Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
12-14-1998 Council Packet
AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, DECEMBER 14,1998,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL 1. 1999 Levy Adoption Hearing - Adoption of 1999 Budget and Tax Levy A. Adopt Final 1998 Tax Levy Collectible in 1999 - Resolution B. Adopt 1999 General Fund Budget - Resolution C. Adopt the 1999 Special Revenue Funds Budgets - Resolution COUNCIL MESTIN G OEC 14 1993 $ CITYCrORQ,\'o CONSENT AGENDA 2. Approve/Amend APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 3. Regular Meeting of November 23,1998 * 4. Truth in Taxation Meeting of December 7, 1998 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Andrew McDemiott, Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Bill Stoddard. Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 5. #2355 Van Moorlehem/Tumham, 4490 Watertown Road - Subdivision - Final Plat Approval - Resolution 6. #2395 Brent Bentrott, 1453 Park Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 7. #2399 Muriel Senn, 4448 North Shore Drive - Variance - Resolution 8. #24 11 Paul and Leann Hanssen, 3195 Casco Circle - Variances - Resolution 9. #2417 TOLD Development, 2380 Shadywood Road - B-5 Amendment - Withdrawal 10. #2425 Sidney and Barbara Rebers/Service 800, Inc., 2190 Wayzata Boulevard - Review Subdivision Approval Conditions 11. Commercial/Industrial Park Fee - Administrative Procedure - Resolution 12. Amend Final Plat Approval - Driveway Location - "4461 ” Bayside Road - Resolution MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT 13. Request for Payment #2 - Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation 14. Request for Payment - Hennepin County Road 6 Right-of-Way 15. Rev ise Assessment Roll - Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation Project 16. Revise Assessment Roll - Heritage/Shoreline Sanitar>' Sewer Project • CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 17. Award Bid for Telephone System AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, DECEMBER 14,1998,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA 18. 1999 Fee Schedule - Ordinance and Summary Ordinance for Publication 19. 1999 Meeting Schedule 20. Pmchase Squad Cars - Letter of Intent 21 . Officer Chris Fischer Six Month Step Increase 22. Long Lake Fire Contract for the Years 1999,2000 and 2001 23. 1999 Non-Union Employee Pay Adjustments - Resolution 24. Authorization of Expenditures for Septic Testing for Highway 1 2 Right-of-Way Properties 25. Schedule Work Session - City Administrator Performance Evaluation 26. 1 998 Interfund Transfers and Loan Payments 27. Authorization to Disburse City Funds for Claims Received 28. Appoint Auditor for Fiscal Year 1998 CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT EXECUTIVE SESSION * 29. LICENSES Home Occupation 1999 Liquor and Beer Licenses * 30. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS im 12/14 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. (Last regular meeting in 1998) 12/17 - Highway 12 Informational Meeting, Orono High School Cafeteria, 7:00 p.m. 12/24 - HOLIDAY 12/25 - HOLIDAY 1999 1/01 - HOLIDAY, New Year's Day 1/04 - Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. 1/11 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 1/18 - HOLIDAY, Martin Luther King Jr. Day 1/19 - Tuesday, Planning Commission Meeting, 6:30 p.m. 1/25 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. Public A ttendance • • • Mee^’g Date / •:? - 1S •i □□□ C ouncil Planning C ommission Park C ommission Other NAME (please print) V y \iO-vA \ V V . 3. 4. 5.. 7.. 8. 9.. 10,. 11. 12. 13.. 14. 15. tfatsA ISWEtolSm® ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER Pj H’- .y~ f -.t • -'M » "T * ’V. *. .wl REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION j)^0 14 1998 cr; Y cr c nc::o DATE: December 10,1998 ITEM NO:I Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Adoption of the 1 999 Annual Budget and Tax Levy - Resolutions A preliminary budget and tax levy was approved by the City Council at its September 14 meeting and reflected ' * the 1999 payable property tax statements. At the December 7 Truth in Taxation Hearing, the Council reduced the preliminary levy' for adoption at the December 14 Council meeting. The preliminary tax levy approved by the Council was $2,339,140. This was an increase of $1 14,010 or 5.1% over the 1998 levy. At the Truth in Taxation Hearing, the Council directed staff to reduce the proposed tax levy to $2,291,884 for an increase of $66,754 or 3% over the 1998 levy. The 3% figure was determined based on a combination of the projected Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase for 1999 of approximately 2% and a City growth fictor of i%. A chart showing the tax levy calculation based on the cost of living and annual growth factors is attached. The 3% tax levy increase is $47,256 less than the preliminary 1999 tax levy. The City Council directed staff to make the reduction in the le\y' while retaining the main expenditure items causing the expenditure increase in the General Fund budget. After review of the General Fund budget expenditure detail, staff has determined the way to accomplish what the Council has directed is to use a portion of the projected 1998 General Fund surplus to fund two one-time cost items in the General Fund. These are the additional expenditures related to updating the City ’s Comprehensive Community Management Plan and updating the City's Zorung Code ($35,000), and the expenditures related to the Inspections Tracking Module ($12,000). Staff is generally very reluctant to use General Fund reserv es to fund operating costs. However, in this situation, both expenditure items are one-time costs. Also, because the General Fund surplus is due mainly to planning and zoning revenues exceeding projected amounts, it is reasonable to match those surplus fees with expenditures related to the planning and zoning area. A summary of the 1999 budget and tax levy reflecting the Council's direction at the Truth in Taxation Hearing is attached. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the following resolutions: 1 . Resolution Adopting the Final 1998 Tax Levy Collectible in 1999 2. Resolution to Adopt the 1999 General Fund Budget 3. Resolution to Adopt the 1999 Special Revenue Funds Budgets 1 - - PROPOSED 1999 BUDGET AND TAX LEVY Proposed 1999 Budget The proposed 1999 budget reflects an effort to address a number of current needs (some requiring increased service capacity, and others requiring the City to clarify and strengthen the implementation of its Comprehensive Community Management Plan), and to position the City to address a number of long-term public infrastructure needs. Tax Le\-v The total tax levj' required to fund the proposed 199^ budget is $2,291,880. This is an increase of $66,754 or 3.0% over the 1998 levy. The major items causing the tax levy increase are as follows: 1. Additional costs for services the City obtains on a contracted basis, particularly fire protection and assessment services. 2.Additional expenses related to public infrastructure to begin to position the City to address long-term infrastructure needs in the areas of parks and open space, streets, and stormwater management. 3. Annual compensation adjustments for City employees. Property Clas.s Tax Rate Reductions. Tax Capacity Rate, and Impact on Properties The 1998 Legislature approved additional property class tax rate reductions for higher valued residential properties and commercial/industrial properties. The combination of the property class rate reductions and the increase in tax levy will cause the City's tax capacity rate to increase from 14.716% to 15.678%. Without the property class rate reductions, which have significantly reduced the City's tax capacity, it is estimated that the proposed tax levy would have resulted in a reduction in the City's tax capacity rate to 14.506%. • The general affect of the property class tax rate reductions on propeity ’ owners is to shift taxes from higher valued residential properties and commerciaLdndustrial properties to lower valued residential properties. For example, a home valued at $100,000 would have a $3.22 increase in City taxes, assuming no increase in value; and a home valued at $300,000 would have a $15.63 reduction in City taxes. General Fund Budget Expenditures General Fund expenditures are highlighted as part of the proposed budget information because they have the greatest impact on the tax levy. The proposed 1999 General Fund budget expenditures are $3,850,000. This is an increase of $211,905 or 5.8% over the 1998 budget. The tax levy required to fund the general fund budget is $1,771,350. This is an increase of $21,350 or 1.2%overthe 1998 General Fund tax levy. The proposed General Fund budget includes expenditures related to increased costs for contracted services such as fire service and assessing service. The General Fund budget also includes a number of substantial expenditures related to providing increased .service capacity, such as hiring a full-time Assistant Zoning Administrator and hiring a full-time animal control officer, that are offset by increased revenues generated by the services provided. Sewer and Water Rate lncreasc.s To provide adequate funding to address sewer and water infrastructure needs, water rates are proposed to be increased 2.9% for 1999 and sewer rates are proposed to be increased 3.2%. A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE FINAL 1998 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 1999 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the final 1998 Tax Levy Collectible in 1999, is determined to be as follows: GENERAL FUND - Operations PIR FUND - Infrastructure - Storm Drainage PIR FUND - Infrastructure - Roads PARK FUND - Land Acquisition & Development $1,771,430 45,000 35,450 5.000 TOTAL GENERAL LEVY $1,856,880 BONDED INDEBTEDNESS G.O. 1992 Sewer Improvement Bond G.O. 1995 (1985) Refunding Bonds G.O. 1997 Sewer Improvement Bond G.O. 1995 (1989 Water) Refunding Bonds 45.000 30.000 10.000 100.000 TOTAL BOND INDEBTEDNESS $ 185.000 BONDS OF OTHER GOVERNMENTAL UNITS H.R.A. Building Bond 1991 250.000 .$ 250.000 TOTAL ALL LEVIES llie City Clerk is hereby instructed to tiansmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 14, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor FXWaTAX.99 I — - A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1999 GENERAL FUND BUDGET BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the 1999 General Fund budget is determined to be as follows: ESTIMATED REVENUES Taxes - General $1,771,430 Licenses and Permits 240,000 Intergovernmental 532,940 Charges for Services 1,080,210 Fines and Forfeits 75,500 Interest Income 72,000 Miscellaneous 31,000 Use of Fund Balance 46.920 TOTAL $3,850,000 APPROPRIATED EXPENDITURES General Government $ 795,140 Public Safety 2,159,670 Street Maintenance 515,730 Parks and Recreation 63,080 Recycling Program 74,520 Engineering > Unallocated 14,860 Reimbursable Expenditures 48,510 Special Projects and Contingency 83,490 Transfers To Other Funds 95.000 TOTAL $3,850,000 -f Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at .a regular meeting held December 14,1998. i ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk CENFUND99 Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1999 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS BUDGETS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the 1999 Special Revenue Funds budgets are determined to be as follows: Estimated Revenues Improve & Equip Outlav Building Cap Outlav Taxes - General $ 5,000 - -- - Interest Income 6,450 $ 20,240 $ 136,000 User Fees / Loan Payment « mm 12,660 Park Dedication Fees 50,000 •m Transfers from other Funds 95,000 Use of Fund Balance 33.550 - •14.000 Total Revenues $ 95.000 ^ 127.900 $ 150.000 Appropriated Expenditures General Government $$ 40,500 $ 20,000 Streets 81,000 Parks & Recreation 95,000 - - Transfers to other Funds - -- -130,000 Increase to Fund Balance 6.400 • - Total Expenditures S 95.000 $ 127.900 S 150.000 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Ofono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 14,1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk 8PSCIALR.99 Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor I City of Orono Tax Levy Calculation Based on Cost of Living and Annual Growth 1999 Tax levy 1998 Cost of Living adjustment, 2.00% Annual Growth adjustment, 1.00% Tax levy 1999 CO.L.AAG. Tax levy 1999, Proposed Difference $2,225,130 44,500 22,250 $2.291.880 $2.339.140 $47,260 4 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 ‘>eci 199a ROLL ^■'C'?o.vo The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present; Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Council Members Charles Kelley, J. Diann Goetten, Barbara Peterson. Council Member Flint arrived at 7:02 p.m. Representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse. City Attorney Tom Barrett, Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, Pubic Works Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m (#1) CONSENT AGENDA Items 12,13,14,16, 20, 21, and 22 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 (*fr3) REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9.1998 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council meeting of November 9,1998, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays. RECOGNITION (#2) DARE VOLUNTEERS - ORONO POLICE OFFICER MIKE CARLSON AND ORONO POLICE RESERVIST MATTHEW HAGEN Mayor Jabbour stated Police Officer Mike Carlson and Police Reservist Matthew Hagen were being honored tonight for their efforts in promoting the D.A.R.E. Program. Ron Moorse read Resolution No. 4197, recognizing Mike Carlson's support of the D.A.R.E. Program. Gary Cheswick, Police Chief, stated the D.A.R.E. Car Program was started in 1996 by Mike Carlson who had indicated he would be willing to donate his time to this worthy program promoting drug awareness education throughout the various communities. Carlson donated his own race car and solicited funds from the local merchants on behalf of the D.A.R.E. Program. Carlson and Hagen contributed many, many hours attending events throughout the various communities in the area and received 1st and 2nd place honors continually. Cheswick noted that Carlson and Hagen's participation in this program was strictly volunteer and that they should be commended for the outstanding job they have performed in promoting the D.A.R.E. Program. Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4197, a Resolution of Recognition for Mike Carlson's Support of the D.A.R.E. Program, and to present Matthew Dennis Hagen with a Certificate of Appreciation for his promotion of drug awareness through the D.A.R.E. Program. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 1 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2 DARE Volunteers, continued) Mayor Jabbour thanked Mike Carlson and Matthew Hagen on behalf of the City Council and the City of Orono for their participation in this fine program. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - PETER WELLES, REPRESENTATIVE None PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - DALE LINDQUIST. REPRESENTATIVE Lindquist stated he was here to answer any questions of the Council members that might arise during the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS None ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#4) #2395, BRENT BENTROTT, 1453 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES - APPROVAL RESOLUTION. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Brent Bentrott was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant applied in June, 1998, for multiple variances to make changes to their existing residence and relocate their garage. Various plans have been reviewed by the Planning Commission, and it was determined that a conditional use permit would be needed because grading changes were proposed within five feet of the property lines and between 500 and 800 cubic yards of fill was proposed to allow for the garage to be rebuilt closer to the residence. At the October meeting the Planning Commission had requested that the Applicant submit revised plans, which have been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Commission at their October and November meeting. The most recent plan calls for remodeling of the deck on the west side of the existing residence into a three-season porch, which requires a side yard adjacent to street variance. The Applicant is also requesting a change to the southwest comer and entrance to the residence which requires a side yard adjacent to street variance. The Applicant is also proposing in this most recent plan to build a new garage closer to their residence which requires variances for a side yard adjacent to street and hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback. A conditional use permit to alter the existing topography with 500 cubic yards of fill and to grade within five feet of the property line is required. The Applicant is also proposing to use a portion of unopened Bluff Street and Park Drive for a driveway. Van Zomeren noted that it is difficult to situate a driveway on this property due to the existing topography, noting that a ten percent grade or less is recommended for driveways and less than eight percent is preferred with 3:1 slopes for maintenance. The Planning Commission had recommended approval of the side yard adjacent to street variances for the proposed improvements to the residence to change the deck into a three season porch and to allow the improvements to the south facade of the residence, subject to removal of hardcover In the 0-75 ’ setback. Page 2 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23,1998(#2395 Brent Bentrott, continued)The Planning Commission had recommended denial of the conditional use permit for grading and land alteration to relocate the garage and to deny the side yard adjacent to street setback for the garage and the use of Bluff Street and Park Drive for a driveway to the proposed garage.Van Zomeren noted she received the survey Friday morning from the Applicant.Bentrott had no comment. Mayor Jabbour commented in his opinion this application has not been handled very efficiently, and that City Staff should inform applicants that they will not accept any new information after Wednesday. Jabbour noted that the City Council is being presented with some of this information for the first time at tonight's meeting. Moorse remarked that ownership of Bluff Street may need to be addressed. Mayor Jabbour stated that the Supreme Court had ruled a while ago that City Councils could not vacate fire lanes, noting that he does not foresee vacating Bluff Street now or in the future. Goetten noted that the Planning Commission had told the Applicant that it was doubtful that Bluff Street would be vacated to allow for private use. Mayor Jabbour inquired whether there were any problems with what has been recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. Peterson stated no. Kelley inquired who constructed the retaining walls on the property. Bentrott stated the previous owner had constructed the retaining walls. Mayor Jabbour staled the question for the City Council to determine is whether the upper portion of Bluff Street should be opened up for private use. Goetten stated in her opinion Bluff Street should not be opened up due to the precedent that it might set. Mayor Jabbour stated he was in agreement with Goetten. Van Zomeren commented that the present plan proposes additional retaining walls, noting that hardcover has not been calculated on that portion. Van Zomeren stated that drainage and grading will need to be reviewed based on whether or not Bluff Street is vacated and the conditional use permit is approved. Kelley inquired whether the proposed garage will be built. Bentrott stated they are proposing to construct the new garage halfway to the back of the house. The new garage will be similar to what currently exists only in a different location. Kelley stated in his opinion this application comes down to whether there is a hardship that exists for relocating the garage. Mayor Jabbour commented that the present situation of backing out onto the roadway is a dangerous situation. Page 3 J ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23,1998 (#2395 Brent Bentrott, continued) Kelley Inquired whether this is the plan that the Applicant would like the City Council to act on. Gronberg stated the first plan submitted by the Applicant was a better plan engineering-wise but they have attempted to revise the plan to accommodate the wishes of the Planning Commission. Kelley noted that City Staff has not had an opportunity to review the proposed grading and drainage. Mayor Jabbour inquired whether the City Council would be in favor of opening up Bluff Street for private use. noting that he personally does not have a problem with the vacation. Jabbour inquired whether that would be a permitted use under Orono's ordinances. Barrett stated in his view the use of the alley or driveway is consistent with the easement, noting that Bluff Street is a legal platted road. Barrett remarked that the other issue is who owns the underlying fee for Bluff Street and that a third party may need to consent to the private use if that underlying fee is owned by a third party. Mayor Jabbour remarked that if the City Council is in agreement with allowing Bluff Street to be used, then it will need to be determined whether there is a third party involved. Bentrott commented that this plan has been reviewed by the City Engineer. Mayor Jabbour noted that the fee owner will need to be determined and that the City Council cannot give permission to drive on neighbor's land. Jabbour stated that it appears to be the consensus of the City Council to allow the Applicant to use Bluff Street. Dale Lindquist, Planning Commission, stated that it was their understanding that Bluff Street would not be opened up. Moorse noted that the grading and drainage still needs to be addressed and could perhaps be made a condition. Kellogg stated that Item #3 needs to be addressed further, noting that he has a concern with the amount of water that will flow through the culvert as well as the affect the grading would have on the adjoining property. Kelley stated that the drainage impact to the neighboring property needs to be fully understood before this project can proceed. Gronberg noted that Bentrott's house is lower than the neighbor's and any drainage problems would occur on the Bentrott property first before the neighboring property. Mayor Jabbour stated the drainage issues need to he addressed first before approval of the driveway and garage can be given. Jabbour remarked he would like to see no impact tc the adjoining property, and recommended that the Applicant continue to work with his neighbors to ease any concerns that they may have. Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4198 for the proposed house improvements which require side yard adjacent to street variances only, and to continue Application #2395,1453 Park Drive, to the December 14th City Council meeting, with the understanding that the City Council is in agreement with granting use of the upper portion of Bluff Street for a landing subject to the submittal, review, and approval by the City Engineer Page 4 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2395 Brent Bentrott, continued) and City Staff of a drainage and grading plan with no additional watershed to the adjoining property. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1. Goetten opposed. Goetten noted she was not opposed to the continuation but had concerns regarding the use of Bluff Street. Van Zomeren inquired when the Applicant should have the information submitted by. Mayor Jabbour stated that the information should be submitted by December 4th if this item is to be included on the agenda for the December 14th meeting. (#5) #2399 MURIEL SENN, 4448 NORTH SHORE DRIVE • VARIANCE Muriel Senn was present. Van Zomeren presented photographs of the property to the City Council members. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is requesting multiple variances to add to an existing residence and to construct a garage. This residence lies within the LR-1B district, which has a minimum of one acre. However, this parcel only consists of .38 acres, and does not lend itself well to many improvements. Van Zomeren remarked the Applicant has submitted three or four plans and is now proposing to change the roof line and to construct a garage located 10 feet off of the property line. Van Zomeren noted that 84 percent of the lot Is located in the 0-75 ’ setback, and requires variances to lakeshore setback, north side yard setback, street yard setback, structural coverage, and hardcover. A large amount of hardcover consists for the driveway, noting that Hennepin County has paved a portion of the lot due to erosion. The Planning Commission had recommended unanimously to deny the application finding that the amount of hardcover remains excessive and the structural coverage exceeds the 15 percent limit by 147.7 square f.et. Senn commented she has resided on this property for 24 years and has seen her land continually erode. There currently is no parking on either side of the street and it is difficult to access the existing garage. Senn stated she is in need of more storage room due to the fact that there is no basement or attic in the residence and she is limited to three closets. Senn stated she would like to convert the old garage into a utility room, noting that her furnace is presently located in her kitchen and needs to be replaced in the near future. Senn remarked she has met numerous times with her builder to revise plans that would reduce the need for variances but this property does not lend itself well to any Improvements without requiring variances of some sort. Mayor Jabbour commented that this residence once possibly was a cottage and was converted into a year-round residence. Jabbour stated a hardship is determined based on the configuration of the lot and other factors. Senn stated that the residence was only six years old when she purchased the property and it didnl seem to be a cottage at that time. Senn noted there were no setback requirements at that time. Mayor Jabbour stated in his opinion a hardship does exist. Page 5 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2399 Muriel Senn, continued) Goetten remarked she has viewed the property and In her view a hardship does exist. The structure does not have a basement and currently the Applicant's utility room is in her kitchen. Goetten Indicated she wa.> willing to work with the Applicant. Senn noted she is requesting a car and a half garage. Mayor Jabbour noted the Applicant is requesting the addition to the existing house for a utility room. Kelley stated he has no problem with the application. Peterson noted she was in agreement with the application as well. Mayor Jabbour commented the application was reasonable and that a hardship does exist. Jabbour inquired whether the garage needs to be realigned. Senn stated the slant to the garage adds thousands of dollars to the project, Kelley inquired when the County had last taken land for the right-of-way. Senn remarked it was at the time the bridge was improved Mayor Jabbour stated that was in approximately 1974. Senn stated she has heard that the County may be widening the bridge in the near future. Kelley stated he does not mind if the Applicant straightens out the garage to avoid the angle and give her a variance to go into the sideyard. Van Zomeren noted the garage encroaches eight feet into the sideyard. Mayor Jabbour stated a condition could be added not to exceed eight feet. Kelley suggested the garage could be moved back somewhat. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Application #2399,4448 North Shore Drive, granting of variances to lakeshore setback, north side yard setback, street yard setback, structural coverage, and hardcover in the 0-7S* and 75-250* setbacks as outlined in the November 18,1998 Planner's Report, with the sideyard setback not to exceed five feet for the garage. Mayor Jabbour inquired whether Senn understood what the City Council was proposing. Senn commented she understands the garage can be moved somewhat. Kelley stated the City Council is attempting to give the Applicant a little more room by allowing her to encroach up to Five feet to the side yard setback. VOTE ON MOTION: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#6) #2403 TERRY CLARK. 1575 LONG LAKE BOULEVARD - VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT • RESOLUTION 4199 Page 6 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2403 Terry Clark, continued) Tom Terry, Builder, and Neil Weber. Architect, were present. The Applicant was not present due to an illness in the family. Van Zomeren stated this application is requesting to add a 12' by 16' addition In the required street yard setback of an existing residence and to add a lakeside upper deck and stairway to be located within the 75' lakeshore setback. This property lies within the LR-1A district, which has a minimum of tv/o acres. This lot Is comprised of .72 acres and is considered to be a shallow lot. Van Zomeren stated a conditions! use permit is required to raise the house four feet to allow the construction of a walkout basement where the land alteration/grading will require a net increase of 15 cubic yards of fill and be partially located in the lakeshore setback. Hardcover variances are needed in the 0-75' setback as well as a top of bluff variance to alter the grade within the required 30 foot bluff setback. Van Zomeren remarked the City Engineer has viewed this property and has a concern with the steepness of the slope, noting they normally recommend a slope of 3:1. The architect has informed City Staff that a portion of the retaining wall will be removed. The Planning Commission had voted to approve the requested variances and conditional use permit subject to the submission of an accurate grading plan with the amount of cut/fill determined. Neil Weber, Architect, stated they are proposing to add a 12' by 16' addition to the current residence. Weber noted they had presented a lower impact plan but the Planning Commission did not like the added hardcover in the 0-75' setback. This plan proposed to increase hardcover by one percent in the 0-75' setback, noting that impact to some degree could not be avoided. Weber stated the overall footprint of the house is not being increased. Tom Terry, Builder, stated that a second story to the house is not possible without a new foundation. Flitit indicated he was fine with the application. Goetten indicated that there was prior approval given for an addition that was located out of the 0-75' setback. Tom Terry indicated this plan costs about half the price as the other proposal. Van Zomeren indicated the prior approval was given to the previous occupants of the house and called for most of the interior of the house to be remodeled. Tom Terry indicated the location of the garage would not change. Goetten inquired whether the Applicant will be requesting additional garage space in the future, noting that the Applicant is proposing to use up all the allowable hardcover with this application. Kelley indicated he was in agreement with Goetten, noting that a new owner may want to come in and add more garage space. Kelley inquired whether the increase to the hardcover in the 0-75' setback is attributable to the proposed deck on the lakeside. Weber stated the deck is being added for the functionability of the house, noting that the house is being raised up four feet. The location of the front entrance will not change. Weber commented the front entrance is located on the street side of the structure. Flint indicated in his view the Applicant has attempted to comply with the Planning Commission's Page 7 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2403 Terry Clark, continued) recommendations, noting he wiil tend to go along with the vote of the Planning Commission. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application #2403,1575 Long Lake Boulevard, and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4199, granting variances to street yard setback, lakeshore setback, top of bluff variance, hardcover variance in the 0«75 ‘ setback, and a conditional use permit, per the recommendations of the Planning Commission. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Mayor Jabbour noted that the City Council has warned the Applicant that no new hardcover will be allowed in the event a larger garage is desired by this property owner or future property owners. (#7) #2411 PAUL AND LEANN HANSSEN, 3195 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCES Paul Hanssen was present. Weinberger stated this application was reviewed at the last City Council meeting where it was sent back to the Planning Commission for further review based on new information. The Applicants are requesting to repair a boathouse located 15 feet from the lakeshore. The boathouse has been determined by the City Building Staff to be in a state of disrepair. This application requires a variance to the hardcover in the 0-75' setback and a variance to allow a boathouse to exist within 75' of the lakeshore. A variance from the side yard adjacent to street setbacks is also required to allow the structure to be located ten feet from a piatted public right-of-way. Weinberger stated the deck located above the boathouse was damaged in a storm back in May, and the Building Official did not issue the building permit due to the condition of the boathouse. The Applicant had a structural engineer inspect and prepare a report on the scope of work to be completed. It has been determined that the front and back walis wouid need to be replaced as well as portions of the side walls. Repairs to the foundation are also necessary. Weinberger noted that the State Building Code requires that these structures have new foundations as well as new footings. The Planning Commission originally had voted to deny this application in October based on issues involving replacement cost of the structure. City Council requested the Planning Commission revisit this issue due based on the fact they had the incorrect information when their decision was reached. The Planning Commission reviewed the application again in November and recommended denial of the application based on not having any new information to reverse their previous decision. Hanssen stated he has spent $550 on a structural engineering plan at the request of City Staff, and if improvements to these types of structures are already prohibited by City ordinance, then that cost could have been avoided. Mayor Jabbour stated in his view there is a misunderstanding about what the exact ordinance is that applies in this case. Dale Lindquist, Planning Commission, stated they had requested information from the City Attorney which they did not receive prior to their meeting. Mayor Jabbour stated it was his understanding based on what the City Attorney has stated that the value and use of the property does not apply in this case, and that this structure should be considered a non-conforming structure that requires a variance to the 0-75 ’ setback. Building Staff has determined that if improvements to the structure are allowed, then the boathouse must be Page 8 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTcS FOR NOVEMBER 23,1998 (#2411 Paul Hanssen, contirued) brought up to code, which requires certain variances. Jabbour commented that a hardship must be found in order to grant the variances. Hanssen commented the wind storm in May had blown the deck off the boathouse, and upon closer inspection, it was determined that the foundation is in disrepair, but in his opinion the boathouse could have been used for another ten years. Goetten indicated she was still somewhat confused about the ordinance, noting that in her view the value of the structure played a factor in determining whether the improvements could be made to the structure. Hanssen stated the ordinance states that the value of the building is determined at the time of the loss and not at the time the ordinance was adopted. Barrett indicated he did not receive the letter from City Staff until after the Planning Commission meeting and at the previous City Council meeting was not familiar enough with the case to give clear direction on how to proceed on this application. Barrett stated the location of the boathouse makes it non-conforming due to the setback and is not a non-conforming use. The City Council needs to decide whether a variance should be granted to allow this type of non-conforming structure to remain. Barrett stated the value of the structure has been looked at in previous applications in determining hardship. Barrett stated the variance is properly before the City Council and the City Council needs to make a determination based on hardship on whether to grant the variances. Mayor Jabbour stated in his view the City Council needs to determine whether that structure would have had a longer life span had the damage not occurred in the windstorm. Jabbour commented he was attempting to differentiate what percentage of the repairs are necessary due to bringing the structure up to code versus what damage was caused in the storm. Kelley remarked that the Building Inspector must think that more than 50 percent of the structure needs to be replaced, noting that the ordinances arc pretty clear. Flint stated he has difficulty making the Applicant tear down what was pre-existing. Flint commented that numerous residents in the Casco Point area have expressed complaints regarding the costs associated with obtaining the required structural engineering plans and other studies that the City requests. Flint stated that maybe that issue should be reviewed to see if some of these costs can be avoided. Mayor Jabbour indicated that a hardship must be demonstrated. Flint stated in his opinion the hardship is that the boathouse was pre-existing, the windstorm damaged the structure, and the Applicant is nov/ requesting to repair what he already had. Mayor Jabbour remarked that the required engineering plans and studies are needed to determine the full extent of the project before work is commenced, and that City Staff attempts to use common sense when requesting these studies. Hanssen indicated that the engineering plan fee was not a big issue in his mind. Mayor Jabbour commented that the difference in this application and other applications is that this application has become necessary due to the damage caused in the storm. Jabbour noted that the City in the past has taken the position that non-conforming structures should not be allowed to stay Page 9 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23,1998 (#2411 Paul Hanssen, continued) if the property owner has allowed the structure to deteriorate. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application #2411, 3195 Casco Circle, granting a variance to hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback, a variance to allow a boathouse to exist within 75* of the lakeshore, and a variance from the side yard adjacent to street setbacks to allow the structure to be located ten feet from a platted public right-of-way as outlined in the November 18,1998 Planner’s Report. John Erickson stated he understands the position of the City Council, but noted that he was required to remove a pre-existing boathouse. Erickson inquired whether he would be permitted to rebuild that structure. Mayor Jabbour remarked that the resident can submit an application, noting that he is not thoroughly familiar with what the resident was referring to but that it happened a long time ago. Jabbour indicated he would be willing to meet with the resident if he so desired to discuss the matter. Kelley inquired whether Mayor Jabbour*s position was that the majority of the damage to the boathouse was caused by the storm rather than the general disrepair of the structure due to deterioration over the years. Mayor Jabbour stated to his understanding the storm eliminated the roof and a tree fell on the boathouse. Hanssen stated the deck was ripped from the foundation, but was unsure as to whether a tree actually fell on the structure. A tree located close to the structure was required to be removed. Mayor Jabbour indicated he understood the storm had damaged the structure. Hanssen remarked the storm damaged the deck. VOTE ON MOTION: Ayes 4, Nays 1. Goetten indicated she was opposed to approving the application due to the fact that City Staff has indicated that the boathouse in their view was not damaged by the storm, and has not changed her understanding of the ordinance at this time. (#8) #2417 TOLD DEVELOPMENT, 2380 SHADYWOOD ROAD - B-5 ZONING AMENDMENT Bob Cunningham, Told Development, was present. Gaffron indicated the Applicant is requesting an amendment to the B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District to add a drugstore use to the list of allowed (permitted or conditional) uses. The B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District includes 2380 Shadywood property as well as two areas along Shoreline Drive. The B-5 District was created in 1975 to provide limited business activity compatible with the adjacent and surrounding residential uses. The B-5 District was also intended to provide for businesses that serve residents in the surrounding neighborhood as opposed to a place for City-wide or regional oriented uses. These businesses are not intended to be high traffic generators and do not necessitate an inordinate amount of hardcover. The district shall have immediate access to adequate highways and public sanitary sewer. Because of the location of the B-5 District as contemplated in the area known as Navarre, the uses are limited in order Page 10 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23, 1993 (#2417 TOLD Development, continued) to limit the hardcover in that area and to limit the future generation of traffic for that property in that use district since there is already a traffic problem in Navarre. Orono's Comprehensive Plan generally recognizes the Navarre area as one of only two commercial areas in the City, noting that Navarre will provide sufficient opportunity for neighborhood retail and service businesses, plus adequate professional offices, to serve the needs of most Crono residents. The Comprehensive Plan also specifically states that commercial and industrial development will not be permitted to adversely affect neighboring residential property. The location and scale of commercial and industrial development will be controlled so as not to encroach upon the primary residential land uses in Orono. Wherever possible, natural land forms or buffers will be required between different land uses. The current list of conditional uses in B-5 was amended in October, 1996, with the deletion of home and garden equipment rental, which was concurrently made a permitted use in the B-1 District. The B-5 District was again amended in March. 1998, by adding coffee or bagel retail stores to the list of allowed conditional uses, with a number of conditions related to maximum floor area, parking and seating. The drugstore use as listed in the B-1 and B-3 districts is defined as "drugs, candy, ice cream, soft drinks, cosmetics and other other usual drug store merchandise." This listing was apparently created as part of the 1975 zoning code revisions, since it doesn't appear in the 1967 code. The range of merchandise and services associated with a drugstore use has changed somewhat since 1975, and now commonly Includes on-site one hour photo processing service and coolers for a range of perishable as well as non-perishable take-away foods. The Planning Commission has reviewed this application and considered several questions in determining whether a drugstore use might be acceptable within the B-5 District. Staff and Planning Commission have concluded that a drugstore is something that is needed and wanted in the Navarre area. The site plan was not addressed by the Planning Commission at its last meeting. Gaffr.n reported that a public hearing was held at the Planning Commission's last meeting, and several residents expressed concern with the amoutr. of hardcover, lighting, traffic and noise that this development might create. For the most part, the residents in attendance at the meeting spoke in favor of this project. Tne Planning Commission motion to amend the B-5 District to allow "full-service drugstore" as a conditional use failed, and a second motion was made to deny the request for such an amendment based on the proposed use not matching the intent of the B-5 District, which motion carried. It should also be noted that the Planning Commission voted to table the commercial site plan without review, pending a decision by the City Council on the zoning amendment. Gaffron stated that all properties in the B-5 District are subject to a 30 or 35 percent hardcover limitation due to their proximity to the lake, and the proposed Shadywood site is also difficult to develop due to topography, shape, and the existing and future stormwater pond constraints. Because of the difficulty in situating a large structure on this site. Staff feels that it may be inappropriate to amend the B-5 District which would result in the necessity for certain variances, if approved, the City Council is acknowledging that the need for variances does exist and wilt likely be granted, and the City Council may want to address whether the zoning needs to be changed rather than grant variances. Bob Cunningham. TOLD Development, stated he has invited John O'Sullivan to be present with him at tonight's meeting since he is more knowledgeable about the history of the site. Cunningham stated he is requesting the City of Orono to amend the B-5 District to allow the use of a drugstore, noting that this use is compatible and desired in the Navarre area. Cunningham Page 11 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23,1998 (02417 TOLD Development, continued) acknowledged that the site plan is proposing a large amount of hardcover, noting that the proposed building will be between 10,000 and 15,000 square feet. This site was chosen due to the lack of other available land in this community to build a Walgreen's. Cunningham commented that Walgreen's has conducted numerous studies of their stores and have concluded that this size store best meets the needs of their customers. Walgreen’s caters to the residents in the surrounding area and are looking at approximately a mile and a half radius as their service area. Most of Walgreen's traffic is pass-by traffic and should not increase traffic in the general area significantly. Cunningham noted that the nearest drugstore to this site is approximately three to four miles away, and a Walgreen’s at this site would provide the neighborhood with a good retail opportunity. Cunningham remarked he is willing to address whatever concerns the City Council may have regarding the proposed site plan. Mayor Jabbour commented that the City needs to look at this issue very carefully and needs to be as consistent as possible in making amendments to zoning districts. Jabbour noted the City had sound reasons for zoning the City the way it is and have made certain changes over the years to accommodate certain services that were not anticipated at the time the districts were adopted. Mayor Jabbour noted that the City Council needs to determine why the B-5 District should be amended to include this use and not erode away the City’s limits on the business districts simply to accommodate a particular development. The City Council needs to decide whether this use is appropriate for this area, noting that the City would like to get a firm commitment from Walgreen's that they are serious about proceeding with this project before amending the zoning district. Cunningham stated he is merely representing Walgreen’s as a potential landlord, noting they would be a long-term tenant in this building should the project be approved. Cunningham remarked he will be meeting with representatives of Walgreen’s on December 7th to discuss the project, and his goal is to have the district amended to accommodate this use. Mayor Jabbour noted that the public hearing for this development was held at the last Planning Commission meeting, but the Council will allow additional public comment at tonight’s meeting. Gaffron stated he agrees that the City needs to understand the full impact that this zoning amendment would have on the City as a whole, noting that City Staff has not had sufficient time to look at this issue in a comprehensive manner. Cunningham stated he would not be opposed to a conditional use permit for this project. Flint commented he is having a difficult time distinguishing between the request for the amendment and the site plan. Flint stated he would like to see a drugstore in Navarre but has a concern over the size of the proposed building. Cunningham stated this is merely a prototype of the building that Walgreen’s typically builds based upon numerous market studies and customer research. Cunningham indicated that Walgreen’s may be agreeable to modifying the site plan slightly, noting that they have chosen not to have a two-story building, which they felt would be more objectionable. Cunningham stated that it would be Walgreen’s decision on whether the size of the building should be reduced. Kelley commented that he is aware that Walgreen’s does have smaller stores located in downtown Minneapolis, and suggested that Cunningham discuss with Walgreen’s the possibility of erecting a smaller size building at this location. Page 12 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23,1998 (#2417 TOLD Development, continued) Cunningham stated if that is the direction of the City Council, he would be willing to approach Walgreen’s with that recommendation. Flint stated that the present trend is towards more pedestrian friendly sites to promote a better sense of community, noting that this project is more oriented toward automobile traffic rather than pedestrian traffic. Peterson stated she is not opposed to the zoning amendment but has a concern over the size of the proposed building. Kelley noted he is in favor of a drugstore at that location, but the residents should have input into how they would like to see Navarre developed. Kelley slated that the size of the building and the potential water runoff are. in his view, the two main issues. Flint indicated he is not in favor of approving the amendment at this meeting. Goetten indicated that a drugstore is needed in Navarre, but that the size of the building and drainage should be addressed with Walgreen's. Steve Cod, 4225 Wilshire Boulevard. Mound, staled he has lived in Orono most of his life and feels that this is a great opportunity that might not happen again. Ted Kolander, 3265 Lafayette Ridge Court, slated the present site is an eyesore and this is a good opportunity for the City to improve the site. Mayor Jabbour commented that the City Council needs to take al! factors into consideration before arriving at a decision. John Anderson, 2195 Shadywood Road, noted that this area is an aging community and there is not a lot of undeveloped land available. Anderson stated in his opinion the drugstore would be an asset to the community, and he has polled the surrounding houses and has found only one resident who was opposed to the project. Steve Wagner, 3607 Shoreline Drive, remarked he is pleased that the City Council is looking at all the issues involved with this project, and noted that he would like to see a concrete answer to this requested amendment. Rick Meyer, 2195 Bayview Place, staled he is in favor of this project since it will provide jobs in the community as well as provide for positive retail growth in the neighborhood. John O'Sullivan presented the City Council with a petition in support of this development as well as a letter from Re/Max A-1 Excellence stating their support for the project. O'Sullivan noted the petition is from the residents surrounding the proposed development and the support has been overwhelmingly in favor of the project. Mayor Jabbour noted that the City Council will not be making their decision based solely on the input of the citizens. The City Council will not issue blanket variances on any development without going through the proper process, noting that the City Council would like the project to be built according to Orono standards. Jabbour remarked that the local residents need to realize that this decision will affect the other B-5 districts as well. Cunningham thanked the City Council for their consideration on this application and indicated that he is willing to work jointly with Orono to come up with the best possible plan for this site. Page 13 J ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2417 TOLD Development, continued) Cunningham noted that the Planning Commission has indicated they are willing to work jointly with TOLD Development and Walgreen's on this development as well. Jabbour moved, Flint seconded, to direct City Staff to draft a letter to Walgreen’s recommending that they consider reducing the size of their building. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to continue Application #2417, 2380 Shadywood Road, to the December 14th City Council meeting. Barrett noted that the Applicant will need to agree to the continuation in writing. Cunningham indicated he is agreeable to the continuation. Cunningham stated he should have a firm commitment by Walgreen's to either proceed with or withdraw the application. VOTE ON MOTION: Ayes 5. Nays 0. (Recess taken at 10:01 p.m. -10:10 p.m.) (#9) #2426 GEORGE STICKNEY, WILLOW DRIVE - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION NO. 4200 George Stickney was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is proposing to subdivide a 6.57 acre parcel into two zoning lots. Lot 1 would be a 4.02 acre lot and Lot 2 would be a 2.57 acre lot. This property lies within the RR-1B district which has a two acre minimum lot size. Van Zomeren remarked there are suitable septic sites available and no further variances should be necessary for the building sites. The preliminary plat does not indicate where the driveways would be located, and Staff is not recommending a shared driveway. The driveways shall not have a slope greater than 10 percent nor be located closer than five feet to either the north or south property lines of either lot. No stormwater ponding will be required as determined by the MCWD. A drainage map and grading/erosion control plan will need to be provided before the Tinal plat is submitted. Van Zomeren commented that the park dedication fee for each parcel is $4900.00 based upon the City Assessor's valuation. Mayor Jabbour indicated it was his understanding that you only pay park dedication fees on the newly created lot. Flint stated that was not his understanding. Moorse Indicated that if a park dedication fee has already been paid on ttie original lot, then only one park dedication fee needs to be paid. Moorse indicated that Staff will need to verify whether a park dedication fee has already been paid. Mayor Jabbour indicated that a new park dedication fee was adopted approximately one year ago which set a cap on the amount that needed to be paid. Page 14 _________t ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2426 George Stickney, continued) Barrett indicated that the language in the new ordinance will need to be reviewed. Flint stated they should get a recommendation from the City Attorney on the amount of park dedication fees that should be paid. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Application #2416, XXXX Willow Drive, and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4200, Granting Preliminary Approval of a Class II Subdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, Bill Kelley’s Land. Flint stated there Is ambiguity in regards to the stormwater management plan, noting that each development Is to handle its own drainage but the language in the documents does not reflect that. The City Engineer states that depending on the comments of the MCWD, other options such as buffer strips may be needed, and the letter from the MCWD states that they have no suggestions with respect to this. Mayor Jabbour noted that the City Council has been consistent in their practice of requiring that each development manage their own drainage/runoff issues. Kellogg indicated he understands the position of the City Council. Kellogg noted that the current stormwater drainage plan has not been adopted as of this time, and once adopted, it will be easier to manage. VOTE ON MOTION: Ayes 5. Nays 0. (#10) #2428 TERRY MAURER ON BEHALF OF DAVID HARDTEN, 2515 KELLY AVENUE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 4201 David and Christine Hardten were present. Terry Maurer was present. Weinbeiger stated the Applicants are proposing to remove the existing house and detached garage on the proeprty to build a new residence with attached garage. They would like to keep the existing boathouse with stairs along the lakeshore. At the last City Council meeting the Council recommended the Applicant revise the site plan to reduce hardcover in the 75-250* lakeshore setback to the allowed 25 percent. The Applicants have revised the site plan reducing hardcover to 24.8 percent. The proposed hardcover In the 250-500* setback is 30.6 percent where 30 percent is allowed. Kelley inquired what the City*s policy is about issuing a certificate of occupancy prior to the driveway being blacktopped. Van Zomeren stated the building inspector will review the property before an occupancy certificate is issued, and in the case of the Silas application, a temporary occupancy certificate was issued before the driveway was completed. Kelley stated he wanted to insure that the driveway Is completed and how that was regulated. Weinberger stated on the Silas application he went with the building inspector and measured the driveway. Page 15 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23, 1998 (#2428 Terry Maurer, continued) Kelley inquired whether the City does have procedures in place for inspecting the driveways. Weinberger stated yes. they do. Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Application #2428, 2515 Kelly Avenue, and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4201, a Resolution Granting Variances to allow an accessory structure to remain on the proeprty without a principal structure, and variances in hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback and in the 250-500' lakeshore setback. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#11) #2430 PAUL PHILLIPS, 2140 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - PRELIMINARY PLAT - RESOLUTION NO. 4202 Paul Phillips was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is proposing to divide his 4.5 acre homestead parcel into two lots. Each lot would contain 2.0 acres served by a .5 acre outlot. The Planning Commission reviewed this application and had a concern whether a cul-de-sac was necessary, and determined that a cul-de-sac was not necessary based on the location of the existing residences and driveway. The majority felt that the proposed subdivision met the intent of the zoning and subdivision ordinance. The Fire Department and Police Department have received this plan and wanted to insure that the road had the proper width for emergency vehicles to get in and out. Van Zomeren stated that the Applicant has previously paid a park dedication fee of $400 for the one lot and will need to pay $4900.00 on the other lot. Mayor JaoDouir sr.ated in his view he does not t’ ink the cul-de-sac is warranted in this case. Van Zomeren remarked that the septic sites have to be taken into consideration when platting the cul-de-sac and if a cul-de-sac is required, the lots would not meet the two acre minimum. Mayor Jabbour commented that the ordinance requiting cul-de-sacs might need to be reviewed since there is some confusion over when a cul-de-sac is required. Flint noted there is some ambiguity concerning the stormwater ponding and that the MCWD has indicated via a telephone call that they will not require stormwater ponding for this subdivision. Flint inquired how the City will be regulating the drainage on this parcel. Mayor Jabbour stated it has been the philosophy and practice of the City Council to have each property owner be responsible for their water runoff, and the City is merely checking with the MCWD to verify that there are no other issues that need to be reviewed and drainage is subject to final review and approval by the City Engineer. Phillips stated he has no problem with drainage. Mayor Jabbour commented that the City is trying to insure that everyone understands the policy of the City as it pertains to drainage. Page 16 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2430 Paul Phillips, continued) Van Zomeren stated that some template language could be added to the res^' ution reflecting the City Engineer's letter, Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application #2430, 2140 Sixth Avenue North, and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4202, a Resolution Granting Preliminary Approval for a Class II Subdivision, subject to the inclusion of the template language in the resolution reflecting the City Engineer's views on the stormwater issues. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (•#12) #2435 JEFF LITZAU - LUTZ CONSTRUCTION, 3433 LIVINGSTON AVENUE • VARIANCES • RESOLUTION NO. 4203 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application #2435, 3433 Livingston Avenue, and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4203, a Resolution Granting a Variance to Lot Area and Lot Width. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (•#13) #2437 JEFF MARTINEAU, 2565 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4204 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application #2437, 2565 North Shore Drive, and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4204, a Resolution Granting Variances to Average Lakeshore Setback and Hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#14) #2438 MICHAEL SLETTEN, 4680 BAYSIDE ROAD - LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT RESOLUTION NO. 4205 Goetten moved. Peterson seconded, to approve Application #2438, 4680 Bayside Road, and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4205, a Resolution Approving a Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement of a Property Located at 2680 Bayside Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (Item #15 follows Item #18) (#18) JOE FIEDLER - REFUND APPROVAL - RESOLUTION NO. 4208 Joe Fiedler was present. Barrett suggested that Paragraph #2 on page three be stricken from the draft. Moorse indicated that that paragraph has already been stricken. Kelley moved, Jabbour seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4208, a Resolution Approving a Partial Refund of Sewer Assessment for 373 Westlake Street. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 2, Peterson and Goetten opposed. (#15) #2439 SERVICE 800, INC., 2190 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW - VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 4206 Page 17 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2439 Service 800, Inc., continued) Jean Mork Bredeson, Service 800, was present, along with Rich Kiemen. Builder, and Charles Radloff, Architect. Gaffron stated the Applicant is requesting approval of variances and commercial site plan for the construction of a 10,880 square foot office buildirig on Lot 1. Block 1, Sugar Woods 2nd Addition. This request does require a conditional use permit for office use in the B-1 District. Variances to lot coverage, number of parking stalls, parking lot setbacks, and lack of loading berth are being requested in this application. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at its last meeting, and concluded that the lot coverage at 26.1 percent is acceptable given that this is a commercial site. There is no intent on the part of the Applicant to have a loading berth, and they are requesting that they only be required to construct 36 parking stalls instead of the required 45 parking stalls. Gaffron reported that the City Engineer did make a number of comments and recommendations in his November 9,1998 letter regarding traffic, grading, drainage, utilities, and easements. The majority of these issues can and will be addressed in the construction plan review process prior to issuance of a building permit. Gaffron stated a letter of credit will be required as part of the development agreement. There is no access proposed to the adjacent Orono Shopping Center site, and the Applicant is proposing to do landscaping around the building and in front. The building material being proposed is a brick facade on the exterior of the building, with the trash receptables being contained inside. Gaffron remarked that a conditional use permit is required for the office use in the B-1 District, which has been recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. Gaffron stated the Applicant did cons; jer the possibility of making the building a two-story structure but ruled this option out due to the increased expenses associated with additional bathrooms and the need for an elevator. The Planning Commission did vote in favor of a recommendation to approve the commercial site plan with the variances as presented, to approve the conditional use permit for office use, to accept the proof of parking concept, the retention of the last nine stalls as green space until they are needed, subject to a future screening requirement along the rear lot line if the service road is ever built, and subject to resolving any remaining engineering issues or other matters. Jean Mork Bredeson stated she is the owner of Service 800, which currently employs 15 employees in Wayzata. They are in the business of providing consulting services to computer companies and are in need of expanding their present office space. Bredeson indicated they are willing to work closely with City Staff and City Council on this project. Kiemen noted that the site pian has been designed to take advantage of the natural topography as much as possible, with a boulevard being constructed along Highway 12. Landscaping around the building and low profile lighting is being proposed. Radloff stated the one story building fits in well architecturally with the other surrounding buildings as well as meeting the Applicant's needs at this time. Radloff stated the proof of parking was a reasonable request, and 36 parking stalls should provide adequate parking at this time. Kiemen stated the building material proposed is masonry w th stone banding similar to brick but less expensive. Page 18 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2439 Service 800, Inc., continued) Bredeson remarked that It is a primary goal of Service 800 to end up with a building that they can take pride in as well as addressing their future and present business needs. Radioff stated the lighting being proposed is in compliance with Orono's lighting standards. Mayor Jabbour inquired whether the 26.1 percent lot coverage is in line with what has been approved previously for other commercial sites. Gaffron stated the 26.1 percent is slightly higher than what has been approved previously, noting that the ordinance when adopted was geared more towards residential and accessory structures located on less than two acres rather than commercial sites. City Staff has reviewed commercial sites in the surrounding areas and has found that on average 25 to 30 percent lot coverage is typical for a commercial site. Radioff remarked that other cities regulate parking relative to the size of the building. Mayor Jabbour stated the public should be made aware of the differences between this development and the proposed project in Navarre. Gaffron stated this site is not subject to hardcover requirements which the other site is and lies within a B-1 District which has a different set of standards than a B-5 District. Kelley expressed a concern about the type of development that the City would like to see along Highway 12, noting that he would like to continue with the proposed lighting and setbacks for the remainder of Highway 12. Kelley noted i:iat the B-1 District was Orono's most intense commercial use district, and raised a concern about what this building might possibly be used for 15 years down the road. Kelley noted that this building has a potential of 30 employees in the building and there might be a problem with lack of parking in the future. Kelley stated he is in favor of the project. Gaffron stated that any new use associated with the building would require a certificate of occupancy and those issues could be addressed at that time. Bredeson stated they are proposing to use the building for their own use and anticipated growth, noting they do not have any intentions at this time to rent (he vacant space out. Bredeson remarked that the company's groviith has not been rapid and they anticipate this building will accommodate their needs for the next ten to fifteen years Kiemen noted that they do not have a problem if the City Council would like the additional parking stalls constructed at this time. Kiemen noted that City Council can control the future uses of this building. Mayor Jabbour stated it is the obligation of the City Council to address all issues when considering an application. Goetten indicated in her view it is an attractive project, noting she is fine with the proposed parking and likes the green space. Goetten inquired what would trigger the additional parking spaces. Gaffron stated that would be up to the property owner to determine. Keliey inquired what district Otten Brothers is located in. Page 19 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2439 Service 800, Inc., continued) Gaffron remarked that Olten Brothers operates under a PUD. Kelley commented that he does not have a problem with the proposed use but has a concern about what the building will be used for in the future. Flint inquired what this project will do to the service road to the north. Mayor Jabbour stated the service road will be used by a limited number of people. Gaffron stated the service road was originally designed when the Highway 12 corridor was undetermined, and the recommendation was to have it as an urban corridor to service various areas. Peterson indicated she was in favor of the project, but raised a concern regarding snow removal. Gaffron indicated that the snow will need to be moved off site. Mayor Jabbour inquired whether the Applicant would like to see this site changed to a B-4 District. Bredeson stated if the City Council would like to change the specifications so retail would net be allowed In the future at this site, that would be fine with her. Bredeson stated in her view she does not feel this building will lend itself well to a retail use. Gaffron indicated a B-4 District would involve municipal buildings, banks, insurance offices, nursing homes, hospitals, research centers, libraries, first-class restaurants, noting that retail is not a permitted use. Radloff stated it was their intent to design a building with zero variances, and was later informed about the 15% lot coverage limit after the building had been designed and the possible existence of the road in the back. Mayor Jabbour indicated the right to have retail at this location still remains, and directed City Staff to explore the pros and cons of rezoning this property. Jabbour commented that he does not want to make that a condition of approval. Van Zomeren stated that a zoning amendment needs to be noticed. Gaffron noted that the Building Code does not require that the utility lines be buried. Mayor Jabbour commented that it might place an unnecessary burden on the Applicant if the utility lines were required to be buried, and suggested that the Applicant contact NSP to see if they would be willing to bury the utility lines. Gaffron remarked that the Applicant must coniply with 15 or 20 conditions before a building permit will be issued, noting that the Applicant will not need to appear again before the City Council should they approve the application tonight Moorse commented that the City Council may want to consider what building material they would like to see for any new future developments along Highway 12 as that will have the most impact as far as appearance. Mayor Jabbour suggested the application be approved subject to final review and approval by City Staff. Bredeson indicated they are very willing to work with City Staff on this application. Page 20 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2439 Service 800, Inc., continued) Mayor Jabbour stated the City Council should consider what they would like to see for future development along Highway 12. Flint commented that sidewalks have been installed along portions of Highway 12. A resident commented that the sidewalks are six feet wide and extend down to the retaining pond where the sidewalk decreases to four feet wide. Moorse remarked that the City Council may want to address the building material being proposed as it will give the building a definite character and whether this is the type of building material they would like to see utilized on any future developments along Highway 12. Kiemen commented that this type of material has been chosen because it is less expensive than brick but still has a nice appearance to it. Goetten stated she finds the building material to be attractive. Kelley inquired how the stormwater drainage will be handled. Gaffron stated the existing stormwater system should handle any runoff from this property. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application #2439, 2190 Wayzata Boulevard, and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4206, a Resolution Granting Variances and Approving a Conditional Use Permit for an Office Use in the B*1 Zoning District and Approving the Issuance of a Building Permit to Service 800, Inc., subject to final review and approval by City Staff of the conditions outlined in the November 20,1998 Planner's Report, and further subject to the construction of an eight foot sidewalk in the boulevard. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#16) #2442 TONY EIDEN, 345 LEAF STREET - VARIANCE - RENEWAL RESOLUTION NO. 4207 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application #2442, 345 Leaf Street, and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4207, a Resolution Granting a Variance to Lot Area for Property Located at 345 Leaf Street. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#17) LITTLE ORCHARD - VEGETATION EASEMENT AMENDMENT Dan Anderson was present. Gaffron stated the City Council had reviewed this application at their November 9th meeting where it was determined that the location of the existing easement boundary could be modified subject to staff and developer reaching a suitable agreement on the location. Council had generally accepted a boundary known as Line A with a curved line as depicted in Exhibit 6. Staff and the Applicant have concluded that there are two additional alternates. Line B and Line C, which address the specific issues that are of concern. Anderson indicated he was in agreement with both Line A and Line B. Gaffron commented that one issue is someone may not realize that this is a bluff area and will attempt to build into that area. Staff recommends Council adopt Line B. Page 21 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#17 Little Orchard, continued) Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to amend the Vegetation Easement Boundary to Line B, and adopt the language changes as proposed. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (Council Member Goetten leaves at 11:59 p.m.) (#19) BLUE HILL SPECIAL LOT COMBINATION - REVISE CONDITIONS Andrew Goetten was present. Gaffron stated the property owner is requesting that the City amend the Special Lot Combination Agreement to allow temporary or occasional parking on Outlot A of Blue Hill. The Applicant is wishing to establish a parking area for as many as six vehicles at the site, which will be used while the lakeshore is in use. Staff recommends Item 4b of the agreement be amended to allow the accessory parking area provided the parking area meets all required setbacks and hardcover limits within Parcel B, the parking area is adequately screened by natural vegetation or a fence so as to not be obtrusive to the neighboring properties, any grading work shall be subject to the appropriate land alteration permit, a chain barrier shall be maintained across the entrance to the parking area, and vehicle parking shall be limited to no more than four vehicles. Mayor Jabbour inquired whether leaving vehicles in a driveway is considered parking. Gaffron staled that the language in the ordinance Is difficult to understand, but leaving a vehicle in a driveway is considered parking. Andrew Goetten indicated he is looking for temporary or occasional parking to accommodate his guests who wish to use the lake for ordinary purposes. Goetten sU'ted he is not looking for permanent parking, noting that Section 10.61 applies to permanent parking. The requested six car parking area was arrived at to accommodate a party for 12 people, which would be the maximum number of cars that would be allowed to park in this area. Goetten commented there is no parking allowed along County Road 15 and the residents along Orono Orchard Road would probably not want parking along the roadway. Goetten indicated he is willing to erect a barrier across the entrance to the parking area as well as provide adequate screening. Goetten stated he will comply with the required setbacks and is well within his allowable hardcover for that parcel. Goetten indicated the use of this parking area will be limited to private use and will not be open to the general public. Flint remarked that this area will not be policed and that language should be included in the agreement to reflect that this area is to be used only for the property owner's private use. Peterson inquired whether a limit on the number of cars needs to be established. Mayor Jabbour suggested that parking area be limited to 750 square feet. Goetten indicated he does not have a problem with the limits recommended by City Staff and will comply with all required conditions, noting this agreement will not be easily enforced. Mayor Jabbour noted that if the Applicant chooses to erect a fence, it must be in compliance with Page 22 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#19 Blue Hill Special, continued) the City’s fencing ordinances, and that the City does not allow screening along the rear of the property. Jabbour moved, Flint seconded, to amend the Blue Hill Special Combination Agreement to allow a parking area not to exceed 750 square feet in overall hardcover and to meet all conditions outlined in the November 20,1998 Planner's Report. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (Dianne Goetten returns at 12:30 a.m.) MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Mayor Jabbour requested that authorization be given to display a photo/flyer soliciting donations for Saga Hill. It was the consensus of the City Council to approve display of the flyer. Flint indicated that a complaint regarding the Chase matter has been turned over to the City Administrator for his review. Goetten inquired about the status of Highway 15, noting that the south side is not being completed until the spring and no surcharging is being done. Mayor Jabbour commented the surcharging will be done later on. Goetten indicated that another lane of bituminuous has been installed but is not a full traffic lane. Gappa stated that has been done for snowplowing reasons. (*#20) REQUEST FOR FINAL PAYMENT - OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Request for Final Payment to Electrical Installation & Maintenance, Maple Plain, Minnesota, in the amount of $8,250.00. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#21) REQUEST FOR PAYMENT #1 - NAVARRE WATER PLANT REHABILITATION Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Request for Payment #1 to Shank Constructors, Brooklyn Park, Minnesota, in the amount of $79,313.00. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (*#22) POLICE SERVICE CONTRACT RENEWALS • LONG LAKE, SPRING PARK AND MINNETONKA BEACH Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the renewal of the police service contract with the Cities of Minnetonka Beach, Spring Park, and Long Lake. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 23 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 23.1998 (#2S) LONG LAKE FIRE DEPARTMENT PROPOSAL TO PURCHASE 5 INCH FIRE HOSE Mourse recommended purchase of a five inch fire hose for the Long Lake Fire Department which will provide them with a water source that has as much capacity as a fire hydrant at the end of the hose. Kelley moved. Peterson seconded, to approve the purchase of 2,000 feet of 5 inch fire hose by the Long Lake Fire Department at a total cost of $12,300 (with Orono’s share being $8,639.52), and to amend the 1998 Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund budget to reflect this expenditure. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Moorse indicated a work session has been scheduled for December 2 at 7:30 a.m. Kelley requested Moorse to send him a break-out of the City's portion of the health insurance costs, noting that the increase may be more than 3 percent when that aspect is factored in. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT Barrett had nothing to report. (*#24) LICENSES Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the following licenses. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. On Sale Liquor 8i Sunday Jimmie's Lounge 3380 Shoreline Drive Off Sate Liquor 12 Hi Liquor, Inc. 2160 West Wayzata Boulevard Navarre Liquors. Inc. 3421 Shoreline Drive Club Woodhill Country Club 200 Woodhill Road (*#25) BILLS Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 24 MINUTES OF THE TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARING^ EC ^ 4 1998 HELD AT 7:00 P.M. ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 8,1998 IN THE ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS ‘Y Cr CRC^:0 Members present: Mayor Jabbour and Council Members Goetten, Peterson, Flint and Kelley. Staff present: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Finance Director Tom Kuehn, Assistant Finance Director Ron Olson, and Recorder Jamie Gemar. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Jabbour. Mayor Jabbour indicated the purpose of the Truth In Taxation hearing was to provide an opportunity for citizens to obtain information about the proposed 1999 Budget and Tax Levy. Moorse began the presentation of the budget by indicating that City's property tax levy is 12.3% of a property owner’s total property tax bill. He then summarized the elements of the tax levy increase. The preliminary tax lev>^ approved by the Council was $2,339,140 dollars. This was an increase of $114,010 dollars or 5.1% over the 1998 levy. The General Fund Budget, which has the greatest impact on the tax levy is proposed at $3,850,340 dollars. This is an increase of $212,245 dollars or 5.8% over the 1998 budget. Moorse reviewed a list of expenditures items causing the increase in the General Fund budget. These included expenditures related to the update of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code, the addition of a full time Assistant Zoning Administrator and a full time Animal Control Officer, annual employee compensation adjustments, and increased costs related to contracted services such as assessing and fire services. Mayor Jabbour stated resident expectations and the budget increase are not parallel. The Navarre area residents believe the city should provide higher levels of service to the area. Kelley voiced concern over the $35,000 for the update of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment in the 1999 budget. Kelley was concerned that this would not be a one shot budget item and that it would linger on to the next year’s budget. He indicated he would rather see this one-time expenditure funded by the 1998 General Fund budget surplus. Council discussed different options for reducing the tax levy for the 1999 budget. Moorse indicated although new* development causes expenditure increases, it also generates new tax capacity which expands the base over wliich property taxes are levied. This helps to limit the impact of expenditure increases on City taxpayers in general. However, in recent years the reductions in property class rates for higher-valued residential properties and commercial/industrial properties have caused the City’s tax capacity or tax base to be reduced, even though the City has experienced significant new development. Flint indicated he had asked Moorse to determine the level of property taxes that w ould be generated using the 1998 tax capacity rate in the absence of property class rate changes. Moorse showed a property tax calculation that indicated without the property class rate changes the 1998 tax capacity rate of 14.716 would have generated $2,326,000 dollars in property' tax revenue. This is MINUTES OF THE TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARING HELD AT 7:00 P.M. ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 8,1998 IN THE ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS approximately $13,000 dollars less then the proposed levy of $2,339,140 dollars. This would be a 4.5% levy increase versus the proposed 5.1% increase. Mayor Jabbour indicated he had requested Moorse to determine the levy increase based on the cost of living increase plus a factor for city growth. Moorse indicated that projecting a 2% increase in the consumer price index plus a 1% city growth factor would result in a 3% tax levy increase. This amount would be $2,291,884 dollars or a reduction of $47,256 dollars from the preliminary approved levy. Flint stated he could support the tax levy at $2,291,884, and asked staff to come back to Council with a recommendation reflecting the tax levy at $2,291,884. Council directed staff to reduce the tax levy to $2,291,884 for final adoption at the Council meeting on December 14, 1998. Mayor Jabbour asked if there were any questions or comments regarding the budget from the public. There were no public comments. There being no further comments. Mayor Jabbour closed the hearing and announced that the subsequent levy adoption hearing would be held at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, December 14,1998. ATTEST:Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk DEC 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION LiiV C; Date: December 11, 1998 Item No.5 Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. GafTiun Agenda Section: Zoning Title: Senior Planning Coordinator Item Description: #2355 Susan & Douglas Van Moorlehem and Ken Tumham, 4490 Watertown Road - Final Plat Approval for 'Tumham Toll Addition" - Resolution Zoning District: RR-1 A, Single Family Rural Residential, 5 acre, not sewered. List of Exhibits A - Final Plat Approval Resolution B - Final Plat Drawing C - Preliminary Plat Approval Resolution No. 4094 D - MCWD Letter re: No Permit Required E - Easement Documents: 1) Drainage Easement incorporating vegetative buffers 2) Flowage & Conservation Easement over Lot 1, Block 1 3) Wetlands Covenants (non-Orono, Type 1 and 2) 4) Drainfield Covenants F - City Assessor's Park Dedication Fee Valuation The applicant has substantially completed the conditions of Preliminary Plat Approval Resolution No. 4094, including: Provision of final plat drawings including the appropriate perimeter easements, roai dedications, etc. Granting of a Flowage and Cop'^ •' Easement over the major wetland on Lot 1, Block 1 (see discussion bciuv,^. Granting of a Drainage Easement for the vegetative buffer areas on all lots. Creation of covenants for protection of drainfield sites. Creation of covenants for non-Orono protected wetlands. No MCWD Permit Required The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District concluded that due to the nature of this plat, no MCWD permit will be requiied, and no stormwater control structures or improvements are required. Per the conditions of preliminary plat approval, the City >\ill therefore not require a Developers Agreement for this subdivision since there are no site improvements required. ! #2355 Tumham Toll Addition December 11, 1998 Page 2 Conservation and Flowage Easement Language The applicant requests a slight revision from our standard Conservation and Flowage Easement language, to 1) allow the existing fence within the wetland on Lot 1, Block 1 to remain and be maintained, repaired and replaced as necessary; and 2) to allow continued use of the wetland area within the fence as pasture and grazing area. Pasture and grazing are Permitted Uses within wetlands per the provisions of zoning code Section 10.55, Subd. 9 and 10. Fences are not a listed permitted, conditional, or accessory use within wetlands, although a fence might be considered as falling within the category of "residential accessory structure". The existing fence could remain as a legal nonconforming structure since it appears it was in place as early as the 1 950s based on our old airphotos. This delineated wetland area has been used as pasture for many years. Park Dedication Fee The City Assessor has established a Fair Market Value for Lot 1, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3 at $68,000 each. The 8% fee would amount to $5,440 per lot, but per Resolution No. 4063 the residential park fee is capped at $4,900 per unit, hence each of these 2 lots will be charged a park dedication fee in the amount of $4,900 for a total of $9,800. We are advised that mylars will be available for signature at the Council meeting. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the granting of final plat approval, including acceptance of the revised language of the conservation and flowage easement. Filing of the plat and documents by the City Attorney will be authorized as soon as all final documents have been signed and fees paid. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution granting Final Plat Approval for the Tumham Toll Addition. i A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF TURNHAM TOLL ADDITION FILE NO. 2355 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a three lot plat by Susan & Douglas Van Moorlehem and Kenneth Tumham (hereinafter "the subdividers"); and WHEREAS, the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-1 A, Rural Residential Zoning District finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that would allow its use for a single family residence to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Completion of all the requirements of Resolution No. 4094, the resolution granting preliminary approval of the Class III subdivision. Dedication on the plat of drainage and utility easements. Establishment of covenants for protection of drainfield sites. Establishment of covenants regarding non-City protected wetlands. Dedication to the City of drainage easements over all vegetative buffer areas to be preserved for stormwater management. Page 1 of 4 6.Dedication to the City of a Conservation and Flowage Easement over the City- protected wetland in Lot 1, Block 1. 7.Provided evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District appro * al (no permit required). 8.Payment to the City of a park dedication fee for Lot 1, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3 in the amount of $9,800. 9.Payment to the City for the final plat review fee and fee for legal review and filing of the plat, easements and covenants in the amount of $400.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Tumham Toll Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, subject to the following conditions: 1.A variance is hereby granted for lot area and lot width of Lot 1, Block 1 which do not meet the 5 acre area and 300' width requirements of the RR-1A District. The basis for the granting of these variances is established in Resolution No. 4094. 2.Setbacks for all principal residence construction shall be as shown on the preliminary plat drawings. 3.Lot 1, Block 1 shall retain its existing access to County Road 6/Watertown Road. Lot 1, Block 2 shall be served by a new access to be created along McCulley Road. Lot 1, Block 3 shall be served by a new driveway access along Tumham Road. The location of such new accesses for Lot 1, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3 shall first be approved by the Director of Public Services. All other existing farm road accesses shall be eliminated upon constmetion of the new driveway accesses. 4.All identified primary and alternate sewage system drainfield sites within the subdivision shall be fenced off prior to any land alterations, and such fencing shall remain in place until such time that each Lot is developed. Page 2 of 4 i 5. 6. 7. 8. Owner of Lot 1 shall be responsible for installing a new conforming septic system to serve existing residence on Lot 1, Block 1 within the time frame established by City Ordinance. Prior to City release of the plat for filing, applicant shall provide a title opinion providing evidence of fee ownership of the property and applicant shall meet any other title requirements as may be required by the City Attorney. Applicant shall provide all documents noted in this resolution in a foimat acceptable to the City Attorney prior to release of the plat for filing. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before June 14, 1999, together with a certified original copy of this resolution and executed copies of the easements, deeds and covenants noted above. The approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 14th day of December, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of December, 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 4 c CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.__4.Q_a4___ A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A CLASS III SUBDIVISION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4490 \VATERTO\W ROAD - FILE NO. 2355 WHEREAS, Susan and Douglas Van Moorlehem and Kenneth Tumham (hereinafter the "subdividers ”) on March 24, 1998, filed a formal subdivision application wth the City for approval of a four lot residential plat of property legally described as: (Exhibit A, Attached) (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono's Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 20, 1998, at which time al! persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at said April 20 meeting the Orono Planning Commission on a vote of 6-0 recommended approval of the proposed plat subject to a revision to a 3-lot plat rather than 4 lots, to which the subdividers agreed; and \VHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on May 26, 1998 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the subdividers noting the following findings of fact: 1.The property is located within the RR-IA Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of five acres of dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2,The property contains a total of approximately 35.65 acres of land, of which approximately 18.01 acres is dry buildable land and approximately 17.65 acres is wetland. Page 1 of? ' i CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. /I 0 Q 4 3. 4. 5. 6. The proposed plat consists of three residential lots each meeting the minimum lot standard requirements of the RR-IA, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District, except as follows: A.Lot 1 contains approximately 4.8 acres of dry buildable land and 17.5 acres of wetland. No additional adjacent land is available for purchase, and the only additional land available to the subdividers is within the property but separated from Lot 1 by County Road 6. B.Lot 1 does not meet the defined minimum 300’ lot width requirement as measured at the rear line of the defined front yard. Lot 1 has a defined lot width of approximately 280'. No additional adjacent land is available to increase the lot width to a conforming status. The granting of lot area and width variances for Lot 1 is justified by the fact that Lot 1 contains an existing residence and accessory building meeting all required lot line setbacks without the need for further variances, that Lot 1 contains the necessary primar>' and alternate drainfield sites to support septic system needs, and the fact that the only additional lands available for inclusion with Lot 1 are across County Road 6. The Council notes further that the granting of a lot area variance for a new subdivision in Orono is highly unusual and in this case only justified by the unique geographic relationship between the existing underlying tax parcel and the County and City roadways which have been developed within it over many years. Lot 3 is a 'through' lot subject to conditional use permit for placement of any accessory structures. All lots have been found to have adequate and suitable soils for on-site septic treatment facilities providing both a primary and alternate site for each of the three lots. Lot 1 has a nonconforming septic system which under current City code must be replaced by December 31, 2007. i Page 2 of 7 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __4 0 4 7. 8. 9. 10. All three Lots shall be served by direct access to adjacent public roads. Lot 1 shall retain its existing access to County Road 6/Watertown Road. Lot 2 shal' be served by a new access to be created along McCulley Road. Lot 3 shall be served by a new driveway access along Tumham Road. The applicant has provided pre- and post-development drainage calculations indicating that vegetated buffer areas at selected locations on the property will provide for adequate stormwater quality and quantity management, subject to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Approval. Hennepin County and City of Orono road rights-of-way have recently been established in the area of the subdivision and no additional right-of-way are required from this plat. The Orono Park Commission and City Council have reviewed the City's trail corridor needs along Watertown Road, County Road 6 and McCulley Road and have concluded that no trail easements will be required from this plat. 1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Susan and Douglas Van Moorlehem and Kenneth Tumham at 4490 Watertown Road per preliminary plat drawings by David E. Crook, a licensed sur\eyor of DeMars-Gabriel Land Surveyors, Inc., dated March 20, 1998, as revised and attached to this resolution as Exhibit B, subject to the following conditions: A variance will be granted for lot area and lot width of Lot 1 which do not meet the 5 acre and 300 ’ width requirements of the RR-IA District. Setbacks for all principal residence construction shall be as depicted on the preliminary plat drawing. Lot 1 shall retain its existing access to County Road 6AVatertown Road. Lot 2 shall be serv’ed by a new access to be created along McCulley Road. Lot 3 shall be ser\'ed by a new* drivew'ay access along Tumham Road. The location of such new accesses for Lots 2 and 3 shall first be approved by the Director of Pa2e3of7 J. r L ■m CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 094 - 4. 7. 8. 12. Public Services. All other existing farm road accesses shall be eliminated upon construction of the new driveway accesses. The subdivider must obtain Min; ehaha Creek Watershed District approval for the proposed stormwater management plan prior to fmal plat approval. Subdivider shall grant drainage easements over all drainageways, buffer areas or stormwater ponds that may be required within the plat, as well as establishing covenants for the protection of such areas. 5. All identified primary and alternate sewage system drainfield sites within the subdivision shall be fenced off prior to any land alterations, and such fencing shall remain in place until such time that each Lot is developed. Subdivider shall develop covenants for each lot for protection of drainfield sites within each Lot. Covenants shall include protective language for alternate septic sites along with site plans locating both primary and alternate sites. Owner of Lot 1 shall be responsible for installing a new conforming septic system to serve existing residence on Lot 1 within the time frame established by City Ordinance. 9. Subdivider shall grant a Conservation and Flowage Easement over the wetlands occurring in Lot 1. 10. Subdivider shall develop a covenant for protection of the non-City protected wetland in Lot 1, Block 2. 11. Payment of standard Park Dedication Fee per City ordinance. Subdivider is hereby advised that pre’iminary subdivision approval will expire one year from the date of Council preliminary plat approval. Should the subdivider fail to complete the filing of the final plat application within the year deadline, it shall be necessary for the subdivider to file a new preliminary subdivision application with the City. Page 4 of 7 Mi CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4QQ4 Final Plat Submittals: The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follo’vs: 1. Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City's records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200*. Drawing to include: a. b. c. Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by David E. Crook of DeMars- Gabriel Land Sur\'eyors, Inc. dated March 20, 1998, attached hereto as Exhibit B. Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10' wide along the exterior boundaries of property. Designation and dedication of drainage easements over drainageways as may be identified or shown on the grading, drainage and erosion control plan. 2. Legal documents required: a.Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b. The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c. Signed and executed Developer's Agreement and letter of credit for Paee 5 of7 esHO d. e. f. S CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. /I r> Q A approved stormwater and drainage facilities if required. Signed and executed Drainage Easements to be taken over drainagevvay and detention areas within plat if required. Covenants for protection of vegetative buffer areas shall additionally be required. Signed and executed Flowage and Conservation Easement over wetlands within Lot 1. Completed private covenant for protection of non-City protected wetland in Lot 2. Completed private covenant for all Lots regarding protection of drainfield sites. Covenants to include protective language for primary and alternate drainfield sites and to include the site plans locating both the primary and alternate sites. Covenants must be in a form suitable for filing. The City has samples of protective covenants used by former developers should the applicants wish a cop>’. 3. Fees to be paid: Total due: S400.00* a. Final plat fee = $200.00 b. Legal review and filing fees for subdivision and associated documents $200.00 c.'•'Park Dedication Fee; amount shall be determined as soon- as City Assessor has placed a fair market value on the undeveloped land at the time of preliminary plat approval. The subdivider shall be advised as soon as Assessor's report has been filed with City. Park dedication fee shall be based on 8% of the fair market value of land in Lots 2 and 3, with a minimum per-lot fee of $2,900 and maximum per lot fee of $4,900 per City ordinance. Page 6 of7 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0Q4 ^ Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meetijig held this 8th day of June, 1998. ATTEST; ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of June, 1998, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 7 of7 EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO: 4094 LEGAL DESCRIPTION • • • • of the East Five-eighths of the East Half of following described line: ■ ; • ' . . • • ’ • . • • . •/• •• ** •* ** . Commencing at the Southwest coj'ner of said ^^ection 31; thence on .40 mfeiites 43 seconds West hne of the Southwest Quarter of said Section- 31; ■ '• ... 'O distance of 777.96 feet: thence Hortheasterlx 13 13.29 feet ■' *. .. . of 1632.80 'feet and a central angle of .49 degrees 05 ' ‘ r seconds East, 50.00 feet to the beginning • . of the .hne to be described: thence North 48' degrees 24 minutes. • 43 seconds Fast. 9?p.2l feet: thence South 76 degrees 35 minutes 1 18 seconds East to the East line of the Northwest Quarter of said . ^cchon 31 and there lermina,ting. y ’ • ‘ - • 5ulvect to an easement for Hennepin County State Aid Highway No. 6. Plat 5, over part of above Par 1 filed in CR-Doc. No, 3844152;' I ■ Suhjeqt to permanent highway easement per torrens cert.no. 849095 . PAGE 1 OF 3 *• :• *. ?. * *• * » *. A *. • • Par I:’ Thatipart of'the.'East Five-eighths of..the BbsL Half of \ y ' the Northwest #o.^n oo ^ described as • • • ’ • est Quarter of'Section 3t,;T6rrtiship^lJd,Eahge'23 ■ s /bUoirs;* 'Commencing 'at the Southwest corner 'of said^.^ebtion'' 31; Ihetice- on " * an assumed b'earin'g.-.p'f North 0 'degreek- 40- minutes .43'"seconds -Ifest • along ’the "ffest: lihe '.of the:Southwest^Quarter of- said Section 31, a. distance of 7^7,96; feel:’.iheiice Northe'aytWiy/lS along a -tangehtial .curve,-concave. tp.;:lh€''So.uthe'^st,':|iitving .f ‘.r.adius \of 1632.60'^^feet,'.apd .a central angiyof '49‘[degree3.; 05 "' : minutes' 26 • seconds; :'th.encc;NQr(Ji. 46‘:d^ 24:.hijau^s -43. seconds y 'East 'tangent , id .said c}irye, ■1500.d0.,feeti\-t^dn:cel Ng^ . • r : ,-fcet and '■ ’’ thence • the-.iast minutes '29' seconds .West; '15100 '.feet; -tbcnce/j^grth 'jS9' degr^s -13 _ • minutes' 31..secoiid3: West; :20,00yeet; i^^^^ ..30. degrees 46 . : minutes:29 seconds Edslf\f6.00‘feeU-.ih'ehce-./^orth .^9 degrees 13 .-, , \'minulcs.31-s€:cphds< W^^^^ ^eti'-ifyepce North 00 degrees 46 • minutes 29'seconds East to the. ...le, designated. "survey-line”.on . the plat of Hennepin Co'dniy: Slate Aid-jlighw^a^^^ - . '.thence Northyresterlv along said ^'survey line”'.to th'e West line of • the. cast Five-eighths pf said: East Half pi the Northwest Quarter; ’ thcncc' Southerly along said West iincficli^' interse'e^^ with .a line, that bears' South .48 degrees 24 .aiiputes. .43 seconds Jfest from '. '■ the'point of beginning; thence-Norih''48. (degrees'24\jninutes 43 '-.-.seconds East', 6-19.49 feet to the point of 'beginning. ■ •i ; ^ V;.. c t y..' ’ •• • -.Subject to.'permahent hlghirav easement per: tdrrehi cert. no. 849095 •• ...• • •• • ' -V . •• . • . • PAGE 2 OF 3 rZ- • • • ■■ •■••■.■ ■■'■• ■• • •• •• ' ■• -\:-: *■, .'.-- •' '. V * .'- •» •■ s-r •• : •./. • •. ' • •••* .' ■. . . . • • ‘ • . • -••■ -.• '■:■ ■• . : > >•■ •. •. .. . . •• * •. /. • ..... • , ^. * *. • ^ PAGE 3 OF 3 til 7 UP UKunu Gray Ffe$hvi.ii3r Centei Hwyt.1S&l9, Ntvarrs MaH; 2500 Stiadywood Road Eicataior.MN 55331-ySTa Phone:(612)471-0590 Fail (612) 471-C682 Email: adminOminnnhahacteek org Web Site: MMMr.minnehahacreek.org Pamela Q.Bliit James Caikins Lanee Fisher Monica Gross Thomas W. LaBounty Thomas Maple, Jr. Malcoirn Rek7 0 it«PM ctfvsi¥wHi HIMmpOtf ms M @ o \cm lu l£:/UI/70 lO.HH U* .\JCi\JC, I1U.JJO Minnehaha Creek iBl Watershed District Improving Quality of'Water, Quality of Life November 18.1998 Ms. Sue Van Morlehan 4490 Watertown Road MMc Plain. MN 55359 NOV 2 3 two MCWD Permits Dear Ms, Morlehan: This letter is in response to your rcccni inquiry as to the need for a Minnchidia Creek Wulershed District (MCWD) permit for your property in the City of Orono. As you described, your property is being rcpialtcd and will result in tlircc separate lots. Normally, under MCWD nilcs, this would require you to provide stormwater management treatment for the three U>t.s. I lowevcr, based on yt>ur explanation that no u>nstruction of new homes is planned for the near future, your description of site constraints, and the City of Orono minimum lot si/e requirements which prevents future subdivision of these lots, this proposal qualifies for the single family residence exemption. Therefore, no pennil will be required from the MCWD at this lime. Proposed changes lo these rules may affect future development at these loealions. Please contact our office if any one should decide to build on one or all of ihc lot.s in the futiire. If you have further questions plea.se call me at (612) 47l.iJ590 . Sincerely, District Technician c:Mike Gaffron, City of Orono Carrie Dazclla, Malkerson, Gilliland Martin Reserved for Recording DRAINAGE EASEMENT THIS DRAINAGE EASEMENT is made this__^day of 1998, by Susan K. VanMoorlehem and Douglas F. VanMoorlehem, wife and husband (collectively, the "VanMoorlehems”) and Kenneth Tumham and Edith L. Tumham, husband and wife (collectively, "Tumhams"; the VanMoorlehems and Tumham are collectively sometimes referred to herein as "Grantors"). RECITALS: A. Grantors obtained approval of the plat of Tumham Toll Addition from the City of Orono, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the "City"), and the City as a condition of such approval requires this Drainage Easement. NOW, THEREFORE, Grantors hereby declare and agree as follows: 1. Dfaiuage Easement. Grantors hereby declare a perpetual drainage easement over, across and upon those portions of Lot 1, Block 1, Lot 1, Block 2, and Lot 1, Block 3, Tumham Toll Addition, accCiXling to the recorded plat thereof, owned by them as set forth and legally described on Exhibit A and depicted on Exhibit A"1 attached hereto (the "Easement Areas"). 2. Restrictions. Except as permitted herein: A. No trees, shmbs or other vegetation shall be destroyed, cut or removed from the Easement Areas except as authorized by written consent of the City. B. No earth, loam, peat, grave, soil or any other natural material or substance shall be moved or removed from the Easement Areas and there shall be no dredging or excavation of any nature whatsoever or any change of the topography of the Easement Areas without the written consent of City. C. No soil, sand, gravel, or other substance or material as landfill shall be placed, dumped or stored upon the Easement Areas and no waste, trash or garbage shall be placed, dumped or stored within the Easement Areas. • « 20997CLB D. No use shall be made of the Easement Areas which would tend to change the drainage, flood control, water conservation, erosion control and soil conservation characteristics within the Easement Areas. 3.Permitted Uses. A.Grantors may use the Easement Areas for any purpose that does not change or alter the natural condition of the Easement Areas. B. Grantors may utilize that portion of the Easement Area that lies within the confines of an existing fence located on Lot 1, Block 1, Tumham Toll Addition for the purposes of the grazing of livestock, and Grantors shall have the full right to maintain, repair and replace such fence as they deem necessary. 4. Enforcement: Release. The conditions contained in the Drainage Easement may be enforced by the City, and the City and its agents may enter upon and im'pcct the Easement Areas to insure compliance by the Grantors with the terms and conditions herein. Grantors hereby release the City, its officers and employees, from any and all claims, demands or causes of action of any kind or nature whatsoever which may arise o; accrue by virtue of its right to enforce the provisions contained herein or its inspection of the Easement Areas. 5. No Public Right. The easement herein declared over the Easement Areas does not confer any right, title or interest of the public in or to the Easement Areas. 6. Ownership. VanMoorelehms hereby covenant that they are the lawful owners of Lot 1, Block 1, Tumham Toll Addition, and Tumhams hereby covenants that they are the lawful owners of Lot 1, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3, Tumham Toll Addition, and that each has the lawful right and authority to declare the easements over such land owned by them. 7. Binding Effect. This Drainage Easement shall run with the title to the land described herein and shall extend to and bind the Grantors, their respective heirs, successors, representatives, grantees or assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantors have made and entered into this Drainage Easement effective as of the date first written above. GRANTORS: Susan K. VanMcorlehem Douglas A. VcnMoorlehem 20997CLB ^-2 Reserved for Recording FLOWAGE AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT AGREEMENT AND WAIVER OF DAMAGES THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), is made this__day of 1998, by and between Susan K. VanMoorlehem and Douglas F. VanMoorlehem, wife and husband (collectively, "Grantors"), and the City of Orono, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota ("Grantee"). In consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and the other valuable consideration, the Grantors hereby limit and preclude the use, improvement and development, of the land embraced within that portion of the drainage and utility easement on Lot 1, Blockl, Tumham Toll Addition crosshatched on Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Land") and do hereby further agree, as follows: 1. Restrictions. Except as permitted herein: A. No structures shall be constructed, erected, or placed upon, above or beneath the Land including without limitation, fences, fireplaces, steps, docks, piers, hardcover or roads of any nature whatsoever, or any other structure or improvement inconsistent with the natural state of the Land; B. No trees, shrubs or other vegetation shall be destroyed, cut or removed fi-om the Land except as authorized by written consent of the Grantee; C. No earth, loam, peat, gravel, soil or any other natural material or substance shall be moved or removed from the Land and there shall be no dredging or excavation of any nature whatsoever or any change of the topography of the Land without the written consent of the Grantee; D. No soil, sand, giavel, or other substance or material as landfill shall be placed, dumped or stored upon the Land and no waste, trash or garbage shall be placed, dumped or stored upon the Land; and E. No use shall be made of the Land except uses, if any which will not change or alter the natural condition of the Land, and no use which would tend to change the drainage, flood control, water conservation, erosion control, soil conser/ation, fish and wildlife habitat characteristics shall be made of the Land or the water situated thereon. 21028CLB -1- 2. Permitted Use. Not withstanding anything herein to the contrary, the existing fence located on a portion of the Land is specifically permitted by Grantee. Grantee hereby further consents to and permits Grantors to (a) maintain, repair, and replace the existing fence as Grantors deem necessary, and (b) the use of that portion of the Land located within the confines of such fence as pasture for the grazing of livestock. 3. Grant of Easement. Grantors hereby grant, gift, quit claim and convey to Grantee, a perpetual flowage easement, the right and privilege to trespass with water over and upon any or all of the Land, and the right to enter upon the Land for the purp ses of inspection and enforcement of the covenants contained herein and to cause to be removed from the Land without any liability any structures, uses, materials, substances, or unnatural matter inconsistent with the natural state of the Land or the covenants contained herein. 4. Enforcement: Release. Grantors hereby release the Grantee, its officers and employees, from any and all claims, demands or causes of action of any kind or nature whatsoever which may arise or accrue by virtue of any flowage or trespass with water within terms of this Agreement. In addition to any other remedy the Grantee may have, the covenants and restrictions contained herein may be enforced by injunction. 5. No Public Right. The grant of the easement herein does not confer any right, title or interest of the public in or to the Land, except as may be provided herein. 6. Ownership. Grantors hereby certify that they are the lawful owners of the Land and have full right and authority to enter into this Agreement. 7. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall run with the title to the Land and shall extend to and bind the heirs, successors, representatives, grantees or assigns of the respective parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantors and Grantee have made and entered i;i’.o this Agreement effective as of the date first written above. GRANTEE: CITY OF ORONO GRANTORS: Susan K. VanMoorlehem By. Its Mayor Douglas A. VanMoorlehem Its City Clerk 2I028CIB -2- e Reserved for Recording DECLARATION OF WETLANDS COVENANTS THIS DECLARATION is made as of 1998, by Kenneth Tumham and Edith L. Tumham, husband and wife (collectively, "Owner"). RECITALS: A. Owner is the owner of the land situated in the City of Orono (the "City"), Hennepin County, Minnesota described as Lot 1, Block 2, Tumham Toll Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof (the "Land"). B. The Owner desires to provide notice with respect to the Type 2 Wetlands located on that por.. of the Land designated as "Wetlands" on the plat of Tumham Toll Addition, (the "Wetlands"). NOW, THEREFORE, the Owner, for himself, his successors and assigns, hereby declares, as follows: 1. Wetlands. The Wetlands shall not be altered before (a) contacting the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the United States Corps of Engineers, and (b) the submission of a wetland alteration plan to the City for its review, and (c) the issuance of a permit for such alteration, if such permit is then required. 2. Bindine Effect. This Declaration shall run with the title to the Land and shall be binding upon all future owners thereof. 3. Amendment. This Declaration may be amended upon the execution of an amendment to this Declaration by the record owner of the Land with the written consent of the City affixed thereto, and the filing thereof in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for Hennepin County, State of Minnesota. 2I065CLB Reserved for Recording DRAINFIELD COVENANT THIS DRAINFIELD COVENANT is made effective as of ,, 1998, by Susan K. VanMoorlehem and Douglas F. VanMoorlehem, wife and husband, their heirs, successors and assigns (collectively, the "VanMoorlehems"), the owner of Lot 1, Block 1, Tumham Toll Addition, and Kenneth Tumham and Edith L. Tumham, husband and wife, their heirs, successors and assigns (collectively, "Tumhams"; VanMoorlehems and Tumham are collectively, the "Owners" and individually an "Owner"), the owTier of Lot 1, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3, Tumham Toll Addition, for the purposes of protecting the sewage drainfields and treatment facilities (collectively, the "Drainfields") that have been approved by the City of Orono (the "City") and located on the foregoing described lots (individually, a "Lot" and collectively, the "Lots") as depicted on Exhibit A hereto, as follows: 1. No constmction of driveways and buildings or earth moving equipment are permitted on a Lot until the Owner of such Lot, or his/her agents or contractors, first: A. Erects a clearly visible fence tw’enty feet from and along the boimdary of the Drainfields on such Lot that are accessible to earth moving equipment or construction activities; and B. Erects a clearly visible fence along the boundary of such Lot and the Drainfields on any adjacent property that are accessible to earth moving equipment or construction activities. 2. The boundaries of thq Drainfields shall be staked at each comer by the Owners, and their 21068CLB locations may be found on the plans on file in the office of the City. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Owners have made and executed this Drainfield Covenant effective as of the date first vmtten above. OWNERS; Susan K. VanMoorlehem Douglas A. VanMoorlehem Kenneth Tumham Edith L. Tumham STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )ss. ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1998, by Susan K. VanMoorlehem and Douglas F. VanMoorlehem, wife and husband and Kenneth Tumham and Edith L. Tumham, husband and wife. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: MALKERSON GILLILAND MARTIN LLP Suite 1500 AT&T Tower 901 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 2I068CLB TURN HAM TOLL ADDITION f fi / ^MLR • f <t<y * ---------------- .—------*------------: imnTnr mua • \ t F CITY of ORONO Municipal OfSccs Post Office Box 66 C17SUI Bay, Minnesota SS323-0066 lO: Orono Zoning Department FROM; Rolf Erickson, City Assessor DATE; 1 - RE; Park dedication fee of; Lz 3i~ -7\-• n^r» I Aeifes @ $£sf $ i3U>^o<^^ TELEPHONE - 473-t>S7 • FAX-473-0510 Vp •o • O Cil •ooo H •n H• Qu cc o § 0 1g I 1 1 h 1 i iii 0 2 ?> k; m I t I I £ «i I « 0 I Ii 6g a li' II Ii V I 3 I n t I !; IO J?u: :'2 li 5j: H 3 I '9t^il >ia 5l|a||‘||5 j if H:Mi 1^. isiSiij Ii Ii is 'Hi ail zl\ hi *t5 I"''t I® 2«It ii It h II ««' i!i|l^ ^ • r u \m«!fl X- I si: ?s A s> I In I t Hr k I ks g g •e I I i j si 6 in II II ^3 £ • 8*341 ::£ar Ic ki I w I I .a I I fr 9 i !■' :fS(il8' li!:3 6*Eic«^;sv.imun... CO H Ul Ul •T^ •*4 CO CM u«o H Ul U] X CO Ip yp ox: u Uu H :5 CL ox: •ooa • H a: o § E-. ig E-i - 1 S ( * f • * % I r-: l/ I. > • i § ti S ? ■V .‘‘v>k- > \ 't % \ % I r* i n r 1 I k i •i 5 ■» 4 I •4 n i 1 S ? 4 i J 3< Ca 0 « «• « <M S% c 1u e « C-•c 01— III - • 15 -S >n •*:9 ^5 t:* HUJu: X •/? Urno f-UJ UJ I 60 day limit: 1/20/99 COUNCIL f/£2riv: D ec 14 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION f DATE: December 9, 1998 ITEM NO.: 6 ~.r-\.0 Department Approval: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2395 Brent and Kathryn Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Variances and Conditional Use Permit Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:17,150 sq. ft. (.39 acres) Background: Application: This application was reviewed at the November 23rd City Council meeting. On a 4-1 vote, the City Council directed continuation of the application pending the applicant's surveyor providing a drainage plan and map that met the City Engineer’s concerns regarding drainage. The application is for variances and a conditional use permit to allow improvements to the existing residence and to allow for removal of the existing garage and construction of a new garage and driveway that would use a portion of unopened Bluff Street and Park Drwe. Variances required include: 1. A side yard adjacent to street variance to change the existing deck on the west side of the residence to a three season porch and to change the street side entrance and deck where the existing deck and entrance is located within the required 35' setback and the proposed three season porch is 3 ’ from the west property line. 2.A hardcover variance in the 0'-75' setback to allow 9 sq. ft. (.24%) of hardcover to remain where 370 sq. ft.(9.97%) is currently located. anm wmiiiw &MuT3RTiTiKi ^CiVtlTSTi •:w.i MMETiTiKl SMMrRmT5 •JiraXiTS sm [•«Tirei raiHI iiijctjiitWirtii simjwra EEIVTiRT? 5wTiiKl MMKTiTiR rirore [•■5»rriniT*] •UK SRli^ 60 day limit: 1/20/99 E F G H J November staff report to PC November letter from Tom Kellogg October letter from Tom Kellogg House plans Garage plans A B C E G H I M Application Plat map Topo Topo Letter from Adjacent owners Acknowledgement form Sewer map Permit record Notices to Applicant PC Minutes ,BOr/ESTROO ROSENE ANDERLIK ^ m Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & "Vlf Associates Engineers & Architects December 0, 19% Hlizabcth VunZomeren City Planner/Zuning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 5532.1 Ke: BetUrolt Site Plan Hie No. 139-2395 ^6516361311 12/09/98 19:37 g :01/01 N0:113 Rnnrtroo Anormk A\trn.irr\ tnC »» .«n 4, n 0^$.>ottuThty Otfn Cl ^onevnui' Cf • C pj • i Pt • fichiiidC Turner ep • r nn» f»| . r, Pf • ic.r^ i OcurJan Pf • fOLPiC W Poir-f PF >mi Sui.m M hr ..i,n •* Ca ^rr,.>, f Ajfui i.«fr ^r.nripArj A Pf • i.niM a pc • Vir.e#rff pr«rr«*i« • f?tchA»J W roitar, PF • OAxiJO PI • Pubri* ( vtm. » AIA • M.irk a Henjuii. rC • Michael T PAuimann, PP • Tejiffielft ►> • KorMieif*/* Ar».icr.r.»*. pj t \fafkR Pnifs Pf $ Cinnfy •» vV"fiAn>itin, Pf I \ # PcOfM f nuf. n.rr • A^*. v< K luj • Mi. h^arl P <<au. • AiiiinWifi ^rhmidt Pt 0///4ri P»ii; P0CPr,ie». y/.i.-T, „ „v*j CluuJ Wf< • ’i'l kl'pbJ/lr ^*.\%vOonesltdO V i*rn Dear Liz: wc have reviewed the revised site plan d.ited December 4. 1998 for the proposed gaiuge rckH;aiion on the Brent Bentrolt properly. The site is located at 1453 Piuk Drive on the south side of Forest Lake in the south half of Section 7. We have the following comments in regards to engineering maiu*rs. • Grading: The revised gmding plan appe.us to be tttceptable. A note should be includetl with the plan set specifying the removal of the timber retaining wall located downstream from the proposed 12-incli culvert. Storm water should not be allowed to run over the top of the existing wall. Retaining wall details for the proposed wall should be included with the plan set. • Drainage: The drainage area map and drainage calculations submiued appear to lie acceptable. • Driveway: A typical section for the driveway should be included with the plan set. Please contact me at (604-4863) it you have any questions regarding this iiialtei. Yours very truly. BONE.5TROO, RO.SF.ME. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul. MN 55113 • 612-636-4600 • F.ix: 612-636-1311 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B); SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2; SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (1&2) AND GRAN 1ING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISIONS 19-21 FILE NO. 2395 WHEREAS, Brent Bentrott and Kathryn Bentrott (hereinafter the "applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1453 Park Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 9, Block 15, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota," also that part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Northeasterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" and the straight portion of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 9, (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City of Orono for variances to Municipal Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B); Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2; and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1&2) to allow an existing deck to be remodeled into a three- season porch to be located 3’ from the property line where 35’ is required; to allow the existing street side entrance and deck to be modified where said deck and entrance are located within 35’ of the required side yard adjacent to street (Bluff Street); to allow the proposed 22’x26 ’ garage to be located 8’ from Bluff Street where 35’ is required; to allow 9 sq. ft. (.24%) hardcover in the 0-75’ setback where 370 sq. ft. (9.97%) is existing and none is allowed; to allow 3,404 sq. ft. (34.18%) hardcover in the 75-250’ setback where 2,303 sq. ft. (23.12%) is existing and 2,490 sq. ft. (25%) is allowed. The applicants have also requested a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Section 10.03, Subdivisions 19-21, to cut and fill to raise the elevation of the property to create a building pad for the proposed 22’x26 ’ garage and suitable driveway with a slope of 10% or Page 1 of 8 • •• } less which will require approximately 500 cubic yards of fill and grading within 5’ of the property line. Minnesota: 3. 4. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2395. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on July 20, August 17, October 19, and November 16, 1998. On November 16, 1998 the Planning Commission recommended denial of the proposed variances and conditional use permit for the garage finding that the use of Bluff Street and Park Drive was not consistent with City policy, the amount of hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback excessive, and the proposed drainage plan may have a negative impact on the adjacent residence. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the side yard adjacent to street variances for the proposed improvements to the residence. The City Council reviewed this application or November 23 and December 14, 1998 and recommended approval of the proposed variances and conditional use permit based upon the following findings: A. The subject lot does not meet the LR-IB lot area or lot width requirements. B. The existing residence encroaches into the required 35 ’ side yard adjacent to street setback. C. Bluff Street is a platted, unopened street. Page 2 of 8 CL 5. 6. D. The existing garage is located 165’ from the residence and is located within the required street yard setback. The parking pad in front of the garage is located in the Park Drive right-of-way. E. F. The amount of hardcover in the 0-75’ setback will be reduced from 370 sq. ft. (9.97%) to 9 sq. ft. (.24%). The topography of the zoning lot is steep which necessitates the proposed driveway to be located within Park Drive and a portion of Bluff Street to provide a 2% landing area at the street and in front of the garage and a slope of 10% or less for the driveway. G. The proposed culvert, grading, and land alteration as proposed in Exhibit A will direct water away from the structures to a low area on the zoning lot towards Lake Minnetonka. The City Council finds that the facts and conditions applying to this application are peculiar to this zoning lot and do not generally apply to other property in the LR-IB Zoning District; that granting the variances would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a hazard to neighboring properties; and would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow 500 cubic yards of cut and fill and grading within 5’ of the property line will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B); Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2; Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1&2) and for a conditional use permit to allow land alteration and grading, subject to the following conditions: Page 3 of 8 • « • f 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Applicants to obtain a land alteration permit from the City of Orono prior to commencement of this project. Applicants to adhere to the plans approved by the City Council per survey by Mark S. Gronberg dated July 3, 1998, most revised December 4, 1998 (Exhibit A). Applicants to sign a hold harmless agreement (Exhibit B). Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owners, but are 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 (December 14, 1999). Violation of o; non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned 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. Page 4 of 8 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of December, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Cleric Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of December, 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 5 of 8 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. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. On this day of , 199___, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared____________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 6 of 8 6 A''^ ' 7 ASjh ' /'I / EXHIBIT B HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT Brent and Kathryn Bentrott, 1453 Park Drive, shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City from and against all claims, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fees, which the City, City Council and agents and employees of the City may suffer to for which it may be held liable, arising debts or obligations in consequence of his performance of the following improvements: Retaining walls and driveway in Bluff Street. Driveway and curbs in Park Drive. No permanent easement, or property rights are being granted by the City of Orono as a result of these improvements being located on the City right-of-way. The City of Orono reserves the right to order the removal of improvements located on the right-of-way at any time. In the event that the improvements are not removed, in a timely manner, upon a directive from removal from the City, the City will remove the improvements and will assess the owner for the costs of removal. By Brent and Kathryn Bentrott, their employees, agents or subcontractors, whether or not caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder. Brent Bentrott Kathryn Bentrott STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) )ss. ) On this day of 199_before me a Notary Public within and for said known to me tocounty, personally appeared_____________________________________ be the persons described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same as their free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 8 of 8 BLOCK 15, SAGA H HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ,75 uWE- LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lot 9, Block 15, “Sago Hill Revised. Hennepin County, i also that part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicoti plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesoto" between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the erly line of Lot 9, Block 15. "Saga Hill Revised, Hennep Minnesota" and the straight portion of the Southwester said Lot 9. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above d( property, the location of an existing house, garage, and oth< "hardcover" thereon, and the proposed location of a propos It does not purport to show any other improvements or ent o : Iron marker Existing spot elevation Bearings shown are based upon an •----------------: £~ Con — : congouf r~'KLV. *1 rr. ftoH copNai or acuaccut ■» eOAC Of ORMMAf fon. OBNEVfll PAO lo9( SUOlUfaiU DIL|VE>^ icf^ ST««5r • • |2MnJ<^ \AhP A • I (T/i^r ^fA^r/iOTr . , •• •••• • •• *.. /^. /A^A c^it /AeA /AAr& CA/it/fAr - /.Z7tACA€S 2, T/Atf OF C^mAC. •=* A**JtJiAT(J ^ X,C0 = 7> O . Si. ^eAAAOFfi CO ^FF^C/FAAT **(:'* = ~^ 5 y. - CZ/1 = O.S (7.0)0.27) = ^>*fS C/rs S, A /z" ACF CA //OF€ e /.y^a AtJiA. a< /S^& O.S^a AA^aj. • • .. - — I • •• • • »«*il « •••.•• mm • • •• • * • • « • • « • • • — —f* ColflB ft Gfoobf r|, loe. 482HmnckAv«. Long LjI«.MN 55356 • • %9mm « •rnm*9m •• • *• /Jx f/\^r aj f HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 75-250'250-500'500-1000* EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZO\R A. House _____________ Length B. Garage • - • • • C. Driveway • * D. Sidewalk X X X X Width E. Pado/Deefc- _____9 ^ecK F. Landscape //oc4ff Underlain By Plastic _____________ G. Other X X X X X X X X X //rs s • < • - A- TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE ■ TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - - B 37/Z X 100 = PROPOSED HARDCOVFR TN 70NF A. House ___ X Leo^th Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plasiic... X X X X X X X X X X X X G. Other ss £3 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 3 - B 3?/Z /2€ 37 370 S7/2. X 100 37/Z. . 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. 9^77 7o 0.2*/ . S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. I 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. % C B A B ^<(Ayr ^fK/TKOTr HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZOiN’E: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75'75-250L 250-500' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House - _______ Length B. Garage C. Driveway X X X X Width D. Sidewalk j3coa<s~_ — - E,- Patio/Deck _ . J.€ ^ fCK ' y/z /y F. Landscape /7 G. Underlain HhptAi> 6'f By Plastic_____________ A/c Pad 2.5 Other • jDja 2 X X X X X X X X 2.2 o. 4Z 3 V TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE Z3D3 B __9 j1Ad X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN 70NF A. House X LengUi Width X X X B. Garage ►—C.- Driveway 2^ZZ. ' D.‘ Sidewalk ^0 JrfD E. poACiit rn^Ai C CH (TOtirH) F. LandscapeCTcjl/) Underlain pjj/t t By Plastic _____________[ A/c aaO G. Other ___________ X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 3*/OV -i- B X 100 500-1000' //cP/ S.F. S.F. S.F* S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 25 S.F. 3Z8 S.F. 9s / S.F. 7 S.F. <T9 S.F. S.F. 8 ?S.F. 23£^J S.F. S.F. 23, iZ % . //CC S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. s?z S.F. /^9€ S.F. S.F. /^O */o 63/az ao 3^ 89- 8a S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.' 99oV S.F. JJCO S.F. 39, T8 % A B A B £t^f^rf<or7 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75'75-250' 050-500*3 500-1000’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONK A. House Length Width X X X B; Garage X C. Driveway "X X D. Sidewalk •X X E. Pa:io/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other O.S TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 7Po ^ B. X 100 = PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN yONT A. House X Length Widm X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck X X F. Landscape ^ FT. CUjlLL Underlain ___________ By Plastic ___________ X X X G. OLher TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 9/3 -f B X 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. /2 7 S.F. S.F. S.F S.F. S.F.. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ‘/S S.F. 7<f*0 S.F. ?V7^ S.F. ZZ, i3 % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 170 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _____S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 2?. *38 % A B A B h i I L COFFIN & GRONBERG. INC. SUnVCYINO, SNOINCimNO AND LAND ALANNINO 4«a.A TAMAMACK AVINUI LONa lAKI, MINN. SUM 473.4141 Novembers, 1998 Brent Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Orono, MN 55364 Dear Brent: Because of the steep slopes from Park Drive down to your house, this is a difficult site to fit in a proposed driveway. The existing gravel driveway on Bluff Street right-of-way is at a 23% grade which is too steep to use for a driveway. Your previous October 7,1998 plan by Larson Associates has the right idea but the elevation at the entrance to Park Drive is actually 2 feet higher which would cause problems with sideslopes, tree removal, visual appearance and amount of fill needed. The enclosed plan moves the entrance to Park Drive to the west and cuts along your property at an angle in order to stay off the steep sideslope. This eliminates grading and tree removal in this steep area, gives you a flat landing area at the entrance to Park Drive and gives you more length to get down the hill at a reasonable (10%) grade .md give a flat area (2%) by the proposed garage. These proposed grades work well with this property and adjoining properties and require about 500 cubic yards of fill which is much less than would be needed under the October 7th plan using actual grades. Sincerely, COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC Mark S. Gronberg, P.E. & L.S. MSG/cr D t i TO;Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM; DATE; Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator November 9,1998 SUBJECT;#2395 Brent and Kathym Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Conditional Use Permit-Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area: 17,150 square feet (.39 acres) Application:The conditional use permit application is for grading and land alteration within 5' of the property line and to allow 500 cubic yards of fill. The applicant has submitted a plan that shows a different driveway approach than the plan reviewed at the October meeting. The grading and drainage plan submitted for the conditional use application moves the curb cut to Bluff Street to provide a less steep landing area. Background Information My. The applicants appeared at the July 20, August 17, and October 19, 1998 Planning Commission meetings and requested hardcover variances, a 10’ vacation of Bluff Street, and side yard adjacent to street setback variances. The Planning Commission recommended that the proposed three season porch be located at least 3' from the side propert>' line and that Bluff Street not be diminished by a 10' vacation. The applicant was also directed to redesign the location of tlie garage to include meeting the side yard setback from the east property line. H2395 Bentrott 1453 Park Drive CUP 11/16/98 page~l I i I I i r August The applicant submitted a new plan in August that showed access from Park Drive and located the garage closer to the house, approximately 130 ’ from the street. The applicant also submitted building elevations for the proposed garage. The garage was proposed as a two story structure with the doors facing the street and a door on the lakeside for access to the storage area. October The applicant submitted two similar drawings for the October meeting where the only significant difference was the amount of fill. The October plan needed the following approvals: 1. 2. A side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new deck and porch to be located r from the property line where 35' is required. A side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new garage to be located 8' from the property line where 35' is required. 3. A hardcover variance in the 75'-250' setback to increase from 2,334 sq. ft. (23.43%) to 3,518 sq. ft. (35.32%). 4. A conditional use permit alter land and grade within 5' of the property line. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the above-referenced variances at the October 19, 1998, meeting subject to submittal and approval of a drainage and grading plan before commencement of construction. Staff noted that the conditional use permit application for grading and land alteration needed to be officially published and noticed to property owners within 350', therefore, the Planning Commission did not take action on the conditional use permit. November The conditional use permit notice was published in the official newspaper and property owners within 350' received a notice with the survey. The applicant has submitted a plan that shows a new driveway curb cut from Park Drive via Bluff Street to provide a level driveway approach. #2395 Bentrott 1453 Park Drive CUP 11/16/98 page~2 Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.25, Subd.5 (B) LR-IB Standards Section 10.22 Subd. 1 and 2 Hardcover Regulations Section 10.56, Subd. 16 Hardcover Regulations Section 10.03, Subd. 19 Land Alteration Lot Area and Yards LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street Lakeside 1 acre 140'35'10’35 ’75’ Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street Lakeside 17,142 sq. ft. (.39 acres) 48’ at OHWL 54’ at 75’ setback 5.3’ to garage House is 9'; Proposed deck is at r & garage is 8’ 72’ to house The subject property does not meet minimum lot area or lot width requirements. The proposed deck/porch on the west side of the residence requires a side yard adjacent to street setback variance. The proposed garage also requires a variance from side yard adjacent to street. Because the deck/porch addition is proposed to be located less than 3' from a property line, there are additional Building Code requirements for fire and public safety that are required. The applicant will need to work with Building Inspections staff to meet building issue concerns. #2395 Bentrott 1453 Park Drive CUP U/16/98 page-3 Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75’3,712 sq. ft.370 sq. ft. (9.97%) NONE 9 sq. ft..24 75'-250’9,960 sq. ft.2,303 sq. ft. (23.12%) 2,490 sq.ft. (25%) 3.404 sq. ft. (34.18%) 914 sq. ft. (9.18%) 250'-500'3,478 sq. ft.780 sq. ft. (22.43%) 1,043.4 sq. ft. (30%) 813 sq. ft. (23.38%). NONE TOTALS: 17,150 sq. ft. % of LOT AREA: 3,453 sq.ft. 20.13% 4,226 sq. ft. 24.6% The proposed plan represents an overall increase in hardcover of 971 sq. ft. Hardcover is proposed to be reduced in both the 0'-75' and 250’ -500’ setbacks. The consulting engineer questioned whether the area between the parallel sidewalks would be hardcover. According to the Building Inspector, applicants have proposed similar parallel paved areas in the past to reduce hardcover, however, the City has considered the entire area between the sidewalks to be regarded as hardcover because it becomes compacted as it is driven over. The Planning Commission should determine whether this area should be added into the hardcover calculations. The grading and drainage plan indicates slight changes in the amount of proposed hardcover. The above table reflects the newest survey submitted. The Planning Commission should again revisit proposed hardcover because the numbers are different than those reviewed in October. ISSUES The conditional use permit for land alteration and grading is subject to the following criteria: 1.That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan; The Planning Commission shall consider if the drainage and grading plan meets the objective of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. #2395 Bentrott 1453 Park Drive CUP 11/16/98 page-4 3. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Driveway curb cuts are to be at least 5' from the property line. This curb cut is not on the applicant's property and therefore does not meet Zoning Code requiiements. The engineer has indicated his concern that the changes may have a negative impact on the adjacent property because of grading along the property line. The engineer also does not favor the curb cut on Bluff Street because if the City ever opens or uses the area for public purpose, the curb cut would need to be moved off of Bluff Street. The applicant would tlien not have the appropriate grade level for a landing area at the top of the driveway. The proposed driveway cannot be contained on the applicant's property because of the existing topography and the need to provide a grade of 10% or less for the driveway. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. The zoning issues are as follows: A. The location of the driveway does not conform to the Zoning Code. B. The subject lot does not meet lot area or lot width requirements. C. The west side of the property is subject to a 35' setback from platted, unopened Bluff Street. The applicant originally requested vacation of a 10* portion of Bluff Street which was not favorably received by the Planning Commission. D. The existing deck encroaches into the required side yard adjacent to street. Both the proposed porch/deck and new garage encroach into the required setback, the Planning Commission in October approved these variances, subject to the submittal and approval of the grading and drainage plan. E. The existing garage encroaches into the required street yard setback. The parking pad in front of the garage is partially in the street right-of-way. F. The existing hardcover exceeds the limits in the 0'-75' setback. The applicant is proposing to remove hardcover in the 0'-75' setback, however, overall hardcover would increase on the zoning lot. The hardcover numbers are slightly different than the numbers submitted with the previous plan, please reconsider the numbers. Please note that hardcover would be added for the driveway area near Park Drive which is outside of the property lines. H2395 Benirolt 1453 Park Drive CUP 11/16/98 page- S' t • STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission should evaluate the revised plan in view of the revised location of the driveway curb cut and the engineer's concerns regarding the culvert, retaining walls, the landing area and curb cut location and future use of Bluff Street. The variance approvals were contingent on the submittal and acceptance of a drainage and grading plan. The Public Services Director does not recommend approval of the driveway as proposed because it does not conform to the driveway regulations as set forth in Chapter 6 of the Municipal Ordinance regarding width of curb cut at the right-of-way and the angle of the driveway. Attachments AX Tom Kellogg's letter dated 11/10/98 BX Tom Kellogg's letter dated 10/14/98 CX Driveway regulations A Application B Plat map C Surveyor's letter D New plan E Hardcover worksheets FI July minutes F2 August minutes F3 October minutes G Letter from neighbors—Palms H Acknowledgement form (dated June 1998) I Sewer plan J Garage elevations K Plan #1 L Plan #2 NOTE TO COMMISSIONERS: In an effort to reduce the amount of staff reports that have previously been sent to you on this matter, the previous staff reports are not included as exhibits. If you need copies of previous reports before the meeting, please call Liz at 473-7357. U2395 Bentrott 1453 Park Drive CUP 11/16/98 page-b Boneitroo Rosene. Anderhk ond AssociMes. Inc ts an Afftrm.Wve Action, Equal Opportunity Errployer Principals Otto G Bonestroo. PE • Joseph C Anderlik. PE • Marvin L Sorval«i. PE • Richard E Turner. PE • Gienn R Cook. PE • Robert G Schumchi. PE • Jerry A Bourdon. PE • Robert W Rosene. PE and Susan M. Ebcriin. C PA . Senior Cornuit.mts Associate Principals Howard A Sanford PE • Keith A Gordon. PE • Robert R. Pfefferle. PE. • Richard W Foster. PE • David O Loskota. PF • Robert C Rossek. Al A • Mark A. Hanson. PE • Michael T Rautmann PE • Ted K Field. PE • Kenneth P Anderson. PE • Mark R Rolfs. PE • Sidney P Willian.son. PE, LS • Robert F Kotsmiih • Agnes M. Ring • Michael P Rau. PE • Allan Rick Schmidt. PE. Offices St Paul. Rochester. Willmar and St Cloud. MN • MiJwauke-. Wl W'ebsife wwwbonestrco com . ........T) I c.-I •, J W J Bonestroo ff=iS Rosene Anderlik & \\]\ Associates Engineers & Architects November 10,1998 Elizabeth VanZomeren City Planner/Zoning Administraior City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Bentrott Site Plan File No. 139-2395 Dear Liz: We have reviewed the revised site plan dated November 10, 1998 for the proposed garage relocation on the Brent Bentrott property. The site is located at 1453 Park Drive on the south side of Forest Lake in the south half of Section 7. We have the following comments in regards to engineering matters. 1. Grading: The revised grading plan appears to address some but not all of our previous concerns. The proposed swale and associated grading east of the driveway is shown right up to the property line. To construct the swale and driveway as shown it will be necessary to obtain a temporary easement from the property owner to the east. Drainage along the east side of the house is still a concern. The proposed grading plan shows a culvert under the driveway that may direct some water westerly however it appears that a considerable amount of storm water will be directed towards the existing home. Retaining wall details and design should be submitted for review. 2. Driveway: The proposed grades on the driveway appear to be acceptable. The 2 percent landings at Park Drive and at the proposed garage make sense. The City should consider if the future construction of Bluff Street is a possibility. The proposed plan shows the driveway to be constructed in the Park Drive and Bluff Street right-of-way. Future improvements to either street would eliminate the 2 percent driveway landing making ingress and egress difficult if not dangerous. 3. Drainage: A detailed drainage area map of the contributing drainage area and drainage calculations should be submitted for review. 4. Easements: Utility easements should be shown 5-feet wide along the interior lot lines and 10-feet wide along Park Drive and Bluff Street. Drainage easements should be provided across all drainage ways. Please contact me at (604-4863) if you have any questions regarding this matter. Youts very truly, BONFSTROO, ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. /<3-r>^ Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono F 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612-636-4600 • Fax: 612-636-1311 ^ J Bonestroo Rosene ^ ■ Anderlik & Ivll Associates Engineers & Architects October 14, 1998 Elizabeth VanZomeren City Planner/Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Re: Bentrott Site Plan File No. 139-GEN Bonestroo. Bosene. AnderUk Assoct^tes. inc n Affirmt*tive Action Equal Opportunity Principals Of:o G Bonestroo. PE • Joseph C Anderlik. PE • M.nvin L Sorv«»l«». PE • Ricnard E Turner, PE • Glenn R Cook. PE. • Rooert G Schunicht. PE • Jerry A Bourdon. Pf Robert W Rosene. PE and Susan M Eberhn, C PA . Senior Consultants Assocf,ne Principals Howard A Sanford. PE • KeTh A Gordon. PE • Robert R Pfefferie. P Richard W Foster PE • David O Loskota. PE • Robert C Russek. AIA • Mam A Hanson. Michael T Rautmann. P£ . Ted K Field. PE • Kenneth P Anderson. PE • Mark R Rolfs, PE • Sidney P Williamson. PE.. L S • Robert F Kotsmith • Agnes M Rmg • Michael P Rau. PE • Allan Rick Schmidt. PE Offices St Paul. Rochester. Willmar and St Ooud. MN • Milwaukee. Wl Weisite wwwbonertroo com G DearLiz: We have reviewed the site plan dated October 7,1998 for the proposed garage relocation on the Brent Bentrott property. The site is located at 1453 Park Drive on the south side of Forest Lake in the south half of Section 7. We have the following comments in regards to engineering matters 1. Grading: The proposed grading plan appears to present some problems. The proposed slopes north of the driveway at the south end of the lot scale to 2; 1. We recommend the maximum slopes be 3:1 so they can be maintained. The proposed swale east of the driveway is within 6-feet of the lot line and as close as 7-feet to the neighbor ’s garage. It may be necessary to obtain additional easements to construct the driveway and swale. The grading plan appears to make the existing drainage situation worse by directing water towards the existing home and proposed garage. We would recommend revising the grading plan so that drainage is directed away from structures. The proposed retaining walls exceed 6-feet in height in some locations. Retaining wall details and design should be submitted for review. 2. Drainage: A detailed drainage area map of the contributing drainage area and drainage calculations should be submitted for review. 3. Easements: Utility easements should be shown 5-feet wide along the interior lot line. Drainage easements should be provided across all drainage ways. 4. Financial Guarantee: When the plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee lequired. Please contact me at (604-4863) if you have any questions regarding this matter Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612-636-4600 • Fax: 612-636-1311 piunfcfjK) \t\^% t tC-^ S^o S&. pt: j —1 - _ii—11 —i ■• 1 JT—j ir 11 -----1 t ■ li----1LZ=! nu»jr eiHAWjio [&¥tr view> ,aw«Hewv^(TKteeCve^i)VO(-^. (^^v0>rv»^J) B I r 1 COcH OKI Appli cocKon 0* !^k«p ■lop* 4»f HtakU«r'fr6»>% Stw^r rviAp ^^p€rii^tV loO DUf Uarvjsc'i Tl, A Application U 35^^ Date Received !0« 23"^^ Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION . , - Site Address Dr\NT^_______________ Type of Application to be Filed ^ ^ • F-_________________________________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.1 L-crV onH2. aO'LZ- ' APPLICANT , ^ , 4X- (home) 4") Name R?rgccV ^evvyro"^ Phone (work) ~ H ^ vo Address (W\c Or ^ City (OrCvjoo _______Zip OWNER (if different than applicant) Nam>.e Phone (home). Phone (work). Address City Date Property Acquired_____________________________________ I (do) (06 n^also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - d sigrated wetland or floodplain )^ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from ^iginiO application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current A^ ^i^ai-on Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$350.00 C')mprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule Zip, (month/year) A REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. V.'-' 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). < G»''\ . ^ ___Certificate of Survey (signed by a licenised surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. ___Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ___Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). ___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). ___Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). ___As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (U" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff \vill require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: Date APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant ’s signature Date \0 OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature I purposes of investigation i Date Vq 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 idl scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. Application # Date Received *14 >n:a JFnJAmount Paid **3fSh- CITY OF ORONO - VA^IAIiCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee^^SO.OO ^ ($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 14*5 S Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)x -» Ml QO^'X Attach legal description to application if not included on required surv'ey. Date Property Acquired Js] C>\/E\Va^eiI^ __________(mohth/year)Qj I (do) ^do no^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X. residential ___^other (specify) Zoning District: X LR~ I S_____________________ __ ""0 APPLICANT Name ^TF^T1 Address: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home ) Z. - _____ Phone (work ) ) City: _______Zip: Phone (home)_ Phone (work)_ . > Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: iJ^tO *^^4 Ctc5G^~\Z) - (attach additional sheets if necessary) L-^ U.i^ StOfcy(attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width X Setback;Front X Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore )< ocher (specify) \D' V'Ac:(CToM OF P/)'4 ^^^^SSi6KJ 'R) [>OUVS[^OF Access fJEVO fUlDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:/^ jfifVtex rg)mwtJTfexi^ K'^'s Vawt-tovft- ‘SrgfJ AM) l-f iS fVXCl.V C^KU t~~?x /TT) glPg loT (attach additional sheets if necessary) |_( vJE" REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted hv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete:kl V 1. / 2. ^ 3. Completed Application Form Certified Property OvMiers 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). 4. 7 Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy Z'A" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8!4" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy SYi” x 11").5. 0 ________^______________________...................... ^ ^ 6. s/ 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. 7. 8. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all infonnation 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. Applicant’s Signature Date 0\VNER’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. DateOwner’s Signature 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 VAC OOC NO S435422 VAC OOC NO 6074295 r ®7-in-a3 296.6 C (35) \ 245.85 ^ H u 203. S7 ^ 1. * 10.44. 145. 54 \‘®i® )v/a»* / •’f? 65 65 ^55 j 1 » ' 12 'I (25) ^''?) (I) ;•“*% ■;\ % /' /’v .T#%-''5/:i\M/ P 1 I J h. & J-rKCAjJ> r r 1 0^vAAS!-vJj^r |>ur VA/\» ^'^^3XJU^kJL/D \<Wv\jL</l , o/n te w Adjacent Propertj' Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) [print name(s)][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at PcKr'\C also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, 1 (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor’s project or use requires Council approval. VC Property Owner Date iprtv Owner \Property Owner Date (eh I I(i***:)l*l(l**^*l(l ♦♦♦♦*♦*♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦’t'****************************************'*"*'****'*'^*** I (we) [print name(s)][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date DateProperty Owner If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. r^ • •*••'. •• ^-*' * ■ -^. • •.* »t • ..■•-• ■••1,’ * • . . •’ ' . V.y . •' ■ :y. -. •. ^ • ; / j.: ' ?V':*'V".-; . • ;.^r-- ;.'- -V*' ;-.X >..^i NOT TO BE SERVED I BY GRAVITY - 'PA R K^‘ ••••••••••••••••••••#«•••••••»«••••• •♦••♦••••♦♦•••••••••••♦%♦•••••••♦••• >••••• «•••••••••••«•••••••*••♦••••♦♦•••••• *•••♦• ••••• ••••♦< •••••*••••••••••••••#•••••»•••••••••« •••••••••••*••••»••««•••••••«•■ «••*••••*••••••••• • •••••••••A*. ••*••••••••«••«•••••• »\« *••••♦•••«••••*•••••••••••••••••••••«•« PARR-DRIVg % ....................... ' • * •••••• • »•«•••• ......................... • ........... “ffiliCX HA I** • .. - . ► ••••♦••••J •••••••••«»••« ••••••••••••••I •«•»«••••• •M•«•••••••••••••••• ••••••• ••••••• «••*«••«»••••••••••«••••••»•»« •*•••••••••••••••»*»«•••#*••••«•#•••••• *•••••»•••»••«•••••••«•••#•■••• • ••••••»« •*•«••••• «»«•••••• ■•••••••»♦« '••*•••«•••#•••••••*••• « « » ««•••••*««••• •♦•••••••••a aa«a«*aa «#•#•••••##•a#«a« • • •• ••^aaA •••• • a**^ #•«*•«.••»•«««•# . • • a# • ««a • - •*««•••#•«•*•• • •« • ••« • • •♦«aA#M • ••«•••• a ••• a *•♦«••«••••••*••• a • • •t »•»••• a »«a*«..aaaaaaa ••••#•• »«»•••« ^•a»aa»««>*«»*aaaaa.a «*«aa • ••■•••••• #••a«*«.aaaa aa •a %•««»#«••« «• »• • • «a»**aa aaaa^a • 9 • a** • -aaAaaaaa •••aaa»#aaa«aaaaa •< ••••aaaa*aaa*«*aaaa«a a »aaaa«aa*a a < a«»« aa«a«a* • a« •« *a« •• aaa« • a • aaaa < • M««a« aa*aa*« • aaaa aa aa«* • a a a* a a«a aa a a a • •■•a »#• • aa*fla»a«aaaaaaa#a>aaaa«aaa • »aa#aa aa*a«aaaaaaa a«« aaa«aaaaaaaaa< i»«> aa aa^waaa a>aaaa«aaaa*aaa a«« • aa aaaaaaaaaaaaa aa aaaa aaa a^aaaaaaaaaaaa# aa-aaMaaa*aaaa • a «*• aaa^* *aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaa»a*aa «aa • 349 aaaaaaaaa* «aaa**aaa aaaaa#* aaaaaaaa* aaaHBtaaaaaa*#••%«aaa*a«aa#aaaaa laaaaaaaaa ^ ^•aaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaata* a .aaa^aaaaaaaaaaaa a«aa*aaa^aaaa*aaaaaa • a«aaa«aaaaaaa9** aaaaaa aa*aaaaaaaa <aaaaaaaaa ••aaaaaaaaa a*aaaa*«aaaaa aaaa«aa*aaaaaa *«aaa«taaaaa >aa«%aaaaaaaaaaa*a - •a*a#aaa« >a.a*aa**aaaaaaaaaaa#*aaaaaa aaaaaaaaa# aaaaaaa-aaaa • aaaaaaaa* « • aaaaa aaa* aaaa#••^paaaaaaaaaa a •a«aa*aa*aaa aapaaaa .aaaa**# - *a*aaaa ♦aaaa »a »aaa * a#aaa ♦•«#«♦♦ aa. ♦♦♦#♦♦#a • aappaa#aa- .aaa • Mpapa .apaaaaaaaaafl* «♦# .a^aaaaaa. aM^aaaaaapaaaaaaa .aaaaaaaaaaaaaa#*aaapaa .a.aa^^aaaa. ra**aaa»aa^a«^a« •♦♦• a • -aaa* a«aaa*^ i«aaaaaa*aaaaaaaa *aa.aaaaa« apaaaaa aaaa#aa»»a* aa ••Maaa«apaa* .a>aaaa-aa«a.a aa a«»aaa aa*aaaa• >• aaaaa'•* * aaaaaa-a aaa#a *a-^a«aaa \ Permit Ho. PERMIT RECORD Date M e^y-SS' Type of Permit /IOC. ^<rojeA y hf(^- 79 y- <gg/yv.0Qgx • 4 N OTI Ces "K> Y / sppl \ c CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 TO: Brent Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Mound, MN 55364 ZONING FILE #2395 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: 7/21/98 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION: DATE OF MEETING; 7/20/98 Vacation of Bluff Street and Variances VOTE:6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. 2. 3. Make sure that proposed 3 season screen porch is at least 3' from Bluff Street property line - show on survey. Deny 10' vacation of Bluff Street. Rework garage location and be at least 10' from garage on adjacent property (Palms). Contact buildinf ifficial, Lyle Oman, at 473-7357, for assistance in detennining a location for the p. ^posed garage. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Planning Commission Monday, August 17, 1998, meeting starts at 6:30 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X \APPS\W P\VIN60\Wr ■'OCS\CAPOLE\PCACTION\2395 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 TO:Brent & Kathryn Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Mound, MN 55364 TYPE OF APPLICATION: DATE OF MEETING: 8/17/98 ZONING FILE #2395 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE TF NOTICE; August 18, 1998 COPIES TO: Variance VOTE;6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Resolve issues re; a. hardcover - provide accurate information for proposal b. location of proposed garage c. proximity to adjacent residence - noise, lights issue d. engineering ’'■.sues with grading, fill, slope - provide engineered design with grading, drainage and topography as existing and proposed. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the September 21, 1998 meeting is September 4,1998. Enc. Minutes from 7/20/98 Extension Letter X:\APPS\WP\MN60\WPDOCS.CAROLE\PCACTlON\2395-2 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2395 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 20, 1998 TO:Brent Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Mound, MN 55364 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETING: 10/19/98 VOTE:5 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Pi ovide drainage and grading plan for the plan submitted by Larson Assoc. 2, Work with adjacent owner regarding drainage concerns. Applicant's next .scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the November 16 meeting is to be worked out with staff dependent on when you can obtain the new information, no later than November 1. The review period is hereby extended an additional 60 days. X;\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS'CAROLE'PCACTION\2395-3 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2395 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: November 17, 1998 TO:Brent & Kathryn Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Orono, MN 55364 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance/Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: 11/16/98 VOTE:6 FOR 1 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: 1. Approve variances for house improvements for side yard adjacent to street, 2. Deny conditional use permit, grading and land alteration. 3. Deny variances for hardcover and side yard adjacent to street for garage. 1 NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council November 23, 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 approval by the Planning Commission. X:\APPS\\VPWIN60\WPIX)CSCAROLE\PCACTlON\2395-4 • • • 9 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 APPLICATION NO, #2395 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: November 24, 1998 TO: Brent Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Mound MN 55364 COPIES:Mark Palm 1447 Park Drive Mound MN 55364 Mark Gronberg 482 A Tamarack Avenue Long Lake MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance and Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: 11 /23/98 VOTE:4 FOR 1 AGAINST COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: To continue the variances and conditional use permit, subject to the applicant's surveyor preparing plans that address drainage issues and the City attorney reviewing legal fee ownership of Bluff Street. Information to be provided by December 4,1998 for the December 14, 1998 City Council meeting. Applicant and surveyor to contact Greg Gappa, Public Services Director, to design a drainage plan acceptable to the City. Hardcover worksheets will be needed by December 4,1998 to include in the draft resolution. jig ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2427 Kenton and Diane Carlson, Continued) Van Zomeren commented the drawing shows 3/4 ’ stone along Baldur Park Road and in the yard between the house and north property line. Currently a boat is stored on the rock. Staff is recommending that this area be regarded as hardcover but not included In the hardcover survey. Staff is recommending that this stone or rock be replaced with sod and landscaping. Staff is also recommending approval of the after-the-fact variances for structural lot coverage, side yaro setback, and hardcover, with the condition that no further variances for hardcover and structural coverage be granted. Carlson stated he intends to sell the boat or house the boat indoors. Chair Smith suggested the Applicant seriously consider adding sod to that area. Carlson commented he could put in a decorative garden in that area. There were no public comments. Chair Smith stated the Planning Commission will give the Applicant a reasonable amount of time in which to remove the boat. Lindquist suggested by June 1. 1999. the Applicant have grass in the area and the rock removed. Chair Smith suggested the boat be removed within 60 days. Smith inquired whether hardcover for this lot should be reduced. Van Zomeren recommended no new hardcover or structural coverage be allowed on the property. Stoddard moved, Smith seconded, to approve Application #2427, 3498 North Shore Drive, gtanting of after-the-fact variances for side yard setback, hardcover, and structural coverage, subject to removal of the boat within 60 days of today's date, and further subject to the condition that the rock be removed and sod be placed in the area where the boat is currently stored, and further subject to the stipulation that no new hardcover or structural structure will be allowed on this property in the future. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS (#4) #2395 BRENT BENTROTT, 1453 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 8:04 p.m. - 8:54 p.m. Mr. and Mrs. Brent Bentrolt were present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicants have appeared at the July 20th and August 17th Planning Commission meeting requesting hardcover variances, a 10 fool vacation of Bluff Street, and side yard adjacent to street setback variances. Van Zomeren commented the Applicants have submitted a new plan which requires a side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new deck and porch to be located one foot from the property line, as well as a side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new garage to be located eight feet from the property line where 35 feet is required. A variance to hardcover is also required in the 75-250' setback to allow 35.32 percent hardcover. Page 7 1 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2395 Brent Bentrott, continued) Van Zomeren staled a conditional use permit is also required to alter land and grade within five feet of the property line which will require proper notification to the adjoining property owners. Bentrott commented his architect has reviewed Kellogg's letter and responded to the concerns. Bentrott staled they are contemplating planting hostas and other green cover along the bank to avoid the necessity for mowing. Mrs. Bentrott commented they have planted hostas previously along an existing bank. Bentrott stated they coi 'J also consider constructing a retaining wall or move the fill somewhat. Chair Smith inquired whether the water drainage issues concerning the adjoining properties have been adequately addressed. Bentrott staled their adjoining neighbor is in the process of remodeling as well. Lindquist stated a joint drainage and grading plan should be developed betv/een the property owners to resolve any water runoff issues. Bentrott remarked he was unsure what Item No. 4 in Tom Kellogg's letter was referring to. Van Zomeren stated the language contained in Items 3 and 4 is standard language for a subdivision, and was not sure of Mr. Kellogg's intent by including that language in his letter. Bentrott commented he is frustrated by the continual requests by the Planning Commission at each meeting to change a different aspect of the plan, noting he requested at the last meeting to have the Planning Commission give better direction on what they would like to see changed in the plan. Van Zomeren slated Staff has received a letter from the Palms at 1447 Park Drive expressing their support of this application. Bentrott commented according to the building inspector, his present driveway is a hazard due to the necessity to back out onto the street. Hawn stated she has concerns about the amount of fill that will be necessary. Chair Smith staled the drainage issues still need to be addressed before this application could be approved. Stoddard stated he was okay with the three fool setback on the side for the proposed three season porch. Hawn commented that she knows the Applicant has appeared before the Planning Commission three times, noting there are substantial issues that need to be addressed with this application. Lindquist slated a definite plan for the grading and drainage needs to be submitted. Van Zomeren stated notification needs lo be given to the adjoining property owners of the request for a conditional use permit for any grading within five feet of the property line, noting there was not sufficient lime to give notice to the neighbors before tonight's meeting. Van Zomeren commented the Applicants have : oen working closel; with City Staff to get an acceptable plan together. Page 8 OROiNO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2395 Brent Bentrott, continued) Chair Smith inquired when the Applicants were planning on commencing construction. Bentrott stated they had wanted a fall start date but have pushed it back to the spring. Chair Smith suggested putting this item on the November agenda to allow the Applicants time to submit a detailed drainage plan and less fill required. Bentrott inquired whether the Planning Commission could approve the application subject to the submittal of a drainage and grading plan. Schroeder stated an acceptable drainage plan needs to be submitted before approval can be given. Van Zomeren stated the steepness of the driveway also should be addressed. Stoddard suggested approving the side yard and hardcover variances subject to the submittal and approval by City Staff of a grading and drainage plan. Lindquist inquired whether the Planning Commission was in favor granting the variances. It v/as the concensus of the Planning Commission that they might look favorably upon the variances subject to an acceptable grading and drainage plan. Schroeder moved to approve Application #2395,1453 Park Drive, granting of variances to side yard adjacent to street to allow a new deck and porch to be located one foot from the property line, a side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new garage to be located eight feet from th<. property line, a variance to the hardcover requirements in the 75-250' setback as outlined in the Planner’s Report dated October 14,1998, subject to the submittal and approval of a drainage and grading plan before commencement of construction. MOTION DIED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND. Van Zomeren noted an extension will be required because the 60 days expires November 8th. Schroeder suggested tabling the item since notification has not been given for the conditional use permit. Schroeder withdrew his motion pending submittal of a grading and drainage plan. Van Zomeren staled the variances are part of the old application. Schroeder suggested submitting a new application for the variances as well as inclusion of the request for a conditional use permit. Chair Smith stated it was the concensus of the Planning Commission ♦hat the variance.*; will be approved subject to the submittal of an acceptable drainage and grading plan. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2395,1453 Park Drive, to allow the Applicants time to submit a drainage and grading plan. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#7) #2413 PAUL AND MEGAN BENNETT. 500 HANLON AVENUE - VARIANCES, 8:55 p.m. - 9:05 p.m. Paul and Megan Bennett were present. Page 9 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 (#2408 MIKE HiLBELINK, Continued) Chai -nith stated the Planning Commission has to act on what is presented to them, but the Applicant could request that the application be tabled to allow time to submit revised plans. Van Zomeren stated if the barn Is to be used to house animals, the Planning Commission needs to know the exact lot lines that are being proposed. Schroeder stated to house horses a minimum of three acres is needed. Van Zomeren stated since the barn has not housed animals for an extended period of time, the intent to house animals probably has been abandoned and a new conditional use permit w*)uld be required. Van Zomeren stated if a new house is constructed on the backlot, it must meet the required setbacks for that lot, noting the restriction for the barn falls on the lot tnat contains the barn. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2408 for property located at 900 Willow Drive North to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS, CONTINUED (#3) #2395 BRENT BENTROTT, 1453 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES, 7:20 p.m. - 7:45 p.m. Van Zomeren stated this application was considered at the July 20 Planning Commission meeting where the Applicants requested hardcover variances, a ten foot vacation of platted, unopened Bluff Street, and side yard adjacent to street setback variances. The Planning Commission had recommended denial of the vacation of Bluff Street and tabled the application to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans. Van Zomeren reported the Applicant has submitted a new plan that shows access from the street a:iu locates the garage closer to the house, approximately 130 feet from the street. The Applicant is proposing to construct a two-story 22’ by 25* garage. Van Zomeren stated she has spoke.i with Tom Kellogg, an engineer with Boneslroo, who has reviewed this plan. Kellogg has expressed concerns over the slope of the driveway, which would require a considerable amount of fill to obtain a grade of 8 percent. Van Zomeren stated the Planning Commission needs to consider whether this garage can be relocated to its proposed site, what grade the driveway should be at, how much fill will be allowed, how close the garage should be to the adjoining property line and existing house, and whether a variance to hardcover should be granted. Cnair Smith stated this application involves issues that need to be addressed by an engineer, which the Planning Commission is not in a position to handle. Bentrott stated at the last meeting the Planning Commission had stated they would not be in favor of using the unopened street for access to the garage, which necessitated the need to relocate the garage. Bentrott remarked a structural engineer has viewed the property. Bentrott stated the adjacent property should not be impacted by the additional fill since the elevation is much higher. Van Zomeren stated the engineer has also raised concerns about the distance available in the lot Page 5 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 (#2395 BRENT BENTROTT, Continued) width to maintain an adequate bench of three to one for safety and mowing. Stoddard commented the steep embankment might require retaining wails, which would also increase hardcover. Lindquist stated this property will exceed the ali ^wable hardcover in all three zones if the application is approved and will require variances in both the 75’-250' and 250**500' setbacks. Lindquist stated he would probably vote against this application with the proposed hardcover. Van Zomeren stated that the new hardcover numbers were not provided with the revised plan. Chair Smith stated the Planning Commission probably cannot act on this application without the new hardcover numbers. Stoddard stated the surveyor or Applicant should be notified by City Staff that hardcover needs to be calculated before the meeting. Mrs. Bentrott stated they would like to relocate the garage closer to the residence to allow elderly relation the ability to visit them year-round, noting they weren’t aware tney couldn ’t relocate the garage. Mr. Bentrott stated Bruce Vang, building inspector, has been out to view the property and followed his suggestions to utilize the platted, unopened street and to construct a new garage because in his view the existing garage was a hazard since they had to back out onto the street. Stoddard stated it has not been the philosphy of the Planning Commission to vacate or allow use of platted, unopened street for private driveways. Stoddard stated the Applicant will need to review the possible need for retaining walls, amount of fill, and new hardcover numbers, noting the Planning Commission cannot act on this application until those issues are addressed. Berg expressed concerns over the driveway being close to the neighboring house and the imp.vt the noise and headlights would have on the adjoining property. Schroeder suggested tabling the application to allow the Bentrotts time to address these issues. Chair Smith stated she would prefer a plan without retaining wa'Is if possible, and suggested the Applicant continue to work with City Staff on the hardcover and engineering issues. Mr. Bentrott staled they applied for the vacation to eliminate setback for the three-season porch. Hawn stated the vacation probably would not be approved. Mr. Bentrott stated in h'*^ opinion he has three options; 1) keep existing garage; 2) reconsider the application without th' • ■* ^'ot vacation of Bluff Street; and 3) proceed with the revised plan, which is the most costly. Hawn remarked in her view t; options are not viable due to the increased hardcover. Schroeder suggested tabling the matter, noting he is not prepared to give guidance on this application due to the engineering issues that need to be addressed. Stoddard suggested the Applicant continue to work with City Staff in an effort to resolve some of Page 6 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 (#2395 BRENT BENTROTT, Continued) these issues. Tnere were no public comments. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2395 for property located at 1453 Park Drive. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS; PUBLIC HEARINGS (#5) #2391 EVAN ANDERSON. 1260 SPRUCE PLACE - VARIANCE. 7:46 p.m. - 8:05 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Anderson were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are app lying for an after-the-fact variance for hardcover to allow a patio to remain in the 0-75 ’ distance from ’he lake, and a variance from allowed hardcover in the 75*- 250* lakeshore setback for a patio and the reconstruction of an old garage, which would require a variance from the side yard adjacent to street setback. The Applicants are proposing to construct a 24 ’ x 20 ’ garage to replace an existing 22.5' x 20 ’ garage, which is 40.6 square feet larger. Weinberger stated a conditonal use permit is needed for retaining walls that have already been replaced on the property. An after-the-fact variance is needed to allow retaining walis and patio to remain in the 0-75 ’ zone which are not depicted on a 1996 survey. Mr. Anderson stated the retaining walls have existed since 1978 and have been replaced. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing to maintain the total hardcover within the 0-75 ’ lakeshore setback at 18.5 percent. The allowed hardcover in this zone is none, which would require a variance. A hardcover variance is also required for the 75 ’-250 ‘ distance from the lake. The Applicants are prooosing to increase hardcover from 55.3 percent to 56 percent. The allowable hardcover for that zone is 25 percent. Anderson stated City Staff have been out to review his property in the past, noting they were not aware the retaining walls were not depicted on the survey. Mrs. Anderson stated they have obtained many permits over the years for the work that has been completed on their property. Mrs. Anderson noted their property is the principal watershed for that entire area and the retaining walls are necessary for the drainage. Chair Smith expressed concern that the retaining walls were not depicted on the survey. Stoddard stated he agrees with Staffs recommendations. There were no public comments. Stoddard remarked he would be in favor of granting the after-the-fact variances, but would like to limit the size of the garage to what is currently existing. Stoddard corr mented he has viewed the Page 7 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 (#2391 EVAN ANDERSON, Continued) property. Anderson commented if the retaining walls were not present, the water runoff would go into his basement, and the improvements are necessary to keep the drainage out of his basement. Chair Smith inquired of the Applicants whether hardcover could be reduced. Anderson suggested the garage be moved further south into the driveway to eliminate some hardcover. Stoddard commented overall hardcover is a concern. Hawn noted structural coverage also exceeds the allowable limit. Stoddard suggested the Applicants construct a 22' x 22 ’ garage per Staffs recommendations and limit overall hardcover at 55.3 percent. Hawn questioned whether the patio that was replaced was increased in size. Anderson stated the patio was not increased, citing a need for the hardcover to prevent water runoff. Stoddard moved. Schroeder seconded, to approve Application 2391 for property located at 1260 Spruce Place, granting of a Conditional Use Permit, an after-the-fact variance to hardcover per Staffs recommendations to allow patio and existing hardcover in the 0-75' zone, construction of a 22 ’ by 22' garage, doubling of the permit fees, approval of a variance to Side yard adjacent to street setback to allow construction of garage five feet from lot line, limiting total hardcover in the 75'-250' zone to 55.3 percent, with the stipulation that no additional hardcover or structural variances will be granted in the future. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 2, Hawn and Smith opposed, noting disapproval of structural coverage. (#6) #2398 WAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB. 200 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/LAND ALTERATION, 8:06 p.m. - 8:18 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Oberhauser, a representative of Wayzata Country Club, was present. Gaffron stated the Wayzata Country Club is requesting conditional use permit approval of a master plan for upgrading the course which includes reconstruction, relocation or addition of tees for holes #1-18; reconstruction, relocation and/or addition of bunkers along most fairways and around most of the greens for holes #1-18; and expansion of three pond areas on the property, which are subject to City and MCWD/Corps of Engineers regubtio.o and need to be further evaluated. Gaffron reported the Wayzata Country Club is proposing to widen the fairways, which will involve replacing of sod and minimal grading. Certain of the proposed tee locations will be near the road or Luce Line right-of-ways or residential lot lines. The Planning Commission may want to consider whether it would be appropriate to establish a minimum setback for tees from property boundaries based on the activity impact the tees would have on adjoining properties. Gaffron remarked the new bunkers are not an issue, but more detail will need to be provided before Page 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 20,1998 (#14) #2395 BRENT BENTROTT, 1453 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES AND VACATION, 9:24 p.m. - 9:47 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Brent Bentrott /^ere present. Van Zonneren stated this lot is located in the LR-1B zoning d.strict, which has a minimum of one acre. Van Zomeren stated the applicants are requesting that a 10 foot portion of platted, but unopened. Bluff Street be vacated to allow an existing deck that if. along the west property line to be remodeled into a three-season porch. The vacation is also requested in order to build a new garage that would be accessed from Bluff Street. Variances are needed for hardcover in the 0*-500* setbacks. Variances are also required for the side yard adjacent to street setback from Blu^f Street to add the three-season porch, and a variance to the side yard setback for the proposed garage because it is considered an oversized accessory structure. Van Zomeren stated this application is dependent on the vacation, which traditionally have not been granted, and recommended the Planning Commission consider that portion of the application first. Bentrott stated they are proposing to build a new garage which would be located closer to the residence which should help reduce hardcover. Bentrott stated he didn’t know a fire lane was considered a road. Mrs. Bentrott stated they would like a portion of the existing deck turned into a three-season porch. Chair Smith inquired what the practical use of the fire lane was. Van Zomeren stated any access off of the lake would need to also be reviewed by the utility companies and the DNR, who would probably deny the request. McMillan stated the Planning Commission might be setting a precedent if the variance is granted, noting she was not in favor of the vacation. Lindquist remarked he does not think realistically this application would be approved as proposed. Bentrott stated they suggested using the fire lane as one option. There were no public comments. Chair Smith inquired what would happen If the vacation is denied. Van Zomeren stated if the vacation were not granted, the Planning Commission would be looking at a side yard adjacent to street setback to build right on the property line, no additional hardcover, and the conversion of the deck into a three season porch would be considered a structural change, and at least ten feet would be required between the accessory buildings. Bentrott stated he would be in favor of constructing the garage under 750 square feet and ten feet from the neighbor's building. McMillan stated she would be in favor of the three season porch and a redesigned garage with proper setbacks from side yard with no additional hardcover in the 75'-250' and 250'-500’ zones. Lindquist stated the garage cannot be constructed right on the property line. Page 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 20.1998 (#2395 Brent Bentrott, continued) Benlrott commented the existing deck is currently located right on the property line, which will be removed. Lindquist stated the Applicant probably will be denied the vacation and will have to comply with present hardcover restrictions. Chair Smith suggested the matter be tabled to allow the Applicant to submit revised plans. Bentrott stated he would be fine with tabling the application. Lindquist commented he would be In favor of a 60 day extension from August 22. Van Zomeren stated the City is required to act within 60 days of when the application is submitted. Bentrott stated he would be in favor of extending the time limit. Smith moved, McMillan seconded, to table Application 2395 for property located at 1453 Park Drive. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#15) #2388 CLINT AND JODI MORRISON, 3510 BAYSIDE ROAD - VARIANCES, 9:48 p.m. - 9:57 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Morrison were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting to replace their existing residence with a new house and attached garage. This property is located in the LR-1A zoning district, which requires a minimum of two acres. This lot consists of 1.36 acres. A variance from lot size requirements would be needed as well as a variance from average lakeshore setback requirements. A conditional use permit is also necessary to allow a boat house to remain on the property during the demolition and reconstruction. The boat house would need to remain as an accessory structure and not be occupied while the residence is under reconstruction. No variance to hardcover is required. Staff recommends approval of the application based on the lot being a comer lot and the construction is completed In a timely manner. The Applicants had no comment. There were no public comments. McMillan inquired whether a conditional use permit is needed to allow the accessory structure to remain. Van Zomeren stated a variance is needed to allow the accessory to remain during the reconstruction. Morrison remarked the boat house is really the original garage of the house. Lindquist commented boat house should be changed to read accessory structure. Page 14 Date of Application: 7/21/98 Date Complete: 10/30/98; most revised plan received 12/10/98 60 day limit: 12/30/98 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ( - A • i4 1998 CITY Ci- j DATE: December 7, 1998 ITEM NO.: 7 Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive Variances Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:16,722 sq. ft. (.38 acres) Background: Application: This application was reviewed by the City Council on November 23rd. The applicant was directed to revise the plan to be a minimum of 5* from the edge of the right-of-way and revise the plan to provide a suitable angle for entrance/exit to the proposed garage. The following variances are required: 1. North side yard setback of 8.7' where 8.7 ’ is existing and a 10' side yard is required. 2. 3. Street yard setback of 5' where 13.3’ is existing and 35' is required. Hardcover in the 0'-75' setback to allow 3,533 sq. ft. (25.09%) hardcover where 3,493 sq. ft. (24.81%) is existing and none is allowed. 4. Hardcover in the 75'-250' setback to allow 1,756 sq. ft. (66.46%) where 1.129 sq. ft. (42.73%) is existing and 660.5 sq. ft. (25%) is allowed. 5.Structural coverage variance to increase from 1,944 sq. ft. (11.62%) to 2,842 sq. ft. (16.9%). Date of Application: 7/21/98 Date Complete: 10/30/98; most revised plan received 12/10/98 60 day limit: 12/30/98 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommended that the Planning Commission approve the plan reviewed on November 16th that located the addition 10' from the edge of the right-of-way and required hardcover variances in the 0'-75' and 75'-250' setbacks, a north side yard setback and structural coverage. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission recommended denial on a 7-0 vote of the plan due to excessive hardcover and structural coverage. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To amend or adopt the enclosed resolution granting the requested variances. Motion: To approve a side yard setback variance to allow the addition to be located 8.7' from the north property line where 10' is required; to allow the addition to be located 5' from the edge of the right-of-way where 35' is required; to allow hardcover variances for 25.09% in the 0'-75' and 66.46%in the 75'-250' setbacks; and to allow a structural coverage variance of 16.9% where 11.62% is existing and 15% is allowed. Attachments Exhibit A--new survey B New hardcover worksheets Previous report A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B); SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2; SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C); AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (1&2) FILE #2399 WHEREAS, Muriel Senn (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 4448 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: See Exhibit A (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 16, 1998, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision S (B); Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2; Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C); and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1&2) to permit an addition to an existing residence to allow the addition to be located 8.7* from the north property line where 8.7' is existing and 10' is required; to allow the addition to be located 5' from the right- of-way where 13.3' is existing and 35' is required; to allow 3,533 sq. ft. (25.09%) in the 0-75' setback where 3,493 sq. ft. (24.81%) is existing and none is allowed; to allow 1,756 sq. ft. (66.46%) of hardcover in the 75-250' setback where 1,129 sq. ft. (42.73%) is existing and 660.5 sq. ft. (25%) is allowed; to allow 2,842 sq ft. (16 99%) of structural coverage where 1,944 (11.62%) is existing and where 2,508.3 sq. ft. (15%) is allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Page 1 of 6 1 2 FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2399. The property is located in the LR-IB, Zoning District where 1 acre or 43,560 sq. ft. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of .38 acres or 16,722 sq. h. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 16, 1998 and recommended denial on a vote of 7 to 0 finding excessive hardcover exists on the lot and the proposal exceeds the allowed structural coverage. The City Council reviewed the proposal on November 23, 1998 and made the following findings of fact: A. B The zoning lot does not meet minimum lot area requirements. The size of the lot h‘'s been reduced by platting the county road and for bridge improvements. The existing residence encroaches into the north side yard setback, the street yard setback and the lakeshore setback. C. Approximately 84% of the total lot area is located in the 0-75' setback. D. The zoning lot exceeds hardcover in the 0-75' and 75-250' setback. The amount of hardcover for the driveway is needed to provide safe turnout on the county road and for erosion control. E. The existing structure does not have an attic or basement. 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 preserve a substantial Page 2 of 6 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 6. 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 variances on the health, safety and v/elfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B); Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2; Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C); and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1&2) to permit an addition to an existing residence where variances are required for north side yard setback, street yard setback, hardcover in the 0-75' and 75-250' setbacks, and structural coverage as shown in Exhibit A. Approval was subject to the following conditions; 1. 2. 3. 4. Future variance requests to increase hardcover or structural coverage will not be favorably considered. Authorities granted by these variances 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 these variances will expire on that date (December 14, 1999). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 6 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of December, 1998 ATTEST; 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 14th day of December, 1998, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal coiporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of % , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (ti;ey) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 5 of 6 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CERCLE ONE).. .. 75-250’250-500’500-1000’ •EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE • • m ^ A. House Mcuss-X ISS S.F. Length Width • X as S.F. X =S.F. X S3 ■m S.F. • • B. Garage • X . • S.F. C. Driveway Co^c X • - - —• S5 i/Sf S.F. X s S.F. D. Sidewalk X aow =Zoz S.F. -X rs S.F. • se, PAT-/0 7?S E. Patio/Deck A/6- SnooP X a ^z’2’S.F. snsrPS X 8 S.F. A/IV -PAT-zo ZA F. Landscape X z/s S4*S.F. ' Underlain 3opch ^X s 74-S.F. By Plastic /4>X . ^.6 8 JC S.F. .G.. Other /z.X /,7 8 Z€>S.F. ... .TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 34^43 S.F. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -/ 4-000 S.F. A J493 -i- B /4osg X100 a Z4-.S/% .PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE • • • %• • A. House X 8 S.F. Length •Width ••• • ^/>/>/T70A/X s S.F. X ' • • =S.F. X s S.F. •B. Garage X S.F. C. Driveway APX> Z ZV/K6 X BS S.F. X ss S.F. D. Sidewalk X - /s.S.F. •X •8 S.F. - /5 E. Patio/Deck X 8 S.F. • • • •X 8 S.F. F."" Landscape -X S.F. «\Underlain X 8 S.F. jPy Plastic X 8 S.F. c- ) .G-'-^ther,X 'S.F./ ZD riD -TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE Ml1•A 3S3S,S.F. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE .S.F. A 3633 -i- B 74-AS O X 100 a % A B A B <iS39:^Mua^KziL.HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE:. (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75'75-250’250-500’ EASTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House” Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X 370 33 D. Sidewalk X X •Ev - Paiio/Deck / SyJPfitr/O TiUCA X X ^2, 2^ F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X or Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE .... - TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A -i- B 2 iLza. X 100 = PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X Length Width Aoomo/s/ X X X ^ S7^ B. Garage C. - Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X t. ~ :E. Patio/Deck 5*tV X X - 70 F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X C.-‘ O* G. Other 0.. • • TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE Vi^ TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE J B 2^Z X 100 500-1000' 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. ^2,73 % 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. A B A B • • rr<v lous Date of Application: 7/21198 Date Complete: 10/30/98 60 day limit: 12/30/98 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: November 18, 1998 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive Variances Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:16,722 sq. ft. (.38 acres) Application:The applicant is requesting the following variances: 1. Lakeshore setback of 32' where 32' exists and 75' is required. 2. North side yard setback of 8.6' where 8.6' exists and 10" is required. 3. Street yard setback of 10' where 8' exists and 35' is required. 4. Structural coverage to allow 15.88%(2,656 sq. ft.) where 2,508.3 sq. ft. is allowed and where 11.62% (1,944 sq.ft.) exists. 5. Hardcover in the 0'-75' setback of 3,371 sq. ft. (24.65%) where 3,493 sq. ft.(24.81%) is existing and none is allowed. 6. Hardcover in the 75'-250' setback of 1,387 sq. ft. (52.5%) where 660.5 sq. ft. is allowed and where 1,129 sq. ft. (42.73%) is existing. Overall hardcover is 27.64% of lot area and proposed at 28.45%. 84% of the lot is located in the O'-75' setback. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: To unanimously (7-0) deny the requested variances finding that the amount of hardcover remains excessive and the strucmral coverage exceeds the 15% limit by 147.7 sq. ft. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To deny application ^399 for lakeshore setback, side yard setback, street yard setback, structural coverage, and hardcover in the 0'-75' and 75'-250' setback. Attachments TO; mOM: DATE: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator November 10,1998 SUBJECT: #2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive Variances-Continued Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:16,722 sq. ft. (.38 acres) Application:The applicant is requesting multiple variances to add to an existing residence. This application was postponed from the August, September and October agendas in order to obtain an accurate survey and develop a plan that meets the Zoning Code regulations to the extent possible given the topography, proximity to the channel, and existing conditions on the zoning lot. The applicant is requesting variances for lakeshore setback, side yard setback, street yard setback, and hardcover in the 0'-75 and 75-250' setback and structural lot coverage. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.24, Subd. 5 (B) LR-IB Standards Section 10.22 Subd. 1 and 2 and 10.56, Subd. 16 Hardcover Requirements Section 10.03 Subd. 14, C Structural Lot Coverage #2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive PC-11/1 6/98 page-1 ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside Yard 1 acre 140'35'10' Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside 16,722 sq. ft. (.38 acres) 212' at street setback 8' existing 10' proposed 8.6' existing tnd proposed 32' existing and proposed The zoning lot does not meet lot area requirements. The lot does noi meet street, side or lakeshore setbacks. The proposed addition does not increase the lakeshore setback encroachment. The addition does add more structure into the required side yard along the existing north facade. The proposed plan improves the street yard setback distance by removing the portion of the existing house/garage that is 8' from the right-of-way at the southwest comer to 1 O' along the street yard property line. StmctUi al Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Allowed Existing Structural Coverage Proposed Structural Coverage 16,722 sq. ft. .38 acres 2,508.3 sq. ft. (15%) House=1,884 sq. ft. Shed=60 sq. ft. Total=1,944 sq. ft. (11.62%) House= 1,345 +712 Shed=60 sq. ft. Total=2,656 sq. ft. (15.88%) +147.7 sq. ft. The current residence £ind shed comply with structural lot coverage requirements. The proposed addition exceeds the lot coverage requirements by 147.7 sq.ft, or .88%. ^2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive PC-11/16/98 page~2 Hardcover Distance from Shoreline 0'-75' 75 ’-250' Total Area in Setback 14,080 sq. ft. 2,642 sq. ft. Existing Hardcover 3,493 sq. ft. (24.81%) l,129sq. ft. (42.73%) Allowed Hardcover None 660.5 sq. ft. (25%) Proposed Hardcover 3,371 sq.ft. (24.65%) 1,387 sq. ft. (52.5%) Variance Requested 3,371 sq. ft. (24.65%) 726.5 sq. ft. (27.2%) The applicant is requesting hardcover variances in both setbacks. The applicant received approval for the driveway configuration from staff in 1984 (see Mike Gaffron's letter dated 7/12/98, Exhibit (G). Hardcover variances are required for the addition. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant has indicated that she desires to have additional living space to include a utility room. The existing lot does not have a suitable building pad because much of the lot area is located in an unbuildable area due to required setbacks, topography, proximity to the channel and the bridge location. The existing'structure encroaches into required street, lakeshore, and side yards.However, this plan is an improvement over the previous plans submitted in previous months. The applicant is proposing to remove 285 sq. ft. of paver driveway area, 75 sq. ft. of patio blocks, and 32 sq. ft. of the patio. ISSUES 1. 2. The zoning lot does not meet minimum lot area requirements. The existing residence encroaches into the following setbacks: a. North side yard is 8.6' existing and proposed where 10' is required b. Street yard is 8' existing where 10' is proposed and where 35' is required c. Lakeshore yard is 32' existing and proposed where 75' is required 3.Structural coverage is currently 11.62% where 15% is allowed and 15.88% is proposed. The proposal exceeds the allowed limit by 147.7 sq. ft. #2JP9 \furiel Senn 4448 North Shore Drixe PC~1 1/16/98 page-3 i 4.The zoning lot exceeds hardcover limits in both the 0'-75' and 75'-250’ setbacks. The applicant has proposed reducing hardcover in the 0'-75’ setback by removing stone walks, a portion of the patio, and blocks. In the 75'-250' setback, the applicant has proposed a 650 sq. ft. addition and removal of other hardcover for an overall increase of 258 sq. ft. in the 75'-250' setback. 5.The proposed addition encroaches into the required north side yard and required street yard. The proposal improves the street yard setback by moving it back two feet. 6. There is a well near the southeast corner of the residence that limits the location of an addition. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recognizes that this is a ver>' difficult site to work with given the location of the existing residence, the slope/grade from the road to the driveway and parking area, and the bridge. The proposed plan is an improvement over other pi ins that were submitted to date because a 10' setback would be maintained along the County Highway and some hardcover would be removed. Staff had previously suggested an alternative to increase the structure by adding living space over the existing main floor. This option, however, would not provide more garage space or solve internal floor plan issues regarding mechanical systems. Staff recommends approval of the following variances: 1. Lakeshore setback to remain at 32' where 75' is required 2. Side yard setback to remain at 8.6' where 10' is required 3. Street yard setback to be 10' where 8' is existing where 30' is required 4. Hardcover in the 0'-75' and 75'-250' setback Attachments A B C D E F G H Application Plat map Topography Survey Hardcover August minutes Letter re: driveway County road plat #2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive PC-October 19. 1998 page-4 ft Application U _____ Date Received^ 111Ila^ JLj . [C\6\S Amount Paid - CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S250.00 _ (S50.00 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_____if M 5*^if* Property Identification Number fP.I.D.'l A'7 jl~^ ^3 31 (^013 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired^/ _____________________________^(month/yeax) I 0o)j (do not) also o\’^ the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residential ___other (specify). Zoning District: / JZ [ - _________________________— APPLICANT I Name ic / i A Address: Phone (home). ______________ Phone (N\T)ik)_ Pc City: MnxfSj. 4*7 g-- Zip: c 4 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name__________________ Phone (home). Phone (\vork)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $. Describe request in detail: <f.^ / _____ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback:X f Side X Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage r^. <?> -TsNr1 t\ IAverage Lakeshore v^^ V Other (specify) LAK>ZST>b^ G HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: gcvv QacA 'tc — 61 aJ,". I i'____(eACrx^ £?•___________________________ . _________________—--------------— (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS AlLof_the following information must be submitted bv the appliearion deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete; 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. z / Completed Application 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, 348-3270. Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy ZYj' x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8‘A" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy ZVi" 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 vour variance applicat ion 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. Applicant ’s Signature Date f/ k-' ' ^0\VNER'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 A Date 7/ ^ f 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. r''H/i 1^ Af- ^SlJ^hr'hJ • ^vy^ , ' f/^/ ♦' / c» -/fif4'‘’’ ^ -f*5T Ll'^ rr R L 5 H32 c' > r4 ' ”X ^<5v'%A - ' / V /3\''4C>y~ <i' ‘30) 4*!?^ 07'«7- '3'‘<2- / -C D ^ -9 / t ••> /.\ ^v' k" rr"^-^ 7^ f , ?7 i» / k^ih. NCT^ ^> 44,.7‘V,. .........................................................................................................................................................................................................-^* ••/•• • ■ HC zxKcr " I (no Jsti- j ^ 55)^______/^3,? .2 13 '3i(’-C».V^ y ' : ijSDf.'j . VJ') !/ HOT£. lC7 a TC?RC*/IPf GAHD£?»S ■\y- '^.......tr / * / -•/‘y. ^ \/ P/4 4/y/ ., 7.117-23-3H y-^ s \ r r At\\ ^ .^Ty^.w * s ’-?!,-'^'1 (;-3) .J^ Parcel Informafion Parc«l 100711723310013 HouMNumtotf 04448 StTMt Hum NORTH SHORE DR 0»..,f^ to,Ml* i.ifN' ir. 1) / ^ ^ i HARDCOVER CALCULATION WOUKSHEL l t<u. /o-JO'Js 75-250’250-500’500-1000' ryi^sTlNG HARDCOVER IN ZONT A. House ______________ Ltnjih Width 5rf6-D X X X B. Carafe C. Driveway (LomC, 'pAMi^rL X X Bockro^ D. Sidev.alks *-*=’*=*oA»t> (frct'^ f cuA t<<) X X 7g y<><zavc.t~oc^c to U W DBCK. E. Patio/.Dcck ilt ^toop S£ Sraia<. X X ............ .. M.W ,'iPATIO F. Landscape ^ z- b loc ,k.s x Underlain _______k>d<d bl o£.k^ x By Plas'.ic iu x “TLoorio ^Tet*€:^ G. Olher 1.1 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -r B l4oAc? /34-S S.F. €0 S.F.- S.F. S.F. S.F. m S.F. S.F. so Z£>7 S.F. S.F. / *i-v Z.2.2 S.F. S.F. Z 6 SA'S.F. /A _S.F. / o S.F. Zo S.F. J4J3 S.F. /4.0^0 S.F. . A B X 100 =2<.B/% \ A'.House LcTv^ih Width •X X s «X A — B.Garaze'X B C.Driveway X cs X s D. • Sidewalk X ACr^o\/C STa^A(B X CJl> VFVt)s E.Patio/Deck X Jt (A\ Ci/f fiJT t 0 B •X is F.Lar.dicaoe X a*ter</= Underlain X Aoua-A frjjuC:'s Bv Plastic X Sl/C OD/i vf/ r S G.Other X S3 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ■f CZ S.F. + ^5 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. -7 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. - 2o -/4l S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE •r B X 100 C/z/A^Cf S - 22. ?<7/ S.F. S.F. ■ % /■4.0 90 A B 24. if y RTiHItliTi /<H. / ' >•"- ii ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17, 1998 P (#7) 2399 MURIEL SENN, 4448 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES, 8:18 p.m. - 8:2 The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mrs. Senn was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is requesting hardcover and street yard setback variances to construct an addition to an existing residence to include a 16' x 22' garage and utility room. The Applicant has been asked to provide a current survey with updated, accurate hardcover Information. Van Zomeren requested the Planning Commission provide direction on what amount of hardcover will be allr ,ved, how close the encroachment to the front setback can be. and whether an addition to the house will be allowed. Senn stated she purchased the property 25 years ago, noting tl.e stipulations regarding hardcover and setbacks were not present on the property when it was originally purchased. Senn commented the lot has a unique configuration as well as problems with continuing erosion. Senn requested she be allowed to construct a new garage on the property. Schroeder suggested the Applicant submit an application based on the ordinances, noting the property is a difficult piece of land to work with. Senn remarked she has contacted a surveyor but has had poor response. Lindquist Inquired how much acreage this lot consists of. Settn stated the lot is one acre. Van Zomeren stated a rough estimate for the hardcover is 2,200 square feet. Van Zomeren requested the Planning Commission give guidance on what a reasonable setback from the county right-of-way would be. Berg co.mmented the Applicant will need to submit a proposal before the Planning Commission can ac* on her application. Ltr dquist stated the Applicant will need to obtain an updated survey and plan for what is acceptable to the City of Orono. __________ Schroeder suggested the Applicant start with 1,500 square feet and attempt to minimize the setbacks. There were no public comments. Smith moved. Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2399, Muriel Senn, 4448 North Shore Drive, to allow the Applicant time to submit a proposal. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#8) #2401, THOMAS AND MARGARET RADKE, 3424 EAST LAKE STREET - VARIANCES, 8:25 p.m. - 8:26 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was not present. Lindquist stated the Applicant was unable to stay until this matter was heard tonight and requested that the application be tabled. Page 10 Q CITYof ORONO Post Office Box 66 •Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 • Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka July 12, 1984 Mrs. Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 Re: Paving Driveway Dear Mrs. Senn: I have reviewed your proposal to pave your existing gravel driveway and turn-around apron. After discussion with the City Engineer, we agree that in your specific situation, paving with asphalt or concrete over the existing gravel surface may actually have a beneficial effect on the quality of runoff entering the lake, since the silt from the gravel will be eliminated from the direct runoff. Even though bituminous or concrete paving is less permeable than gravel, it appears that with your unique topographic problems, paving appears to be a good idea. I also discussed with the City Engineer the idea of creating a "basin" around the perimeter of the turnaround area to catch the runoff and slow it down. He felt this would need to be quite extensive to have any major effect, and he suggested instead that you ensure that the paving be sloped to allow runoff to flow equally to all edges of the paving, and eliminate a swale which would channel the runoff to a single point and possibly cause some erosion. Based on the above, we have no objections to your proposal, with condition that the paving cover only areas already gravelled, i.e. 12' wide garage driveway apron leading to the turnaround, and turnaround itself which is approximately 30' wide and 40' deep, bounded by the existing hedge, and that the paving be sloped in directions as described above. the the the and all No permit is required for this work. Thank you for your concern with this project and your patience in awaiting this response. Sincerely, Michael P. Ga^ron Assistant Zoning Administrator administration a finance - 473-7358BUILDING A ZONING - 473-7357 • ASSESSING . ,pc: Thomas J. Jacobs, Building Official PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 snraAV^^^vavHvi 30» ^ NlijOa 06e96 .02^1 86/Ci/6 A3Ayns y3A00ayVH NN3S 131'dni^ ------------/•'T'3?' w.rKMi « 11 VIS XI JO S«vl XI HW) .^vSrsraivxoxs VoiJHiaSJi-L QJjQJtQ MM¥MQ SXbvni^i A ^ a9 lllvOI sjJWWWc^: ■5o«8'5"a"gSo . *• UJ h- Z #> Z c O # ^ LlJ o 1 — ^ w VI a >-■ ° UJ^ '^■g — f- 9 z ^ E Z) H- LlI^ io ^ z Qi o y S? E| "Pi §ii?i«iM|ui w & a ' UJ o 5 " 'Qif|rs IH i t|iPi«= ips? 11III 5 5 I i ;i if I B If III »v<s »I * nil ■y / / / / I Application Date: Completion Date: 60 Day Deadline: Approved by Council: 8/14/98 9/25/98 11/24/98 11/23/98 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 12/8/98 I4 1998 ITEM NO. Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning / / Item Description: #2411 Paul and Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Variances-Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Application: LR-IC 24,750 One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) square feet (.56 acres) At the regular City Council meeting on November 23, 1998 application #2411 was approved granting variances to Paul and Leann Hanssen to permit repairs to a boathouse by a vote of 4 to 1. Staff has prepared an approval resolution to be acted on by Council. This application required the following variances: 1. Hardcover in the 0-75’ lakeshore setback. The existing hardcover is 310 s.f. (4.5%). The applicants are requesting to replace the 160 s.f. boathouse. 2. To allow a boathouse to exist within 75' of the lakeshore. 3. A variance from the side yard adjacent to street setbacks to allow the structure to be located 10’ from a platted public right-of-way, where 15’ is required. COLT^CIL ACTION REQUESTED To approve or amend the enclosed resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 (B); SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2; SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (1) FILE NO. #2411 WHEREAS, Paul Hiinssen and Leann Hanssen (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 3195 Casco Circle within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 33 and the Easterly Half of Lot 34 also that part of vacated Lakeshore Avenue and of that tract of land lying between said vacated avenue and the shore of Lake Minnetonka which lies between the southerly extension of the westerly line of the Lot 33, Spring Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held public hearings on October 19, 1998 and November 16, 1998, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) to permit an accessory structure to be located 15' from the lakeshore where 75' is required; Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) to allow 310 s.f. (4.5%) hardcover where none is allowed; and Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit an accessory structure to be located 10' from the side lot line where 15' is required for side yards adjacent to a street. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Page 1 of 6 1. 2. 3. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2411. The property is located in the LR-IC Zoning District, where 1/2 acre or 21,780 s.f. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of .56 acre or 24,750 s.f. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 16, 1998 and recommended denial on a vote of 7 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. B. C. D. E. A May, 1998 storm damaged an accessory building located 15' from the lakcshorc. High winds from the storm heavily damaged the deck located above the structure. The floor of the deck also served as the roof for the structure. An undeveloped platted street is adjacent to the subject property requiring a 15’ side yard adjacent to a street setback for structures. The existing structure is located 10' from the property line adjacent to the undeveloped street. The City Building Official has determined the boathouse will require structural repairs to support a new deck. In 1997 the Planning Commission recommended denial of variances to permit the existing house to be removed and allow a new residence to exceed 25% hardcover in the 75-250' setback. It was recommended at that time the boathouse be removed to reduce overall hardcover on the lot. The applicants withdrew the application before the City Council could take action. Letters in support of the application have been submitted to the City from the property owners of 3225, 3185 and 3205 Casco Circle. Page 2 of 6 5. 6. The location of the boathouse makes it non-conforming due to the s‘'tbacks and hardcover within 75' of Lake Minnetonka. The structure is not a non- conforming use. A hardship has been placed on the property due to the existing location of the structure 15' from Lake Minnetonka and 10' from the east property line. The boathouse was built prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance and before a building permit would have been required, resulting in the boathouse being a legally non-conforming structure that could remain on the property during its useful life. The storm damage occurred prior to the structure's useful life being exhausted. 7. 8. 9. The deck located above the boathouse served as part of the structure's roof. Heavy winds damaged the deck and roof, requiring both to be fully replaced. Full replacement would require structural repairs to the boathouse to conform with the State Building Code, to include a new foundation and replacement of portions of the existing walls. The repairs are necessary to protect against an unsafe situation by placing a new roof and deck above a foundation not conforming to the State Building Code. 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 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 has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 3 of 6 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) to permit an accessor)' structure to be located '15' from the lakeshore where 75 ’ is the required setback; Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section . 0.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) to allow 310 s.f. (4.5%) hardcover where none is allowed; and Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit an accessory structure to be located 10' from the side lot line where 15' is required for side yards adjacent to a street. Approval was subject to the following conditions: 1.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but arc 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 (December 14, 1999). 2.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. 3.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the temis 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. Page 4 of 6 i Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of December, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owmer (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of December, 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 5 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 _before me a Notary Public within and knownfor said county, personally appeared_____________________________________ to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this__day of_____,, 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared_________________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 6 of 6 C. W V.^ • • « M • ■ ^4 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DEC 14 1998 C^^YC•;'C•l1C^.0 Date: December 9, 1998 Item No. Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaflron Title: Senior Planning Coordinator Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2416/17 TOLD Development Co., 2380 Shadywood Road - Request for Amendment to B-5 District Allowed Uses / Walgreen's Development Proposal - WITHDRAWAL Application Withdrawal Council tabled this item on November 23 pending the outcome of Mr. Cunningham’s December 7 meeting with Walgreen's management to gain their acceptance of this site. Council directed the City Administrator to send a letter to Walgreen's indicating the City's support of the proposed rezoning and indicating that a somewhat smaller building should be developed for this particular site (see Exhibit A). On Tuesday, December 8 staff met with Mr. Cunningham who advised us that Walgreen's had turned down the site for reasons unrelated to the City's site planning or zoning concerns: 1) Inadequate projected sales volume at this location. 2) The site does not fit their criteria for being on the comer of two major roads, since it is slightly north of the intersection. As a result, TOLD Development will be withdrawing the zoning amendment and commercial site plan applications, and Cunningham will be providing a letter to that effect. Current Site Conditions Staff has noted that this site is becoming an eyesore and an attractive nuisance. Aside from ongoing concerns about security of the existing church i-uilding, the site is apparently being used for some type of commercial storage (trucks, satellite dish, timbers, etc.). Also, the stormwater pond has never been properly vegetated, perhaps in anticipation of its (ever-pending) redevelopment. Staff will be working with the owner of the site, Adam Smith Co. in Alexandria, to resolve these issues. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Mr. Cunningham is intending to be present at the meeting to advise Council of the Walgreen's response and answer any questions you may have. No Council action is required. GlTYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 0066 Mr. William Michael Frame Walgreen Co. 200 Wilmott Road, MS #69 Deerfield, IL 60015-4681 Dear Mr. Frame: The Orono City Council is in the process of reviewing a proposal related to the development of a Walgreen's store in the Navarre area of Orono. The development proposal requires an amendment to the City's B-5 zoning district to add the drugstore use. The Orono City Council reviewed the proposal at its November 23, 1998 meeting. The City believes a Walgreen's store would be a fine addition to the Navarre area and the City of Orono. However, the City is concerned that the size of the proposed store is too large for the B-5 zone, which is specifically intended for neighborhood- scale retail, and too large for any of the sites currently zoned B-5 in the City. The City is interested in working with Walgreen's and TOLD Development to develop a solution that works for both Walgreen's and the City. The City believes a key part of the solution is a reduction in the size of the store so that it better fits the site. A 10,000 square foot store would be a much better fit for the site than the proposed 13,900 square foot building. It would be very helpful if Walgreen's would authorize TOLD Development to revise the proposal to reflect a smaller store. The City Council will again be considering the proposal at its December 14 meeting. The Council's consideration of the proposal would be significantly facilitated if the size of the store was reduced. If you have any questions, please call me. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator RJM/lsv cc: Robert H. Cunningham, TOLD Development Company, 6900 Wedgwood Road, #100, Maple Grove, MN 55311 Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 4734)510 ^TOLD DEVELOPAAENT COMPANY D/:C I A December 10,1998 « i • « Mr. Mike Gaffron City of Orono 2750 Kelly Parkway Orono, MN 55356 OtC ^ '1 • I V Re: Application #2416 and #2417 Dear Mike: As you know, Walgreen Company did not approve the above referenced site at their recent Real Estate Committee meeting. Therefore, 1 hereby withdraw Application #2416, TOLD Development Company, 2380 Shadywood Road-Request for Commercial Site Plan Approval- Variances. We will not be proceeding with the site plan that was previously submitted for your consideration. I also hereby withdraw Application #2417, TOLD Development Company, 2380 Shadywood Road-Request for Amendment to B5 District Allowed Uses. It was a pleasure working with you and Liz Van Zomeren, and I do appreciate your efforts and the time and consideration of the Planning Commission and the City Council. I do regret that we were not able to bring this proposed project to completion, ^rjly yours, l. cunnmgi Vice President - Dev^opment RHC:cst MINNEAPOLIS • MILWAUKEE WEDGWOOD COMMERCE CENTRE • 6900 Wedflwood Road. Suite 100. Maple Grove. MN 55311 • (612) 420-9000 Fa* (612) 420 7574 A *. ». >w DEC 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION cm' cr DATE: December 10,1998 ITEM NO.: y ^ Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Senior Planning Coordinator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2425 Sid & Barbara Rebers / Jean Mork Bredeson (Service 800, Inc.) Request for Review of Subdivision Approval Conditions Application: Conversion of Outlot E, Sugar Woods to buildable lot status. List of Exhibits A - Resolution No. 4182 - Preliminary Plat Resolution B - City Engineer's Cost Estimate - Future Service Road Construction C - Letter and subdivision/building permit punchlist 12-7-98 Final Plat Responsibilit>' Jean Mork Bredeson's purchase agreement with Rebers resulted in the transfer of final platting responsibilities to the purchaser. This is not a common practice, and has caused a bit of confusion amongst the players as to who is responsible for what final approval items. Both BRW (Rebers* surveyor) and Mark Gronberg (Mork Bredeson's surveyor) thought the other was doing the final plat drawings, and that work is just now getting underway. As a result, final plat approval will be scheduled for Council's January 11 meeting. Final Plat Conditions Preliminary Plat Approval Resolution No. 4182 was adopted October 26, 1998 and contains a number of conditions which must be met in order to grant final plat approval. There are two specific conditions for which additional discussion is warranted at this time: 1) the park dedication fee amount, and 2) the financial security requirement for the future service road. 1) Park Dedication Fee The park dedication fee has yet to be established for this property pending Council action on the administrative procedures for determining the number of employees attributable to a given site. This is addressed in a separate agenda item for the December 14 meeting. Applicant has indicated an anticipated initial staffing of 15 employees in the Service 800 building, occurring in about 2/3 of the usable space. The parking requirements for the site suggest an ultimate employee capacity in the 30-35 range. The site is appro.ximately one acre in area. Some or all of these factors may ultimately come into play in determining-the park fee amount. #2425 Rebers/Service 800, Inc December 10,1998 Page 2 Under the prior park fee ordinance, this site would be charged 8% of the fair market value (established by City Assessor in 1997 at $3.05/s.f. or about $125,270), i.e. a park fee of $10,021. Please review the memo and exhibits regarding commercial/industrial park fees elsewhere in your packet. 2) Security for Future Service Road Construction A condition of the preliminary and final plat approval resolutions is that the developer provide to the City an escrow or letter of credit to cover the anticipated costs of future service road development adjacent to the rear of the property. This condition was adopted as a mechanism to ensure that this property will pay its fair share of a future service road, in lieu of requiring actual construction of such road at this time. In exchange, the property owner would retain the right to contest the necessity and feasibility of the road at such time it was proposed. Council may recall that the original Sugar Woods plat approval in 1989 required the construction of a service road when Outlots E or F were platted into buildable lots. In 1997 Council concluded that it would be premature to build just the 153' portion of the service road adjacent to Outlot E, and that although the ultimate access for the property should be via a frontage road, the form of future development of the adjoining and nearby properties should be taken into account at the time the frontage road is developed. It was also noted that the conditions of the road easement granted by Otten make it difficult to develop the entire service road at this time. The City Engineer has estimated the cost of a 28' paved road with concrete curb and gutter, storm sewer, etc. (but not trail construction) from Brown Road to Willow Drive, and prorated that cost for the 153' length adjacent to Outlot E. The estimated amount attributable to this site is $51,162. If the Council wishes to treat this requirement in the same manner as a standard developers agreement, we would expect a security amount of 150% or $76,743. Staff is advised that the purchaser, Ms. Bredeson, wishes to discuss this requirement with Council, possibly to explore alternatives to encumbering $50-75,000 for an indeterminate period of time for a road project that might only be constructed many years in the future, if ever. B-4 Rezoning Potential The possibility of rezoning this site to B-4 was discussed on November 23. Ms. Bredeson has indicated she would not be opposed to such a rezoning. The benefits to the City include a better zoning 'fit' for the office use, and elimination of some of the more intense B-1 uses such as Class II restaurants and gas stations, as well as general elimination of retail uses. There are a few B-4 uses that would not have been possible in B-1, such as nursing homes, schools and libraries. If Council wishes staff to proceed with such a rezoning, this can occur over the winter. #2425 Rebers/Service 800, Inc. December 10,1998 Page 3 Staff Recommendation 1) 2) Park Fee: (See related agenda item) Security for Future Road Construction: Discuss this issue with the applicants and consider whether a) it is appropriate to require security for a project that has been neither designed nor scheduled, and b) whether some other format to provide such .security might be appropriate. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Reach a conclusion regarding the administration of the conunercial/industrial park fee ordinance, and advise applicant of the conclusion. Discuss the issues surrounding the future road. If Council wishes to look at alternatives, consider the following option: - The current property owner would waive their right to appeal the assessment up to the $51,162 dollar amount, with an annual inflation factor. Any amount above this would be appealable if the future assessment exceeds this amount. Tie this waiver to the property, not just this owner, by: 1) Establishing an agreement that any future buyer must formally agree to the same waiver condition; or 2) At the time the property is sold, seller provide to the City an escrow or letter of credit for 150% of the $51,162 (inflated) amount. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.4 I R T? A RESOLUTION G;l \NTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A CLASS II SUBDIVISION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2190 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - FILE NO. 2425 WHEREAS, Sidney and Barbara Rebers (hereinafter the '*Applic^ts") on Feb^iary 19, 1997, filed a formal subdivision application with the City of Orono (hereinafter City ) for approval of a replat of property legally described as; Outlot E, Sugar Woods, except that part shown as Parcel 342A on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right-of-Way Plat No. 27-70, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the Property"); and WHEREAS, this replat is proposed for the purpose of converting said Outlot E to bulldable lot status in order that the Property may be developed, as required by the City as a condition of the plat of Sugar Woods; and WHEREAS, after duly published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 17, 1997, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to spea thereon; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting held on April i4, 1997, the Orono City Council considered the subdi\ision application of the Applicant and made the following findings of fact; 1.The property is located within the B-1 Retail Sales Business Zoning District requiring a minimum lot area of 20,000 s.f. and a minimum lot wdth of 100’. The property contains a total area of 41,612 s.f. and has a defined width of approximately 146'. J.The proposed plat consists of one commercial lot meeting the minimum lot standard requirements of the B-1 Zoning District. Page 1 of 10 IL^ CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF TKE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 1 R 5. 6. 7. 8. The property is served by municipal sewer and water. The property abuts U.S. Highway 12 as well as Outlot D, Sugar Woods, a segment of a proposed future frontage road corridor platted within Sugar Woods. In 1987 the City adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 which planned for the future development of a frontage road between Brown Road and Willow- Drive, paralleling Highway 12. In 1987 it was anticipated that traffic on Highway 12 would continue to increase as a result of the upcoming completion of Interstate Highway 394. The purpose of this plarmed frontage road was to reduce and/or eliminate access directly to and from Highway 12, generally for safety and traffic flow- reasons. Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 specifically addressed road improvements needed prior to development of the commercial corridor as follows: "Prior to the development of the commercial portion of this property, the existing intersection at Brown Road and Highway 12 shall be improved so that safety concerns associated with the current use and future increased use of this intersection are addressed. Configuration of the frontage road and North Brown Road would be determined at the time of development." Orono ’s 1994-95 reconstruction of Brown Road alleviated alignment concerns with the 12/Browu intersection, and Mn/DOTs 1995-96 safety improvements on Highway 12 similarly alleviated a number of safety concerns. The plat of Sugar Woods, completed in July 1989, included two commercially zoned parcels (Outlots E and F) abutting Highway 12. These two parcels were platted as outlots, rather than as buildable lots, because the Applicant at that time wished to delay decisions regarding future access to the commercial property until such time that it was developed. The Sugar Woods plat conformed to the comprehensive plan by creating Outlot D. a short segment of the proposed future east/west frontage road. Outlot D, however, only provides a corridor from the west boundaiy of Sugar Woods to Page 2 ofIC CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^^82 9. 10. 11. the northwest comer of Outlot F. The City's intent in approving the plat of Sugar Woods was that at some future time when Outlot F is developed, the remaining frontage road segment eastward to Brown Road would be defined and platted. On December 12, 1988, the Orono City Council adopted Resolution No. 2554 granting preliminary plat approval, conditional use rermit and variances for the plat of SUGAR WOODS. Page 8, paragraph 4.£ stated that the subdivider’s agreement should; "Clarify that Outlot D (portion of futui« east/west road) is to be fully developed at the time of future development of the commercial corridor. The access road will be fully installed at the time of either the applicant's development of the commercial corridor or as a result of any other condition that may require the installation of the road prior to applicant's development of the commercial corridor." The foregoing language was not put in the subdivider’s agreement, but it was put in the resolution granting final plat approval. On July 10, 1989, the City Council adopted Resolution No.2653 approving the final plat of SUGAR WOODS. Page 4, paragraph 4 stated: "4. Outlot D, a portion of future east/west road located within the commercial zoned portion of the property, shall be installed at the time of the development of Outlots E or F or the development of the Wear property (unless the City has obtained an alternate legal access through Outlot E to the Wear property all subject to the approval of the City)." Pursuant to the terms of the preliminarj* plat resolution and final plat resolution, on September 8, 1989, Rebers Construction Co. and Sidney and Barbara Rebers granted public roadway easements over Outlot D to the City of Orono. Said easements were filed with the Hennepin County registrar of Titles as Document Nos. 2038791 and 2038792. Page 3 of 10 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 18 2 12. 13. Thereafter, the Orono Building & Zoning Administrator and City Attorney objected to certain terms of said easements; said easements were renegotiated between the City and the Applicants; and a replacement public road easement over Outlot D was granted to and accepted by the City subject to the following: "1. No road shall be installed by Grantee until a building permit has been issued for construction of a commercial building on Outlot E, SUGAR WOODS (in which case the road may extend no further east than the Northerly extension of the East boundary of Outlot E) or on Outlot F, SUGAR WOODS (in which case the road may extend the full length of Outlot D). "2. The south edge of any road built by grantee shall be no further North than the South boundary of Outlot D, SUGAR WOODS. "3. If and when a frontage road or service road is built connecting Outlots E and F, SUGAR WOODS, across land South of Outlot D, SUGAR WOODS, or an easement for such a road is dedicated, granted or condemned, this easement shall automatically expire." (Quit Claim Deed dated May 30, 1990, recorded June 25, 1990 as Registrar of Titles Document No. 2105974.) It appears that Interstate Highway 394 will not be extended along the current corridor of U.S. Highway 12; it appears that a bypass route will be extended from the current freeway terminus near the easterly boundaiy of Orono to the intersection of Highway 12 and Count>' Road 6. When this bypass is operational, traffic on Highway 12 adjacent to the Property will decline. However, the resultant traffic volumes on Highway 12 adjacent to the property at that time are anticipated by the City to be at a level that would generally indicate the need for a limited access highway. Pase 4 of 10 1 ♦ I CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 1 _______ 14. The Council finds that although the ultimate access for the Property should be via a frontage road, the form of future development of the adjoining and nearby properties should be taken into account at the time the frontage road is developed. Such future development has not been determined, but it will influence if, how, where and when the frontage road is constructed. Therefore, the Council chooses not to install the Highway 12 frontage road through Outlot D, SUG.^R WOODS, at this time, whether or not Outlot E is developed with a commercial building, without waiving its right to require or order such installation in the future. 15. The Council finds that suitable interim access to Outlot E from Highway 12 may be possible using the Mn/DOT right-of way directly west of Outlot E, which would allow an access to be constructed opposite Brimhall Avenue, Such an access location affords an opportunity for shared access to serve the adjacent property in the plat of East Willow' Woods. 16. Outlot D, Sugar Woods, is intended to ser\e as a trail corridor as w'ell as a frontage road corridor, and therefore requires a continuous width of 60' in order to accommodate both uses. Outlot D currently is 60 ’ in width at the west end but tapers to a width of 40' at its east end. Additional right-of-way is needed by the City via creation of an additional Outlot and granting of drainage, utility, road and trail easements in order that the 60' corridor be provided. 17. The City Engineer has additionally recommended that a 5' drainage and utility easement be granted along the south side of the added right-of-way outlot, within proposed Lot 1. 18. The easement granting the City rights to develop a frontage road in Outlot D does not grant an easement for drainage or utilities purposes, which is necessary' in order for the City to use it for the intended purpose. 19. Proposed Lot 1 is subject to the Park Dedication requirements of Municipal Code Section 11.62. Paae 5 of 10 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ ^ S 2 20.Any development proposed within proposed Lot 1 will be subject to a commercial siM plan review process before the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS, on October 13, 1997 the Orono Citv’ Council adopted Resolution No. 3972 granting preliminary plat approval for the proposed conversion of the Property into Lot 1, Block 1, SUGAR WOODS 2ND ADDITION, subject to a number of conditions; and WHEREAS, the approval granted in Resolution No. 3972 e,xpired on October 13, 1998 prior to the applicant completing the requirements for final plat approval; and WHEREAS, the applicant applied for renewal of the Preliminar>' Plat Approval on September 22, 1998, and a public hearing was subsequently held by the Planning Commission on October 19, 1998 at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; whereupon the Planning Commission recommended that the preliminary plat approval be renewed per the conditions of Resolution No. 3972; and WHEREAS, the applicant ’s surveyor has submitted a revised Preliminary Plat drawing which depicts the proposed Outlot A in addition to the proposed Lot I, B’r.ck 1, SUGAR WOODS 2ND ADDITION as required in the conditions of Resolution No. 3972. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the request for renewal of the preliminary plat application of Sidney and Barbara Rebers per plat drawings by Wayne D. Cordes, a licensed surveyor employed by BRW, Inc. dated October 19, 1998, for the conversion of the Property into Lot 1, Block 1, and Outlot A, SUGAR WOODS 2ND ADDITION, said survey attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions: 1.Lot 1 shall be allowed direct access to U.S. Highway 12 only if the applicants are successful in relocating their existing access to Highway 12, by obtaining an access permit from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Page 6 of 10 .i 1 J. 4. 6. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 1 o permitting access over the triangular parcel of land o%\Tied by MnDOT across from the intersection of Brimhall Avenue and Highway 12. Any direct access to Highway 12 which is not directly opposite Brimhall Avenue will not be allowed. The right-in/right-out access of Lot 1 to Highway 12 at Brimhall Avenue is approved on a permanent basis. The left-in/left-out access of Lot 1 to Highway 12 at Brimhall Avenue is approved on an interim basis. At such time as a frontage road is installed to provide alternative access to Lot I, the City shall have the right to terminate the right-in/right-out access at Brimhall Avenue upon payment of just compensation and the right to terminate the left-in/left-out access at Brimhall Avenue without payment of any compensation; provided that Lot I’s access to Highway 12 will not be terminated unless the Highway 12 accesses of the other parcels served by the frontage road are similarly terminated. The City reserves the right to control access to Lot I from the Wear property directly east of Lot 1 in the commercial site plan review process. Applicant shall, if found necessar>' by the City, place barriers to prohibit access from the Wear property. Lot 1 shall bear the total reasonable costs of constructing the portion of the frontage road directly adjacent to Lot 1. If the frontage road is built, the owner of Lot I reserves the right to contest the necessity and feasibility' of the frontage road improvement. The Council will require at the time of final platting secunty in the form of a cash escrow, letter of credit or other form of secunty acceptable to the City. Applicant shall grant the City a drainage, utility and trail easement o^ er Outlot D. A triangular segment of right-of-way shall be platted as Outlot A. SUGAR WOODS 2ND ADDITION, per Exhibit A attached, and applicant shall grant to the City road, trail, drainage and utilities easements over said Outlot A. Page 7 of 10 CITYofORONO 8119. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __‘41 R 9 7.Applicants shall provide confirmation that the existing stormwater pond is viable to ser\e Lot 1, or shall provide a new comprehensive stormwater plan for Lot 1 and Outlot F, SUGAR WOODS, subject to approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the City Engineer. 8.Applicants shall in conjunction with City staff determine the exact location of the existing water main along the west boundary of the site and applicants shall grant to the City an easement for utility purposes within the property extending 10 ’ from the centerline of the existing pipe. 9.Applicants are hereby advised that preliminary subdivision approval will expire within one year of the date of Council approval, on October 26, 1999. Should Applicants fail to complete the filing of the final plat application within the one year deadline, it shall be necessary for applicant to file a new preliminary subdivisiori application with the City. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows; 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City’s records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200 ’. Drawing to include; A. Lot lines platted per preliminary plat survey by Wayne D. Cordes dated October 19, 1998. B.Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10 ’ wide along the exterior boundaries of the Property with additional water main easement as noted in Condition No. 8 above. C. Designation of Outlot A per Exhibit A attached, to ser\*e as an expansion of the frontage road corridor. Fase 8 of 10 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.4 1 ^9. 3. 4. Legal documents required: A. B. Title opinion addressed to the City, All owners, m:>rtgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. C. The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the Property. Signed and executed road, trail, utility and drainage easement over Outlot A, SUGAR WOODS 2ND ADDITION. Si ed and executed trail, drainage and utility easement over Outlot D, SUGAR WOODS. 5. Fees to be paid: Total due: S 200.00* A. Legal review and filing fees for subdivision and associated documents $200.00 B.♦Park dedication fee, fee shall be based on 8% of the fair market value of land within Lot 1, per the provisions of City of Orono Ordinance No. 173, Second Series adopted April 13, 1998 and Resolution No. 4064 adopted April 13. 1998. The applicant shall be advised as soon as the amount of the park dedication fee has been detemiined. Page 9 of 10 1 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 1 s 2 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at its regular meeting held this 26th day of October, 1998. ATTEST: J.(/. Linda S. Vee, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on thisj^6'^^day of . 199X., by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. c/flOLE A hasem ;>j i NOTARY FUEL iC-MIM;ESOTA K HENNEPIN COUNTY My Ccmmlssicn Expires Jsn. 31. ?0C9 f i Notary Public Page 10 of 10 • • UONARa^TREET Jt I^E^tNARD . ,, ^TH'JI 4.24'97 14:44/^; 14:y/K0.,i^604SS9J^^^^ ' exhibit A ------ . ■■ I____________ •"• ^ A i ?> 2 •• >-V* • • • •. - •* • • • <N ^ ^ ^ •j ' ^ J3 / / ' ONixavd snomni/8.^ **•%, *v‘S.N'W* s V '•• '.NXV\X\S% •p ^ / T"% ■■■ %% ft: _&gi I K- « ‘-' 3^’s*- • ^ to to A'; ggll >^X\\xx^XXNW X' "‘'yjay oNmvd snoNir M „oo,sk2:o £ -£9 'S6S------ |sOOO/H ^'ons V8d 1N3K3SV3 MllUH CNV 30VMVi/a- '•• . dBNiorVY . V3ny 03M01d'* ' 'ZtOl - — • -.......-%s..........^ X-;. ^ S ^ ........ '<:• Xv' • O ^ V vti•'“• Cfc- *J5-_ ^ Vl- ^ .*>.• • '*>. Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Bonestroo, Rosene. AnOe.hk and Associates, tnc. is an Affirmative Action, Squai Opportunity Employer Principals: Otto G Bonestroo. PE • Joseph C A.nderJiK. PE • Mjrvm L. Sorvala PE • Richard E. Turner. PE • Glenn R. Cook. PE • Robert G Schumcht. P.E. • Jerry A Bourdon. P£. • Robert W. Rosene. PE and Susan M. Ebe'im. C PA.. Senior Consultants Associate Principa/s: Howard A Sanford. PE • Ke'th A Gordon. PE • Robert R. Pfefferle. PE • Richard W Foster. PE • David O Loskota. PE • Robert C. Russek. A.I.A. • Mark A. Hanson. PE. Michael T Rautmann. RE. • Ted K F»eld. PE. • Kenneth P Anderson. P.E. • Mark R. Rolfs. PE. • Sidney P Vtrmiamson. RE.. L S • Robert F. Kotsmitn • Agnes M Ring • Michael P Rau. PE. • Allan Rick Schmidt. PE. Engineers & Architects December 7.1998 Offices: St. Paul. Rochester. Wiilmar and St. Cloud. MN • Milwaukee. Wi Website' wwwbonestroo com OHO 0 A Mr. Michael P. Gaffro i, Senior Planning Coordinator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Sid Rebers, Outlot E File No. 139 2439 Dear Mike, Attached please find a cost estimate to construct 153 feet of the future service road located north of Outlot E. The costs are based on the following assumptions: The roadway will be constructed 28 feet face to face with concrete curb and gutter. The street section will consist of 12” aggregate base and 3 Vi" of bituminous surface. Existing soils are adequate and no imported granular material will be required. Storm sewer will run the entire length of the frontage. The unit prices are based on 1998 construction and assume the project would be constructed from Willow Drive to North Brown Road. The estimate does not include any costs for a trail or walkway that may be appropriate along the roadway. Please contact me at 604-4863 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612*636-4600 ■ Fax; 612-636*1311 CITY OF ORONO SERVICE 800 SERVICE ROAD CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE PLAT FILE NO. 2439 SERVICE ROAD COST ESTIMATE EST. ITEM UNIT UNIT EST. Mobilization LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000Common Excavation CY 300 6.00 1.800Geotextiie stabilization fabric SY 550 2.00 1.100Aggregate base. Cl. 5,100% crushed TN 400 10.00 4.000Type 31 bit. base course TN 60 32.00 1,920Type 41 bit. wear course TN 45 35.00 1,575B618 concrete curb and gutter LF 306 6.00 1,83615" RCP, Class 5 LF 510 32.00 16,320Catch basin MH w/casting EA 2 1,300.00 2,600Mechanical trench compaction LF 510 1.00 510Improved pipe fndn. in 6" increments LF 510 1.00 510Silt fence LF 100 3.00 300Sod with 4" topsoil SY 400 3.00 1.200 +5% Contingencies +20% Legal, engineering, admin. +5% Bonding and capitalized Interest Total Estimated Cost 234inttleorchard.xls 1,934 40,605 8,121 48,725 2,436 $51,162 s t i GITYofORONO Municipal Onices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 December?, 1998 Jean Mork Bredeson Service 800, Inc. 407 East Lake Street, Suite 200 Wayzata, MN 55391 Re: 2190 W. Wayzata Blvd. - File #2439 - NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Dear Ms. Mork E :edeson: On November 23,1998 the City Council voted 5-0 to adopt Resolution No. 4206 granting variances, a conditional use permit, and commercial site plan approval for your proposed building, subject to adding two minor approval conditions: 1) Existing sidewalk along Wayzata Boulevard to be widened 2' to a total width of 8'; and 2) Landscape plan to be subject to staff approval. Resolution No. 4206 has been revised and a copy attached. Please arrange to sign the 3 original resolution copies at the City Offices (iVlonday thru Friday, 8:00 to 4:30). All persons with an interest in the property must sign the resolution. Approval is limited to the extent sho\sTi on the approved plan and as noted in the approval resolution. Changes in approved plans are subject tofurther review by the City. Variance and conditional use permit approval expires one year after date of approval. A building permit must be applied forwithin one year of the approval date or that approval will expire. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the Council. In order to facilitate the completion of the platting process (file #2425) and issuance of building permits, the attached checklist is provided for your use. Please contact me at 473-7357 if you have any questions. Sincerely, 4^ Michael P. tiaffron Senior Planning Coordinator end. Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 SERVICE 800, INC. - PUNCHLIST 12-7-98 I.FIN AL PLAT APPROVAL □ ^ MnDOT Access Approval (Permit? Letter?) □ • Financial security (letter of credit? escrow? 150%?) for future service road construction. City Engineer is providing estimated cost; City Council to establish amount and form) □ • Drainage, Utility and Trail Easement over Outlot D, Sugarwoods (Rebers to grant) □ • Road, Drainage, Utility and Trail Easement over Outlot A, Sugarwoods 2nd addition (Rebers and Mork Bredeson?) □ ^ MCWD written approval of stCTnwater plan incl. use of pond on Outlot F o • 14' Utility Easement along west property boundary for existing water main □ Final Plat Drawings / Mylars □ ^ Title Opinion □ Certified copies of all existing easements □ • $200 legal review and filing fees. □ NOTES: Park Dedication Fee (to be established by Council 12-14-98) Staff will draft a final plat approval resolution for the December 14 meeting ^ Items marked with an asterisk are needed prior to the December 14 meeting • Items marked with a bullet point are needed prior to filing of subdivision (Building permits will NOT be issued prior to filing) r U.FINALIZE PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT □ Items A thru G to be provided to / approved by City Engineer: □ A. Sewer and water service connectioa‘> □ B. Grading & drainage plans and calcs - documentation of pond suitability, erosion controls, etc. □ C. MCWD plan approval □ D. Retaining wall design if proposed □ E. MnDOT access written approval □ F. Expand west side utility easement to 14' □ G. Sewer/water units procurement □ □ □ □ □ Submit plans to MCES and obtain SAC determination Landscape plan; show future proposal if service road is built Final lighting and signage plans Building permit application and required :>ubmittals (plans, energy calcs, survey, etc.) Developers Agreement re: site improvements, inch letter of credit (City Engineer will define amounts upon submittal of final plans) Evidence of property ownership. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Dec M 1998 CITY C;~ Date; December 10,1998 Item No, // Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron J/ Title: Senior Planning Coorainator Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Commercial/Industrial Park Fee - Administrative Procedure List of Exhibits A - Draft Resolution for Adoption B - Council Minutes 11-9-98 C - Memo & Exhibits of November 4, 1998 Council Action of November 9 After discussion of this issue at the November 9 meeting, Council tabled the matter and directed staff to review and compare methods for determining the park ^ee by using 25-30 employees per acre or using a straight percentage method. Commercial/Industrial Use Average = 25 Employees Per Acre On average, a one-acre commercial parcel used for office purposes with 25% cov.;rage by building, 25% green space and 50% parking areas, likely will accommodate no more than about 40-45 parking spaces without variances. In terms of employees, for an office or industrial use probably 80% of these stalls (about 35) will be used by employees, the remainder for visitors. For a retail use, probably 25% (10) will be for employees and the remainder for visitors. This suggests that for a commercial or industrial property, on average, the number of employees that can reasonably be accomodated will likely be in the range of 20-25 employees per acre. Average Commercial/Industrial Land Value Developed commercial land in Orono is valued for tax purposes in a wide range, from as little as less than $ 1 per square foot to as much as $4 per square foot. Existing industrial land valuations are significantly lower than commercial valuations. The actual fair market value of undeveloped lands is probably much higher than the value they are being taxed on. For Sugar Woods Outlot E, the assessor in 1997 assigned a value of $3.05 per s.f. as the fair market value prior to development. Using S3 per s.f. as an average value of developable commercial land, this translates to $130,000 per acre, of which 8% is $10,400. Commercial/Industrial Park Fee December 10,1998 Page 2 Equating 25 Employees Per Acre to 8% Standard Using 25 employees per acre as a standard, this is equal to 2.5 dwelling unit equivalents based on 10 emJ)loyees equalling one dwelling unit. Based on the minimum/maximum park fee of $2900/$4900 per dwelling »jnit, a one acre parcel should paj somewhere in the range of (2.5x$2900=S7250) up to (2.5x$4900=S12,250) for a park fee. As a percentage of the land value, $7250=5.6% of the $130,000 value, and $12,250=9.4% of $130,000. The 8% park fee falls comfortably within this range. Therefore, it can be argued that the 8% park fee, on average, is roughly equivalent to the park fee that would be generated by the average commercial/indusLrial employee load of 25 employees per acre, on the basis that 10 employees have the same impact on the park system as a typical dwelling unit or household (2.7 persons per household is Orono's current average). Staff Recommendation: Amend Resolution No. 4064 Ordinance No. 173,2nd Series, established that commercial/industrial subdivision park dedication requirements "will be tied to the residential dedication requirement by determining the number of employees that is equivalent to a residential dwelling unit in terms of impact on the City's park sy'^em." Resolution #4064 adopted April 13, 1998 establishes that ten (10) employees are equivalent to one dwelling unit, and further establishes for commercial/industrial property the minimum park dedication fee of $2,900 per 10 employees and a maximum fee of $4,900 per 10 employees. The current ordinance and resolution are worded such that the commercial/industrial park fee collected will be based on a minimum of $2900 per 'dwelling unit equivalent’ and a maximum of $4900 per 'dwelling unit equivalent'. It does nfil say that the park fee will be capped at 8% of the Fair Market Value. Staff proposes that the Resolution be amended by establishing that conimercial/industrial park fees will be established at 8% of the Fair Market Value of the property', but not to be less than $7250 per acre and not more than $12,250 per acre. COUN'. ’L ACTION REQUESTED Adopt u.c a ‘ revised Resolution Establishing Minimum and Maximum Park Dedication Amounts for \,,c.iimercial Industrial Zoned Land. A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM PARK DEDICATION AMOUNTS FOR COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ZONED LAND WHEREAS, the City's general park dedication requirement is 8% of the land being platted or subdivided; and WHEREAS, the City's park dedication ordinance calls for the dedication requirement to be roughly proportional to the projected impact of the proposed development on the City's park system; and WHEREAS, the City's park dedication ordinance provides for the establishment of minimum and maximum park dedication amounts per residential dwelling unit; and WHEREAS, the City finds the employees of commercial/industrial developments make use of the City's park system in ways similar to City residents, particularly since the City’s park system is focused on trails and natural areas; and WHEREAS, the City's park dedication ordinance ties the commercial/industrial park dedication requirement to the residential park dedication requirement by determining the nun-’jer of commercial/industrial employees that is equivalent to a residential dwelling unit in terms of impact on the City's park system; and WHEREAS, the City has established a minimum park dedication amount per residential dwelling unit as $2,900 per unit, and a maximum park dedication amount pei dwelling unit as $4,900 per unit; and WHEREAS, the City finds that ten employees are equivalent to one residential dwelling unit in terms of impact on the park system; and WHEREAS, the Citv finds that the average number of employees accommodated bv commercial/industrial zoned land is 25 employees per acre: and Page 1 of 2 WHEREAS, the City finds that one acre of commercial/industrial land has an impact on the park system equivalent to that of 2.5 residential dwelling units: and WHEREAS, the equivalent minimum and maximum park dedication amounts for commercial/industrial property would be 2.5 x $2900 = $7250 per acre and 2.5 x $4900 = $12.250 per acre respectively. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council does hereby establish the minimum park dedication amount for commercial/industrial zoned land as $2,900 per coch ten employees $7.250 per acre, and the maximum park dedication amount as $4 ,900 per each ten emploveca $12.250 per acre. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 14th day of December, 1998. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Page 2 of2 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 9,1998 (#12) EXTEND MORATORnJM ON DWELLING UNIT DENSITY CREDIT IN LR-lC-1 DISTRICT - ORDINANCE NO. 180, 2ND SERIES. GaflB-on explained the ordinance was adopted May 11, 1998 to establish a moratorium for 190 days on the granting of applications that use the 50% increase in dwelling unit density in the LR-lC-1 zone which is basicdly a few properties in the Navarre area. The moratorium expires November 16 and it is recommended that it be extended for an additional 180 days because the study has not been completed. Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Ordinance No. 180, 2nd Series extending the moratorium established in Ordinance #175, 2nd Series. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#10) COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PARK FEE - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE Gaffron explained in April 1998 Council adopted a new park dedication ordinance that established a maximum and minimum park fee which is used whenever the City decides to accept a fee rather than land in residential situations. Commercial property needs to be dealt with in a different manner to establish a connection between the impact that commercial property has on the park system. The City by Resolution No. 4067 established that 10 employees are equivalent to one dwelling unit. The problem in defining 10 employees is that at the time of subdivision it is not always known how that property might be developal or used. An office use would have a different population of employees than a retail use. The ordinance does not establish a method for determining how many employees to use for calculation purposes. Some of the ways suggested for making a determination is through the parking requirements, an acreage basis, highest use basis or a combination. Moorse noted that other cities use a basic percentage of property value in determining the p?jk dedication fee. Flint said using the 50 employee determination calculated too high and felt 30 employees an acre for this kind of usage would be more appropriate. He suggested collecting the fee at the time a building permit would be issued. Kelley stated it would be better to collect the park fee at the time of subdivision. Moorse suggested using a percentage showing a connection between the park usage and employees. After discussion, it was decided that staff reexamine the methods for determining commercial park fees by either using 25-30 employees an acre or a basic percentage of value. 8 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title: Senior Planning Coordinator C Date: November 4, 1998 Item No. Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Commercial/Industrial Park Fee - Administrative Procedure List of Exhibits A - Ordinance No. 173, Second Series B - Resolution No. 4064 Residential Park Fee Background '~rn f ' i-- -^ 2 /X trc f:P« In April 1998 Council adopted an amendment to the park dedication ordinance and a companion resolution which established maximum ($4900) and minimum ($2900) park dedication amounts per dwelling unit when applying the 8% land dedication rule. This made perfect sense for single family residential development. If "8% of the Fair Market Value" is less than $2900, the park fee is set at $2900. If "8% of the Fair Market Value" is more than $4900, the park fee is capped at $4900. If "8% of the Fair Market Value" falls between $2900 and $4900, the 8% value is used. These figures seemed to be reasonable, in that most single family lots created in Orono have a pre-development Fair Market Value exceeding the $36,250 value that yields a $2900 park fee at 8%. As a result, few if any lots would be paying a park fee of more than 8% of their value. Commercial Park Fee: 10 Employees = 1 Residential Dwelling Unit The amendment then went on to establish that commercial/industrial subdivision park dedication requirements "will be tied to the residential dedication requirement by determining the number of employees that is equivalent to a residential dwelling unit in terms of impact on the City's park system." Resolution #4064 adopted April 13, 1998 establishes that ten (10) employees are equivalent to one dwelling unit, and further establishes for commercial/industrial property the minimum park dedication fee of $2,900 per 10 employees and a maximum fee of $4,900 per 10 employees. The ordinance and resolution are worded such that the commercial/industrial park fee collected will be based on a minimum of $2900 per 'dwelling unit equivalent' and a maximum of $4900 per 'dwelling unit equivalent'. It does noi say that the park fee will be capped at 8% of the Fair Market Value. Commercial Park Fee - Administrative Procedures November 4, 1998 Page 2 A commercial parcel developed to accommodate a large number of employees could end up paying significantly more than 8% of its Fair Market Value. The same parcel developed for use by only a small number of employees could end up paying significantly less than 8%. Following are some examples of how this works: Example 1 If a $200,000 property will accommodate 50 employees, this is the impact equivalent of 5 dwelling units (5 DU's). Park Fee Based on 8% of Fair Market Value = 8% of $200,000 = $16,000 Minimum Park Fee Based on 5 DU Equivalents = 5 x $2,900 = $14,500 ( 7.25%) Maximum Park Fee Based on 5 DU Equivalents = 5 x $4,900 - $24,500 (12.25%) In this case the 8% fee falls between the minimum and maximum, and we would presumablj* collect $16,000. Example 2 If the same $200,000 property will accommodate 100 employees, this is the impact equivalent of 10 dwelling units. Park Fee Based on 8% of Fair Market Value = 8% of $200,000 = $16,000 Minimum Park Fee Based on 10 DU Equivalents = 10 x $2,900 = $29,000 (14.5%) Maximum Park Fee Based on 10 DU Equivalents = 10 x $4,900 = $49,000 (24.5%) We would have to raise the park fee from $16,000 to the $29,000 minimum, and the developer would pay a 14.5% park fee. Example 3 If the same $200,000 property will accommodate only 10 employees, this is the impact equivalent of 1 dwelling unit. Park Fee Based on 8% of Fair Market Value = 8% of $200,000 = $16,000 Minimum Park Fee Based on I DU Equivalent = 1 x $2,900 = $2,900 (1.45%) Maximum Park Fee Based on 1 DU Equivalent = 1 x $4,900 = $4,900 (2.45%) In this case, we wo*, id have to lower the park fee to the maximum allowable $4,900. Commercial Park Fee - Administrative Procedures November 4, 1998 Page 3 Determining Number of Employees The three examples indicate that the same parcel developed three different ways could generate three widely differing park fees. The problem is in determining how many employees to use for calculation purposes: ► There is no method for this established in the ordinance nor in the resolution. ► At the time of subdivision it may be impossible to determine what size or type of building is planned, much less how many employees it will accommodate. The number of employees could fluctuate over time, or potentially increase from a low number used to calculate the park fee to a high number a few years later. ► Different uses of the same size building, have different employee needs. An office building may have a high employee count and few visitors, while the same size retail store would have few employees but many visitors. The variety of allow'ed uses in each of our zoning districts could easily result in a variety of potential employee counts for a given building on a site. Alternatives to Consider A. B. Parking requirement basis. Once an actual building is proposed, its square footage and probable use are known. Since these two factors are nomially used to generate the minimum parking requirement for a building, this could be directly equated to number of employees. A reduction factor for visitors would be needed based on the type of use: Example 1: A 5,000 s.f. retail building would require about 28 parking stalls based on the zoning code. The employee parking needs might be 7 stalls, leaving 21 stalls for visitors. This would yield a 75% reduction factor for retail. Park fee would be based on 7 employees. Example 2: A 5,000 s.f office building would require about 20 stalls. The employee parking needs might be 15 stalls, leaving 5 stalls for visitors. This would yield a 25% reduction factor for office. Park fee would be based on 15 employees. A downside of this complex method is that it likely requires a delay in park fee collection until the building permit is applied for, which may be months or years after the subdivision is completed. Acreage basis. A less complex method would be to establish that commercial or industrial properties will generate a certain number of employees per acre. This could be done simply as an average for all commercial/industrial uses; or a separate number could be established for each type of use, but again we would have to either know the intended use at the time of subdivision, or delay collection until a permit is issued. Use of an average number would be less defensible from the "rough proportionality" standpoint. Commercial Park Fee - Administrative Procedures November 4, 1998 Page 4 C."Highest Use" basis. Rather than waiting to define the final use of a site, a "highest use" employee count could be established at the time of subdivision, based on the zoning standards for the site; i.e. determine the biggest building that could be built meeting all code standards, determine its probable employee count with no reductions, and base the park fee on this number. The rationale for this is that the site likely will reach this employee count at some future time, even if not proposed initially for a high-employee use. The downside here is that the determination of "highest use" will be a somewhat rigorous exercise for staff to complete as compared to other methods, and could be subject to dispute. A less rigorous combination of alternatives B and C would be to simply define a "highest use" number of employees per acre for commercial/industrial uses, which would then provide us an employee count to use foi determining Dwelling Unit Equivalents. The greatest employee counts per acre are likely to be generated by office uses. Example:A 25,000 s.f. 2-story office building would require approximately 125 parking stalls and could fit on a 2-acre site while leaving 30-35% green space and meeting setback and yard requirements. This site would have an ultimate capacity of perhaps 100-110 employees, or roughly 50 employees per acre. Staff Recommendation It might be appropriate to simply base the employee count on the "worst case" scenario for a site based on its highest potential use, knowing that its use could change at any future time without further subdivision nor opportunity to collect a greater park fee later. However, defining the "highest use" scenario for each site would be rigorous and could be subject to dispute. It would be much less rigorous to simply declare that commercial/industrial property should pay a park fee based on 50 employees per acre (i.e. 5 dwelling unit equivalents per acre), using the 8% rule and maximum/minimum guidelines as in the examples on page 2. Council could consider appeals where the property owner can show that the site could not reasonably accommodate 50 employees per aere. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Advise staff whether a standard employee count of 50 employees per acre should be established for administration of the comrnercial/industrial park fee ordinance. If so, direct staff to prepare a resolution for adoption. ORDINANCE NO. 17^. SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 11.62 REGARDING DEDICATION OF LANDS FOR PUBLIC USE FOR PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS IN CONJUNCTION WITH CLASS II AND III SUBDIVISIONS The City Council of Orono ordains as follows: Section 1. Municipal Code Section 11.62 is hereby amended as follows: SEC. 11.62. PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS, CLASS II AND III SUBDIVISIONS. Subd. 1. Lands For Public Use. The City finds that when land is subdivided, including a planned residential development or a planned unit development, the resulting additional housing units or commercial/industrial buildings have an impact on the City’s park system. Therefore, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, (1989), Section 462.358, subd. 2b, the City requires all persons, corporations or other legal entities that subdivide land within the City of Orono; as a prerequisite to approval of a lot division, final plat, planned residential development or plarmed unit development; to convey to the City or dedicate to the public, for use as parks, playgrounds, trails, or open space, a given percentage of the land being platted or developed as hereinafter specified, said portions to be approved by the City. In lieu thereof, the subdivider shall, at the option of the City pay to the City, for use in the acquisition, development or improvement of public parks, playgrounds, trails, wetlands or open spaces and debt retirement in connection with the foregoing, an equivalent amount in cash based upon the fair market value of the land to be developed. The form of contribution (cash or land, or any combination thereof) shall be decided by the City Council based upon the need and conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The amount of the dedication requirement shall be roughly proportional to the impact of the subdivision on the City’s park system. Subd. 2. Dedicated Leind Requirements. Any land to be dedicated as a requirement of this Section shall be reasonably adaptable for the above public purposes. Factors used in evaluating the adequacy of proposed dedicated areas shall Include size, shape, topography, drainage, geology, tree cover, access and location. Subd. 3. Land Dedication Minimum Area. Subdividers shall be required to dedicate to the City for parks, playgiounds, trails, open spaces and other public purposes as a minimum that percentage of gross land area, or other such amount as may be determined by the City Council, as set forth below: 1 A. Residential/agricultural/multiple residential zoned land. Dedication requirement of 8% of the land being platted or subdivided. The dedication required shall be roughly proportional to the projected impact of the proposed development on the City's park system. Because of the vastly differing land values in Orono, the 8% park dedication requirement could result in park dedication requirements that are either significantly greater than or significantly less than the amount which is roughly proportional to the impact of the proposed development on the City's park system. Periodically, therefore, the City will establish both a maximum and minimum park dedication amount per dwelling unit based on an updated projection of the cost of the City's park system, arid the proportionate share of this projected cost to be borne by new dv/eliing umts in Orono. This will be done by a resolution of the City Council. B. Commercial/industrial zoned land. Dedication requirement of 8% of the land being platted or subdivided. The dedication required shall be roughly proportional to the projected impact of the proposed development on the City's park system. The City finds that the employees of commercial/industrial developments in the City make use of the City's park system, particularly trails and natural areas. Because the City's park system is focused on trails and natural are^ versus active community parks and ballfields, commercial/industrial employees use the City's park system in ways similar to City residents. Therefore, the commercial/industrial dedication requirement will be tied to the residential dedication requirement by determining the number of employees that is equivalent to a residential dwelling unit in terms of impact on the City's park system. Periodically the City will establish both a maximum and minimum park dedication amount per employee based on this determination and the determination of the residential dedication requirenient as set out in Paragraph A of Subdivision 3. This w'ill be done by resolution of the City Council. C. Because the City of Orono's park system is focused on trails and natural open space areas, the City does not have a broad system of neighborhood parks. If a subdivision is planned to be ser\'ed by a neighborhood park, this subdivision will receive a greater benefit from the City's park system than that received by the general population. Therefore, the maximurn p^k dedication amount as determined in Paragraph A may be exceeded up to the full^ 8% dedication requirement in the case of a subdivision that is planned to be served by a neighborhood park. Subd. 4. Cash Contribution in Lieu of Lands. In those instances where a cash contribution is to be made by the subdivider, in lieu of a conveyance or dedication of land, the cash contribution to be contributed shall be equivalent to the fair market value of the equivalent undeveloped land that would otherwise have been conveyed or dedicated. The City shall account for such funds in a special fund named Park Dedication Funds. These funds are to be used only for the acquisition, development and improvement of public parks, playgrounds, trails, wetlands, or open spaces, and debt retirement in connection with the foregoing. Subd. 5. Fair Market Value of Lands. "Fair Market Value" for purposes of this Code shall be the land pre-development value to be determined by the City Council as of the time o preliminary plat application in accordance with the following: A. The City Assessor shall recommend to the City Council as to the fair market value of the land after consultation with the subdivider. B. If agreement is not reached between the City Assessor and subdivider, then the fair market value shall be determined in accordance with the following: 1. Fair market value as determined by the City Council based upon a current appraisal submitted to the City by the subdivider, at his expense. The appraisal shall be made by appraisers who are approved members of SREA or MAI, or equivalent real estate societies. 2. If the City disputes such appraisal amounts, it may obtain m appraisal of the property by a qualified real estate appraiser which the City Council selects and which appraisal may be accepted by the City as being an accurate appraisal at fair market value. The cost of the appraisal shall be paid by the subdivider. 3. The subdivider may appeal any final determination of fair market value as provided by Minnesota Statute Section 462.361. C. The determination of fair market value of the undeveloped land by the City Assessor, City Council, or designated appraisers, shall be determined at the time of preliminaty subdivision approval provided that there is final plat approval within the time limits as set ^odh in this chapter. The time of preliminary plat approval is utilized because the nature of the subdivision, its probable population, lot size and value, and other relevant factors are known. If an extension of the time limits in this chapter is approved by the City Council, the fair market value shall be determined as of the time of the approval of that extension. In determining the fair market value as of time of preliminary plat application, or the extension thereof, the factors to be included in the analysis shall include any and all factors which are generally accepted and used by approved members of SREA or MAI or equivalent real estate appraisal societies. Subd. 6. Development of Land Previously Platted. (Repealed per Ordinance #89, Second series, adopted October 8,1990.) Subd. 7. Future Subdivision. Any land which is further subdivided, divided or replatted or applied for such subsequent to May 1, 1990, shall be subject to the requirements of the ordinance then in effect concerning dedication of land for public purposes, and credit shall be given for any charges previously imposed upon that land if the subdivider can prove that fees were previously paid. In no event shall the City be liable for any payment which may be due because of a subsequent reduction in the application percentage of land or equivalent market value in cash to be dedicated. Subd. 8. Administrative Procedures. The City Council shall establish such administrative procedures as they may deem necessary or appropriate to implement the provisions of this section of the Code. .. • Section 2. Adoption and publication. This ordinance shall be effective after the date of approval and publication. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota on this 13 th day of April, 1998 by a vote of 5 aves and o nays. ATTEST: CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0 6 -•• A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING MLNIMUM AND MAXIMUM PARK DEDICATION AMOUNTS FOR COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ZONED LAND WHEREAS, the Cit>'*s general park dedication requirement is 8% of the land being platted or subdivided; suid WHEREAS, the City’s park dedication ordinance calls for the dedication requirement to be roughly proportional to the projected impact of the proposed development on the City's park system; and WHEREAS, the City's park dedication ordinance provides for the establishment of minimum and maximum park dedication amounts per residential dwelling unit; and WHEREAS, the City finds the employees of commercial/industrial developments make use of the City’s park system in ways similar to City residents, particularly since the City’s park system is focused on trails and natural areas; and WHEREAS, the City's park dedication ordinance ties the commercial/industrial park dedication requirement to the residential park dedication requirement by detem^ng the nurnber of commercial/industrial employees that is equivalent to a residential dwelling unit in terms of impact on the City’s park system; and WHEREAS, the City finds that ten employees are equivalent to one residential dwelling unit in terms of impact on the park system; and WHEREAS, the City has established a minimum park dedication amount per residential dwelling unit as $2,900 per unit, and a maximum park dedication amount pe^dwelllng unit as $4,900 per unit. NOW', THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council does hereby establish the minimum park dedication amount for commercial/industrial zoned land as $2,900 per each ten employees, and the maximum park dedication amount as $4,900 per each ten employees. Page 1 of 2 Ok O CITY of ORONO m RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL [^tcd by the City Council of t' e City o^SroiArf^^^eta-at-frfeguJar meeting held this 13thday of April, 1998. ATTEST: ’ Lihda S. Vee, City Clerk Page 2 of2 0£C i 4 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^0 c ROVJ DATE: December 10,1998 ITEM NO./.2 Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Senior Planning Coordinator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Mike Hilbelink/Mark Johnson, 4461 Bayside Road - Request to amend or rescind Condition 2 of Resolution No. 3346 - Resolution Zoning District: RR-IB, 2 acre rural residential List of Exhibits A - Draft Resolution B - Letter of Request C - Resolution No. 3346 D - Site Evaluation/Site Plan E - Plat Drawing F - Topographic Map Summary of Request Resolution No. 3346 approved the plat of Johnson Wheeler 1st Addition in October 1993. Condition No. 2 of that approval required that the driveway to serve Lot 2 be located at the southeast comer of the lot to avoid conflicts with the tested and approved drainfield sites. The City code requires a minimum separation of 20 ’ between drainfield sites and driveways or other hard surfaces. Because this required driveway location would yield a circuitous route and have a potential negative impact on the neighboring residence due to auto headlights, the property owner is having additional septic testing performed to determine whether the approved sites can be relocated. If the approved sites can be shifted or new sites found that will meet code requirements, there may be no further need for this approval condition. In that case, the property owner would like the condition revised. As of this writing, no new information has been provided as to the actual feasibility of relocating the drainfield sites. There is a dug pond on the site which may impact the feasible locations. The applicant notes the goal is to establish a driveway at a location somewhere between the originally approved primar>’ and alternate drainfield sites. There is no stated intent to establish a new driveway access onto Bayside Road, and it was concluded during the 1993 subdivision review that the best access would be via sharing the existing driveway. 4461 Bay side Road December 10,1998 Page 2 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposal under the following provisions: 1.Access to Lot 2 ("4461" Bayside) shall still be from the private driveway located on the adjacent property (4455 Bayside) east of Lot 2, which is also owned by Johnson. 2.This shared driveway shall be formalized via an easement in favor of Lot 2 at the time Johnson sells Lot 2 or no longer owns both properties. 3.Any driveway constructed to serve Lot 2 shall meet a setback of no less than 20' from approved primary and alternate drainfield sites. Such drainfield sites may be relocated upon provision of proof to the City that site relocation is feasible and meets City code requirements. If the property owner is successful in relocating drainfield sites so that a driveway can be constructed accessing the existing driveway without encroaching within 20' of approved drainfield sites, the City will not enforce the condition regarding placement of driveway at the southeast comer of the lot. This scenario will allow the prope"*y owner the flexibility to relocate the driveway as long as conditions arc met, while still protecting the City's interests in ensuring no potential encroachments of drainfield sites. A formal amendment to Resolution No. 3346 is not appropriate without re-opening the subdivision review process, according to the City Attorney. He has suggested, as an alternative, that the City send the property owner a letter stating that the condition regarding the driveway location will not be enforced. This could be done in the form of a resolution, but would not be filed in the chain of title. To this end, a resolution is attached incorporating the above provisions. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution Regarding Enforcement of Condition 2 of Resolution No. 3346. A RESOLUTION REGARDING ENFORCEMENT OF CONDITION NO. 2 OF RESOLUTION NO. 3346 WHEREAS, on October 11, 1993 the Orono City Council adopted Resolution No. 3346 approving the plat of Wheeler Johnson 1st Addition, and WHEREAS, Condition No. 2 of Resolution No. 3346 contained language requiring that the access driveway to Lot 2 shall enter Lot 2 no more than 25' north of its southeast comer to avoid encroachment of the approved drain^ield sites for Lot 2; and WHEREAS, the owner of Lot 2, Mark Johnson, has requested that the City not enforce this condition if the drainfield sites can successfully be relocated while still meeting all Orono On-Site Sewage Treatment Code requirements; and WHEREAS, the Cit)' Council has reviewed the request and finds that the request is reasonable, subject to a number of conditions which are necessary to ensure the City's goals of safe access to property and protection of identified drainfield sites from encroachments which could lead to the premature and costly extension of municipal sewers to the defined rural area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono that Condition 2 of Resolution No. 3346 will be enforced in the following manner: 1. 2. 3. Access to Lot 2 ("4461" Bayside) shall still be from the private driveway located on the adjacent property (4455 Bayside) east of Lot 2, which is also owned by Johnson. This shared driveway shall be formalized via an easement over 4455 Bayside in favor of Lot 2 at the time Johnson sells Lot 2 or no longer owns both properties. Any driveway constructed to serve Lot 2 shall meet a setback of no less than 20' from the approved primary and alternate drainfield sites. Such drainfield sites may be relocated upon provision of proof to the City that site relocation is feasible and meets City code requirements. If the property owner is successful in relocating drainfield sites so that a driveway can be constmcted accessing the existing driveway Page 1 of 2 'a* » without encroaching within 20' of approved drainfield sites, the City will not enforce the prov isions of Condition 2 regarding placement of the driveway at the southeast comer of the lot. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of December, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 2 of 2 647 P02 00 ’00 00:00 f- Mike Hilbclink 1120 Wayzata Blvd. Wayzata, MN. 55391 Mike Gaffi-on City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Relocation of septic site @ 4461 Bayside R6ad Dear Mike; I would like to request, on tlie behalf of the Johnsons, the City of Orono's consideration, at the next council meeting, the relocation of the northern most septic site, as defined on the following septic site plan, for the Bayside property. It is the Johnsons desire to comply with the City's request, to have a driveway come off the existing drive and access the lot between to the two septic sittes. In order to accomplish this, there needs to be a greater separation between the two sites, which would allow for a drive in that location. The original plan called for an additional driveway off of Bayside, and thus the resulting septic site plan. Please let me know' if we will be able to get this on the Monday’s meeting. Thank you. k CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.8 S 0 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF JOHNSON WHEELER 1ST ADDITION FILE NO. 1663 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered this application for a subdivision of a plat by Mark Johnson, the subdivider (hereinafter "the subdivider"); and WHEREAS, on September 9, 1991, the City Council approved Resolution No. 3014 granting preliminary approval for the plat of the property located at 4465 Bayside Road; and WHEREAS, on October 11, 1993, the City Council adopted Resolution No. granting an extension of the effective period of preliminary subdivision approval to October 11, 1993; and WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-IB Rural Residential Zoning District finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow the continued use of the developed lot for single family residence use and the undeveloped lot to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including: 1. Completion of all the requirements of Resolution No. 3014. 2. Dedication on the plat of right-of-way for a public road shown at Bayside Road. 3. Dedication on the plat of drainage and utility easements. Page 1 of 3 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4.Creation of Outlot A that is not contiguous with Lots 1 and 2 and is divided from the remainder of the property by a County road. Said lot shall be designated as an unbuildable lot and available for combination with adjacent residential properties on north side of County Road 84 or Bayside Road. 5. 6. Payment to the City of a Park Dedication Fee in the amount of $2,544.00. Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat, and other documents in the amount of $150.00. 7. Payment to the City for the final plat application fee at $150.00. iNOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Johnson Wheeler 1st Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, subject to the following conditions: 1.Access to Lot 1 shall remain via an e.xisting driveway that serves the e.xisting residence. 2.Access to Lot 2 shall be achieved via an existing private drive along the east side of the property owned by the applicant. Upon the sale of Lot 2, applicant shall grant an access easement in favor of Lot 2. Such access must be located at the extreme southeast comer and to extend no further north than 25’ in order to maintain a 20’ separation setback from the principal drainfield site. j.The 30.4 ’ x 18.4’ bam on Lot 2 shall be removed by October 11, 1994 if a building permit has not been issued for residential construction by that date. 4.The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder’s Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before April 11, 1994 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and executed copies of either easements or covenants noted above. Page 2 of 3 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ■ ^ •• The approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the plat cannot be filed by the date specified above. In that event it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 11th day of October, 1993. ATTEST: Dec 14 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION C/Tv r .■ ,N - * *• .V V DATE: December 14. 1998 ITEM NO.13 Department Approval: Name Gregoiy A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer's Report Item Description: Request for Payment #2, Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation We have reviewed the information submitted by the City's engineering firm and recommend approval of this Request for Payment. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Request for Payment ^2, to Shank Constructors, Brooklyn Park MN in the amount of $19,149. BONESTROO ROSENE ANDERLIK ^ 6516361311 12/04/98 15:19 g :02/05 NO:992 f Citv olOrono. 2750 Kelly Pkwy, Otono. MN 55323-0066 Rosenc ----------------------------^^---------------- Anderik Pcrioil: October 31,1098 to December L 12M‘Jl A«oci«e^ _____Prtte: December 2,1998 R^uest No-_______2______ rnawfftu««iit«iiConlr;K-li>r' sbiink <*iin<nuctofs, Inc , 3501 85th AvcN, Brooklyn PorV, MN 55445 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NAVARRE WAl tR TREATMENT FACILITY RENOVATION BRA FILE NO. 13997 3 4 .SL.MMARY 1 Oniiinal Contract Amount 2 Channc Order • Addition Change Order • Deduction Revised Contract Amount 5 Value Completed to Date 6 Material on Hand Amount Carned l.e.tti Retainage 5% Subtotal lt» l.ess Amouni Paul Previuu.'«l> 11 AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. S S 7 8 9 S s % s $ s $ $ Recoramentled foi Approval by. BONESTROO, ROSENE, AMOEHI IK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Approved by Comracior: SHANK CONST Hi:C rOR.S. INC. Approved by Owner; CITY OK ORO.NO .Specified Contract C'omplction Hate:Date; IM 3tt' 1 30U7\K£OUEST2 WS2 ft.36.6CK3 636,600 103,644 U.OO 103,644 5.182 98.462 79:m3 19,149 BONBSTROO ROSENE ANDERLIK ©6516361311 12/04/98 15:19 S :03/05 NO:992 llrm Contract Unit Quantity Unit Quantity Current Price to Date Quantity Amount to Date I Total price for the icnuvutiun of the Navarre Watci Treatment Facility, including demolition, procC'i e*niipmenr (hy hate hid nunufactuiers. iia ‘.'c'cribctl in Pari III ol thi* Propncal) plumbing, IIVAC, electrical wotl.. control.-t and instrumentation, process piping, painting, and all other ilem> vimwn, s|iccinetl, or iiiiplictl to place the facility into full operation for thcl.t'MP.Sl .Mof. tS DrvaUtlovtn of abioe: Mubili/ation & Div I Demo • l.ub. Demo - Mat ('iiiieicic nollont • l.ab. Concrete Bottom • Mat. Div 5-lub. Die S • Mat. Div & • Lab Div. 6 • Mat Softening Fquip • Fet. Softening Fr{uip • Ini. Filici Fquip - Fxt I'illcr Ltfuip • lot. Piping A. Valve* Interior FiUei Fquip • l.ub. Filter Hquip • Mat. Softening Equip • Lub Sonening liquij' • Mat Filter Media • Lab Filter Media • Mai Softening Media • Lab Softening Media • Mat Chemical Feed • Lab. Chemical Feed • Mat Pumps • B.rl Pumps • Mat ItloMUf • l.ab. blower • Ntal Piping Si Vrtlve.v - l.ab. Piping Si Valves * Mai. I.M 3'J\I SaordtEQUEST/WB? Fk 49300 1,173 00 I.I'jn fM) 4.9SOOO 5,2n0()0 0,000 00 13,500 00 31.000 00 l3.<ilM)fM) 6.6(M).00 15.092.00 53.793.00 2..^5;oo 17,0.18.00 4,200 00 28.375 00 563.00 18.554 00 7,35200 8.39300 7.500.00 16.827.00 5.987IK1 6.757 00 26,922 00 87,181 00 30'?i 30».« 20% 10% 30% 30V» 20% 636,600.00 37.894.(h)100%1 00%37.894 12.944.00 100%15?»12.944 11,8.50 00 100%l$Vu 11,8.50 10,121 00 HUfiOlK) 28% 2,700.00 9.300.UO 470.40 1.704 28% 24.51800 BONESTROO ROSENE ANDERLIK © 6516361311 12/04/98 15:19 0 :04/05 1^0:99^ Hvuw Electrical Steel Wckling (inniling 16,2011.00 I34.OO0.00 1.200 00 50%smi 600.00 5.500 IK)20%20*i 1.100.00 2.500.00 25-^25%564 ToUl Work Completed To Pot*103.644 •■a *5 l:\1 Jy^^39flr'.RECJU£S t2 WB2 I i BONESTROO ROSENE ANDERLIK ^6516361311 12/04/98 15:19 3 :05/05 N0:992 PROJECT PAYMEN r STATUS Owner CITY OT ORONO Project No. Hie Nu. Conirtcior .SHANK CONSTRUCTORS. INC. CHANCE ORDERS Amount1 ^ w* •J* 2 3 Total Chanae Orden PAYME.NT SUM.MARV 1 .Si4rt lO/.U.'Og 79.313.00 4.174.00 58.060 00 >10 12.01/98 19.149 5,182 10.3.644 X 4 s 6 7 8 0 U) Maltrial on llnnil 0.00 Toliil Pjvmcni lo [Kiic S98,462.(X)Oriflinal Contract $636,600(10 UctjiiUMC, Pavfi>tnl No 2 S5.182.19 ChanRc Orders Toul Amount Rarned SI 03.644.19 Revised Contract $636.6(M1.(I0 1 I \l.1SMl99AREOOf $r/ lAB? .1 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DEC U 1998 DATE: December 14,1998 CITY ore ROMO ITEM NO ■ H Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Revieved: 'A Agenda Section: Engineer Report Item Description: Request for Payment County Road 6 Project We have received an invoice from Hennepin County for part of the City's share of the right of way- costs. According to the cooperative agreement with the County the City is responsible for 50% of the right-of-way costs. These costs are eligible for reimbursement from the City's Municipal State .-\id funds. We will apply for reimbursement of these funds after payment to Hennepin County is made. This invoice is for $202,927.23. A review of the attached tabulation of costs shows twenty parcels already settled with ten parcels in condemnation proceedings. Nine of twenty parcels that have settled had started condemnation proceedings. For most of the parcels that settled, the final settlement was approximately double the deposited money. There is $118,700 in deposits being held for the ten remaining properties in condemnation. Assuming these all settle for double the deposit amom., that will result in approximately $240,000 in additional costs. With Orono responsible for 50% or $120,000 of these costs. There is one parcel in condemnation, James Johnson property for which the condemnation ' o: mission has proposed a settlement of $226,500. Hennepin County's valuation is $29,850. Mike Gaffron provided testimony for this case to the commendation commission. The main issue of dispute is whether buildable lots were lost. Several smaller tax parcels were combined in July 1977 so a building permit could be obtained. The property owners position is that theses parcels can be uncombined to obtain additional lots. The City's position is that a subdivision is required to create any additional lots. According to our current zoning regulations this property is only subdividable into five acre lots. The condemnation commission's settlement is being appealed to the District Court by Hennepin County. The settlement on the Johnson property could have a significant impact on the City's share of right-of-way costs for this project. The right-of-way budget for this project in the City's Capital Improvement Plan for Municipal State Aid fund is $600,000. This was raised from the County's estimate of $345,000 for Orono’s costs to provide a contingency factor. If the remaining parcels in condemnation settle for twice the deposit amount, or $120,000 in additional City costs, our estimated right-of-way costs will be approximately $330,00. This would leave $270,000 as a contingency amount related to the Johnson property acquisition. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve payment to Hennepin County for County Highway 6 right-of-way expenses in the amount of $202,927.13. C.S.A.H. 6, PROJECT 9444. TOTAL RIGHT43F-WAY COSTS THROUGH 10/30/98 besdRiPTioM K mn WARRANT ' DATE i AMOUNT • 5 HENNEPIN ... i COUNTY :' ORONO 6 Best & Flanagan Title Opinions 05/09/97 S75.00 $37.50 $37.50 7 Best & Flanagan Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 8 Best & Flanacan Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 9 Best & Flanagan Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 10 Best & Flanagan Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 11 Best & Flanagan Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 29 Best & Flanagan Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 31 Best & Flanagan Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 32 Gene Rosenblum Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 33 Gene Rosenblum Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 34 Tene Rosenblum Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 35 Gene Rosenblum Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 36 Gene Rosenblum Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 37 Gene Rosenblum Title Opinions C5/09/97 $75.00 S37.50 $37.50 38 Gene Rosenblum Title Opinions C5/09/97 $75.00 $75.00 39 Gene Rosenblum Title Opinions 05/09/97 $75.00 $75.00 12 Larry Coulter Title Opinions 05/29/97 $90.62 $45.31 $45.31 16 Larry Coulter Title Opinions 05/29/97 $90.62 $45.31 $45.31 17 Larry Coulter Title Opinions 05/29/97 $90.62 $45.31 $45.31 18 Lairy Coulter Title Opinions 05/29/97 $90 62 $45.31 $45.31 19 Larry Coulter Title Opinions 05/29/97 $90.62 $45.31 $45.31 22 Larry Coulter Title Opinions 05/29/97 $90.62 $45.31 $45.31 23 Larry Coulter Title Opinions 05/29/97 $90.62 $45.31 $45.31 28 Larry Coulter Title Opinions 05/29/97 $90.62 $45.31 $45.31 34A Gene Rosenblum Title Opinion 07/29/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 30 Best & Flanagan Title Opinion 08/01/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 20A Larry Coulter Title Opinion 08/01/97 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 S 14 Craig & Elizabeth Williams Temp Const. Permit 12/18/97 $900.00 $450.00 $450.00 6 Best & Flanagan Title Opinion Update 12/18/97 $35.00 $17.50 $17.50 S 6 Pierce. Robert & Mary Perm Hwy/Drain Ease 12j^3/97 $5,750.00 $2,875.00 $2,875.00 S 40 Rocer Bnjce Temp Const, Permit 12/23/97 $150.00 $150.00 <^ 13 Donald & Newal Flies Temp Const. Permit 12/31/97 $599.00 $299.50 $299.50 s‘ 15 Fern & Lavon Determan Temp Const. Pemiit 12/31/97 $900.00 $450.00 $450.00 m0 i^ 10 Susan & Douglas Van Moor Perm & Temp Easement 12/31/97 $3,400.00 $1,700.00 $1,700.00 10 Best& Flanagan Title Opinion Update 01/1 S'98 $35.00 $17.50 $17.50 ^ 4 Douglas & Ann Hawkinson Temp Easement 01/29/98 $250.00 $250.00 C 2 Donald Painter Temp Easement 01/29/98 $100.00 $100.00 ^ 9 Norbert Johnson Perm & Temp Easement 02/26/98 $2,750.00 $1,375.00 $1,375.00 16 Larry Coulter Title Opinion Update 03/10/98 $35.00 $17.50 $17.50 17 Larry Coulter Title Opinion Update 03/10/98 $35.00 $17.50 $17.50 19 Larry Coulter Title Opinion Update 03/10/98 $35.00 $17.50 $17.50 20A Larry Coulter Title Opinion Update 03/10/98 $35.00 $17.50 $17.50 ^ 23 Larry Coulter Title Opinion Update 03/10/98 $35.00 $17.50 $17.50 <> 12 James Caroanter Purchase Easement 03/24/98 $2,900.00 $1,450.00 $1,450.00 S 17 Katharine Calqrove Purchase Easement 03/24/98 $5,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 12 Larry Coulter Title Opinion Update 03/26/98 $35.00 $17.50 $17.50 I ^ 23 Shirley A. Hetman Purchase Easemen 03/30/98 $950.00 $475.00 $475.00c7 Hennepin County District Cond Deposit 04/07/98 $10,600.00 $5,300.00 $5,300.00 T_l ZOOce Hennepin County District Cond Deposit ^ E11 L hf 04/07/98 $4,850.00 $2,425.00 $2,425.00 i•i . ClOC. 1' C 11 Hennepin County District Cond Deposit 04/07/98 $21,200.00 $10,600.00 $10,600.00 A # C 18 Hennepin County District Cond Deposit 04/07/98 $24,300.00 $12,150.00 $12,150.00 4rC 19 Hennepin County District Cond Deposit 04/07/98 $8,700.00 $4,350.00 $4,350.00 C 20A Hennepin County District Cond OeDOSit C: fc 17L 11?04/07/98 $1,250.00 $62500 $625,00 1*^ ^(JO ^ C 22 Hennepin County District Cond Deposit 04/07/98 $3.800.C0 $1,900.00 $1,900.00 ^ (L 28 Hennepin County District Cond Deposit S fllL tD 04/07/98 $26,400.00 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 ^\onoo__ s tL 29 Hennepin County District Cond Deposit 04/07/98 $37,200.00 $18.600 00 $18,600,001 TA rr. 30 Hennepin County District Cond Deposit 04/07/98 $2,100.00 $1,050.00 $1,050.00 ' syC 31 Hennepin County District Cond Deposit 04/07/98 $15,000.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 £^31A Hennepin County District Cond Deposit S 1 t V 04/07/98 $46,200.00 $23,100.00 $23,100.00 x: «JL. r C s: I- < <: r \ \ «-» Za Ppuiii sEvrUD Printed: 11/25/98, 12.29 1^ W, ^ Page 1 of 2 , stniLiMw.ri bl^0UL\~ Cost ReCaps.xls. 9444 C.SiV.H. 6, PROJECT 9444, TOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY COSTS THROUGH 10/30/98 i: < V 'DATE ■;-:P'AMdUlltwPP HENNEPIM y< COUNTY^• ;::;v •:v :: ORONO :iNOEPEfaDENCE ^ 32 Hennepin County District Cond Deposit ^ETILLP_____04/07/98 $4,850.00 $2,425.00----------$2,425.00—^00 -------------------C------------4------------------- ——r——TTTTr:::: *-*'> «« $2,100.0033 Hennepin County Di^ct Cond Deposit ^✓C 34 Hennepin County jistrict Cond Deposit 04/07/98 04/07/98 $4,200.00 $2.1C0.00 $3.900.00 $1.950.00 C34A HennepinCour' .district Cond Deposit I> hT\LtlQ 04/07/98 $1,400.00 ----------S7CG.00 $1.950.00 $700.00 i H-/9/7 iX’ 35 Hennepin CounW OisWct Cond Deposit v- 04/07/98 ^ 36 Hennepin County District Cond Deposit L ~f 1 L pt/ 04/07/98 38 Hennepin Count/ District Cond Deposit 04/07/98 $2.100.00 $1.050.00 $1.300.00 $650.00 $1.050.00 $650.00 1. f\ no $11.500.00 $11.500.00 C 39 Hennepin County District Cond Deposit ^ F.*l~\L Vb 04/07/98 __^.850 j}0 -------$4,850.00 ----------------------- C 37 Dennis Esterly___________Perm & Temp Easement 04/07/98 $14.000.00 -------$7,000.00 -----------$7.000.00 T-'i. 06 7 Divefsified Real Estate County Appraisal 04/28/98 $2,500.00 $1,250.00 $1,250.00 11 Diversified Rea' Zstate County Appraisal 04/28/98 $2.500.00 $1.250.00 $1.250.00 18 Diversified R' Estate County Appraisal 04/28/98 $2.500.00 $1.250.00 $1.250.00 28 Diversified Rc. Estate County Appraisal 04/28/98 $2,500.00 $1,250.00 $1,250.00 29 Diversified Real Estate County Appraisal 04/28/98 $2.500.00 $1.250.00 $1,250.00 31A Diversified Real Estate County Appraisal 04/28/98 $2.500.00 $1.250.00 $1.250.00 11 Lunz Massopust Reid County Appraisal 04/28«8 $2.500.00 $1.250.00 $1.250.00 29 Lunz Massopust Reid County Appraisal 04/28/98 $2,500.00 $1.250.00 $1,250.00 31A Lunz Massopust Reid 37 Lunz Massopust Reid County Appraisal County Appraisal 04/28/98 $2.500.00 $1.250.00 $1,250.00 04/28/98 $2,500.00 $1,250.00 $1.250.00 38 Lunz Massopust Reid County Appraisal 04/28/98 $2.500.00 $2.500.00 39 Lunz Massopust Reid_____County Appraisal 04/28/98 $2.500.00 $2,500.00 S' 16 Robert Gehrman Permanent Easement 04/16/98 $1,950.00 $975.00 $975.00 31 A Best& Ranagan Title Opinion Update 04/30/98 $35.00 $17.50 $17.50 5 31A Ken Tumham Easement 05/07/98 $85.000.00 $42.500.00 $42,500.00 37 Gene Rosentli.m Title Opinion Update 05/18/98 $35.00 $17.50 $17.50 28 Coulter. Larry 8 Best & Flanagan Title Opinion Update 06/01/98 $35.00 $17.50 $17.50 Title Opinion Update 06/01/98 $35.00 $17.50 $17.50 .S 20A Huntington Farm Home Perm & Temp Easement ^ 21 Jim & Robin' tin____ 06/02/98 $19.500.00 $9,750.00 $9,750.00 Temp Easement 06/02/98 $300.00 $150.00 $150.00 31 Berg. Leonaro L Kathleen Hwv Easement 06/04/98 $37.200.00 $18.600.00 $18.600.00 8 Kip Nelson Perm & Temp Easement 06/18/98 $8.000.00 $4.000.00 $4,000.00 ■S" 3 Alexander. Brett & Judy Temp Easement 07/14/98 $350.00 $350.00 39 Nowak. Brian Soil TesUng 07/24/98 $625.00 $625.00 S 34A McCallev Farm Perm & Temp Easement 08/27/98 $1,400.00 $700.00 $700.00 39 Nowak. Brian Mound Septic Replace.09/01/98 $7.800.00 $7.800.00 S 23 NSP Perm Hwv Easement 09/16/98 $3.400.00 $1,700.00 $1,700.00 g 7 Lurton S36 Butterfield Stip. Settlement 09/17/98 $21.500.00 $10.750.00 $10.750.00 Stip. Settlement 09/17/98 $1,600.00 $800.00 $800.00 30 Heritage Tree Tree Valuation 09/10/98 $990.00 $495.00 $495.00 2® Charles Larsor' Landscape Retaining Wall 09/29/98 $2.710.50 $1.355.25 $1.355.25 22 Larry Coulter Title Opinion Update 09/25/98 $35.00 C 28 Charles Larson Landscape Purchase Easement 10/08/98 $30.000.00 $17.50 $15,000.00 $17.50 S 5.000.00 32 Jeffrey Brolletav Stip. Settlement 10/08/98 $17.500.00 $8.750.00 $8.750.00 39 Busse Construction Inc. Driveway Work 10/20/98 $1,250.00 $1,250.00 32 Diversified Rea! Estate County Appraisal 10/22/98 $1,500.00 $750.00 $750.00 26 William Mueller Temp & Tree Removal 10/22/98 $1,200.00 $600.00 $600.00 . X 39 Nowak. Karl, Brian & Ruth Stip. Settlement 10/27/98 $23.300.00 $23.300.00 $573.029.46 $314.177.23 $258.852.23 $0.00 Hennepin County Right of Way Expenses Orono Right of Way Expenses Independence Right of Way Expenses $314,177.23 $258,852.23 $0.00 $573,029.46 Printed: 11/25/98.12:29 PM Page 2 of 2 Cost ReCaps.xls. 9444 RECONCtUATION OF RIGHr OF WAY AMOUNTS total sharc of right of way expenditures FarctI Pay««Dtscrtpdon Warrant Date7Htnntpin County Oistnci Cond Deposit 04707/966Henntptf) County District CondDt^t 047077962CAHmtptfi County Distnci Cond Deposit 0470779628Htnntpin County District Cond Deposit 0470779631Htnntpin County District Cond Deposit 04707/9631AHtnntpin County District Cond Deposit 04707/9632Htnntpin County District CondOe^t 04707/9634AHtnntpin County District CondOe^t 0470779636Htnntpin County District CondDe^it 04707/9639Htnntpin County District CondDt^l 04707796 TOTAL OF CONDEMNATION DEPOSTTS WHERE THE PARCEL IS SETTLED REIMSURSaiENT REQUEST (Total loaa dapoalts hold on oottiod parcols) TOTAL HENNEPIN ORONO INOEPENDDiCES573.029.46 S314.177J3 S256.652.23 S0.00 S10.600.00 $5,300.00 $5,300.00 S0.00S4.650.00 M.425.00 $2,425.00 $0.00S1.2SOOO S62S.00 $625.00 so.ooM8.400.00 SI3.200.00 SI 3.200.00 $0.00S1S.000.00 S7.SOO.00 $7,500.00 $0.00S46JKX).00 S23.100.00 $23,100.00 so.ooK850 00 S2.425.00 $2,425.00 so.ooS1.400.00 $700.00 $700.00 so.ooS1.300.00 S6SO.OO $650.00 so 00St.850 00 S4.650.00 so.oo so.oo S1 16.700.00 $80,775.00 SSS.92S.0O so.oo • $456,329.46 S253.402 23 S202.927.23 S0.00 i Hennepin County An Equal Opportunity Employer i • ' I 1 •• •#4 «• --------- • I 0;; 199^ November 30, 1998 '-'iJ V V.,,- Mr. Glen Cook, Director of Public Works City of Orono Department of Public Works 2750 Kelley Parkway, PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 County Project 9444 on CSAH 6 Agreement PW 53-08-96 Dear Mr. Cook: For the City of Orono ’<; participation in Agreement PW 53-08-96, County Project 9444 on CSAH 6, the following is enclosed for the city’s initial share of right-of-way expenditures: 1. Invoice #28205 in the amount of $202,927.13. 2. A Right of Way Certificate, listing expenditures by parcel through 10/30/98. 3. A Reconciliation of Right-of-Way Amounts which reduces the City of Orono ’s share by the amount of deposits held in Condemnation Court on parcels which have been settled. Please note that the city’s share has been reduced by the amount of deposits held in Condemnation Court on settled parcels. If you have any questions, please call me at 348-8977 Sincerely, Kathleen Caldwell Financial Management & Accounting Enclosures Public Service Administration - Financial Management and Accounting Division Recydtd Paper417 North 5* Street, Suite 310 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1360 (612)348-9353 FAX:(612)348-9710 TDD: (612)930-2696 m Hennepin County Public Service Administration INVOICE # 28205 Financial Management and Accounting 417 North Fifth Street, Suite 310 Minneapolis, MN 55401-1360 Billed To: Mr. Glen Cook, Director of Public Works City of Orono Department of Public Works 2750 Kelley Parkway, PO Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Invoice Date: County Project Agreement Customer Project Agreement 11/30/1998 2944400 PW 53-08-96 CoUAly 6 project Item Description Amount For the City of Orono's Participation In Agreement PW 53-08-96, County Project 9444 on CSAH 6 in Orono, the City s initial right of way participation is Indicated below: Rioht-of-Wav City of Orono’s Share of Right of Way Expenditures Through 10/30/98 Less Condemnation Deposits on Settied Parcels $258,852.23 ($55,925.00) AMOUNT DUE BY 1/14/99 Subtotal $202,927.23 $202,927.23 All payments to the County must be postmarked by the date due or a late penalty of 1 % per month, or fraction thereof, on the unpaid balances will be charged to the City. The City shall pay the arrKXint due as stated on the statement, notwithstanding any dispute of such anxxrnL Should a disputed amount be resolved in favor of the City, the County shall reimburse the disputed amount plus daily Interest thereon calculated from the date such disputed amount was received by the County. Daily Interest shall be at the rate of 1% per month on the disputed amount REMIT BY CHECK. MONEY ORDER OR DRAFT PAYABLE TO: HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER . Attention: Mike Sandetl Hennepin County Public Service Administration 417 5th Street North, Suite 310 Minneapolis, MN 55401-1360 PLEASE PRINT THE INVOICE NUMBER ON YOUR REMITTANCE Page i of 1 C^ W O « , ^ ^ DEC 14 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION cmc-;V>.J DATE: December 14, 1998 ITEM NO.:/5 Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer's Report Item Description: Revise Assessment Roll Navarre Water Plant Rehabilitation The asst sments on commercial properties for the Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation were based on the number of sewer units the property was being billed, with a maximum assessment of five units. The per unit assessment is $350. After approval of the assessment roll, several property owners questioned the number of sewer units they were being billed for. Commercial accounts in Navarre were being billed for sanitary sewer units based on the amount of water they used. This was a complicated system that required adjusting of sewer units to reflect changes in building occupancy and water use. Research into this issue discovered some inconsistencies in the number of sewer units being billed. The Highway 12 commercial accounts are billed for sewer based on the metered volume of water they use. This is a simplified and more equitable billing system. In response to the concerns about sewer billing units, the Council recently approved changing the Navarre Commercial accounts to a metered water use billing system for sanitary sewer. The Council action to change to a metered billing system resolved the sewer billing concerns, but several Navarre Water Treatment Plant assessments that were based on the number of sewer billing units will need to be corrected. Below is a listing of the properties requiring a correction in the number of assessment units being levied for the Navarre Water Treatment Plant project. Since the number of assessment units was capped at five, these revisions only affect properties with five or less units. Address 2455 Shadywood Road 2477 Shadywood Road 3360 Shoreline Drive 3440 Shoreline Drive 3655 Togo Road Original Units 2 4 5 4 2 Revised Units 1 3 3 3 1 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to amend the assessment roll for Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation to revise the number of assessment units for the listed com.mercial properties. f. DEC 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION cmr- :\yj\o DATE: December 14, 1998 ITEM NO.: j Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer ’s Report Item Description: Revise Assessment Roll Shoreline/Heriiage Sewer Project This week we received written requests for exclusion from the Shoreline/Heritage sanitary sewer project from two addition al property owners David Scott, 1905 Heritage Drive and Dean Patterson 1025 Heritage Lane. Both property owners recently installed new conforming septic systems and are eligible for exclusion. During the initial planning stages fro this project there were many questions and discussions with many property owners with some owners talking about exclusion from the project. Throughout the project several letters were sent to the property owners explaining the process for exclusion and the future payment of a connection fee should their septic system fail or be rendered nonconforming. The intent of the letters was to obtain a final answer regarding exclusion from the property owners as throughout the project property several property owners changed their minds. These two residents assumed since they had initially discussed exclusion that they were automatically excluded, so they did not respond to the letters. Exclusion of these two properties from the Shoreline/Heritage sanitary sewer project requires Council approval of an amendment to the assessment roll. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to amend the assessment roll for the Heritage/Shoreline sanitary sewer project to exclude David Scott, 1905 Heritage Drive, and Dean Patterson, 1025 Heritage Lane based on both properties having new conforming septic systems. 'UEt— lO — S«e THU 10ri49 F* . G 1 December 9,1998 Oreg Gappa 2750 Kelley Parkway Om>ih>, MX 55356 Dear Gree I request to be excluded from the heritage drive/lane sewer project, due to the fact that 1 have a confonnlng septic system which was installed in Jami;u7 of 1998. I understand that should my septic system fail or be rendered nonconfonning. I will be ic(|uiicd to connect to sewer and will be required to pay the connection charee and SAC, - connection charge and SAC tee before hookup. I also understand that the cost will be inflated every year aceordina m the cost of livina »ncrea.sc. Sincerely; i i 'JfvW David F. Scott 1905 Heritage Dr. Way/ata, MN 55391 1 /?- /0-98' 6^ <s2<46jS:i'?U«^ J)f/1N B. pATTEteSaf^ /02S //e^'^/-C- -fS39 > ~ MI •• • REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DEC 1998 cnvr . v:\j DATE: December 11, 1998 ITEM NO:n Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Award of Bid for New Telephone System In April of 1998, the City Council authorized staff to contract with Elert & Associates, a telephone system consultant to conduct a needs assessment, develop a request for proposals, and evaluate proposals for a new telephone system for the City offices. The current phone system is at capacity and would have to be substantially upgraded to provide voice mail capabilities. In response to the R.F.P., the City received three proposals. A report evaluating the three proposals is attached. Because the McLeod/ESI and Matrix proposals were relatively close in costs, both were reviewed more closely by the consultant and a staff team. The consultant has indicated both systems are high quality systems. The ESI system has a tighter integration of voice mail with the phone system and will require less training because it is similar to the City's current system. The ESI system also has a type of phone that best matches the needs and desires of the office support staff who receive and route calls. The ESI system also has a type of phone that has an expanded display and function keys that make voice mail much easier to use. Staff Recommendation Based on the advantages of the ESI system described above, and the fact that ESI submitted the low bid, it is staffs recommendation that the ESI proposal be accepted in the amount of $42,720.40, plus a 2.5% contingency amount of $1,068.00, for a total cost of $43,788.40. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to award the bid for the City telephone system to the low bidder, McLeod/ESI at a cost of $42,720.40 plus a 2.5% contingency amount of $1,068.00 for a total of $43,788.40, to be funded from the Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund; and to amend the Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund budget to reflect the expenditure. City of Orono Description Cost Base System - includes 48 - Digital Ports (43 used) 16 - IMX ports (for old phones) (9 used) 12 - Trunk Ports (8 used) 12-DID (7 used) 32 - Analog Ports (3 wall phones. Modems, etc) 28 - Voice Tenninal 9-52 Button IMX phone 9 - Basic Voice Terminal Voice Mail ACD Call Accounting (need PC) Remote Maintenance (need PC) $42,348.40 Delete 1 Analog Card (1628) Upgrade 16 Voice terminals to Executive Display $2,000 2.5% Contingency $1,068 Total $43,788.40 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Telephone System Recommendation October 27,1998 Prepared by: Tom Pavek ELERT & ASSOCIATES 651-430-2772 www.elert.com m t r’v t ’ t !.i ' City of Orono Telephone Recommendation TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TELEPHONE SYSTEM RECOMMENDATION ..............................................................................3 Upfront Costs..............................................................................................................................5 Five -Year Costs......................................................................................................................5 Point Totals.................................................................................................................................5 EVALUATION CRITERIA ...............................................................................................................6 Notes ......................................................................................................................................7 CASH FLOWS...................................................................................................................................9 Elert & Associates Page 2 1 *h City of Orono Telephone Recommendation Telephone System Recommendation The purpose of this study is to summarize our evaluation of telecommunications bids for the City of Orono and to present our initial recommendation. Our evaluation is based on: 1.Our review of the needs analysis we performed in the initial study for the City of Orono. 2. Our review of telecommunications bid responses for the City of Orono. Our evaluation of vendor proposals was based on 16 separate criteria in 4 categories, Each vendor was ranked I -10 on each criterion: Criteria Weight 1. 2. j. 4. Cost Technology Vendor Maintenance 30 20 25 25 100 Note: Elert & Associates represents that the information and recommendations contained within this report are preparedfor the City of Orono based on the most current data made available during the specified study period This report is meant to be only advisory in nature. The City of Orono's management is responsible for all consequences resulting from their decisions in accepting, rejecting, or implementing these recommendations. Elert & Associates Page 3 h City of Orono Telephone Recommendation Information was collected through interviews and planning sessions with the City of Orono staff and management personnel to determine their voice telecommunications needs. The fmdings of these planning sessions were utilized as the basis for preparation of the Telephone Request for Bid. Proposals were received from the following vendors; 1.ESI Intertel Ax.xess 2.Matrix NEC 2000 3.Vicom NEC 2000 ll Elert & Associates Page 4 City of Orono Telephone Recommendation Upfront Costs Vendor Upfront Cost ESI S39,072 Matrix $43,787 Vicom $48,207 Five-Year Costs Vendor Five-Year Cost ESI $44,929 Matrix $45,245 Vicom $55,835 Includes : telephone system, voice mail, trade-in, conversation record, UCD recorder. The above sales do not include sales tax. Point Totals Vendor Points ESI 1,000 Matrix 955 Vicom 840 Elert & Associates Page 5 VrOJ .Tf City of OronoEvaluation Criteria - Telephone System Possible Factor Weight Score ESI Vicom Matrix COST 300 300] TOTALS 1001 1000 1000 180 840 270 Basic System Equipment 30 300 300 180 270 & Maintenance {TECHNOLOGY 7 "'"v; ;V ■■■‘'‘i 201 200 2061 leoj 185 Instruments 5 50 50 45 45 Overall Capabilities 5 50 50 45 45 Voice Mail Integration 5 50 50 45 45 Auto Voice Mail Record 5 50 50 25 50 VENDOR 1 261 2501 260]250]250 Financial Stability 5 50 50 SO 50 Industry Experience 5 50 50 50 50 Manufacturer Support 5 50 50 SO 50 Reputation 5 50 50 50 50 Training 5 50 SO 50 50 [maintenance ^1 251 250]2601 256!250 # of Trained Tech's 5 50 SO 50 50 Spare Parts Inventory 5 50 50 50 50 Dispatch Distance 5 50 50 SO 50 Installations - Local 5 50 50 50 50 R.M.A.T.5 50 50 50 50 955 l*rcparedhy F.lcrt A.wocmie.s 651^4.U)-2772 City of Orono Telephone Recommendation Notes The following notes correlate directly to the various points indicated on the preceding “Evaluation Criteria*' sheet. The costs reflected are based upon the seven-year total operation costs and include those items indicated in the left columns of the attached cash flow pages. COST Cost - Full points were awarded to ESI for being the low cost vendor on a five-year analysis. One point was deducted for every five percent in cost variance. TECHNOLOGY Instruments - Full points were awarded to ESI for having telephones that are most similar to the current models, reducing training time and keeping continuity in functions. One point was deducted from all other vendors. Overall Capabilities - Full points were awarded to ESI and Intertel. Their system is much more similar to the existing system, reducing training costs. One point was deducted from all other vendors. Voice Mail Integration - Full points were awarded to ESI for the tight integration with the voice mail. One point was deducted from all other vendors. Auto Voice Mail Record : Full points were awarded to ESI and Matrix. Five points were deducted from Vicom for not having the functionality. VENDOR Financial Stability - Full points were awarded to all vendors. All vendors look like they have good financials. Industry Experience - All vendors provided adequate references. Full points were awarded to all vendors. Manufacturer Supp ort - All vendors provided the adequate letters for support from the manufacturers. Full points were awarded to all vendors. Elert & Assoct^Page 7 % City of Orono Telephone Recommendation VENDOR (continued) Reputation - All vendors have a solid reputation. Full points were awarded to all vendors. Training - Full points were awarded to all vendors. MAINTENANCE Number of Trained Technicians - All vendors appear to have the appropriate number of trained technicians per installed base. Full points were awarded to all vendors. Spare Parts Inventory’ - Full points were awarded to all vendors. Dispatch Distance - Full points were awarded to all vendors. Installations - Local - Full points were awarded to all vendors. R.M.A.T. - The term R.M.A.T. stands for Remote Maintenance Access Terminal. The purpose of this function is to enable the vendor to remotely administer to their proposed system and to dispatch a technician only if necessary and all also include an automatic outdial on alarm that will notify their serv ice centers as soon as an alarm is indicated. Full points were awarded to all vendors. Elert & Associates Pages % City of Orono Telephone Recommendation CASH FLOWS Elert ft Associates Page 9 The City of Orono Matrix 8-5 Cash Outflows Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Years Years Year 7 Years Years Year 10 1 Equipment Initial 43,787 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Energy Costs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Voice Mail 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Insurance 0 88 93 98 104 111 117 124 132 140 148 5 Trunks (Com Car)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Equipment Room 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 Maintenance 0 0 1,922 2,018 2,119 2,225 2,336 2,453 2,576 2,704 2,840 8 Net Cash Flow 43,787 88 2,015 2,116 2,223 2,336 2,453 2,577 2,707 2,844 2,988 9 PV Factor (8%)1 .9260 .8570 .7940 .7350 .6810 .6300 .5830 .5830 .5830 .5830 10 Present Value 43,787 81 1,727 1,680 1,634 1,590 1,546 1,503 1,578 1,658 1,742 Present Value Escalation Factors: ti;.'. ■ V:'• ; ;. Energy Cost:6% Insurance:6% Maintenance 5% ^ Factor 8% Trunks:0% Five Year Present Value 60,600 Less Residual Value Five Year Present Value 45,246 Seven Year Present Value $3,648 Less Residual Value WI378.7 Seven Year Present Value 49,169 Ten Year Present Value 60,626 Less Residual Value 4602.96 Ten Year Present Value. ;66,023 10/16/98 The City of Orono McLeod 8-5 Cash Outflows YearO Yearl Year 2 Years Year 4 Years Years Year 7 Years Years Year 10 1 Equipment Initial 39.072 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Energy Costs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Voice Mail 0 0 0 0 d 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Insurance 0 78 83 88 93 99 105 111 117 125 132 5 Trunks (Com Car)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Equipment Room 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b 0 0 7 Maintenance 0 0 3,100 3,255 3,418 3,589 3,768 3,956 4,154 4,362 4,580 8 Net Cash Flow :.1072 78 3,183 3,343 3,511 3,687 3,873 4,067 4,272 4.48'^4,712 9 PV Factor (8%)1 .9260 .8570 .7940 .7350 6810 .6300 .5830 .5830 .5830 .5830 10 Present Value 39,072 72 2,728 2,654 2,580 2,511 2,440 2,371 2.4U0 2,616 2,747 Present Value Escalation Factors: /ij'Five Year Present Value 49,618 • ■ ■ : :? V'*-- . 'Less Residual Value •4688.64 ma•soSrr6% . ■ .: :•••••’ x'.:; ‘ ■ v •. */p. x; •«:< >1”'. (I2.(M) per $1,000)-^^ - X:V V. :• ••: • ■ VX-. •••i - •; .••• • . •;• •• Five Year Present Value 44,929 Insurance:6% Maintenance S%Seven Year Present Value 54,429 PVFa^or 8%Less RMlduai Vai^^-3907i Trunks*0%Seven Year Present Value 60,822 Ten Year Present Value 62,282 Less Resiidual Value ^128.76 Ten Year Present Value 69,156 10/16/98 The City of Orono Vicom 8-5 10/16/98 Cas h Outflows YearO Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Years Years Year?Years YearO Year 10 1 Equipment Initial 48,207 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Energy Costs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Voice Mail 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Insurance 0 96 102 108 115 122 129 137 145 154 1635Trunks (Com Car)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ti Equipment Room 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 /Maintenance 0 0 4,233 4,233 4,23P 4,233 4,233 4,233 4,233 4,233 4,233 8 Net Cash Flow 48,207 96 4,335 4,341 4,34 4,355 4,362 4,370 4,378 4,387 4,396 9 PV Factor (8%)1 .9260 .8570 .7940 .7350 .6810 .6300 .5830 .5830 .5830 .5830 10 Present Value 48,207 89 3,715 3,447 3,196 2,966 2,748 2,548 2,552 2,557 2,563 Present Value Escalation Factors:. V ------------------ ■ • • . ; , : : x;- : . .••Five Year Present Value 61,620 • ;Less Residual Value •8784.84 *■Energy C<»t:6%■ .--S ■■■ . ‘S;:: ;:Five Year Present Value 55.835 Insurance:6%($2.00 per $1,000);^'?f';;j:''^rl;‘..... /. . • *. - ’[Maintenance 0%•V: x;..Seven Year Present Value 88,915 ■ W Factor:8%Less Residual Value •4820.7 Trunks:0% v'-M ..x;-: - .■! E Seven Year Present Value 62,095r'... ; ... • ■ • . V' :; ;; :X . s 1 ... . ^ . Ten Year Present Value 74,888 Less Residual Value •38M1m Ten Year Present Value ,*70,731 The City of Orono Matrix 24 tir Cash Outflows Year 0 Yearl Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Years Years Year 7 Years Years Year 10 1 Equipment Initial 43,787 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Energy Costs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Voice Mail 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 4 Insurance 0 88 93 98 104 111 117 124 132 140 148 5 Trunks (Com Car)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Equipment Room 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 Maintenance 0 0 1,922 2,018 2,119 2,225 2,336 2,453 2,576 2,704 2,840 8 Net Cash Flow 43,787 88 2,015 2,116 2,223 2,336 2,453 2,577 2,707 2,844 2,988 9 PV Factor (8%)1 .9260 .8570 .7940 .7350 .6810 .6300 .5830 .5830 .5830 .5830 10 Presunt Value 43,787 81 1,727 1,680 1,634 1,590 1,546 1,503 1,578 1,658 1,742 Present Value Escalation Factors: ^Five Year Present Value 60,600 • .. . ($2.00 per $1,000) Less Residual Value •6264/44 ’ . . . -•! ! ■ Energy OMt:6%Five Year Present Value 46,245 Insurance:6% Maintenance 5%Seven Year Present Value 63,648 PVFacton 8%Lms Residual Value •4378.7 Trunks:0%Seven Year Present Value 49,189 Ten Year Present Value 68,628 Less Residual Value •35(»i06 Ten Year Present Value 66,023 10/16/98 The City of Orono McLeod 24 hr Cas h Outflows Year 0 Year1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Years Year 6 Year?Year 8 Years Year 10 1 Equipment Initial 39,072 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Energy Costs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Voice Mail 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Insurance 0 78 83 88 93 99 105 111 117 125 132 5 Trunks (Com Car)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Equipment Room 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 Maintenance 0 0 3,100 3,255 3,418 3,589 3,768 3,956 4,154 4,362 4,580 8 Net Cash Flow 39,072 78 3,183 3,343 3,511 3,687 3,873 4,067 4,272 4,487 4,712 9 PV Factor (8%)1 .9260 .8570 .7940 .7350 .6810 .6300 .5830 .5830 .5830 .5830 10 Present Value 39,072 72 2,728 2,654 2,580 2.511 2,440 2,371 2,490 2,616 2,747 Present Value EtulaUon Factora: ,: sgaKScSg Five Year Present Value 49.618 ■■.rv: . •• X.-.. : > •Less Residual Value •4688.64 Energy Cost:e%Five Year Present Value 44,929 Insurance:6%($2.00 per 1 Maintenance 5% , ; ;S;;- t. ■.■: :i t ? ; •> ' V . ■, ■ ;: : Seven Year Present Value 54,429 PV Factor:8%Less Residual Value •3907.2 Trunks:0%Seven Year Present Value 60.922 Ten Year Present Value 62,282 Less Riraidual Value •3125.76 ten Year Present Value 69,156 10/16/98 A. The City of Orono Vicom 24 hr Cash Outflows Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Years Year 4 Years Year 6 Year 7 Years Years Year 10 1 Equipment Initial 48,207 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Energy Costs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Voice Mail 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 insurance 0 96 102 108 115 122 129 137 145 154 163 5 Trunks (Com Car)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Equipment Room 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 Maintenance 0 0 5,111 5,111 5,111 5,111 5,111 5,111 5,111 5,111 5,111 8 Net Cash Flow 48,207 96 5,213 5,219 5,226 5,233 5,240 5,248 5,256 5,265 5,274 9 PV Factor (8%)1 .9260 .8570 .7940 .7350 .6810 .6300 .5830 .5830 .5830 .5830 10 Present Value 48,207 80 4,468 4,144 3,841 3,563 3,301 3,059 3,064 3,069 3,075 Present Value Escalation Factors: .. 'r ; ($2.00 per $1,000) ^ ^ Five Year Present Value 64,313 ' v: ■ ‘ * ■ . • . • ■ •...Less Residual Value '5784.84 Energy Cost:6%Five Year Present Value 58,528 Insurance:6% Maintenance 0%Seven Year Present Valus 70,873 PV Factor 8%] • ;.v-.vy v.^y..v. ‘ ' o | Less Residual Value •4820.7 Trunks:0%|Seven Year Present Value 65,853 : • Ten Year Present Value 79,881 Less Residual Value •3856.56 Ten Year Present Value ^ ^76,025 10/16/98 10/16/98 cost2.xls Alternates City of Orono Cost Breakdown VIcom 8*5 Maint 24 hr maint Matrix 8-5 Maint 24 hr maint McLeod 8-5 Maint 24 hr maint System 40765 3600 4320 34473 1560 1560 39372 2400 2400 Voice Mail 6325 633 791 7241 362 362 Inc 700 700 Auto Attendant Inc Inc 200 Trade In 0 0 -500 1 hour battery Inc Inc Inc Termlnal/printer Inc Inc Traffic reporting Inc Inc Dialer Inc Inc 1 cable run Inc Modem Inc Inc Inc Power Fail Inc Inc Rad and UCD 1117 1117 Recording Option N/A 956 Inc TOTAL 48207 4233 5111 43787 1922 1922 39072 3100 3100 0%5%5% EOC ports 1404 300 360 1641 150 150 1756 Speakerphone 650 30 36 583 15 15 700 T-1/CSU 1806 2073 2300 PRI/CSU 2509 4067 880 CO card 247 280 83 DID card -447 -541 -83 1 port fax 3340 2366 NA 2 ports fax 534C 4930 3960 5 users LAN 2508 2495 2000 10 users LAN 4004 3983 4351 20 users LAN 5300 5273 4351 I -....a/’r ■ ~ 1*' w t __^ I D ec 14 1998 C.;\ •,:o REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: December 10, 1998 I ITEM NO: ''8 Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name Lin Vee J2f27/i City Administrator’s Title Ciny Clerk Report Item Description: Proposed 1999 Fee Schedule Attachment; A. Proposed 1999 Fee Schedule Ordinance B. Summary Ordinance The proposed 1999 Fee Schedule Ordinance and Summary' reflecting the proposed changes are attached. The proposed changes include: Addition of fee for Conditional Use Permit Amendment. Addition of fee for labels printed from the City's utility billing system. Increases in permit to cany' firearms and fingerprinting service. Addition of fee for Summary Data Report from Police Department. All sanitary sewer and water connection charges. 3.2% increase in sevver rales and 2.9% increase in water rates. Increase in bulk sale of water to Minnetonka Beach for Lafayette Ridge Area. Increase in water tum-on and turn-off. 2.1% increase in annual recycling charge. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached ordinance amending the City ’s fee schedule and summary ordinance for publication. fj ORDINANCE NUMBER , SECOND SERIES SUMMARY APPROVED The Council hereby determines that the text of the summary of this ordinance marked "Official Summary of Ordinance Number____, Second Series," and a copy of which is attached hereto, clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. The Council further determines that the publication of the title and such summary will clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. r OFFICIAL SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NUMBER , SECOND SERIES ORDINANCE NO.____, SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 1999 FEE SCHEDULE, AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 166, SECOND SERIES AND 168, SECOND SERIES Tne following is the official summar}’ of Ordinance Number___ approved by the City Council of the City of Orono on______________________, 1^98. , Second Series The following sections have changes, additions and/or deletions: DESCRIPTION 1998 EEE 1999 £££ ZONING APPLICATIONS Conditional Use Permit $100.00 ALL SANITARY SEWER & MUNICIPAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES Various charges Various charges LICENSES & MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES General Administrative Documents Labels trom Utility Billing System Police Department Administered Firearms Permit to Carry Fingerprinting Service Summary Data Report SI 0.00 $ 15.00/application $.05 per label (approximately $150.00) $15.00 $25.00/application-Resident only (Citize- ship No Charge) $10.00 MUNICIPAL SEWER RATES by unit: 1st 2nd by flow: $ 76.85 per qtr. $ 69.55 per qtr. $ 2.88/1000 gallon plus $ 7.30 per quarter per connection $ 79.30 per qtr. $ 7 1.80 per qtr. $ 2.97/1000 gallon plus $ 7.50 per quarter per connection MUNICIPAL WATER RATES Navarre Area Billing & Ready to Serve Chg Water Usage Rate Unconnected Property Chg $ 22.00/qtr $ 1.87/1000 gal $ 22.00/qtr $ 22.60/qtr $ 1.92/1000 gal $ 22.60/qtr 1998 1999 DESCRIPTION ££££££ Wat^r Rates continued Highway 12 Area Billing & Ready to Serve Chg $ 8.10/qtr $ 8.30/qtr Water Usage Rate $ 2.59/1000 gal $ 2.66/1000 gal Chev>' Chase Area Billing Ready to Serve Chg $ 8.10/qtr $ 8.30/qtr Water Usage Rate $ 2.06/1000 gal $ 2.1211000 gal Bulk sale to Minnetonka Beach for Lafayette Ridge Area Area # 1 Rate $22.40/qtr billing charge $22.60/qtr billing plus $1.87/1000 gallon total charge plus $1.92/1000 flow at border meter gallon total flow at border meter Water Tum-On $18.00 Minimum $20.00 (Minimum) Water Turn-Off $18.00 Minimum $20.00 (Minimum) RECYCLING CHARGE $22.60/ year $23.08/year A printed copy of the 1999 Fee Sciiedule Ordinance is available for inspection by any person at the office of the City Clerk during regular ofilce hours. This ordinance becomes effective the week of January 4, 1999. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on this 1998, by a vote of___ayes and_____nays. day of December, ATTEST:Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk « « w.. . .*-'-----.1:/.. Pec U 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: December 4, 1998 ITEM NO: / ^ Department Approval: Name Lin Vec Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:m Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report ✓ Item Description: Proposed 1999 Meeting Schedule Attachment: Proposed 1999 Orono Meeting Schedule On the attached schedule. Council meetings are scheduled for the 2nd and 4th Mondays of the month at 7:00 p.m. As in the past, only one Council meeting is scheduled in December. Plarming Commission is scheduled to meet the 3rd Monday of the month at 6:30 p.m. January and February are the exceptions because of Monday holidays. In those monthb, the meetings will be on tlie third Tuesday. In past years there has not been a meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled in December. Park Commission meetings are scheduled for the first Monday of the montli at 7:15 p.m. Exceptions are July 4 and September 6 when the meeting is scheduled for the first Tuesday because of the Monday holiday. The City schedules eleven holidays tliroughout the year which are indicated with an "X". Because Christmas falls on a Saturci.i>, both Thursday and Friday, December 23 and 24 are designated holidays. Since New Year's Day, 2000 falls on a Saturday, the official holiday will be December 31, 1998 but will be included w ith the year 2000 holidays. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to amend/approve/table the 1999 Meeting Schedule. I OOP nmiNO yiFFTINC SCHF.DULF. - COUNCIT. CIIAMnERS 2^ 7:00 p.m. Council meeting 2nd & 4th Monday ^6:30 p.m. Planning Commission 3rd Monday 2a7:15 p.m. Park Commission 1st Monday N^Othcr Event ^Official Holiday January W T 6 13 ® 20 26 27 7 14 21 20 1999 F S X 2 8 9 15 16 22 23 29 30 Soplembcr February S M T A 2 9 21 23 23 28 1999 March W T F S S M T W 3 4 5 6 A 2 3 10 11 12 13 7 el 9 10 17 18 19 20 14 1 12 16 17 24 25 26 27 21 |^ 23 24 28 29 30 31 T 4 11 18 25 1999 F S 5 12 19 26 6 13 20 27 June S M 6 A 13 T W T 12 3 4 8 9 10 11 15 16 17 18 20 gjj 22 23 24 25 27 ^ 29 30 1999 F S 5 12 19 26 July S M T W 4 11 18 M 25 ^ 7 hj 13 14 20 21 27 28 T 1 8 15 22 29 1999 F S 2 9 16 23 30 3 10 17 24 31 October 1999 S M T W T F S 1 2 16 7 0 9 ! 13 14 15 16 I 20 21 22 23 26 27 20 29 30 November 1999 S M T W T F S A 2 3 4 5 6 9 10 12 13 16 17 18 19 20 23 24 ^ 27 20 29 30 Adopted: April S M T W 1999 T F $ 1 2 3 8 9 10 5 16 17 :2 23 24 !9 30 T 3 1999 W T F S 4 5 6 7 10 11 12 13 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 123| 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 December S M T 5 A 7 12 14 W 1 0 15 T 2 9 16 1999 F S 3 4 10 11 17 10 19 20 21 22 26 27 20 29 30 I * r - dec 14 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION '.o Date: December 8,1998 Item No: ^ 0 Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name: Title: Gary Chcswick J:\<S2- Chief of Police Item Description: Letter of Intent to Purchase - Three 1999 Ford Crown Victoria Squad Cars Exhibits:None DISCUSSION I am requesting approval to send a letter to Superior Ford, (who was awarded the Hennepin County squad purchasing bid), with the intent to purchase three (3) 1999 Ford Crown Victoria squad cars. These three vehicles are budgeted for and are to replace three older cars; Squad 176 with mileage of 110,000 - Squad 175 with 106,900 miles - Squad 170 with 111,000 miles, (mileage based on actual miles as of 12/4/98) Cost per car is S21,064.00. This request for intent to purchase is due to the restrictive number of vehicles being built. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Approval of letter to be sent to Superior Ford. DEC 14 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION C'lvr. Department Approval: Name: Title: Administrator Reviewed: Chief of Police ff) Date: December 3,1998 Item No: ^ j Agenda Section: Item Description: Six Month Wage Increase for Officer Chris Fischer Exhibits:None DISCUSSION On June 8, 1998, Officer Chris Fischer was approved to become a temporary, full time police officer to fill in for Mark Thornton who is on sick leave. During the past six months, I have had the opportunity to evaluate Officer Fischer's performance and found it to be exemplary. I am requesting Chris Fischer receive a step wage increase currently provided all full-time officers after six months of continuous duty. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve wage increase for Chris Fischer to pay rate of $ 14.77 per hour, effective December 7,1998. DEC 14 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY O 'v:; vor-j DATE: December 10,1998 ITEM NO:3^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Long Lake Fire Services Contract Renewal for 1999/2000/2001 Attachments:1. Letter from Joe Lynch, Long Lake City Administrator Regarding the Fire Services Contract Renewal 2. 1999 Long Lake Fire Department Budget 3. Three Year Budget Proposal and Cost Allocation Information The City of Long Lake has submitted a three year fire services contract for the City's appro\al. The current fire services contract with the City of Long Lake, which runs through the year 2000, limits annual expenditure increases to a maximum of 4%. The total 1999 Long Lake fire services budget is $162,761.00. This is an increase of $6,260.00 or 4.0%. Due to the cost allocation formula, Orono's actual costs under the 1999 fire services contract will increase from $109,316.00 to $115,648.00. This is a $6,332.00 or 5.79% increase. The additional 1.79% increase beyond the 4.0% is due to substantial increases in Orono's fire call hours and market value, which are the two factors in the cost allocation formula. The result of these increases is that Orono's share of the Fire Department expenditures has increased from 69.85% in 1998 to 71.05% in 1999. This is a trend that will continue as Orono continues to develop in the Long Lake fire service area. It is recommended the fire services contract with the Long Lal:e Fire Department be renewed for the years 1999, 2000 and 2001. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the e.xtension of the fire serv ices contract at the Long Lake Fire Department for the years 1999,2000, and 2001, and to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the contract. i /fX CITY OF LONG LAKE L)EC 0 November 24, 1998 Oil ' Ron Moorse, City Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 Dear Ron: Enclosed is a copy of the Fire Contract for 1999, 2000, and 2001 with the City of Long Lake and the Long Lake Volunteer Fire Department for Fire Protection Services. Your cost for 1999 is: $115,648.00. This is a $6,332.00 increase from 1998 and a 5.79% increase. This increase is due to the fact that you had a nearly double-digit percentage increase in your three-year call hours In addition, you had a 9.3% increase in market value. Please take this contract to your City Council at your earliest possible convenience and sign and return one copy to the City of Long Lake. By agreeing to the new contract you automatically extend the Fire Contract for an additional year to the year 2001. If you have any questions. Please feel free to give me a call Sincerely yours, Jokem P. Lynch Ciry Administrator cc: City Council, LLFD File, M. Brown, J. Cox enclosures: Fire Contract 1964 Park Avenue • Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 • 612-473-6961 612-476-9622 (fax) f V Long Lake Volunteer Fire Department 1999 Forecast 1998 Budget 1999 Budget Variance Officers Pay $11,300 $11,300 $- Fire Personnel $35,410 $36,275 $865 Administration Support $3,053 $3,118 $65 FICA $3,497 $3,878 $381 PERA $•$147 $147 Employer Paid Health $-$-$- Aiditing and Acct'g Svc $-$-$m E. ctric Utilities $2,250 $2,200 $(50) Gas Utilities $1,950 $2,000 $50 Telephone $1,550 $2,400 $850 Motor Fuels $2,100 $1,500 $(600) Dues and Subscriptions $600 $900 $300 Worker's Comp Ins Prem $3,031 $3,000 $(31) General Liability Ins.$13,000 $10,000 $(3,000) Medical and Dental Fees $4,760 $2,500 $(2,260) Personnel Testing $-$-$- Fire Pension Contributions $18,000 $22,000 $4,000 WAFTA $1,300 $1,300 $- Repairts/Maint Machinery/Equip $4,000 $6,000 $2,000 Pagers $1,500 $2,400 $900 Radio Units $4,000 $4,000 $- Building Rental $13,200 $13,200 $- Repairs/Maint Buildings $500 $1,000 $500 Equipment Rentals $-$-$- Accessories (paper, pens, etc)$1,700 $1,500 $(200) Printed Forms $-$-$- Medical Supplies $1,400 $1,400 $- Protective Gear/Uniforms $9,000 $10,000 $1,000 Shop Supplies $-$m $- Small Tools and Minor Equipment $-$-$- Miscellaneous (General)$1,500 $1,843 $343 Training and hstruct'on $10,000 $11,000 $1,000 Equipment Parts $7,000 $7,000 $- Chemicals and Chemical Products $900 $900 $- Total $156,501 $162,761 $6,260 Page 1 1999 Three Year Budget Proposal X City Fire Service Area Statistics -1999 Long Lake Fire Department Call Hours Total Orono Long Lake Medina Hours %Hours %Hours % 1995 3840 2270 59.11%1329 34.61%241 6.28% 1996 3997 2522 63.10%1233 30.85%242 6.05% 1997 4195 2762 65.84%1239 29.54% 194 4.62% Total •12032 7554 62.78%3801 31.59%677 5.63% lAnriual Average 4011 2518 1267 226 1999 City Call Percentage 62.78%31.59%5.63% 1997 City Fire Service Area Market Values (Million $)$ 512.21 $ 111.09 $ 63.31 t998 City Fire Service Area Market Value Percentage 74.60%16.18%9.22% • 1999 City Budget Percentage 71.05%20.80%8.14% Year One Operating Budget I (1999) City Share | Year Two Operating Budget I (2000) City Share ~\ Year Three Operating Budget I (2001) City Share | $162,761 $169,271 $176,042 1 ORONO 1 ■ LONG LAKEI r MEDINA 1 1 $115,648 1 • 33.859 1 1 $ 13 253“! 1 $120,274 1 h 35.214 1 1 $ 13.783 1 1 $125,085 1 h 36.622 1 1 $ 14.335 1 9/23/98 Page 1 L ....- i DEC 14 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ciTYO:' DATE: December 10, 1998 ITEM NO:;?3 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: 1999 Non-Union Pay and Benefits Adjustments - Resolution Attachments:1. Resolution Approving Pay Plan Adjustments for Non-Union City Employees for 1999 2. Non-Union Employee Compensation Plan for 1999 3. Non-Union Pay Levels and Pay Ranges for 1999 It is reeommended that, for 1999, the non-union pay schedule be increased by 3% and the City's insurance contribution be increased from $328.50 per month to $345.00 per month, an increase of $16.50 per month. Pay Adjustment Annual pay adjustments are generally based on the Consumer Price Index increase and adjustments being provided in the marketplace. As was discussed at the City budget meetings, although the annualized CPI increase is currently at approximately 1.6%, both public and private sector organizations are increasing pay by 3-4% for 1999, with cities averaging 3%. To remain competitive in recruiting and retaining quality employees, Orono needs to keep pace with the market. Therefore the recommendation is that the City's non-union pay schedule be increased by 3% for 1999. Insurance Contribution The City generally increases its insurance contribution by an amount equal to 50% of the average premium increase in the City's health insurance plans. For 1999, the cooperative insurance purchasing group in which the City participates for health insurance has eliminated two of the three health insurance plans, leaving the plan that has the widest network but also the highest cost. By doing so, the cost of the family coverage premium of the highest cost insurance plan will be reduced by $19.08 per month. However, the cost to those who were on the lower cost plans will increase by either $40.25 or $58.18, depending on which plan they were on. Although 50% of the average premium increase, factoring in the $19.08 reduction in the highest cost plan, is $13.23 per month, it is staffs recommendation that the City's insurance contribution be increased by $ 16.50 per month to somewhat soften the increase to those who are moving from the low cost plans to the higher cost plan. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving pay plan adjustments for non-union City employees for 1999. 1’ RESOLUTION APPROVING PAY PLAN ADJUSTMENTS FOR NON-UNION CITY EMPLOYEES FOR 1999 WHEREAS, the City Administrator is responsible for annually presenting a pay schedule for city employees, with the exception of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements: and WHEREAS, the City Administrator has presented the City Council with said pay schedule for calendar and budget year 1999, which pay schedule is attached hereto and hereby made a part of this resolution; and WHEREAS, sufficient funds have been appropriated in the proposed 1999 Annual Budget to fund the recommended pay schedule and such other matters of compensation as herein specified. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Orono City Council as follows: 1.That the 1999 employee pay schedule, reflecting a 3.0% pay adjustment, attached hereto and made a part thereof, is approved. 2.That the city's contribution toward the cost of employee group insurance increase to a maximum of $345.00 per month. 3.That city employees using their own vehicles for approved work related business shall be compensated at a rate of $.33 per mile. Adopted by the Council this 14th day of December, 1998. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Page 1 of 1 Updated 12/09/98 CITY OF ORONO NON-UNION EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION PLAN POSITION/POINT GROUPINGS FOR 1999 Grouping Point Range Mid Point Position in Grouping 1 44-47 45.5 Community Service Officer 2 48-51 49.5 Laborer, Clerical I 3 52-55 53.5 Clerical 11 4 56-59 57.5 Secretary, Deputy Clcrk/Secretary, Payroll/Utili.y Billing Specialist 5 60-64 62 Police Office Manager, Public Works Maintenance Worker 6 65-68 66.5 On-Site Septic Manager (E) Assistant Zoning Administrator (E) 7 69-73 71 City Clerk (E), Golfi Course Supervisor (E), Building Inspector 8 74-78 76 Asst. Finance Director/MlS Coord (E), 9 79-83 81 Building Official (E) 10 0000100186 City Planner/Zoning Administrator (E), Public Works Supervisor 11 (E) 11 89 - 93 91 Senior Planning Coordinator (E), Police Sergeant 12 94-99 96.5 13 100-105 102.5 14 106-111 108.5 Police Chief (E), Finance Director (E), Public Services Director (E) 15 112- 118 115 16 119-125 122 City Administrator (E) (E) - Exempt LIVROVCOMPENSA City of Orono Compensation Plan Pay Levels and Pay Ranges For 1999 Increase 3.0% Step I Step II Step III Step IV Level Hourly Annual Hourly Annual Hourly Annual Hourly Annual 1 10.69 22,238.00 11.33 23,566.00 11.97 24,895.00 12.60 26,202.00 2 11.32 23,545.00 11.99 24,938.00 12.66 26,330.00 13.33 27,723.00 3 12.05 25,066.00 12.76 26,544.00 13.47 28,023.00 14.18 29,501.00 4 12.79 26,609.00 13.53 28,151.00 14.29 29,715.00 15.05 31,300.00 5 13.67 28,430.00 14.46 30,079.00 15.26 31,750.00 16.06 33,400.00 6 14.83 30,851.00 15.69 32,629.110 16.58 34,493.00 17.44 36,271.00 7 16.00 33,271.00 16.94 35,242.00 17.89 37,213.00 18.83 39,163.00 8 17.22 35,821.00 18.24 37,942.00 19.25 40,041.00 20.27 42,162.00 9 18.58 38,649.00 19.67 40,920.00 20.76 43,191.00 21.86 45,462.00 10 20.31 42,248.00 21.52 44,755.00 22.70 47,218.00 23.92 49,747.00 11 21.86 45,462.00 23.13 48,118.00 24.42 50,796.00 25.71 53,474.00 12 23.48 48,847.00 24.87 51,739.00 26.25 54,610.00 27.63 57,481.00 13 25.33 52,682.00 26.81 55,767.00 28.30 58,873.00 29.79 61,958.00 14 27.33 56,838.00 28.93 60,180.00 30.54 63,522.00 32.15 66,864.00 15 29.76 61,894.00 31.51 65,536.00 33.26 69,178.00 35.01 72,820.00 16 32.38 67,357.00 34.29 71,320.00 36.19 75,284.00 38.10 79,247.00 Part Time Regular Positions Level Stepi Step II Stet) III Step rv Comments 2 10.20 10.80 11.39 11.99 Qerical I, L-2 S-II max. 4 10.88 11.53 12.14 12.79 Police Secrclaiy, L-4 S-I max. COUr.'ClL f.'iiTi.’vO DEC 14 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION t.:, - • ) DATE: December 10, 1998 ITEM NO = 5.^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Authorization of Expenditures for Septic Testing for Properties Affected by Highway 12 Right-of-Way Acquisition The City Council has determined that the City will provide as much assistance as possible to the owners of properties that will be acquired, either totally or partially, as right-of-way for the Highway 12 upgrade project. A key element in providing as much flexibility to the property owners as possible, in terms of the use of the land and their negotiations with Mn/DOT, is information regarding the viability of the lots after the right-of-way taking. Staff has provided an analysis of the impacts to the lots in terms of lot sizes and setbacks. The missing piece of information is the availability of primary and alternate septic drainfield sites. Information regarding whether the lots will have adequate septic sites after the right-of-way taking can be provided by conducting septic testing on the affected lots. Staff has contacted septic testing and surveying firms to obtain pricing for the septic testing and for surveying that may be needed to identify property comers. The most favorable pricing was received from S & P Testing and Coffin Gronberg Surveying. The estimated cost of the work is as follows: A. Septic testing B. Surveying Total $4,500 $3.000 $7,500 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to authorize expenditures in an amount not to exceed $7,500 for septic testing and related surveying to identify potential drainfield sites on those properties affected by the Highway 12 right- of-way taking, the expenditures to be funded from the General Fund Contingency account. ¥ DEC I4 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION crri'rrcRcr;0 DATE: December 11,1998 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Schedule Work Session to Conduct the Annual City Administrator Performance Evaluation It is time again for the City Council to review the performance of the City Administrator. Council may at this time want to schedule a work session for this purpose. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to schedule a work session to conduct the annual review of the performance of the City Administrator. I 1 f ^ >- Ct .—■14. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Dec 14 1998 f T>' - ■ - no-,j DATE: December 9,1998 ITEM NO Department Approval: Name Tom KuehiTP^tl* __ » Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: 1998 Interfimd Transfers and Loan Payments Attachment: Schedule of 1998 Interfund Transfers and Loan Payments At the end of each year the Council is requested to authorize transfer of monies between funds. These transactions fall into two categories: 1. ) Budgeted Transfers - Items designated in that year's budget when originally adopted for the purpose of providing support from one fund to another. 2. ) Fund Obligations - Loans and payments from one fund to another to reim burse expenses incurred by one fund on behalf of another. This is generally for City portions of special assessments. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of transfers as indicated on the attached schedule seconded by.to approve the inter-PROPOSED MOTION: - Moved by,__ frmd operating transfers, loan payments and special assessment payments on City owned property as presented, effective December 31, 1998. Ayes___, Nays___. I SCHEDULE OF 199R TNTERFIJND TRANSFERS AND LOAN PAYMFNTS FROM FUND General General General Building Outlay Building Outlay TO FI AMOUNT PURPOSE Imp and Equip Outlay $ 95,000 1995 G. O. Refimding Bond $ 3,940 Debt Service (for 1985 Improvements) Imp and Equip Outlay $ 8,400 1991 Public Facility Revenue Bonds Debt Service $ 130,000 Building Outlay Water Operating Fund $ 475,000 1998 Shoreline/Heritage $341,000 Sanitary Sewer Construction Fund Annual operating transfer for capital equipment purchases, as budgeted. Budgeted payment, 13 th of 15 for special assessments re: sani tary sewer on City owned property in Crystal Bay (Principal $3,080, Int $860.) Balo/s 12-31-98: $6,152. Budgeted payment, 2nd of 5 for police records computer system. Annual operating transfer for debt serv ice support of HRA Building Bonds, as budgeted. Budgeted interfund loan, to assist in funding the Navarre water treatment plant rehabilitation. Interfimd loan to fund the sanitary sewer project until bonds are sold. DEC 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION (i IV 0.'* c ^o^:o DATE; December 8,1998 ITEM NO: 7 Department Approval: /X Name TomKuehn^^’ Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Authorization to disburse City funds for claims received This month we have only one Council meeting, scheduled for Monday, December 14th. The second Council meeting, which falls on or near the Christmas holiday, has been can celled, in line with previous years practices. We will have the next scheduled Council meeting on Monday, January 11,1999. We therefore are requesting authorization to do a normal claims processing for the canceled Council meeting. This practice has been done in December each year with the Council then formally approving the claims at the first meeting in January of the following year. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to authorize the City Treasurer to disburse City funds in payment of claims received for the December 28th Council meeting, which has been canceled, and that such paid claims be presented for formal approval at the January 11. 1999 Council meeting. I ! j I RFQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION C ,4« I.. ^ ^ I i,\ , DEC 1998 CiTY^i"CP.0^:0 DATE: December 10,1998 ITEM NO: ^ g Department Approval: ^ Name Tom Kuehn ^' Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Appoint Auditor for Fiscal Year 1998 We have requested a cost estimate from the audit firm of Malloy, Montague, Kamowski, Radosevich & Company for performing the 1998 fiscal year audits. They have submitted an estimate, including the Minnesota legal compliance audit, and assistance with the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Program, of $19,200 excluding direct expenses. This compares with an actual cost for 1997 of $18,650 plus $794 for direct expenses. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Council appointment of the audit firm of Malloy, Montague, Kamowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. to perform the required audits for the 1997 fiscal year records at an estimated cost of $19,200, plus direct expenses. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DEC I4 1998 CITY or CRO^iO DATE: December 8,1998 ITEM NO;21 Department Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval Home Occupation Club & Sunday On Sale 3.2 Beer Jennifer M. L'Aller 2684 Lydiard Avenue (Hair salon and services) Wayzata Country Club 200 Wayzata Boulevard Lakeview Golf of Orono, Inc. 405 North Arm Drive Off Sale 3.2 Beer Orono Public Golf Course 265 Orono Orchard Road Orono Self Service 2160 Wayzata Boulevard O’Sullivan's 2420 Shadyw'ood Road O'Sullivan's II 3340 Shoreline Drive On & Off Sale 3.2 Beer Navarre Lanes 3435 Shoreline Drive COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the above listed license(s). APPLICATION FOR ANNUAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE CITY OF ORONO 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 SEP 2 8 OF OROI'^O PHONE: ^NAME: HJpnni(rr M> UfjWcr ____ ADDRESS: l-yA'mrri fXCrJs’fOr M/0 5S33) street BUSINESS NAME: city/state TYPE OF BUSINESS TO BE OPERATED: Air If^A ^ Hlr OilOOnrtpn Niimh#»r nf Fmnlftvees Within Oneration: I (Provide names of emolovees on back of application) ^ 'Number of Employees Within Operation:_j__ (Provide names of employees Check One: Initial Review Fee $50,00 u' Annual Review Fee $30.00 License may be revoked if any violation occurs. City staff shall have five (5) business days in which to investigate and make a recommendation pursuant to Oronc Municipal Code Section 5.02 & 5.03. If a site inspection is required by City staff, the review time will be extended to ten (10) business days. The license application with staff recommendation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regularly scheduled meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month. ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 4 (C) Prohibited Home Occupation Practices 1. It is unlawful for any business operating as a home occupation to engage in operation without proper licenses. 2. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dwelling. 3. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permitted in the residential zone. 4. No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises. 5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. 6. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from within the structure. : The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Codi additional conditions the City may require. Signature of Applicant^^^p^,^/^/A$^A^ U\ ------------------------- FOR CITY USE ONLYr' After ^feview of application, staff recommends the following: Approval of application __________ Denial of application Date: //> Signature of Zoning Official:__^ / L. Signature of Building Official: Application Date:,________^Date License Approved:_________Date License Expired: Date:November 24, 1998 To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police Subject: Liquor License - Wayzata Country Club I have reviewed the liquor license application submitted by Kenneth R. Galloway on behalf of the Wayzata Country Club. The police department has conducted appropriate background investigation and reviewed past history of the establishment. I have no objection to the issuance of this license. Date:December 8,1998 To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Gary Cheswick, Chief of Polic Subject: On Sale License for Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquors I have conducted routine background investigation on Mr. Wenkstem and Lakeview Golf Course for purposes of issuing a non-intoxicating malt liquor license. No problems were found. I have no objection to the issuance of this license. L Date:November 24,1998 To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police" Subject:Liquor License Orono Golf Course i I have reviewed the application of Ronald Steffenhagen on behalf of the Orono Golf Course for the on sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license. Background investigation was conducted and no problems were found. I have no objection to the issuance of the license. Date:November 24,1998 To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police Subject:Off Sale 3.2 Beer License Orono Self Service I have reviewed the application of William Wear on behalf of the Orono Self Service for off sale 3.2 beer license. I note there was a past liquor lav/ violation in 1993, but no problems have been reported since that time. I have no objection to the issuance of the license. 1 Date:Decembers, 1998 To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police^ Subject:Off Sale License for 3.2 Beer O'Sullivan's - 2420 Shadywood Road I have reviewed the application of John O'Sullivan on behalf of O'Sullivan's for off sale license for 3.2 beer. After checking the background investigation and past records, I have no objection to the issuance of this license. Date:December 3,1998 To: From: Ron Moorse, City Administrator Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police Subject: Off Sale License for 3.2 Beer O'Sullivan's n • 3340 Shoreline Drive I have reviewed the application of John O'Sullivan on behalf of O'Sullivan's II for off sale license for 3.2 beer. After checking the background investigation and past records, I have no objection to the issuance of this license. Date:November 24,1998 To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police^ Subject:Liquor License Navarre Bowling Lanes I have reviewed the application of Donald A. Scherven on behalf of Navarre Bowling Lanes for the on sale and off sale license for 3.2 beer. Background investigation was conducted and no problems were found. I have no objection to the issuance of the license. 10 Dec 1998 :hu 2:01 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name :heck Number 56535 S6535 KN DEPT OF COMMERCE 01-Dec-98 MN DEPT OF COMMERCE Totals Check Number 56535 MN DEPT OF COMMERCE Check Number 56536 RED APRON CATERING 56536 Ol-Dec-98 RED APRON CATERING Totals Check Number 56536 RED APRON CATERING Check Number 56537 RED APRON CATERING 56537 Ol-Dec-98 RED APRON CATERING Totals Check Number 56537 RED APRON CATERING Check Number 56538 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT 56538 Ol-Dec-98 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT Totals Check Number 56538 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT Check Number 56539 DEPUTY REGISTRAR 56539 Ol-Dec-98 DEPUTY REGISTRAR Totals Check Number 56539 DEPUTY REGISTRAR Check Number 56540 SHER TOOL 56540 Ol-Dec-98 SHER TOOL Totals Check Number 56540 SHER TOOL Check Number 57625 WETT. MARGE 57625 Ol-Dec-98 WETT, MARGE Totals Check Number 57625 WETT, MARGE Check Number 57631 WETT. MARGE 57631 Ol-Dec-98 WETT, MARGE Totals Check Number 57631 WETT, MARGE Check Number 57632 WETT. RICHARD 57632 Ol-Dec-98 WETT. RICHARD Totals Check Number 57632 WETT. RICHARD Transaction Amount 12.00 12.00 0.00 0.00 310.05 310.05 179.51 179.51 16.50 16.50 102.88 102.88 135 00 135.00 66.00 66.00 69.00 69.00 3^ dec 1 4 1998 cm'or cncv'j Comments UNCLAIMED PROPERTY 6-95 VOID BOX LUCHES - ELECTION DAY SKREEN S0010755723 TABS FOR #170 DRILL CHUCKS ELECTION JUDGE ELECTION JUDGE ELECTION JUDGE . 10 Dec 1998 Thu 2:01 PM Check Register City of Orono Page 2 Check Number Date Name Transaction Amount Comments Check Number 57633 57633 57633 HAGEN, MATTHEW 01-Dec-90 HAGEN, MATTHEW HAGEN, MATTHEWOl-Dec-98 -3.08 6.16 PICA BENEFIT IN ERROR REPAY SOC SEC DEDUCTION Totals Check Number 57633 HAGEN, MATTHEW 3.08 Check Number 57634 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 57634 57634 57634 57634 Ol-Dec-90 Ol-Dec-98 Ol-Dec-98 Ol-Dec-90 MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE 9.00 45.00 448.00 2,415.00 OCTOBER SALES TAX OCTOBER SALES TAX OCTOBER SALES TAX OCTOBER SALES TAX Totals Check Number 57634 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 2,917.00 Grand Total 3,541.02 4 J i I ( 10 Dec 1998 Thu 1:50 PM Check Regiiter City of Orono Page 1 Check Number Date Name Tranaaction Amount Comments Qieck Number 57732 57732 57732 ACTION RADIO & CO^WUNICATIONS lO-Dec-90 ACTION RADIO k C0^f1UNICATI0NS lO-Dec-98 ACTION RADIO k COMMUNICATIONS Totals Check Number 57732 ACTION RADIO k COMMUNICATIONS 2.859.78 635.81 3,495.59 RADIO BASE STATION RADIO BASE STATION Check Number 57733 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUE 57733 57733 57733 03-Aug-98 03- Aug-98 04- Nov-90 Totals Check Number AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUE AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUE AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUE 57733 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUE 17.14 17.14 354.65 388.93 UTILITY-ON CALL PHONE UTILITY-ON CALL PHONE CELL PHONES Check Number 57734 ALL STAR ELECTRIC 57734 57734 O8-Dec-90 O8-Dec-90 Totals Check Number ALL STAR ELECTRIC ALL STAR ELECTRIC 57734 ALL STAR ELECTRIC 4,478.27 657.25 5,135.52 HIRING - GENERATORS REPAIRS-TRAPPIC SIGNALS Check Number 57735 AMERICAN MEDICAL SECURITY 57735 08-Oec-98 Totals Check Number AMERICAN MEDICAL SECURITY 57735 AMERICAN MEDICAL SECURITY 675.36 675.36 DECEMBER INS 1100-017010 Check Number 57736 57736 AT A T - lO-Eksc-98 AT A T - Totals Check Number 57736 AT A T - Check Number 57737 57737 57737 57737 57737 AT A T WIRELESS SERVICES/A2 lO-Dec-98 10 Dec-98 lO-Dec-98 O8-Dec-90 Totals Check Number AT A T WIRELESS SERVICES/AZ AT A T WIRELESS SERVICES/AZ AT A T WIRELESS SERVICES/AZ AT A T WIRELESS SERVICES/AZ 57737 AT A T WIRELESS SERVICES/AZ 48.40 48.40 -14.09 5.50 5.49 309.78 306.68 LONG DISTANCE CHGS CELLULAR PHONE CHGS CELLULAR PHONE CHGS CELLULAR PHONE CHGS CELL PHONE ACCmil53509 Check Number 57730 57738 BENEPITS DESIGN GROUP 08-Dec-98 Totals Check Number BENEPITS DESIGN GROUP 57730 BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP 672.69 672.69 DECEMBER Check Number 57739 BIFFS INC. 57739 lO-Dec-98 BIFFS INC.74.76 PORTABLE-BIDERWOOO PF 10 Dec 1998 Check Register Thu 1:50 PH City of Orono Check Transaction Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Number 57739 BIFFS INC. 57739 lO-Dec-98 BIFFS INC.-15.17 PORTABLE-HACKBERRY 57739 lO-Dec-98 BIFFS INC.-30.32 PORTABLE-HACKBERRY 57739 lO-Dec-98 BIFFS INC.-30.32 PORTABLE-SUMMIT BEACH 57739 lO-Dec-98 BIFFS INC.59.60 PORTABLE-BIDERWOOD PF Totals Check Number 57739 BIFFS INC.58.55 Page 2 Check Number 57740 BLACKOWIAK & SON 57740 57740 lO-Dec-98 08-Dec-98 Totals Check Number BLACKOWIAK & SON BLACKOWIAK k SON 57740 BLACKOWIAK k SON 350.00 175.00 525.00 LEAF PICKUP LEAF PICKUP Check Number 57741 BUDGET PRINTING 57741 5774X 57741 57741 lO-Dec-98 lO-Dec-98 lO-Dec-98 09-Dec-98 Totals Check Number BUDGET PRINTING BUDGET PRINTING BUDGET PRINTING BUDGET PRINTING 57741 BUDGET PRINTING 7.25 8.40 7.96 156.61 180.22 SHELL CSINGS TO ULTRMAX SHELL CSINGS TO ULTRMAX SHELL CSINGS TO ULTRMAX INITIAL COMPLANT FORM Check Number 57742 CARLSON CONSTRUCTION 57742 08-Dec-98 Totals Check Number CARLSON CONSTRUCTION 57742 CARLSON CONSTRUCTION 3,500.00 3,500.00 GRINDING-FALL CLEANUP Check Number 57743 CHESWICK, GARY 57743 lO-Dec-98 CHESWICK, GARY 13.00 LUNCH-IffiNN CO CHIEF MTG Totals Check Number 57743 CHESWICK, GARY 13.00 Check Number 57744 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 57744 09-Oec-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 16.75 CHECK BRAISS 57744 09-Dec-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 198.05 OIL CHG, TIB ROD 57744 09-Dec-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 24.95 MOUNT TIRES 57744 09-Dec-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 32.21 OIL CHANGE 57744 09-Dec-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 455.24 REPLACE STARTER 57744 09-Dec-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 32.21 OIL CHANGE 57744 09-Dec-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 115.23 REPLACE PITMAN ARM 57744 09-Dec-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 80.50 OIL CHG. MOUNT/ROTATE 57744 09-Dec-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 60.66 OIL CHG. MOUirr TIRES 57744 09-Dec-98 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 19.68 MOUNT TIRE Totals Check Numbe,-57744 CHUNKS LAKESHORE ALTO 1,037.48 Check Nurabei 57741 CITY OF MEDINA 57745 08-DCC-98 CITY OF MEDINA 640.00 SECURITY - PAULUCCI 10 Dec 1998 Thu 1:50 PM Check Number Date Name Check Register City of Orono Transaction Amount Page 3 Comments Check Number 57745 CITY OF MEDINA Totals Check Number 57745 CITY OF MEDINA 640.00 Check Number 57746 CITY OF MOUND 57746 09-Dec-98 Totals Check Number CITY OP MOUND 57746 CITY OP MOUND 89.06 89.06 PHEASANT RD HTR MAIN BRK Check Number 57747 CITYVIEW PLUMBING & HEATING 57747 57747 57747 08-Dec-98 08- Cec-98 09- Dec-90 Totals Check Number CITYVIEW PLUMBING & HEATING CITYVIEW PLUMBING k HEATING CITYVIEW PLUMBING k HEATING 57747 CITYVIEW PLUMBING 4 HEATING 91.70 117.92 2,310.74 2,520.36 REPAIRS-LR SINK REPAIR-MEN'S URINAL SEPTIC TO SWR-MARVIN RES Check Number 57748 CLASSIFIEDS 57748 08-Dec-98 Totals Check Number CLASSIFIEDS 57748 CLASSIFIEDS 52.60 52.60 ADV FOR RECORDER Check Number 57749 CON-MIX 57749 09-Dec-98 Totals Check Number CON-MIX 57749 CON-MIX 243.89 243.89 CONCRETE - BB POLES Check Number 57750 CONSTRUCTION MARKET DATA GRP 57750 08-Dec-98 Totals Check Number CONSTRUCTION MARKET DATA GRP 57750 CONSTRUCTION MARKET DATA GRP 47.85 47.85 ADV - LAWN MOWING Check Number 57751 CONTECH INC. 57751 08-Dec-98 Totals Check Number CONTECH INC. 57751 CONTECH INC. 2,246.09 2,246.09 CULVERTS, APRONS Check Number 57752 CYS UNIFORMS 57752 57752 09-Dec-98 09-Dec-98 Totals Check Number CYS UNIFORMS CYS UNIFORMS 57752 CYS UNIFORMS 8.51 82.90 91.41 NAME PLATE SHIRTS 4 EMBLEMS Check Number 57753 E-Z RECYCLING 57753 08-Dec-98 Totals Check Nun^er E-Z RECYCLING 57753 E-Z RECYCLING 5,583.48 5,583.48 NOVEMBER RECYCLING 10 Dec 199S Check Register Page Thu 1;S0 PM City of Orono Check Transaction Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Number 57754 EARL F. ANDERSON & ASSOC. 57754 09-Dec-98 EARL F. ANDERSON k ASSOC.192.70 HYDRANT MARKERS 57754 09-Dec-98 EARL F. ANDERSON k ASSOC.275.49 ST SIGN POLES 57754 08-Dec-98 EARL F. ANDERSON k ASSOC.1,600.50 BB POST, BACKBOARD, NET 57754 08-Dec-98 EARL F. ANDERSON k ASSOC.98.74 DEER XING SIGN 57754 08-Dec-98 CARL F ANDERSON k ASSOC.137.20 ROAD SIGNS Totals Check Number 57754 EARL F. ANDERSON k ASSOC.2,302.63 Check Number 57755 ESS BROTHERS k SONS 57755 08-Dec-98 ESS BROTHERS k SONS 715.68 lai SELF SEALING COVER 57755 09-Dec-98 ESS BROTHERS k SONS 76.68 lai - SANITARY COVER Totals Check Number 57755 ESS BROTHERS k SONS 792.36 Check Number 57756 EULL'S MANUFACTURING CO. INC. 57756 09-Dec-98 BULL'S MANTTFACTURING CO. INC.87.86 lai - MANHOLE RINGS 57756 09-Dec-98 BULL'S MANUFACTURING CO. INC.175.73 lai MANHOLE RINGS Totals Check N'omber 57756 BULL'S MANUFACTURING CO. INC.263.59 Check Number 57757 EXPRESS MESSENGER 57757 lO-Dec-98 EXPRESS MESSENGER 19.65 DEL TO MN DOT 57757 lO-Dec-98 EXPRESS MESSENGER 68.60 DEL TO HINSHAW Totals Check Number 57757 EXPRESS MESSENGER 88.25 Check Number 57758 FRONTIER CO^•1UNICATIONS 57758 08-Dec-98 FRONTIER CO^f^UNICATIONS 31.62 V MAIL-ACCT #612-985-1142 Totals Check Number 57758 FRONTIER COft^UNICATIONS 31.62 Check Number 57760 G k K SERVICES 57760 lO-Dec-98 G 6 K SERVICES 5.93 UNIFORM - STBFFENHAGEN 57760 lO-Dec-98 0 6 X SERVICES 101.08 UNIFORMS 57760 lO-Dec-98 Q k K SERVICES 14.00 UNIFORM - RATHBUN 57760 lO-Dec-98 Q k K SERVICES 33.95 MOPS 57760 lO-Dec-98 G li K SERVICES 5.93 UNIFORM - STBFFENHAGEN 57760 lO-Dec-98 Q a K SERVICES 62.14 UNIFORMS 57760 lO-Dec-98 G a K SERVICES 14.00 UNIFORM - RATHBUN 57760 lO-Dec-98 G a K SERVICES 5.93 UNIFORM - STBFFENHAGEN 57760 lO-Dec-98 Q a K SERVICES 90.21 UNIFORMS 57760 lO-Dec-98 G a K SERVICES 14.00 UNIFORM - RATHBUN 57760 lO-Dec-98 G a K SERVICES 5.93 UNIFORM - STEFFENHAGEN 57760 lO-Dec-98 G a K SERVICES 86.44 MATS - PW 57760 lO-Dec-98 G a K SERVICES 42.01 MATS - COUNCIL CHAMBERS 57760 lO-Dec-98 G a K SERVICES 42.01 MATS - ADM 10 Dec 1998 Thu 1:50 PM Check Register City of Orono Page 5 Check Number Cate Name Check Number 57760 57760 57760 G fit K SERVICES lO-Dec-98 G fit K SERVICES lO-Dec-90 G 6 K SERVICES Totals Check Number 57760 G 6 K SERVICES Check Number 57763 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. 57763 57763 08-Dec-98 08-Dec-98 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. Totals Check Number 57763 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. Check Number 57764 hawkins water treatment group 57764 08-Dec-98 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GROUP Totals Check Number 57764 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GROUP Check Number 57765 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE 57765 08-Dec-98 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE Totals Check Number 57765 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE Check Number 57766 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 57766 08-Dec-98 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF Totals Check Number 57766 HENNEPIN COUIfTY SHERIFF Check Number 57767 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 57767 lO-Dec-98 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Totals Check Number 57767 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Transaction Amount 74.64 55.11 653.31 14.00 14.00 28.00 30.00 30.00 77.69 77.69 10/594.99 10.594.99 202.927.23 202.927.23 Comments UNIFORMS MATS - PD Check Number 57762 GENUINE PARTS CO. 57762 lO-Dec-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.8.89 TARP FASTENERS 57762 l>-Dec-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.70.23 IPER BLADES 57762 lO-Dec-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.4.35 AIR FRESHENERS 57762 lO-Dec-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.15.40 REFLECTOR 57762 lO-Dec-98 GEt^UINE PARTS CO.1.86 FLASCHER 57762 lO-Dec-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.10.88 OIL FILTER 57762 i:-Dec-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.9.95 :IL FILTER 57762 lO-Dec-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.11.70 AIR CHUCK 57762 lO-Dec-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.30.81 MISC SUPPLIES 57762 lO-Dec-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.12.65 HD30 OIL 57762 lO-Dec-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.9.27 BULBS, CLEANER 57762 lO-Dec-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.4.78 RAIN-X 57762 lO-Dec-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.16.50 SHOP SUPPLIES 57762 lO-Dec-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.13.12 PLUG. LENS Totals Check Number 57762 GENUINE PARTS CO.220.38 OCTOBER LOCATES OCTOBER LOCATES DEMURRAGE CABIN MIX-SEED ANNUAL RADIO LEASE RGHT OF WY-MSA 53-08-96 Lsatttk 10 Dec 1998 Thu 1:50 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 57768 57768 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS. 08-Dec-98 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS Totals Check Number 57768 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS Check Number 57769 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN 57769 lO-Dec-98 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN Totals Check Number 57769 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN Check Number 57770 HENNEPIN COUNTY - HEALTH 57770 08-Dec-98 HENNEPIN COUNTY - HEALTH Totals Check Number 57770 HENNEPIN COUNTY - HEALTH Check Number 57771 ICMA DISTRIBUTION CENTER 57771 08-Dec-98 ICMA DISTRIBUTION CENTER Totals Check Number 57771 ICMA DISTRIBUTION CENTER Check Number 57772 IIMC 57772 08-Dec-98 IIMC Totals Check Number 57772 IIMC Check Number 57773 J H LARSON COMPANY 57773 57773 lO-Dec-98 09-Dec-98 J H LARSON COMPANY J H LARSON COMPANY Totals Check Number 57773 J H LARSON COMPANY Check Number 57774 J.P. COOKE CO. 57774 lO-Dec-98 J.P. COOKE CO, Totals Check Number 57774 J.P. COOKE CO. Check Number 57775 JOHNSON, BRAD 57‘»75 08-Dec-98 JOHNSON, BRAD Totals Check Number 577:^ •••'HNSON, BRAD Check Number 57776 KD & COMPANY 57776 57776 09-Dec-98 08-Dec-98 KD & COMPAQ KD & COMPANY Totals Check Number 57776 KD & COMPANY Transaction Amount 78.75 78.75 3,115.50 3,115.50 98.00 98.00 26.95 26.95 55.00 55.00 -27.01 105.23 78.22 190.27 190.27 53.49 53.49 6.00 12.00 18.00 Page 6 Comments PROPERTY LIST-DICKEY PARK RM AND BOARD 10/98 LICENSE FEE THE ETHICS EDGE MEMBERSHIP DUES CREDIT FOR DAMAGED BULBS FLUOR LIGHT BULBS DOG TACTS GUN INSPECTOR LAMP DUMP ASPHALT DUMP - ASPHALT 10 Dec 1998 Thu 1:50 PM Check Number Check Number 57777 Check Register City of Orono Date Name 57777 KENNETH N. POTTS. PA O8-Dec-90 KENNETH N. POTTS. PA Totals Check Number 57777 KENNETH N. POTTS. PA Check Number 57778 57778 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC lO-Dec-98 Totals Check Number KUSTOM SIGNALS INC 57778 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Check Number 57779 57779 LAKE KTKA AREA CHAMBER OF COM lO-Dec-98 Totals Check Number LAKE MTKA AREA CHAMBER OP COM 57779 LAKE MTKA AREA CHAMBER OF COM Check Number 57780 57700 LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS 08-Dec-98 Totals Check Nuinber LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS 57780 LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS Check Number 57781 57781 LONG LAKE GLASS INC. 09-Dec-98 Totals Check Number LONG LAKE GLASS INC. 57781 LONG LAKE GLASS INC. Check Number 57782 57782 57782 57782 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT lO-Dec-90 lO-Dec-90 O8-Dec-90 Totals Check Number LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT 57782 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT Check Number 57783 57783 LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIPMENT lO-Dec-98 Totals Check Numbor LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIPMENT 57783 LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIPMENT Check Number 57784 57784 MAGIC CLEANERS 09-Dec-98 Totals Check Number MAGIC CLEANERS 57784 MAGIC CLEANERS Check Number 57785 57785 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SER 09-Dec-98 Totals Check Number MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SER 57785 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SER Transaction Amount 2.291.66 2.291.66 155.65 155.65 12.00 12.00 48.50 46.50 485.00 485.00 24.60 94.00 94.05 212.65 24.29 24.29 6.66 6.66 10.890.00 10.890.00 Page 7 Comments NOVEMBER PROSECUTIONS RADAR REPAIR SEPT LUNCHEON ADV FOR RECORDER WINDSHIELD 8429 BELT WHEEL. CUTQUIK CHAINSAW PARTS DOOR 8430 BLANKET CLEANING OCTOBER SAC CHARGES 10 Dec 1998 Check Register Totals Check Number 57786 MIDWEST ASPHALT Check Number 57787 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 57787 57787 09-Dec-98 09-Dec-98 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Totals Check Number 57787 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMP.-iNY Check Number S7788 MINNEGASCO 57788 57788 57788 09-Dec-98 09-Dec-98 09-Dec-98 MINNEGASCO MINNEGASCO MINNEGASCO Totals Check Number 57788 MINNEGASCO Check Number 57789 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION 57789 08-Dec-98 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION Totals Check Number 57789 MN benefit association Check Number 57790 MN DEPT OP HEALTH 57790 08-Dec-98 DEPT OP HEALTH Totals Check Number 57790 MN DEPT OF HEALTH Check Number 57791 MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 57791 lO-Dec-98 MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION Totals Check Number 57791 MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION Check Number 57792 MN Pv XUTION C0N7P0L AGENCY 57792 08-Dec-98 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Totals Check Number 57792 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Check Number 57793 MTI DIST CO. 57793 08-Dec-98 MTI DIST CO. Totals Check Humber 5*’793 MTI DIST CO. 1.947.11 13.50 27.00 40.50 12.39 136.19 880.37 1,028.95 74.32 74.32 1.126.00 1.126.00 232.00 232.00 240.00 240.00 420.00 420.00 Page 8 Thu 1:50 PM City of Orono Check Transaction Number Date Name Amount Comnvents Check Number 57786 MIDWEST ASPHALT 57786 09-Dec-98 MIDWEST ASPHALT 351.18 PHEASANT WTR MAIN BREAK 57786 09-Dec-98 MIDWEST ASPHALT 104.51 PATCH 57786 08-Dec-98 MIDWEST ASPHALT 545.41 CASCO COVE-MAIN BREAK 57786 08-Dec-98 MIDWEST ASPHALT 686.83 161 - MANHOLE R.EPAIRS 57786 08-Dec-98 MIDWEST ASPHALT 259.18 PATCH MEDICAL OXYGEN ACETYLENE, OXYGEN GAS SERVICE GAS SERVICE GAS SERVICE DISABILITY-BORIS 0669 WATER CONNECTION FEE MNDOT MANUALS PERMIT-HEAD SAN SWR WINTERIZE GC IRRIGATION r.10 Dec 1996 Check Register Thu 1:50 PM City of Orono Check Transaction Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Number 57795 NAVARRE HARDWARE 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 26.52 GRASS SEED-PHEAS RD 57795 lO-Dec-90 NAVARRE HARDWARE 6.35 KEYS 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 2.43 KEYS 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 20.61 MISC SUPPLIES 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 9.53 SCREW EYE. ENAMIL 57795 lO-Dcc-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 26.89 BATTERY 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 3.18 CAULK 57795 lO-Dec-90 NAVARRE HARDWARE 2.44 STD HOSE 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 2.44 BULBS, BOLTS 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDW>RE 8.50 FRAME 57795 lO-Dec-90 NAVARRE HARDWARE 0.55 CLIPS 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 10.11 FLASHLIGHT 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 1.66 BULK BOLTS 57795 XO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 4.24 OV.AL ALU REFLECTOR 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 2.11 HOOK HANGER 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 4.05 BOLTS 57795 lO-Dcc-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 43.40 SM TOOLS, SOAP 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 31.94 PORTABLE HEATER 57795 lO-Dec-90 NAVARRE HARDWARE 7.22 I&I HORTOR MIX 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 17.00 ENA.MEL, BATTERIES 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 25.18 PIPE, ELBOWS 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 18.30 BULBS FOR ENTRYWAY 57795 lO-Dec-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 2.11 FUSS Totals Check Number 57795 NAVARRE HARDWARE 276.76 Check Number 57796 NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS 57796 08-Dec-98 NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS 120.00 PERA LIFE Totals Check Number 57796 NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS 120.00 O'eck Number 57797 NORTH STAR TURF 57797 08-DCC-98 NORTH STAR TURF 57.65 PARTS Check Number 57797 NORTH STAR TURF 57.65 Che^.,^ umber 57798 NSP 57798 08-Dec-98 NSP 129.09 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 57798 08-Dec-98 NSP 172.26 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 57798 08-Dec-98 NSP 1,274.20 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 57798 08-Dec-98 NSP 442.03 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 57798 08-Dec-98 NSP 797.60 ELECTRICAL SERVICE Totals Check Number 57798 NSP 2,815.18 Check Number 57799 OFFICE DEPOT 57799 10-D«C-98 OFFICE DEPOT -19.14 OFFICE SUPPLIES Page 9 10 Dec 1996 Thu 1:50 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 57799 57799 57799 57799 OFFICE DEPOT lO-Dec-98 OFFICE DEPOT lO-Dec-98 OFFICE DEPOT lO-Dec-98 OFFICE DEPOT Totals Check Number 57799 OFFICE DEPOT Check Number 57800 OTTEN BROTHERS 57800 lO-Dec-98 OTTEN BROTJffiRS Totals Check Number 57800 OTTEN BROTHERS Check Number 57801 POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC. 57801 O8-Dec-90 POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC, Totals Check Number 57001 POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC Check Number 57802 PRAIRIE OFFSET 57802 57802 10-Dec<98 lO-Dec-98 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRAIRIE OFFSET Totals Check Number 57802 PRAIRIE OFFSET Check Number 57803 PROTECTION ONE 57803 23-Oct-98 PROTECTION ONE Totals Check Number 57003 PROTECTION ONE Check Number 57004 PUMP k METER SERVICES INC. 57804 O9-Dec-90 PUMP k METER SERVICES INC, Totals Check Number 57804 PUMP k METER SERVICES INC, Check Number 57805 RED APRON CATERING 57805 lO-Dec-98 RED APRON CATERING Totals Check Number 57805 RED APRON CATERING Check Number 57006 RICK ROSSING 57806 09-Dec-98 RICK ROSSING Totals Check Number 57806 RICK ROSSING Check Number 57007 RIT2 CAMERA 57807 lO-Dec-90 RITZ CAMERA Transaction Amount 37.20 483.56 223.27 724.89 1.544.25 1.544.25 1.752.48 1.752.48 376.36 -333.95 42.41 5.00 5.00 204.48 204.48 144.25 144.25 212.50 212.50 9.04 Page 10 Comments OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES REPLACE DEAD TREES BRN RD NOVEMBER JANITORIAL DOG Lie APPLICATIONS DUP PAYMENT SECURITY SYSTEM REPAIR-UNLEADED PUMP LAKE AREA MGRS LUNCH BACKHOE - CURB BOX REPLAC PHOTO PROCESSING 1 10 Dec 1998 Thu 1:50 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 57807 57807 RITZ CAMERA lO-Dec-98 RITZ CAMERA Totals Check Number 57807 RITZ CAMERA Check Number 57808 SCHOENHOKF, JOHN 57808 08-Dec-98 SCHOENHOFF. JOHN Totals Check Number 57808 SCHOENHOFF, JOHN Check Number 57809 SHANK CONSTRUCTORS 57809 lO-Dec-98 SHANK INSTRUCTORS Totals Check Number 57809 SHANK CONSTRUCTORS Check Number 57810 SHERIDAN SHEET METAL COMPANY 57810 lO-Dec-98 SHERIDAN SHEET METAL COMPANY Totals Check Number 57810 SHERIDAN SHEET METAL COMPANY Check Number 57811 ST CROIX RECREATION CO., INC 57811 lO-Dec-98 ST CROIX RECREATION CO., INC Totals Check Number 57811 ST CROIX RECREATION CO.. INC Check Number 57812 STAT-MEDICAL 57812 57812 lO-Dec-98 08-Dec-98 STAT-MEDICAL STAT-MEDICAL Totals Check Number 57812 STAT-MEDICAL Check Number 57813 STRETCHERS 57813 08-Dec-98 STREICHERS Totals Check Number 57813 STREICHERS Check Number 57814 THE HOUSE DOCTOR 57814 lO-Dec-98 THE HOUSE DOCTOR Totals Check Number 57814 THE HOUSE DOCTOR Check Number 57815 THOMPSON ASSOCIATES 57815 09-Dec-98 THOMPSON ASSOCIATES Totals Check Number 57815 THOMPSON ASSOCIATES L. Transaction Amount 55.45 64.49 22.99 22.99 19,149.00 19,149.00 10.883.00 10.883.00 405.97 405.97 20.04 275.98 296.02 36.85 36.85 106.95 106.95 300.00 300.00 Page 11 Comments PHOTO PROCESSING REPLACE TORN PATH’S NAVARRE WTR REHAB RFP #2 ROOF REAPAIRS-CITY HALL RECYCLING BIN-BEDERWOOD SUGIPAD 5X9 MEDICAL SUPPLIES FLASHLIGHTS pheasat: rd main break PERSCTCJEL EVALUATION 10 Dec 1998 Thu 1:S0 PM Check Humber Check Number 57816 Check Register City of Oropo Page 12 Date Name 57816 TRACY TRIPP FUELS lO-Dec-98 TRACY TRIPP FUELS Totals Check Number 57816 TRACY TRIPP FUELS Check Number 57817 TREADWAY GRAPHICS 57817 lO-Dec-98 TREADWAY GRAPHICS Totals Check Number 57817 TREADWAY GRAPHICS Check Number 57818 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 57818 57818 57818 57818 lO-Dec-98 lO-Dec-98 lO-Dec-90 lO-Dec-98 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Totals Check Number 57818 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Check Number 57819 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 57819 09-Dec-98 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Totals Check Number 57819 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Check '.jmber 57820 UNIV OF MINNESOTA Check Number 57822 57822 57822 57822 57822 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 08-Dec-98 19-NOV-98 19-NOV-98 19-NOV-98 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Transaction Amount 2.199.40 2.199.40 54.72 54.72 26.84 229.36 125.83 595.00 977.03 36.00 36.00 310.27 77.82 71.54 764.72 Comments 2800 GALS UNLEADED MISC DARE SUPPLIES MAGAZINE CASE - HAT. PANTS. HOLSTER SHIRTS. TROUSERS. GLOVES BODY ARMOR PO BOX RE.NTAL 57820 09-Dec-98 UNIV OF MINNESOTA 195.00 CITY ENG ASSOC OF Totals Check Number 57820 UNIV OF MINNESOTA 195.00 Check Number 57821 UNLM LIFE INSURANCE - LIFE 57821 lO-Dec-98 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 0.15 DECEMBER A06D 57821 lO-Dec-98 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 1.66 DECEMBER AD&D 57821 lO-Dec-98 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 3 89 DECEMBER AD5D 57821 lO-Dec-98 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 88.65 DECEMBER ADfiJ) 57821 lO-Dec-98 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 0.70 DECEMBER LIFE INS 57821 lO-Dec-98 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 5.28 DECEMBER LIFE INS 57821 lO-Dec-98 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 12.32 DECEMBER LIFE INS 57821 lO-Dec-98 uinjM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 448.10 DECEMBER LIFE INS Totals Check Number 57821 UNL’M LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 560.75 PHONE SERVICE PHONE SRVC 612-404-9937 612-E44-0016 612-E07-7466 PHONE SRVC PHONE SRVC Totals Check Number 57822 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 1.224.35 10 Dec 1998 Thu 1:50 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 57823 57823 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER 09-Dec-98 VIKING INDUSTRIAL COLTER Totals Check Number 57823 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER Check Number 57824 WARNING LITES OF MN 57824 08-Dec-98 WARNING LITES OF MN Totals Check Number 57824 WARNING LITES OF MN Ch*ick Number 57825 WEST HENT^EPIN PUBLIC SAFETY 57825 09-Dec-98 WEST HENNEPIN PUBLIC SAFETY Totals Caeck Number 57825 WEST HENI^EPIN PUBLIC SAFETY Check Number 57826 WEST PHOTO 57826 lO-Dec-98 WEST PHOTO Totals Check Number 57826 WEbT PHOTO Check Number 57827 WIDMER INC 57827 57827 lO-Dec-98 lO-Dec-98 WIDMER INC WIDMER INC Totals Check Number 57827 widmer inc Check Number 57828 WM MUELLER a SONS 57828 57828 lO-Dec-98 lO-Dec-98 WM MUELLER k SONS WM MUELLER k SONS Totals Check Number 57828 WM MUELLER k SONS Check Number 57829 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC 57829 57829 lO-Dec-98 lO-Dec-98 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC WFIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Totals Check Number 57829 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Check Number 57830 YOCUM OIL CO INC. Check Number 57831 YOUIIG, JACKIE 57831 08-Dec-98 YOUNG, JACKIE Transaction Amount 491.92 491.92 108.95 108.95 1,050.00 1,050.00 89.09 89.09 900.00 1,275.00 2,175.00 188.33 186.56 374.89 8.00 23.81 31.81 612.50 Page 13 Comments SAFTY SUPPLIES - PW BARRICADES SECURITY - PAULUCCI CA.MERA BAG. FILM CASCO PT-MAIN BRK 11/3/98 PHEASANT MAIN BK-11/21/98 CRSHED LIMESTONE CRSHED LIMESTONE ELECTRICAL SERVICE ELECTRICAL SERVICE 57830 08>Dec-98 YOCUM OIL CO INC.1,125.46 DIESEL FUEL 57830 08-Dec-98 YOCUM OIL CO INC.100.51 FUEL OIL - CLUB HOUSE 57830 08-Dec-98 YOCUM OIL CO INC.97.09 FUEL OIL - CLUB HOUSE Totals Check Number 57830 YOCUM OIL CO INC.1,323.06 PARK COM 11/2 j •! r 10 Dec 1998 Thu 1:50 PM Check Register City of Orono Page 14 Check Huniber Date Name Transaction Amount Comments Check Number 57831 YOUNG, JACKIE Totals Check Number 57831 YOUNG, JACKIE Check Number 57832 ZIEGLER 57832 08-Dec-98 ZIEGLER Totals Check Ihx.vber 57832 ZIEGLER 612.50 73.84 73.84 GRADER WING PIN Grand Total 319,255.11 X Dec 1998 Tue 11:06 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 045302 045302 ANDERSON, BRUCE L, Totals Check Number 045302 Check Number 045303 045303 BORIS, SCOTT H. Totals Check Number 045303 Check Number 045304 045304 CORNICK, JAMES L. Totals Check Number 04S304 Check Number 045305 045305 DEMBOUSKI, JAY C. Totals Check Number 045305 Check Number 04:.306 045306 ERICKSON, KURT R Totals Check Number 045306 Check Number 045307 045307 FARNIOK, CORREY L. Totals Check Number 045307 Check Number 045308 045308 FISCHENICH, DAN T. Totals Check Number 045308 Check Number 045309 045309 FISCHER, CHRISTOPHER K Totals Check Number 045309 Check Number 045310 045310 JOHNSON, BRADLEY P. Totals Check Number 045310 Check Date Ol-Dec-98 Ol-Dec-98 Ol-Dec-98 01-Dec-98 Ol-Dec-98 Ol-Dec-98 Ol-Dec-98 Ol-Dec-98 Ol-Dcc-98 Page 1 Check Amount 1,649.23 1,649.23 342.69 342.69 1,514.02 1,514.02 1,326.02 1,326.02 494.09 494.09 1,169.48 1,169.48 1,263.02 1,263.02 450.78 450.78 1,501.01 1,501.01 i ~i 1 Dec 1998 Tue 11:06 AN Check Nu<nber Employee Name Check Number 045311 045311 MCNALLY, STEVEN A Totals Check Number 045311 Check RegisLei City of Orono Page 2 Check Date Ol-Dec-90 Check Amount 458.95 450.95 Check Number 045312 045312 MCNICHOLS, DAVID L. Totals Check Number 045312 Ol-Dec-90 1,451.00 1,451.00 Check Number 045313 045313 MOROWCZYNSKI, JAMES Ol-Dec-90 1,745.12 Totals Check Number 045313 1,745.12 Check Number 045314 045314 SCHOBNHOFF, JOHN B.Ol-Dec-90 1,339.6C Totals Check Number 045314 1,339.60 Check Number 045315 045315 TOMCHECK, LAWRENCE F.Ol-Dec-90 1,351.73 Totals Check Number 045315 1,351.73 Check Number 045316 045316 TOMCZYK, MARK W.Ol-Dec-90 1,566.57 Totals Check Number 045316 1,566.57 Grand Total 17,623.31 1 Dec 1998 Tue 8:54 AM Check Number Employee Name Check Number 045252 045252 JOHNSON* MARY ANN Totals Check Number 045252 Check Register City of Orono Page 1 Check Number 045253 045253 GEMAR* JAMIE L. Totals Check Number 045253 Check Number 045254 045254 HASEMAN* CAROLE A. Totals Check Number 045254 Check Number 045255 045255 MOORSE, RONALD J. Totals Check Number 045255 Check Number 045256 045256 VEE* LINDA S. Totals Check Number 045256 Check Number 045257 045257 KUEHN, THOMAS M. Totals Check Number 045257 Check Number 045258 045258 OLSON, RONALD J. Totals Check Number 045258 Check Number 045259 045259 PETTIT, SANDRA K. Totals Check Number 045259 Check Number 045260 045260 ANDERSON, BRUCE L. Totals Check Number 045260 Check Pate 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02 Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-DCC-98 02-Dec-98 Check Amount 478.30 478.30 201.17 201.17 560.63 560.63 1,468.50 1,468.50 1,003.71 1,003.71 950.79 950.79 99.30 99.30 758.29 758.29 800.84 800.84 1 Dec 1998 Tue 8:54 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 045261 045261 BOBZIEN« SUE A. Totals Check Number 045261 Check Number 045262 045262 BORIS. SCOTT W. Totals Check Number 045262 Check Number 045263 045263 CARLSON, MICHAEL B. Totals Check Number 045263 Check Number 0452o4 045264 CHESWICK. GARY B. Totals Check Number 045264 Check Number 045265 045265 CORNICK, JAMES L. Totals Check Number 045265 Check Number 045266 045266 DBMBOUSKI, JAY C. Totals Check Number 045266 Check Number 045267 045267 ERICKSON, KURT R Totals Check Number 045267 Check Number 045268 045268 FARNIOK. CORREY L. Totals Check Number 045268 Check Number 045269 045269 FISCHENICH, DAN T. Totals Check Number 045269 Check Number 045270 Check Date 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 Page 2 Check Amount 636.38 636.38 1,121.27 1,121.27 480.54 430.54 1,576.52 1,576.52 1,806.65 1,806.65 1,464.33 1,464.33 1,316.31 1,316.31 1,353.50 1,353.50 1,259.31 1,259.31 I Dec 1998 Tue 8:54 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 045270 045270 FISCHER, CHRISTOPHER K. Totals Check Number 045270 Check Number 045271 045271 HANSING, CAROL J. Totals Check Number 045271 Check Number 045272 045272 JOHNSON, BRADLEY P. Totals Check Number 045272 Check Number 045273 045273 KNOLLENBERG, KRISTIN L Totals Chtift tJumbe^ 045273 Check Number 045274 045274 MCNALLY, STEVEN A. Totals Check Number 045274 Check Number 045275 045275 MCNICHOLS, DAVID L. Totals Check Number 045275 Check Number 045276 045276 MOROWCZYNSKI, JAMES Totals Check Number 045276 Check Number 045277 045277 PERSELL, WILLIAM R. Totals Check Number 045277 Check Number 045278 045278 SCHOENHOFF, JOHN B. Totals Check Number 045278 Check Number 045279 Check Date 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 O2-Dec-90 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 Page 3 Check Amount 1,082.00 1,082.00 352.76 352.76 1,199.90 1,199.90 679.56 679.56 1,018.63 1,018.63 1,107.96 1,107.96 1,506.45 1,506.45 440.03 440.03 1,233.10 1,233.10 i 1 Dec 1998 Tue 8:54 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Numk • r Employee Name Check Number 045279 045279 TOMCHECK, LAWRENCE F. Totals Check Number 045279 Check Number 045280 045280 TOMCZYK, MARK W. Totals Check Number C45280 Check Number 045281 045281 WITTKE, ANTHONY A. Totals Check Number 045281 Check Humber 045282 045282 HAGEN, MATTHEW D. Totals Check Number 045282 Check Number 045283 045283 JOHNSON, JEFFREY D. Totals Check Number 045283 Check Number 045284 045284 GAFPRON, MICHAEL F. Totals Check Numbei u45284 Check F*imber 045285 045285 GA^PA, GREGORY A. Totals Check Number 045285 Check Number 045286 045286 OMAN, LYLE E. Totals C v4< h Number 04 5286 Check Nv- !.-*r 04 5287 045287 VAN ZOMERLN, ELIZABETH Totals Check Number 045287 Check Number 045288 Check Date 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-9B 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 Page 4 Check Amount 416.36 416.36 1.233.52 1.233.52 352.24 352.24 199.75 199.75 602.31 602.31 1,116.86 1,116.86 1,422.60 1,422.60 232.75 232.75 112.53 112.53 X Dec 1998 Tue 8x54 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 045288 045288 VANG, BRUCE L Totals Check Number 045288 Check Number 045289 045289 WECKMAN« STEPHEN J. Totals Check Number 045289 Check Number 045290 045290 WEINBERGER, PAUL E. Totals Check Number 045290 Check Number 045291 045291 BRINKHAUS, JOHN P. lucals Check Number 045291 Check Number 045292 045292 DEBAERE, DONALD L. Totals Check Nutnber 045292 Check Number 045293 045293 GREGORY, JAMES D. Totals Check Number 045293 Check Number 045194 045294 HANSEN* STEVEN C. Totals Check Number 045294 Check Number 045295 345295 OBERAIGNER, SCOTT G. Totals Check Number 045295 Check Number 045296 045296 OBRIEN, RANDY L. Totals Check Number 045296 Check Number 045297 Check Date 02-Dec-98 Ol-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 Page 5 Check Amount 976.33 976.33 29.68 29.68 759.06 759.06 1,054.36 1,054.36 931.42 931.42 70C “ 700.19 708.06 708.06 959.34 959.34 319.70 319.70 1 Dec 1998 Tue 8:54 AM Check Number Employee Name Check Number C45297 045297 PALMER* GREGORY A. Totals Check Number 045297 Check Register City of Orono Page 6 Check Date 02-Dec-98 Check Amount 949.40 949.40 Check Number 045298 045298 RATHBUN, BARRY J. Totals Check Number 045298 02-DCC-98 1,035.15 1,035.15 Check Number 043299 0452S9 SKREEN, DALE S. Totals Check Number 045299 02-Dec-98 625.85 625.85 Check Number 045300 045300 STEFFENHAGEN, RONALD E 02-Dec-98 1,054.36 Totals Check Number 045300 1,054.36 Grand Total 41,748.55 p- 1 Dec 1998 Tue 8:54 AM User Initials Buffer Name Check Register City of Orono Payroll Tuesday 1 December 1999 Check Reg Records Read Records Selected NuiAber of Pages 49 49 7 Page 7 8:54 AM Start 8:54 AM Finish Selected by Check Date Equal To 02-Dec-99 Sorted by Check Number Totals No Page Breaks 1 Dec 1998 Tue 9:30 AM Check Register City of Orono Check liuisber Date Name Check Humber 57717 57717 CITY COUNTY OIBDIT UNION 02-Dec-98 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Totals Check Number 57717 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Check Number 57718 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES 57718 57718 57718 C2-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Totals Check Number 57718 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Check Number 57719 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. 57719 02-Dec-98 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO Totals Check Number 57719 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. Check Number 57720 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 57720 02Dec-98 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Totals Check Number 57720 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Check Number.*57721 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 57721 02-Dec-98 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Totals Check Number 57721 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Check Number 57722 MINNESOTA CTILD SUPPORT PKT CT 57722 02-Dec-98 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT Totals Check Number 57722 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT Check Number 57723 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT 57723 02-Dec-98 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT Totals Check Number 57723 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT Check Number 57724 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 57724 02-Dec-98 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Totals Check Number 57724 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Check Number 57725 MN MUTUAL LIFE 57725 02-Dec-98 MN MUTUAL LIFE Totals Check Number 57725 MN MUTUAL LIFE Transaction Amount 8.409.00 8.409.00 3.467.11 3.467.11 8.694.88 15.629.10 980.68 980.68 225.00 225.00 0.00 0.00 179.51 179.51 0.00 0.00 3.678.98 3.678.98 878.80 878.80 Page 1 Comments SAVINGS W/H k TRANSFERRED FICA k MEDICARE W/H FICA.MEDCR CITY SHARE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING DEFERRED COMP W/H DEFERRED COMP W/H UNION DUES WH SKREQ9 10010755723 THOMTON IC0266780 STATE TAX W/H DEFERRED COMP W/H i 1 Dec 1998 Tue 9:30 AM Qieck Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 57726 57726 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP 02-Dec-98 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Totals Check Number 57726 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Check Number 57727 PEBSCO/OBRA 57727 02-Dec-98 PEBSCO/OBRA Totals Check Number 57727 PEBSCO/OBRA Check Number 57728 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS 57728 02-Dec-9P PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS Totals Check Number 57728 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS Check Number 57729 PBRA 57729 57729 02-Dec-98 02-Dec-98 PERA PERA Totals Check Number 57729 PERA Check Number 57730 UNITED HAY 57730 02-Dec-98 UNITED WAY Totals Check Number 57730 UNITED WAY Grand Total Transaction Amount 227.00 227 00 18.94 18.94 2.424.35 2.424.35 4.761.99 6.303.67 11.065.66 31.00 31.00 43.748.02 Page 2 Comments DEFERRED COMP W/H OBRA DEFERRED COMP W/H USCM DEFERRED COMP W/H PERA EMPLOYEE W/H PERA CITY SHARE CHARITY DONATIONS W/H 1 1 ■i i I . December 9,1998 DEC ^4 1998 CiTV or CR0!v:0 To: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour and City Council Members From: Greg Gappa, Director of Public Services Subject: Status Report for County Road 15 Project I have contacted Hennepin County for a status report on this project. Material is currently being hauled in on the south side of the project. The plan is to fill this area level with the paved area and then remove the concrete barriers within the next two weeks. The barriers need to be removed to provide space for snow plowing activities. The settlement of the south side will be checked in the spring. According to the soil boring inform tion there is less poor material in this area, than was on the north side, so additional surcharging is not envisioned for next spring. However, if the settlement is greater than expected there may be a need for additional surcharging next year. The current paved area is further north than the final road will be. The final road alignment will be shifted to the south and approximately seven feet of the paved area will be removed. The bottom of the slope will remain as is, and material will be removed to provide for a flatter slope on the north side up to the new rond shoulder. After completion of the filling and barrier removal work on the south side, work on excavating the wetland mitigation area along the old Femdale cutoff road, and on the retaining wall west of Orono Lane will begin. This work will progress throughout the winter. The planned schedule for final project completion is for the middle of next summer. For your information, I have attached copies of the final signing and striping plans that show the locations of the proposed signs and turn lanes. C.S.A.N. IS 84 m m-2R LEGEND: STA. 9+645 TO STA.. 9+780 PERMANENT PAVEMENT MARKING SYt«OLS 0 100 am mllE SOLID LINE (CPOXYI 0 200 am MHITC SOLIO LINE (EPOXYI O too am YEllOa saio LINE lEPOXYl 0 DOUBLE 100 am S&to YELLOV LINES (EPOXYI m PAVELCNT KSSLCE (NT OR LT ARROWI ARROvS POLY PREfORICO NOIEi (I I 0 TC be INSTALLEO in I ai LtNCTHS. SPAUO B ■ APART. (21 0 TO BE INSTALLEO IN I ai LENGTHS. SPACED < • APART. 131 TRACAS SIDE Of STOP BAR TO BE A.t ai MIN. fROM RR t. %20 mmr • t amir ICO ot y I ss II MCI Kio iisio nkt^\ RCC. «. '^OAlC ONAW er CMCCIEO IASI REVISION ^M3-4A ^M1-6 W10-2L HENNEPIN COUNTY PROJECT 9222 C.S.A.H. 15 S.A.P. 2T-E15-15 U.S.A.P. 152-020-07 permanent SIGNING & STRIPING PLAN SHEET LEGEND: S7A. 10-f140 TO STA. 10*^540F£RMANENT PAVEMENT MARRING SYMBOLS©© © © 0 © ONLY 100 irni MHITE SOLID LINC (CPOXYI 100 iTin YELLOW SaiO LINE f EPOXY I too irm YELLOW BROKEN LINE (EPOXYI SOO inn YELLOW SOLID LINE (EPOXYI SOO irm WHITE SOLID LINE (CPOXYI DOUBLE 1Q0 mn YELLOW LINES (EPOXYI 200 mm WHITE BROKEN LINE I EPOXY I PAVEKNT ICSSACC IRT OR Lf ARROWI ARROWS POLY PREFORlyCO PAVEUENT ICSSACE (ONLY I POLY PREFORICO NOTE I Ml © TO BE INSTALLED IN 2 » LENGTHS. SPACED B m APART. (21 © 10 BE installed IN 1 m LENGTHS. SPACED 4 m APART. (31 tracks side of stop OAR TO BE 4.4 m MIN. FROM RR C. W10-2L *tO-3L aRiiFico at (f PROfCSSI^fci twCMKCR 22 r/B IKC. NO.'oAi : ORAn BY CHfCKCO BY LAST BtVlSION HENNCPIN COUNTY PROJECT 9222 C.S.A.H. 15 S.A.P. 2T-015-1S W.S.A.P. 152-020-OT PCRUANCNT SICNINC & STRIPING LEGEND: STA. 10+540 TO STA. 10+920PERUANtNT PAVEMENT MARKING SYMBOLS Q 100 im MHITC saio UNC (CPOXYl 0 600 im YCUO« SOUO LINC CCPOXYI @ DOUBLE 100 ffm YELLOW SOLID LINES IIPOXY) > PAVEICNT fcCSSACE IRT OR LT ARROWI ARROWS POLY PREF0Ri€0 ONLY PAVEICNT iCSSACE C ONLY I PaY PREfORiCO NOTEi (1 I © to be installed in 2 lengths, spaced B m APART. C2I © TO BE installed IN 1 • LENGTHS. SPACED 4 hi APART. ISI TR a CXS side Of STOP BAR TO BE 4.4 m UIN. FROU RR 1- i 20 ■ Mawaon****^ W10-3R 1^ M3-4A W Mt-6 [immamilonifwmiTmmmnmTmitnnmnimmnnmuuumtnimmmnmiuiiTminmmiumnmttiaumi M3-2A ^M1-6 gg M2-1 @ M1-4A RZn wo-10OP •^ERNDALE marsh tu uuluJ CERIiniO BY WAWI BT u P y i HEIOCPIH COUNTt PROJECT 9222 • C.S.A.H. 15 S.A.P. 2T-515-15 U.S.A.P. »52-fl20-07 SHcn 42 11T ^mortssioiiL CMGiHCCR tcc. w. a Ii PERMANENT SIGNING & STRIPING PLAN LEGEND: STA. ID-i-920 TO STA. 11+320. PERMANeNT PAVEMENT MARKING SYMBOLS100 i»w WHITE SOLID LINE CEPOXYI (00 irm YELLOW SOLID LINE lEPOXYl OOUBI E 100 YELLOW LINES I EPOXY I PAVtWCNT UESSACE CRr OR LT ARROVI ARROWS PaY PREFORKO PAVEkCNT ICSSACE CONLYI PaY PREFORuCO NOTE: m 0 TO BE INSTALLED tN 2 m LENGTHS. SPACED 6 m APART, 121 0 TO BE installed IN 1 « LENGTHS. SPACED 4 m APART. 131 TRACKS SIDE or STOP BAR TO BE 4.4 m MIN. FROM RR ©0© ONLY % 20 m t / Ct.llfllO (Y ^WOF CSS I on / C NCI K Ci J2Sla ACC no H/zih: . NO. Olfl OllAVN BT CMfCKCO BY last ACYISIQN t-HCNNE?IN COONIt PROJECT M22 C.S.A.H. 15 S.A.P. 27-^15-15 M.S.A.P. 1S2-020-0T PERUANENT SIGNING h. STRIPING PLAN Stic £ I T I ! LEQEND STA. 11+320 TL END OF PROJECTPERMANENT PAVEMENT MARKING SYMBOLS © ©0. ONLY 10O im WHITE SOLID LINE fCPOIYI 00U8LC 100 trm YELLOW SaiO LINE (EPOXY) 600 tm YCLkOV SOLID LINE (EPOXY) PAVEiiCNT ICSSACE (RT OR LT ARROW) ARROWS POLY PAEfORiCO PAVE^NT tCSSACE (ONLY) PQLY PREPORiCO %20 m NOTE: (II 0 TO BE IUSTALLEO IN 2 m LENGTHS. SPACED • « APART. (21 0 TO BE installed IN I m LEnCTmS. SPACED 4 il APART. (3) 'RACKS SIDE or STOP BAR TO BE 4.4 » MlN. fROI RR C# miriEO BY ^feriSSI(XtM.^MtlKlR zzr^o •1C. 10. *' 'li HENNEPIN COUNTY PMUECT 9222 C.S.A.H. 15 S.A.P. 2TH15-15 M.S.A.P. 152-020-07 SHEET 44 m OEWCOBY liSf lEYlSlQN PERMANENT 5ICNINC 1 STRIPING PtAN ^ z %, — To: From: Date: Mayor and Council Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Planning & Zoning Staff Mike Gaflron, Senior Planning Coordinator December 11, 1998 Dec 14 1998 crry or c•Ro^Jo Subject:June 1944 Supreme Court Case - Lake Minnetonka Access The City Attorney has forwarded this court case for your bedtime reading. This is, we think, the case the Mayor was referring to that contains some eloquent passages regarding the public's interest in dedicated lake accesses (see pages 187-188). Minn.15 NORTH WICSTKUN RErORTER. 2d SERIES and any interference with this flow to thtir injury is a wrong for which they arc/cn- tillVd to an appropriate remedy. To/pre- venK such a wrong, injunction is m ap propriate remedy.” Morrill v. Saint An- ihonyXFnlls Water-Power Co., 2(f Minn. 222. 229. 2 N.W. M2. 847. 37 Am.Rep. 399; Snniiorit V. IVopIc’s lee Co., 82Alinn. 43, 84 N.W.yil. 51 L.R.A. 829. 83 Am.St.Rcp. 401, and ^cliacfcr v. Marthalor, 34 Minn. 487. 26 N\\V. 726. 57 Am.R^. 73. supra. Yonngstowys plan contcmpritcs the tak ing of property without jiiy compensation and withoutXcondcmnation/proceedings as prc.^crihed hy\thc lease aild statute. This is a violatioti.of plaintiffs* private rights which they wilK suffer n/t in common with the public generally buy as a damage sole ly to their own wrivaty property. Youngstown ob\cct/ that plaintiffs* dam age. if any. has not/bcen shown to be ir reparable. In casewof this nature, the rule has been moclificd /^expressed in Bilsbor- row V. Pierce, lo/ Minn. 271, 276, 112 N. W. 274. 276, wlylch involved damage re sulting from a drainage project: relaxation of the rule re quiring a prinp facie ease of irreparable damage as a Condition of granting an in junction in siic!i a ease asuhis, and a modi fication of {pc enforced ^andard of such <!amage obvious in such\ decisions gen erally. has/bcen exprcssly\ recognized by this court.’] In WhUtaker v. Stangvic^. 100 Minn. .186. 302./III N.W, 205. 2OT, 10 L.R.A., N..S., 921/ 117 Am.Rep. 703\ 10 Ann.Cas. .^2S, it was staled: **Thcrc \has been a material modification in such eases of the rccpiircmcnts that the injury snoiild be ir- reparaljlc and the legal rcmfdy inade- qtiatc.*' (211 We are of the opinioA that the coinppint snnicicnity alleges the injuries w!iici will result if Youngstown's pro posed plans arc put into operanon, and ihat/the evidence sustains the coukt’s find ing/that such operations, if permitmd, will coiKiiiutc a trespass upon plaintiffsAripari- aii/rights and that the nature of\ these threatened injuries is such as to plAimiffs to injunctive relief. Affirmed. intitlc VLORING, C. J.. and THOMAS GA1.- AGllER, J., took no part in the con sideration or decision of this case. Application of BALDWIN at al. No. 3372I. Supreme Court of Minnesota. Juno 2.1. inn. I. Dedication ^=>4I A street having been located by a plat on the shore of a lake, its dedication to the use of the public will be presumed to have been intended to enable the public to have access to the water for all proper public purposes. Minn.St.1941, § 505.14. 2. Municipal corporations ^G57(l) Where it is proposed to vacate a street which is located upon a lake shore, the final lest is whether the public interest will be best served by discontinuing the way. 3. Evtcenca C=3l0(5) Judicial notice will be taken of the ex tensive public use being made of Lake Minnetonka for recreational purposes. 4. Municipal corporations ^=>657(1) The word “useless**, as used in statute permitting vacation of a street when it has become useless for the purpose for which it was laid out, should not be given any re stricted meaning, but should be given the meaning of the term as commonly defined as being of no use, unserviceable, and an swering no desired purpose. Minn.Sl.l941. § 505.14. •See Wordi and Phraiica. Prrmnnrnl Eflilinn. for all other dcfinlllntis of •*nm4rjiR**. 5. Municipal corporations ^657(5) In the absence of any showing that a portion of street leading to the lake shore had become “useless**, within meaning of stalulc permitting vacation of street when it becomes useless for the purpose for which it was laid out, refusing to set aside timely motion to reopen proceedings in which decree vacating street was entered was an abuse of discretion. Minn.St.l941, § 505.14. SylUibus by the Court. 1. A dedication by plat of a street upon the shore of a meandered lake will be pre sumed to have been intended to enable the public to have access to the lake for all proper public purposes. 2. The final test in determining wheth er a street located upon the shore of a r • mcar titioi whet serve char; tensi' rccrc 4 § 505 ting ' Jess f out," mean! 5. ing a of Lai joJnIn; notice errone App. Coiint3 Proc tion o Baldwi located Bay of ty, whe Arne I filed a r «tn ordc niid anc Rcvci Thom appcilan o. J. son, Sa for resp STRI-: This i § 505.14 vacation (about 1. of St. A * Lxcclsioi scribed a ing bctw( *y Rnad of West Mi Covingtoi Baldwin . spondents age of 50 On Lake r APPLICATION OP HALDWIN 15 N.lT.td IR4 Minn.185 • meandered lake may be vacated upon pc- is oxvncd by Albert Jacoby, who consented whclhcr 'nterested property owner is in writing to the partial vacation of the whether the public interest will be best street. served by such vacation. . .t r . . .arc the owners of a lakc-sluirc character of Ukc Minnetonka and the ex- mc.liatcly cast of the portion sought to be reeJeaLS n 'l‘l’‘^y occupy their properly only recreational purposes. ,|„ring the summer months of each year coc .1 "useless” in Minn.St.l941, but. during such period, have occasion to § 505.14 (Mason St. 1927, § 8244), permit- nsc the portion of Lake Street sought to irg vacahon of a street when it is "use- be vacated as their most direct connection •ess for the purpose for which it was laid with county road No. 82, leading to Minne- otit, must he given its full and unrestricted apolis and Excelsior. They can, how- meaning. ever, by a more circuitous route, via West 5. Refusal to set aside a decree vacat- also reach the county road, ing a public street located upon the shores Lake Street was dedicated to public use of Lake Minnetonka upon petitiV'' of an ad- in 1883 by the plat of Bennetfs Addition to- joining owner not personally served with Covington, filed in that year. However, notice of the vacation proceedings held ‘be portion of the street here involved has erroneous. never been graded or otherwise improved ■------------- by the township, and its use as a thorough fare by the public generally has not been Appeal from District Court, Hennepin extensive. °proce On August 14, 1942, on application of the Proceejng in the matter of the applica- Baldwins, the district court made an order tion of Edward H. B.ildwin and Hazel fi-xing September 8 as the date hearing ^Idwin to vacate a portion of L?ke Street on their petition to vacate the portion of ^ated on the north shore of St. Albans Lake Street which has been desciibed. Hay of Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin Conn- Pursuant to directions contained in the or- fy, wherein a decree was entered as prayed, der for hearing, it was duly published and Arne Hergren and another subsequently posted and a copy served upon the chair- filed a motion to set aside the decree. From man of the township of Excelsior. The an order denying the motion Arne Bergren order did not direct service ution aiipcllaiits and another appeal. .nnd they were not personally served, nor’ Reversed. did they have aclual notice of the proceed- Thomas Tallakson, of Minneapolis, for appellants. cnierea. O. J. Grathwol, of Excelsior, and John- matter came on to be heard In son. Sands & Brumfield, of Minneapolis, cour; no opposition appeared. The for respondents. . ’ ‘'''•'1 court, after hearing the petitioners, made appropriate findings, including one .STKEISSGUTM. Justice. following the language of the petition, viz.: This is a p-oceeding under Minn.St.I941, "That the portion of said Lake Street so § 505.14. Mason St. 1927, § 8244, for the useless for the pur|)oses for vacation of a short stretch of Lake Street 'vhich said street w.is laid out; that all of (about 150 feet) located on the north shore property owners abutting on said por- of St. Albans Bay of Lake Minnetonka in street are desirous of having ’•xcelsior township, Hennepin eounty, de- vac.ated, ,and th.it s,iid portion of said scribed as “All that part of Lake Street ly- m^w of no use to your petitioners mg between the southeasterly line of Conn- ^"7. °‘b«»' person for the purposes for ty Ro.id No. 82 and the southwesterly line "’hich said street was laid out." of West Street extended to the shore of A decree vacating the described portion ^kc Minnetonka, Bennett’s Addition to Lake Street was accordingly entered on Lovington." The petitioners, Edward H. September 14, 1942. SDond'?". Baldwin, who arc re- All was well until the following spring, aw of SO ^n7st°T" ^ Bergrens moved back to th^ lalfe 0^1 akfstree? ifd '^“b apparent innocence. 16NAV:2d-!^12^ third abutting lot they began using the vaUted portion of ISO Minn.15 NORTH WESTERN RErORTEIl. 2d SERIES Lake Street as a means of access lo their cottage. But. about June 1, Arne Bergren received a telephone call from the attorney for the Baldwins warning him to discon- timie ihe use of the vaealed street “or else he wnuld be subject to legal process for <loing so.*’ Bergren immediately engaged his present attorney to investigate what had happened. With proper diligence, notice of a motion to set aside the 1942 decree and to permit the Bergrens to appear in op position to the vacation of the street was served upon the Baldwins, as well as upon the occupant and record owner of other abutting property, and upon the chairman of the town board. A copy of notice of mo tion was also posted in three public places in the township. Only the Baldwins appeared in formal opposition to the motion to reopen the pro ceedings. They relied mainly upon the claims (1) that the Bergrens had not been eleprived of access to their premises, be cause West Street was available to them; (2) that Lake Street had not been used as a street or thoroughfare until 1940, when the Baldwins filled in a portion of Lake Street adjacent lo the county road and commenced improvements on their own property; and (3) that the vacated part of I^ike Street^ “is useless to the public for the purposes for which it was laid out, has never been used by the public or by anyone for pur poses as a street, and the public interests arc best served by not using said platted street, in view of the location of said street :\m\ the complete accessibility of the public to the shores of Lake Minnetonka at the southerly end of West Street.*' Supporting the Baldwins in their efforts to prevent a reopening of the proceedings were the three town supervisors, who by .affidavit asserted that, upon being served uiili iiuiiiv of ilir iiiipinal hearing in 101?, lIu’V li.ul iii.hI** a VMiMpIrtr in vr^l igal imi .Hid li.’id I'MiM liidrd lli'il llir fMirlion of L.'ikc Street here involved “was no good for the purpose for which it was laid out and that there would be a benefit accruing to the public by the proposed vacation.** The »iupcrvisors further deposed **ihat no use ful purpose would be served and that the interest of the public would be prejudiced by order of this court setting aside the de cree.** Just what benefit the public would derive from the vacation of the street, other than being saved the minor expense of maintaining 150 feet of it, or what prejudice would result lo the public from setting aside the decree does not appear from these affidavits and must remain a mystery. Notwithstanding the timely motion made by appellants, the district court, by order dated Sei»lembcr 23, 1913, refused lo set aside its former decree so as lo permit ap pellants to be heard in opposition to the application lo vacate the street. The ap peal is from that order. [1] 1. Through'^ut the proceedings be low, the abutting owners have emphasized the nonuse of the vacated portion of Lake Street as a street or thoroughfare and the fact that appellants have another street as a means of access to their properly. Ap pellants, on the other hand, have stressed the claim of damage to their own properly caused by the vacation. Apparently lost in the shuffle were the rights of the public in the lake Uself, for neither party seems to have given much consideration to the value of Lake Street, located as it is on the shores of St. Albans Bay, in providing lake frontage and shore ilr.e for ‘he use of the public for recreational purposes. Lake Street having been located by the plat of Bennett’s Addition on the shore of the bay, its dedication to the use of the public will be presumed to have been intended "to cn.-iblc the public to have access to the wat er for all proper public purposes.** In re Petition of Schaller, 193 Minn. 604, 259 N. W. 529, 530 headnote. [2] 2. The contest here is not a mere bout between private individuals with mem bers of the public acting merely in the role of spectators. The public has a real and substantial interest in the outcome. “The public rights in these lakes, with which this state abounds, are of great value and importance,** Witty v. Board of County Com ’rs of Nicollet County, 76 Minn. 286, 2^'), 70 N.W. 112, 11.1, aihl ibis ronil has alw.iyn bi‘c*ii /raintin in pinlri*ling I'lmi. L.iiiiprcy V. Slate, 52 Minn. 181, 53 N.W. 1139, 18 L.R.A. 670, 38 Am.St.Rep. 541; Madsen v. Larson, 117 Minn. 369, 135 N. W. 1003; State v. Korrer, 127 Minn. 60, 148 N.W. 617, 1095, L.R.A.1916C, 139; Erickschen v. County of Sibley, 142 Minn. 37, 170 N.W. 883; In re Petition of Schal ler, supra; In re Petition of Krebs, 213 Minn. 344 6 N.W.2d 803; Petraborg v. Zonlelli, Minn., 15 N.W.2d 174, decided June 9, 1944. And where, as here, it is proposed to vacate a street which is lo cated upon a lake shore, the matter should receive **our most careful consideration. •4 public served Petitir W. The existec supra, ton La titionc: which the lak mainly lands. I/O N. tied pi waters lie,** sa •• 0 contest* ers arc holding cuts arc their la those o con flic ti public ( the slot sented i stantial should I and of t public, ; of this a water w lie value wil mo: jipi Cut Ihj or la or • • • •r Mliiii.1S7APPLICATION OP BALDWINIS N.n.td iM -------- i.-w public interests will Jfll n^t'b" belt ibkl!!!lcck served by discontimiinp the way.’" In re er« Petition of Schaller. PI.l Minn. 614 2S9 N do i.m who\V. .<;.K . M. do not uKltd^c m .active recreation, it af- J be situation is not unlike that which ''•'‘turc at its hesL''with^thT'in^^^^^ sX. involv|g?hc draina^^^^ Washing-' cxIe'roTU^'sho^e'al^iTable’l^^^^^^^ i;".f z",Sir";, t '"r ™.o 170 N.W. 884. 88S), referring w lht •'vl' '" "" »PP4al. tied policy designed to preserve inland m.hl.V i a w«.er. Which aOord rccrcion ,o .he puh- L °‘^Z . • a a observed that in facilities offered by the lakes which minro con fsted drainage proceedings the petition- •’•‘‘s so freely given us in this state Tl-oi*^ er ere eh.etl, mteres.cd in adding their Ecnerons sharing hy ? w | “ ke hr a holding, of araUc land, while .heir oppon. healthier and happier Xle The ZZt Zh Z “""'"'•I »>"' P»«ible damage .o "« tor.una.e enm^h ,o “e ,Me lo aeS ft r ^ result of the drainage of advantages of ownershio of fAlcr .bore o the.r neighbors. /„ o/ properties sLid notT deSrisU of tZl ronjoetm, Jr.us,, inlcrcm, ll^se of the benefits. This we wLd do if "e oermine^ f/ie «dh'rWh ‘‘7'' T“ >horo h, be va.!•" ^^Pre- cated as here proposed." In rc Petition of sub- Krebs, 213 Minn. 344, 347 6 NW2d <?03 stanhal ngh:s to protect. * • • It 80S. ’ 803, sluuild be the concern o.' the county board lai d • • nnd of the courts to guard the rights of the ntiblir , "’'id ‘he value to the public, and to preserve for the enjoyment Iho!! ^ of this and future generations all bodies of part of 'l water which have present or potential pub- wuh n Street has become "useless’’ he value." (Italics supplied.) ^ ^ J’r tern as com- fi, , t-k- . ^ "useless," which^ l^J Inis court rcauirr« nn nr/^/^r *u-.4 appears in Minn lOJi r cncfii , Xk- ^ "useless," which I ,iTJ M- "o P^oof that ^f'nn.St.I941, § 505.14, Mason Lake Mninetnn!,. i. . priee|.„ heritage of S> IPf, S 8244, permi..in| vacation oi lthe r»..n«i. r »7- ncriiagc of a permitting vacation of a Ind S ^ ^ Minnesota, to be preserved s‘rcct when tt is "useless for the purpose w"n b!V,*? should not be will be taken of the fact that it is one of the restricted meaning. Courtv ost precious pearls in the string of Ttn ascribe to it the well-acccptcd con'- iiiMl"*^"* *-lkcs of which Minnr.s.tt.i is so "'’taiinn: "not serving or not rnp.TMr of ..... '"-••uly has hr '‘•■•''"'t: '"'y v.-l„,.|.|r iWn.l‘‘ "f "'>«•; 'in to our mri c-'tpansc and proximity “rvtceable; producing no good end; an niented anTn’ fi* I v"*"!, P“^P«e." Funk &_• . ,. used for boating, hshing /‘agnails ..cw Standard Dictionary 1932- than'^^"'®^’ t"'* bathing--perhaps more "^<^h'tcr’s New International Dictionary than any other lake in the state I,s ' >938. i^iciionary Jiorc line of nearly 100 miles is dotted with fSl s Tt,* t . .. permabcu home. a„d summer cottage., J fee', if .ij. ft ' 'A'..8?“i' »'«.m,„eu.hom„X;d.„';;‘ r'‘eoC,";" Jp„, ^ ’'"f ‘“r*''' »' '« °"ly at it. water’s edge but evic ,dm^‘ r. . ?' * ">'»l »' approxi- hacit frnm tbc shore' hm the use of ihi "’’’I' "" H-ildwiiis.Kr . ..v>. —. . . .. Ut the seem incoiiscoucnl at -__ ;..r..;.. • .l-ck. from the sVorV^^hm .lie the Baldwins I -KC IS not confined to dwellers on its shore a t or even infinitesimal nearby. Daring -nr summer season es- lli s f' Pccially, It IS the mccca for thousands uoon sm!ll^ ,• of precious shore line, only a thousands of urbanites, not so fortunate^as n i f has been reserved for the. ot so lortunatc as public; and if the courts should create a UJL.JL Il}188 Minn. 16 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES rprecedent by permitting a single inroad, however small, upon the public’s share of the shore line, other inroads will inevitably follow, until the aggregate becomes a real threat to the public's free access to the lake. To avoid any possibility of such a re sult, the courts should with equal vigor re pulse the first, the second, and every other assault upon the public domain. If^ eternal vigilance is the price of pre serving the full benefit of Minnesota’s lakes for all members of the public—as it is of liberty—public officials must gladly pay th.Tt price. They must not stand by, wholly unconcerned, like Nerc, who fiddled while Rome burned, and permit public access to our lakes to be cut off or reduced for sel fish private purposes. Yet here town supervisors .appear to have been entirely ob livious to the full import of the petition, of the filing of which they received notice. N'ol only did they fail to protest, but they .actually gave aid and comfort to the pe titioners in their raid upon the public's con servation chest. The obvious purpose of providing notice to the town supervisors of proceedings to v.acatc a street or highway is to put these officers on guard, so that the interests of the public may be amply protected. The supervisors of E.xcelsior township having failed in their duty in this respect and having permitted a default to be entered, it is at least understandable why the petition was originally granted by the lower court. Hut when the court’s decree vacating the street was promptly attacked by appellants upon their receiving notice of the proceed ing, the trial court should have been alert to the public interest and, unhesitatingly, should have reopened it; and this, not withstanding that appellants’ motion to re open was motivated principally by the an ticipated damage to their own property. N’ot to reopen the proceeding >n the public interest was a clear abuse of discretion, and the order denying appellants’ motion must be reversed. If, in view of the importance we have attached to the preservation of our lakes and full .access thereto tor the public and for posterity, rcspo idents still desire to urge that the portion of L.akc Street be tween their property and St. Alhans Bay has become "useless for the purpose for which it was laid out,” they will be ac corded that privilege. We may not have all the facts. But respondents should un derstand that any decree of vacation must be supported by clear proof that the street has in fact become "useless” to the public in the full and unrestricted meaning of that term. Reversed. In re LIPSCOMB. No. 33759. Supreme Court of Minnesota. June 2, 1944. 1. Attorney and client C=39 Conviction of a felony or a misde meanor involving moral turpitude residts in disbarment as a matter of course, even though sentence is suspended. Minn.St. 1941, §481.15, subd. 1(1). 2. Attorney and client ^39 The record of conviction of a felony or a misdemeanor involving moral turpi tude is conclusive in disbarment proceed ing and cannot be questioned by proof aliunde. Minn.St.l941, § 481.15, subd. 1(1). 3. Attorney and client €=54 That money which client owed attor ney but refused to pay would have been more than enough to take care of another client’s claim did not constitute such ex tenuating circumstances as would justify a reference of proceeding to disbar attor ney for embezzlement of second client’s money. Minn.St.l941, § 481.15, subd. 1(1). Proceeding on order to show cause why Allen H. Lipscomb should not be dis barred. Respondent disbarred. Philip Neville, Sec’y, State Board of Law E.xamineis, of Minneapolis, for peti tioner. Henry G. Young, of Minneapolis, foi respondent PER CURIAM. On October 27, 1943, respondent an at torney at law duly licensed to practice in our state, pleaded guilty to an informa- • lion $522 tence a ter order sente' on pi Rei disbai tence Icged swer mone.' priati) only . this h ing fr him, s er me enoug claim. 1 roiBtj riTtrthu* WifsUsIfJ WTKt [•Tint m\i%\ ra«iiiililwi«j rtimii*] riT:Utiiitnfra Rmctxt] •TiilUSlK ^tTt] •II*: riX:llM wiroK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16. 1998 (#2395 Brent Bentrott. continued) the curb cut to Bluff Street to provide a less steep landing area. Van Zomeren remarked that Tom Kellogg, City Engineer, has reviewed this property and has concerns regarding the negative impact the grading would have on the adjoining property as well as the need to relocate the curb cut on Bluff Street if that street is ever opened for public purpose. Van Zomeren stated the Planning Commission had recommended in July that Bluff Street not be vacated. The proposed driveway cannot be contained on the Applicant's property because of the existing topography and the need to provide a grade of ten percent or less for the driveway. Chair Smith stated to her recollection the reason the last plan submitted in October was not looked favorably upon was due to concerns regarding grading and drainage, and this newly revised plan seems to be similar to a previous plan that was submitted where the Applicant was advised that the Planning Commission would not look favorably upon a vacation to Bluff Street. Bentrott remarked this is a new plan that has not been submitted before. Cnair Smith commented this plan appears to have a different degree of impact on Bluff, but it was the consensus of the Planning Commission a couple of months ago that they would not look favorably upon any plan that would impact Bluff Street. Van Zomeren stated that it was her understanding that Bluff Street currently contains a grade of 23 percent. Bentrott stated he received Kellogg’s letter on Thursday, noting that the proposed curb cut is 19 feet and not the 20 feet as stated in Kellogg’s letter. Bentrott remarked the curb cut could be further reduced if necessary. Stoddard inquired whether the driveway could be completely located on the Applicant ’s property. Van Zomeren stated the driveway cannot be located entirely on the Applicant ’s property due to the topography that exists and the need to have a flat area to make the proper grade. Van Zomeren commented that the grade of the driveway was not known at the last meeting. Chair Smith inquired whether there were any public comments. There were no public comments. Chair Smith stated there has been some comments received from the adjoining neighbors Mark and Pam Palm. Van Zomeren remarked that City Staff has received some inquiries from the Palms regarding what is being proposed. The Palms are proposing to do some underpinning around the foundation of their house. The City Engineer has stated that grading cannot accurately occur up to the property line, and that some grading may occur on the neighbor’s property. Chair Smith stated according to some comments contained in Van Zomeren’s memorandum, the Palms have concerns about the drainage impact on their property. Smith inquired what the Palms exact concerns were regarding. Van Zomeren stated the Palms have reviewed the proposed plan and called City Staff saying they Page 2 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16,1998 (#2395 Brent Bentrott, continued) did not understand what exactly was being proposed, and they were advised that they needed to have an independent person review the plan on their behalf. Bentrott commented he has been speaking with the Palms about this project, noting that they have endorsed this project in the past. Van Zomeren slated that one issue is the fact that the curb cut and driveway does net meet City standards, and that the Public Service Director would not approve it as proposed. Schroeder commented he was not sure that the driveway could be designed to meet the appropriate standards. Chair Smith remarked she does not see many options available to the Applicant regarding his driveway. Bentrott slated that Gronberg has reviewed his property and suggested that the garage could be located three to four feet higher, which would require more fill and retaining walls. Van Zomeren commented that the City Engineer has not reviewed that option. Lindquist staled in his opinion that option will not be acceptable either. Bentrott stated he has taken photographs of the surrounding neighborhood depicting their driveways, noting that two of the existing driveways have steeper grades than what is being proposed here. Chair Smith corr. rented she was unsure what the Applicant was referring to. noting that the Planning Commission can only address what is before them with this application. Schroeder commented this is a hard lot to work with, but would not look favorably on a vacation of Bluff Street. Bentrott stated there is history that the City has vacated unopened platted streets previously. Van Zomeren remarked that the vacation the Applicant is referring to occurred in the 1960s. Lindquist stated the Applicant can request the City Council to vacate Bluff Street. Chair Smith commented even if Bluff Street is vacated, there still are some d'-ainage issues that would need to be addressed. Smith stated the Planning Commission is merely an advisory body to the City Council and they may choose to go a different route. Schroeder suggested the Planning Commission vote on this revised plan, noting that the only way this proposal will work is if Bluff Street is vacated. Schroeder commented the drainage issues with the adjoining property will still need to be addressed. Chair Smith stated the Planning Commission needs to gel some direction from the City Council on Bluff Street, noting that the Planning Commission did not look favorably on vacating Bluff Street in the past. Lindquist stated he has a problem with the drainage, but this application needs to move forward. Bentrott commented he would like the Planning Commission to act on this application. Page 3 rtTiTtnnt] [iTlIlWMKt] •nifinivrtinirat] [•TfVclth rtifRwt RirSTil iBlKYimiira nKWtltrifTt r«iiw ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16.1998SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGW6) #2430 PAUL PHILLIPS PROPOSES A TWO-LOT SUBDIVISION OF A 4.5 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 2140 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH, 7:13 p.m. - 7:35 p.m.The Applicant was present. van Zomeren stated this application appeared before the which with each lot Wing comprised of 2 0 acres served by an outlet. There are pnmary and second ry septic sites for each parcel. of the preliminary plat for review and comment. Paul Phillips stated he has no comments. There were no public comments. Chair Smith inquired whether the circle driveway could serve as a cul-de-sac and accommodate emergency vehicles. Stoddard inquired what necessitates the need for a cul-de-sac. Van Zomeren staled three residences are needed for a cul-de-sac. Gaffron remarked that in a similar application on Watertown Road a cul-de-sac and 50 foot road was platted but not built. Lindquist commented that a lot ot the cul-de-sacs do not get constructed. Lindquist inquired whether the Applicant has a problem with adding a cul-de-sac. Phillips stated he does not as long as he does not need to build It. Philhps remarked this driveway would only be serving two residences. Lindquist suggested the Applicant revise the plat to include the cul-de-sac. Van Zomeren stated the cul-de-sac may affect the building pad for one of the lots, noting that an independent surveyor will need to plat the cul-de-sac for the Applicant. Hawn commented that perhaps a cul-de-sac is called for. Phillips stated it the cul-de-sac Is mandalory and land is taken from either one or both of the lots, the lots might then not meet the two acre minimum. Chair Smith commented that it appears the Planning Commission is saying that a cul-de-sac will probably be necessary. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16.1998(#2430 Paul Phillips, continued)Lindquist inquired whether it was necessary per City codes.Hawn stated that the curb cut off of County Road 6 is out of the question. Hawn noted that City codes requires cul-de-sacs in subdivisions. van Zomeren remarKed that Hennepin County would not allow access off of County Road 6. Chair Smith stated if approved, it would set a precedent. Lindquist stated he was in favor of the plan as presented without a cul-de-sac. Chair Smith inquired whether the cul-de-sac had to be 50 feet. Van Zomeren stated the cul-de-sac has to be platted at 50 feet. Chair smith remarKed that the Planning Commission needs to looK at the future needs of this subdivision. Lindquist moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application 112430, 2140 Sixth Avenue North, as submitted. NO VOTE TAKEN. Lindquist stated the drivevray is hasicait, serving ont, t»o lots, noting that access cannot he gained off of County Road 6, McMillan inquired whether this would siill be considered a front tot/back lot situation, Stoddard remarked he is in agreement with Lindquist. rs”"brcr«^ need to review this plan. Chair Smith agreed with Hawn. OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS (43) #2398 MURIEL SENN, 4448 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCES, 7:36 p.m. - 8:06 p.m. Muriel Senn was present. Page 6 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16. 1998 (#2399 Muriel Senn, continued) accurate survey and develop a plan that meets the zoning code regulations to the extent possible given the unusual shape of the lot and current conditions on the lot. Van Zomeren stated this lot lies within the LR-1B zoning district, which has a minimum of one acre requirement, with this lot being comprised of .38 acres. The Applicant is requesting to construct a new garage and convert the existing garage into additional living space. Van Zomeren noted that the majority of this lot lies within the 0-75 ’ setback. The proposed addition would be ten feet from the edge of the right-of-way and would require variances for lakeshore setback, sideyard setback, street yard setback, and hardcover in the 0-75* and 75 -250 ’ setback, and structural lot coverage. This proposal would increase structural coverage from 11.62 percent to 15.88 percent. The Applicant is proposing to remove 285 square feet of paved driveway area, 75 square feet of patio blocks, and 32 square feet of the patio. Van Zomeren stated this revised plan is an improvement over the previously submitted plan. Chair Smith inquired whether there is already a garage on the property. Van Zomeren stated there is currently a one car garage and the new garage would be constructed over a portion of the paved driveway with the old garage being converted into living space. Van Zomeren commented that this residence does not have a basement or attic. McMillan inquired whether the Applicant was proposing to construct a one or two stall garage. Senn stated the new garage would be a stall and a half, noting that the architect has suggested that the garage be constructed at an angle which would require that the driveway be widened slightly. Senn commented that she would be willing to remove a portion of the patio and the stepping stones in an effort to reduce hardcover. Senn remarked that she would like to keep the existing shed located on the property due to the fact that the residence has no basement and storage space is very limited. Chair Smith inquired whether there were any public comments. There were no public comments. Hawn commented that in her view hardcover is already high in the 75 ‘-250 ’ setback with the Applicant proposing to increase it to 52.5 percent. Hawn stated she would have a difficult time approving an increase to the hardcover in that setback, and suggested that the Applicant try to reduce hardcover somewhat. Hawn suggested that the structural coverage be limited to 15 percent. Van Zomeren stated to be at 15 percent hardcover. 147 square feet needs to be reduced. Lindquist stated he also has problems with the excessive hardcover. Chair Smith stated that the consensus of the Planning Commission is to hold to the existing hardcover with structural coverage being limited to 15 percent. Smith remarked that the Applicant will need to consider whether the existing shed should be removed or whether the garage should be constructed in the same location as the existing garage. Page 7 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16,1998 (#2399 Muriel Senn, continued) Smith suggested the application be tabled to allow the Applicant time to submit a revised plan. McMillan noted that most of the residence lies within the 75-250 ’ setback and hardcover can only be reduced by a slight amount. McMillan stated the overall structural coverage is more important in her opinion. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant needs to stay 10 feet from the lot line. Stoddard inquired whether the Applicant had considered building up on the existing residence. Senn stated she would like to have a larger garage. Senn remarked she has had the architect look at this proposal three different times, the surveyor twice, and they were of the opinion that this new plan was feasible for this property. Chair Smith indicated that the Planning Commission has tried to provide further direction for the Applicant. Schroeder stated the Planning Commission could vote on this application tonight so it could proceed on to the City Council who would then make the final decision. Senn stated she would like the application to move forward without jeopardizing her application. Senn indicated she would like the application to go to the City Council. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to deny Application #2399, 4448 North Shore Drive, as submitted, based upon the existing excessive hardcover in the 75'-250 ‘ setback as well as the proposed increase to the structural coverage above 15 percent. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#4) #2410 PETER BOYNTON, 1973 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD, VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT., 8:07 p.m. - 8:09 p.m. Peter Boynton was not present. Chair Smith recommended this application be tabled. Van Zomeren stated the requested information has not been submitted, and a letter has been sent to the Applicant requesting that he waive the 60/120 day review period. There were no public comments. Hawn moved, McMillan seconded, to table Application #2410,1973 Eagerness Point Road, to allow the Applicant time to submit the required information, and to waive the 60/120 day review period. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#5) #2411 PAUL HANSSEN, 3195 CASCO CIRCLE, VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 8:09 p.m. - 8:28 p.m. Paul Hanssen was present. Page 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16.1998 (#2411 Paul Hanssen, continued) Weinberger slated this application was before the Planning Commission in October where they had recommended 4-1 to deny this application. The City Council reviewed this application at their October 26.1998 meeting and tabled the application to allow the Planning Commission to reconsider the application based on the finding that the ordinance should have considered the fair market value rather than the value of the structure at the time the zoning chapter was adopted. Tom Barrett. City Attorney, stated that Section 10.03(J) applies only to the use and not the location of a non-conforming structure. Weinberger stated the Applicant is requesting permission to repair an existing boathouse and deck located above the boathouse. The deck cannot be rebuilt without the nec'^ssary structural repairs to the boathouse to support the deck. The building inspector has determineu that the boathouse was not damaged by the storm and is recommending not allowing the repairs to the deck due to the deteriorating condition of the boathouse. The Applicant has had a structural engineer review the existing condition of the structure and is recommending that the front and back walls be replaced along with portions of the side walls. The foundation is also in need of replacement. Weinberger stated he has contacted the City Attorney in an effort to get written documentation concerning how the zoning code should be applied to this application, and was verbally told that Section 10.03. Subd. 5(J) applies to uses only and the boathouse is not considered to be a use. Hanssen stated he would like his application approved. John Erickson, 1620 Shadywood. stated he was forced to remove his boathouse due to the deteriorating condition and indicated he will sue if the City approves this application. Schroeder indicated he did not talk with the City Attorney personally and that this interpretation is inconsistent with what his understanding has been for boathouses. Weinberger stated that the City Attorney has determined that the section that applies is the section of the code that deals with non-conforming uses, noting that this structure was in existence prior to the ordinance and the property owner may have certain property rights. Schroeder indicated he would like the City Attorney to advise the Planning Commission personally or something in writing dealing directly with this application. Weinberger commented he would feel more comfortable if the City Attorney would comment on this application. Chair Smith stated she was in agreement and would like the City Attorney to comment on this application. Weinberger stated the City Attorney was uncomfortable about drafting a letter and having it interpreted as City policy when in fact it is an interpretation of the ordinance as it applies to this application. Lindquist remarked if the Planning Commission denies the application, the boathouse will need to be removed unless the City Attorney advises otherwise. Schroeder stated the issue has to do with hardcover in the 0-75' setback, noting that the City’s philosophy is to protect the lake by removing structures close to the lakeshore that are in disrepair. Page 9 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16,1998 (#2411 Paul Hanssen, continued) Schroeder recommended tabling the application to allow the City Attorney time to comment. Chair Smith inquired whether there was any further public comment. There was no further public comment. Hawn apologized that the Applicant had to reappear before the Planning Commission, but stated that she would like to get legal counsel on this application. Chair Smith indicated the Planning Commission can either approve, deny, or table this application. Weinberger noted the 60 day period expires November 24th. Staff would request the Applicant agree to extend the 60 day period. Hanssen stated he would like the Planning Commission to proceed on this application. Stoddard inquired what the estimated cost of repairs are. Hanssen stated repairs are estimated at $10,000.00. and the City Assessor has indicated that the fair market value would be listed at $15.000.00. Hanssen indicated he had the understanding that the fair market value did not apply in this case. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to deny Application #2411, 3195 Casco Circle, due to the understanding that the boathouse/deck could not be rebuilt per City Ordinances. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (Schroeder leaves from 8:28 p.m. • 8:32 p.m.) NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS (#7) #2435 LUTZ CONSTRUCTION, 3433 LIVINGSTON, VARIANCES, 8:28 p.m. - 8:32 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was not present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing to construct a house with detached garage on a lot that does not meet lot area or lot width requirements with the intention of selling the house upon completion. The lot is currently served by sanitary sewer and has been vacant since the original house was removed in 1992. Staff recommends approval of a variance to lot area and lot width since the lot is served with sanitary sewer. There were no public comments. Stoddard moved. Smith seconded, to approve Application #2435, 3433 Livingston Avenue, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Page 10 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16,1998 (#8) #2437 JEFF MARTINEAU, 2565 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCES, 8:32 p.m, - 8:45 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Jeff Martineau was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing to construct a 3’ by 13’ addition to the residence located within the 0-75* lakeshore setback which requires a variance to the average lakeshore setback and a variance to the allowed hardcover in the 0-75* lakeshore setback. The building inspector has determined that the existing wall is in poor condition and needs to be replaced. The Applicant is proposing to remove a portion of the lakeside deck and a patio to decrease hardcover. Staff recommends approval of the application. Martineau stated that the concrete patio was installed in violation to the ordinance at the time the driveway was replaced. Martineau stated the patio has already been removed, and the proposed addition is in an effort to eliminate the gutters and reduce the water runoff to the basement. Martineau stated the basement has been drain tiled in an effort to reduce water in the basement, noting that he has experienced water problems in his basement ever since the property was purchased. Martineau remarked this addition has been discussed with the neighbors who are not in disagreement with the proposal. Chair Smith inquired whether there were any public comments concerning this application. Mr. Callahan. 2545 North Shore Drive, stated he is agreeable to the changes as it would not affect their property. Schroeder noted the overall hardcover will decrease on this property. Lindquist inquired when the patio was installed. Martineau stated it was installed around the time the driveway was replaced. Lindquist noted the patio was not included in the hardcover numbers. Stoddard moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2437, 2565 North Shore Drive, allowing the construction of a 3' by 13* addition to the residence within the 0-75' setback, and granting of a variance to the average lakeshore setback and a variance to the allowed hardcover In the 0-75’ lakeshore setback. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#9) #2438 MICHAEL SLETTEN, 4680 BAYSIDE ROAD, LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT, 8:45 p.m. - 8:49 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Michael Sletten and Peter Achey were present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is proposing a lot line rearrangement, and is requesting approval to sell a corner of his property that measures .25 acres to his adjacent neighbor at 4720 Bayside Page 11 '"*1 I ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16.1998 (#2438 Michael Sletten, continued) Road for a septic area. This property is comprised of 6.51 acres and lies within the RR-1A zoning district which has a minimum of five acres. Van Zomeren stated the easements will need to be revised to take 10 feet drainage and utility easements along the new exterior lot lines of the parcel and vacate the old easements. The Applicant will also need to obtain a consent form from his mortgage company to sell a portion of the property to the adjacent property owner. Sletten commented he was waiting for the resolution to be approved. There were no public comments. Schroeder moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2438, 4680 Bayside Road, granting of a lot line rearrangement to accommodate a non-conforming lot by selling .25 acres to his adjacent neighbor at 4720 Bayside Road for a septic area. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#10) #2439 SERVICE 800, INC., 2190 WEST WAYZATA BOULEVARD, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN. 8:50 p.m. -10:17 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Jean Mork Bredeson. Service 800: Charles Radloff, Architect, and Rich Kiemen were present. Gaffron stated this application is requesting approval of variances and commercial site plan approval for the construction of a 10,880 square fool office building on Lot 1, Block 1. Sugar Woods Second Addition as well as approval for a conditional use permit for office use in the B-1 District. Gaffron remarked the Applicant is proposing variances to lot coverage of 26.1 percent where 15% is allowed, 36 parking stalls where 45 stalls are required, and variances to parking lot setbacks. The Applicant is requesting a variance to omit a loading berth. The Applicant is required to submit plans for access to Highway 12 to MnDot for review and approval, with access being proposed to be through the triangular portion of MnDot right-of-way just west of the property. The parking lot grades should be reduced from the proposed 5 percent to 4 percent, and construction of a retaining wall may be needed along the east lot boundary line, as well as a construction easement since the storm sewer and parking lot are so close to the sid«. lot line. Storm sewer calculations and a drainage area map will need to be submitted. Gaffron noted this site is required to be connected to City sewer and water, and an expanded utility easement will be needed over the existing City water line along the west property line. Gaffron stated the Applicant is not proposing at this time to create an access between this site and the adjacent Orono Shopping Center site. A rear access driveway is not necessary at this time, but the site plan allows for a future driveway. A fence or hedging along the rear line of the property is also not required at this time. The Applicant is proposing landscaping around the building, with green space constituting approximately 25 percent or 34 percent of the site depending on the parking scheme chosen. Gaffron remarked that snow storage is likely to become an issue if the parking lot is fully utilized for parking, and a lighting plan will need to be submitted. The proposed signage appears to be in conformance with the limitation of 145 square feet total, with the Applicant proposing signage of Page 12 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16,1998 (#2439 Service 800, Inc., continued) approximately 50 square feel in area. Trash and recycle facilities are proposed to be located within the building near the east entrance. Staff is recommending that the developer have the existing overhead wires buried as part of this project, although City code does not make this a requi'^ement. A conditional use permit is required for an office use in the B-1 Retail Sales Business District. The City has the option of requiring as part of the conditional use permit specific building materials to ensure high quality development along Highway 12. Jean Mork Bredeson. property owner, stated Service 800 is a consulting service to computer companies with no warehousing or assembling being lequired at this location. Service 800 currently employs 15 people, with their present offices being located in Wayzala. Due to the present and anticipated growth of the company. Service 800 has found a need to improve their present office space, and has chosen to purchase this property to construct their new office building. Charles Radloff. Architect, stated the company ’s objective is to design a workable solution for both Service 800 and the City. Schroeder inquired whether a loading berth will be necessary. Bredeson stated the company has no need for a loading berth and will be able to move their office equipment and furniture in and out the main entrance. Kiemen noted the 15 percent coverage applies more to residential lots than commercial, and the company has made efforts to keep sufficient green space available on this parcel. Kiemen staled most of the items of concern can be handled with City Staff. Radloff presented a diagram of the proposed building, noting that they are proposing to utilize the structure for office use and not retail. Chair Smith inquired what the maximum capacity of the building is. Bredeson staled the company currently employs 15 employees, with this building being designed to meet their r .ticipated growth needs for the next 12 years. Bredeson stated the empty space depicted on the diagram might eventually be rented out. McMillan inquired whether there were access points available to the rental space. Kiemen stated there is a main access to the building as well as a rear access. Radloff commented there are three total entrances to this building Stoddard thanked the Applicant for considering Orono, and commented that the 15 percent lot coverage applies mainly to two acre lots or less and not necessarily to commercial. Stoddard inquired why a conditional use permit is needed on this application. Gaffron slated the conditional use permit allows the City to place specific conditions on conditional uses such as an office use in a retail district in order to ensure their compatibility within the zoning district. Gaffron noted that the 15 percent requirement was primarily intended for residential and commercial use was not discussed at the time the requirement was approved. The City in the past has typically granted a variance when the proposed structural coverage exceeded 15 percent for commercial sites. Page 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING minutes for NOVEMBER 16,1998(#2439 Service 800, Inc., continued)Schroeder inquired whether the Applicant had considered constructing a two story bonding to reduce the structural coverage.Bredeson stated they had considered that alternative but due to the added costs of installing an elevator and extra bathrooms, it was deemed not feasible.McMillan inquired what the City’s planning strategy was for this area, noting that this building is definitely commercial in nature. Schroeder commented that this appears to be a good business for this site and Orono as a whole. Hawn inquired whether the road to the rear of the building will be constructed in the near future. Gaffron slated it does not appear that the rear frontage road will be constructed anytime soon. Chair Smith inquired whether there were any public comments. is a view easement he obtained in an agreement with Sid Rebers. Bredeson stated the building is situated behind the view easement. Gaffron staled the Applicant is aware of the agreement, noting that the agreement is not enforceable by the City. the building. Parking is allowed to within three feet of the side o me. Bredeson commented thal they may not have purchased this property had they been aware ot the 15 percent structural coverage limit. Stoddard stated the Planning Commission should look at the possible construction of the road and what the impact will be on parking. Gaffron stated the parking stalls were calculated at one per ^00 square feet of net usable floo area. Lindquist stated in his opinion he does not feel that the rear road will ever be built. schroeder commented that the City still needs to provide for that possibte road in the future, with a need to address the parking for the building. request thal the Applicant reduce the size of the building. Page 14 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16, 1998(#2439 Service 800, Inc., continued)Stod.:ard inquired whether the size of the building could be reduced.Bredeson stated reducing the size of the building is not cost effective, and if the building is required to be reduced, they may need to reconsider their options. Bredeson remarked that they have provided ample parking spaces according to the size of the building and they will not be infringing uDon the roadway.Lindquist commented that in his view this is a good project. McMillan remarked that the Planning Commission needs to understand that if this building is constructed, the opportunity for retail on this parcel is very limited. Schroeder noted that retail opportunities are available on either side of this property as well as other sites in Long Lake. Schroeder remarked the parking infringes into the setbacks, but in his opinion this is not a major issue and a variance could be granted to allow that infringement now or in the future. Schroeder stated that screening or some kind of buffer could be required if that road is ever built. Lindquist stated he is comfortable with the size of the building. McMillan inquired how many variances are normally required in a typical office development. Bredeson noted they are requesting only two variances. Gaffron stated typically more variances are requested on a commercial development. Gaffron commented that overall hardcover on this lot is appioximately 75 percent with parking calculated in. Chair Smith inquired whether the Planning Commission was in agreement with the proposed hardcover. Lindquist stated he does not have a problem with the application as proposed. Hawn suggested that the extra parking spaces be left green until a need is demonstrated for the additional parking. Hawn stated she has been persuaded and is in favor of the project. Stoddard stated he agreed with Hawn on the parking and that this project should go forward. McMillan noted she is not familiar with the guidelines for commercial development and would like the City Council to make the final decision on structural coverage. McMillan commented she likes the idea of the screening and is willing to allow the parking stalls to stay green for now. Stoddard noted proof of parking is acceptable and that the majority of the issues can be handled by City Staff. Stoddard remarked that the lighting will need to be screened from the adjoining properties. Gaffron noted that the ordinance requires that the lighting be screened. Schroeder commented the Applicant will need to work with the adjoining property owner on insuring the proper drainage. Schroeder inquired whether access to this property is a problem. Page 15 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16, 1998(#2439 Service 800, Inc., continued)Gaffron stated a plan needs to be submitted to MnDot for their approval and that access is being proposed through this triangular piece.It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the lack of a loading berth was fine. Gaffron commented that as a requirement of the conditional use permit the need for screening and a parking variance could be added in the event that road is ever constructed. Chair Smith stated she was tine with the proposed landscaping. Lindquist moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2439, Service 800, Inc., 2190 West Wayzata Boulevard, granting of a conditional use permit and approval of a commercial site plan subject to the conditions outlined in the November 12,1998 Planner’s Report, and further subject to the added condition of screening at the rear of the property in the event the frontage road is constructed. Proof of parking will be accepted. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 1, Stoddard opposed. Stoddard noted he is generally in favor of the project but voted against approval due to the density. (Recess taken from 10:18 p.m. -10:28 p.m.) (#11) #2416/2417 TOLD DEVELOPMENT CO.<BOB CUNNINGHAM, 2380 SHADYWOOD ROAD, ZONING CODE AMENDMENT AND COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW, 10:28 p.m. - 11:42 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Bob Cunningham was present. Gaffron stated the Application is requesting approval of variances and commercial site plan approval for the construction of a Walgreen ’s Drugstore on the former Grace Baptist Church site. The Applicant is proposing an amendment to the B-5 District to allow a full-service drugstore at this site. The other B-5 sites in Orono consists of two strips along the north side of Shoreline Drive. The total B-5 district in the City comprises 5.9 acres, with the total commercial zoned property in Navarre being 33 acres. Gaffron noted that overall commercial development in Orono amounts to a small percentage of the applications reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council. Gaffron stated the purpose for the B-5 district is to provide a district for businesses that supply commodities or perform a service primarily for the residents in the surrounding neighborhood, which businesses are not high traffic generators and do not necessitate an inordinate amount of hardcover. The district may adjoin residential districts of other business districts which are subject to more restrictive controls. In this case the B-5 district abuts the B-1 district in two areas. Because of the location of the proposed development in Navarre, the uses are restricted in order to limit the hardcover and traffic generated in that district since there already is a traffic problem in Navarre. Gaffron noted the B-5 District was created in 1975 to accommodate existing businesses adjacent to single family residential areas. The intent of the district was to limit the intensity of uses in the B-5 District to those which would not only be good neighbors, but prov'de a valuable service to the surrounding neighborhood. The B-5 District was amended in 1996 to delete home and garden equipment rental which was concurrently made a permitted use in the B-1 District. The B-5 District was again amended in March. 1998. by adding coffee or bagel retail stores to the list of allowed Page 16 rtriifnirt]rtnmwti niSBCViMlCt[irilTAiM [•TlStl rtriidTsTti rivit] rt111 HI tl ^mrtT:iw RiisMin^nnitVvui • • Lvj I tUf II iirt%nirj.« [•nnitirii«wiHirtiii*itTiiTtrfi«vtiifftM p:mvirf r« iwtM rfiiriivtifliHTrtw«TOMtTtfsrivriTtTrfinT:iH«:TriT^^ rsTsiiirtVi ^niiiifr0Tiiitititms:vtnvrtT.ict] rOKtlfM MKtrti [tw:TiTi •■TimH rtTTtr:rtliXV:Ti rtitiuift] rtHict rtxtnraiira rtifirtiti MlIsTtl. [•nirtMCf] nrimrtxsXfHmwti \mfKmu] MIHt rtTlTTlIf [•mwiiiiiiiMmiTiMt Mfirt [•nianfiti MXtIiIif1IinH1i][;S:1iiMirt IiTt mrr«Hifrtriix«iHi«:MtriniTfX7ZfifiriiiH^rfnriT«rriT« HTmXi] rtutrt rtxtmti rtTrtMHiii* F:ril0 rtlft rtTairaHi«0i(t rtHT^tlTlIt rtHWJO* ^iX0T;iai«rtT0l^TirtX:1 rtntTiitMAKt f ■m ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16,1998 (#2416/1417 TOLD Development, continued) Chair Smith inquired whether there were any public comments. Margaret Jagodzinski, 2300 Olive Avenue, expressed concerns regarding the condition of the existing site as well as concerns about lighting, traffic, and the visual appearance of the final development. Jagodzinski stated she would like to see more green space and landscaping to lessen the affect on the neighborhood as well as an attractive building. Chad Nilsson. 3324 Navarre Lane, slated he lives directly across from the site and would like the area to be landscaped and screened to buffer his home from the lights and noise. John O’Sullivan, owner of Culver's, noted he has talked to many businessmen in the area and has a petition in favor of this use from both commercial and residential owners in the Navarre area. O'Sullivan stated that the B-5 zoning was chosen for this use to specifically avoid the B-1 and B-3 potential impacts, noting that Walgreens will have significantly fewer impacts than other possible uses. O’Sullivan cited a need for a drugstore in the Navarre area, and stated he is in favor of the zoning amendment. There were no further public comments. Cunningham noted the standard size of a Walgreen’s Drug Store averages between 13.905 to 15.500 square feet. Lindquist stated the Planning Commission needs to determine whether a drugstore should be allowed at this location and what type of buffer to the surrounding neighborhood should exist. McMillan noted that all of the B-5 Districts need to be co”.idered when arriving at a decision to approve or not approve this text amendment. McMillan inquired whether Walgreens will be expanding the proposed hours, noting that are not open during the peak morning hours. Cunningham stated they would be willing to add a stipulation limiting the amount of hours of operation. Hawn noted that Walgreens is more than just a drugstore and that the issues regarding traffic and impact to the neighborhood need to be addressed further. Hawn felt this project will increase traffic in the Navarre area, which might be better addressed at the next stage of the application. Hawn noted she does not have a problem with this portion of the application. Schroeder commented that Walgreens lends to sell art and book supplies, gifts, pottery, and tobacco products. Cunningham reiterated that Walgreens main consumer base comes from pass-by traffic and the immediate area, noting that Walgreens is looking at approximately a two mite radius McMillan remarked that Walgreens is in the business of selling more than just medicines and the impact to this area needs to be determined. McMillan noted they are proposing to construct a large building on this site and the intent of the B-5 District is to serve as a buffer zone. McMillan stated in her opinion this is more heavy commercial and might be better suited to a B-1 or B-3 zone. McMillan noted she was not in favor of amending the district. Lindquist stated he might be Jn favor of changing it to a B-1. Page 18 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16,1998 (#2416/2417 TOLD Development, continued) McMillan commented she would like to see some development on that site but has reservations about this project. Mayor Jabbour stated the City came up with the B-5 District back in 1975, and the district has been modified over time due to uses that were not necessarily anticipated by the City at the time the district was formed. Jabbour recommending the Planning Commission look at the overall picture of what Orcno wants to accomplish with their zoning and not react to individual applications. Jabbour cautioned the Planning Commission against eroding the intent of the zoning code in an attempt to make this property more marketable. Cunningham noted he will be meeting with Walgreens December 7th to discuss this project and hopefully will have a dennite commitment by the company to develop this property. O’Sullivan stated that other businesses such as a bank and retail center have looked at this site, noting that a drugstore would be an appropriate use for this area. O'Sullivan commented most of the residents in the area are in support of this project and that the B-5 language is old and should be updated. McMillan reiterated she is opposed to amending the district simply to accommodate this one development. Berg commented she would like to see a drugstore in the Navarre area, but had concerns about the drive-through window. Lindquist stated he is in agreement with McMillan and is not in favor of spot zoning. Schroeder inquired what a B-3 District is. Gaffron stated a B-3 District is a shopping center/business district/general retail district, and a B-1 District tends to have larger sites and a larger grouping of tenants. McMillan commented she was not against development on this property. Cunningham staled Walgreens is a good developer for this property because they can afford to complete all of the requirements. Gaffron stated that a B-1 District is similar to a B-5 in that they supply commodities but differ in that some uses are allowed in a B-1 that would not be allowed in a B-5 such as garages and restaurants. Gaffron commented he does not think this development would make sense as a B-3. Schroeder noted this is an expensive piece of property to develop and that other proposals for this parcel have been considered in the past to no avail. Schroeder stated in his opinion this is a good business for this location and would be in favor of the project. Stoddard stated most of his comments relate to the next portion of the application, noting he would be inclined to vote along with the rest of the members Hawn stated she does not have a problem with the selling of pharmaceuticals, but has some concerns over the size of this development and the vast range of products sold by Walgreens. Chair Smith noted that the Planning Commission in the past has looked at some controls to limit the impact to the district, noting she has some concerns with the drive-through window. Smith Page 19 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16,1998 (02416/2417 TOLD Development, continued) stated she would be inclined to support the application with some reservations. Schroeder stated he would be willing to make a motion to amend this district to include pharmaceuticals. McMillan remarked that the Planning Commission needs to look at all of the B-5 Districts and not just this site. Schroeder moved to approve Application #2417, TOLD Development Co., 2380 Shadywood Road to add drugstore use to the list of allowed conditional uses in the B-5 District. NO VOTE TAKEN. Gaffron stated his understanding of the motion was that Schroeder was adding to the B-5 District all those functions that a drugstore is today, and inquired whether that was the intent of the motion. Schroeder stated the intent of his motion was to add a drugstore use such as a Walgreens to the list of allowed conditional uses in the B-5 District. Schroeder moved to amend his motion, Stoddard seconded, to approve Application #2417, told Development Co., 2390 Shadywood Road to add a full-service drugstore use to the list of allowed conditional uses in the B-5 District. Chair Smith inquired whether some limitations should be set on this property regarding the overall size of the structure and how much space should be limited to retail sales. Schroeder stated that performance standards are set on a case by case basis. Gaffron remarked that the size of the building could be limited. Cunningham stated Walgreens has spent years researching and advancing this particular type of protocal and have done numerous studies regarding what their customers buy and have determined that this size of building is appropriate for their needs. McMillan stated the Planning Commission needs to consider what we are trying to achieve by amending this zoning district and what the City envisions for the future development of this area. Hawn stated she was in agreement with McMillan. VOTE ON AMENDED MOTION: Ayes 3, Nays 4; Hawn, Lindquist, Smith, McMillan opposed. MOTION FAILS DUE TO LACK OF MAJORITY VOTE. Lindquist inquired whether the Planning Commission should consider changing this site to B-1. Gaffron stated the Planning Commission might be better tabling this application until the Applicant has time to locate a site that is appropriately zoned for this particular use. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to deny Application #2417, TOLD Development, Co., 2380 Shadywood Road, due to the fact that drugstore use does not fit within the current allowable conditional uses for the B-5 Zoning District. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 3; Schroeder Stoddard and Berg opposed. ’ Page 20 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16, 1998 (#2416/2417 TOLD Development, continued) Gaffron slated this application for amending the B-5 District will proceed to the City Council on November 23 with the Planning Commission’s recommendation. Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2416, TOLD Development, Co., 2380 Shadywood Road. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Berg inquired whether Walgreens will stay at their proposed building size of 13,905 Cunningham slated the proposed size will probably stay at 13.905. SKETCH PLAN REVIEWS (#12) #2436 BOB ERICKSON, 364/372 WEST LAKE STREET, LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT - SKETCH PLAN REVIEW, 11:45 p.m. -12:10 p.m. Bob and Lisa Erickson was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing a lot line rearrangement for properties located at 364 and 372 Westlake Street. The proposed lot line rearrangement would create two substandard lots with the 364 lot being comprised of 1.6 acres and the 372 lot being comprised of 1.1 acres. The LR-1A zoning district requires two acres for each lot. Currently the 364 lot is comprised of .65 acre and the 372 lot is 2.01 acres. Weinberger remarked that 364 Westlake contains a non-conforming structure which the Applicant is proposing to remove as well as the existing structure., on 372 Westlake. Both properties have been assessed for one sewer unit each with Lot 364 having been connected to sanitary sewer since 1994. Lot 362 was required to connect to sewer in 1995, but to date has not been. Staff is recommending that the Applicant maintain the 50 foot front lot line for the 364 property which would allow a movement of the lot line towards the lakeside of the property and make it a true lot line rearrangement. Weinberger noted with this lot line rearrangement it is being proposed to take the one conforming lot, Lot 372, and combine it with non-conforming Lot 364 to make two non-conforming lots. McMillan inquired whether a flag lot was being created. Weinberger stated a flag lot would be created under the definition of the code, which the zoning code does not allow. Weinberger remarked that if the 50 foot front lot line was maintained, then a flag lot would not be created because the lot line would change further back on the property. Van Zomeren noted this is a lot line rearrangement and not a subdivision, with access being kept the same. Variances for lot area may be required for a residence to be built on either lot. Van Zomeren stated a lot line rearrangement is a Class 1 Subdivision, which require Mylars to be filed at the County. Bob Erickson stated they may have reached a solution by leaving the existing 50 foot front lot line for the 364 property. The intent is to construct a residence on both lots. Erickson requested that the Planning Commission approve the sketch plan as revised, keeping the 50 foot front lot line, which is not depicted on the diagram. Page 21 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16,1998 (#2436 Bob Erickson, continued) Weinberger stated the plan was dropped off today, noting the building pads have not changed. Lindquist commented that the Applicant should try to avoid variances on new construction. McMillan remarked tnat a variance to the average lakeshore setback will probably be needed because of the shape of the lot. Chair Smith inquired whether there were any public comments. There were no public comments. Chair Smith stated the Applicant will need to provide for some turn-around. Smith noted that normally the Planning Commission does not give a recommendation on a sketch plan. McMillan inquired whether there would be a hardship that exists for the two non-conforming lots. Havwi suggested that one lot could be conforming and one lot non-conforming. Schroeder noted the Applicant was not able to obtain enough land to make the lots conforming. Weinberger stated the Applicant has the option of appearing before the City Council or coming back before the Planning Commission with their preliminary plat. Gaffron remarked that this sketch plan application does not need to go before the City Council unless there is a problem with the application and that the Applicant can submit the preliminary plat to the Planning Commission for their review. (#13) #2441 MIKE HILBELINK FOR JOHN VOGT, 3020 WATERTOWN ROAD, SUBDIVISION • SKETCH PLAN REVIEW, 12:10 p.m. -12:31 p.m. Mike Hilbelink was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is proposing to subdivide an existing 12 acre parcel into Five parcels, noting that a survey is needed to verify the wetland and dry land areas. Two lots are to be served by the existing curb cut off of Watertown Road and three lots are to be served by an extension of the cul-de-sac serving the Crystal Creek subdivision to the west of this parcel. Lot 7 in Crystal Creek does not have frontage on a platted road or outlot. Staff is not in favor of the road the way it is proposed, and the size and location of the proposed cul-de-sac is not acceptable. The Applicant needs to provide a septic report and a stormwater management plan for review by the City Engineer and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Hilbelink stated some testing and field work has been performed, and discussions have been held with Mr. Winston, the owner of Lot 1 . Hilbelink noted that the two bottom lots do not have adequate septic sites available and will need to be combined into one parcel Van Zomeren noted that there would be 15 proposed lots on one cul-de-sac with this proposal. Van Zomeren stated she will need to review the City code to determine how many residences can be located on a cul-de-sac, the length allowed, and the required paved width. Page 22 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16,1998 (#2441 Mike Hilbelink, continued) Chair Smith inquired whether there were any public comments. John Winston, Lot 1. Rolling Meadows. Third Addition, stated he prefers the plan presented tonight rather than the previous plan where the cul-de-sac was proposed to be in his back yard. Winston stated he would like to have more time to review the proposed plan. Winston suggested that the Planning Commission also look at the surrounding area and how that potentially could be developed. Van Zomeren remarked she was unsure why an area on the map is depicted as a wetland. Gaffron stated it was taken from an old aerial photograph and is related somewhat to topography. The wetland possibly was eliminated at the time the cul-de-sac was constructed. Hilbelink inquired whether there was a private easement agreement. Gaffron stated there probably is one. Van Zomeren noted Staff would prefer a different access Winston expressed concerns over increased traffic, noting they will be exiting onto Crystal Bay Road. Schroeder remarked they need to be looking down the road 20 or 30 years when platting this subdivision. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant needs to have the required survey work completed. Schroeder suggested the Applicant continue to work with City Staff and the adjoining neighbors to resolve some of these issues. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#14) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS ON OCTOBER 26.1998 AND NOVEMBER 9.1998 Smith noted that the City Council voted to reduce the Hardten application from the Planning Commission's recommendation of 27 percent to 25 percent. (#15) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION None (#16) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 19,1998 Corrections were made on Pages 1. 9.12. and 15. Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to approve the minutes of the Octo. •*r 19,1998 Regular Planning Commission meeting as amended. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Page 23 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16,1998 (#17) SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON NOVEMBER 23.1998 AND DECEMBER 14.1998 November 23.1998 - Lindquist December 14,1998 - Stoddard ADJOURNMENT Schroeder moved, Stoddard seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 12:40 p.m. Sandra Smith, Chair Page 24