepin County prior to obtaining a building permit. Schroeder said the Council W'"'u* | v.*'»>y make it a condition of approval. Van Zomeren also asked for a determination of the actual amount of hardcover. (#9) #2358 RANDY AND MARIE STAFFANSON, 1422 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES - 8:10- 8:20 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren stated a fire destroyed applicants' garage. A 24'x26' garage is proposed by moving it forward of the previous footprint approximately 5-7'. The triangular shape of the property presents a hardship for the location of the new accessory structure. The previous garage encroached in the 10' side yard setback area by 6.16'. The new garage will encroach slightly more than that because it will move forward and the distance between the garage and side lot line decreases as the garage moves towards the front lot line. The property is located in the 250-500 ’ setback area. The hardcover currently exceeds 30% but the applicant is proposing less hardcover because the proposed addition would move forward and be located over a portion of the existing driveway. Staffanson noted a discrepancy in the size. The garage is proposed to be 24'x30’. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#9 - #2358 Randy and Marie Staffanson - Continued) Smith mentioned the shed could be taken out of the side setback area. Van Zomeren indicated it would be difficult to move because of the concrete pad. There were no public comments. McMillan moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2358 to replace the garage that was ume granting side yard and hardcover variances with the condition that proposed hardcover not exceed 31.18%. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Van Zomeren informed the applicant that the building official specified the need for frost footings. (#10) #2359 HESTIA HOMES INC. ON BEHALF OF MATT AND KAREN PARKS, 825 FOREST ARMS LANE - VARIANCES - 8:20-8:45 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants were present. Van Zorneren explained the property is 1.26 acres and meets the lot size requirements for the LR-IB zoning district. The application has two parts. First, the applicants are requesting approval to allow a g^age addition that was constructed in March 1998 to remain by granting variances for bluff setback and average lakeshore setback. The second part is to allow construction of a new 526 s.f. u M ^ smaller deck was previously located. Because a miscommunication within department occurred, the builder was given premature approval to construct the garage. A 30 setback is required from the top of the bluff which limits where improvements can be made currentl^y and in the future on this property. Staff recommends an after-the-fact variance be granted for bluff setback and average lakeshore setback for the garage addition. There were no comments from the public. Smith stated the Planning Commission was in consensus with an after-the-fact variance for the garage. Van Zomeren estimated that the new deck comes out 12' further than the old deck. Lindquist stated the ne^vv deck is approximately 28'xl4'. In reviewing the site elevations. Van Zomeren stated the the old deck came out 2' from the farthest lakeside wall. She was unable to find any records showing the exact dimensions of the old deck. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#10 - #2359 Hestia Homes Inc. - Continued) McMillan inquired if a bumpout had been done to the wall. Applicant's builder from Hestia Homes commented the only bumpout on the house was a bay window on the first floor. Lindquist determined the addition of the deck amounts to an increase of 336 s.f. of hardcover. Van Zomeren noted the existing garage and proposed deck do not exceed structural coverage or hardcover limitations. The issues with the deck are setbacks to the bluff and average lakeshore. McMillan felt replacing the existing square footage was consistent with other recommendations. Schroeder asked if the bump out was done in anticipation of approval for a deck. Hestia Homes answered it was not a consideration and they had been focused on hardcover issues and unaware of the impact to the bluff and site line. He asked for clarification of the bluff ordinance. The applicant bought the property before the bluff ordinance was in effect. Van Zomeren responded the bluff ordinance protects the views from the lake for aesthetic reasons and provides protection of structures to prevent erosion to the bluff. Lindquist did not feel comfortable recommending approval to increase the size of the deck. Hawn suggested a curved design instead of a rectilinear shape to the deck. Hestia Homes said tlie lack of depth would be a problem. The original deck was only 10-11' deep. The current deck proposal is for an 18' depth. A common deck size is around 14' which would put it 9 1/2' past the edge. Lindquist suggested a compromise. Schroeder commented that the original size of the deck was acceptable at the time the house was purchased. Hawn said there was no point in building a deck that was not useable and proposed approval be made in temis of square footage. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2359 for (1) an after-the-fact variance for bluff setback and average lakeshore setback based on the fact the building permit was issued; (2) a deck extension consisting of 392 s.f plus 24 s.f for the side section. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Smith alerted applicants that in the future there should be no additional impacts done to the bluff McMillan offered the applicants the option of tabling this application to redesign the deck. Applicant agreed that the recommendation was reasonable. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#11) #2360 ANTHONY KMETZ, 640 ORCHARD PARK ROAD, VARIANCE RENEWAL - 8:45-8:47 P.M. - CONTINUED The Applicant was not present. Smith suggested phoning the applicant to remind him of the meeting while Planning Commission took a 5 minute break. (#12) #2362 BOB HOWARD, 1300 SHORELINE DRIVE, VARIANCES - 8:55-9:18 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren explained variances for front, side and rear setbacks, lot width and lot area are requested to replace a structure because of a fire. Access to the property is from Shoreline Drive. A wetland area was identified on the property. The property is located in a 2 acre zoning district and is actually less than 1/2 acre. In the RR-IB District the lot width requirement is 200', front yard is 50', side yard 30', side adjacent to street is 30' and rear yard is 50'. This lot is restricted for buildability. The structural coverage is proposed to be less than 15%. This lot is in the 500-1,000' setback area from the lake. Hardcover is proposed to be less than 35%. The structure was more than 75% damaged and the non-conforming section of the zoning code governs replacement. The subject property does not meet the lot area and lot width requirements so in order to return any structure to this lot, variances are required. The existing residence does not meet the setback requirements from the front or the side setback. The proposed residence would improve upon those setbacks, with the exception of the rear setback. Staff recommends approval of the lot area and lot width, front and side setbacks as proposed. Any future structural additions should not exceed 15% structural coverage. The applicant is working with the Building Department to clean up the site. Elevation plans indicate the level of the garage will be more accessible. Applicant needs to submit a grading plan prior to getting a building permit showing normal and customar>' grading near the residence and lot lines. There are no hardcover or structural coverage requirements. Smith noted the lot is substandard. Van Zomeren said the RR-1B has the most difficult requirements to meet with the lot size at less than 1/4 of the requirement and the lot is further impacted by the wetlands and the fact that the property is a comer lot. Smith asked if the size of the house was being increased. Van Zomeren said the existing building is approximately 1,966.20 s.f. and 2,734.4 s.f is being proposed. Howard explained the only change being proposed is the addition of a two car garage and the front door location will face east instead of south. 12 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 I g (#12 - #2362 Bob Howard - Continued) Smith referenced a letter received from Andrew J. Goetten, a neighbor, dated April 18, 1998. Van Zomeren reported an adjacent piece of property had been sold in a tax forfeiture sale and the present ov\Tier would be willing to sell the property to Mr. Howard. Smith summarized the concerns in Goetten’s letter as 1) Mr. Howard confine his construction activities to his platted lot; 2) that mounds of dirt, railroad ties and debris be removed from the unopened Fox Street right-of-way, area be returned to pre-existing grade and be stabilized with grass; 3) that the City of Orono carry out maintenance obligations relating to pump station, gates, fences and appropriate screen plantings contained in grant of easement. Van Zomeren said the letter had been turned over to the Inspection Department for review. Howard explained a remodeling project was started about 2-3 years ago and had not been completed before the fire. The new project is an insurance issue and feels the insurance company will be in control. He relerred to a 6 month state law for rebuilding. The house burned December 4, 1997. Applicants would like to be in the new residence by fall. Smith noted the proposed residence met the 26' setback from the wetland. She questioned applicant if down sizing the garage to a 2 stall would be a problem. Mrs. Howard indicated there would be no problem because it was just the two of them. Schroeder sa* J applicant needs to clean the area and remove the railroad ties. Howard stated the railroad ties w'ere not his nor were they on his property. There w'ere no public comments. Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2362 for lot area, lot width, front and side setbacks as proposed and any future structural additions should not exceed 15% structural coverage. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Berg suggested to Howards that a good neighbor policy be enacted as to cleanup of the premises. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#11) #2360 ANTHONY KMETZ, 640 ORCHARD PARK ROAD, VARIANCE RENEWAL - 9:18-9:21 P.M. - CONTINUED The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was now present. Van Zomeren reported applicant is requesting the renewal of an elapsed variance to allow the construction of an attached three car garage and entryway addition. A front setback variance is required. The property does not meet the lot area requirement for the RR-IA zoning district. Structural coverage is not an issue with this application. Staff recommends to approve the renewal of a front setback variance to allow an attached three stall garage and entryway addition that would be located 71.7' from the front lot line where 75.7' is existing and 100' is required. Schroeder inquired when the variance expired. Van Zomeren stated the old resolution expired May 27,1996. There were no public comments. Hawn moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2360 per staff recommendation. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#13) #2363 BILL BOCKMANN, 1130 LOMA LINDA AVENUE - VARIANCES 9:21-9:45 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present together with his son, Dave. Bill Bockmann noted he purchased the property from his father but his father retained a life estate interest. Van Zomeren explained the property is only .44 acres where i acre is required. Applicant is proposing to replace the existing structure that would have a three cai attached garage. Topography is not issue. Staff has concerns with the placement of the structure. Variances are required for lot area, side street setback and hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback. Applicant has indicated that plans have changed. Dave Bockmann informed Planning Commission that he has redesigned the house. L ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#13 - #2363 Bill Bockmann - Continued) Vein Zomeren said a survey is needed showing the new structure. Dave Bockmann has changed the front of the house to face the west toward the service road. The new structure will be located 22' from the north line and 17' from the side south. When the staff report indicated denial, he proceeded to rework the plan. With the new proposal, the garage faces to the west. He demonstrated the placement of his new plan on the survey. Another issue is placement of the well which is located 33' from Loma Linda and 44' from the service road. Any structure needs to be located 3' from the well. They would rather not abandon the well because of the cost. The deck has been angled to conform to the average setback line. The entire house does fall behind the 75' setback but the average setback line is strange and difficult to conform to. Because his elderly grandfather will be living in the proposed structure, special consideration was made in the design to address his care. The three car is a necessity because there will be four drivers and four vehicles. Lindquist inquired as to placement of the driveway. Dave Bockmann said the driveway would come off of Loma Linda and stated the service road in the summer is very crowded. Lindquist asked the width of the service road. Van Zomeren stated the road is 20' and functions like an alley. Gappa said the City does not plow' the road. Smith said overall the plan is better and suggested moving the structure further to the service road. Dave Bockmann stated moving the structure in that direction would interfere w ith the well. Berg suggested tabling the application so the applicant can return with revised calculations and an updated survey. Smith explained that the Council would also require an updated survey. Van Zomeren noted the well needs to be shown on the survey. Berg moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2363 for review at the May meeting of the Planning Commission. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#14) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS ON MARCH 23,1998 AND APRIL 13,1998. Berg, w ho attended the April 13, 1998 Council meeting, reported review of the Brook Park Realty application noting discussion of the 60 day rule. Brook Park was given the option to work things out and come back. She noted that the Old Crystal Bay Road plat was approved with a bike path on one side of the road. 1 he Hauser application was denied. Regarding the Olsen-Touve preliminary subdivision. Council felt the matter was a housekeeping issue and recommended Lots 55 and 56 be r ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 20,1998 (#14 - Report of Planning Commission - Continued) kept together and Lots 57-61 be combined. Otten appeared in connection with the amendment to industrial zone moratorium. His property is located at the intersection of County Roads 6 and 12 and he would like to be able to have the use of the property before it is condemned. No one attended the March 23,1998 Council meeting. (#15) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Smith asked the status of tree preservation and home occupation. Van Zomeren said the home occupation review will be brought before the Commission at a future date. Smith said she would rather have a separate work meeting scheduled. Berg informed members that the park dedication fee was approved. Gaffron explained the park dedication fee cap of $2,900 minimum to a maximum of $4,900 which applies to everybody regardless of the value of their lots. In connection with commercial subdivisions, a relationship was established regarding commercial activity and the use of parks as employees would use trails or parks. (#16) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MARCH 16,1998. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of March 16, 1998. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#17) SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON APRIL 27,1998 AND MAY 11,1998. April 27 - McMillan May 11 - Lindquist ADJOURNMENT Smith moved, Hawn seconded, to adjourn at 9:55 p.m. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Sandra Smith, Chair Person -.z.rz.-ir-, .J r May 6, 1998 C0uNC/LMi3r_ ■} MAY i 1 rnry o.-. , Jyj^8 >.. I Mr. Edward J, Callahan, Chair Orono Highway 12 Design Review Advisory Committee City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Dear Mr. Callahan: This letter will serve as Mn/DOT’s initial response to your letter of March 24,1998 on behalf of the Orono Highway 12 Design Review Advisory Committee. As your letter indicates, many of the issues raised require more investigation. In this letter I will respond as best I can given the information at hand. In the attachment I’ve reproduced the numbered section of your letter in italics with Mn/DOT’s responses following, item by item. /. Bast Interchange Starting at the eastern end of the proposed highway, it appears to us that a general design layout and location has received acceptance from the Advisory Committee members of the three cities and Mn/DOT. But, we do understand that further information will be presented refining and clarifying some of the additional details. In connection with this interchange, it is Orono's view that, to a considerable extent, the opinion of the City of Wayzata should be given the greatest weight since the proposed structures are almost entirely within that city. However, it is immediately adjacent to, and in some cases, impinges upon Orono as well. The City of Orono seriously objects to and opposes the placing ofa semaphore at the intersection of Wayzata Boulevard and Highway 12. Further, although the matter has not been discussed at the Committee meetings, we are hopeful that it will prove unnecessary to move the Meyer Brothers parking lot at state taxpayers' expense. However, the Orono Police Department has raised the question of whether it would be possible to incorporate an entrance for emergency vehicles only, to permit them to obtain access to the Highway on the east end without the necessity of going all of the way to 101. If this is done, the Dairy parking lot will have to be moved. Based on trafhc forecasts, the intersection of Wayzata Boulevard and “old Highway 12" will meet the most important traffic signal warrants. Ln an unsignalized condition the right turn from Wayzata Boulevard to westbound “old Highway 12" will operate at level of service F in the afternoon peak hour. Whether a signal is justified at the time of construction has yet to be determined. Several factors will weigh in the decision. Mn/DOT certainly prefers not to relocate Miller Dairy, both because of the cost of doing so and the disruption to the Dairy. In the event that Miller Dairy does not move, the intersection of Wayzata Boulevard and old Highway 12' is more likely to be signalized immediately. As you indicate, emergency vehicle access ramps to “new Highway 12" in that area may require the relocation of the Dairy. In the event the dairy docs move, that area becomes even more attractive as a park and ride lot location. This, also increases the likelihood of signalizing the intersection immediately. r Mr. Edward J. Callahan, Chair Page 2 Apnl 9. 1998 2.Noise and Visual Mitigation jjig Orono residents directly south of the corridor would like to have MnDOT start with the objective of giving them "sightline" relief from the top of the trains, thereby minimizing the combined sound of trains, cars and trucks from "spilling over" any more than is absolutely necessary. These residents understand there are problems with the wetlands, and their requests may initially create barrier heights that exceed MnDOT guidelines. However, the point they continually make is that we'll never know until we get accurate elevation cross-sections behind each property that portray the impact this sightline relief would cause. Mn/DOT will consider this. We will have to evaluate the cost of higher walls versus the benefit provided. B. Moving easterly along the south side of the new corridor beginning at the Orono easterly boundary and continuing the length of the corridor, the matter of retaining walls or other barriers had been discussed at a considerable length. The results of discussions, so far as Orono is concerned, is the conclusion that in general, retaining walls are the only viable solution to the problem.and, we believe that this is particularly true on the easterly end because of the existence of wetlands which would be damaged by a berm. And likewise, this conclusion appears to be true in the section where the Highway is below grade because of the safety factorfor persons who might fall from or climb over the edge onto the new corridor from the rear of surrounding lots if walls are not in place. I’ve enclosed an illustrative cross-section for the Orono Oaks Drive neighborhood with our concept for the berm and wall. This concept is to widen the berm required for the railroad to the extent necessary to place a noisewall at approximately the same grade as the railroad tracks. The railroad has agreed that noisewalls in this type of location could be place at a distance of 35 feet fi’om the track centerline. In depressed sections the requirement for drainage ditches may lead to the wall placement at a distance greater than 35 feet from the track centerline. The cost of retaining walls through much of the depressed section is very high, preliminary estimates in the area of Old Crystal Bay Road are over $1000 per lineal foot. As an alternative we may look at very steep (1:1) reinforced slopes. Ir; ither case we would anticipate a barrier fence up to 8 feet in height place on top of either the retaining wall or the slope. I’ve also enclosed an illu.strative cross-section for the Silver Meadow neighborhood with our concept for the retaining wall, berm and barrier fence/ noisewall. C. However, we understand that the Department is working with the Railroad with the hope of placing the retaining walls closer to the railroad tracks than would be permitted by the normal right-of-way which is part of the reason for our approval of the use of retaining walls, by which we also mean sound barriers. Many of the citizens have expressed preferences for the use of a berm for the purpose of a barrier. And, the Long Lake report has suggested a partial berm against the retaining wall/bamer. The Long Lake suggestion, to the extent practical, seems like a good one. Moreover, we realize that individual home owners affected by the new corridor may Lave individual preferences regarding berming or other features which they will have the, opportunity to express to the Department representatives in the course of discussions with them concerning "takings" of their property or on other occasions. And, again, we believe that to the extent accommodation of these wishes may be practical it is also desirable. As mentioned above, the railroad has agreed that in wetland areas and on depressed sections with retaining wall, it is allowable to construct the retaining wall and/or noise wall at a distance of 35 feet from the nearest railroad track centerline. Mn/DOT (and the city) are and will continue providing ample opportunity for local input into the decisionmaking process. Mr. Edward J. Callahan, Chair Page 3 April 9,1998 f-. "--J c... f D. To a considerable extent, the retaining wall/barrier problem on the north side is identical and Orono opinions about it are identical. But a major portion of the north side faces the business district ofLong Lake and we assume that the opinions and wishes of Long Lake in that regard will be receiving considerable attention from the Department. The suggestions of that City in their recent report and in connection with the barriers seems sensible. I believe this refers to the request to reflect noise preferentially toward the north side of the corridor from Brown Kocd to Willow Drive. Mn/DOT’s response was that this is consistent with Federal and State noise policy and fvin/Di 'T will attempt to meet this request. 3. Trails We oppose the concept of a trail on the south side of the newly aligned railroad on the portion of the corridor easterly of the Fleming Addition. The City is concerned about minimiziug the impact of the, Highway 12 project on the wetlands in the area. If a trail requires additional space, the wetland impacts would be increased. Also, the trail would be in the now very much reduced backyard areas of the residential properties, requiring additional condemnation. It is strongly opposed by the citizens of the area. Mn/DOT is not developing this trail as a part of our project. 4 Brown Road Bridge Although both ends of this bridge are technically in the City of Long Lake, the southerly end is a major entrance to Orono. We believe, that serious consideration should be given to whether there is a need for side walks on both sides of the bridge, and to the lighting proposal on the bridge. While we see that the proposed construction of the City Hall and the Fire Station immediately on the south side of the new corridor will be likely to increase greatly the lighting on the south side around those public buildings, and see that for that reason the lighting on the bridge will not necessarily add a great amount of additional intrusive lighting into a neighborhood which is presently private and residential, it does seem that it might be a good idea to keep the intrusion of the lights as limited as possible, i.e. decorative. The corridor, itself, after all makes a complete separation between the actual business district of Long Lake and the residential area, to the south. Mn/DOT’s understanding is that the lighting proposed by the City of Long Lake for the bridge is decorative. Mn/DOT has agreed to provide sidewalks on both sides of the bridge because sidewalks to exist on both sides of Brown Road at the railroad crossing today. 5. Willow Drive Bridge This bridge is essentially on the town line between Orono and Long Lake and no construction of public buildings is proposed in this location on the south side of'the track, or on the north side for that matter. So our objection to lighting of that bridge is considerably stronger and the necessity of more than one side walk is also much less apparent. Your concerns are noted, we will insure this becomes a topic for the Design Review Committee. Mr. Edward J. Callahan, Chair Paged April 9, 1998 6. Emergency Vehicle Arrpcc , ; /A -JTriy- DoinHn^trl w r f of an emergency vehicle access at or abou, this poini m he comdor has received serious consideration. We believe that the consideration should continue andl.il, unless comp... „tg reasons are advanced, the proposed access should he abandoned. Obiections foTh7ZizTZTr::,‘oZ%z tproblems of acquiring additional right-ofway for the ramp. ne Orono Police Department has indicated that police emergency response to the new highway would be adequately provided by access at each end of the roadway (at each of the interchanges). The proposed pZl^ar^^ movement. The proposed^W^zata r design does not currently include this movement. The City of Orono has requested Mn/DOTpursue the inclusion of an emergency vehicle access ramp at this interchange to enable wZ^PumwoZ Zui^' of"'‘ Your concerns <J^e noted and will be addressed in the development of this project. No Additional Points nf Accpjif! tn AW f^ioUjjtrm, j2 • mile we are discussing the Willow Drive bridge area, we wish to repeat Orono's rejection of any exit ‘^^rchange entrance, or anything similar at that location for the general public. Orono's concepZme the h interchange, it would be on ahi^ fT u'"' possibility of exiting until it reached the intersection of land 12 And no o^^onal^affic could intrude. The prohibition of access points is a key factor in the iffective functioning of the roadway, and in protecting the residential neighborhoods along the north/south roadways. ^ T is gwerally opposed to any additional access along this corridor. Your points about impacts to ^ proposal to add an exit ramp at Willow has been aroLd for toMn/WT js gathering traffic forecast information. However, Mn/DOT has not been asked wonsidtr any such proposal, and we will not unless specifically asked by the City of Long Lake. S- Luce Line Bridge Little discussion about the Luce Line Bridge over the new corridor has oa urred. Wc believe additional ihe^itZr concerning preserving the current bridge "design" so that htZZZp'T^^ fZ" »"■<%« W"« have to be reconstructed and ZnglhJed ZlZnhZjZZTZ,T^'’''f''‘^!.‘’'^-^‘’'' ^‘^f‘P‘^cage among walkers, bikers, and horse ride^across P- West Interchan^p The Department has submitted drawings of a proposed preliminary design for the interchange at 6 and 12 Mr. Edward J. Callahan, Chair Pages April 9,1998 i >* #w c — A. B. a Provide a median barrier at the location of the acceleration lane for traffic from east bound County Road 6 merging with east bound new Highway 12 traffic. This is an important safety feature on this two lane roadway to prevent east bound new Highway 12 traffic from mistakenly moving into the west bound traffic lane when traffic is merging. Median barrier is being incorporated into the design as requested. Provide a free right turn at the intersection of County Road 6 and new Highway 12 for traffic flowing from east bound County Road 6 to east bound new Highway 12. Mn/DOT is investigating this change. Because the widening required for a free-right-tum- lane will be largely on the County Road 6 bridge over the BNSF railroad, this free-right-tum- lane may be cost prohibited. Provide a free right turn and an acceleration lane for traffic coming off the loop from west bound Highway 12 to go west on County Road 6. D. Provide for proper alignment of all necessary lanes to serve all traffic movements at the^ intersection of County Road 6 and Old Highway 12. Given the close proximity of the intersection of the south ramps and County Road 6 an acceleration lane is not advisable. Even without the requested fiee-right-tum and acceleration lane, the operation of the north ramp intersection in the year 2015 is forecast at a Level-of- Service B, which is quite high. 10. Independent Noise and Vibration Study In recent neighborhood meetings, concern is escalating regarding the potential noise and vibration increase that will result from a corridor that will include, not only car and truck traffic, but more, faster, heavier, longer, and taller trains. Some citizens are already reporting intolerable increases in vibrations and noise, due to increased train traffic. They, and we, arc wondering ifMNDOT truly has a handle on what will be created in this new corridor. Therefore, we are strongly in favor of having independent studies made on this issue. These studies should include a nationwide search for similar existing corridor configurations, and tests conducted along these corridors to determine the actual sound and vibration impact on the environme it and livability, as well as information regarding the most effective methods of mitigating the noise and vibration impacts. RESPONSE UNDER DEVELOPMENT Sincerely, Tom O’Keefe, P.E. Preliminary Design Engineer tfsliMi»tl •[tvoafiiiir«iiiT« rfiTi tVMltl •llVtl [•■•14 tj i^tisirsit ■cin^ MINNEHAHA CREEK W ATERSHED DISTRICT RULED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT & EROSION CONTROL FOR-LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS 1. POLICY. It is the policy of the Board of Managers to: (a) Require stormwater facilities to be included in land development projects where practicable and effective. (b) Manage stormwater and snow melt runoff on a regional or subwatershed basis throughout the District to: 1) promote effective water quality treatment, w here feasible, prior to discharge to surface waterbodies and wetlands; 2) limit developed peak rates of runoff into major surface water bodies to less than or equal to e.xisting peak rates; and 3) promote infiltration of both precipitation and runoff. (c) Require preparation and implementation of erosion control plans for land development activities, during the period of construction. 2. REGULATION. Except as provided herein, prior to commencing any land altering activities, a developer of land for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, or public roadway uses shall submit a stormwater management plan and an erosion control plan to the District in conformity w ith the requirements of this rule and secure a permit from the District approving the stormwater management plan and the erosion control plan. Except as provided herein, a stormwater management plan and an erosion control plan are required for new development, redevelopment or additions to an existing site. The managers will review a stormwater management plan and the erosion control plan only after the applicant demonstrates that the project has received preliminary approval from the municipality indicating compliance with existing municipal plans. (Please refer to the “Summary of Regulatory Requirements” below.) Draft - April 29, 1998 ‘ i LANDUSE/PROJECT SUMMARY OF REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS SINGLE FAMILY HOME CONSTRUCTION NO PERMIT SUBDIVISIONS LOT SIZE > 1/2 ACRE RURAL RESIDENTIAL (SINGLE FAMILY HOME) NO PERMIT BMPS RUNOFF RATE CONTROL. BMP’S RUNOFF QUALITY AND RATE CONTROL. BMP’S SUBDIVISIONS LOT SIZE < 1/2 ACRE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MULTI UNIT) NO PERMIT BMP’S RUNOFF RATE CONTROL. BMP’S RU NOFH QUALITY AND RATE CONTROL. BMP'S ROADS, STREETS AND HIGHWAYS'” SEE SECTION 2(e)SEE SECTION 2(e) COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL BMPs RUNOFF RATE BMP’S CONTROL k RUNOFF QUALITY AND RATE CONTROL. BMP’S 1/2 ’Mill 10| 1S| 20| >20 SUBDIVISION/PROJECT AREA (acres) NOTE; Administrative permits will be issued whenever BMP's only are required. All other permits and waivers require a public hearing. (a) Single-Family Homes. A permit is not required for the construction or reconstruction cf a single family home or its residential appurtenances. (b) Single-Family, Developed or Redeveloped Subdivisions. A permit is not required from the MCWD for the construction of less than five (5) acres with a density of two (2) units or less per acre. A permit is required for residential development or redevelopment of subdivisions with a density of two (2) units or less per acre on sites of five (5) acres or more, as follows: (1) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of five (5) acres or more but less than ten (10) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this rule are required; (2) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of ten (10) acres or more but less than twenty (20) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of this rule are required; Draft • April 29,1998 8 (3) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of nvent> (20) acres or more, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3. the uater quantity control provisions set forth in section 4. and the water qualit> provisions set forth in section 5 of this rule are required. (c) Medium to High Density Residential Land Development. A permit is not required for the development or redevelopment of residential subdivisions less than two (2) acres with a densitv of more than mo (2) units per acre. A permit is required for development or redevelopment of residential subdivisions two (2) acres or greater w ith a density of more than two (2) units per acre. as follows: (1) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of two (2) acres or more but less than five (5) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this rule are required; (2) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of five (5) acres or more but less than eight (8) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of this rule are required, (3) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of eight (8) acres or more, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3. the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4. and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of this rule are required. (d) Commercial, Industrial, or Institutional Development or Redevelopment. A permit is required for commercial, industrial, or institutional development or redevelopment, as follows: (1) For all commercial, industrial, or institutional development or redevelopment, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this rule are required; (2) For development or redevelopment activities on sites of one-half (1/2) acre or more but less than eight (8) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of this rule are required; (3) For development or redevelopment activities on sites of eight (8) acres or more, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3, the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4, and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of this rule are required. (e) Roads, Streeto and Highways. A permit is not required for the maintenance oi improvement of a public or private road, street or highway, if the project does not result in a net increase in impervious surface. A permit is required for a public or private road, street, or highway project that results in a net increase in impervious surface area, as follows: (1) For projects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of less than one (I) acre, the best management practices in section 3 of this rule will be required; (2) For projects that result in a net increase in imperv ious surface of one (I) acre or more, but the total project area is less than five (5) acres, the best management practices Draft - April 29, 1998 provisions set forth in section 3, and the water quantit\’ control provisions set forth in section 4 are required to treat the increase; (3) For projects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of one (1) acre ore more and the total project area is five (5) acres or more, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3, the water quantity control provisions set forth in settion 4 and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of this rule are required to treat the increase; (4) Sidewalks and trails which do not exceed ten (10) feet in width do not require a permit and are not included in any calculation of net increase in impervious surface w hen part of a road or street project. (0 Performance Bond. A performance bond or other surety in a form satisfactory to the District is required for all activity, including Clearing, grading, and e.xcavation, that results in the disturbance of five (5) or more a:res of land. The District will not require a performance bond or other type of surety from cities, townships, municipal corporations, counties, the state or federal government, or agencies of any of the aforementioned. 3. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES REQUIREMENTS. (a) Permanent (Structural and Non-structural). Permanent BMPs consist of structural and non- strucnjral practices. Permanent BMPs must be incorporated in all projects requiring a permit under this rule and must be consistent with specifications of the MPCA manual “Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas (revised July 1991) and its future revisions. Other permanent BMPs, not addressed in the MPCA manual may be allowed on an experimental basis if their use will generate new and useful data or information regarding effectiveness of the practice. The following table is a summary of the MPCA BMPs and their effectiveness for removal of metals, phosphorus, nitrates, and suspended solids from stormwater, and for controlling rates and volumes of runoff. BMP Typ«EffectWentat of Selected BMPa MeUla Total Phoephorua Dissolved Phosphorus Nitrates Total Suspended Solids Floatablee Runoff Rate Runoff Volume Control Control Structural Infiltration (no overflow)high high high high high high yes yes Dry Detention (24 hr)moderate low low low moderate outlet speafle yes low Oil/gnt separators moderate low no no low yes no no Skimmers no no no no no yes no no Grass stnp/swale moderate low low low moderate low low low Diversions no no no no design speofle no parts)partal Non-atiuctural Vveaands yes yes*yes*yes*yes yes yes partal organic litter management low yes yes yes yes yes no no Street sweeping yes yes yes yes yes no no Drafts April 29,1998 ferjhzer management • •mod high mod-high • •no no no no eaten casin eieanmg low no no no low ’**no no no suD-grade ereparation non-Dhospr^erus fertilizers Temporary Temporary silt fence yes yes no no yes***no no no Straw bales yes yes no no yes***no no no Temporary sediment basin yes yes design speafie • •yes outlet speafie design specifie low Roex entranea pad no no ■ no no yes no no no * Natural wetlands can also contnbute nutnents '* No data to evaluate effectiveness *• Small volumes only (b) Temporary BMPs must be incorporated in all projects requiring a permit under this rule, as follows: (1) An Erosion Control Plan must be prepared by a qualified individual showing proposed methods of retaining waterborne sediments on-site during the period of construction and showing how the site will be restored, covered, or revegetated after construction; (2) The Erosion Control Plan shall be consistent with specifications of the MPCA manual “Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas” (revised July 1991) and its future revisions; (3) Permanent detention/retention ponds, used as temporary sedimentation basins must be cleaned out after construction is complete; (4) Erosion control measures, such as silt fences and hay/straw bales shall be removed after all disturbed areas have been fully st^Mlizer*; (5) Sites with high erosion potential characterized by steep slopes or erodible soils may be subject to the provisions of section 2, paragraph (f) of this rule. 4. WATER QUANTITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS. (a) The peak rate of stormwater runoff from the site shall not increase as a result of the proposed development. Developed peak rates of runoff shall be controlled such that the existing peak rates are not exceeded. This criteria shall be analyzed and met for runoff producing events of critical duration with return frequencies of 1,10 and 100 years in the subwatershed in which the site is located. Draft - April 29, 1998 [Hilfa]Rirtnifsiira MXimiMiKtlSt w*iti I ii I iitit r«r#:nifi Mt]ovinrvi p.Tiiiira [•] I ■ •!•] I r« Xi ih 111 tlw l«j*4 tlH* m MS'*] riTSTOilltYTir* •MlO [• B CtK4:1 Ml IP* U4IJ riitraxw rtTlT«K«] •UtVilt V r Kis»i«]in I •itii'a i*i m ft] [•[tvwtii] nilp.l lUTfl •] CtVJ IdTt]KMilk'SCt [•U'.V'.llla (I) Property lines and delineation of lands under ownership of the applicant. (?.) Delineation of the subwaiershed contributing runoff from off-site and proposed and c.xisting subwatersheds on-site. (3) Proposed and existing stormwater facilities location, alignment, and elevation. (4) Delineation of existing on-site wetland, marshes, shoreland, and/or floodplain areas. (5) Existing and proposed normal, and 100 year water elevations or-site. (6) Existing and proposed site contour elevations at two foot intervals, related to NGVD, 1929 datum. 7. (7) Construction plans and specifications of all proposed stormwater management facilities. (8) Stormwater runoff volume and rate analyses for the I. 10 and 100 year critical events, existing and proposed conditions. (9) All hydrologic, water quality, and hydraulic computations completed to design the proposed stormwater management facilities. (10) Documentation indicating conformance with an existing municipal stormwater management plan. When a municipal plan does not exist, documentation that the municipality has reviewed th r«)oject. (11) Delineation of any flowage easements or other property interests dedicated to stormwater management purposes, including, but not limited to, county or judicial ditches. (12) Documentation that the project has received a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) if required by the MPCA, once available. (b) A maintenance agreement shall be submitted for: stormwater treatment ponds, outlet structures for such ponds, culverts, outfall structures, and all other stormwater facilities. The maintenance agreement shall specify the methods, schedule and responsible parties for maintenance and must includ.2 at a minimum, the elements contained in the District’s Maintenance Agreement Form. A Maintenance Agreement Form will be provided to the applicant for use by the applicant as a maintenance agreement or as guidance if the applicant desires to draft a separate maintenance agreement. The maintenance agreement must be recorded with the county within 10 days of the issuance date of the permit. (c) Geotechnical soil boring results if available. EXCEPTIONS. (a) If the District has approved a municipal stormwater management plan for a municipality, or for a subwatershed within a municipality, the requirements of this rule may be deemed satisfied upon showing of compliance by an individual developer with the municipal plan. Craft-April 29, 1998 I 1' (b) The water quantity requirements of this rule will be waived upon a determination by the Board of Managers that a downstream facilit>(ies) is in place or has been ordered and the facility(ies) is designed with adequate capacity to limit the peak runoff rate from the subwatershed under fully developed conditions. The water quantity requirements of this rule may also be w aived upon a determination by the Board of Managers that the time of concentration of the dow nstream receiving water body is sufficiently long such that limiting the peak rate of runoff from the project has either no practical effect or an adverse effect. c) The water quality requirements of this rule will be waived upon a determination by the Board of Managers that a downstream facility(ies) is in place or has been ordered and the facility(ies) is designed to remove at least 50% of the total phosphorus from runoff entering the facility from the subwatershed under fully developed conditions. Draft • April 29, I99S MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT RULE B STORMWATER MANAGEMENT & EROSION CONTROL PLANS FOR INDmDUiVL LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS 1. POLICY. It is the policy of the Board of Managers to: (a) Require stormwater facilities to be oonritructedon individual sites included in land development projects where practicable and effective. (b) Manage stormwater and snowmelt runoff on a regional or sabv/atershed basis and promote natural infiltration of-runofF throughout the Distnet to: 1) p rovid e promote effective water quality treatment ond where possible provide suoh treatmen t. where feasible, prior to discharge to surface waterbodies and wetlands; and 2) so that future limit developed peak rates of runoff into major surface water bodies aro to less than or equal to existing peak rates: and 3) promote infil'ration of both precipitation and runoff. (c) Require preparation and implementation of erosion control plans for eenstruction and land development activities, during the period of construction. 2. REGULATION. Except as provided in paragraph S herein, prior to commencine anv land altering activities oenstruotion, a developer of land for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, or public roadway uses shall submit a stormwater management plan and an erosion control plan to the District in conformit}' with the requirements of this rule and secure a permit from the District approving the stormwater management plan and the erosion control plan. Except as provided herein. A a.stormwater management plan and an erosion c ontrol plan are required for new development, redevelopment or additions to an existing site. The managers will review a stormwa'er management plan and the erosion control plan only after the applicant demonstrates that the project has received preliminary approval from the municipality indicating compliance with existing municipal plans. (Please refer to the “Summary of Regulatory Requirements” below.) r LANOUSE/PROJECT SUMMARY OF REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS SINGLE FAMILY HOME CONSTRUCTION NO PERMIT SUBDIVISIONS LOT SIZE i 1/2 ACRE RURAL RESIDENTIAL (SINGLE FAMILY HOME) NO PERMIT 1i BMPS RUNOFF RATE CONTROL BMPS RUNOFF QUALITY AND RATE CONTROL. BMPS SUBDIVISIONS LOT SIZE < 1/2 ACRE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MULTI UNIT) NO PERMIT BMP'S RUNOFF RATE CONTROL, BMPS RU NOFF QUALITY AND RATE CONTROL. BMPS ROADS. STREETS AND HIGHWAYS'" SEE SECTION 2(e)SEE SECTION 2(e) COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL BMPs RUNOFF RATE CONTROL BMP'S RUNOFF QUALITY AND RATE CONTROL. BMP'S 1/2 1| 4| ,,10| 15| 20| >20 SUBDIVISIONff>ROJECT AREA (acre*) NOTE. Administrative permits will be issued whenever BMP's are required. All other permits and waivers require a public hearing. fa) Single-Family Homes. A permit is not required for the construction or reconstruction of a single family home or its residential appurtenances. fb) Single-Family. Developed or Redeveloped Subdivisions. A permit is not required fef4he dovetootnmt or rodev elopnient of oubdivisions from the MCWD for the construction of less than five f 5) acres with a density of two (2) units or less per acre. A permit is required for residential development or redevelopment of subdivisions ^''th a density of two (2) units or less per acre on ^te' cf five (5) acres or more, as follows: (1) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of five (5) acres or more but less than ten (1^) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this rule are required: f2) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of ten HO) acres or more but less than twenty (20) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of this rule are required; Draft • April 29.1998 8 r (3) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of tv-entv (20) acres or n.>;re. the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3. the water Quantity control provisions set forth in section 4, and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of this rule are required. (c) Medium to High Density Residential Land Development. A permit is not required for the development or redevelopment of residential subdivisions less than two (2) acres with a density of more than two (2) units per acre. A permit is required for development or redevelopment of residential subdivisions two (2) acres or greater with a density of more than two (2) units per acre. as follows : (1 ) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of mo f 2~> acres or more but less than five (5) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this rule are required: (2) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of five f 5) acres or more but less than eight (i) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of this rule are required: (3) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of eight (8) acres or more, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3. the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4. and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of this rule are required. fd) Commercial. Industrial, or Institutional Development or Redevelopment. A permit is required for commercial, industrial, or institutional development or redevelopment, as follows: f n For all commercial, industrial, or institutional development or redevelopment, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this rule are required: (2) For development or redevelopment activities on sites of one-half (1/2) acre or more but less than eight (8> acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of this rule are required; (3) For development or redevelopment activities on sites of eight (8) acres or more, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3. the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4. and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of this rule are required. (e) Roads. Streets and Highways. A permit is not required for the maintenance or improvement of a public or private road, street or highway, if the project does not result in a net increase in impervious surface. A permit is required for a public or private road, street, or highway project that results in a net increase in impervious surface area, as follows: n>____For projects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of less than one (1) acre, the best management practices in section 3 of this rule will be required: Draft-April 29,1998 r Q}____For protects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of one (I) acre or more, but the total proiect are a is less than five (5) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3, and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 are required to treat the increase: (3) For protects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of one f H acre ore more and the tot al proiect area is five (S) acres or more, the best management practices provisio ns set forth in section 3. the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4. and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of this rule are required to treat the increase; (4) Sidewalks and trails which do not exceed ten flO') feet in width do not require a permit and are not included in anv calculation of net increase in impervious surface when part of a road or street project. (0 Performance Bond. A performance bond or other surety in a form satisfactory to the District is required for all activity, including clearing, grading, and excavation, that results in the disturbance of ten-(10) five (S3 or more acres of land. The District will not require a performance bond or other type of surety from cities, townships, municipal corporations, counties, the state or federal government, or agencies of anv of the aforementioned. 3. BEST MANAGENtENT PRACTICES REQUIREMENTS. DECISION CRtTEMA FOR EROSION CONTROL PL»\NS. Erosion Control Pla ns shall -comp ly-with-the following orit erio: (a) Permanent (Structural and Non-stnicturaD. Permanent BMPs consist of structural and non- structural practices. Permanent BNfPs must be incorporated in all projects requiring a permit under this rule and must be consistent with specifications of the MPCA manual “Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas (revised July 1991) and its future revisions. Other permanent BMPs, not addressed 111 the MPCA manual may be allowed on an experimental basis if their use will generate new and useful data or information regarding effectiveness of the practice. The following table is a summary of the MPCA BMPs and their effectiveness for removal of metals, phosphorus, nitrates, and suspended solids from stormwater, and for controlling rates and volumes of runoff. BMP Tvd«Erractivtnaaa of Salactad BMPt MatJit Tout Phofphorut Ditsolvad Photphomt NItratat Total Suepandad Soll^Floatablaa Runoff Rata Runoff Volume Control Control Stmctunt Infiltration (no overttow)high high high high high high yaa yes Dry Oeienoon (24 nr)modaraia kym low low modarata ouM spactflc yaa low Oil/gnt saparators mooerata low no no low yes no no Skimmafs no no no no no yea no no Grass strp/swata mooarata tow low low modarata low low low Diversions no no no no dasgn spaoflc no partial partial Non-fltructural Draft ~ April 29, 1998 r Weoands yes yes’yes*yes*yes yes yes partial organic litter management low yes yes yes yes yes no no Street sweeping yes yes yes yes yes no no fertilizer management re mod-ngn mod-n»gn no no no no eaten basin e^nmg low no no no low***no no no sub-grade preparation noo-pnospnorus fertilizers TemDorary Temporary Silt fence yes yes no no yes***no no no Straw bales yes yes no no yes-*no no no Temporary sediment beam yes yes design speoftc yes outlet speofle design speoftc low Roc»( entrsiKeped no no no no yes no no * Natunl wttfandj can also oootrtbuta nutncnts ** No data to evaiuata affectivenoss Small volumes only (b) Temporary B\fPs must be incoroorated in all projects requiring a permit under this rule, as follows: f n An Erosion Control Plan must be prepared by a qualified individual shoti showing proposed methods of retaining waterborne sediments on-site during the period of construction and shaU showing how the site will be restored, covered, or revegetatcd after construction; (2} The Erosion Control Plan shall be consistent with specifications of the MPCA manual “Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas” (revised July 1991) and its future revisions; (3) Permanent detention/retention ponds, used as temporary sedimentation basins must be cleaned out after construction is complete; (4) Erosion control measures, such as silt fences and hav/straw bales shall be removed after all disturbed areas have been fully stabilized; (5) Sites with high erosion potential characterized by steep slopes or erodible soils may be subject to the provisions oi section 2. paragraph ff) of this rule. 4 WATER QUANTITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS. DECISION CMTERIA-FOR STORMWATEPi ^4AMAOP^4F^^T or a ms Stnmiwaf > managarnent plans shall aomply with tha fo llow ing orit ariat (a) The peak rate of stormwater runoff from the site shall not increase as a result of the proposed development. Developed peak rates of runoff shall be controlled such that the existing peak rates are not exceeded. This criteria shall be analyzed and met for runoff producing events of critical Draft-April 29.1998 E 5. duration with return frequencies of I, 10 and 100 years in the subwatershed in which the site is located. (b) Natural existing low areas will be used, where feasible, for detention of runoff to comply with rate control criteria. Reservoir routing procedures and critical duration runoff events shall be used for design of detention areas and outlets. (»)-Wat erborne sedimentG sholl be provontad fironventering existing drainog eways to provent sediment transport off the site during and aft er oonotruotion. (c f) The proposed project shall not adversely affect water levels off the site during or after construction. fig) Runoff droining onto the site tributary to the project must be accommodated in the analyses and design of new stormwater management facilities. (e b) The volume of s4te runoff may not increase due to the project when the receiving area of said runoff is landlocked, and not capable of handling the increased volume of runoff. In addition, the applicant shall either own or have proper rights over the landlocked property to handle water from the development. Back-to-back 100-vear runoff events will be used to analyze holding capacity and freeboard for landlocked areas. (f ♦) All stormwater rate control facilities sholl be located above the projected 100-year flood elevation for the site and within drainage, utility and/or flowage easements to provide access and to prevent future alteration or encroachment. fg tl Water quantity control methods and facilities used or constructed pursuant to Stormwat er Nkmage ment-Plans under this rul? shall be in conformance with approved Municipal Stormwater .Vlanagement Plans. (n k) The outfall structures within wetlands and public wat ers and wetlands shal l inoerporat e a saili ng bas in, surge basin, energy disoipat er, plac ement of ungrouted-noturol-fook-fip rop-or other devices to minimize distufbonoe and erosion of natural shof»iin»ttn<t bed resuking from-peok discharg es shall incorporate designs to minimize erosion and scouring. (i 1) AH-new residential, commercial, industria l and institutional buildings and structures shall be constructed such that all have door and window openings are a minimum of two feet above the 100 year high water elevation of neorby surface wat erbodies, wetlands end stormwate r bas ins. WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS. (a c) Wet detention ba sins pond shall be required on site and designed for at least 50% phosphorus removal efTiciency in a ccordanc e with the Minnesota Pollution ControE Agency (MPCAl design recommendat ions published in sections i. 1- -1 through 4.15 (“Protecting Woter Quality in Urbon Areas 1991”), and its future revisions. These design criterio were developed bas ed upon the results of the Nat ionwide Urban Runoff Program (NURPK^^SEPAt 198^)r The applicant shall use the PondNet (or approved equivalent) model to determine removal efficiency of the pond, using a 2.5” rainfall. Total site ar ea and anycontributing off site tributary drainage area shall be used to calculate permanent pool volume. Structura l Pond outlets shall remove floatables from ponded Draft-April 29, 1998 12 J r runoff before discharge for a 1 year event. All ponds must provide a ten HO) foot safety bench at a slope no steeper than lOH: IV and two (2i feet of freeboard above the 100 vear pond level. (b) The outfall structures shall incorporate designs to minimize erosion and scouring. (c) New buildings and structures shall have door and window openings a minimum of tv^o feet above the 100 vear hiuh water elevation. (4) If Q developm ent or redevelopm ent site-is-teog than 40 oor es'ond -the Board of Managers determines tha t the w ot detention and/of -stewnwat er storag e requirements wou ld-be-better addr essed on o regiona i-basisr the'Opplieont may insteod oontribut o'to o dedicat ed Distriot wat er quali ty/stormwQter■stora ge-fund in li i^of -pro vtiding the neo essory foo itities on site. The fund will be used HI plann ing, oonstruot ing, and ma intain ing regiona l detention bos ins/wetlondsi Contr ibution to the obov e fund will only be ol low ed: ^--------if on a greement for a tegiona l facility is-in ploo e with the-a ffeot ed rnunwipa lities', or, ^--------if there-is-an existing or plann ed District regional stormwat er foc ility within the some subwot ershed; or, 2--------if the Board of Manog ers determines tha * anoth er facility in a different-subwat ershed is ot'o higher-wQter qual ity priority and would better o erv'e the public health and weifar e-and the purpos e of the wat ershed law. The Diotriot will utiliee funds-ooli eot ed within the sam e subwat ershed, provided that the Board of Manog ers moy-a llooot e contributions to the dedioa >.id fund for a different subwat ershed-if-the-Bo o rd determines that a regiona l stormwat er facility wl - i the sam e subwat ershed is not feos ibler-of that-a faoiiity in o different subwot ershed is of a higher wat er qua lity-priority-and -would better-serve the public hea lth and weifar e and the purpos e of the wat ershed law. The oontribut ion w ill be equo i to the oost of the-land, bas in oonstruct ion -and bos in ma intenanc e l-fcv^d value will be bas ed on the tan ass essed value and ba sin cost -j of S2Q.000 per acr e foot of required porid volume. At the discretion of the District, the stormwat er wet detention -and storag e requirements for o given site may be split between on -site foo ilities and contributions to the District water quality/stormwater storag e fund'. SitecpwiFio Best Manag '<»ment Practic es (BMP*s)-will be required on a ll-sites-.' regardle ss of contr i^tion to ttte wot er Qivatity/stormwatcr storag e fund. Contribut ions to the District wat er qunlity/stormwat er storag e fund for add ition s to existing sites and for roods. streetSf and highways ar e bos ed on the ar ea of the new addit ion or. for roads, streets, and highwovs. the increas ed hard surfac e ar eo and not the teta l-site ar ea. Contribut ions to the abov e fund for new- on the tota i site ar eo. If a site drains to -andevelopment or reconstruct ion redeveloom ent ar e bos ed existing or plann ed District regio nat-st ormwat er faoilitv ‘, the app lica nt is required to contr ibute te the wat er qual ity/stormwat er storag e fund as stated obov e. (g) Runoff -dro ining onto the-site nwst be oocommodot ed in the anolys es and design of new stormwat er monog ement facilit ies.' (i> Wet detentiow-ba sins construct ed pursuant to Stormwater Manog ement Plan s under this-fwle shall-bein conformanc e-with approv ed Municipal Storm woter Manage ment Plans. (!<>■ The outfa ll structures within wetlond s ond public wat ers and w etlands shall incorporat e a stilling bas in, surge bosin. energy dissipot er, plac ement of ungrout ed natural rock rip rap or oth er April 29. 1998 J r de v iceo tofiyw imized isturbono e’iMHi erooion of Roflira l-shof eline and -bed reouU ing from peak discharg es. (0 All n ew fesid ent ial, oomm ero ioK ' industria l and institutional otrucnjr es ohoU be construct ed such that oil door and witnlow openings are a mininnim of ^vo foot obove th » t00 year high water d evotion of n eorby surfooe waterbod ies, wetlands and otormwot er bosins. ^ ^ REQUIRED EXHIBITS (SUBMIT IN DUPLICATEV (al If the water quantity or water Quality provisions set forth in sections 4 and S of this rule apply to a proposed development, plans certified bv a professional engineer registered in the State of Minnesota and reflecting the following items shall accompany the permit application (one set of plans must be full size: one set must be reduced to a maximum sire of 11 ” x 17*”): Th e fo llowing enh ibits sho ll-aooompany th e permit applioot iof».(o) Stormwot er Manog ement Plan. A Stormwot er Manog ement Plan^ certified by a professional enginee r registered in th e Stot eof Minn esota, shall tnc lod e the fo llowing: (1) Property lines and delineation of lands under ownership of the applicant. (2) Delineation of the subwatershed contributing runoff from off-site and proposed and e.xisting subwatersheds on-site. (3) Proposed and existing stormwater facilities location, alignment, and elevation. (4) Delineation of existing on-site wetland, marshes, shoreland, and/or floodplain areas. (5) Existing and proposed normal, and 100 year water elevations on-site. (6) Existing and proposed site contour elevations at two foot intervals, related to NGVD, 1929 datum. (7) Construction plans and specifications of all proposed stormwater managemt t facilities. (8) Stormwater runoff volume and rate analyses for the 1,10 and 100 year critical events, existing and proposed conditions. (9) All hydrologic, water quality, and hydraulic computations completed to design the proposed stormwater management facilities. (10) Documentation indicating conformance with an existing municipal stormwater management plan. When a municipal plan does not ex'st, documentation that the municipality has reviewed the project. (11) Delineation of any flowage easements or other property interests dedicated to stormwater management purposes, including, but not limited to, county or judicial ditches. (12) Documentation that the project has received a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) if required by the MPGA, once available. Drafi-April 29.1998 J r 7. (t>>- Erosion Control Plon. (b ©) A maintenance agreement shall be submined for: stormwater treatment ponds, outlet structures for such ponds, culverts, outfall structures, and all other stormwater facilities. The maintenance agreement shall specify the methods, schedule and responsible parties for maintenance and must include at a minimum, the elements contained in the District’s Maintenance Agreement Form. A Maintenance Agreement Form will be provided to the applicant for use by the applicant as a maintenance agreement or as guidance if the applicant desires to draft a separate maintenance agreement. The maintenance agreement must be recorded with the county within 10 days of the issuance date of the permit. (dc) Geotechnical soil boring results if available. EXCEPTIONS. (a) If the District has approved a municipal stormwater management plan for a municipality, or for a subwatershed within a municipality, the requirements in purogroph 3 of this rule whioh are not met by the munioipol plan shall mav be deemed satisfied upon showing of compliance by an individual developer with the municipal plan. (b) The requirement of paragraph 3(a) abov»s ha>l not apply to a projeet w here the-total site area is tess-thoB-one- half aore. (o)-Residentiol dev elopments where the total site area is less than ^v^►Qor e5 and oontoins four or fewer liv ing units, and where the total off site area contributing runoff to the-site improv ements in less than one oore, do-no< require a permit under this rule.- Approv ed-erosion control measures must be properly installed, howev er, and maintoined throughout the eonstruotion process and until all disturbed areos are fully stabilized. (b) The water quantity requirements of this rule will be waived upon a determination bv the Board of Managers that a downstream facilitvfiesl is in place or has been ordered and the facilitvfies) is designed with adequate capacity to limit the peak runoff rate from the subwatershed under fullv developed conditions. The water quantity requirements of this rule mav also be waived upon a determination bv the Board of Managers that the time of concentration of the downstream receiving water body is sufficiently long such that limiting the peak rate of runoff from the project has either no practical effect or an adverse effect. c> The water quality requirements of this rule will be waived upon a determination bv the Board of Managers that a downstream facilitvfiesi is in place or has been ordered and the facilityfiesl is designed to remove at least 50% of the total phosphorus from runoff entering the facility from the subwatershed under fullv developed conditions. Draft • April 29,1998 1 r MItiMEHHHH tlPEB, I.JhTEPSHEE'b124710*52 P.Ol 01 Gray Freshv/ater Center H*7S. 15& 19. Navarre Mail 2500 Shadywood Road Excelsior, MN 55331-9578 Phona (612)471-0590 Fax: (612) 471-0682 Email: admin @ minnehahacreek.org Web Site: v/iv//.minnehahacr eek.org Board ot Managers Pamela G. Blixt Janes Calkins Lance Fisher Monica Gross Thomas W. LaBounty Thomas Maple. Jr. Malcolm Reid District Office; Diane P. Lynch District Administrator 0 conwr rj II >Mi Xn pKl mm Minnehaha Creek M^tershed District Improving Qudlity vf^^iter, Qiiality of Life DATE: TO: May 1. 1998 MEMORANDUM COui MA> , I ^ i J r»Tv 7 0 FROM: Mayors and City Administrators Chair. Township Board of Supervisors Carver County Board of Commissioners Hennepin County Board of Commissioners Pamela Blixt. President RE: Rule B Letter Signed by Mayor Howard Bennis Deephaven J understand that a letter has gone out to all the cities requesting their support of a letter initiated by Howard Bennis. asking the District to return Rule B fees to the cities. I also understand that there was a concern that the District was going to vote on Rule B at the Board’s workshop meeting yesterday. First of all, I would like to reiterate how hard the District and the cities have worked on making revisions to Rule B. There have been countless meetings over the last year and from what I’ve been hearing, participants have been pleased with the process. The meeting yesterday was scheduled as a Board workshop, called especially to inform the Board members about the latest Rule B draft, which resulted from the last F^ule B committee meeting held on April 8. There was never an intention to “give final approval on Rule B“ at this meeting. (t is anticipated that the Board will have several discussions about Rule B. especially after the May 12 meeting scheduled at the last Stormwater Task Force meeting on April 9. You will receive a memo under separate cover about the May 12 meeting and will be given copies of the Stormwater Task Force’s final draft The Boara intends to then schedule public hearings end make a final decision on Rule P changes in the next few months. In addition, due to an unfortunate situation that I was informed of a few hours before the workshop meeting, both of our consultants were unavailable to help present these changes to the Board As a result, we have rescheduled Our workshop to May 7 at the Freshwater Center. We are trying to create better communications with our member cities and townships. I would ask you to please call me or our District Administrator before vou judge the actions of the District. I think that would go a long way in building a trusting relationship and clearing up misinformation and rumor. | can be reached at my office at 935-8143. Diane Lynch, our Administrator, can be reached at the District Office at 471-6284. Thank you TOThL P.Ol r esr--_s^sjO fmmm “' V' r- r 'l'hi> year ’s l.o:y4 Lake (iirn Day's celebration .. ill take place un .\ii”nsr >th tS: 9th at .St. Georjie's C.liurch. 'i’he two dav e\ ent will iiKliule the traditional Sunday Akerno ,n Parade, which will beiiin this year ar !2:(Hi n /.»n on Sunday. Auiiu-.t 9th. We a%k tliat yon fill (>uc tlic entry form below and return it to us as s-'on i> possible. 'Phis year's entry fee is 5,s(,' for all particiiwnts. .As always, there is n > ch.arue for non-profit o^uani/ations. .\ larue turnout is anticipated, so mark uxir caleiular and return vour entry form. We louk lorward to seeine: you on .Anau^t 9th at noon in Lorn; Lake. I’lease call 47.vlS4S with any (luestiou'. Parade line up to be>;in at 1 l.(/i) am. When [nannine, for your float, for safety sake, if you are ”oin.” v < tiirov. items - please have someone walkiiva next to your float passing out items. .Map to toll<nv aloma w/conlirmation. .Sincerely. I'.HVl < i.Tlii'eh >0 l ei 47.>- i o-i' I ax47.L: - i; 7'.ia T>A:r'j\'93 BSSn'lS a? *J 2Js©-i) M O OM ’/nis YSARJ L' 1,,'kc 'hamber of ^'.oi-nmerce 19'. I>o\o',_’ j ,... \c. \I\ ,s.s.^4o *• « •«« mh im •«mat t-i* «*« wm am *•« .•<• mm am fwa ^ mm m* mm mm m\ -?□ T,i T IT* ^ "A i J J . j \ a . j * ••*:*/ a J. . J J a J ^'e■.. 'A«. ^^o!ild like to enter our unit in thi> vear's nar.idc. h.net -Ncd. iv our .S.sO.OO entrv fee. J ^es. we v oul ! ! ke to sponsor a uroup. (cal! tor details) J Yes. we wouUi like to make a tax deductible donation. □ $50 □5100 J .Sorrx. we \ ill ite un.ible to attend this year's parade. Name of (Jrouo A (lontact Person_ .Address □ 51.^0 J Other Peleph.one Type of Lmry Leiv'th of I nit/l nits .Special C lonsiderations Id ri e f .An n<»u nee m e n t COltN DAYS - LONG LAKE FAMILY FESTIVAL AUGUST 8 & 9, 1998 Saturday, August Sth 9:00 .V\i 10:00 AM NOON 1:00 PM ::00 PM 3:00 PM 4:30 PM 6:00 PNI 6:00 PM 11:30 PM Car Wash. Pancake Breakfast until noon Beginning of \blley Ball tournament Live Auction in tent Opening of food, games, crafts, midway. petting zoo and pony rides, silent auction and bingo Minnesota Zoomobile Raptor Center Rescue Demonstration Eucharistic Celebration KIW C Road .Show (disc jcjckey) White Sidewalls Band Close Sunday. August 9th 9:00 .\M Pancake breakfast until noon 11:00 AM Fun Run and Life Walk Noon Parade 2:00 PM 'lamarack Band 2:30 PM Parade .Aw ards Ceremonv 3:0(r I’M Super Raffle draw ing, silent aiu tion close, vollev ball aw ards 6:00 PM f:|nse (^uitinuous through out the two days... .Ml the roast corn you can cat for $2.00 a day; Youth DJ and games, beer tent w ine tasting, cigars. BBQ chicken, beef ribs Please no coolers. be\ erage containers, bicycles or pets on the grounds r May 8,1998 To: City Council From: Bruce Vang, Building Inspector Re: Burning Permits In February of this year the City Council approved a relaxation of the standards for issuing burning permits in the City of Orono. Now burning is allowed not just for the burning of logs and cooking weiners but also for the burning of brush /yard clean ­ up. This seems ro have resulted in a large increase in the number of burning permits being issued. Hc\>- ever, so far we have not had the increase in complaints from neighbors which i iiad expected. 1997 Logs Brush 1998 Logs Brush Jan 2 Feb 1 Mar 1 Apr 17 May 33 June 15 3 ^ordinance change 10 first week only allowed because pile could be removed only with great difficulty 1 h Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator .L Mays, 1998 SUBJECT: Woodhill Alternate Access On Wednesday, May 6, staff was made aware that Woodhill Country Club had done grading work on their property to create a driveway connection from the golf course to Woodhill Avenue (please see the attached map). The purpose of the driveway connection is to provide an alternate access to Woodhill Country Club to address the problem of access to and from the Country Club from County Road 15 —particularly during the County Road 15 construction period. The driveway work was done without communication with the City and without permits. Once the City became aware of the work, a Stop Work order was placed on the project, and a meeting was scheduled with Woodhill representatives for Thursday, May 7. At the meet ag with the Woodhill representatives, staff discussed with the representatives Woodhill's intentions regarding the access and the process to be used to address issues and concerns of both the City and the neighbors related to the access. Staff indicated a key elen.ent of the process needed to be an effort by Woodhill Country Club to identify and address the concerns of the neighbors related to the access. At the meeting, staff indicated that if the golf course was planning the access to be a permanent access, it would require an amendment to their conditional use permit. The City Administrator indicated that if the golf course was able to adequately address the concerns of the City and the neighbors regarding the access, it would be possible to open the access on a temporary basis to address the traffic problems on County Road 15. Subsequent to the meeting with the Woodhill Country Club representatives, and after further discussions with the Building and Zoning staff and the City Attorney, it was determined that the process related lo the access should proceed more slowly and that the access should not be opened without action by the City Council. A letter to Mark Albrecht, the manager of the Woodhill Country Club, setting out the City's position related to the access is attached. )066 Mark Albrecht May 8,1998 Page 2 The need for adequate traffic control and signage plans for review by professionals. Work in the City right-of-way, impact on existing or proposed municipal utilities. The land alteration permit application must provide basic information including grading and drainage plans, cross-sections, etc., as well as a statement of your intent as to the use of the access, i.e. whether a gate will be uped, how and when it will be monitored/locked, etc., and how you will address other issues identified by the neighbors thus far. It is very important that the concerns of the neighbors be identified and adequately addressed. The concerns expressed by the neighbors to date include the following: - The opening of the access will cause a significant increase in traffic on Woodhill Avenue. Safety of pedestrians and children who have become accustomed to a road with almost no traffic, the only traffic being their immediate neighbors. The associated impacts of more traffic including dust, noise, lights, etc. and the potential for traffic at a time when it is now non-existent. The need for well thought out traffic controls, signage, etc. Safety of the Woodhill Avenue/Orono Orchard Road intersection (sight lines). You have indicated your intention to invite the neighbors to a meeting to express their concerns and to discuss methods of addressing their concerns. The City is in agreement that the access problem created by construction on County Road 15 is significant. However, the City is obligated to act in the best interests of public health, safety and welfare, and the City does have the authority to place reasonable and prudent conditions on your access to Woodhill Avenue, Until the issues and neighborhood concerns surrounding the use of Woodhill Avenue can be adequately identified and addressed, the new access must remain closed. The City Attorney has recommended that reopening the access to Woodhill Avenue on a temporary basis should be accomplished by an action of the City Council, and that a permanent reopening of the access requires an amendment to youi conditional use permit.