Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07-08-1991 Council Packet
NAME 0 0 0 0 0 (p ec. se pr s o.. . I I j E FO T C .• E ) ------------------,------------�----.-...--------------- • !/Jl<L /: 3. 4.1�:/-;::- s. 6. 7. ----------------�----------------------------- 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 3. 14 1 • 6 • 8 • 20. AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JULY 6, 1991, 7:00 P.M. (*)Asterisk items are considered to be rou:ine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be o^ained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL 1.CONSENT AGENDA* APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. Regtiiar Meeting of June 24, 1991 PLANNING O PUBLIC CG USSION COMMENTS - Maureen Bellows Representative ITS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT **APPLICANTS**Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (J) original resolutions at the Recorder's desk. Applicants need not execute resolutions for suMivisions, vacations and denials. 3.#1604 Clair Rood, 2215 Kenwood Way - Variance/Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 4.#1645 A. J. Graff, 2009 sugarwood Drive "'•“quest for Second Curb Cut *5. #1648 Ronald Prineas, 1920 Shoreline Drive - Variance Renewal - Resolution 6.#1649 Elaine Petersen, 1921 Eagerness Point - Variance - Resolution 7.#1650 Hennepin County Department of Transportation - Intersection of #15 and #51 - After the Fact Conditional Use Permit/Variance 8.#1652 Daniel Fleischman, 500 Hanlon Avenue - Vaiiance - Resolution 9.#1653 Jeff Johnson, 3825 Cherry Avenue - Vacation - Resolution 10.#1655 Elaine Pagonis, 2740 Shadywood Road - Variance - Resolution 11.Curtis H, Green, 3220 Watertown Road (Lot 2, Senn Addition) Request for Single Access to New Building Site MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT 12.City Administrator Search Process 13.Appointment of Acting Administrator - Resolution CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 14.City Facilities 15.Lake Use Committee 16.Request for Refund - Cuff *17.Police Chief Selection *18.Responsible Authority Data Privacy - Resolution AGENDA FOR COONCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUT,Y 6, 1991, 7:00 P.M. CITY ADMINISTRiiTOR'S REPORT Continued * 19. Municipal Board Process 20.Assessor's Contract 21.City Recorder Resignation 22.Source Reduction Recycled Products - Resolution 23.Step Increase - Officer Fischenich 24.Salary Adjustment - Randy O'Brien 25.Summary for Publication - 1990 Audit Report 26.ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION 1950 Shoreline - Cabin Removal Holding Tank - 315 Crestview Avenue 360-370 T«af Street Highway x2 Deunage Claim May Receipts and Disbursements Goal Setting Status * * * * * * CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (27*) BILLS (2e*) ADJOUR] I. h y h ^ CyPCOMIWG ISSDES AND EVENTS 07/04 - Holiday - Independence Day (Thursday) 07/08 - Council Meeting 07/15 - Planning Commission 07/22 - Council Meeting : V* a-* 1-- ^ MINUTES OF THE RFGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 %aROLL CALL: ^ The Council met on the above date v/ith the folloW^^^ melriijjbrs present: Mayor Barbara Peterson, Counci Imembers Goetten, Edward Callahan, Gabriel Jabbour and Mary Butler ,As^e following represented the City Staff: City Administrator ,<sf\ Bernhardson, Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne MabusthT^ Public Works Director John Gerhardson, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, City Attorney Thomas Barrett, City Engineer Glenn Cook, and City Recorder .^aurie Scheffler. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m (#1*)CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Peterson requested the removal of Consent Agenda. item #21 from the It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda, with the exception of item #21, which was removed and discussed in the sequence in which it appears on the Agenda. All voted .tyu. ; ocion ssed. (#2)RESOLDTION OF APPRECIATION POLICE CHIEF MELVIN KILBO Mayor Peterson presented Chief Kilbo with a Resolution of Appreciation for his many years of servic'= to the City of Orono in the capacity of Chief of Police, and wished him well in his retirement. (#3*)APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt the minutes of the Regular Council Meeting held May 28, 1991. All voted aye. Motion passed. (*4*)APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt the minutes of the Regular Council Meeting held June 10, 1991. All voted aye. Motion passed. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRI T REPORT Bernhardson informed Council that JoEllen Hurr was unable to attend the meeting this evening.He noted that LMCD Executive Director, Gene Strommen was present to discuss Agenda Item #12, LMCD Budget. Mayor Peterson asked Mr. strommen if he wished, at this time, to comment on LMCD matters not related to their budget. Strommen indicated that his comments this evening would pertain only to the proposed budget. -1 - r^T-7- ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 PUBLIC COMMENTS: Henry Furchner, 360 Leaf Street, indicated thit *ie believes he is being harassed by an employee o£ the City, He stated t’.at when the Septic Inspector visited the property behind his, he spun the wheels of his automobile on Mr. Furchner's property. Mayor Peterson referred to the memo from Michael Gaffron, dated June 20, 1991 (presented as an attachment to Agenda Item #26), and asked Gaffron if Mr. Furchner had received a coov. Gaffron advised that a copy of his memo had not been sent to Mr. Furchner. Mabusth handed Mr. Fuichner a copy of Gaffron's memo to revj ew. Mayor Peterson asked Gafr-on if there would be additional inspections of Mr. Furchner's property and the properties adjacent to it. Gaffron indicated that the inspections that have occurred, were done at the insistence of Mr. Furchner. He also stated that he was unaware of any incident involving the spinning of automobile tires, but would ioo<c xnto the matter further and report back to Council. Mayor Peterson informed Mr. Furchner that he would be hearing from City Staff regarding the tire spinning incident. She encouraged Mr. Furchner to call the City after he reviewed Gaffron's memo if he had further questions or concerns. Mr. Furchner stated that, ir. his opinion, there is a real problem with the septic system at 400 Leaf Street. He explained how a rockbed had been installed with a ditch leading to the septic tank and that there was seepage all over the yard this Spring from the system. Mayor Peterson asked Gaffron if the three properties that have been the subject of Mr. Furchner's concerns are included in the Stubbs Bay sewer area. Gaffron answered in the affirmative. Mr. Furchner encouraged the City Council to take whatever steps are necessary to get the Stubbs Bay sewer project initiated. Mayor Peterson asked Gaffron to have Mr. Weckman visit the Furchners tomorrow (June 25, 1991). -2 - 'I- ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: (#5)ZONING FILE #1657-NICK SIMONDS 2007 SUGARWOOD DRIVE DRIVEWAY REQUEST Nick and Nanne Sinonds were present. Bernhardson explained that the Simonds were requesting approval to vary from the Development Standards for the Sugarwood PRD. Mabusth displayed a sketch of the proposed dtiveway, showing that it would curve around several existing trees and encroach into the 30 foot side yard setback area. Bernhardson stated that the intent of the 30 foot side yard setback is to assure minimal tree removal. The Simonds request for encroachment into that area stems from their dc'sire to preserve several large existing trees.He noted that three Planning Commission members had voted to recommend approval, three ’^oted to recommend denial. Mr. Simonds confirmed Bernhardson's statements, adding that the encroachment into the 30 foot side yard setback area would have no impact on the neighboring properties. Goetten stated that she had attended the June 17 Planning Commission meeting when this matter was reviewed. She appreciated the efforts put forth by the Planning Commission pertaining to establishment of the "'evelopment ''‘tandards. Goetten said, "In this case, however, ^ Simond* a'->:-Tying to preserve trees, which is ^he basis of *'le development Standards. I cannot see w.’’. we would not allow this to occur. I did go out to the Simond house and I could see that a large Maple tree, among others, would have to come down if the Development Standards are met." Jabbour, Mayor Peterson, and Butler indicated that they concur with Goetten that tree preservation is an important aspect of not only the Sugarwood Development, but the entire Community as well. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve a Variance to the Sugarwood Development Standards, by allowing the driveway at 2007 Sugarwood Drive to encroach into the 30 foot side yard setback in order to preserve several mature trees. All voted aye. Motion passed. Mr. Sid Rebers, owner of property adjacent to the Simonds, expressed his appreciation for Council's approval and confirmed that the proposed location of the Simonds' driveway v;ould in no way impact bis property. -3 - k ORONO CITV COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#6)WHITNEY MACMILLXN 1620 FOX STREET REQUEST TO WAIVE D.RECTIVE OF DEMOLITION PERMIT Mr. and Mrs. Whitney MacMillan were present. Bernhardson provided an overview of the events that took place and issues involved with this application, iRefer to Jeanne Mabusth's June. ' , 1991, memo).He added that should Council approve the Ma_Millan's request to waive the need for a demolition permit, it v/ould then be necessary to grant a Variance to the City's Ordinance requiring the use of clean fill. Mrs. MacMillan explained that she was not aware of the need for a demolition permit. They had hired a contractor to come in and crush what remained of the house, after i.t had been burned. The crushed material was then buried in a hole. She stated that it was not until the process was complete that she received a letter from the City notifying her of the need to have obtained a demolition permit. Mrs. MacMillan stated that there v/as nothing in the burning/demolition process with the Fire Department or City that alerted her to the fact that such a permit was needed. She stated that the Building Inspectors had been out to the property several times and had not informed them of the need for a demolition permit. Jabbour suggested that it may be appropriate to require the various Fire Departments to notify people that a demolition permit must be obtained from the City in conjunction with burning a building. Mabusth stated that persons intending to burn a structure must obtain a permit from the PCA. The PCA permit application includes a question about the method that will be used to dispose of the debris. If the applicants indicate that the debris is -o be buried on site, the PCA requires that certain covenants oe filed in the chain of title for that particular property. Callahan noted that Mr. MacMillan’s letter of June 4, 1991, indicates that he will provide the necessary covenants to meet the PCA requirements.He questioned what further action is required on the part of the City Council. Mabusth explained that the MacMillan's did not obtain a demolition permit to demolish the structure on their property. When City Staff notified the MacMillan's for the need of such a permit, they sent a letter asking that the requirement for a demolition permit be waived. She noted that it was not until today, when Staff further discussed this issue, that it was determined there would be a need for a Variance proceeding if Council granted the MacMillan's request.It would be necessary to hold a Public Hearing before the Planning Commission and obtain approval of a Variance from the City’s Ordinance requiring -4 - ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#6)MACMILLAN CONTINUED the use of clean fill. Mrs. MacMillan stated that the contractor that had crushed the foundation of the structure had informed her that the crushed debris was classified as clean fill. Butler commented that it is not the responsibility of the Building Inspectors to make sure that property ov;ners secure the proper permits for all aspects of a project. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten. to require the applicants to obtain an after-the-fact demolition permit for the razing of the principal structure located at 1620 Fox' Street. Further that the fire departments that serve the Orono area should be directed to notify persons seeking burn permits of the requirement for a demolition permit as well.All voted aye. Motion passed. (#7)SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Mabusth summarized the information provided in her June 19, 1991 memo pertaining to the Planning Commission's recommendation for a Temporary Sign Ordinance Amendment. Mayor Peterson asked Planning Commission Chair, Charlie Kelley, if he v/ished to make any comments regarding this matter. Kelley stated that the Planning Commission djd not want the Temporary Sign Ordinance to be drafted in such a way that it would over-regulate the citizens.He said, "The Planning Commission's recommendation primarily focused on the need for the business owner to obtain a temporary sign permit.This would also apply in the case of advertising balloons and banners." Butler asked Staff how the City will keep track of the number of temporary sign permits issued to eacJ. property to assure that no more than four permits are issued per year. Mabusth advised Butler that the City has a computer program in place for recording the number of permits issued to each property, and that it is currently used to monitor permits issued on a property. Butler asked if other communities have similar sign ordinances in place.She added that, in her opinion, such an ordinance seemed to be very "knit-picky". She asked, "How can a person located in a multi-tenant building run a business if the other tenants have depletea the four signs per year, per building allocation? There are very few free-standing businesses within the City of Orono. Most are clustered under one roof." Mabusth replied, "In the case of multip •»-use buildings, I -5 - W' », >-•]’ -?■ . .i’ i^v ' mL^u ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (|7)SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONTINUED would recominend that the property owner apply to the City for a permanent sign that would provide the ability to display temporary advertisements. The mam focus of this Ordinance Amendment is to discourage the use of the yellow, bread-board type signs throughout the business areas. It is the consensus of Staff and Planning Commission that these signs are aesthetically undesirable." Jabbour commented that John O'Sullivan had been present at tne Planning Commission meeting when the Public Hearing on this matter was held. Bernnardson asked Mabusth if Staff had notified the Merchants Association of the particular language p-oposed for the Ordinance Amendment. Mabusth replied, "I believe John O'Sullivan understood what was being proposed. The Merchants Association provided me with some final input. As I understand it, the amendment met with their approval. They were mainly concerned about the existing Ordinance which allowed only one temporary sign every 24 months. There was one business owner on Wayzata Boulevard who did not approve of the aspect of the four signs per year applying to all of the tenants within one building. To that property owner, 1 would recommend a permanent sign, that would provide flexibility for advertising." Jabbour asked Mabusth in what capacity John O'Sullivan was present at the Planning Commission metcing. Mabusth stated that he was present on his own behalf for an application pertaining to an addition to his service station, but then stayed for the Temporary Sign Public Hearing and represented the Navarre business owners.She asked Council if they would prefer to have the area merchants review the proposed amendment prior to Council action. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Goetten, to table this item until the Orono business owners have reviewed the proposed amendment. All voted aye. Motion passed. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT: (#8)HARDCOVER REVIEW OF FINDINGS Mabusth advised that at the June 17, 1991 Planning Commission meeting, Charlie Kelley raised the question of whether Council intended to allow the use of non-woven fabric v/ithin the 0-75 foot setback area, and if so, to what degree. Goetten stated that she had been of the understanding that when Council took action approving the use of non-woven fabric. -6 - ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#8)HARDCOVER REVIEW CONTINUED that the approval was of a conceptual nature and more detailed standards would be discussed. She indicated that she would like to have more definitive standards incorporated into the Ordinance Amendment, and suggested referring the issue to the Planning Commission. Butler stated that Council may wish to prohibit use of the non-woven fabric within the 0-75 foot setback area. Mayor Peterson stated that she, too, was of the understanding that some restrictions would be incorporated into the Ordinance Amendment. She added that she had not intended to allow the use of the non-woven fabric within the 0-75 foot setback area. Callahan, who had voted against the motion to allow the use of non-woven fabric, indicated that his understanding of Council's action was that non-woven, geotechmc fabric, would not oe considered as hardcover. Jabbour suggested assigning a certain percentage for which non-v;oven fabric would be considered as hardcover. He said, "If we assign as certain factor to the non-woven fabric, we can more easily control the extent of its use. If it is considered as even a fraction of a percent of hardcover, it cannot be used in the 0-75 foot setback area at all, as we do not allow anything there." He asked Gaffron to comment on his proposal. Gaffron indicated that he would prefer that a hardcover factor not be assigned to the non-woven as it would further complicate an already complex calculation, that from experience seems often impossible for anyone but City Staff to do correctly. He said, "If it is Council’s wish to have nothing but trees, shrubs, and grass within the 0-75 foot setback area, then that should be stated, though there will be numerous Variance requests." Mabusth noted that geotechnic fabric has been used as a method of stabilization for steep, eroding banks along the shoreline. Callahan stated that for the most part, the requests that have come before Council involving landscaping plastic has had to do with its removal as a trade-off for the addition of hardcover elsewhere on that property.He said, "I do not recall an instance where someone has requested a Variance to install landscaping plastic. It may be appropriate to establish a policy stating that non-woven fabric cannot be used as a trade-off for other forms of hardcover. It was the consensus of the Council that this issue shouJd i’f.- ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING K LD JUNE 24. 1991 ( #8) HARDCOVER REVIEVI CONTINUED revi6v/0d by th6 Pl^rfiing Commission. Kelley asked Council what policy will interim. be in effect in the Callahan suggested leaving the pre-existing Ordinance as is (which states tha'. any weed control material, plastic or fabric, is considered as hardcover) until an appropriate amendment is recommended by Planning Commission and adopted by Council. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to rescind the Ordinance relating to non-woven fabric until such time that an Ordinance Amendment is drafted and adopted.All voted aye. Motion passed. Gaffron noted that in light of the action previously taken by Council, he knows of several people that have installed non-woven fabric on their property. Council stated that they could foresee no problem with the existing situations. Staff was asked to continue urging people to use the fabric, as opposed to plastic. but with an understanding that during the interim pe.riod of fine tuning the ordinance amendment, the fabric will be considered hardcover. OTHER o ..Mayor Peterson stated that she would be .meeting with Betsy Swartwood, Mayor of the City of Long Lake, to discuss some of the issues of mutual concern for both cities. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: (#9)STUBBS BAY SEWER Bernhardson presented Council with information pertaining to the issues of financing the proiect, further engineering v/ork that should be done on the project, and the areas to be included in the project.He said, "The City could opt to contribute a certain amount to the cost of project, vhich would defray tne cost to the individual residents.However, there is really no of knowing what deg.'^cc of financial involvement on the City s behalf will make the project acceptable to the residents. VJould ‘•‘le City consider a request from the residents to defray the project costs by 50%? The City cn*.Id either determine a certain percentage of participation and ask the residents if that would be acceptable, or ask the residents for input as to what they would consider to be an acceptable level of City participation." Butler stated that it would be difficult for the City to indicate its willingness to pay a certain percent of the project costs, because the project costs are not Known at this time. -8 - ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (19)STUBBS BAY SEVfCR CONTINUED Jabbour said, "I believe that the project is long overdue, and that Council must make a decision. Tnis project is necessc.ry for the public’^ health, safety and welfare. I think we shoold deal with the cost issues after the final numbers are known." Mayor Peterson asked John Thiesse, a member of the Stubbs Bay Sewer Committee, if he had any additional information. Thiesse advised Council that he talked with 2“ people in the Stubbs Bay area about t^e project.He said, "I v;ould estimate that approximately 85% of those people would pay up to 60% of the cost of the project." Mayor Peterson agreed with Jabbour that the project has to be done. She asked what the next step should be. Gle»in Cook stated that the next step should be updating the costs indicated in the original feasibility study. MayOi Peterson asked if the areas to be included in the project have changed since the original feasibility study war done. She said, "There were discussions about excluding Christine Drive and Oxford Road." Bernhardson advised that neither Christine Drive, nor Oxford Road were included in the original project. Properties east of Leaf Street were not included in the original projecc, but properties in this location are approachini the point v/here they may need to be included. He said. "Propercies in the Bedcri/ood and Bayside areas meeting specific criteria couid ’opt-out’ of the project. That criteria would also apply to tne properties or Christine Drive and Oxford Road.’ Goetten understood that there were several properties on Oxford Road in need of municipal sewer. Gaffron confirmed that there are three properties on Oxford Road that have problems with their septic systems. Two of the systems have problems related to distribution systems and can be repaired.The problem with the system on the third property is that it has been over used for many years, and must either be added onto or replaced. Goetten asked if any of these properties are on the lake. Gaffron replied, "Two of the properties are not lakeshore. Virtually every property has two acres and the ability to replace the existing system if need be. The question is whether, from a philosophical viewpoint, the City wants to sewer lakeshore properties.In my opinion, it makes good sense to sewer lakeshore properties." -9 - I ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#9)STUBBS BAY SEWER CONTINUED Mayor Peterson stated that an Oxford Road resident had contacted her indicating that they would like to be included in the project, but wished to review cost estimates.This paj^ticular resident is having difficulties due to clay soils. Callahan asked if it would in fact be necessary to get Metropolitan Council approval for a MUSA line extension if Christine Drive, Oxford Road, and Sussex Drive are to be included in the project. Bernhardson replied, "Technically, we would have to get approval of a MUSA line extension for the entire ^rea. We identified the five areas originally included in the feasibility study in the Comprehensive Plan as being areas the City intended to sewer. The two acre properties outside those areas were not identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Setting that issue aside, Sussex and Christine are not on the lake, and are in the Two-'ere Zone. At what point does the City draw the line on including twO""acre properties in the sewered area.Both Christine Drive and Sussex Drive are new developments." Callahan stated that the septic problems for the two-acre properties in the Stubbs Bay area should be treated no differently than the two-acre properties elsewhere in the City. He said, "We can say that the problem is worse in the Stubbs Bay area because of the lakeshore properties.It seems to me that all we need to do is require those properties that are having problems to go to their alternate systems.In my opinion, if there are two-acre lots in the Stubbs Bay aiea that have adequate alternate areas, that the City is justified in allowing them to opt-out of the project. The City would need to strictly enforce the septic standards and require the owners to change to alternate drainfields if that is necessary." Goetten noted that at some point, those properties will fully utilize the capacity of the alternate sites, and would then have to look for yet another alternative. Callahan responded that such is the case with every two-acre property within the City. Butler said, "It would seem to me that the properties that are being considered for exclusion from the project, should in fact be included. It is those properties that are picking up the unit charge, the "make-ready" charge. If those properties are included now, then in the future when the alternate septic site fails, there would be an option to merely hook up to the trunk line without the need to do another entire project. Can we not replicate the methods we used when municipal water v/as installed. When water was first installed, the City charged a ready-to-serve fee. Further, including those properties would drop the per unit -10 - ORONO CITY COUNCIL MELTING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (19)STUBBS BAY SEWER CONTINUED charge for the trunk line." h Gaffron agreed with Butler, but rioted that the question then is where to draw the boundary for properties that are potentially served. He said, "A lateral could be installed that is two miles long and it would serve the rest of the City." Gaffron displayed a map he had prepared showing properties that would be included in the initial project, and hooked up directly to the trunk, and those properties that would be served by a neighborhood lateral. He stated that there are approximately 100 properties, of which 60 would be in the initial project, and the otlier 40 would be split up into three or four different neighborhood lateral projects, but could pay the trunk charge now. Gaffron advised that the project could be expanded to include properties on Cygnet Place, which Is the next area that will begin to experience problems with existing septic systems. Butler asked if there are any existing problems on Cygnet Gaffron advised that approximately 1/2 have replaced systems over the last ten or those systems are still working. of the properties twelve years, and Callahan asked whether it would be appropriate to forego a motion calling for an updated feasibility study and proceed to ordering plans and specifications. Gerhardson indicated that construction of this project would not begin for sometime, and suggested that it may be more beneficial to have an updated feasibility study. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Jabbour, to direct the City Engineer to update the feasibility study for the Stubbs Bay sewer project. All voted aye. Motion passed. (#10)CITY FACILITIES-FINANCING Bernhardson presented Council with additional information regarding financing or the City facilities, as well as a draft resolution to set a public hearing to determine if Council desires to establish a Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Mayor Peterson stated that Council would consider and take separate action on each of the issues presented in Bernhardson's June 21, 1991 memo. Bei'nhardson explained that if Council chooses to adopt the draft resolution setting a Public Hearing to establish and HRA, the City Attorney would review the final resolution prior to publication in the newspaper. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Butler, to adopt Resolution #2978, to publish a notice of Public Hearing to -11 - VC ¥’■ i.. 1^. 'V, ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#10)CITY FACILITIES FINANCING CONTINUED establish an HRA, which xS to be drafted by the City Attorney and published by July 5, 1991. Motion, Ayes-4, Mayor Peterson, Nay. Motion passed.Mayor Peterson stated that she understood Council's reasoning behind their vote to establish an HRA. She believed however, that due to the magnitude of costs involved with this project, that it should be put up for a referendum. Jabbour indicated that timing is critical in this process, as any delay may result in additional costs to taxpayers, should there be a change in interest rates.Jabbour stated that it is extremely important for Council to do the ]ob they have been elected to do, as effectively as possible.It was his understanding that the interest rate is at the second lowest point it has had in fourteen years. Jabbour urged Council to move swiftly on this matter. Bernhardson referred Council to the information regarding a draft time schedule for the project tnat can be used as a guideline. He asked Council to accept the i. ormation, and stated that no action is needed on this aspect of this item. Issue number four set forth in Bernhardson's memo requested Council approval to send out the draft Request for Proposal for hiring a construction manager, as well as establishing a committee to interview candidates. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Butler, to authorize Staff to seek proposals from qualified construction managers for use on the project. All voted aye. Motion passed. Bernhardson suggested it would be appropriate for the preparation of informational brochures to begin.He advised Council that the approximate cost of preparing the brochure would be $1,500, and the cost to produce and distribute it throughout the Community would also be approximately $1,500. Bernhardson asked Council to authorize the expenditure of approximately $3,000. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to authorize Boarman and Associates to prepare a draft brochure for review at the Council's July 8, 1991 Council meeting. All voted aye. Motion passed. The final City facilities issue Bernhardson presented for Council's consideration and action pertained to the formation of a Design Committee.He stated that Mayor Peterson, and CounciImembers Goetten and Butler had expressed interest in serving on this Committee, and asked that two members from the Planning Commission be involved as well. Bernhardson proposed a three-meeting schedule for the Design Committee. Goetten stated that Steve VJilson, who had served as the -12 - t- ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#10)CITY FACILITIES FINANCING CONTINUED Chairperson for the City Facilities Citizens Committee, make an excellent addition to the Design Committee. wou i d Jabbour stated that he would like to participate in the Design Committee. Mayor Peterson asked Charlie Kelley if he would be a member of the Design Committee. Kelley indicated that he would. Mayor Peterson also suggested Planning Commission members Maureen Bellows and/or Sara Moos. Bernhardson asked the Committee members when they would prefer to hold their first meeting. It was agreed that the first meeting would be held Tuesday, July 2, 1991, at 7:00 p.m., in a location other than the Council Chambers. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Butler, to establish a Facilities Design Committee with the follow: g members: Barbara Peterson, Mary Butler, Diann Goetten, Gabriel Jabbour, Charlie Kelley, Steve Wilson, Sara Moos, and Maureen Bellows. Goetten asked Staff to notify all members immediately of the date, time and location of the first meeting. All voted aye. Motion passed. (ill)HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY Bernhardson reported that the June round of Highway 12 Committee meetings resulted in the elimination of the Highway 55 and County Road 11 corridors. He added that he and Butler had done everything possible to stress the importance of eliminating everything but the existing corridor. MNDOT indicated that they would only accept the deletion of Highway 55 and County Road 11 at this time, based on transportation objectives, and asked the Committee members if any were opposed to the deletion of those two corridors. No objections were raised, and the two corridors were dropped. Bernhardson also advised that he had spoken with the Mayor of the City of Maple Plain, subsequent to the Highway 12 Committee meeting.He said, "The primary reason for Maple Plain's position favoring a southerly corridor is that they believe that option drops the most traffic count in the current corridor. Now that the northern corridors have been deleted, Larry Dallam indicated that MNDOT will be looking at some of the sub-alternatives. Such as extending the south route around Maple Plain and tying it into the current corridor and Highway 6 to see if that pulls down some of the traffic counts to an acceptable -13 - F- 'V [ f i • r-"-w. r' f;- !5' y? ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#11)HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY CONTINUED range. That may satisfy Maple Plain's position. In my opinion, a south by-pass around Maple Plain, tying into the current corridor, versus it continuing south, should not have an appreciable effect on the traffic counts in the City of Maple Plain." Jabbour expressed disappointment about the City of Maple Plain taking it upon themselves to design a highway corridor through the City of Orono. He said, "It is my understanding that the merchants in the City of Maple Plain are unhappy about the Council routing traffic away from them. The merchants have drawn up a petition favoring the existing corridor. I do not think we want to get involved with Maple Plain's business, but I would like to see Maple Plain reconsider their position on where the corridor should go once it leaves the City of Maple Plain." Jabbour further indicated that he had received the letter from the City that was sent to all Orono City residents.He complimented Staff and CounciImember Butler for their efforts in preparing and distributing the letter. Bernhardson noted that included wiih his June 13, 1991 memo is an attachment setting forth the schedule of activities that have and will take place. Council accepted the information presented by Bernhardson, and took no formal action on this matter. (il2)LNCD BUDGET Bernhardson stared that the LMCD Board would be reviev/ing the proposed budget Wednesday, June 26, 1991.He offered to draft a letter similar to that of the letter from the City of Tonka Bay.Bernhardson advised that the distribution of the proposed budget to the City of Orono represents an increase of slightly over 10% for next year. He stated tnat is due in part to a re-codification in the method of distribution, which at one time was based on assessed value, and now uses taxable market value. Butler referred to a letter that had been sent to the LMCD from the City of Tonka Bay, and stated that she agreed with the comments and concerns raised in that letter. She said, "It seems that the LMCD continues to increase line items in its budget, while municipalities are attempting to decrease these items. Many communities have reached a point where they are receiving little or no State aid. Organizations such as the LMCD, that exist at the pleasure of other governing bodies, v/ould be well advised to be very careful of their budgeting process. It seems that the routine costs of running an office have a dramatic increase proposed. Those are areas thai could be cut back rather than increased." -14 - ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#12)LMCD BUDGET CONTINUED Stromrnen stated that the concerns raised by CounciImember Butler and the City of Tonka Bay have been taken into consideration by the LMCD Board. He added that it is difficult, however, to accurately predict the anount of office supplies that will be used in the upcoming year. The Board tries to go by past experience when making budget projections.He assured Council that the LMCD staff is very cost conscientious. He agreed that there may be areas in v/hich reductions could occur, and that the Board should be receptive to such recommendations. Jabbour suggested to Stromrnen that a considerable amount of funds could be raised if the LMCD increased its late fee from $100 to $200. Goetten informed Stromrnen that nearly all municipalities within the State are concerned about salaries, and increases are being limited to three percent or less. She noted that the salaries indicated in the proposed LMCD budget will be increased approximately 5%, and questioned v/hether such increases are appropriate at this point of time. Stromrnen agreed with Goetten stating that such questions should be brought to the attention of the LMCD Board. Jabbour indicated (to Stromrnen) that it is not a good practice to present the cities with a proposed budget, \;hen in fact those cities have no means to do anything to change it. He said, "You are basically here on a courtesy call. The cities have no power of veto, and cannot take a position that the amount shown will not be paid. Somehow, this process has to be revised." Bernhardson stated that the cities have the right to appeal the LMCD budget once it has been published. Stromrnen confirmed that the cities do have the ability to make an appeal, but cannot veto the LMCD budget. He stated that there is active communication between the LMCD cities and the LMCD Board, and that the Board has been sensitive to the concerns raised by the cities. Stromrnen stated that over the course of the three years he has been involved with the LMCD. only three city councils have raised periodic questions regarding the budget, which reflects a general, overall satisfaction with the budget on the part of the cities. Mayor Peterson noted that the budgeted revenues for the Milfoil effort include $170,000 from public agencies. She asked Stromrnen what will happen in the event the public agencies do nor. meet that goal. Stromrnen replied, "In that case, the LMCD would come back to -15 - r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#12)LMCD BUDGET CONTINUED the cities for input as to where they would like the Milfoil program to go.Is it somethin, that the cities could like to have continued, increased, contained, or abandoned entirely?” Goetten asked why the 1992 budget shows no revenues generat6d from the private sector. Strommen indicated that the LMCD will continue to solicit private funds in the way of a mail campaign, which they expect may yield $60,000 to $75,000. The monies received from private sources would be directed toward research of a permanent solution to the Milfoil problem, rather than the control program. Strommen stated that they may receive more contributions for private sources if people know it is going to find a cure. Callahan asked Strommen if there has been any feedback from the public agencies as to how much they intend to contribute. Strommen replied, "The DNR has confirmed that they will give us $30,000. The DNR had hoped to contribute more, but due to a lack of appropriations from the legislature, and the fact that the monies from the $?.00 watercraft surcharge will not be realized until next year $30,000 is the extent of their budget." Callahan asked why the LMCD has not given consideration to keeping their budget at its 1991 level. Strommen again stated that would be an appropriate suggestion to make to the LMCD Board. He said, "The Board has not discussed a zero increase budget, but could still look at that." Goetten asked Strommen to pass that reguest along to the LMCD Board. Jabbour commented that the LMCD Board has been more receptive to the ideas of the LMCD cities, and that there has been more open lines of communication. He said, "My main concern is that, with times being what they are, the cities have to be fiscally responsible.We have to find innovative ways to cut costs.Has the LMCD given any consideration to having a volunteer harvesting program?The Lake Minnetonka Homeowner’s Association is anxious to participate with the LMCD. The LMCD needs to find ways to accomplish their goals without raising budgets, and ultimately taxes." Butler asked Strommen if there have been any efforts on behalf of the LMCD Board to lobby for financial support from the Park Reserve District or the Metropolitan Council for the Milfoil program. -16 - ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (|12)LMCO BUDGET CONTINUED Strommen replied, "We are receiving 'in-kind' assistance from the Parks through their harvester and operator. They have supplied one harvester and a full ti.me operator for the entire 50 days of the program. VJe also have the benefit of computer assistance and data recording v/hich they have been providing for three years. The harvester and operator have been donated for the past tv/o years." Butler stated that Lake Minnetonka is a resource used by persons from all over the Metropolitan area, not just from the 14 communities surrounding it. She asked, "Why is the LMCD not beating the bushes to capitalize on the fact that agencies have told us, on no uncertain terms, that the Lake is of Metropolitan significance?If such is the case, then why is the LMCD not receiving financial support from the entire Metropolitan area to help fight the Milfoil that limits the use cf this resource?" Strommen stated that it was determined from a survey done by the LMCD that approximately 92% of the people that use Lake Minnetonka, reside within Hennepin County." Butler commented that there are many, many people living in Hennepin County, and if each one were asked to give a dollar for the Milfoil program, it would eliminate the funding problems. Jabbour stated that he did not understand hov/ Hennepin County could pass an 11% budget increase that did not include funding for the Milfoil to which they contributed last year. Callahan asked Strommen if the LMCD pays for the services of the Hennepin County Water Patrol. Strommen replied, "The V7ater Patrol is funded by the County, and State subsidies. The total budget for V/ater Patrol is in the $450,000 range. We get approximately 80% of the Mater Patrol's service time, which is a major contribution on the la\; enforcement that is in the County in that regard." Callahan asked if there are allocations within the proposed budget for increasing safety on the lake, and educational programs for boaters, etc. Strommen stated that boater safety education is part of the Lake Management Plan. He said, "The boater education campaign that is going on at this time is a distribution of the summer rules which contains highlights of all of the ordinances governing behavior on the lake, and how to properly conduct boating practices.That information \/as mailed out to all lakeshore residents, and a copy is kept at all the access boxes." Callahan asked if there have been attempts to get aiditicn*.! -17 - i;-=. r f. 'i I i ■>- ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD 1991 (#12)LMCD BUDGET CONTINUED water patrol on the lake. Strommen replied, "Not at this time, the objectives to secure." thouqh that is one of Council thanked Gene Strommen for his time. Bernhardson indicated LMCD Board expressing the Orono City Council. that a letter would be sent to the concerns and recommendations of the Council took no formal action on this item (#13)LAKE USE COMMITTEE Bernhardson informed Council that the Lake Use Committee has scheduled a meeting for June 27, 1991, where they will discuss shoreland regulations and the draft mission statement. He noted that he recently learned that the DNR v/ill submit the City's grant agreement after the first of July, for the appropriate signatures. Council accepted the information presented by Staff, and took no action. (#14)1992 BUDGET PROCESS Bernhardson provided Council with information pertaining to initial estimates for budget consideration, as well as a proposed budget process. Council accepted the information as presented, and took no formal action. (#15)1990 AUDIT REPORT Bernhardson asked Council if they would like to have a representative from Malloy, Karnowski & Co. attend a Council meeting to answer questions about the 1990 audit. It was Council’s consensus that there is no need to ask a representative to attend an upcoming Council meeting. No formal action was taken. (#16)LIQUOR LICENSE REVIEW The June 20, 1991 memo prepared by Mark Bernhardson, presented Council with information pertaining to a revised policy for hearing issues related to liquor license suspension. The memo outlined four methods of addressing a liquor license review. Bernhardson recommended alternative #3, v/hich involves the selection of an in-house individual to serve as the Hearing Officer. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt -18 - ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#16)LIQUOR LICENSE REVIEW CONTINUED procedure #3, as outlined in Attachment "A" of Bernhardson's June 20, 1991 memo. All voted aye. Motion passed. (|17)SEWER POND LEVEL-PERMIT REQUEST Be’-nhardson reported that Staff is in the process of submitt 3 a permit to the Department of Natural Resources to establis a level in the pond. He referred Council to his June 12, 1991 lemo which outlined the historical events pertaining to the pond. After speaking to representatives from the DHR, it is Staff's recommendation that a level of three feet above the lowest point is sufficient to sustain wildlife, whiie minimizing the City's liability.The permit would be subject to certain conditions that would allow the City to drain the pond if problems occur.Draining would only occur in conjunction with permission from the DNR. Jabbour stated that he has spoken to several residents who have indicated that the City has been using the pond for a compost site. He asked Staff if this is true. Gerhardson answered in the affirmative. George Bust, 820 Old Crystal Bay Road South, distributed pictures of the sev/er pond before and after the City drained it. He stated that the pond had been very deep and was used by a large number of water fo\/i. Mr. Hust also provided a photograph of the compost pile situated on the property. He advised that the DNR became involved with this issue at the request of Brad Peterson, and they were extremely concerned about the condition of the pond. Callahan indicated that the City should submit the permit to the DNR asking permission to increase the water level in the pond.He stated that two of the Park Commission members have discussed the pond level with him. Callahan said, "It seems to me that we ought to request a six foot level, rather than three feet.That does not mean the pond must be filled to six feet, but could be if we find that more desirable.While v/e are waiting for a response from the DNR, we can review the report from the Park Commission regarding their recommendations for the pond." Goetten inquired as to the size of the pond. Brad Peterson, 2160 Shevlin, stated that the pond is seven acres.Mr. Peterson has resided in the area of the sewer pond for some time and offered to give Council a brief description of what has transpired since the pond was created. He stated that the pond was used for 20 years by the City to take the sewage from the area, but was abandoned when the area hooked into the Metropolitan Waste system. The pond sat in an abandoned state -19 - f' \ i. kr ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#17)SEWER POND LEVEL CONTINUED for approx:;mately 13 years, durinu which time the water levex fluctuated between four to six feet. Mr. Peterson commented that at one point a beaver had constructed a dam in the pond and completely closed off the weir. The City decided to remove the beaver dam and started disposing of yard wastes in a small corner. The following year that area was expanded, and harvested Milfoil was also deposited on the site. He indicated that it was at that point that he, George Hust, and Mike Ellis became involved. Hr. Peterson stated that he has done a lot of research and has been working with the DNR over the last three or four months.He said, "It comes down to two things: The -ity of Orono can no longer dump in that pond because it is classified as a protected water, which is different than a protected wetland. It is considered in t ne same class! f ication as French Lake and Lake Minnetonka.Ceil Strauss, from the DNR, advised that no more dumping could occur, but she could not require that a certain level of water had to be maintained in the pond because the DNR has no jurisdiction for water levels above the Ordinary High Water Mark. We learned however, that the level of the pond can be controlled due to the Ordinary High Water Mark established during the 13 years when the pond was abandoned. You can see by looking around the perimeter of the pond, there are tree lines and grasses that vary from the water vegetation. We had both the DNR hydrologist and wildlife personnel visit the pond.The ^^ildlife people suggested that a level of three or four feet would be sufficient.We felt that was better than nothing and did not wish to push the issue. If the City decides to raise the level to five or six feet, that would be better. There are migratory v«/ate.rfowl that use the pond, and they require much deeper water. I would also like to see that the permit from the DNR has an established time limit for the City to remove the snow fence and rubbish." Dernhardson reiterated the potential liability problem for the City if the level of the pond exceeds three feet.He suggested if it is Council's wish to exceed three feet, that submission of the permit be delayed until further information and recommendations from the Park Commission and/or other experts can be reviewed to determine an appropriate level. In the interim, the water level of the pond would continue to naturally increase or decrease. Goetten indicated that she would like to review the information from the Park Commission before making a decision about the water level. Butler involving th water. She to whatever appropriate tioned Council to attentive to the issue ty's liability in relation to the depth of the "On the ether hand, I would be very receptive .ormation we may receive concerning the most 1 for the pond from an environmental point of -20 - -■ IMP ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#17)SEWER POND LEVEL CONTINUED view. The area is very unique and needs to be protected." Mike Ellis, 1020 Old Crystal Bay Road, stated that there are retention ponds located throughout the City that have rrore water depth than that of the sewer pond. pond. Butler asked Ellis if there is current]y water in the sewer Ellis stated that there is approximately one foot of water in the pond. He added that just because tne City may agree to allow a level of six feet in the pond, it does not mean that such a level will actually be achieved. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Goetten, to table this matter until such time that Council can reviev; additional information from the Park Commission and the DNR as to the appropriate level of the pond. All voted aye. Motion passed. Callahan noted that Park Commissiort member, Susan \Jilson, was present and could perhaps shed some light on the Park Commission's review of this matter. VJilson advised that the Park Commission had discussed this issue at their June 3, 1991 meeting, but that only five of the eight members were present.The consensus of the five members was that they would like to have the pond designated as a natural wetlands area, but that the other three members should be given an opportunity to provide their input. She said, "There is definite interest in the area, and we would like to see the water level restored.The key use of tne pond is by diving ducks, which require a certain depth of water.It was that element which made for a unique wetlands complex, which would be nearly impossible to duplicate. I am a member of the Nature Conservancy and have had the opportunity to see other wetland complexes in the State. This is one of the best I have seen. I encourage the Council to push for the additional depth. The diving ducks and migratory birds will come back." (#18)SPATES AVENUE ALTERNATIVES In response to Council's request, Bernhardson provided information and sketches pertaining to various alterations that could be done to Spates and/or Railroad Avenue in order to reduce traffic levels. He asked Council for their input. Butler suggested that Staf^ should provide this information to the residents in the area, such as Dan Crear and Art Tourangeau, who had raised concerns and asked the City to address the traffic problems on Spates Avenue. It was Council's consensus that this information should be -21 - :•. H € ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#18)SPATES AVENUE CONTINUED presented to the residents living on for their input. Soates Avenue asking Ltiem Bernhardson suggested scheduling a neighborhood meeting for the residents and City Staff to discuss the issue and the alternative''. Council agreed with Bernhardson's suggestion and took no further action. (#19)PUBLIC/PRIVATE ROADS It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to table this item Until September, 1991. All voted aye. Motion passed. (#20)POLICE CHIEF SCREENING Bernhardson informed Council of the upcoming meeting scheduled for July 2, 1991, at 5:00 p.m. which will be held to reduce the number of applicants down to a range of 5 to 7. He asked Council to determine which two members will serve on the screening committee. Mayor Peterson indicated that she and CounciImember Butler would serve on the screening committee. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to appoint Mayor Peterson and Councilmember Butler to the screening committee. All voted aye. Motion passed. (#21)1991 SUPERVISOR'S CONTRACT Mayor Peterson had requested that this item be removed from the Consent Agenda. Bernhardson noted that his memo incorrectly indicates that a $20.00 increase in insurance would be $321.00, rather than $231.00, which is the correct amount. Mayor Peterson noted that the contract refers to long-term disability and dental insurance and she asked whether the City is providing such coverage to its employees. Bernhardson stated that the City does not offer such coverage, but that the Police Officer Contract includes a reference «'0 those two items. He said, "That provision would only come xnto effect when the City offers this coverage to its employees." It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Attachment A as the 1991 contract between the city and its Police Supervisors. All voted aye. Mot on passed. -22 - ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 (#22*)CITY ADMINISTRATOR GOAL SETTING-UPDATE It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Attachment A as goal setting for the time period May 1, 1991 to April 30, 1992 for the Administrator. All voted aye. Motion passed. (#23*)EQUIPMENT PURCHASE-PARKS AND RECREATION It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve the purchase of one 45 horsepower Toro mower, Model 345, for an amount not to exceed $9,770.00. All voted aye. Motion passed. ( #24*)RESIGNATION-PART TIME POLICE SECRETARY-SALLY CHRISTIANSON It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to accept the resignation of Sally Christianson with thanks for a job well done together with authorizing staff to seek a replacement for the position to be brought back to Council for approval. All voted aye. Motion passed. (#25*)CHIEF KILBO RETIREMENT-RESOLUTION #2977 It was moved by Butler, seconded by tlayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2977, for Police Chief Melvin Kilbo on his retirement. All voted aye. Motion passed. (#26*)ADMINISTRATOR*S INFORMATION It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to accept the City Administrator's Information regarding:Leaf Street Septic Problems, Sandy Beach, 1960 Shoreline Drive-Tanks, 1950 Shoreline Drive-Removals,Highway 12 Damage Claim, March/April Receipts and Disbursements, and Wire Transfers. All voted aye. Motion passed. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: City Attorney Barrett referred to information that had been distributed to Council under separate cover- regarding the current status of the agreement. He stated at he had heard nothing further from the City of Long Lake. (#27*)LICENSES It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, approve the following license(s): Set Up Permit: Navarre Lanes, Inc. 3435 Shoreline Drive All voted aye. Motion passed. (#28*)BILLS It was moved by Butler, seconded approve payment of the All Funds Account. passed. by Mayor Peterson, to All voted aye. Motion -23 - ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 24, 1991 Ikn lOf It was Proved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 9:50 p,m. All voted aye. Motion passed. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk To; From: Date: Mayor Petersen and City Council City Administrator Bernhardson O/fy ^ Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administf^jjjjj^ July 2, 1991 Subject: #1604 Clair and Lynn Rood - 2215 Kenwood Way - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Resolution Zoning District: LR-lC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2 acre, sewered Application: Request for variance/conditional use permit for pond excavation and clean-up in designated wetland List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Resolution Kotice of Planning Commission Action 6/10/91 Memo and Exhibits of 6/13/91 Discussion Please review the memo and exhibits of June 13. Briefly, the applicant requests variance/conditiona 1 use permit approval for land alteration involving a designated wetland in the Navarre area. This wetland area served as a neighborhood dumping ground for decades, and part of the applicant's intent and work to date has been removal of debris from the perimeter of the wetland. Additionally, he proposes to excavate a 1/2 acre pond within the 1.5 '^re designated wetland area. The proposal Includes construction of two 3-1/2' high, 100' long ret '.ng walls at the northwest and southwest corners of the propvxty, and spoil disposal within the property boundaries. The City Engineer has reviewed this proposal in detail and has determined that from a stc -m water management standpoint, the proposal as revised will meet all pertinent storm water management requirements. A conservation and flowage easement will be required over the entire wetland area defined by elevation contour 931.5, plus a 15’ wide easement extending to the 8" PVC culvert at Navarre Lane. The applicant has discussed this project with the Army Corps of Engineers and he notes they have advised him that this wetland work is of a low enough magnitude that it would be covered under a national permit. The City has received no written documentation of this from the applicant or the Corps. This wetland is not a DNR protected wetland. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has reviewed the application on a preliminary basis but has not granted final approval pending City approval. Ron Quanbeck of the Watershed District indicates that there do not appear to be major issues with the project. Zoning File #1604 July 2, 1991 Page 2 City approval, if granted, should be conditioned on applicant gaining approval and meeting all requirements of the other jurisdictional agencies. In reviewing similar applications to determine what specific conditions of approval might be appropriate in addition to those recommended by Planning Coiruiiission, staff reviewed the somewhat similar application request by the Gregorys on County Road 15 in 1985. In general, that review suggested that if specific findings can be made with regard to alteration of designated wetlands,those alterations would not set a negative precedent or have negative impacts on the lake if the following findings can be made: 1.Small size of wetlands altered. 2.Small size of watershed served. 3.Limited flow into the lake. 4.Wetlands have matured to a steady state. 5.Alteration of storm water ponding characteristics to increase retention time. 6.Expected benefits far outweigh risks. 7.Magnitude of risks in relationship to the lake are minor. 8.No or few others are occurring during the same timeframe. With regard to the current project under consideration, this 1.5 acre wetland with a 24 acre watershed is relatively small compared to many of the wetland complexes which feed into Lake Minnetonka. The culvert leading under the railroad tracks provides limited flow to Lake Minnetonka, however, the elevation of the tile suggests that the wetland will fluctuate closely with fluctuations in Minnetonka. The applicants are proposing to slightly increase the storm water ponding characte* sties as a result of their excavation and filling, and opening up one-third of the wetland area to pond status will provide additional sediment storage in the basin. Neither the City Engineer or the Watershed District feel the impact of spoils disposal on the site will be of consequence. In general, this project appears to be in concert with a finding that there will be no negative impact on the lake. Planning Co—ission Reconnendation The Planning Commission was concerned that the original plans did not include a comprehensive restoration plan for the site. The applicant then provided a restoration/revegetation planting schedule and diagram along with detail on the proposed retaining walls. The Planning Commission at their June meeting voted 5 to 1 to grant approval of the variance/conditional use permit for work in the wetland, finding that based on the proposed plans and stated intent of the applicant, this project Zoning File #1604 July 2, 1991 Page 3 will have a positive impact on this wetland while maintaining a natural habitat character rather than a park-like setting. Planning Commission also based theii approval recommendation on the basis that all storm water and flood plain management engineering requirements have been met so that there is no adverse impact cn the lake. The Planning Commission recommended the following conditions of approval: 1.Applicant shall conform to all construction and site protection requirements recommended by the City Engineer and as may be required by the Watershed Di.:',trict, Corps of Engineers and DNR. 2.Sil . fencing and other required erosion controls shall be maintained in place during the period of excavation and until revegetation is accomplished. 3.Applicant shall adhere to the revegetation pi. n proposed. 4.Applicant shall grant a flowage and conservation easement over the entire wetland area defined by elevation contour 931.5, plus a 15' easement extending the the 8" PVC culvert at Navarre Lane. The legal description for such easement shall be provided by the applicant's surveyor. No land alteration permit shall be issued to the applicant until such easement has been properly executed by the applicant. 5.The applicant shall obtain a land alteration permit ($75.00 per current fee schedule) prior to commencement of the project. Staff Recoanendatlon Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation. A number of additional conditions of approval are suggested (and incorporated into the attached resolution) based on conditions considered for previous similar projects: 1.Construction/excavation must be done in the winter and the outlet culvert must be sealed off during the entire construction time. 2.Applicant shall work with the appropriate agencies (City/Minnegasco) in restoring grades around the culvert and exposed gas line at the south end of the property. 3.Chemicals for the control of algae and aquatic vegetation within the pond shall not be allowed. 5. Zoning File #1604 July 2, 1991 Page 4 4.Areas designated on the plan as remaining undisturbed shall be fenced off prior to grading to prevent their destruction. Applicant to execute a Developer's Agreement with the City including: a.Completion at approved time periods. b.Posting of security so City can step in and complete work if necessary. c.Payment of fees for any excessive inspections needed during the construction period, and payment of any excessive engineer review fees accumulated during the review process. 6.The applicant shall legally combine the four tax parcels upon which the project will take place. \ I- ¥ k h. I Fence Pillar Issue (During this application, the issue of the height of proposed and partially completed boundary fence pillars was discussed. Staff requested Planning Commission's interpretation of side street and rear lot lines in relation to allowed fence height for this property. The Planning Commission determined that the pillars for all intents and purposes should be considered as a fence, and that where lot lines abut a platted improved or unimproved road right~of-way, the pillars must not exceed the normal fence height of 3-1/2*. Applicant was advised to either lower the pillars to meet that requirement, or to make a separate application for a fence height variance.) Isv Ip i f i A RBSOLOTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.55r SUBDIVISION 8 AND GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT PER SECTIONS 10.55 SUBDIVISIONS 10 - 12 AND SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE #1604 NBBRBAS, Clair and Lynn Rood (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 2215 Kenwood Way within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lots 54, 55, 56, 61, 62 and 63, "Wallaces Addition to the Village of Minneton)ca Beach", Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and NHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10,55 Subdivision 8 to allow excavation of a designated wetland area where no such excavation is normally allowed, and a conditional use permit per Sections 10.55, Subdivisions 10 - 12 and per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 for excavation, grading and filling in excess of 100 cubic yards and within a wetland/flood fringe district. NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1.This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1604. 2.The property is located in the LP-IC Single Family Lalceshore Residential Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 19, 1990, January 22, 1991, May 20, 1991 and June 17, 1991. After receiving additional materials as requested from the applicant during the review process, the Planning Commission on June 17, 1991 voted 5 in favor 1 against to recommend approval of the requested variance and conditional use permit for excavation of a half acre pond within a 1.5 Page 1 of 6 r 4. 5. acre designated wetland, with spoils disposal above the flood plain elevation on the site, based on the following findings: a)The area of the wetland has been used as a dumping site over many years. Applicant's stated intent is to remove the accumulated debris and haul it off the sites. This clean-up is considered a general improvement to the area of this wetland. The City Engineer has reviewed the project and has advised that all storm water and flood plain management engineering requirements have been met so that there will be no anticipated adverse impact on Lake Minnetonka. The applicant's intent is to restore this area, after excavation, to a natural habitat character rather thar a park-like setting, and the applicant has provided a suitable revegetation plan and planting schedule. The Council finds that the proposed pond excavation project generally will have insignificant impact to the Lake based on the small size of the wetland and its influent watershed. The slight increase in storm water storage is considered a benefit to the area, and removal of debris accumulated in the wetland basin coupled with creation of an open water pond and retention of the natural characteristics of the wetland area, will generally have a positive impact on wildlife habitat. It is the stated intent of the City in approving the requested variances and conditional use permit that the wetland be restored to a natural character rather than revert to a manicured park-like character . The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to Page 2 of 6 r V. rvreserve a subs^-antial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the proposed excavation, filling and grading within a designated wetland area will not be detrimental to the healtn, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 and grants a conditional use permit per Sections 10.55, Subdivisions 10 - 12 and :vction 10.03, Subdivis: i 19, to allow land alterations within a de ignated werland per the approved plans attached as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions; 1.Applicant shall conform to all construction and site protection requirements recommended by the City Engineer and as may be required by the Watershed District, the DNR, and the Corps of Engineers. 2.Silt fencing and other required erosion con^’rols shall be maintained in place during the period of excavation and until revegetation is accomplished. 3.Applicant shall adhere to the revegetation plan as proposed. 4.Applicant shall grant a flowage and conservation easement over the entire wetland area defined by elevation contour 931.5, plus a 15’ easement extending the the 0" PVC culvert at Navarre Lane. The legal description for such easement shall be provided by the applicant's surveyor. No land alteration permit shall be issued to the applicant until such easement has been properly executed by the applicant. Page 3 of 6 h 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. The applicant shall obtain per current fee schedule/ 3 alteration permit ($75.00 wT to commencement of the project. Such permit shaxl not be issued until appropriate permits of other agencies are submitted to t e City. Construction/excavation must be done in the winter and the outlet culvert mus«- be sealed off durin>' the entire construction time. Applicant shall work with the appropriate agencies (City/Minnegasco) in restoring grades around the culvert and exposed gasline at the s^'uth end of the property. Chemicals for the control of algae and aquatic vegetation within the pond S....11 not be allowed. Areas designated on the plan as remaining undisturbed shall be fenced off prior to grading to prevent their destruction. Applicant to execute a Developer's Agreement with the City including: a.Completion at approved :ime periods. b.Posting of security so City can step in and complete work if necessary. c.Payment of fees for any excessive inspections needed during the construction period, and payment of any excessive engineer review fees accumulated during the review process. The applicant shall legally combine the four ♦’ix parcels upon which the project will take place. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within c'e year of the date of Council approval, or the spec! i conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (July e 1992). Page 4 of 6 13. 14. 1991. ATTEST: Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall coiistit ’.te a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall bo punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agiees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 0th day of July, Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument- was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of July, 1991, by Barbara A. r-terson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on beliaIf of the City. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 %■ m- 0- r.' :•;■?. 1 I^Sr C CITY OP OROMO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bayf 473-7357 ZONING PILE #1604 55323 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 6/18/91 TOs Clair 6 Lynn Rood 2215 Kenwood Way Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES TO: TYPE OP APPLICATION: Variance Conditional Use Permit DATS OP TIHG:6/17/91 VOTE: 5 For 1 Against Plaimlii9 CMMlssion recomiends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below ■OTBS AMD SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Land alteration permit approval recommended for work in the pond area as proposed^ subject to conditions noted in staff memo of 6-13-91, subject to conformity with plans as proposed. Planning Commission advised that the boundary pillars shall not exceed 3-1/2' in height. Any future request for pillar height above 3-1/2* must bs via a separate fence height variance application. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as City Council on Monday, July 8, 1991; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission fl^inutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. Isv r f k To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission ^5embers City Administrator Bernharison From:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: Subject: Juna 13, 1991 #16 04 Clair and Lynn Rood - 2215 Kenwood Way - Corditional Use Permit/Variance -Third Review Additional Detail List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit P Revised Topographical Survey Showing Walls Revised Revegetation Plan Showing Pillars Construction Detail, Walls & Pillars City Engineer Letter 5/20/91 Planning Commission Action Notice 5/22/91 Memo s Exhibits of 5/15/91 Discussion This item was tabled at Planning Commission's May meeting in order for applicant to provide additional detail regarding the brick pillars and the proposed retaining walls. The additional information provided indicates (on the Revegetation Plan) the approximate location of pillars along "Hillside Place". The diagram doesn’t indicate that pillars are also proposed (and in place) along Navarre Lane and along the northeast lot line back from Navarre Lane. Applicant has provided an elevation view of his proposed hedge between the pillars, with the pillars at both the Planning Commission's 5-1/2' recommended height and at applicants proposed pillar height of 4'-6". Regarding the retaining walls, two walls each of 100' length and 3'-8" height are proposed at the northwest and southwest quadrants of the lot respectively, apparently for the purpose of reducing the bank slope of spoils to be deposited. The Building Inspection Department has advised that at this height, these walls don't require a building permit, but will be included as part of the land alteration permit if approved. The Building Inspectors also note that no safety railing or barrier is required for these walls because they are not adjacent to the house. It is staff's understanding that the concrete wall blocks are a split-face stone design, more aesthetically pleasing than standard foundation blocks. The City Engineer has been asked to review the revised grading plan and retaining wall plan, however, we have no report from him as of this writing. No significant changes from his comments in the May 20th letter are anticipated. Zoning File #1604 June 13, 1991 Page 2 Staff Recosaiendation If Planning Commission determines that there will te no adverse impact on the natural environment qualities wetland area, a project approval recommendation would be appropriate on the basis that all storm water and flood management engineering requirements have been met so that Is no adverse impact on the quantity or quality leaving this site. A further basis for approval would be that the area will be restored and maintained as a natural habitat rather than a "park-like" setting. Do uhe proposed retaining walls have any effect on the visual perception of 'naturalness of this pond? Certainly the walls decrease the spoils bank slopes, reducing the potential for erosion back into the pond. Any recommendation for approval should be conditioned on the following: 1.Applicant shall conform to all construction and site protection requirements recommended by the City Engineer and required by the Watershed District. 2.Silt fencing «-hall be maintained in place during the period of excavation and until revegetation is accomplished. 3.Applicant shall adhere to the revegetation plan as proposed. 4.Applicant shall grant a Flowage easement over the entire wetland elevation contour 931.5,plus a 15' to the 0" PVC culvert at Navarre description for such easement shall applicant's surveyor. and Conservation area defined by easement extending Lane. The legal be provided by the The Planning Commission is further requested to either reaffirm or revise your recommendation regarding the allowable height of boundary pillars. Isv ...... i Bones troo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Oao G 0oneu*oo fioOra ij *»E jcweD- C E PE : -r-r 9 Coo« P£ ’Nyias 6 Noyet PE Prc^ G PE UiWr M CP* Engineers A Architects A Gortfcri PE vt Potter PE C ®£ .e"*, * Sou'scr- ^E V,»'h * **E ’e2 P’e^ PE Wiceje» T BjutMUnn p6 scoen « P<y^^ PE O .oticcsfj PE vV Pete'vy' PE M- *‘>e* C p£ j'-r^ p PE »^f^ry.fr «>PE Vara 9 PE PoOe^ C Puvse* A 1 A E A'xqui P£ •-rv.j'C A ijn^oa Pf PE Va • * yc. P£ p*'«»o - C ajvc ^^ PE MAfTiriCZ^PE vj't c XV '^*•1^'^,!^ 9 A j C P\*rnj^. A A A<jnei M P‘f’'g AC® r Penrw'' ®E C ec ••<: 0'*v -r- p E Pt^'* ® PE r>4#'-. A PE •Lire^Pf Arth I* ^iva PE A fixuon May 20, 1991 • 3 8 1 ?■ f City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Mr. Mike Gaffiron Re: File No. 139 - 1604 Clair Rood Dear MUce: We have reviewed the grading plan for Clair Rood at 2215 Kenwood Way. The wetland boundary should include a 15 foot easement to Navarre Lane for drainage purposes. The proposed excavation in the wetland area will not impact the overall storage of the drainage basin. There is some minor filling proposed below the 931.5 contour in the southeast comer of the wetland. There is proposed to be an equal amount of excavation below the 931.5 contour in the northwest comer. The remaining excavation from the pond is proposed to be placed above the 931.5 contour. We would recommend approval of the grading plan. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:U 139.COF 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul. Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 r CITY OF ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay^ MM 473-7357 ZONING PILE #1604 55323 NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 5/22/91 TO:Clair 6 Lynn Rood 2215 Kenwood Way Wayzata, MM 55391 COPIES TO; TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance Conditional Use Permit DATS OF MEETING: 5/20/91 VOTE: 7 For 0 Against FlaniiJji9 Comlssior recoasiends the followlngr: Tabled for reasons noted below. BOTES AMD SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1.Add fence/pillars to landscape plan drawings, and indicate proposed Intent for how this fence/hedge, etc. will be finished. 2.Provide design plans and specs for any berms or retaining walls proposed, and show them on the landscape plan. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the June 17th meeting is June 7th, or July 5th for the July 15th meeting. 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. lev k I .1- ;■ .‘1 I To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Conmission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Date: Michael P, Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator May 15, 199< Subject:#1604 Clair and Lynn Rood - 2215 Kenwood Way - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Second Review of Revised Request - New Planting Schedule for Restoration List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Revegetation Plan Grading Plan (no changes from previous) Notice of Planning Commission Action 1-24-91 Planning Commission Minutes 11-19-90/1-22/91 Memo S Exhibits of 1-17-91 Standard form Flowage 6 Conservation Easement (for applicant review) Discussioii As Planning Commission requested in January, the applicant has provided a revegetation plan indicating locations, sizes and quantities of various trees and shrubs to be placed on the property. The areas expected to be disturbed are intended to be revegetated with a prairie grass seed mixture, to be seeded and mulched within one week of completion of the grading work, other plant materials to be installed within two weeks of the seeding operation. The applicant's proposed planting schedule suggests that the prairie grass mixture will allow for the natural character which Planning Commission recommended be maintained for this wetland area. Referring to the memo of January 17th, the City Engineer has recommended approval of the application subject to adequate erosion protection measures and adherence to Watershed District requirements. Watershed District approval was tabled pending approval by the City of Orono. It is staff's understanding that the Watershed District will issue a permit subject to City of Orono approval. Applicant was requested by Planning Commission in January to provide the details on a shelter island and any walls or berms proposed. The applicant is not proposing any walls, berm, or islands, and has not changed his grading plan since your last meeting. Please review the memo of January 17th for specifics on the pond request. V,- •5 f- V. -V .. mh Zoning File #1604 May 15, 1991 Pase 2 Staff Recoonendation If Planning Commission determines that there will be no adverse impact on the natural environment qualities of this wetland area, a project approval recommendation would be appropriate on the basis that all storm water and flood plain management engineering requirements have been met so that there is no adverse impact on the quantity or quality of run-off leaving this site. A further basis for approval would be that ^he area will be restored and maintained as a natural habitat rather than a "park-like" setting. Approval should be conditioned on meeting all construction and site protection requirements recommended by the City Engineer and required by the Watershed District, including properly constructed silt fencing and adherence to the proposed revegetation plan. A further condition of approval would be that applicant grant a Flowage and Conservation Easement over the entire wetland area (boundary to be defined by elevation contour to be determined by City Engineer, legal description to then be provided by applicants surveyor). Isv CITY OF ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MH 473-7357 55323 ZONING FILE #1604 NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 01/24/91 TO:Clair Rood COPIES TO: 2215 Kenwood Way Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance Conditional Use Permit DATS OF MBBTING: 01/22/91 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Co—ission reconmends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below HOTBS AMD SPBCIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission requested applicant to provide detailed information regarding restoration of the wetland and surrounding area after grading is completed: 1.Provide a planting schedule for restoration i.e. - Time schedule -Plant materials listing and site plan -Detail on shelter island if proposed -Landscaping plan (walls, berms, etc. if proposed). 2.Planning Commission indicated that their intent for this area is to maintain the natural habitat quality (as opposed to a park like manicured look). Staff suggests you contact the Hennepin Soil & Water Conservation District (544-8572) who will work with you regarding standards for wildlife ponds. Regarding the issue of the brick pillars. Planning Commission determined that they are to be considered as a fence, and because they are in yards adjacent to dedicated public streets, can be no higher than 3 1/2' per the non-encroachments sections of the Code. No permit is required, but the pillars must be cut back to 3 1/2* high above existing grade. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the February 19, 1991 meeting is Monday, February 11, 1991, or Monday, March 11, 1991 for the March 18, 1991 meeting. If the applic'nt has trouble obtaining additional information, please contact the Zoninc Department (473-7357). If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Cler!; after review and approval by the Planning Commission. Isv ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 22. 1991 #1604 CLAIR ROOD 2215 KENWOOD WAY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ^^rtM*PTNTlATION OP PUBLIC HEARINGCONTINUATION^ was present, as was Mrs. Lorraine Moss, a nexcnoor interested in this application. Kelley re-opened the Public Hearing at 5:15 p.-Ti. and asked Gaffron to briefiy review Mr. Rood's proposa-. Gaffron stated that Mr. Rood had revised his P^°P°sal since Sold is the pond only five feen in depth. 12 feet.The boundaries of the pond have not ehanaed but the slopes are now shown at a four to one ratio, as changed, bu P still requesting approval i.o c^nve^. approximately ‘one-third of the wetlands is also proposing to fill and excavate portions of the ^ 1 % » riff ran showed the Planning Commission where the would b^d^posited and stated thal it would be necessary spoils woul P^^ provide silt fencing and erosion control meLures. ‘ e reviewed^ the additions^! issues involved with this application as noted in his January 17. 199 memo. Cohen asked if the monuments were still an issue. Gaffron replied. "The monuments may b= a separate issue, -he.e is an unlevtloped public rig.ht-of-way to the rear and side o*f the property. Is this property considered a through corner lot?Would abuHInra^r^ght"^^^^^^^^should they be more than 3.5 ^igh? If thev^ are L accessory structure, should they meet a 10 foot Setback. If tSay can exist at all in a side yard or rear yard without a Conditional Use Permit. There are many issues. Rowlette asked whether Mr. Rood had a specific reason, other than aesthetics, for altering the wetland. Gaffron stated that the applicant's ma:or intent is to clean _ the wetlands which have been used as a dumping ground iLra ni said, "Mr. Rood also wants to aestheticaiiy improve ^he Appearance of the wetland in addition to c.reating some different characteristics for wildlife. Mr Rood seated that ha has not seen a great deal cf wildlife in t.he'wetland.He said. "I t.hought i.'' I provided additional area of open water, it may enhance the * would like to install some wood duck houses ^roy tSi ducks must land in water. It is not my intention to destroy the wildlife." |: ¥ r i :,'■, ; ■f ■ i • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 22, 1991 ZONING FILE #1604-ROOD CONTINUED ^ ^v,o Hanson stated that whatever e:<istrng is ... t.h. wetland may be disturbed, but that other wi_axx.e wcu .c b. attracted to the area once the alterations have been maae. He said, "In that sense, that issv ’s subjective. In t.v opi.nion, cleaning up the wetland -significant issue and enables me to view this favorably." Mrs. Moss stated that she had walked around the wetland just after the November Planning Commission meeting.Sne said, we scared up a deer and there are quite a few geese, mallards and other critters there in the spring. All this digging is going to disturb them." She asked Mr. Rood what he intends to ao with the rushes and stated that is where the ducks and geese hide. Mr. Rood stated that most of the rushes woula remain just as thsy are. Mrs. Moss stated t.hat Mr. Rood had already removed quite a hit of the rushes and was concerned about placing the spoils on a '' _ , . .- - - 1 it IS andgrassy area* She preferred to have the wewlan^-ert as stated that several of her neighbors share her views. Kelley asked if there were any other comments from the public. There were none, and Kelley closed the Public Hearing at 8:25 p.m.He stated that it is difficult to consider how the alterations will look in the summer.He questioned wnetner it may appropriate to table this matter until sum’"'* Rowlette stated that she did not favor altering t.he wetland to this degree. She said, "If it is necessary to clean up t.he area, that is one thing. I do not agree with excavating, filling and changing the nature of the wetland." Moos stated that she had no objections to Mr. Rood's pond proposal. Bellows concurred with Moos.She said, I^^ do no. see any pj^oblem with altering the wetland in this manner. Kelley asked the Planning Commissioners to their opinions about depositing the spoils on-site. He said, "I have no idea how everything will look when the project is completed. Rowlette said, "I nm concern?d that it will be very antiseptic looking." Bellows suggested, given the delicate nature or this .^and, that Mr. Rood submit a landscape plan showing plantings, etc. She said, "That may provide us with a means of assuring the neighbors that the wetland will be left as natural as possible, while accommodating a reasonable request from tne homeowner. -8 - S ° r 'tj ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 22, 1991 Rood to elaborate on olans for the areaBellows asked Mr. around the pond. Mr Rood -eDlied, "I thought I //ouid grow grass around it, hri-t let it co-n4 back as it was.I nave considered having a sanc-uary/i’-'and in t.ne niddie of t.he pond. On the siae near my 5ard t7e wetland ^ust blends into rr.y yard. On the other side, rh«r4 is a steeo bank tnat washes out. There is an e.<?osed gas line there.I would lixe co do something to divert ihat erosion will not continue. Perhaps put in so.ae rock walls. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Cohen, to table this it was raceiot o' a comprehensive pj.an ana tabUng 4"e ponrlsfua wcui'd also delay dbe monument tssue. She rt^teS =- PJ--ted to addt^ss that tesue s^atately. ^It moLm^e-rt rssre""s^l.e\T.---- carried. K^illev asked whether Mr. R'^od should make a separate Kelley asxea w^«-u ^okted th'- Pianninc commissionapplication for the monuments. He asKea tn- t'i.annj..!, how they view the monuments. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission monuments constitute a fence and shoula have a maximum heig 3.5 feet. "eTlTze-^tht-e^^l^s “a- lel'oa^ilS right-of-way there." Bellows asked if the plantings between the pillars had to be restricted to a certain height. Mabusth stated that the City Code .f=Vien\°%i«tncV is'”! height for plantings except in cases whe.e sight d factor." Bellows stated that if the City Ordinances are J" this case, something very hideous :.n appearan..'Y constructed. Mr. Rood explained that he had intended to ;^^str'aCt the pillars to be five feet high. He T^®^^5^j^„J^a-ound them torioht now, but I would do some grading anc .illin^ a.ouna rn achievra uniform five foot height. The snrubs wouxc oe .nree -9 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 22, 1991 ZONING FILE #1(T04-ROOD CONTINUED four feet." Bellows suggested that it m to entirely forego the pillars. in Mr. Ro s bes -res Mr. Rood asked whether he .oui. apply for a Var^anoe tc have the pillars five feet high. Kelley infor.Tied Mr. Rood tlai .he 'ad t.he rignt to s^ubrr.it a Variance application if he w.ir-ed dc so. He said, ’’However the Plan.ling Cormnission h-..L -er fairly consistent in recommending that fences alot'. purl-- road-iys be no mere than ..5 feet high." #1605 DR. RICHARD LINDSTROM 1065 WEST FERNDALE ROAD VARIANCES CONTINOATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Charles Lindstrom, the applicant's brother, and Paul Becker, the applicant's contractor, were present. Cohen stated >_hat due to his professional relationship with Charles Li.ndstro.m, he would abstain from the discussion and voting on this matter. Kelley opened the Public Hearing at 8:45 pm. Gaffron distributed a heights and floor elevations, most part, have revised their 0-75' setbac/v area. Tlie only the existing house. Cha i 'es setback area. There must oe a line and I am concerned about in relation to the flood plain «^ketch showing the revised roc”’ He said, "The applicants, for the plan to keep hardcover out of the encroachment in t.hat area is above aie still proposed for the 75-250' 30* pool setback from the side lot the elevation of the be nt floor Mr. B.edker referred the Planning Commission ro the sketch ____^ mm, ^ ^ Mthat Gaffron had distributed.He said, "You car. see that the existing basement is below tie flood plain elevation. We propose to construct the first level of the garage at t.ie 9 32.6 elevation. The second level of garage would be at 939.11, whicn is approximately two f-: .' above the existing m-.^ in floor. 'The second floor addition •/ould ever, out across t.he garage addition the existing s ’uc’.ure.We are prcoosing to construct a t :k planter, approximately 40’ long and 2' high, outside the matn entrance to accommodate the 2' difference in tne garage elevation. The driveway will slope up that additional two feet along the pla..ter up to tne garage." Bellows as’ced Mr. Bedker wnat t.he slope is lower garage. :oning out of the Mr. Bedker replied, "We are proposing a 5% slope. 10 zo To:Planning Comniission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Cor.Tinission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Dace: Michael P- Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator January 17, 1991 Subject:#1604 Clair Rood, 2215 Kenwood Way Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Continuation of Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IC, Single family lakeshcre residentiax, acre, sewered List of Exhibits 'K. Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G City Engineer's Letter i/16/91 M.C.W.D. Letter 12/26/90 M.C.W.D. Application Review 12/14/90 Revised Grading Plan . „ . Hydraulic Calculations by Applicant s Engineer Planning Conunission Minutes 11/19/90 Memo & Exhibits of 11/15/90 Revisions/Additional Information - Applicant has slightly revised his proposal and provided additional information as required by the Watershed District an the city Engineer: 1.The pond is now proposed at a depth of 5' rather than 12' . 2.The pond side slopes have been flattened to a 4:1 grade, enhancing both tVe stability and safety of those slopes. 3,The pond sur.ace area dimensions remain the eame as before,i.e. appro imately 1/2 acre open water within t 1,5 acre designated wetland. yards ^ ^he'^dredqVlVo^ilTar! ^ow%ropo\td ^to^ rVm^^ site, c ^rdly along the south end of the site (see plan). U-.ToI,,, erd ^ r JT (V-f f ^ / Zoning File #1604 January 16, 1991 Page 2 of 3 Discussion - The City Engineer has reviewed the application from a storm water management standpoint and has recommended approval conditioned on adequate silt fencing and compliance with Watershed District requirements. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has preliminarily reviewed and tabled the application until preliminary approval from Orono (Planning Commission approval) is granted. The applicant's engineer has made the plan revisions requested by the Watershed District and has provided the engineering and hydraulics data necessary to show no adverse storm water/flood plain management impact. Remaining issues - As noted in the memo of November 15th, absent any 2oning code directive that such pond construction is strictly prohibited under any circumstances, if all hydrologic/engineering concerns are satisfied, then the only other question in the granting of this conditional use permit is rather subjective: will construction of this pond and proposed grading work at its perimeter be compatible with the policies expressed in Section 10,55, Subdivision 1, i.e. will such work have i: ^ dverse effect on the na^'ural environment qualities of this wetl area? While there has been some neighborhood opposition to the proposed changes to the wetland, the applicant has re,.terated his goals are to create a better wildlife habitat while cleaning up the debris and trash dumped on the property over many years. Finally, please again review Page 4 of the November 15th memo regarding the issue of the brick pillars constructed around the perimeter of the property. Please direct staff and applicant as to whether the pillars in question are allowed "as-is" as a fence, or whether they should be subject to a building permit or variance application. Staff Recommendation - If the Planning Commission agrees that the proposed work will have no adverse impact on the natural environment qualities of this wetland area, a recommendation for project approval could be appropriate on the basis that all storm water and flood plain management engineering requirement have been met so that there is no adverse impact &n the quantity or quality of run-off leaving the site. Approval would be conditioned on meeting all construction and site prot^.tion requirements recommended by the City Engineer and required oy the Watershed District, including properly constructed silt fencing and timely revegetation of disturbed areas. r ?r ■V L h y.. I Zoning File #1604 January 17, 1991 Page 3 of 3 As a separate but related issue, staff requests the Planning Commission's direction regarding the brick pil4.ars. Shouxd they be considered as a fence, or as accessory structures? Based on that determination and given the relationship to surrounding street lot lines, should the pillars be allowed at the existing 5-6’ height, or should their height be reduced? Do they need to be relocated? Should they be subject to a buxlding permit or variance application? li-'' H:vv. i= Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Ore C- 3c^sroo PE BiocjeT 'X 9o^e^ PE ovftjn C Arvae^'K **£ PE 9<r, o i PE Z Or^'- je^r> 0 Coo* PE E Poer^ o k'' vnif '': P£ Su«r V Er<^.-r C Engineers A Architects Kr^ ^ PE Picr'jfO W ^ste* ^E Don^cJ C Bu/^^.'Of E *BourCor Pi pe ^ PE ' ?4*ot'-'4nn Sr-c--^r 9 pv^. >• Pi O 03UOU p‘ A ^e^.CT' pf Vc**^ C P£ P \U^r\: PE O pf Mark « PCP\ PE i^oe^ C Po\set * • ^"x:^j5 E :;-v j EJ9rro^ p£ '.«<>'• ^ Se-c PE P*‘ c Li^-vr** pf 'snar pf Mj-'k D Aa r*. ®E B Vyse^** p P.-'i'vje' Pf 4 4 M'les 3 pp ;. *» PE C P^urr^n A . A V k CP C* PrTnc*- Pf Cr^ 'C 3.<vief PE Pooeh s Of«)icM< Pf Gjry a Mex^ Pf C^J'^5 A pnckw .e•:^ V» Pj*»Ar“.«v Vt O’lO^ January 16, 1991 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 JAN i B 1991 Attn: Mike Gaffron Re: Clair Rood Our File No. 139-1604 Dear Mike: We have reviewed the hydraulics information submitted on the Clair Rood property. The proposal calls for constructing a 5 foot deep pond within the wetland area. The material excavated from the pond will be placed south of the pond near Navarre Ume. The storm water calculations indicate that the high water elevation will be below 931.5 which is acceptable for the ponding area. The excavation will not reduce the storage capacity in the watershed. We would recommend approval of the application provided adequate silt fence is instaUed and watershed requirements are followed. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:dh Enel. 2335 Wnt Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 1 -t ••r •u . ^ V a • * - W/ATi.:iJ:;ii! P.O. Bo« 3»7. WjyiaU. Minnesota 55291 V p# Of MAlMaiS: James R. Spensiey Pres • Jonn E Thocnas • Ricnard « Miiicr Kgb«t 0. Erickson • C Vtoorirov^ Love • CUfKSon Undiey • Thomas Maple Jr r'- i). t’x /’■ is liv December 26, 1990Pormit Anniication No. 90-126 Applicantr Cla^ 2215 Kenwood Way Wayzaia, MN 55391 PwposeT SSdgin°Toc'ia.e an o^n water pond in a wetland and fill and excavation i floodplain area. in a Dear Mr. Rood: Al ihe regularly scheduled December 20.1990 meeting of the Board of Managers, the subject permit application was tabled pending receipt of I.Review and approval by ihe City of Orono This item should be received no later than January 7. 1991 to cn.sure your pennit applicauon vdll be on the agenda for the next meeting of the Board of Managers scheduled for January 17, 1991. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at 473-4224. Sincerely. JAMES M. MONTGOMERY, CONSULTING ENGINEERS. INC. Engineers for the District Ronald S. Quanbeck, P.E. cc;BMjdiile t^ty of Orono Mark Gronberg I WiTfVtNiO lOUMOMV 1 7 / MINNEHAHA t2REEK WATERSHED DISTRICT UKC mNNCTORRI P.O. SOK St7. Wavala. MInnttota 55391 •John E. niomn • Mctiard R Mlltor II MMn • 6. WMmir Um • CMiaon LMtoy • Thamn Mapit. Jr. December 14.1990 Permit Application No, Applicant: OairRood 2215 Kenwood Way Way2ata,MN 55391 Qty of Orono. Sec. 17DD Dredging to create an open water pond in a wetland and fill and excavation in a floodplain area. Location Purpose: EnclosedDsp^tease futd the Engineer ’s report and recommendation for your permit application. The held the andb^gSf at?!?!) m " meeting will be tf^ouja^ any questions concerning this report or recommendation, please call Ron Quanbeck at December 14, 1990Permit Application No. 9Q»126 Applicant: QairRood 2215 Kenwood Way Wayzata, MN 55391 ^ Location: City of Orono, Sec. 17DD Purpose: Digging to create an open water pond in a wetland and fill and excavation in a . floodplain area. Anniicable Rules: Rule C - Floodplain Altaadon Rule D - Wetland Alteration Rule E • Dredging Kahibits Reviewed ! 1. 2. 3. Pennit Application 90-126 receiv^ October 8,1990. Chading pun received October 8,199C 4. 5. 6. Letter nom the District to the applicant dated October 22,1990 informing him of the Board action on October 18.1990. Revised site plan received December 10,1990. Hydrolo^ calcularicms received December 10,1990. delineating subwater'hed received December 10,1990. Staff Review Summary; The project involves dredging to remove 2,774 cubic yards of material from ? wetland to provide an open water pond 5 feet deep with 4:1 side slopes. The project is located north of the Cinintersectioa of Navaire Lane and Hillside Place in the City of Orono. The wetland is connected to Crystal Bay, Lake Minnetonka by a culvert with an invert elevation of 927.93. Therefore, t^ wetland acts as pan of the floodplain for Lake Minnetonka. Spoil is to be placed adjacent to the pond at a slope of ^>prOKimately 3.5:1. Fill is to be placed withm the wedai^ along the east edge. Excavation is to be provided along the west edge to compensate for storage capacity loss within die floot^lalh. It is unclear from the information submitted whether the proposed excavation is at the same elevation as the filL This project was reviewed and tabled * the regularly scheduled October meeting of the Board of Maiugm. The Orono Planning C omission has tabled this project. The next Planning Comriussiop netting is Janua^ 22, If 1*1. District rules specify tlut the Nianagers will review ttiplkations fv permits involving land development only after the applicant demonstrates that the plan has receivM preliminary approval irom the municipality indicating compliance with the municipal plans. Recommendation Table ling recent of: 1.Stage/storage relationship for the wetland for both existing and proposed conditions beginning at the runout elevation of Lake Minnetonka of 928.6 providing no net decrease in stormwater storage capacity at various stages. 2.Revised plan providing maximum spoil disposal slopes of 4:1 and revised silt fence installation detail providing wire mesh reinforcing for the silt fence and posts spaced no gtea^ than 4 feet apart 3.Review and qtprt.al by the Qty of Orono. Project Review Statu s bv Other f»ovgrninentfll Units; Qty of Orono is currently reviewing this project 8 of 19 *Vi Seed & Mulch ciiiturrjfjd ,»fe.j5 witluii 2 weeks after curipletion ut -iradint). BRACE, ROSTS AT LOW AREAS SEOIMCNTATIOM COWTROL FABRIC BACKFILL CV FABRIC industrial NETTIWe TOC OF FABRIC SILT FENCE DETAIL it * \ i life- 'v-- i.• r ‘ik t . €>C/TT/A/C.. KJ€ r CyiA^LS £M£M. ( <•A/^€A (Sa.^r.) /A/cje£j*i f^j(l i/ol. acc/^*m. */ac.. 1 I JZf.i •fiif.; W|/ i...: fj!/, 5 1 .0 . O.i A V ^ y z,r rr.^OO Ja.rr. Bi^ZOO fO.O " ^OO " C^6 " > > € V<P^ Cv.rr i%SSO // '77, ooa " r . . JT^.Sf - STCjeA<^e '.A^o/>ai^a iOrriAA^i:>S £jkj/.) /^CAC^f4^AL 92S.AI 9ZS--1 yii-u 1 > ?!/ :. .. 4 y ZY : •• •• •. 2.0 (S Sd.^r^ 3 Z 7oo . *•. 7Z, OO.d . '/. ?7j S/oa " yoa '* 7/y^ 5.?; 770 '' 7% 750 '* •« ys^9oo O C44.r. <9^0 " /33^ 030 " / 7^ JSS " ACC£4A^, I/O/.. 0 7 i*fO " « »« /V.', ifo " /i€, Vf‘> “ *-3^^-rS7’OjiA J/octjMf Mas. /Ctuacz^/A^/CAfAffO .TZfo//rc.Y :j^t .^^C\aUAl0H7 . JTA6€J ‘.. « «' 1 '.••«».- ..ak *• * _ .■::/ cert/ ' U st th ’s p!:n, spec. ^ ’♦iert, '.'.rbi : V.'Cg'prepared'by rfie or b.i,i«.. my c /jir';ic cn end-that I am a duly Rco»s* . J'.isicncI Engineer under tha lav/s ot 2 C.'r;.-. of Minnesota. .•X* /2 Rr^. No. /tzrs ' r •J-------^1-------j------^ J 1 !1 ; '' i 1i •■ 4 • . .CCA/A /^OOO n ; U.w-2 %AZic^^.\A/t.eA. /A^Tu: . UA€TlAt^S . --27.7^ ACACS iaiTj^./KACTa/i , ".C^= .o,*fo •rVA(f-^^.:C^C. ~ SC? /*1/aA .^ 2Tye<i = S.Z LM.^X X.A . a, (f.2) 2.7. 7<r So. y/ C/^S DEC 2 1 1990 -•t, f I 1 I JZl^J.ltA^erSTAr^A.^e A rr^r^r^ G/eA/'^) I I ; £2€i/ ■ .: \fhM phh - --t MpI m< I t-- ;. .£tj j.:: ^ATfA Ift/fL . . O.____. : .. <7 . ^ .. ^ . . .. 2: ^. ... ■: .7,.^. . . AAA1 /j«g.A-rJ SO.Q '. . i?^ /oo ./at^^ zcf.o //.X^ ^S'oo /AACA^/n€AyrAL UaL .ACCC*TA . 3 y, 920 C.A-.O f. y 77^ OOO *'7%910 i, esc /U^9lO •» y/Oj ^oo •'2o7, S70 o .J/.9." ACT (J€^ Arr^r/tc/f 2Z7Ii-J^^iT- J>/rcj/AA<;^, /Z"c/^A AT ac.-rcAr y ^A f = . ooZSS.CCAr<fr CsA^TAOL 9i7.^i\ I * _ I T t i 'f Ao -■ Tu/ 9 Vi. V ^ 9 Jo. o fAtU. r <U7. 9S !SlO^O I J I ;.5^ZuiP-..7 Lsy. // '7.,y<.-. // '/ .J^iha -/So fLSO Q CAtf O.( /. 6 2.6 O.7 A 5 2./ I \C^ 'T/t TCaJ \AT 92^. ii S,6 7 ////J.6‘2.5 i J £iSlL -Mse^-Z So ^ CEJi ’ :.*^A_..2^.07...O.Y7 O O . . . . Aju^—JcCtz.a // ^A/.Uf/r/^ f*4> * ..itj.'c . y.^7 . f• ....2,0 /.9 Ar 970.0 .:9V-ff .:,S^o7 .20 .2.3 -✓« ! , ' -1 Tn^-iraAJf^ i^2tii ruA Jtr 97a.a A<TUA*. iaiOl .710.0..~..C..___JZL.FT.77,0^0 93 i:j>.2.0.... .27, ^OO . ^650 7ZOOO " 93i..O .2,0 3 0 ' /22, Zoo . ^ A/S^ Spo A //O^ 9 0(7 / 77* CSO " 229.5SC? " vr ... _jN.J!t�.U,,1 NY�,1,1trlfAI'�. /J A fr�� �u�·rr/t?;V /f���o.x,�11T/(11V /IP -r11� : .. 1)1.MLNJ/IJ/V'LFIJ Hrl/�PC,,fAPli Civt� /A/' Bu�fA f CIF �eCLA;.,A,/r/A,/� P�J1c.✓ _ t:J, ..r I'!� 4'-. a,,,;,, ..r .t � : 5 o /111�a p = .lo. 'I 1 \ t. - • i . :�' • • . � IP, __ -¼.,e l(/tl1.v) a (,.c' J . O, .. l.l. '...fll'f .. 5 .IJ.73. ·I)..�,s _ ,o z .. r, I D .. 1 .. ,.2 I IJ <. 1, . 0;1£.i ... 35 .. lo. 10.,'f. (J •. s.. ; j • .'f " ,, __ , ! ' -.. 0 :· � 7 .. :.. IJ-1 ; •�--- (). , •' .. 11' . . I.. fJ. � : /. IJ() . ,�.,.: ...... ?I. I, . . :. -1� . � :l r. 6-lo. Jo 11. 77. .1$. 2'1.02.. '/(). l7. 37.rs. 2CJ. 30 $(,) ..Ja._'11. $!. 1·, 10. (o. z1.J7. t/ /fp /. 3 /. "I ,_ $ /_ 6 I 7 /. p / '1 � i(1",ltf) .15 ,s . 7"/ 7o .. t'I. 75 •·55 i'o .'f.i' IS- '�z. ·e;o . 3 (, '15 . 3 I JOO . 2 7 /05 l.'1 /IO , lo ll f' lf· l2." • a J: JS. IS 21 .. 50 l? '16 /( •. 7 3 /'( 6 /2, 77 /().? s 9.<t 3 3.-i..1 7.Jo ( OS' ..,r:-. 'I? 2.5 1.t ? .. 1 2.,f . l- � ; .. o J.I ]. < 1. J � ,✓ ) . ' /l. 5 llo lS'O l.ff -. ,.rs )70 f: (l'f1µ) .1 5 � l] .l2 0 r• •ct ,. . . a CFJ 'f.5 6 J.9S J.oS J.oy 2 . 7 't 2.'13 2./-':/ I, ; :.. /,, .52. /., 2 2 /. 2 2 o.9,· r.8.11.�.,-/µt; rA#t,�_LJ]'◄J· = l'�· · c)A· ) ( .5" /t',�) ( to .IUfe-1,.,) rlh -' AT 9l '1. y . �1... �rLtt<l!!d. N£,11w tr,,,J ./.. ·.. ... 0 .0 L... S.II.11 ; . J-·-··-< -� ,�2· '19 Y,_� .···--IS 641 J 9 $: lO •· ..... -· -� Z.1 7_: J. , ... -.. ·-} $.'. -• 'fo-· 10 /I IZ •· ?J r4f .� 11 J<.. 11. ... . . If.. ...,,. lt> . 1, ll .'I$ So $5 -. � 6 ....,s 7 ·--. .. 0. . .. ... _7J. •• '"· I . . ts. ... , •. ,,.- /tlQ /OS •- . ... . . . . - . . . . JII .. &'( _,��,lo ··'"-7 l� 02 l.. 1 .. 11 27.iP JD_'t/ 2, 20. 21 .. 17 l.s. I l_l .SQ /7 .. �16 �,. 73 •'f._� 0 / 2 �.77 /IJ. ?S 9.tl 7 . .2/ . . .;T'O�A fJf° _ (CtA� TT:) OU,£(�·,/ {� r ,·i 0 -o GJ=0/4 011ir=l1'1/�,,Q.r,1/ /tJ.f 6 o1''1/ .J�O.]_f1,y 4/( s. . . o ,,,1 (). rs -+'SI' 1/ /� {� . . . i 'O (I.� s. . fPS1//( > '?ltJ1/ ZJ" .. j'(!.,'l f1 � 6·,1 11 �'1/ YO &./1 1 3 1711/ �I J'r I �611/s:R. .I . / 0 (19 iYcrs, 9.J,7 't'1o/ 71. � •· ('fl 1/, ,, . . ,, . . . �l(J� fS, 2CJ "'"Yi11 t)73:'1/ '13, t?,.7 ]'ll'/9 7, :12] 2114.f//th...,✓ 197' t�,y /()2,,�C/9 ().?5 c;.$S .J. 6 . t'. 7 o.9 CJ.? 7. /./'/5 I#/ .... . ., /, 1 .. 25 /4 3 ?5 7 " . j.'? /.Y S'rcstd^f pr.)ZTcdr^^t £tc^ ArA .. L_L..i_..;.............................. .:JU..L...//O.. 7./ y . . Atf_....; ./iS /. V2 . ;_lJr.: -....ao. . . . • • 1 • . y.V7 /!Y^ Q /y^ .. it 1 J .: n.s: . . .: y.'^'V /p%03i /./5 •:.Z7..L.! ..o.o . . .. S, 9 iT /.y^ . 1 • i .J.ts 7/2 Ay7 _iV !f^O 1 i ‘ ' ] ?.o</A/^SS 6 /. . ! ia> -i-i :/«• : . . ! .2.7V , ./. 5-t.^s 7/l,ZcS /,5-'n. ,1 J . Z. ►V //2A35 .A 5 AS2 72V//A ^7y A 5 . .ay..; ,:./t^./X2 77 0 A 5" . .ji».i, :./”<3 i t /. 2 2 V//2, 774f Ca. X ^ 3 i / 7 J .. i !A 2 2.'^^///2y <r?2 A 5 ..—, —. j . . .. . TAa if C4^/r//Ar 9SO,o •.... . *# « STcued/^r (rcy.rr.)^C/Tjr/oc^ * 'f) .:A 0 . .. o . . . . . .. J5-: .01 1 I ...i.. ‘ ..„.. % ................. f O.fi ...........o% . ...•i'...:........../^ . .. l.ii "'Va/y . o . ._v....j..n £.3’). o •..........zp . . 0,5 .';...^..J—..IS................... . .;.-’i..i_.....if....................77 -0.75 .-...js.............._.. t . ^ .<7.25 .-Yf ................. •I 4 * 27.i7 . io.^5; ..1...YS.$.7?yy . til J...........So .3P*Sft 4 ♦« ..'1..J-x :•...........29./^^.72 !}Sc••^-• •-m •«27.i7 ^^ysT,.3o7 , .<a.w<* •« .. 'iL_i.ss.............•^’”/f<C255 .0.^3. fS :7d .A<?2 f€7S /9.y^.A/2 1 :/A 73 ,f77 /./y <f: !/X ’ • •/y./^ . .‘*“VYo,33J . .A22 . ..^i._L_^ ,Yo. . . .... •/2.77 .A 25 .. .;jd_L... .9f. . . . ....i^7S ......................^"5^97,.fc?y. ./,2^' ; iLl. :.<«='... . . ;7^3 A 3 . a^. r. :/-»/•....?. ^ /"'’'•'y /<y,/v7 /. 3/ ij....; :7-So 2/9 -. A 7 J t?' t •• .Tf ^(" c^i)S rc?/eA<;:f ^'c^. rr.)Oc^T/^ioc^ (c^ 2f ZS 27 ZY ir Jo 3 /• ' ii JS. Jc A5 . /Zo /2 5 fJo 13 S . f'iO /tS /Jo /Jf /e<? 4T5 /yj e .o){ S.V7 S.^s 3. 3.ov 2.7Y z .y^ 2.^3 A 72 A^2 /.2i /.2Z ^'^^'//OZO.O /c/2, 9z3 ’^‘'Y //o^ S9. ///yS^ 7 V//2^ oz € //z, so^ 7 ’V//2^ ^^y//3y/j3 2«y//i, J*?7 *'•///1, SOS- '^'/j/3,^5 2^ ///,*/ /.3 7 A 3^ A y /. y/ /,y2 /. /. yy /. V5 /.y^ A V5 /. Cy> /.yj A'/l £'C/‘l/A T/Jt'y yz9.y J yf fr^J^r/A'^^OyA^T ^ ry/f £4>OCno y<>yf^ z~0 ^3/.0 /Ay y1‘ /ao r/i/ ^ .CiJ/Ay^ vf . ^Jo,o fT/47/yycJ 7yyf /cyoui^ y^/ff t^O ^J/» 3S ^f/pA€ TWf /A/rf A^J/ rc ^3/,S £t/f*^TiAyCLr . /fjf.s COC>cT /!/^ ACCf/r/jif rfy< /ycO/yy Tcr^^r/^^ y//€'AJ C*/J ck . as £A/Cf /i/ /yt^,^/r/y>iy/AA^ ic/ yr// //o yaj/ O/^ .(/OLi4^^^^CcC\^S' A>a7^aA / C/^pasS€aC:^//-'f. ‘ccriify fiat tirs rlin, specification, 0.r„p.jrt vvas picpored. by. me or under my . “ -n ^nd thnt I am a duly Rcr.is- ' ’^‘-^sional Engineer under the laws of -' i-i - c,' wiinnoscia. _y. /S ~/o, ?</R t-z. No. /2 7r<- • h(\ > • I • I I t I I..; -.... I • .... L • I ••• t . ,• I .. ; --· •• u ·• . . ' ... . ·-. ' • I - 1 J 1 . : • ' I --�. , __- l. , .. . • ·-·-· . , I -• ♦ • ---'. _,, .. -·. ' -- ,. • I -. Z, • l ) t ---... -. "I' - -· I l ;I r I • •••I t,1.,11rH rw -.l(r ·?19. +' 3 r^:r S L C CA/Jt AOOO *i3o. o Tc*>f JT.L ■ /A/ .PtA(o.^ ejsr^At.r S/^(Pa/uC) O.Fr, /. f - f - AfifA L/at 7^00 S^.fr.^ "ZC70 0Slop ^oo cu. rr. AC.Ct/t'’K . l/ClCtAl^ O Cm, rr,. ills " /^.y.zs {• ,... ~ 3 ?Z Cu.irAS. . 2T.»*CaAfF^^SAr/Ayf. F'ycjtfjATjgj^ /aa ^iFa/yF^^,Ay ^l€A. 4F Cc*r i O.pA/: : /. ^ '},Fr.. AFfA /A/CA (A^ f^rA: tyai /4./4'Z> Ja..Fr. ,3^0^ A* >/a, ^?S Cc/.rr. Accct/^ t/FlCt/»F O.....ced^Fr. /^yfPS -S92 . CAd. yjir^ T/Pi/ST^FA'F .AS. AAc AAfT FFcAf AXf /jlA /^foAc STa^ACf CdFAC/rr. '.dAf" ,lr'^CJtJJr‘A.aAj> FoaaQ. AFArc* ., .Jl/t €a .. /jycAfFt (a^ta i i/Oj.. O \^ / ...iJ^A ooo . //__> 3/^ 700 23, y^<?J s. « // 2J,.Coyz so.fr. /i^ ooo . // i3^ lao ’ *3 700 .*• ✓/ // Atfo r PfArjf . lAfA FtCC*/A^. t/OlCdgri e : O ^4A. FF. /%2oo r'. . S/, SToo /' . . 9oo. ' ' : =. ^77V CO. TOI^ i > SFo/aS CAOAUf *33A.5) F^fA 7T UOlm/^ f o FT. 2300 TO. FT., , - 2 '•^ 300C ',. "Z t ■■ ttoo .. Z y*"'’ ^ « 3oo ••' ^ rSoo DfATA' Q Fr. ^ .. 6 F l/OCUfo\F 3oo /* /2, ,Oo « .^r. yio ifgo >/I* /at> ^ ' 9 ooo ^ ^/Jo // S 300 /■■ 3 2 oo '< 9oo . '' 27,000 CU.f^r. I- -f IT' . t^7,cho Total - 7%40o Cct.,Fr. - ZT€S Cc<.r<ff. -= jV/*fr as fycFtyMr^OA/ ' • 1 COA/Sr***f rf09A SrCHFOOtK r r/W^^ AfO/t,, /99/ I........................................ ; . . . • .................. — . S'9ptdFF\iCA.^T ‘/T'AfiFoSeA - ff^CArAdOF a CAf F"^ # I comorehensive plan of one oooioinen paroa^.s lor -ouncn- review an>- thap covenants ba filed on the chain or title pertaining to the accessory structures and future subdividing of this parcel. Motion,* Ayes-'1, Bellows and Cohen, Nays. Motion carried. Cohen believed that the application was forced ahead and preferred to see a comprehensive plan before making a recommendation. Bellows concurred with Cohen and reiterated her comments regarding the commercial appearance of this greennouse structure. #1604 CLAIR ROOD - 2215 KENWOOD V/AY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 8:30 P.M. TO 8:40 P.M. Mr. Rood was present. p.c //-/<?-70 ^*fj_davit of Publication and Certificate of Ma——ing we—e duly noted. summarized the information contained in his N.^vembe- 15, 1990 memo. Ms. Lorraine Moss. 3.335 Crystal Bay Road, expressed concern about Mr. Rood s oroposal destroying t.he c.haracteristic of the wetland. She stated that the wetland is a wildlife habitat and that she would hate to see anything happen to change it. Mr. Rood said, "I have lived on the property for two years have seen little wildlife in the wetland. The culvert that extends across Navarre Lane has been there for some time. When I bought this property, the house was unfinished. The body shop on the corner dumped all of their trash in the pond for many years, j have changed my proposal and no longer intend to dig the pond to a twelve foot depth. Tne A.rmy Corp of Engineers sent me a letter indicating the ramifications of doing that. My surveyor has re-drawn the pond and it will now be five feet dee? with a gradual slope on the sides. I want to excavate the pond so there Is some water in there. I do not intend to destroy any of the wildlife habitat.I started cleaning out the debris and found that there is Navarre Lane." a 4'* gas line exposed near the culvert under There were no further comments from t.he public regarding this raattar and the Public Hearing was continued. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Moos, to table this application until further, necessary information is received. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0. Motion carried. #1605 DR. RICHARD LINDSTROM - 1065 WEST FERNDALE ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:43 P.M. TO 8:49 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Paul BedJcer, Dr. Lindstrora's Architect, and Mr. Charles Lindatrom, were present.Cohen indicated that it would be necessary for him to abstain from discussion and voting on this ijMititer because of his professional relationship ho the applicant's representative. Gaffron reviewed the information pertaining to Dr. Lindstrom's application (see Michael Gaffron's memo dated November IS, 1990). I CITY OF OROHO 473—7357 _ ____ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _—- - - - --- - - - - -- «r ‘ci;irRo^d to: 2215 Kenwood Way Wayzata» MN 55391 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ TYPB OF APPLICATIOH: Variance^Conditional Ose Permit _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ mw'S'J^iwr'u/Ii/io VOTR: 6 For 0 Against PlaimlBg CiM*d.ssioii recomeods the folloning: Tabled for reasons noted below HOTBS AMD SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant to provide additional information: 1.invert elevation and condition of tile outlet at Crystal Bay. V e.ihinittal to City of all items requested by Minnehaha Creek w;ter8he^District in their letter of 10-22-90 (copy attached). Planning Commission tabled all discussion of the brick pillars until the application is again scheduled for review. .ddi$?ln “l°TnVo™a\"V.^te\dA- foVUe^u^^dfyr^-ara ‘ry “2T lllf it January 10, 1990. If the appll .'xnt has trouble obtaining additional information, please contact the Zoning Department (473-7357). by the Planning Commission. Itv ~'mA. I //./£T.aoTo:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Pros:Michael P. Gaff^on, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator DT4te:November 15, 1990 Subject #1604 Clair and Lynn Rood - 2215 Kenwood Way - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IC, Single family lakeshore residential, 1/2 acre, sewered Application - Request for conditional use permit and variance to create a pond within a designated wetland List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Cross Section Letter of Request Notice of Tabling from Watershed District Staff Letter to Applicant 9/27/90 Wetland Air Photo Code Sections re: Pillar Discussion Pcurtinent Facts - 1.The applicant is proposing to excavate a pond approximately 1/2 acre in area within this 1.5 acre designated wetland. 2.Applicant has applied to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed <P District where his application was tabled pending submittal ^ ^ ^ of additional information. As of this writing, app 1 icant f has not provided that information to the Watershed District.V 3.Applicant notes he has discussed the project with the Army Corp of Engineers, but has not indicated whether they have issued a permit for the project. This is not a DNR- protected wetland. 4.Applicant notes that approximately 1500 cubic yards of excess fill will be removed. Staff calculates that a 12*excess fill will be removed. Starr calculates tnat x y deep pond 1/2 acre in area would yield approximately 10,000 cubic yards of fill, hence 8500 cubic yards apparently are ^ unaccounted for in applicant's proposal. S.The applicant is absolutely correct in the statement that the area has been used as a dumping site over many years. Staff inspection in October revealed debris along the north. k----- I- Zoning File #1604 November 15, 1990 Page 2 6. 7. 8. east and south ends of the property. Applicant had gone ahead with a bulldozer to remove some of that debris, and when this was brought to staff's attention, applicant was stopped and was advised of the necessary procedures to gain approval for continuing that work. Applicant had taken one Qj- swipes at the very perimeter of the wetland, however, it appears that very little if any wetland vegetation had been destroyed. This designated wetland receives drainage through a culvert from the south side of Navarre Lane. The outlet of this wetland is via a 16" clay tile tnat heads northward underneath the railroad tracks, underneath a portion of the house located at 3329 Crystal Bay Road, continues underneath Crystal Bay Road to outlet at the shoreline of Crystal Bay. This tile was likely installed a century ago when the railroad was built. With the invert of this tile approximately 1.5' below normal lake level, there would ,, appear to be a direct connection of this wetland with Lake Minnetonka . While the Orono Comprehensive Plan mentions wildlife habitat as a wetland benefit, the Zoning Code basis for review and approval of wetland alterations, is primarily controlling the quantity, rate, and quality of run-off entering the lake. The City Engineer has reviewed the applicant's proposal and has walked the site, and has requested the same information as was requested by the Watershed District, in order to determine whether the proposal meets the required flood plain management engineering characteristics. As noted above, approximately 1/3 of the wetland will be opened up to create a 12 ’ deep pond. This may have a number of ramifications, both from a wilalife standpoint and frcm a flood plain management standpoint: a.Providing an area of open water surrounded by a cattail marsh will likely increase the diversity of wildlife attracted to the site. b.Aeration of the pond as proposed will tend to reduce the algae growth, as noted by the applicant. c.Depending on fluctuations of the water table, excavation of the pond could tend to dry up the fringes of the wetland during low water years, hence changes in the nature of wetland vegetation might occur. m I i 'Zoning File #1604 November 15» 1990 Page 3 9.The City Engineer stated he woiild not recommend tliat the City approve a pond excavation wr',h 2:1 side slopes. While this slope would leave a greater proportion of the pond at full 12* depthf from a safety standpoint, it would be nearly impossible for a child or adult to walk up the bank and out of the pond should they fall in. Most of the City's lakeshore is at a 6:1 or flatter slope near the shoreline, v Staff would agree with the Watershed District requirement that the slopes be no steeper thin 4:1. tf 10.In addition to providing the information requested by the Watershed District, applicant should be required to have his surveyor locate the 15" clay tile outlet at the lake and verify the invert elevation. Because this only pond outlet is underneath a neighboring property owner's residence (probably without benefit of a drainage easement), the engineering data will be critical in determining whether construction of this pond and the general clean-up of this area will have an adverse effect in increasing flows through the neighbor's property. / A w 11.Applicant has constructed a number of concrete/brick pillars along the perimeter of the property, with the intent that bushes would be planted between them to act as a fence-like barrier. Note from the staff letter of 9/27/90 th« these pillars were constructed without a permit, and staff intended to advise applicant regarding interpretation of the Code regarding thxs issue. Planning Commission is requested as part of the current application, to review the Code Sections regarding fences and interpret whether or not these pillars meet the fence requirements. Staff Re ndation Staff would recommend tabling the request pending submittal to the City all of the information requested by the Watershed District, and additionally, information regarding the elevation and nature of the clay tile outlet at the shoreline of Crystal Bay. Absent any Zoning Code directive that such pond construction is strictly prohibited under any circumstances, if all hyrologic/engineering concerns are satisified, then the only other question in the granting of this condi-.ional use permit is rather subjective: will construction of this pond and the proposed grading work at it's perimeter be compatible with the policies expressed in Section 10.55, Subdivision 1 i.e. will such vork have an adverse effect on the natural environment qualities of this wetland area? H- Zoning File #1604 November 15, 1990 Page 4 The final issue for the Planning Commission to review is with regard to the pillars constructed approximately every 20-30’ on the perimeter of the property. This interpretation is requested by staff, since the Code is somewhat unclear on this: 1.The pillars in questions are approximately 18”-24" on a side, and range from 3'-6’ in height above grade, ^re these pillars considered as a fence, or are considered as accessory structures? Zoning Code not define a fence. Pillars are intended to bushes between them, with the intent of providing a barrier at the property line. they does have 2.Is the side yard adjacent to the street considered a side yard for fence purposes? If so, a 6' fence would be allowed along Navarre Lane. On the other hand, if for fence purposes the Navarre Lane side yard is considered as a second front yard, the maximum fence height allowed would he 3 1/2'. 3.Because the Code does not address nonencroachments for a side yard adjacent to a street, and because only the principal structure setbacks are defined for a side yard adjacent to a street, the Code gives no direction as to whether accessory buildings would be allowed within the required side yard adjacent to a street. In the past, staff has taken a conservative approach and generally allowed no accessory structures within the required side yard adjacent to a street. 4.Does the fact that the wetland parcel is not legally combined with homestead parcel, have any bearing on your view of this property? 5.If this property is considered a"through"lot , then do you agree that a 6' high fence would have to be at least 30' from the rear lot line? Attached in Exhibit J are excerpts from the Code which may help in your interpretation of the above questions. Please direct staff and applicant as to whether the pillars in question are allowed as is as i fence, or whether they should be subject to a building permit or variance application. Isv I/'. ^ ;6-'/ Cj«pY OP ORONO “ GENERAL LAMu USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOC riON Z2L w.A f 'f c • c?*w-rr-rr •.i I **'^J fc-V»•AWU •*•►I • t -tX « ,/V— *-* V* wv __ _ "t i *r»/*' V'X uu ^lb- V' V • V T!'r-Ai’t fSite Address ... . ^ f *_ Ji Property Identification Number (P.I.D.).V .. . . .•.*. uM ^C V^X »»VX # A w f A -• • . i V * *;-*• Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name 0 La ifL <f- Ly /*y.v Phone (home) ^7 /V3 Phone (work) f ^ ^ ^ / Address ^P^j.City ^iP \>*1 L ONNER (if different than applicant) Name _ _ _ _ _ - Address Phone (home) Phone _ _ _ _ City _ _ _ Zip Date Property Acquired _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land.M i FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee i $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application $125.00 Residential accessory Use $150.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Creuit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration © UK I i X Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain — wa?ls :ithin%5' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see i*?e schedule R APPLICATIONS $200.00 $250.00 $175.00 $ 50.00 $250.00 $100.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) Vacation Easement Vacation Easement Vacation With Subdivision Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) Appeals Other — see fee schedule PRESENT OSB OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: 2. v: REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1,Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271). Plat Map. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve cha..iges in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application,please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 3. i. 5. 6. 7. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff; Date_ _ _ ___ _ __ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to thOv best of his/he.r )griowledge. Applicant's signature Date OMWERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acJcnowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council m3mbers for purposes of investigation and veri^cation of this revest. Owner's signature - 4^/Date .X 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 ma)ce arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. r • 7. •* s •A-.* •*#■-.f '/r . *r* •.JT*.. •.. . j. -*. f X ,^7 / /7-//7-23 * t»?? ( «M *V S( 1^) 5 7l'V>(141 ». e9. n 4 '5>BI)|tj/»« »0 T^ W|r«C>0Mi* S*0<. •<S>- v:.’>^‘''’’ rrio 2A^ *V 3 V ^n„N t *0 >KM. ^ro 19361 531)» V ^-(/i)\ (•') \ \S' 2 \4*^ ;-\' \ 10 V?3-\ V- Axx A v'« j'*) Xzcl.A ■■^.^My '•sm'A t- 69 —F'-* / v(»9) (W 5> /' f / (3)•.57) « / / IW *t ^(661 -(47 '.X? ,:’r/ /40 ^ J •^'V . K.lA ___OLD 7-^ 'i z (A 5 i* \ 0 I' ixixin S. J ^ \m Tj\1 i 3(4^ I r— ^ 1 \J _A LU ^' '»7 .i Xxk V4 /' / S^7' f63)/r^^ U*)j >•- y W (i. & N A (91) )C vK-^ Ca) = hr^ OUTIOT C (9-0 16 XT :t^r , V .V' — •rrrs^' 7 ’*/- ••r -r^*^.*v7T . •.; <A' ‘ V s’>f' *. • t RUN DATS lO/ti/90 f MT€N 001 V?• a TAXPAYfR r ; NAME/AIM ;:n.'’ I 4 * i ^ tr MOP AINNI DM€R NAME M 17-117*25 41 0002 ; 02140 RENHOOO HAY CARL S JOHNSON V: DONNA E RADANUK 4451 DALLAS RD < HRLS Ml 5S450 MirMEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEMPROPERTY 0»MERS LIST 38 17-117-23 41 0003 02ISO KEM4000 HAY H L S J H PAASCH JAYNE M PAASCH 2150 KENHOOO HAY HAYZATA HN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401PAGE 1 58 17-117-25 41 0004 02160 KE^•«)00 HAY S P DI^PIICK t B. OIMMICK STAR A TRIBUNE EMP CREDIT UN 425 PORTLAND AVE MPLS W 55488 ■ ■■■V, A -I TAXPAYER 50 17-117-25 41 0005 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIQNED ^ PAUL R HOLMOERO PAUL R HOLHOERO ' ;V'<>^ LfMHIE//UMM.Vvi7Ml 9TN AVE N E V I POULSMNA 98570\ t j'•'t ^ V t ^4 •it I ^i|l. MOP'AOOR . •r. ONNEt NAME -NARK C ZAGARXA I 50 17-117-25 41 0015 05245 CRYSTAL DAY RD ^ *»r< TAXPAYER NAIC/AM % t•! r" . X.k. .:NARK C 2A6AR1A ,;: U24 21ST AVE N E "•ROCHESTER Ml 55404 ^PROP AOOR CMffR'NAHiVi taxpayer NAHE/ADOR i!.M ■' 17-117-E5 41 0017 ^>0551S CRYSTAL BAY RO J A TRUDEAU A J B TRUDEAU J A TRUDEAU 8 J B TRUDEAU 1 ISIS CRYSTAL BAY RO •I . :■ li' ; I ••i •- :i; NAYZATA tfl "it’ 55541 i: r‘: ‘ r. .^7, .., ;Vrop mm .I' p’ TiUCPAYER :NANE/AM ^Hi ♦;;•... j ‘•-1«I i;/ C' OllSS. */r;i«!'A. LORRAINE 17*117-tS 41 OOEO CRYSTAL BAY RD t''^A) LORRAINE H06S l:j: 'lS5S CRYSTAL BAY RO r;- NAYZATA m 6BS91 ■ .V I'l ■i.'I ' :SB 17-ll7-n 41 0021 f', 05S49 CRYSTAL BAY RD OliCR-. NAME! 3-t NARREN \\ PASCHKE - . ,(TAXPAYER .. j.),; NARREN L; PASCHKE . NAW/ABORjIt.g 14441 VXLLA6E HOODS DR '.r;EDEN PRAIRIE »M ■' -1't t.i •■! ■4-- 11 38 17-117-23 41 0006 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED PAUL R HOLMBERG PAUL R HOLMBERG 17961 9TH AVE N E P0ULS60 HA 98370 38 17-117-23 41 0015 03285 CRYSTAL BAY RO THOHAS E MC HUE ETAL THOMAS E MCCUE 3285 CRYSTAL BAY RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 41 0018 03325 CRYSTAL BAY RO RICHARD J SIAKEL RICHARD J SIAKEL 3325 CRYSTAL BAY RO HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-25 41 0021 05339 CRYSTAL BAY RO PATRICK D 0*FLANAGAN PATRICK 0 0*FLANAGAN 5339 CRYSTAL BAY RO HAYZATA Ftl 55391 38 17-117-23 41 0024 03355 CRYSTAL BAY RO JOHN E KUST JOHN KUST 3355 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NAYZATA m 55391 58 17-117-23 41 0007 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED PAUL R HOLMBERG PAUL R HOLMBERG 17881 9TH AVE N E P0ULS80 HA 98370 38 17-117-23 41 0016 03309 CRYSTAL BAY RD PSP GUSTAFSON ROBERT HEGERMAN 3309 CRYSTAL BAY RO NAYZATA 55391 38 17-117-23 41 0019 03329 CRYSTAL BAY RO TERRYL A PEDERSEN DIXIE LEE NEEKS 3329 CRYSTAL BAY RD HAYZATA *4 55391 38 17-117-25 41 0022 03345 CRYSTAL BAY RO ALINE K 06LAND ALINE K OGLANO 3545 CRYSTAL BAY RO HAYZATA rtl 55391 38 17-117-25 41 0025 03359 CRYSTAL BAY RO GREGORY H LONG A HIFE GREGORY N LONG 3359 CRYSTAL BAY RO HAYZATA ttl 55391 tH ..4, 0 ■i *'*';.*.••> *.•«■j < MM MTt 10/t«/90 . "t : ‘ ' MTCH 001 7 •I •» ■ ml i moo ASM OMCR NAtC TAXPAYER NAME/AOM * ■> ny •nn!, so 17-117-*! 01 00*7. 0S*10 NAVARRE LA CURENCE O SCHRAPP ETAL ELBERT eXMCEL S*10 NAVARRE LANE NAYZATA Ml SSS91 HEMCPIN COUNTY P1WPERTY INfORMATION SYSTEMPROPERTY OMCRS LIST SO 17-117-25 ^1 0028 02180 KEIMOOO NAY CONRAo”j*i*SlUREEN L MELNICK 2180 KEIMOOO HAY NAYZATA m 5S391 J I ri' .* - iv, It-J]’ ' 17-117-*! 41 PROP AOM XW ONCR NAME [TAXPAYER , :NAIC/AOM ♦Y ‘it TAXPAYER NAME/AOM SO ' 17-117-*! 41 0050 fOOOSO AOORESS UNASSIGNED C IXOMA KABANUK . OOMU KABANUK ’ 4451 DALLAS RO BROOKLYN CENTER Ml 554S0%s;' • so 17-117-*! 44 OOU T0SS4B CRYSTAL BAY RO '\-J R LOFRANO ETAL. J‘R LO FRANO , !!4S CRYSTAL BAY RO < ' NAYZATA Ml SBS91 . 'I '■ 17-il>-*! 44 00!*’ 90050 AINNIB8S UNAS8XGNE0 ^ GENE ANB.SMERYLL BLOCK . . GENE AND iSMERYLL.BLOCK . *!0B BAYVlEN PLACE ’ NAYZATA Ml , BSS91•1.. .-;u .. 'K::*o i.■. ,1 .!SB 17-117-*! 44 0040 ^i.'HliPIMP ABOO 0**40 ^' BAYVlEN PL .... >n^'V;OMCR NAME k JACOUELYMI J ZONTELLl lTANPAVER .: |^>MCCX SEONER i. NIME/ABMI't*40 BAYVlEN PLACE | r .. t* NAYZATA.Ml^. IBSn ‘i-.i ?!:P [yV-" f: ’ 'i 1 i.4.'•!;s. !^i!0 17-117-*! 44 0044 ET AL .i'V' r • i ) •^ ;a ...AOM . ^iOOOSO . AOORESS UNASSXGNEO V! OM«R NAMT tON PALMER OBJ PALMER ^ . '^ TANPAVER. .' .}^CMRXiS A BARBARA PALMER ^;. ‘n-.IBB«/ABM 'A *710 CASCO PT RO . v .. ■}/'‘.;l YS.iv-il•. rirMONO MlY;f BBS91 -’[.n.■. t .. a‘t«.V L 50 17-117-25 41 0051 00050 AOORESS UNASSIGNED OOIMA E KUBANUK DONNA E KUBANUK 4451 DALLAS ROAD BROOKLYN CENTER IM 55450 50 17-117-25 44 0017 05544 CRYSTAL BAY RD J B OAHLHAN AHA DAHLHAN JON N PAPAS 5544 CRYSTAL BAY RO NAYZATA Ml SS541 50 17-117-25 44 0055 02505 BAYVlEN PL R H STELL1N6 ETAL GENE H BLOCK 2505 BAYVlEN PLACE NAYZATA Ml 55391 50 17-117-25 44 0041 02250 BAYVlEN PL CATHY JO TURNER CATHY JO TURNER 5014 ENCHANTED RO HOUND Ml 55544 58 17-117-25 44 0045 00050 AOORESS UNASSIGNEO C H PALMER A B J PALMER CHRIS A BARBARA PALMER *710 CASCO PT RD ORONO MN 55541 REPMT no. PX4SB401PAGE* 58 17-117-25 41 0024 02170 KENNOOO HAY OOrtIA E KABANUK DOMIA E KABANUK 6951 DALLAS RO BROOKLYN CENTER Ml 55450 38 17-117-23 .41 0053 EDH STEARNS DONNA HUNTSBERGER 3128 OLD COUNTRY RO 1! NAYZATA Ml 55591 38 17-117-'44 0018 03375 CRYS.AL BAY RO JAY B KEISER ETAL JAY B KEISER 3375 CRYSTAL BAY RO NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 44 0059 02240 BAYVlEN PL JACQUELYMI J ZONTELLl ET AL JACCI SEGNER 2240 BAYVlEN PLACE NAYZATA Ml 55591 58 17-117-23 44 0042 02240 BAYVlEN PL 0 S NILLIAMSON ETAL 0 S NILLIAMSON 2240 BAYVlEN PL NAYZATA Ml 55541 38 17-117-25 44 0044 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED C H PALMER I B J PALMER CHRIS A BARBARA PALMER 2710 CASCO PT RO ORONO Ml 55341 tH »• ;•V' •!• •»» »I ll MJN QATC 10/24/90 ' /h'tATCM 001 .11.. \ '‘ii• « * . .ir:; \• r4* » ♦ »AOOR U'l'.) OMCR HAtC TM9AYER • ' . NMC/AINM •♦ ' .t >$. \ «. / • I M t1l’. I.' *:i.': ;: ■} , Ml? ' * 'ULm mm 4000 ONNii N4IC TAMPAVtO NAHE/ADOR i • SO 17-117-2S 44 0047 OOOSa AOOOESS UNASSIGNiO C N PAUCR A 0 J PALMER CHRIS A SARBARA PALMER 2710 CASCO PT RO ORONO m; 55S91 . . ♦ . ; r Sa 17-117-23 44 0055 00036 A00II5SS UNASSIGNED C T ROOO I L 0 ROOO CUIR T i LYItl 0 ROOO 2215 RElfCOO HAY NAYZATA MN 55341 *•*4 ;i t I 111,' * ' CMNER NAME .4 TAXPAYER . ^:|j^^NAME/AOOR ■i it- ■ rf-jM-’i: r »i ‘so 17>117-2S 44 0050 "0S220 NAVARRE U , ' RICHARD A PROUOFIT ' ROBERT J RITCHIE 1901 BEACH LA :NAYZATA Ml S5S91 'f,' ■.y.’^. ••^ V. V'’ ‘ i 36 17-117-23 44 0066 ' 03215 LAFAYETTE RIOGE CT CHEYEItC LAND CO OEMaS N A JANE 0 BURGESS NME/AOOR MS 1215 UFAYETTE RIDGE CT 55341 / J TAXPAYER -a*NAYZATA Ml. > f,.: . ;*<S V , 'P •. t ••L i’• f .i so 17-117-2 r .rPRORAOOR 0S24B LAFA <.' .i!!'OMCR name TAXPAYER . . \•NAME/AOOR \i %■»■• .1•\ 23 44 0041 03245 LAFAYETTE RIDGE CT CNEYE»HE LAND CO STUART A A HILDA J GOLDBERG SU5 UFAYETTE RIOGE COURT rHAYZATA m 55341 t.i . ..iK-ii t7 • 4 *’•'5 } • :,S0 17-117-2S -44 0094 .!> PROP AOOR . |i«OOOSO •ADDRESS UNASSIONEO I OM«R NAME il UFAYETTE RIOOE HOMEOMCRS TAXPAYER ::' UFAYETTE R1D6E HOMEOMCRS 'tH HI I NAHE/ADOR .1709 N FARM ROAD r ;l‘‘‘■.tONO LAKE l#l 65SS4 iL *i_ii .!.l ''liiUi ’ ■■'1 ;i'M. umd lake iEi bssa ‘i‘ V ‘‘•I.•'ISi-' .;.. 'R V . HErtlEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEMPROPERTY OtCRS LIST 36 17-117-23 44 0048 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED JACQUELY^t4 J ZONTELLI JACCI SEGNER 2260 BAYVIEH PLACE NAYZATA W 55391 38 17-117-23 44 0056 00038 ADDRESS UIIASSIGNED C T ROOD A L D ROOD CLAIR T A LYNN D ROOO 2215 KEftCOD HAY WAYZATA m 55391 38 17-117-25 44 0082 ‘02200 BAYVIEH PL DALE MATSON ETAL DALE MATSON ETAL 2200 BAYVIEH PLACE NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 44 0089 03225 LAFAYETTE RIDGE CT JAB LARSON JOHN T A BETTE J LARSON 3225 LAFAYETTE RIOGE CT NAYZATA MN 55391 3B 17-117-23 44 0092 03245 LAFAYETTE RIDGE CT CHEYENNE LAND CO DAVID F A SUSAN J BRIGGS 3245 LAFAYETTE RIDGE CT NAYZATA m 55391 3B 17-117-23 44 0095 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED LAFAYETTE RIDGE HOMEO^tlERS LAFAYETTE RIOGE HOHEOieiERS 1704 N FARM ROAD LONG LAKE m 55356 ■'"t REPORT NO. PI4S5401PAGE 3 58 17-117-23 44 00E4 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED C T HOOD « L 0 ROOO CLAIR 1 • LYMI 0 ROOO 221S KEIflOOO MAY HAYZATA W 55591 58 17-117-25 44 0057 02215 KEMIOOO HAY C T ROOO A L 0 ROOO CLAIR ROOO 2215 KEr»«OD HAY WAYZATA ft! 55391 58 17-117-23 44 0083 02250 BAYVIEH PL J L SCHNECK A P H SCHNECK J L A P M SCHNECK 2230 BAYVIEH PL S WAYZATA Ml 55391 58 17-117-25 44 0090 03285 LAFAYETTE RIOGE CT SALLY J MCCABE SALLY J HCCABE 3285 LAFAYETTE RIDGE CT WAYZATA Ml 55591 38 17-117-25 44 0093 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO LAFAYETTE RIDGE HOMEOMCRS LAFAYETTE RIDGE HOMEOMCRS 1709 N FARM ROAD LONG LAKE Ml 55354 38 17-117-23 44 0094 02300 BAYVIEH PL JACQUELYMI J ZONTELLI ET AL DANIEL J SEGNER 2240 BAYVIEH PLACE WAYZATA MN SS391 'UiKykRUN DATl lonufo ,a ;\ ^f f,i;|V.-ff: "■ " ; '?• ;!’ 1 -.U 17-ll7-« 44 0096 HEMCOIN r'ossoo N4VAMIE U ^---------------- J4C6UELYIM J SC6NEK • ;.i|i/TA)9AVER JACRUCLYMI J SCGNER .. 1'ff.^NMC/ABM .T tttO MWICN PL I .U ' « . ! NAYZATA IM 55341 .• . I ^ ^ !'•; 1 |v •« U-117-t3 S3 0003 AOM >j)f 03171 U7AYETTV RIDOC RO QMCR HUff C<J DUNLAP R H 0 OUNLAP TAXPAYfR i C: J A N 0 OUNLAP NAMi/AOOR ' ; 3171 UFAYETTE RlOOt RO ■ '■ NAYZATA m , S341!>-vu ?•;«:•: .sf.r. '•'»( * • f •» *h'ii : ‘I V-.', ,* } ; V ' w.r». ■I--’' A 8t U-U7-tS SS 0004 AOMi'^ 03154 LAFAYETTE RIDOE RO 't TAXPAYER /ERIC P GNEN HMER MNE ! E P A N L OMEN rS INAHE/ADDR t. • 'llm: ;':'f f :! ”1 £■ OMNER NMRT'X^ TAXPAYER m ^NMC/AOOR 'ViiiU I i £ vr. I Kw. ih . S150 LAfAYETTE RIDGE RD NAYZATA Itl S5SY1 '■'.'.a.;,. ■ ■•&■•■• rAL ra Tcn . r ■ I I : M*'. ir. 001 0004S r. li'li 5 ‘ w / ' ■ * • / COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATIOM SYSTEMPROPERTY OmERS LIST SO I7-117-ES 44 0105 02240 BAYVIEH PL JACQUELYM4 J ZONTELLI ET AL JACCI SEGNER 2240 BAYVIEH PL HAYZATA hW 55391 82 14-117-23 S3 0004 03147 LAFAYETTE RIDGE RO R A A H L FAULKNER ROBERT A FAULKNER 3147 LAFAYETTE RIDGE RO MI^tCTaN(A BEACH »t4 55361 62 14-117-23 33 0007 03155 LAFAYETTE RIDGE RD RAG SCHNEIN RICK L A NANCY G SCHHEIN 3155 LAFAYETTE RIOGE RD NAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401PAGE 4 82 14-117-23 32 0024 03128 OLD COUNTY RD EON STEARNS OOFMA HUNTSBERGER 3128 OLD CDUNTY RD 15 HAYZATA m 55391 82 14-117-25 33 0005 03143 LAFAYETTE RIOGE RO SAD SIMPSON STEVEN R A DIANE E SIMPSON 3143 LAFAYETTE RIOGE RO MINNETOMCA BEACH N4 55341 82 14-117-25 33 0014 00082 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED LAFAYETTE RIDGE H0HE0F41ERS LAFAYETTE RIOGE HOMEONNERS PO BOX 41 MTKA BEACH 55341 T o Cf- =U' I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AM) TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTNENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION» TO THE BEST OF HY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE ••• �•I ............... , ........ ,.••:••••• •••·•• ••"• •·· ••• ••:•••·••••·•••••••• •• ' . . : . � . . . . ..' . ••• •: • • • ., • • • • • I t I • t • • ! • • • t • ·• • " • • • • • • • • t • . . : . . . . .. -. �-····· •• ♦• • � o I <ii I • , , • • • • • • : ► • • • -• � t : ......... � ........... , ......�. , .... •·t. . . . . . . . .. . • . ' .• ,... . . . . . .. f .. . � : --- ,_ . :. . .... . ii. • • • • • • • • • • • • • .. • .. • .. • • • .. .. ... .. .......... ,. .......... ,. • • • • • • • • • • • • .. • • .. • • • • • • • • ••• - � ... : . 1►• ••• • • : ♦ e -� • 9 • e O. fa e I e. I I• e .,.. • ♦ • • .. • .. .. • • • • ••• . ; I I a . • 1 • 11 • • • • • • o • I • o • • ; • I • . ... .... .. ..... •·• ... . ..... " . . . .. ' . .. .. . . . f e •• f I e I • I • ' I e e t. • • 4" O • e I a . '.; ... . . ... . . ... . . ' .. 3· .. . . . . . . : '•·•! ...................... fl •··• •·•-4••••• a •• , .......... ,a.i,..ioa I a : •• • ·• • • • • t t. I• . . . . . ,. . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . ... . . . :. . . : ' . • 'I � i : o • • I • • • I t I i, ., , o • : • • • i, 4 • 1 I e t • 1 I ♦ ..... : , •• I·••·• ttl <ff• •: ·•••••• • l ••• !t • t • • ,i t t .. I • <I • •• • t t . :. . . . ,. ... . .. .,.. . .. ... .. : . . .. . .... • ♦ .. ·: . . . , ••••• •···· ., ......... '!' .................................. ••••• ••• •• I' • ' ' • I a t .. t • f • • t .. . • • : t .. • • • • t .. • • • • • • • . . . l • • • • • • • • f I • • .. : • • • I . . o ♦ '" I I at I I I. I, , •' . . I • • • • • • • • • I • • o • • , • • 1 !I , t ... . . . . . . . . . . .. � . . . . . .. -: . .. . ... . ... . .• ,t. ♦ ••••••• • · .... , ......... •· • 6 9 l,1i I•• ......... ••••♦ • • • ,-, •• • • ... ..•.. • • I 't. • • • • • • • .. t • • • • • • • • • •: • ,. I • . , • I 1, •• I • I • • I ' f I • • " • • • • • ' , ,. ··I· ......... ; ......... �•-·····•· t .. ; ' • ' • • • .. .. .. • ◄ ..... -♦.: . . . .... : . . . . . . . .. .. . . :. ·• . . . . .. . : . .. . . . ............................... :··�····• .... ·�··•.......... . . t' "•• • ,i • ·• • I• • .. ♦ ♦ • • I • • • I ,o I .. .. I • e • a . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. : .. -. . . . . . . •·· ............... ••1••···•·•�···························· .......... .. . ............ . .. • • .. .. • • • .. • ' .. • • • .. • • .. : • .. • • ' p , • • f • • • ' I • • .. " I t • � 1 9 t t I f • • I ' . • .. • • • • : ... t •• . . ...................... ··:··· ........ �, ....... :···· . . . ..................... 1 ........... , ............................. .. . . . : : : : : : : :. : �:: .. : : : : : : : : r -: • : : : . : : : : : : : : : . : . : : . : l : --..� ' 1 Ill • O I, ....... • ' • • I I • • •• O % • .. • I ••• , a • 4 • f e • I • • 1 I 1' 1 • • . ; •••••• •• •••• ltt .......... �······ ......... ,.......... ·:·· • • .2. ........................ : ..................... , ....... ; ............. , ... , ................ � ... .. . • ' t 4 ' ' • ,. I • • I • : • I I I I • • 1 . I • .. • I ' • I • • • t I .. • • •; • I I I I f • f I , t • I I • I o • • • • '. • • • • • • • • +. • • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .... . . RDl)O --- .. .. • • • • • • • f • • • -• .. .. • .. • • • • • • • • .. -.. .. • .. • • • • • • .. • • /'lt�N>f�.IJ ........ ,---. r Gx,.ibu� ---....... ...... / c� .. ., f : • • t • • I • ' . . . . : .. .. ....... - --- ..930 , 0 . . . . .. ... . .. . . . ... . . . . . •', . .. . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . ·: .S-CAL� : l�.6s•• Nt,, ,,.�,.·w� CoF,�, &lf�#1t,. ,� ��IV� LA *,r /tlf1A,,11L..,r�r, ■ r r St, r? t — I A ^ CLAIR T. ROOD / 2J15 i<£^^.‘.^OOD VvAY / 'a'AYZATA , MN 55 391-9''00 October 9, 1990 City of Orono P.0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 4.L i TT - .r\ «:.av /ar.Ai> Attention: Building ard Zoning Adrainistrator Please accept tlie attached survey and cross~section showing the finished topography of the pond we propose to dig. reasons why I am r&guesting a conditional use permit for this new oond are as follows: 1.The existing area las been used as a dumping site over the past many years and is i.. need of a clean-up. 2.With clean water and an aeroiior in a new pond, fish and wildlife coild thrive and grow. 3.Through research m\ understanding is a pond with an aerator keeps the water circulating which in turn makes it difficult for mosquitos to br ed and hatch. Also algae will not grow when the water is circulating which means if there is heavy rain, the run off which would drain into Lake Minnetonka would not contain algae, etc. The Army Corps, of Engineers suggest we erect an errosion barrier to stock pile excess dirt behind. We will haul away the excess dirt as well as the debris which may be buried in this wetland. We estimate hauling away approximately 1,500 cubic yards of excess dirt. Thank you for your consideration Sincerely, r-7^ Clair T. Rood 0 II «« .« 1 « % -. uu.'Vs^ r.O. Boi 3S7. WayzaU. Minnesota S5391 I^BD Of MimfiBtS*^ Spensi6viPres • Aibetii Len»nan • johnE Th(xria^ ■cHardR. Milef • Robtll 0 EncKSiXi • C Woodrow Lo\t • Cla(V:>on l.r^Ciey Parmil AnnliMlion No. 90-126 October 22, 1990 Applicant: Clair Rood 2215 Kenwood Way Wayzaia, MN 55391 Location: Ciiy of Orotio, Sec. 17DD a Purpose: Dredging to create an open water pond in a wetland and till and excavation in a floodplain area. Dear Mr. Rood: At the regularly scheduled October 18, 1990 meeting of the Board of Managers, the subject permit application was tabled pending receipt of: 1.Calculations showing no net decrease in Lake Minnetonka flo^ storage capacity. 2.Hydrologic calculations by a professional engineer or qualified hydrologist of the local lOO-ycar frequency flood elevation. • . j i . • 3.Calculations providing no net decrease in flood storage capacity below the projected local 100-year frequency flood elevation. ... j i. ^ 4.Erosion control plan prepared by a qualified individual showing proposed methods of retaining waterbourne sediments on site during the period of work and until bare soil surfaces have been covered or revegetated. rr u 5.Delineation and area of the total watershed area contributing stormwater runoff to the wetland. „ • u u •6.Area of the existing wetland and classification of the vegetation types present in the basin. 7.Revised plan including proposed elevation contours for the area of excavation. 8.Revised plan providing maximum slopes of 4; 1. 9.Description of and volume computation of material to be removed. 10.Description of equipment which may be used. 11.Cbnstruction schedule. [2.Location map of the spoil containment area. 13!Erosion control plan for the spoil containment area. 14.Review and approval by the City of Orono. 15.Review and approval by the DNR. These items should be received no later than November 5, 1990 to ensure your jxrmit application will be on the agenda for the next meeting of the Board of Managers scheduled for November 15, 1990. ?! p- v^- L^-.,rr &I- ^:M- Permit Application No. 90-126 Page Two October 22,1990 Should you have any questions regarding this maner, please contact me at 473-4224 Sincerely, JAMES M. MONTGOMERY, CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC Engineers for the District Ronald S. Quanbeck, P.E. Boai:d-file ^^Itvolty of Orono DNR lAa »♦n L (:i ? Y If QRONa CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66«CrystAJ Bay. Minn«ou 55323 • Muniapai Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka Septembor 27» 1990 Clair Rood 2215 Kenwood Way Wayzata, Mn 55391 RE: Proposed Cleanup/Tree Reir.cvai/Grading Dear Mr •• u uhi/-h vnu have coinmenced in variousThe general cleanup work wh handled via a areas of permit. Our site inspections on staff-issued 2^4 th verified that your property September ’7th and ^eptembe dumping ground for indeed has been as a cans, bottles, and decades. The that is’not considered clean old tires, all constitut- de aJ lowed to be dumped fill and by today’s standards would not anywhere except a sanitary landfill. W.il, «. wish to allow you to proceed that the areas of concern are y Before we can wetland, requires that Pf°^® yon^to continue, you must have issue a land ieL^ed a surveyor. Sr^^r''«^.\laVd 1ro^\t7o‘^^^^^ of wetlands (Municipal Code Section 10.55, Subdivision 8). we believe that the ordinary high wate wetland, which appears to the railroad tracks,a culvert that extends "Ojthward underne^ath the _r^axi^r 22^Vy"ou7'pro"pVrty* bu\°“wh%hJal^s^o n.ay^be^on t5rho»«'‘tr33%%Trytta?Bly"Foad and outlets at the lakeshore. Other properties ''^^oh County rd ^^^ efforts to clean ownership. “* "^®„*'’*“^^you peraission to clean up otherart.’.-.-;r.;.r;s —"" •yUNNC a ZONIMG - 473.73ST admin ISTRAnON a FINANCE - 47>U5» FAX-47>45W PUBLIC WORKS - *ryns* Clair Rood Septemb-ar 2 Page 2 199'' the north tra^'el thrcuc options. m will have to either cross other properties or the wetland, neither of which are suitable ^X?stand'in9''“.\ you hlralreacf/ constructerapproxim«'ely%wo^ code sections suggests that along street lot lines, include Kenwood Way, Navarre Lane, and technically wou^ld als include Hillside Place (an undeveloped road which may become a road in the future), fencer are not a. lowed to exceed 3 1/2 height. Since you proposed that you would be planting hedges between ?hS« p«J, there is som/ question whether they fall ^he definition of a fence. Also, the code is not dear on whether such posts can exceed 3 1/2’ in height in a sioe street yard (along Navarre Lane) or a rear street yard (along Hi ® Place). We are still researching this, however, 7°^. aware that there may be an issue about the height of those pillars, and if it is determined that the maximum allowable height is in fact 3 1/2’, your options would be ^ at the appropriate height, or to apply for an after-the-fact variance. We will advise as to a final interpretation on this issue. In order to expedite approval for your intended cleanup wor)c, you should do the following: 1 Have your surveyor determine the inverts of the inlet c‘u^! /uVf^r//ec\^s H^s previous determination of the wetland boundary. 2 Your surveyor should stalce the wetland boundary «proximat.ly every 50', end should likewise «ake the 26' wetland setback where no filling, grading, dredging or excavation is allowed . Once a land alteration permit is issued, the following guidelines must be adhered to: In areas within 26'of the wetland boundary, debris removal shall be all caused by such removal grade elevations. No be all wed within th *only to the d>^iree that voids ’1 be restored to the pre-existing lular or equipment traffic shall ndary of the wetland in any case. Clair Rood September 27» 1-90 Page 3 vegetation. ^ 5’ ->n the attached drawing, at the 2.in areas debris removal within the north end ,°£ „av or with-n properties ..ot nnder your railroad fi^ht f anowed until you supply wiitten ap”o”al for sioh work from those property owners. iiT-»a »2 where you have proposed to fill ar'3.in Area #2,^ . to match the surrounding approximately IfOOO s.f.^ ^^lowed, subject to the use of Ilean® f Al only!’ with such fill not to exceed an amount of 100 cubic yards. 4.in Area .3, the ”-/Vu%t:nd^'n\"gVades. grades restored \^^ised of\he culvert and gas works contac<^i^<; you regarding thoseline exposures, ana mxx structures. h«r established, ^the tiriude%%r^:rsrion “\o;r^^^^^^^^ property owners to work within their properi:/ 1. ♦. a^ 473-7357 if you have any questionsPlease contact meat4/j /ja/ j Sincerely, AaaisMnt'Planning s Zoning Administrator cci /jeanno Mabuath, Building s Zoning Administrator Lyle Oman, Senior Building Inspector Bruce Vang, Field Inspector MPO/lsv ^.'•’^ V' .'«- vj j, , •->>•» X --. •-..^4^. ;v." t -4; ^ '•■ ' -’"rV ' ='('4':'^^-' i . -• . _ - . N.V V *. ^ * rs^»30 r "• r • ^ '. J ? ^ •U’y< ; <• ri t; - --, V,- 7i5ro6'f •- |yOf — ' - a■TK ^ i/*jr^• fOl> •c _. -r -it* r -.^ ^4 t4 ■»*V^i >-j C . -V *v>5 1*^ 7-y C.- * :•» T;«r.'^ *v ^ ‘ '¥T^ ■ M«rrW'4» ■vSk ^ . 1. • •-T.- ac- ;^~T-:: >4 1 \/')^--^x:- " Jr'" ^ i: 2-i J\<^ imh 4r ^ »i«''' !>■W- ^1- pi t •j ‘V:' t..‘I ’:t INNOVATIVE \'^ MICROGRAPHICS DUE TO THE POOR CONDITION OF THE PRECEEDING DOCUMENT WE CANNOT PRODUCE AN ACCEPTABLE MICROFILM IMAGE. P- r>r • it VTl .... •• •* • i-*- •>•» • i./J !5? •■V5-:*m y*-*t »•t* *• < i '-f •*; .. i h , < -r.v :-l 53 » \‘! S-.’v^ • k . ^ I S2C. 10,02. DE7INI7ICNS. AS usee i following words and phrases shall sean: ’’Accessor*^ Use or Shr'JCture "• n -se subordinate to and servinc rhe principal ase cr str same lot and customarily incidental tnerero. «•-k^u.' J . J ^ ■—'^^anr3»*t r. 0 r structure cure on the 4.•Alley" - A public right-of-way which affords a secondary means of access to abutting property. Source: Municipal Code Effective Data: 9-14-67 35 "Lot, Corner" - A lot situated at the junction of, and abutting on two or more intersecting streets, or a Lot at the ooint of deflection in alignment or a continuous street, the interior angle of which does not exceed 135 degrees. 36."Lot Deoth" - The mean horizontal distance between the front lot line and the rear lot line of a lot. 37."Lot, Interior" - A lot other than a corner lot. 38 "Lot Line" - The orooerty line bounding a lot except that where ‘any portion of a lot e'xtends into the public right^f- way or a proposed public right-of-way, the line of such public right-of-way shall be the lot line. 39 "Lot Line-Front" - That boundary of a lot which abuts an existing*or dedicated public street, and in the case of a corner lot it shall be the shortest dimension on a public st.e--. dimensions of a corner lot are ecua*. the =-55^5 designated by the owner and filed :n the orrica or tne 3ui-d.nc Inspector. 40 "Lot Li-.“-3ear" - That boundary of a lot which is oooosite the front lot line. If the rear lot line is less t.han ten fe»t in length, or if the lot forms a point at t..e rear, whe ._ar lot line shall be a line ten faet in length parallel to, and at the maximum distance from the front lot line. 41."Lot Line-Side" - Any boundary of a lot which is not front lot line or a rear lot line. 42."Lot-Through" - A lot which has a pair of opposite lot lines abutting two substantially parallel streets, and which is not a corner lot! On a through lot, both street lines shall oe front lot lines for applying the Zoning Chapter. 43."Lot Width" - The maximum horizontal distance between the side lot line of a lot measured parallel to t.he front lot line and at the rear of the required front yard. 'n ■ r^.r-- -t‘n -t'- ■ •- ' .*v 'I;- ^-r - A dedicated public right-of-way not less .„v.. £iftriee/ln*:idt.» w.fc. affords a primary .aans or access to abutting ^rovertv T, « Anv rrivatie wav ser asideor* Road"*-^ ^ttot^68. =p'r r "e^'’'"'iar accsss rtrty teet o- ciOa.>as a permanent right-of-wav .v.r .e--------a. • - ^ ^ Jin width. V,e--c constructed or erected, the 69 :\elo« or above tbe ground, or use of Whrch req^if” Lv'ng'i location on the ground,attached to something ha/.ng a -oca Source: Municipal Code^ Effective Date: 9-1-i-oT unoccucied and unobSw-ic- _r,-<c-ass ly permitted in the a,on-. r.vel-to the ?^y /iJno a lot^i.ne and at right angUX.vel'to the fi'y,“ /ro'nVa'lit line''and at right angles Chapter. A yar- ' de^-" o- width sceciriec in -ne a-- to such lot line 3.^^:- lit is Iccatec. regulations for tne dist.^c------ Source; Municipa-. Code_^ Effective Date: 9-14-*3-- If-4*"s'^Vorv«d 'arfar^ne^lucrrlriaufreS relate exclusive xy ‘ within specific zoning dis^—c-s. Source: Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-66 77.-yard, front- - A yard th/7ron? a lot between the side front yard setback line, street line of yhe lot and ,treat frontages of which front rd shall be p*o -lakeshore lot shall not be comer lota and double d,but rat.her shall be considered considered as ha-'q //rTon^ one side of the building a.nd a rear “rS*Jn "’he o«5>« building. , __:t _ a V■ 'd Ivino benween tne natural78."Yard, Lakesnor-racuired lakesstors ordinary highwatar nar.t on i^t. satback line, for t.he fuxu wid-h or -a ic Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-34 an •v.e.H-<;tdd'’ - A yard extending along the80."Yard-Side a hav-ino a width as specified ii"'th^T«S ‘^“gu^a^'ronsSor^the di'strict in which such lot is located. street. 81.-Yard-Sida Street- - A side yard abutti.ng a side •L‘-‘ Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date; 1-1-75 . • ^‘1 r> 1 0^' •«rt •I I« •I 1 f» •%t ^ T •• « !*• i=1 I 3 ! Sabd 9.Accssscry Builii-?s. A. Tiine of CoTstiruc“ion. Nc accasscry buildir.c c structure shall be constructed on any lot prior to the tiae c construction of the principal buildinc to which it is accessory. D.Location.Mo detached garages or other accessory buildina shall be located nearer the front or street xct line than the pri.ncipal building on t.hat lot except on lots which have frontage on a lake and rear yard adjacent to a street, accessory buildings located within the street or rear yards of sucn lots are subject to the setback requirements of Section 10.2J, Subdivision 6 (B)^ Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (3) and Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) except that detached garages .tay ce located 10 feet from the street or rear lot line when doors ;^ace away from the street and a turn-around is provided on site. This section shall not apply to lakeshcre lots divided by roadways or corner lots. Source: Ordinance 25, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-36 1.Location of Principal Building to Lakeshore. No feet to the natu-------------------. . . , . crocerty. This lakeshore setback shall be determined as t.ne mean horizontal distance between t.he natural ordinary nigh water mark on the lakeshore and the allowable building line. 2.Variance From Lakeshore Setback. Any application for a variance from the requirements of Item 1 above shall be referred to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for its approval before final action by t.he Council. Source; Ordinance No. 155 Effective Date; 2-14-74 principal building shall be located closer than 75 ,'jral ordinary high water mark ct a lake abutting whe Setbacks. Accessory structures in e.xcess of 7 50 square feet footprint area but not exceeding -,000 square^fee- footprint area shall be located at least 15 feet from any lot xine. Source; Ordinance 72, 2nd Series Adopted: 8-14-39 Subd. 10. Conditional Ose Permit Required.acces sory buildings on through lots located in "R" Districts shall require a conditional use permit. •••• r' -r- ‘ - '^ ' • • • • -V V"*" * ^•* '' I—rMi-*~r j j'--—- 1 — %•* •j,'#^fc.^•• h» ^ .L --------------------------------A..- _ - ^m - A ••. . • -V *-* A * ^J • VX.- .Hr: - 7,^ - - y • . V -* . • * • * . *i,»^»”'*■ *5-** * .*»....... •— .-----••• •.X- ^. 7-. • v..** - - * *7-^ V* V*V"*^^* . - . -.-V .X ''M, ..•'i*.-. • r*Zm < ^ • .4r> * ’ l7^'* f -v r -' -r . ' . - • *->-- ' V .'r-^rfL* ^ -r.-r A .•••• r~-v V •-1 ' i ■■ CMV>r5 1^ Non-Sncrcacnnenrs. s..aSubd- 1:3. va-d rsquirements :considered to be encroac....e.*-s o . ^ - A.Chimneys,= - pilasters, ^■i“*®'-Vters^a”d*'t’-ie^li!«a' P-o-'i^e'S exts.-.dlornices eaves “f.rpai.dn, e:<=ept as hereinafter more than i-x/^ L^-'-r regulated.^7ards‘’’llr lights for i-l-'-““”“‘^"|_|“s*‘’’l.3vided the direct source of lightsafety and security rioht-of-wav or adjacent resicentiax -ay """ C.Fences f -io -t fences net over ? ceet in e.gn ^thoroughfare, requitev-, w**» --- e.--- height or tne crown ui. --- not exceed 6 feet stooos or similar structures, terraces, steps,of the ground floor level of which do to a disrance of not less than 2the principal buixding and ex.-na ro feet from any lot line. D.In side or rear than 20^square^feet, depth of 2 feet nor to 3° feet, fences and walls not file escapes not to origins 1 grade and open off- to exceed a of 6 feet a^o J or wall over 42 street parking except for in height above originalinches but not in excess inches^in^^_^^average grade may be locates .^“-xist’ng residence buildings on L\%: ^s^uy^f:Sc%^^"s1,afl^no\^Ve"?onstructed within 75 feet of the shoreline.Source: ordinance 9, 2nd Series Adopted: 1-28-85 - OOM- va"’ on’vr balconies, breeteways, . “• • anr^-c-eational equipment except as outdoor picnic snelta.s ‘ —.jc-u-e snail be closer t.nan regulated hereiAtafter ;or wa 11. constructed feet from a rsa.helchu of 0 faer above crigi.nau. ,-aue. within a rear yarn excee' F.Side yard, oniy: nc l^nce « Sa!rcone “u«ed*with"iTa siL'y'cd exceed a height of 6 feet above original grade. Source: Ordinance 9, 2nd Series Adopted: 1-28-85 subd. 16. Treffic planting more '=>'»" A*obstr«^ visibility within a lot. aha 11 be r^-A'Vf. Lllow” -Beginning at the intersection triangular area defined as intersecting streets, thence of the projected <=“f^"t|„°^t.,,ence diagonally to a point thirty SiffrlrU pXt of baginnin, on the other curb line, thence to the point of beginning. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 -'T - T1--V - t 51 ■I i i '1 *I ,1 i ‘i* I 1 2 I X m i- I .‘s Sued. 6.Ar»a, Heigl'.t, Loz Widzr. and Yard P.aquiregents . 5'T/\fjiiA^5 Heiaht, No srrucrure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty ieer in heighr except as provided in Section 10.75. 3.Lots. The following inininiu.T. requiretients shall be observed: Side Yard Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard 3 ide Yard Rear Yard Adjacent to Street 1/2 acre 100 feet 30 feet 10 feet 30 feet 15 feet "3 0 r J SBC. 10.75. HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES. Subd 1.Soecial Provisions.The height liniitations structures: A. B. C. D. Antenna or antenna structures. Church spires. Belfries. . viCupolas and domes which do not contain usable space c.. r G. H. I. J. K. L. above height of the building. .M. Cooling towers. N.Elevator penthouses Monuments. Water towers. Fire and hose towers. Observation towers. Flag poles. Chimneys, Smokestacks. Parapet walls extending not more than three feet Subd. 2.Conditional Use Permits. Heights in excess of those allowed under Subdivision 1 above for the uses enumerated Source: Ordinance No. 198 Effective Date:8-22-77 Subd 4.Yards: Additional Provisions.Required yards In the districts specified shall be subject to the following additional requirements: A.Through Lots. Through lots in any district shall have a required front yard on each street. B."B" and *1" Districts: Adjacent Lots. In the •B* and "I* Districts, where the average depth of at existing front yards for buildings within ISO feet of ^SUtloa Vr. less ot greater than the minimum front yard depth P ' ORONO CC 391 (4-1-84) •••••• «...• •-.r »^# Subd. 2. Definitions. As used in this Chapter: ►••4 .. 1."Alley" - A public or private right-of-way Ticimarily designed to serve as secondary access to the side or rear of those lots whose principal frontage is on some other street. •j-- } r/.- x r- f 5 "Building" - Any structure or any part thereof built for the support, shelter or enclosure of persons, animals, chattels or movable property of any kind. ? intersection IV two‘'°2)' st^ets*, the' interior angle of such Lot, Corner" - A lot situated at the •••.V -1 Intersection not exceeding 135 degrees e* ORONO CC 419 (4-1-84) :r-.---------------------- •-..X . •. ^..e, • - . • •S'*^m M . . . 4 e . •'*— •• ;— -V.-*.* . J• *• ’*'* ’ - .*.,.*1^.^* •- ’n '• ..•i --• r.*^ ,*•* -• ■. •. > V'- ;W •4 %»r -a • •^^..4 ...«-.». m ■ -1*••• •■*‘*.*,.*",-t.* •*•..'. *•,' •"-/• ••-----.v....... L', . -.. -**/_-** r_-/. .. . *' •-.*•• " •j', “I*aTr>» •'•.'.••-* ~ ; • <:v. <• -‘i« ■; »“i*ar >*>» • •.' i-- .•--------------- . . >v;r •* i»:..:».'.rv r- "I’^r ■ .■ ••-<• * .•.• -'.. .. , : ••.... >v.*:.-v. • •;.-,. ..... . •.•. -."i * -• - -,- ••-.•• ». .« -*1; .*.. fieaA.’«c- iT -,r': T .. *•- -. . «e. - • «-*“• ... . • • •: ^ . "7^ ** ■ S^' * '^. V -J"•-. ->V4*-->-r.• : •.- "V. ».-••• t* ■ 1. 4 .. ~r . 4 >— a: i^:: c*» ;♦*. -..epP-M •»•••... • - / -• • • •- ^.;.• •«1 • • • • • « •♦• ■ ♦ ^ •-- J *0 ^ 4«U*M « V* . >••. FLOWAGE AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND WAIVER OP DAMAGES «. h ■1^.r r THIS INDENTURE, made and entered into this 19_, by and between _ _ assigns, and successors day of _ _ and its heirs, (hereinafter collectively referred to as theassigns# ana i w-w-. - - - - - - - -^ Grantor(s)] and the City of Orono, its successors and assigns, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter referre to as the Grantee). WITNESSETH, Grantor(s), for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1,00) and other valuable consideration, hereby covenant, orant, gift, quit claim and convey to grantee the right to restrict and grantor(s) agree to limit and preclude the vse, development, un r the conditions and covenants herein ^.ontained, the following df scribed Land in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota; as follows: 1, Grantor(s) hereby covenant and agree(s): 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 from the Land except as authorized by written consent of 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 Grantee. D.No soil, sand, gravel 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. E.No use shall be made of the Land except uses, if any, which will not change or alter the natural condition ®^ no use which would tend to change the drainage, flood control, water conservation, erosion control, soil conservation, wildlife habitat characteristics shall be made of the Land or the water situated thereon. F.Grantee may enter upon the Land for the purposes o^ inspection and enforcement of the covenants contained herein ana to cause to be removed from the Land without any liability any structures, uses, materials, substances, or unnatural matter inconsistent with the covenants contained herein and the natural state of the Land. i 'X ^ . i t-.- L,-- ' •. *, o 4-«^re\ Y^e-ebv arant. ciift, quit claim and convey to Grantee, a K^“-r“ ......... ■» rr*nbor(s) herein do hereby remiss, release, acquit and forever 1:k VVA fVrevI^ the Grantee and any and all of its officers anddischarge, f®re e , claims, demands or causes of action employees of and f ^^^at^oever which may arise or accrue by virtue li fo“t»sp»r«%th wa.er wi?hin tar.s of these agree- ni^n^s •4. ▼AAi*^ir^r^ ft anv Other remedy the Grantee may have, the covenent.c^ta^^e^ he.ein Jay be enforced by injunction. ^ A.*?nt ‘pnd that the public should have any interest i„ the ebc«Tanl^f vTr\uTr/tfiV indenture or otherwise, except as hereinabove set forth. The Grantor(s) herein certify that the land herein described are free and clear of all encumbrances except: All provisions hereof shall run with the land and and bind the heirs, successors, representatives, grantees or respective parties hereto. fk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) 198_ before me a described in and wno execureo \ > fj-ee act and deed,that be (they) executed the same as his (their; tre notary public my commission expires This instrument was drafted by:__ POPHAM, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH, KAUFMAN 6 4344 IDS Center, Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612)335-9331 .V , f f:c.: m- Tos Fron: Date: Mayor Peterson and City Council City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administr^^^^^ July 1, 1991 JS Subjects #1645 A.J. Graf, 2001 Sugarwood Drive - Request for Second Curb Cut Mr. Graf has advised staff .-hat he wishe- *-o be scheduled before the Council at their July 8, 1991 mee As of this writing Mr. Graf has not submitted additions ;ormation and asks that the original request, Exhibit A, i,ubmitted for Council'B consideration. Staff's memo of May 16, 1991 with exhibits is submitted for Council's consideration. Tos Planning Commission Chairman Kalley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:May 16, 1991 Subject:#1645 Albert J. Graf, 2008 Sugarwood Drive - Request to Vary From Special Development Requirements of Sugar Woods Planned Residential Development - Second Curb Cut List of Bzhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit P - Exhibit G Exhibit B Exhibit I Applicant's Request Site Plan Applicant's Hardcover Fact Sheet Landscape Plan (Existing) Amended Hardcover Fact Sheet per Council Approval 11/26/90 Pages 3 and 4 of Staff Memo for Review of Lot 2, Block 2'8 Looped Drive Staff Memo and Exhibits 11/14/90 Sugar Woods Plat and Grading Plan Resolution #2917 Rofvlew of Af^llcatlon - ^l®®se review Exhibit A, the applicant reviews his reasons for seeking special consideration in requesting a second curb cut for a looped drive. He notes current curb cut is located just below a rise in the road creating a lighting problei for motorists driving west. The most pertinent finding is the fact that the placement of the Island in the one-way east/west lane adjacent to the property creates access problems to and from the Staff remembers little discussion concerning the islands this roftdwAy^ nor thu^ there would be one-way lanes within these Island areas. This traffic pattern or plan has obviously created problems fcr this resident. Motorists traveling eastward who wish to access the Graf site would have to turnaround in a westerly direction to use the existing access. This is a concern that will arise again for other persons limited to a one way approach lane. As I recall, one of the reasons for the creation of the islands was to allow the developer the chance to save several mature trees that would have been destroyed wlt*^ the road ®®*'®^^'*ction. It certainly is more aesthetically pleasing to see the island area filled with trees and plantings rather than black bituminous paving. The problem of this residence as with other lots that achieve access from the one-way lanes will be that Sugarwood Drive is not a one way road. Another alternative but less attractive would be the removal of these islands so that future requests for looped drives will be eliminated. te: 9 / r , staff has enclosed two pages from an original staff memo written for the review of Lot 2, Block 2's (Exhibit F) request for a looped drive.In these pages you will find quotes from the Public Works Director providing criteria/standards in the consideration of loop drives within the Sugar Woods PRD. They are noted as follows: 1.Hardcover must he maintained at or below 80%. 2.200* minimum frontage on Sugarwood Drive. The subject property has approximately 116’ to 117’. 3.Heavily treed or placement of unique trees within front yard protected area» loop drive used to minimize impact on existing vegetation. it is staff's understanding that a Linden tree of approximately 10" to 12" in diameter is the only tree that will be lost if roadway is installed. Gerhardson also noted that such looped roads will be limited to a 12* width and that no further encroachment for turnaround purposes would be allowed within the 5C setback area. The City has already approved a turnaround area encroachment within the 50* setback area in November of 1990. Per the previous hardcover facts and fact sheet submitted by applicant^ there clearly is no hardcover problem as hardcover is maintained at approximately 50%. The real issue for this review is the problem created for a lot located on a one-way lane within the subdivision. Unfortunately, if the grading plan layout is correct, this lot Bsy not abutt a portion of the road that is under a two-way traffic control. The difficulty w th this review is that all Improvements are in. In the early scages of the development of this lot. It may have been possible to look at a shared access with the lot to the immediate east.If t’.v lot has access to the two—lane road section, staff would ask t ... r canning Commission to consider a second curb cut. I will consult Glenn Cook and provide clarification on this matter. This application has raised more comprehensive transportation planning issues for the Sugarwood PRD that need to be addressed before more intense development. Should the islands be removed? Should Sugarwood Drive be reclassified as a one-way road? If changes are not proposed from the existing traffic pattern, the City will be dealing with m^re requests for loop roads for at least three other properties. Please note per the directives of Resolution #2917, if applicant chooses not to appeal the Planning Commission decision, your action will be the final action for this request. i.. Ilfiiiiiintrti s I- i- b Zoning File »1645 June 5r 1991 Page 3 Additional Coaments and Planning ConoBission Reconmendation - Upon inspection of the site, staff confirmed that the location of the west euro cut was located within the two-way portion of Sugarwood Dri^; 9. The Planning Commission discussed the original design of tie island areas and the fact that the subject island was not installed per the approved plan. The Planning Commission noted there was no discussion of a one-way lane during the review of the PRD and this condition was not noted during a recent review for Rebers Construction when the contractor sought turn-around encroachment of the 50' street setback yard. The majority of the Planning Commission felt that a single curb cut would be adequate for the property and advised applicant to install a new curb cut to the west side of the property and cease all use of the eastern access that has the sighting problem. The majority voted against two curb cuts for the property. The minority opinion felt that the design of the road created the problems for the site and that now that the property is fully developed and an existing turn-around and drive installed that a second curb cut and drive should be allowed at limited widths. One Member of the minority opinion felt the islands should be either removed or altered. The application is presented as an appeal of a Planning Commission action. Mr. Graf asks for special consideration of the Council. Options of Action Available to Council - 1.Approve a second curb cut as requested by the applicant. 2.Approve a single curb cut to property. If a curb cut is to be relocated, the Planning Commission has asked to review an amended plan. 3.Table all action on tne special request of applicant pendltig a more comprehensive review of the road design as it impacts adjacent lots within the island areas of Sugarwood Drive and to consider either removal or alteration of island areas, redesignation of Sugarwood Drive as a one-way road or other alternatives for properties adjacent to island areas. / April 30, 1991 Jeanne Mabusth Building and Zone Administration P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Ms Mabusth: I am a new resident of Orono and have been a taxpayer since December 21, 1990 when we took possession of a new home we had built in Sugar Woods. I am writing to you to request what 1 understand to be a variance that would permit me to create a circular driveway on my property. I am requesting the variance for the following reasons. 1.I have 2 young children under the age of 7 years. They both ride tricycles and two-wheelers with training wheels. The ciurcnt access to my home is just below a rise that inhibits the vision of motorists who are proceeding west until they clear the crest of the rise just before the current access to my property. A circular drive would provide my children access to Sugar Woods Drive well beyond the hill crest providing motorists traveling westbound adequate time to slow down and/or stop. Further, a circular drive would provide my children more surface area on which to ride their bikes without having to enter Sugar Woods Drive. 2.The current entrance to my home is directly behind an island on Sugar Woods Drive. The island divides traffic on Sugar Woods Drive and substantially narrows the road that provides access to my driveway. Further, a recently placed municipal sign directs all northwest traffic through this narrow lane. The island prevents access to my home for cars that are approaching from the west. They must turn around in a driveway or make a U-tum. A circular drive would permit access to ray home from both directions. 3.In my business I frequently entertain at my home. Because I may have froni 40 to 60 people for dinner and half as many cars parked in front of my home, a circular driveway would be very useful in keeping at least half of those cars off the street and out of the narrow section of the street that serves the entrance to my home. Parking in that section of the street I believe will effectively block it. i ^..1 . <'■ sI. It:-" tt k-VI I- i Page #2 It is for the aforementioned reasons that 1 would like the opportunity to present mv case for a circular drive. Adding the drcular drive would sacrifice four maple saplings, none more than one inch in diameter. It is my plan to replace these trees with at least 7 conifers (at the cost of $2,000.00) that would average fifteen feet in height. Further, I would be happy to review my landscape plan with you which when implemented will add hundreds of trees and plants to my homesite. Sincerely, A.^y Graf ' 2008 Sugar Woods Drive Lx)ng Lake, MN 55356 ‘Alt I, '•f 'i' V..* '! Ir- k e:- m 'tf.,.-- ■ V'"- t*, , I-h' rv : .i-:'-r' I}"-' ^ &•[■■■■ s r. ■ • ‘ >ff'' m.- i- fi.S' W’ il: U)<00l^ ^ /}. J?4y 4a^># La K k I •l-\i>Mjf \ ^-j'- r k * I- ¥* IfT' K * j i:v ■P:: f ■iri&- iv- :kf'- I: &: H. •*> Ip iv Kf;- s i- >■i; Ir i. 1^ r k'' HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHET’ SETBACK ZONE: (CISCLE cne ) 0-75' 75-250 E xisting Hardcover in Zone 250-5CG' 5CC-1CGQ' House B.Garage c.Driveway 0.Sidewalk E.Patio /D eck p.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN BY PLASTIC SHEETING LENGTH G.O ther X X — X -7 / f. r . ^L / <■S.F. WIDTH S.• S ■ r* f S.F. S.F. S.F. < // !^ _ S.F. __ S.F.'Pus d S.F. _ S.F. a y ^ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F, S.F. S.F S.F. Total 'Hardcover in Zone 9y'c Total Propctty Area in Zone _ S.F. •7<? 94^o S.F.E -|Y| 1^-’^'^ -f in nou •I y y'^ O ^ / .'i' ^WiU iL^Xc^aufyy^ /{-^(p -9C HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Hardcover - a.House X «a . 3 96 S.f. length width / X s S.f. X S s.f. X a s.f. X s:s.f. b.Garace X a r -/. f . c.Drlvewav X s axiSL_s.f. (include area within front setback; area) X -s.f. d.Sidewalk -3*X ^*3-a nt s.f. X s 4-<f s.f. X 3 s.f. e.Petit//i?X /^/a s.f. Deck/Pool/ Pond X a //<?s • ^ • f.Landscape X a s.f. areas underlain X a s.f. with pervious or sheetinq/ impervious X a s.f. fabric X a s.f. o.other X a s.f. X a s.f. X «s.f. TOTAL HARDCOVER .s.f.(T^ (A)Building Setback Area (B) Total Lot Area ■ (C) Building Pad 'a.f.-3 . :>-oo ------- 8-^* *1‘ Area 7 ^/3 Vfcd (C)Building Pad Area ^3 . *7 ^0 a.f. Allowed Hardcover s.f. X 80% V-?] •*. *.• f4 .:; >1‘ Lot 2, Block 2, Sugar Woods April 19, 1990 Page 3 of 5 F. It should also be noted that there is no hardcover problem (review Exhibit G). This is the smallest of the building pads and it would appear that we have 3,400 square feet of additional hardcover available for the improvement of this specific lot. In consideration of the PUD as a whole, hardcover will not place any restrictions on additional turnarounds or looped driveways on a given lot. In reviewing this issue with the Public Works Director, he once again advised that in the recent amendment to Chapter 6 that discussed driveway approaches to both private and public joads, that properties were limited to one driveway approach and that loop roads were to be di.«;couraged. This ordinance was approved in 1988. Gerhardson appreciates the concerns expressed in Pflauin's letter and made the following suggestions for criteria that could be used in determining whether a lot would qualify for a loop road: 1.200* minimum frontage on Sugarwoods Drive 2.Heavily treed or unique trees located within front street setback area. As there is no doubt that a loop drive limited to a minimvm width of 12* and strategically placed would reduce impact on protected area. It is staff's recommendation that where safety concerns are the real consideration because of placement of lots on curves, that turnarounds on site always be preferred over loop road configuration . Chief Kilbo has advised the City against allowing the site to be developed where only a backing out onto a roadway is permitted. He warns that you are in violation of State law if you don't back out into the direction of the flow of traffic. In the site plan approved by staff, the user of the property would have to back out onto Sugarwoods Drive as no turnaround is provided on the site. General Staff dation - A, Criteria for Loop Road. The loop road configuration shall be allowed within the Sugar Woods subdivision as long as tne following site conditions exits: 1.Hardcover must be uiaintained at 80%. 2.200* minimum fronta /e on Sugarwoods Drive. 3.Heavily treed or placement of unique trees within front protected area in order to reduce impact on front street setback area. / r>mt ■ f'?' Lot 2, Block 2, Sugar Woods April 19» 1990 Page 4 of 5 Mrtlonrof the front street setback area. Driveway aproaohes Bust be 10' from side lot lines at intersection of private road. Criteria ►rovements for the encroachment of other ___non-structure 4niBrov«menta within front street setback area.. Regarding turnaround/interior"cul-de-sac/backout aprons front street setback area. Encroachment allowed under the following site conditions: 1.House placed at the 50' setback line because of unique site conditions (trees - elevations). a)backout aprons from garage areas shall be limited to a depth of 20’; trees)/ staff to make final determination. Please review staff sketches, Exhibit I, that graphically depict staff's discussion. in conclusion and in consideration of the „fuld conditions that may exist in the Sugar woods plat, encourage the developer and contractors tfiisfi shAJTsd diirivos whsirs possiblsr cinpXoy tumarounds/interior cul-de-sacs within building pad where there is^nisial impact on trees within front street setback area, and at last resort/ seek the use of loop encourage the developers and contractors to contact the Public Works Director in the early stages of application for a building permit. CooBcil Acticu - Direct staff to draft a resolution amending resolution #2652 that granted conditional use permit approval criteria for permitted improvements encroaching front street setback area. N‘i' ^ *‘i‘ * ^ 'i :p^ /O TO:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date November 14, 1990 Subject: Rebers Construction - 2003 Sugarwood Drive - Request to Encroach Front/Street Setback Area List of Bzhiblts Exhibit A - Applicant's Transmittal Letter Exhibit B - Site Plan Approved with Building Permit Exhibit C ~ Topographic Map Exhibit D - Sugarwoods Plat Exhibit E - Amended Site Plan Exhibit F Revised Fax per Applicant's Amended Proposal Determination of Building Pad Area - Total Lot Area » Building Setback Area 52,200 s.f. 35,000 s.f. Building Pad Area 17,200 s.f. Allowed Coverage/Hardcover * 13,760 s.f. or 80% IkeTlew of Bardcover Approved with Building Permit - House ■ Garage • Driveway == Sidewalk ■ Porch/deck 2,090 s.f. 884 s.f. 2,400 s.f. 154 s.f. 373 s.f. 6,201 s.f. or 45% The applicant has filed a request to encroach the 50' front street setback area to allow a turnaround rather than having the turnaround within the front yard adjacent to the house as approved with the building permit (refer to Exhibit B and applicant's Exhibit E). The applicant notes with the amended proposal there would be a reduction of 1% of hardcover, as turnaround area has been reduced from 505 to 383 s.f. (refer to Exhibit F). Staff has asked applicant's representative to stake the proposed turnaround area within the front street setback yard in order to determine the impact on existing vegetation. Staff has made a site inspection and based on the proposed location, the revised turnaround may result in the loss of 1 or 2 young to mature trees at 10-‘12" "ameters. Upon the staking of the area, Members will be able confirm the type and numbers of trees required to be removed. '.7 *.> F’. ■ i:" iV V iK ts ;:‘ Eft' 2008 Sugarwood Drive November 14, 1990 Page 2 of 2 Options of Action - Denial, finding the hardships unacceptable; or Approval, based or the findings set forth by the applicant (i.e. hardcover reduction and impact of turnaround on front of house as approved with the building permit). Additional Conaents and Planning Commission Recommendation - November 21, 1990 Additional Exhibits - Exhibit G - Staff's S)cetch of Method of Determining Driveway Width at Time of Issuance of Building Permit Exhibit H - Staff's Sketch of Method Set Forth by Planning Commission for Determination of Width of Driveways within Front Setoack Area The Planning Commission approved applicant's request to encroach the front street setback area based on the findings and hardships set forth by the applicant's representative. It should also be noted that upon site inspection of the turnaround area, no trees will be required to be removed. The Planning Commission did condition approval on applicant providing plantings adjacent to the turnaround area to minimize visual impact from road* The area is located within a heavily treed area, it shall be up to the applicant to determine the type of plantings that would be able to survive within a shaded environment. In other discussion, the Planning Commission advised staff that they had not met the full intent of the directives of the original PRD in their meth of measuring the width of the driveway, review Exhibit G. The Planning Commission advised 6!:aff that all future driveways shall be measured parallel to the 8t*^et wnd any driveway that angles as the subject driveway does would be subject to the approval of the City. In the future, all driveways must be aligned in a straight line from the road and any variation would require City approval. If Council concurs, the City staff will adopt the method set forth by the Planning Commission in Exhibit H. Staff will make the necessary improvements to the hardcover inventory for Lot 4, Block 1, located at 2008 Sugarwood Drive. r:.v t- 2Cf08 Sugarwood Drive November 21r 1990 Page 3 Proposed Motion: Moved by seconded by_ _, to approve the encroachment of a turnaround resulting in 383 s.f. • f hardcover within the front street setoack area where no encro.-chment except for a 20' w'de driveway is allowed. This appr'^' a] is based on the following hardships and findings: Ayes 1,''here will be no loss of trees as impr .vement. result of this 2.There will be a 1% overall reduction of nardcover within the property. 3.The turnaround as originally proposed, was ul *;ed within the frr yard and has proven to be a'-.r*hc*- i 1 y unacceptable and poor site planning. 4.Although the property is one of the larger I >^s within the subdivision in excess of 1 acre in area# th« building pad area has been limitel to 13,760 s.f. 5, The unusual shape of the buiiding pad defined by the required setbacks and the sloping topography has required that the house be placed at its present location. nays pf i 1 «KW fir BRWiNC PLANNING tpansportation ENGiNEERtNG urban DESIGN 7HPE5KR :CUAR{ViN‘,i* ^ M NSf*:, ‘A-M ^ 6*j’ rc v^<' fA* 6V J ’O ’J^S *• l.»'\C weapon DATE: November 9, 1990 iTEMtS TO:Jeane Mabusth Orono City Hall n35 South Brown Road Orono. MN 55323 FROM:Bob Kost RE:Rebers - Sugar Woods VIA DELIVERY SCRimON Site Plan for Graf Residence with Proposed Driveway Revisions as you requested for your information for your approval review and return reply to sender other (see remarks) Jeane, Our rationale for this request is two-fold: to reduce hardcover, and to get the turn-around away from the house. QK/am c**: 60-8912 DENVER PHOENIX TUCSON ST PETERSBURG SAK DIEGO I / / ' M^S. T/1 , p' >«••”■, - ✓/ ' 1 / •//----------..1 ' ^ t \ <««*/■!*'> / / An* / / / KWVAIE rti^ // P1.000.8.F' :-c A'// ' 40*/Bo/ / '> V 54.?O0iS-f ^ V / / j //.. T 'r^—----1\- Kl, ■'-' I'' ' i4d / \ \ V- ( ^ >4\ \ / * I ( 1 ^ i ^ ){ mj^qaT^T; _i 1 ■ % 1A.I00. \ \ ^ . V».>. \ s ff I \t \\ pWVAtt Oi^ iMtnMaun CM \ 5/ /< A n-! i\ Li;- < \ / I < •/ f \ \ \ \ -W1 MOO.S.P,\ \ ' 32400.S^. ^0 ♦ * 1 V 1 1 c-.r'^ mr^ y' W'vmVi- j4ht;& rV.: ' \ —'ST'Z— r auA*^‘ -c V. I'WiK] UM. i.-f.'. 0 ’/ / :-^^- \'- 1!. !' f 1 . VV ;n,\ */ ^f \/- / |Nir.r / '/'4oou>m^ \ *■*’f ce I0&6S RES V,.-* .,o:.---- � / / / / / I I,, , I I / II , I I / I I I I I I . ,,�./ .. / / I I / I ,I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I / I / I I / / / / / / II I � IE I I I I I / / / ( ; I I I •)I • ti I ,, I I / ...... ; I I I I I I / / I / I I I / /I I / I -'V\ I 4t-I ' r-I -I I I \ • fl !,, \ I -x: is,9oO.S-^- ^ t>nESERVE HWVAtE n^' " ■Ni -V n\:? ^zr *• 'V ^M.OOO.SJ^- “^eso-sJ^j .--------.1 I \ » ‘ -: 55^003J. / 1^' io,a»o*.s.f. 52,4001 s^ ( 1B.0OO. 9^\ _J \ '“"a K N \ 21,400.8J^ b 54^00j/^ -1 5/ \ /V -\ Z:/ e;-'} ' ii t ""K --------— / 1 rfVMlt HMVAtl 0^ AVCIUUM liW ^HHVATm *0*0 oinujr \ \ y' 32,200.Si^- / N \ V , \ \ •\ •* ^ J y ^ *•'\ (i ^ r- 4 O V V r' r^-. ( WOCOLAH MNATl r X •\ -to G rATl HOM \ \ / :l -V ^ T ■X? - >' X 4 . ^ ■ir-\32400JS^. / I . < / / M0S.6S Kl J4-iiS-e3(^2^ « f • • >■? V..- , ■i? ^....iv ftiAf # —n TJ \ • '\C V (6J \> fc (28)Mw.ar 29 •ILn & c m (») ,'--v\ nr n CIO lOl.SL 2<^« \.\>- rso) (!2) IJT.’i W (19) A \ »•375:13L.9 (18)^ (ID ?9 0» <?. IJ. (29 'STS? (17) •(32)Sf 5 ^ 1 ----- 1?0 « y 1 y -iC A ^ •.(24)t « a ,8(25) 1 -«26) ?(27)E / --------W.2« 4»- tao »«l.45 •10 24 ^ CD ft «f ^ .?# ••06.1 ____________>y« ^ I ^1 T k' '^y.,~ watzat A' 'BLv6' City of OROIVO S CITY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ 2917 ORONO A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION #2652, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPROVING A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS SUGARWOODS WHEREAS* Resolution #2652 dated July 10* 1989 and approved by the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter "Council") granted to Rebers Construction Company a conditional use permit pursuant to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20* Subdivision 3 (H) for a Planned Residential Development known as "Sugarwoods"; and WHEREAS* Condition #1(F) on page 5 of resolution 2652 reads as follows: "F, The applicant has created a "no grading" zone/woodlands protection area within the private open space outlets (namely Outlets A and B) and the setback areas defined within each building lot. Within those areas no future owner ^-^ill be allowed to remo'"' trees in excess of 2" in c. r>eter at 4' above grade. No grading is allowed within the protected areas. However* each residential lot may include one driveway HE ^2. ^0 * wide * leading to the loop road. This driveway may be graded and trees ol any"sTze may Be removed to bufTd xt. The subdivider's agreement should also define the protected areas such as the setback area of each lot and the private open space outlets" (hereinafter "condition")? and WHEREAS* the Council has found that the strict enforcement of this condition may have a nega\.ive impact on the future residential development of a builling lot or to be in conflict with the original goals and intent for the Sugar Woods* Planned Residential Development. Page 1 of 2 .1 ii.J tl City of ORONO Cl rv OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2917 MONr THBRBPORB BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of ^rono shall consider requests of a property owner or owner's agent to waive or vary condition of approval as set forth above for the Sugar Woods PRD and directs the Orono staff to present srch written request before the Planning Commission at their earliest upcoming meeting (third Monday of the month), and further approves an abbreviated review process whereby the Planning Commission shall assume the sole responsibility of the review and final recommendation regarding these requests with the owner or owner's agent having the right of appeal before the Council of all decisions of the Planning Commission. All appeals to the Council shall be placed on the Council agendas for the following Monday meeting (fourth Monday of the month). Such %#rit*en requests must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator 7 days before the official Planning Commission meeting and shall Include facts and information to support this request. Adopted by the Cj ty Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, this 14th day of January, 1991. /? j^- ATT! T: Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ;s=l,'y}n llin. City Cl?r)c STATE OF MTONESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acJcnowledged before me on this 14th day of January, 1991, by Barbara A. Peterson 6 Dorothy M.Hallin, Mayor & City Cler)c of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. ^|yBHNeS»TA CPUNJIY m A I ¥ t % </o, ^r To:Mayor Peterson t Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson % Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Data: July 1, 1991 Subject: #1648 Ronald and Julie Prineas, 1920 Shoreline Drive ~ Renewal Variance - Resolution Application - Request for renewal of lot width variance granted in 1989 and previously renewed in 1990, Liat o£ Exhibits • A - Resolution B - Planning 'Commission Action Notic C - Memo & Exhibits of 6/7/91 6/18/91 Discussion ** Applicants are requesting renewal of a lot width variance granted for this long^ narrow lakeshore lot. Planning Commission at their June 17th meet’ i, recommended on a vote of 6-0 to approve the renewal as sub; tec iron the previous resolutions '"inding no change in conditions oval. Staff Re ndatlon - Staff recootmends approval for Council review. A renewal resolution is attached 4C A RBSOLOTION GRANTINGA renewal variance to MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23» SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #1648 iraSRE;^ applicants") art. Shoreline Drive w: legally described as lid and Julie Prineas (hereinafter "the «#ners of the property located at 1:^20 the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and 1 lows: Per Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property")? and WHEREAS# the applicants have applied to the City for a renewal of a variance granted in 1989 per Resolution 52650 and previously renewed in 1990 per Resolution #2829 to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23# Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a single family residence on a lot of defined width 30* where a defined lot width of 200' is normally required. HOW# THEREFORE# BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono# Minnesota: FINDINGS 1.This application w?& reviewed Zoning File #1648. 2.The property is I'^cated in the LR-IA Single Family LaJeeshore Resident!. \ Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission originally reviewed this application #1410 on May 15, 1989, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: A)The lot area exceeds the minimuir 2.0 dry buildable acre require.^'erkt. B)A feasible building envelope exists in audition to primary and alternate drainfield sites which havf been tested and approved for use. C)The hardship to the property lies in its extreme narro%mess at the point where th-' defined lot w.^dth is measured. Furthermore, there .is no adjace.land available for purchase that would increase th.ined lot width to the 200' minimum standard. Page 1 of 5 4.The Hennepin County Department of Public Works has verified that the County will approve a private driveway access onto County Road 15. 5, Although the property contains a feasible building site^ that site is limited by narrowness of the lot and by the designated drainfield sites, hence careful site planning will be required in developing the property. Therefore, it is appropriate that a diagreum of the building envelope and drainfield sites be filed with this resolution to make future potential buyers of the property aware of the site limitations. 6.The City Council originally granted this variance in 1989 per Resolution #2650 and finds no changes from the original findings and conditions of that resolution. A request for renewal was granted per Resolution #2829 in 1990. 7.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 8.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 distr^ ct; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the appllcunts; And would be in keeping with the spirit end intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIOIIS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above,^ the Orono City Council hereby grants a renewal variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a single family residence on this lot of defined width 30’ where a 200 ’ defined lot width is normally required for construction of a single family residence, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 5 1.Any proposed residence must meet the required minimum setbacks established for the LR-IA zoning district, and must further meet the required setbacks from drain^ield lines. 2.A diagram cf the building envelope and approved drainfield sites shall be attached to this resolution as Exhibit ’•B", to advise future potential buyers of the property of the building site limitations. 3,Any proposed residence or development of the property shall meet the hardcover requirements of the LR-IA zoning district. 4, No Other zoning va''iances for development of this property will be granted. 5.The approved access for the property is a single drive way at County Road 15. 6.The standard park fee shall be collected by the City at the time a building permit is issued. 7.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 8, 1992). 8.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. 9.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 3 of 5 t 1-^.1 5' k' tv'-' 5f^ %>■ t k h > 1^.; !''• [il' t' '.f; <"i-r'i '■iV [; r. fe. r-v>?f- Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of July» 1991. ATTEST: Dorotfty M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OP MINNESOTA ) )as. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of July, 1991, by Barbara A. Peterson 6 Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City o, Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 ■h-i-: 7--.-•r BXIIIBIT A RB80LU T10N HO. t%7, l?BPcrlptiont Tracfcfl A and B, Ho^istared Land Survey No, 96, FI lea of Aeolatrar nf tii-i... r>. :s2 so^^—tn-ny un^ar^:,: ^*^'**" Soutliwooterly lino of aold lot. Auditor*a Subdlvl«lnn ^ Humber 356» Hennepin County, MlnneBota, nccordlng to the map or plot thernnf «« f 11 « .1 c r.cora in the o«lo. of the RogUtror of ritl.s of ■J^Sh Sor SJ.H 20 feet of Lot 5, Auditor', sibdlvl.lon Hui^« 35 §>. M-i . V, ' b' • i.- f-‘ rv m- ■ 4*- I I’ i K. I' >r I--?.^.4 ' : •■ » 1..'•| J pe»*0M4.rloA) A^o ._______ Slustw OF BuiLbAAig- ^AJI/rioPr Sires / •I V'• • i‘i I I t*. I •! CITT OP ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 473-7357 ZONING PILE #164855323NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Cate of Notice; 6/18/91 TO:Ronald 6 Julie Prineas 4665 North Bay Road Miami Beach, PL 33140 COPIES TO: TYPE OP APPLICATIOM: Variance (renewal) I- •V t b' 'fc k I 0' k kW-I r f i r-: r I s; DATE OF NESnilG: 6/17/91 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning CobbIssIoh raccsMonds the following: Approval cs submitted (no change from previous approval) BOOS AMD SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, July 8, 1991; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. Xf you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission Bdnutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the Planning Commission. ; . To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Conunission Members City Administrator Bernhardson L From:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:June 7, 1991 Subject: #1648 Ronald and Julie Prineas, 1920 Shoreline Drive - Renewal Variance ~ Public Hearing Xoning District - LR-IA, single family lakeshore residential, 2 acre, unsewered. Application - Request for renewal of lot width variance granted in 1989 and previously renewed in 1990. List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Survey E - Resolution #2650 F - Resolution #2829 lartinant Facts - 1.This is merely a renewal of the variance granted by the City in 1989 for this long and narrow lakeshore lot. 2.Conditions of City Council approval included no variance to required LR-IA setbacks, specifications of the building envelope, and no variance to hardcover requirements. The lot was approved for access via a separate driveway to County Road 15. Discussion - Please review t.Jie findings and conditions of the previous jfusolutions which are attached. The applicants propose no changes from the original application. Staff Recosnendation - Staff recoemtends approval of the renewal lot width variance i^u<juest for Ronald and Julie Prineas per the findings and conditions outlined within Resolution #2829. C2> i- y ■ r- Of OltOHO - VAAXAMCa AffLZCAltlOH' ZnitiAl Application ftt f175.00 (ItO.OO per each additional.variencal acBCwal Variance foe $100.00 (no chanpe freir. original application) After-thffaet fiai {Double application fee) m 1 ■-.y > :■ PBOmTY LOCATION iite Addreaa f^20 .r Property identification Kunbtr (P.Z.D.) 10 - Hi- 23U2 QQOf Attach legal deecription to application If not included on required eurvey. V'• • _••*I «% m . I I ^ • AfPLZCANT Phone (home) SOS' b 3"2. ._^PL 2. Pane PRlNgflS^ g/OK/BLO^ ruu'g'NMt^phone (wor)c) XdAremet LLL^ f^orikScuj l^d-._ CitviA/ianvi Zi9^iLJJlk IT on Of nomTT freceat toning Diatrict f^leSl C>ir>J nA L - (^L freaent Oae of Property usir - (-4N)pgvi2LQfirP Besidential Other (specify) rmcRzmoM or siQimT Eetiaated Conotruotion Cost t Oeeeribe request in details u/iDTn irn t</rvfvyctr fisufiv^eu TAMZAICU HQOZ1ID _ _ Lot Area \y^ Lot Width fetback Varianoes (_ _ _front Eardeover Side _ _ _ Rear) Other Oro\/\jQ Ciii^ Co\^ia(^wlufieK No.2it''0,IkiO , a.Uopi^ ^ ^C(4U!/“T ^S-3‘f /)ty ^-4' «♦nforctmonr of zonini regulotionsICJtlVTXOII OF UNOStlAL PROPERTY CONDITIONSunoiuAl proptrty conditicr.B pravdf.ting con*ipliinc6 with Zoning Codt g^quiramoftta i N:[ ------------------------■■ •VaQOZUD SQBMZmiS Complatod Application Tonn , . , ' . j Ctrtifiad Property Ownart Lisn of owners, within 150' (you^ust obtain this list from Hennepin county Departnient of Flnahce A-603 Qcvt Canter 341-3271)* Pitt Ntp (obtained with property owners list). Certifioate of survey (signed by a lloanted surveyor) to Include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8H'’xii" for reproduction )* Topographic survey (axistlng and proposed elevations) if any ohinges in existing grade are proposed (provide one oopy aH"xll"). dhatohaa or plans of floor 4 elevation views (provide 1 copy 8ij''xll''). At an addandua to this application, pleast attach a separata list of any other persona you wish notified of this application. Additional itans as may be requested by City staff.I* •Applicant and Proparty owner must sign this application. Please er that voor variance arollcation is not coaolate if tha above .TrT»«33tr-r5: ___:CA3R*S aiOATOlUl llie applicant hereby agrees to provide all Information raquired or ^•quested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff lima net covered by original fea payment) and/or conaultant expenses irred in raviaw of this application, and certifies that the information lied is true and corraot to the beat of his/her knowledge. Ippiieant's Signature Date mBoam newmsiM owner hereby aekowledgea and agrees to this application and further Mtboritoa reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, oonsultants, iftntir CenniMioa metBbors» and council members for purposes of invedtiga- lioa and verification of this requaat Amor's Signaturo Afipliotat muit bk^o all aubmlttala into the City offices 2S days before the pidhaiaf Ceoaiitien Mooting. Flanning commission Meetings art held on the Uird Monday of oaoh month. Applicaata mnat be presant at all eobedulod nwlov mootimgo of the Planning Coanisslon and Connoil. Zf an applicant is im^lo to attend a aohadulad meeting, please make arrangements to have an Mthorilfd agent attend in your place and to advise the Building s Zoning iMfioo of this change prior to the meeting. s'* cco IDo: < *' *1 A- U: {10'/' * !:jr V-AVt ; •r« ^ * ‘ ' T L Ivc L' ••'I 'i th < -/'■rv^., <4’-« J / /^ . r»- »/' ivSSSL^ t.' K.,-fi.'. .. t.s»\ .• «: . Property Owenrs List for Application S1648 10-117-23 42 0006 James Wright 1980 Heritage Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 10-117-23 42 0019 W.Gregory Coward 1950 Heritage Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 ‘ .i 9 V5- k k ;v ;•' Viy-i, r" i A r r-. . ,. I cirv I I OF I ■ORONO ■ uv City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ___26 50______ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6(B) FILE #1410 WHEREAS, Ronald and Julie Prineas (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the prooert ' located at Heritage Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows; Per Exhibit "A" attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision to permit the construction of a single family residence on a lot of defined width 30' where a defined lot width of 200 is normally required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1, This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1410. 2.The property is located in the LR-IA Single Family La)ceshore Residential Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May IS, 1989, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings; a)The lot area ei'ceeds the minimum 2.0 dry buildable acre requirement. b)A feasible building envelope exists in addition to primary and alternate drainfield sites which have been tbsted and approved for use. Page 1 of 5 Cl T Y OF ORONa City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.26 50 F-. c)The hardship to the property lies its extreme narrowness at the point where the defined lot width is ™«stred Furthermore, there is no adjacent land available for purchase that would increase the de me lot width to the 200’ minimum standard. 4.The Hennepin County Department cf Pub 1ic Works ha s verified that the County will approve a private dr.ve--y 3^cess onto County Road 15. 5. Although the property contains a that Bite is limited by narrowness of the lot and oy tne designated drainfield sites, hence careful will be required in developing the property.e j- is appropriat! that a diagram of the envelope and Sites be filed with this resolution to make po\enVial b*yers%f the property aware of the srte limitations . g The City Council has considered this Includinq the findinas and recommendations of the Planning cSSi?s.rin, reports b'y City staff, constents by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the hea , safety and welfare of the community. 7 The City Council finds that the conditions existing on tiis property are peculiar to it and do not apply 9«"e”lly together proMrty in this soring district: that granting the vtri.nce'^oLld not adversely affect liaht air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve convenience to the applicant, but is necessary tc alleviate rae^onstrable hardship or bi%"bUcVnV-’'ani ©reserve a substantial property right of the ^PP^ff_„ Sou Id be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. COMCLOSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning ‘^5"*® fimilvSubdiviaion 6(B) to pers.it J^e construction of^ajingle^fa nfinJd'lorwidtV* i8°no?Llly required for ^ single family residence, subject to the following co Page 2 of 5 fe-; /■ City of OROINO Cl rv RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL QRONO3 NO. l'. Any proposed dittUict, and must i:^S;:^%ert*tir«'quired%etbacks from drainfield sites. «i ______AM «^ , 4ii^inri env0lop0 3nG approv0d 2.A diagram of the to this resolution as wj------ j or development of the property ^n.lT»e^^ThVh,?d«ve^^^^^ district.m variances for development of this4No other zoning variances property will be granted.camwj-------------- - 5.The approved property driveway at County Road 15. -cKail be -'•ollected by the City at 6.The standard park ^ the time a building permit is issued.'cne - -- - - -♦ u 4-k 7.Authorities granted by this “isgive^on^y and property not with J**® ®Pf^^?*"Vtion for a building permit Sust be exercised approval, or this vai. ---------- ‘ j 8.Violation of or conlVitl^t ^violati^^^ conditions automatically terminate any authority g$;n?eS"S2rrin!'and ihall be punishable as a misdemeanor. ^a.as.^aj W»A ^^ gran^ou r ----- 9. The ®/P“o?"th\r\eso'*u\^ion"^^^^ behalf hereby egre. to heirs, successors and assigns, and S«J£rSg«r4o ^St recording of this resolution in chain of title of the property. Page 3 of ‘■C.- T ■1.. t- I i- t: § [f \i h kii 8* 'r City of OROIN O ;i' V RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.2650_ _ _ _ _ QRONQ Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 26th day of June* "198 9. Hallin, City Clerk Jamenei R. GrabeKT^ayor 'perty Owner (s) ATE OP MINNESOTA) )ss. COONTY OP HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on thie 26th day of June, 1989, by James R. Graoek ^ * Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Bwmicipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Qi tX lX LAURIE W. HJJUC - HtNNtFIN COUNH My Commi'SSTCir a'Wpires Page 4 of 5 I*' ------------------- s t r I rf k l City of OROIN O (;i I Y ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2650 ________ STATE" OF COONTY OF Mmm bR 0^) ss fPP**Jf* rrTTT—described Tn and who txecuted the foregoing iMtiSm«nt, aid acknowledged that he (they) executed the sairie as his (their) free act and deed. +L day of 198j^ 1/7ll h 0^ notary /public ^ cT -r ''C rlCPi-A. uoTARif li- MY COMMISSION EXPIRES )ss COUNTY OF HWUaSN ) STATE OF Sad acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as hi- (their) free act and deed. Wk day of Zfrda 198^r before me TTZ^rzn-^, i?dtary “Jpoblic MOTAny PUBLIC. STATE OF FLCRiOA. MY COMMISSION Ut'IRCSlOCT. 29. 199t. momo€o TMfUii notanv ruatuc uao ««w<ut »m« my COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 5 of 5 I- K-l yv ^■ *■- |v., I. ,s ■ I y- -■> l,. ti: &?■ H^- A • ■■ tK- . r»: i?.". I•Ai ili'^si'N- •1n< t !■. "'l*: !.1 i,>‘,t »!•! EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2650 \'\ OHBcrintiiont I, Tracts A and B, Registered Land Survey No. 96, Files of Registrar of Titles. Countv of Henn*nln southwesterly o( , line drawn ecroae a^Jd lor^raUerSo*^ and 105 feet Northeasterly from the Southwesterly line of said lot. Auditor's Subdivision Ruinber 356# Hennepin County. Minnesota, according to the map or plat thereof on file and of racord In the Office of the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Together with an aaaament for road purposes over the Westerly 20 feet of Lot 5, Auditor's Subdivision Nuntoar Hennepin county# Minnesota. !* i A V. •.y J , �t<.--------3ZO-----� 'J,O • 100 o' s�" ._� r· :-100 • /oS' ' l 0 100' I A.. t> .20 f'4PIIM. 'SIA�Ut"'f &'1 (:.,Qpb,U.e.t,L� AND A So A -s exf.(,&T 8 '1!.e�OLJAT10N /uo. 2(.50 OF &rc..bA-4.\.E" �NV£'l..of>� .Af'.lt> :DAAr'-' 1cL" S l�S • • I • -----------·----� ...• ; 1 I : t • I ORQNQ City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.3:9 ‘A A RESOLUTION GRANTING A RENEWAL VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZOMING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) PILE #1540 WHEREAS, Ronald and Julie Prineas (hereinafter applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1920 Shoreline Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Per Exhibit "A", attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to he City for a renewal of variances granted in 1989 per Resolution #2650 to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a single family residence on a lot of defined width 30' where a -defined lot width of 200' is normally required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1540. 2. The property is located in the LR~1A Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission originally reviewed this application #1410 on May 15, 1989, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings; A)The lot area exceeds the minimum 2.0 dry buildable acre requirement. B)A feasible building envelope exists in addition to pj^iin^ry and alternate drainfield sites which have been tested and approved for use. C)The hardship to the property lies in its extreme narrowness at the point where the defined lot width is measured. Furthermore, there is no adjacent land available for purchase that would increase the defined lot width to the 200' minimum standard. Page 1 of 5 r u 1 city of ORONO Cl I Y RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL t QRONa NO ^ g Q 4.The Hennepin County Department of Public Works has verified that the County will approve a private driveway access onto County Road 15. 5.Although the property contains a feasible building site, that site is limited by narrowness of the lot and by the designated drainfield sites, hence careful site planning will be required in developing the property. Therefore, it is appropriate that a diagram of the building envelope and drainfield sites be filed with this resolution to make future potential buyers of the property aware of the site limitations . 6.The City Council originally granted this variance in 1989 per Resolution #2650 and finds no changes from the original findings and conditions of that resolution. 7.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 variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 8.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 2oning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the 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. CONCLOSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Base^ upon one or more of the finciings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a renewal variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a single family residence on this lot of defined width 30' where a 200* defined lot width is normally required for construction of a single family residence, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 5 ,T. : % City of ORONO i:i IV RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.2329 ORONO 1 Any proposed residence must meet the required minimum Utbacks'^es^blished for the LR-IA zoning district, and must further meet the required setbacks from drainfield sit dialnfieS*d Vltes'sha\®l “bVto^t°hp r«o Exhibit "B", to advise future potential buyers of th property of the building site limitations. district. 4. No other zoning variances for development of this property will be granted. 5.The approved access for the property is a single drive way at County Road 15. 6.The standard park fee shall be collected by the City at the time a building permit is issued. 7.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are ® Snd 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 (July 9, 1991). 0.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of Eb"h2r:fn^rd-h^!rt:•;t^^sh^Vlrar 9. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and Sr:?X..%\”%r%re!r‘rerrs:%\''cVes7oP^2^^^^ agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain o title of ,the property. Page 3 of 5 f.. r- hf u r* , I 1^ fft' i: JV . l^- City o. ORONO :li Y RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO -> O^ 3 ^ 'r ORONO Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of July, #uiiJv James R. GrabekT^MS^r perty Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged oefore me on of the City. \ Notary Public BOHOCO TWUJ GEHEWL IMS. U*®* Page 4 of 5 ... ST. :: OF FLORIDA COUN·� Y OF DADE ) ) s . ) ESOL 10 0. 0 TH� CJ Y CO 0 C On this 'd-..l. tl.day of _.::,.a::::::::::=:::.._ ______ , 199n_ before me a otary Public wit in �� coun ersonalTT appeared Ronald Jame Prineas, joint owner, e o be theperson(s) descr 'ed exec ted t s r et, and acknow edged execu ed e sa ·s ( eir)free act and deed. STATE OF FLORIDA ) ) CO NTY OF DADE ) NOTARY PUBLIC NOT�RY PUBL C STAT! or FLORIDA MV ·� ,;��I SS 1 ON EXP. Al.JG. 31, 1993 eorm(D THRU G£NERAl UtS. UND. On t 1s kC., � day o �"--, 9 0 , b fore me a otary P b C W1 thin nd f or�a1d -:Sou ty, er O a 1 y a eared J lienne (J lie) Pr , joint owner kno,w o be theperson(s) described d w o executed t e fore g • st ent, and acknowledged t th (they) executed the a O as his (t eir) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC M>TARV PUBLIC STATt OF FlORIDA MY COr-ttISSION EXP. AUG 31,1993 801UO THAU GENERAL UIS. UNO. Page 5 of 5 •All*'■'4i Hi *V,r . I H X ■''.V rf ii!> n 'if I • Iv &■r !■V'- §- fV'. M ' Lli, »! EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2829 Pegcriptioti t Tracts A and B, Reglatered Laiul Survey Mo. 90, Files oE Registrar of Titles Counhv « Sr.a ot n U..o Urnvn ncro/o “"d iTp^rtuSno" ' ly linn of aolo lot. Auditor's Subdivision 1 uwbar County, Minnesota, nccorOlng to the map or plot thereof on file and of ’ record in the Office of the Registrar of Titles of Uennopln Cou,;?yrMlnn^SL Toiethi? vftH ri2n”;jrSU?J,auditor', s^bdlvIsISrHuJiSr 356.' fl ----------------------------' ' �t<=�-----3ztJ-,----- l,D ' o() B lo-' .. ----- I 0 .... z.o..._,_--�---------L.--------------- ''A "� P �I MAA>f l>t.Ar ,.,�, <:-1 t:,. c , r e ( (,\-\ o I.AN b) ,. ,,. B : A 1,,--re. tiN I} 'fltJ • rU.., N r 11:; L.s 11 ( l'-'O'-<"" -0 '' It exH,&&T 8 ' A, .829 J2-e 0UAT10/\J ,�o. ___ _ S\!-Ci: W OF Bv.1t..bA-«.Lt:' �NV tor� ANt> :b,vwvr I LI.> S \-n!:S I I \I I I \ \.. \ ' " ,l ,, ' \\ , .. ' I r l .. .. • : I ' •· l ·.-. • \••.I fe i.-w . K.-i. % r f- ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY S, 1990 ZONING FILE »1538-BORN CONTINUED the information regarding this appiicati:) Mr. Born said, "I previously obtained a permit for this project and had the understanding that a deck v;as approved. I removed the concrete areas as I was reguired to do.Before I constructed the deck. I called the City regarding the increased hardcover that would resu..t from the cnveway. It v;as tnen that I v/as advised that the deck had not been approved." Mabusth provided pictures showing that ail landscaping has been completed on the property. of the CounciImerober Goetten beiieved that the stairs are necessary/ but that she could not approve a deck. moved by Councilmember Goe'ten. seconded by v_a....ahan. to approve the stairs and landing and the aocitiona.. har...v-.over within the 75-250 foot setback area resulting from the relocation of the driveway as required by Hennepin County. .Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1539 DAVID FILKINS 3905 SHORELINE DRIVE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2828 Ilr. Filkins was present for this matter. Bornhardson reviewed the information pertaining tw this application (see Michael Gaffron's memo dated July 2, 1990). Gaffron noted that the Planning Commission had recommended approval of applicant's plan #1. Councilmember Goetten asked whether the Planning Commission had recommended that the concrete walk\;ays be removed. Gaffron shov/ed the are’s of hardcover that are proposed for removal. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Callahan, to adopt Resolution f2828, granting the setback variances to relocate an existing garage. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1540 RONALD 4 JULIE PRINEAS 1920 SHORELINE DRIVE VARIANCE RENENAL RESOLUTION #2829* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2829, granting the renewal of variances granted in Resolution #2650. Motion, -7 - fe'.:- • r.. •f it ’r‘‘' I ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 9, 1990 ZONING FILE #1540-PRINEAS CONTINUED Ay6S“3r Nays-0. Motion passed. #1541 DR. ROBY a JANE THOMPSON 1520 TANGLEWOOD ROAD VARIANCE RESOLOTIOK #2830 Dr. Roby and Jane Thompson were p esent. rpruc-.tro"„ dated July 2» 1990). tne information Tf- was moved by Councilmember Callahan. seconded by CounciLember Goetben, L -opt Resolution V reslderc^ n1tl5 Motion pess.b. #1543 RICHARD C. REED 1000 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD VARIANCE Mr. Reed was present Bernhardson reviev/ed tne information relating application c :’.r. Reed’s It was moved by Mayor Grabek. seconded by Goetten. to Mchlr^^.^^Reedentrance monuments at the Ricnarc r■^\/ •-o oursue Whether it “°“^to oL "a"p^ubUc'’road! " unRnoV hol the" road would affect the abutting property owners with torrens and register- affect the J City could condemn the property. 66 fiet wide. Motion. Ayes-3. Nays-0. Motion passed. #1544 ROGER AND BECKY BERRY 1392 BALODR PARK ROAD VARIANCE RENEWAL RESOLUTION #2831* , .cailahan seconded byrt- was moved by Councilmember Caiianan- secunuc j C r-J^momher Goetten to adopt Resolution H233X, granting that Councilmember Goetten, cw h «.u__ 4-?i;p7 hf> renewed Motion,the • variances approved in Resolution #2587 be renewea. Ayea-3, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1546 SCOTT PROCHNOW 4075 BIGBffOOD ROAD VARIANCE RENEWAL RBSOLOTIONs#2832d councilmember Callahan, seconded by -8 - P- To:Mayor Peterson & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Frca: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Adminia(^jitor/j? July 1, 1991 Subject: #1649 Elaine & Daryl Peterson, 1921 Fagerness Point Road - Variance - Resolution Soiling District - LR-IC, single family lakeshore residential, *i acre, sewered Application - Request for side setback and hardcover variances to construct a detached garage. List of Exhibits - A - Proposed Resolution B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 6/18/91 C - Memo & Exhibits of 6/13/91 Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of June 13th. Briefly, the applicants request a 5.5' side setback variance for construction of a detached garage in their rear yard. Also, they request a 75-250* hardcover variance but will be decreasing that zone from 34.9% down to 31.2%, a decrease of 3.7%. (Prior to the Planning Commission meeting, applicants slightly revised their proposal to increase the depth of the garage from 22' to 24'. This amounts to 40 s.f. of hardcover or approximately .3%, for a final 75-250' hardcover of 31.2%, rather than 30.9% originally proposed). Existing rock and plastic comprises 1.1% in the 75-250' zone. This is included in the pre-existing 34.9% figure. Plai dng Coanission Rerr—r ndation - At their June meeting, the Planning Commission voted 6-0 for approval as submitted with the 20x24' garage being 4.5' from the side lot line and allowing 31.2% hardcover in the 75-250' zone. The Planning Commission noted the lack of existing garage ^lus somewhat limiting topography and the triangular shape of the lot as hardships which justify the setback variance. Planning Commission also noted that extraneous and unnecessary areas of gravel, rock and plastic, and concrete are intended to be removed, but that the long driveway is the main contributing factor to the need for a hardcover variance. Staff Re ndation - Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation. A resolution of approval for Council consideration is attached. A RBSOLOTIOM GRANTIIIG VARIANCES TO MONICIPAL XONIMG CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 15 CF) PILE *1649 WHEREAS, Daryl and Elaine Peterson (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1921 Fagerness Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 18, Fagerness, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (f) to permit the construcion of a 2 car detached garage to be located 4,5' from the side lot line where a 10' side setback is normally required, and contributing to a hardcover percentage of 31,2% in the 75-250' zone where hardcover is normally limited to 25%. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of ...ono, Minnesotas FINDINGS 1, This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1649. 2.The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family La)ce8hore Residential Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1991, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A)There is no garage currently existing on the property. The property is triangular shaped, coming to a point at the rear of the lot. Existing retaining walls, topography, and the angle of the lot lines in relation to the house, provide sufficient hardship to justify granting of a side setback variance. B)Granting of the side setback variance will have no significant impact on neighboring properties. Page 1 of 5 C)The need for a long driveway contributes to the excessive hardcover on the property, however, extraneous hardcover on the property is intended to be removed to result in a decrease in hardcover on the property from 34.9% (of which 1.1% is landscape rock and plastic) down to 31.2% in the 75-250' zone. 4.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission# reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5.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. COHCLUSIOHS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22# Subdivision 2 and Section ..0.03, Subdivision 15 (F) to permit the construction of a 20'x24*, 2 car detached garage located 4.5* from the side lot line where a 10' side setback is normally required and contributing to excess hardcover on the property# amounting to 31.2% in the 75-250' zone where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions; 1.Hardcover in the 75-250' zone is approved at a level of 31.2%. All existing and proposed hardcover approved with this variance approval is recorded in the calculation worksheet and diagram enclosed with this resolution as Page 3.The current property owners and all future owners of this prc^erty are placed on notice that hardcover shall not be increased above the currently proposed level and any proposed improvements of this property that will result in additional hardcover must be approved by the City. Page 2 of 5 L- tP- Such approval may result in a requirement for concurrent equivalent or greater removals of existing hardcover. All existing hardcover scheduled for removal as a condition of this resolution must be removed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction. 2, The oarage shall be constructed per the description provided to the Planning Commissionr i.e. standard 8*^ wall height and peak height of approximately 12’. Any revisions to the garage plans which significantly change the character of th- structure shall be subject to further City review. 3.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a buildinc permit within one year of the date of Council approval, ir this variance will expire on that date (July 8, 1992). 4, 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. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agj^ee to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of July, 1991. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin,"city Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(a) Page 4 of 5 1 STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of July# 1991# by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin# Mayor 6 City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota nunicipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of whe City. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) Notary Public ) 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. ^ K-. I kr k ft i- ifS'.;- STATE OF MINNESOTA ) Notary Public ) 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. i, »!-. Notary Public Page 5 of 5 a CITY OP OROHO P.0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 473-7357 ZONING PILE *1649 55323 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 6/18/91 TO:Elaine Peterson 1921 Eagerness Point Road Hayzata, MN 55391 COPIES TO: fYPB OF APPLICATION: Variances DATS OP NBBTING: 6/17/91 Planning Coaalssion r VOTE: 6 For 0 Against ends the following: zone). Approval as submitted with 20‘x24’ garage (31.2% hardcover in 75-250* IK>TBS AMD SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, July 8, 1991; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission ■lnute», they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the Planning Commission. L' '• t'- l- r nTo:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Froa:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning s. Zoning Administrator Dates June 13» 1991 Subjects #1649 Elaine Peterson, 1921 Fagerness Point Road - Variance - Public Hearing Soning District - LR-IC, single faunily lakeshore residential, acre, sewered Application - Request for side setback and hardcover variances to construct a detached garage. List of Bahibits - A - Application B - Letter of Request C - Plat Map D - Property Owners List E - Neighbor Acknowledgements P - Survey G - Hardcover Calculations Pertinent Code Sections - 1.Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Hardcover regulations. 2.Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (F) • Accessory structures require 10* side setback. Pertinent Pacts - 1.Applicants' property currently has no garage. Applicants propose to construct a detached 20'x2i^garage. In order to Keep that garage in line with the existing driveway and to avoid distrupting existing retaining walls, they request a 5.5* side setback variance, allowing a 4.5' side setback for the garage. 2.Existing 75-250' hardcover is 34.9%. Applicants' proposed hardcover removals in conjunction with the garage construction, reduce this to 30.9%. A small portion of the rear of the lot is in the 250-500' zone. Removal of an existing shed will reduce the existing 35.5% down to 6.0% in the 250-500* zone. Discassion - Applicants propose to remove all rock/plastic hardcover, in addition to reducing portions of gravel parking area which will no longer be needed, and will be removing an existing shed structure in poor condition. Zoning Pile tl649 June 13p 1991 Page 2 of 2 The proposed garage will be 45* from the neighboring residence. It is interesting to note from the survey that applicants' ret<u.ning walls already extend into *-he neighboring property. While this is potentially an issue for the property owners to resolve amoung themselves, it could be argued that replacing the garage as proposed would perhaps limit the possibilities for a future elimination of the retaining wall encroachment. On the other hand, forcing the garage to meet the 10* setback would leave a somewhat less functional angle ot approach to the left garage door, and would result in the need to possibly rebuild the opposite side retaining walls. Applicants have not provided a garage plan. However, they have stated that the garage is intended to be a Menards or similar kit garage, 20'x22*, two stalls, standard 8* walls with a 4tl2 pitched roof, and peak height of approximately 12*. In the context of the proposed location, this garage probably will not have a significant visual Impact on the neighborhood. Staff Re ndation - If Planning Commission feels that applicants have provided sufficient hardships and justification for granting of the 5.5* side setback variance, then a recommendation for approval would be appropriate. Likewise, if Planning Commission determines that the proposed removals of hardcover are acceptable, then a similar recommendation for approval would be appropriate. /_ 'O/. ^ I / O 'I r A"CITY OF OROSO - VRRIARCB APPLICATION Af \ Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 par each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) After*the>Fact Fees (Double application fee) 4 »w:r- -r ’4 U k. 4 PROPERTY LOCATION 1 ^ fA««a / «.' • V'V i • w* • V'V «>'* *^ JT ■ ' \ 4 •^ C .'to**k-W.* Site Address \<4l\ '(^v) Property Identification Nurnber (P.I. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name Phone (home) ;v^c- <^^,A«,r5cT\ Address: \^Xv yt. tv _ _ _Phone (w .) h ~ X'X'b J 3hH CityivjjftMj^ia_ _ _ _ Zip; 5j_3^t OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip; Date Property Acquired ^(month/year) I (do) n^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT OSB OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property ^ I ^ Residential Other (specify) Estimated Construction Cost $ $“000.00 .DESCRIPTION OF RBQOEST Describe request in decail; ^^vj:c>^ v^e■WJ AfcAV>f^ r^ _________________________________________________________________—■■-■■ VARIANCES REQOIRBD Lot Area Setback Variances ( Lot Width Front I Hardcover Side _ _ _ Rear) Other tfe„ ■MDSHIPDescribe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: .a 4 9 \ cjr .-'■o cVrxf 4 t Vo '^^\h A..*. UftiL.—V\ftVL^ C. DBSCRIPnOH OP ONOSDAL PROPKRTY CONDITIOHS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements : 9 ;<-« sVi \p1~ ^Te.b'VrvcJ^— .•W:V ci\—pvf l' V»jt - I V^i r\ C-iJ O ^ 6. 7. 8. lUIBED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form i Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150 vyou must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 340-3271). ^ Piet Map (obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor)to include iTardcover calculations as required. . ,e i. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views. , r As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this applicat:cr. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. TOO ARB RBQOIREO TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OB A ffpRRTWG COPT (11* T 17* OR SMALLER) POR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that voor variance application is not coBg>lete_i^ the above pifogMatlon haa not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Vari nee Application is complete. Initialed by Clerical Staff _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- - - - - - - - - - - - - - AfPLICAMT'S SIGRATORB The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (start time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the infomation supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature ^if\.Q Date 0MMBR8 8I6HAT0RBThe owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the p^opei^ty City staff, consultants^ egantSr Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature JK. ^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date ^11 authorised agent attend in your place and to advise the Building 6 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. I. i ■*, • * • r» ^ *v • •I*.-' ’• t ' J* < S. J >. '• • • >*'. ' > •4 •. >r, . . /** -'• *^ •> . - V .-4* t* v4- KI* ,» ,«r.-it . *. ►*••'••V !/■•r : i /' <y \ . vj^t X<r, o:^ .C-.^''jlcvc-uX -- \j 0k_ S'Xr^yjJ!U-^^'J '-■'^ *^jC Cx-n_ r->iA. 'v>ic-J-C" .s,4N-»^s C T* \ \ ■V4/ vC-.V ._..iu-OA^JL. . ^ V-N-V. C^'T'.-Jt'A ><5_ '^\K. S'Jut' /ri-oJ)L o ^ A_ -t-A' . X ji j ^^ o^vxx YjOQijlAJi?- 'St'^ "\rtr^o -ca -c Xia O"^ _ . >^\JC^'3’viuo'^ C^'A. v.0-0^. *V N ju- 'wo-trtTAji/CN 'w-A.\/ ^ % > #*V *' ^ ^ ^ \ ^ ov j V V i > ^ ).................^ .f, r-. I ‘‘‘•■■ 'r-; A‘ > . ■ “* •’•• VA'^ • ■- 1 X* '• • k iT . • V' •. • ■ •>*>'.-rk.* .« • »i:r •••. y . •' 4*tm* •• jTW. •;?• .vr—V . \jJ-9--vJl/>t. j'vX>T'«'r,'-i-Ck <^T>->'«^ JL t -C', _ \M^‘Jt>Aay»\ o^\,'!>'5.o<a<K cv.o-vo-iv^i- ^c,rY.^Ni3U. ' \ ^<5 __. w^<a X t ..JX.V jx ...sju '^^Xojk X^ % ^ ^ f\y\ ^,,jD^ .t/ik^"'\j~^Av»^Oy CK , . ~ ■*''A __. ^(VTr^^Aft-OjO/v^iC^. _ ^ \ Vs/XA^l- -A.Qj^'iC’wntvj _. v'rfVi^\XA ‘A''^^i^*i C^ ^w -CUWJ'«^ frf\jO.NKlA . _4. .A _ ..9^ J .— **f ■ * >4 ' '*-' *. *' «i;-. ft t5kjl/JL .0-\h^ O-Tw^,. ^C^JLlXuc>-k^CVviL OA*. . ' l-\'i'i>- .SiVbS’ -“^v4X:-tj-«JLrrj 7;oo A.otn <3r .V.30 ;cro . Vjtrrv'A. oo^JjUv^ .. H-00 ^.'Ttn . - 'A'^ \ - , I 'XVoCAtOiA* S>^rw V>^J-VAAJ V^TrtJ» - tj^. *? »jiXaAa^v\, |><M^•'■^ # Ifc * -••-».»,t r» -««« ». ■“.*<%•'.♦' . r'ikCii *% .*^11 ? U s-> : jlK»!;''»^c»‘’/*> ; ? ^.:z - • ■■.• 1 V* ^ ’K-- ■*•/ *% *4 *w« . • —m^. iSs^y‘* * *^-• • •■a 2v » . • -v*?Tv •• •'jvj;^ -.i# •.V<* . « , _____ .•*« U •3* i ^. • - . ■t:* U* •-• ..• . • ... -t* .*,- ^ •» . • V: ■■■:•’r^V »^*** '*.••• • ,.*• ' • • i •*.•••• *.'^**v'• f :V - :••* •■••;. 4*;’ 1 -i *• . .0 ; . , •. . V. .. .. '.; *. • ••. *.4 ^*.1/ k T ^..■•*.v: liUi i. \ -_________ •^ rryv.^ v^U x^^U a -* wcrOt- \ ©'\M^;L,T^ojA^ wiAAjLr'.-A*3^!Xt/^ \<VsM^.Xx(^, Vjs^tTAA^ ’OLY>^LkA>y^»N<^ ^e- V To-CX.1. V.’ A_^CO^JL.y> wv.AlV\ , \ Kx_ .^\XC\iX<r*o OkAJL. ptoCK a A" cWJiAyv^^^ \jK^ 0^*“^v CT»\. C“VXA_3 . ^dXcyvx csjii^ o-wN^ _^i>AAA«o , A<xw»v . OtvOn *»W ^ \A-CA.i^<Jl4X ^SXty. T ^ . VA. . >v>AaAt!^y Ji-cX aju?isi_ .Vo/^aAy_-a.or\^- \iKoX Jc \^i^^^<. Xx_ ^Co'Vv> ^LO-W^V-. rvv-C- prfs.^XXl._ x..v^VsJ»X . ^ ■\ % N v4WV'*V-^ 0»^..a Xo'vjou ^ ,J\,j5rC*^ CvsajtAxA. ~\j5-JiAXA^^MAS*^ VAA "V , \ula ^j oXarr "Xfr I 0“s*^ fvM.)k'<wcSlJta.^ wOa-c/uAva-. O 'Jino \\xvu^/aV^ Vha *_ N \tx. '^'^VO-X NJJ<-\v-ObAM_ CX». .0,-wv^jJLSL. rrsjo-'\jVu^JUrr>,^/^,rN>j«^ nrAKwtX. ^A>cro**\ ... _ _ ♦ ♦'T fVSU.;^ 0*^O^J»A>C».0^ . 'X0^s**<^fw\*4sX , "X- l^M^^*A.i^a.o^J^*4X crr.o_^ OA. -....N a >4^ ..-k-k.0*^-oX^A. '\^ rv>sx*«>\ .IS .Xo/^3i*-'^trw Xvwvx S>AAN.VXA^Jt^,JS. .C^J^AAA/tr<\3 >» ^ i t*.' . A 1 ~.'•t ;1 *1 1 i. f ’9) ZfO 1 ■„♦/lyy •1 ( ’S) •r^•1 ( 17) n< # (IA-,«i i msA\. • i»* • ' ^ « -II •_.‘k j I-’.'.. ;.•1910 ^t-iCOCOHOlil ST ''' '' >r ?• \^JOm t fClST ITM. ( << .. . I r . {T«**tm-ji?i' JKwii’i'WxsT '.V •■*'•(*-/ ‘*,• ‘‘---------- , ?19*« eOM«»tM^:AVI'!>!■ . ■ t' i| jMAVZATA mx^, BSS91 V 2 »; . ? M 'XT*!!?-!! tl 0009. . ^• .«• ABMI t.«191S rMtIOCSS ooiNr n * OMSK mm frBAVXO I sum S NIFI JAXOAVIR^^I^UVXO L sumi v H NMC/MM >7lX9IS rOKIOCSS 9T M Jr,.fS* 17-117-tS'tl OOlt . “ ■"—■------f ’;'«19S7. r7MilMi9S:90INr m ,-------------J 'i‘N L RUTZKI'I 0 J RUTZXe ; TAmAVfO ;'^:C0LUm.^M'RAf0CMi« Vf n [ i' NtttcoxN caMTV pooofirrv xnfoomatkm systehraOKOTY 09CRS LISTM 17-1I7-2S IS 0007 00050 AOlWESS tMASSIGNEO ' LLOYD H DRAPER LLOYD N DRAPER 4015 6IRAR0 AVE SO MPLS »« 554IY 50 17-117-75 75 0010 01971 EAGERNESS POINT RO D L PETERSON > E H PETERSON DARRYL L PETERSON 1971 EAGERNESS POINT RO S HAYZATA m 55391 50 17-117-73 73 0015 01957 EAGERNESS POINT RO HARK R PLATT HARK R PLATT 1957 EAGERNESS POINT RO NAYZATA W4 55391 iv ill M A.kd •1940 ( • CONCOR0M ST -----------------------■ ••' V » ’I ' if. i7-i|i^-ts. ti ’••tt'" j '•■'1* f lY- 50 17-117-73 73 0010 01945 EAGEIMESS POINT RO R 6ENARI A 6 NISKANEN-GENAR*^ R 6ENARI A 6 NISKANEN-GENARi 1945 EAGERNESS POINT RO NAYZATA m S5391 ,:«lt9«n'KCaNC0R0XA ST -----!R^dM)RjlTALS “ *-:E: ! Imm/ARRR PM90 feONCOROuV^i/If.iilei^ I 50 ; 17-117-75 73 0051 01970 EAGERNESS POINT RO BRUCE A CAHILLE CURTISS BRUCE A CAHILLE CURTISS 1970 EAGERNESS POINT RO HAYZATA >94 ^5391 '?•••• i’*:. m3WS REPORT NO. PI4SS401PAGE . 130 17-117-75 75 0000 01905 EAGERNESS POINT RO HILLIAH A HIBBS MILLIAH A NIBBS 1905 TAGERNESS POINT RO ' HAYZATA rt4 55391 30 17-117-7' 75 0011 01979 EAGERNESS POINT RO LLOYO DRAPER LLOYD H ORAr'ER 6015 GIRARD ASE SO HPLS m 55419 38 17-117-75 75 0016 01976 EAGERNESS POINT RO K A J OAHLEN EBS MORTGAGE CORP 7610 UNIVERSITY AVE H ST PAUL EM 55114 30 17-117-75 75 0071 01849 EAGERNESS POINT RO LAN KARPINEN LAURI H KARPINEN 1849 EAGERNESS POINT RO S HAYZATA 55391 •9 TOTAL BATCH 001 00014 =1*: nr CD ■{■■ i A* .A i ‘ i M*- U •4 I ’ 1<•> 'L-u I * h : . ■ .‘ij / ' •• L M;« . r- r t*. 'M W O ^ C/ I < r .•> '• ■*• '>fn- irV*'.* V.* * f-5.:r ->7 I t *if . ^ ;•*•. '*7. •• ••’i ’ -'I’.- •'CT'f'‘.^'r .. '**.C^rf*:v.*;*''‘. r^41.*. ,v-v. >• .• r, .'*• ■ f. *' • «. ••■ i • -•■■ ■. ; *-i. ■*. • • ••. *♦#.••A’-4 * '-A : » * • , ^a3 CxOC<"VjVws^cVx Cx^iY-*^CC^.'au,v> V" Ou^^Cu^^J^.i^ Vt. '^'0. ? PO <2- tbti 1‘i-^t-&■ 1‘jyl /f-^ V Jy- . 'r.*. .-•'fvv • yj'** ^*'*‘'V^i*'•J" ,; -^.'V ^ t •-. 1- ••*. - . 'f- ••- «fV«,,, . v^:» c^* .'airCi'-r* ,v ; >0"'X,. r-■ '/ -'k' r ^v t*”- f . ‘^y'y'■7T r•1 ’.1 I (we) Adjacent Property Owner* Acknowled^enent Form T)^i/in L of /q/fT,,-g_d lirint naine(sT I [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at \a> also referred to as Land Use Application Mo ^^J^we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement(2 (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that(^(we) am {are. aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. "7) ^3 Property Owner Date 1/f Property Owner Date Zf you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building s Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. ^ 'I;.. rfir // .“-..•.w'__'^z.r. '-.-.L-WW-. 1 .-.1 tiw.'.:. %i<o •t * zc. ^ : \ • »*-.rr»cr^1 «• w w •y A // /J.* ^S . r L£*iG7H 'WIDTH V X //. o' CU//‘^ju(7 S7aa/> •0 5 /*C! X /<? . / y.7 V 2.y ?.s X ^ S.F. ______________w • I W >. V |0^ 5^7 nru\^Uw * Cri.»4 iiw.^. w / . — — -*t r» ' » ^^^'V •%^W Existing Har-cove?, i:i Zcne «House r ' ‘ /^c.T_r- '-'7 1 */f X- —-.-n Q X w I r •* LENGTH \j * '-*'ri k t • * 7-TOs Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and C^ty Council City Administrator Bernhardson Oates \ Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administra^Vj^ a <9 June 12, 1991 Subjects #1650 Hennepin County Department of Transportation ~^Oj^ Intersection of County Roads 15 and 51 - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Public Hearing % Pertinent Ordinances - Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 > Conditional use permit required for land alterations in excess of 100 cubic yards. Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 - Nc land alterations are permitted witnin the lakeshore protected area. Application involves storm sewer improvements within the 75’ setback area. Lint of Bzhiblts - A - Application B - Addendum -Plat Map -Property Owners List -MCMD Permit -Site Plan -Elevaticn/Spec Sheet C D E P G Bavlew of Aftar-tbe-fact Application - The Hennepin County Department of Transportation was asked to file an after-the-fact application involving the installation of turn lane at the intersection of County Roads 15 and 51 and much needed storm sewer improvements at that intersection. Rather than delay the project, the City asked the County to file an application and proceed with the improvement. The storm sewer project involves the installation of underqround tiles and a series of catch basins to handle run-off that comes from the west along County Road 51. The current storm sewer system is inadequate. The current system involves a simple underground tile and catch basin that runs along the west side of County Road 15 and then drains eventually into the lake further south. The inadequacies of the limited system have resulted in major washouts in the area during heavy storms. Review Exhibit E, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has already approved a permit for the project. The Public Works Department has reviewed the plans and also concurs with rhe permit from the MCWD. f h ’- ;>>■ i: tfv' r L^' L: - r 5 ..................... Zoning File #1650June 12 r 1991 Page 2 of 2 Staff made an inspection of the storm sewer facility on June 6th.It appears to be complete except for the placement of rip rap at the manhole that empties directly into the lake o th<» eai side of County Road 15. As of that inspection, the arn lanes have yet to be defined by striping. Staff recrmmends approval of the aft jt-the-fact conditional use permit/variance application for the Hennepin County Department of Transportation for storm sewer improvements within the lakeshore protected area located at the intersection of County Roads 15 and 51 based on the following findings: 1.The proposed improvement plans have met the standards of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District - permit issued April 22,1991. 2.The storm sewer plan satisfies ail pertinent standards of Section 10.55 of the zoning code. _ _ Zonlno File #165C July 3, 1991 Page 3 Additional Coaatents and Planning Conn*r>s‘on Recosaendation Additional Exhibits ... , Exhibit H - Resolution #1605 - resolution setting ir.iniir.ur needs for improvement of County Road 15 Exhibit I - Staff Letter to Cook P”. lie nearing, staff was r •ag S’.'iff of the original « .t*" • . rjqradings of County ■.^ ;cncern was that the .f; " ly expanded with each r ones within the shoulder avellei road surfaces and Prior to the Planning Commis: cn' co’'tacted by an affected neighbor , ren. p^/.j-tion taken by the City at the in. Road 15 within the Navarre area. The re actual traveled road was being cons improvement whether that was placing c area or the installation of blacktop over ------ shoulder areas. The owner asked the Cit^to stand by its original position adopted in 1984. Review Exhibit H. In addition, the resident questioned the quality of run-off that vas being released directly into the lake from the sterm sewer system. The Planning Commission conditioned tneir approval on the City Engineer reviewing the plans to determine if water quality had been addressed in the storm sewer plan. Cook reviewed the storm sewer plans advising that the quality issue had been add.ressed as a sump has been Installed within Catch Basin 3. The purpose of the sump is t , collect sand and debris before entering Manhole #5 that drains directly into the ma.in lake. The current storm sewer allows debris and sand to drain divectly i- co the lake at times of heavy rainfall. Cook advises that a regular maintenance schedule must be adhered to requiring maintenance /cleaning 2 to 3 times a year. ‘■'ff would recommend that approval be conditioned on the County provi regular maintenance of the catch basin/sump. The Planning Commission had no further questions pertaining to the improvement project and recommended approval based on t e following findings: 1.The proposed improvement plans have met the standards of the Minnehaha Cieek Ws «rshed District (permit issued April ^2, 1991). The storm sewer plan satisfies pertinent standards of Section 10.55 of the Zoning Code. Approval is subject to the followinc conditions: 1. Hennepin County shall ma.i: tain sump within Catch Basin 13 on a regular b«.<sis providing the necer*=ary remov.*l of debris and sand from entering *:he lake. 2.Per Resolution #1605 of the City of Orono, all improvements proposed by County for Couwty Road 15 must be within the existing County right-of-waj . The City will approve no improvements that require acqui'^ition of rig^t-of-way beyond the two“lane approved County road classif. as a scenic parkway of the Cicy of Orono. Vsl %• CITY OF OROHO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATIOI PROPERTY 'wO^TION Site Address TntPr«;pctinn of C^AH 15 and 51 adjacent to Lake Minnetonka Property identification Number (P.I.D.)______________________— Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT ^Phone (home) Name Wayne Matsumoto Phone (worlc) 930-?584 Address 320 Washington Avenue South Citv Hopkins zio 55343 ONNBR (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone Address Citv Zip Date Prooertv Acauired (monch/year ) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PEES -CONDITIONAL USB PERMITS - enewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee fter-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application $125,00 Residential accessory Use $150.on Institutional ^church, school, etc.) $150- 00 Guest Houst'Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Inductrial Use $200.00 .:d Alteration u „-ing and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling ~ 101 cu, yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of laJceshore _ _ _ _ PRD/PID ~ see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS . «$200.00 Commeri.. ai Site Pl»n Review (+ consultant fees; $250.00 Vacation ________ $175.00 Basement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation with Subdivision $250.00 Rezoning fPUD - refer to fee schedule) ____ $100.00 Appeals _ _ _ _ Other - see fee schedule PSBSBMT USB OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Prcperty Residential Other (specify) C,nr*, itjte Aid Highway OBSCRIPTIOH OP RBQOBST Describe request in detail: Saf’ety inorovement ladd'.tion of turn lane - northbound CSAH 15 to westbound CSAH 51) and storm sewer construction KBQDXRBD SUBMITTALS 1.Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271). Plat Map. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan# if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application,please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. TOO ARB RBQOIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A NORKING COPT (11" X 17* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this applic ion. Please remember that your pplication 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_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ AmZCAMT'8 8I6RAT0RB 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 applica^on,and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to theVbest of^is/her )cnowledge. k/^Applicant*r signature Date / / nWEBP 8XGMATaBB The owner hereby ac)cnowledges and agrees to this application and further authorised reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, if an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building 6 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. V't. HENNEPtN J /. ' DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 320 Washington Avenue South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 PHONE. (6-12)030-2500 FAX (612)930-2513 TDD (612)030-2606 T ^ , r r ■ r . k May 22. 1991 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 CSAH 15 AND 51 SAFETY IMPROVEMENT CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONAL 3E PERMIT APPLICATION Dear Ms. Mabusth: As you are aware, our Operations Division is doing safety Improvement construction at the intersection of CSAH 15 and 51. The construction consists of the addition of a left turn lane on CSAH 15 and storm sewer work. Enclosed is a Conditional Use Permit Application. Copies of the construction plan and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit are also enclosed for your information. There Is no change In elevations on the roadway or adjacent land with this construction. Should you have any questions, please call Marcel Kulas at 930-2577. .rely, ^ Wayne Matsumoto. P.E. Road & Bridge Operations Engineer JEAimak Enclosure HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity emptoyef r f//J SiS. 10 T. 1ir 03 0R0M0>33 M / i i s r 00 .• I I"r p,r-fo:-' m P r !?■ I' i?4-- i- ?■ r rf Ivm-m D CBRTIPICATB OF NAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. ) CITY OF ORONO ) 1, Jamie Bosmar of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of #1650, was mailed to the attached list of property owners . In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 30th day of May, 1991. Jami^ Bosma r- r 1^' tr. ■i \. c i''- r ■h. 'h D Property Owners List for Application ^1650 10-117-23 31 0002 John Spence 2040 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 10-117-23 31 0003 Lyle Godfrey 2060 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 10-117-23 31 0001 George Rovecno 2010 Shoreline Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 10-117-23 34 0001/2 Vernon McCoy 1425 Bay Ridge Road Wayzata, MN 55391 fci:.'- I: Ig':' April 22. 1991Permit Anniication No. 91-52 Applicant: Hennqrin County Dept of Public Works 320 Washington Ave. S. Hopkins, MN 55343 City of Orooo, See. lOCD, Smith Bay, Lake Minnetonka Stenmwater management plan for a 500 foot long widening of County Rd. 15 south of County Rd. 51 and construction of a storm sewer outfall. Location: Purpose: Dear Mr. Ault: Receipt is acknowledged for the following which you have submitted as pan of the above permit appliotion: 1.Revised plan received April 22,1991. This plan is in accordance with the action taken by tl Board of Managers on April 18. 1991 in leferroce to the above permiL This letter is your pennit from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Distria. Permit approval is based upon the following exhibits: Permit Application 91-52 received m tril 8,1991. Letter firm the applicant to the Distnet dated April 8. 1991. Construction plan received April 8, 19V 1. f 6t>m the District to the applicant dated A pril 19. 1991 informing him of the Board action on April 18.1991. 5.Revisedplanreceived April 22,1991. 1. 2. 3. 4. The Board approved the permit applicant with the following condition: 1.The owner has the responsibility to operate and maintain the approved stormwater fnanagement facilities which were d^gned in accordance with Rule B of the Rules. This permit is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval noted above. If construcoon is not pfwnpl<>iii» by April 18,19^ an extension must be requested. Please contact the District at 473- 4224 when the pragect is about to commence so an inspector may view the work in progress. JAMES M. MONTGOMERY. CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. Engmmts for the cc: Board file City of Orono #1 ’J •I—p - 2^ HA^t>C^^JSJC « 2 pfifl Mm/P#T 5T4*'0^ftt^ J’tATc 31345 ee^e-Aijv^'ij 3^,01;) ^fmr¥tt Sc**^*>^ tf nf S i .y,/yfbi W^I /~* -q37,4-i ^4" *r3o"c.*^*P- njrrw I ^V0 #1 c.s.jf.i^ SEE CAP DETAIL m.o <^27»S ‘* u7st*<' S’UV ■?/ 1^4 7 <?c.M.p. -Q \. : i ' S ' (;.^. 3 *« maUU^J tAJffh • Stit'frt 6s^Pt0 935.22. 1^' I S-- I XO q35.2Z .935:22 931.22 /.o% " >< /24-* C,-^• ^» ‘ ^ B* //40.4fc ^$(oAlo tt- .. % I " ~ CHY Ij^RONa City of OR ON O RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _________ A RESOLOTION SETTING MINIMUM NEEDS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF CSAH 15 WHEREASr the City of Oronc is eager to see ir.prcverr.ents made on CSAH 15 but does not feel qualified to design a roadway; and WHEREASr the cities of Orono, .Mound, and Spring Park m st reach a concensus on what improvements are necessary for the safety of both motorists and pedestrians. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono, find the following ite.ms are necessary for improvement of CSAH 15: 1.Two lanes of continuous traffic, one east and one wett. -'Crete sidewalks, concrete curbs and concrete gutters 'ssary. 3.Ri>-j ;id left turn lanes wnere needed. 4.These improvements to be within the e.x’sting County right of way. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED _nac the Hennepin County Engineering Division design the r^. dway to include the provisions above. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono this 13th day of February, 1984. ATTEST: Alberta M. Strom, City ''lerk «• Sr /•' '/o o4* t,»-. K- 'i. .4 ’ CITY of ORONO MumctpftJ Offk» J'osi Offkf Box 66 C.rvMaJ H«>, Minnesota 55323 i^CsHO^ June 19» 1991 Glenn ^-o .Bones^rco.sene^ Anderlik & Assoc. 2335 West Trunk Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 Re:Application #1650 - Hennepin County Dept of Transportation - Intersection of County Roads 15 and 51 - Conditional Use Permit/ Variance Dear Glenn: You have been asked by the Planning Commission to review the proposed drainage/storm sewer improvement to determine if the quality of run-o issue has been addressed, and if not, what recommendation ot changes you recommend? Your written comments should be submitted no July 2, 1991 as application will be presented before the Council at the July 8th meeting. Wayne Motr:moto at Hennepin county DOT would bt yo contact, person* T.f you have any questions of staff# please contact my office. Sincerely. Jeanne A. Mabusth, Buildina & Zoning Administrator jAM/tln ccj John Gerhardson, Public Works Director ITT rPHtlNF - 471-7357 • PAA ■ i/.Mr.MO I; , .••■.V im % To;Mayor Peterson & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson % % fromt Dates Subject: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Ad July 1, 1991 5? % #1652 Daniel and Barbara Fleischman, 500 Hanlon Ave. Variance - Resolution o Zoning District - RR-IB, Single family rural residential, 2 acre, unsewered Application - Request fo ' side and rear setback variances to construct deck List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Proposed Resolution Exhibit B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 6/18/91 Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 6/10/91 Discussion Please review tne memo of June 10, 1991. Briefly, the applicants removed a pre-existing deck because it was rotting, then upon application for a building permit, were advised of the need for variances. Because of the small lot size subject to 2 acre standards, the proposed deck requires rear, left and right side setback variances. Additionally, a lot coverage variance is necessary to allow 22% lot coverage where only 15% ii allowed. Planning Conaission RecoMendation The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their June meeting, and voted 6 to 0 to recommend approval subject to the applicant being notified in the resolution that 22% lot coverage is a maximum for this property. The Planning Commission noted the hardships are the lot size in relation to the zoning district standards, the fact that there was a pre-existing deck, and the locations and elevations of existing door openings in the residence. The Planning Commission also noted that there is no garage on the property, and reviewed the history of the adjacent lot across the alley (see June 10 memo). Planning Commission declined to condition their approval on removal of the metal shed on the tax forfeit lot. However, Planning Commission noted to applicant that that lot is probably the only feasible location for a garage, and although variances would be needed, applicant should consider purchasing that lot. Staff Pwniiindation Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and lot coverage variances. A resolution reflecting the Planning Commission recommendation is attached for Council review. Does Council wish to discuss the issue of the shed on the tax forfeit lot? A RBSOLOTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C) AND SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) PILE *1652 NHEREAS, Daniel and Barbara Fleischman (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 500 Hanlon Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") -nd legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 14, Minnetonka Bluffs, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) and Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to permit the construction of a deck to be located 22' from the south side lot line where a 30' side setback is normally required, 11.3' from the north side street lot line where a 50* setback is normally required, and 28' from the rear lot line where a 50' setback is normally required, and a variance to allow 22% lot coverage by structures where only 15% lot coverage by structures is normally allowed. Minnesota: 1. 2. HOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning Pile #1652. The property is located in the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1991 and recommended approval of the propored variances based upon the following findings: a)The small lot size, being only 6,475 s.f. but subject to standards normally applied to lots of 07,120 s.f., is a distinct hardship in that no improvements to this property could occur without the need for variances. Page 1 of 5 [, 4. 5. 6. The proposed deck continues existing lines of the house and except for the proposed stairway at the west side of the deckf encroaches no closer to the street than the existing house. The proposed deck replaces a pre-existing deck of slightly smaller square footage in the same location. Without thi^ deck, two of the three main doorway entrances to the residence will become only marginally useable due to their elevation above grade. The property does not contain a garage.Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C)allows lot coverage by principal residence and garage structures of at least 1500 s.f. for any developed property,regardless of the resultant lot coverage percentage.In this case, the variance is necessary because for lot coverage purposes the deck is not considered part of the principal residence.However, granting of the lot coverage variance is justified on the basis that replacement of a pre-existing deck structure will not tend to increase the visual density of the neighborhood. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 5 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) and Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a 16' X 20' deck with 4' x 10' stairway, located 22' from the left side lot line where a 30' setback is normally required, 11.3' from the north side street lot line where a 50' setback is normally required, and 28* from the rear lot line where a 50* setback is normally required, and grants a variance to allow 22% lot coverage where only 15% lot coverage is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: t r-' r-'. iii 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Applicant is advised that future proposals to increase lot coverage by structures on this property will not be looke upon favorably by the Council. Applicants shall construct the deck per the approved plans. Any changes from those plans which increase the size or extent rf the deck shall be subject to further City review. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercis'^d by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire cn that date (July 8, 1992). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 I I 1991. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 8th day of July, ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of July, 1991, by Barbara A. Peterson s Dorothy M, Ballin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 t... ff-CITY OF ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, i 473-7357 ZONING PILE #1652 55323 NOTICE OP PLANNING CCMM^SION ACTION Date of Notice: 6/18/91 TOt Q^nlal a Batbata Fleischinan 500 Hanlon Avenue Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES TO: type of APFLICATIOH* Variance DATS OF NBBTIHGs 6/17/91 VOTE; 6 For 0 Against PlaimiJi9 CoBBiissloii rscoMiands tlte following; Approvalaubject to conditions noted below ■OnS AMD SPF lAL CONDITIONS: P; V ■fr. r I Planning commission recommended approval, noting loeatiMS and elevations above grade are significant hardships that support ihf*^iSest^ Aoolicant is advised that the lot coverage by structures of 22% will likely not be allowed to increase should a future garage variance ?^ue.t be forthcoming. Planning Commission took no formal position iTogarding the adjacent lot. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, July 8, 1991; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission ■inut.;, they are aveilable from the City Clerk after review and approval by the Planning Commission. m-W' P^i/, K*- & i' r ;M: To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Frost Dato: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator June 10, 1991 Subject: 11652 Daniel and Barbara Fleischman, 500 Hanlon Ave. - Variance - Public Hearing Soiling District - RR-IB, Single family rural residential, 2 acre, unsewered Application - Request for side and rear setback variances to construct deck List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Application Plat Map Property Owners List Description of Request Survey Deck Plans Assessor's Sketch Pertinent Pacts 1. 2. Lot area is 6,475 s.f. The property is not subject to hardcover 7ulations. 3.Lot coverage:Existing * 17%; Proposed • 'as' 4.Setbacks: Pr"-'i>csed Required Variance Front (E.)11'50'— Left side (S. )22'30*8' Right Side (N.) (side Street)11.3'50’38.7' Rear (W.)28'50'22’ Discussion The applicants previously had a deck in the same location as that proposed, but slightly smaller (see Exhibit G, Assessor's Sketcn). The applicants removed this deck because it was rotting, then applied for a permit and found that variances would be needed to replace it. The new deck will be squared off with the house, plus a 4* x 10* platform and stairway leading to the parking area. Because the railing of this deck will be more than 6' above grade, the deck is calculated in lot coverage. Allowed lot coverage by structures is 15%. With the addition of this deck, lot coverage will increase from 17% to 22%. IV r ' V. Zoning File #1652 June 10, 1991 Page 2 Please review th*. applicants description of request and hardship statements, ard the note from the Miller's next door. The deck will encroach .10 closer to the side r • reet lot line the original deck, and the only portion being closer to the alley will be the 4* x 4' platform and stairway. Your visit to the site will confirm that 2 of the 3 entrances to this residence would be made accessi^'e by this deck. Adjacent hot History Applicant's property has no garage, and a small me* al across the alley to the west appears to be associated with this property. The lot west of the alley was once owned in common with applicant's lot, but we.nt tax forfeit a numbe' of years ago, and is available for sale only to at jacent landowners. While it may take Council approval, applicants property could be considered as adjacent and, therefore, should be eligible to purchase that lot. Also note that when sewer was brought to applicants property, the assessment was split between applicants lot and the lot across the alley. The City has never recovered that half of the assessment, and would expect to recover that as part of the sale of this lot (it is staff's understanding that the tax forfeit status of the westerly lot occurred prior to Fleischman s purchase). At any rate, although it is somewhat unrelated to the variance request, applicants are advised that the shed should be moved onto their own property or they should make arrangements to purchase the vacant lot and combine it with their homestead lot. Note that acquisition of the lot would likely provide a place where a gi\rage could conceivably be constructed in the future. Staff Re ndation If the Planning Commission finds that there is sufficient hardship for allowing construction of the replacement deck, then a recommendation for approval of setback and lot coverage would be in order. The Planning Commission shou specifically define the hardships supporting approval. . .................... ^ j T 2^”/^ ^ "O ^ • *. ‘ 6v 'a i OF OROMO - VARIMICB APPLICATION uitial Application Fee $175.00 ($50*00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fjse $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Pees (Double application -/ a u. fee) V.* PROPBRTT LOCATION sit* Addtass SOO ri/VfOlJON) ,-7*7* r,c ’firkitf L ^ f r W-XU'MU* a^WW'^ -'V -V"'- -Ti/»A I *.' • W'W required survey. _ __ _ _ _3,_ _(75.0^ JkPPLlCMT Nanie Phone (home ) H15“ ** *FUj Phone (work I 7t1 f a ,-ir .7j T W'fc. ' —■ < 1V1 f a V • w Address t 5*0014^1^1^ H-yg City; (VA-y^/y-F^- p-(if different than applicant) Name_ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _— Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip; Date Property Acquired (month/year) 1 (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. r. SSBSXHT OSB OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District P-esent Use of Property /Residential Other (specify) DBSCRJPTIOH OF RBQOBST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: i:VMOMCBS H «!ii t'l.oi V Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover !-P Setback Variances (Front Side X Rear) I." Other •! 1^- BMtDSHIPDescribe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from s^ict enforcement of zoning regulations; UQ-T - - u\\rio it*irvnAafibl£ 4»r% qx/t traAo;r\t cir^H>#lft>wc.lrncib^j^irp^™ conditSns ___7/^ninrrdescription op uwv^u**** «t«w*---------------- I w - Describe unusual property conditions preventii^g compliance with zoning Code Requirements —^H)N t------- ff: BBQOIRED SUBMITTALS 1.Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150* (you must ootain this ]ist from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-:271). Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor)to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (!' copy 8*i xll tor reproduction ) • . . u ^ Topographic survey' (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grad- are proposed (provide one copy 8Jj"xll"). Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8ij'’xll"). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list o any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. 5. T. 8. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Pl^se remember that vour variance application is not—complete—if- -e- - - -ve |irf«mintlon has not been incladed«_ irtLICAET'S SIGNATURE •jThe applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or reoueated 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 ■upplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Date 5"- Zy- 91 and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date Mwlew meetings of the Planning Cneeianion and Council. If an applicant i unable, to attend a scheduled meeting, please make 2°/zoning authorised agent attend in your place and to advise the Building Office of this change prior to the meeting. ■>..I •t^gt *«i M: m *34 n <?z- A (47) fri < ( I) m i; Ul I I li y X cn-to'i \ 'i*oi \lot 15 ao( Ul»#CT(>rA MUi DICKENSON r“T7T*j V i/f J ' ^'J •(4) * r s' 'cc 1 T * 4 St ^(5)' * <0 Q i A . C 3^ «*c (^7) fm -y . m ^; ; <4*1 V I * *•1 • •t »J jg ^ ►Ng S c (1) %■.•IS v; V J.,v* ,, OATI.OS/M/fl .' 4 S ' i.XV; •, ...; At>U7-» SI OOlS ^‘•witi^ iAlrcN bOA HEMCPXN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORTUTION SYSTEH PROPERTY 0»«CRS LIST i -; < i*.'i.t'i -A *% tOOSOO HANLON AVC __________yX.A NKRCSAfifL r :TA)»AVE9 ' ;> DANICL N rtEXSCNHAN ■,NAHi/AOM :'SOO HANLON AVE r 'U-' •- NAY2ATA Ml 5S5Y1 lY?*:/:'-. I i-''*. :iy ••• :*■ ••••’•.‘■'•r ••"I'. ' '»;i.s«- ot-xir-Es si o«« ” <, MW * MM . I 00»9 KEENE AVE l/'l'.'.OMCR NAM O-.HARALD ERIKSCN , fjTAXPAYER NAM/A9M i I AO HAIIAiO:itIKSEH t 4119 2IALAND AVI N I- 1 > I • 1. N|F : MPLS til . BSAta. 4 •f • js* •: lit-ES Sl'OOSV OXCKENSON ST , •li , •if I >*&0MCR NIM ;>iN P SCMHIDT. A K H SCHNtOT TAMAVtN f- ;* NXLLXAN A> KMNXNE SCHHXOT f.'l'f NAM/AOM iRsbi Ai i .11E9S OXCKENSON ST V’r'*-''.i- l#; *,’■ ?' 5 » ‘f **v “.‘•I'-r.MOOAOM ■ .-f ^«>..flMEO y: »• ■ ■.¥. .. .•V NAYZATA Ml. BSSSl ii I (TAMOAYER M; TOTAL OATCN . iViH . 004 00009 .. A ''■-;iw hv,* ,■; 74''/-v ' ' 'A?' ■ ’L-I t.r-Ji.J. . - t'.- ‘■At.y. . .•^AA'. .• •. • - i F :* • ••' •• ' . •* w • 1 *' i,... 4 38 02-117-23 31 0014 00521 HANLON AVE RICK S HILLER ET AL RICK S MILLER AND KATHRYN E STfMSO MILLER 521 HANLON AVE NAYZATA Ml 55391 38 02-117-23 31 0037 00530 HANLON AVE NIL THIES SILL I LUCY THIES 530 HANLON AVE NAYZATA Ml 55391 58 02-117-23 31 0046 00540 BARRETT AVE' 0 N JAFFRAY I M 8 JAFFRAY DRAPER N JAFFRAY 540 BARRETT AVE NAYZATA Ml 55391 REPORT NO. PX435401 PAOfi IS 38 02-117-23 31 0015 00537 HANLON AVE R V I N E KOEHNEN ROBERT I MICHEL KOEFtCN 537 HANLON AVE NAYZATA Ml 55391 38 02-117-23 31 0038 00520 HANLON AVE RAMONA M SLEOZ GERHARD 0 TA'IGER 10043 PILLSBURY AVE BLOOMINGTON Ml 55420 38 02-117-23 31 0047 00450 ORONO ORCHARD RO EDHARO H HAMM FDHARD H HAM1 408 ST PETER ST ST PAUL Ml 55102 X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEMCPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST. OF MY KNOMLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE by ?•.-4 I i • t , • 1 ■h * I . 4- •tr • t* i f I * -II.: '1 - •i:’' » »‘ ; !*' '. •; r •*>'■ ••\\ i.;} • •;. P •*• S ^</?/> Ayp^to /ij^ <■c:ic£ic. -m ■‘‘ *'■'*f «*•#• • . w *. . •. ^ -•^.^.14 5^*« «• • •. I. •« • •v‘*%•\\ * , -♦•r • »v. m •.**7! V •«>. • m klA^___<p^c J^riAyl JfjnA 2 /:L^k:iJdi^p -^n^j......... _____/c>._ rcf^i'ci<^_:& __ .au^-Jl^e!^^--.^ i0< ^_.';/fr. ujos f Q^J^JtM¥:A. -nc^-__7/^____________________ , . ‘y / t^A lY ^ ^ ^ 7/7^/iy. ^4^ _/>^ ^uK. ^P--/______MJJ?a<;±2^.^ JAshiAiYj=^- Q.AhPi^___IALoj-^ a n <Y_______.- - JjJ^C^ aVc^c/qaa^ //p_e _______________ //2-^ 7*t-€ ^ k:^Uh _______jl\...jy__^. //^ __ _ (^/^//^ ^ ^/<4^5_______^ fuiAjhi .. hj.C /1^17 ^ C^I.C'4z:^. 7I-^L. jr c-Tfew^9 _____L_1^(xi]Oj_ upi^o ^ t /*‘* ------f. frT ?«8 ------------i. 7 ✓^ I' |!SSii« D4.C-IC. -f Vs #1 * ^ >KJ-ii>«.'L^..!«. • • ' • • / y-- •1* • •/ • *• . ¥ *• . • ^. r* s--.: '/im •H ^ /, ^ CtTV TF CRC*>iOo''C___niasso'^ l-&t/\V^o^ujiC i'iK^ (J/Jrjt,^/ ff XZ^ z;:XA/y^vc'^ i/y /j}< ,AXC^Z/^^ ^ X/"JXn . X Xc'hX XX ^ /Mio A<^fXX&u<i^ yt/jJ 0'^/^ XuPU/<- X ^ XA'iZz<.X ^ yHXju ^ J>%pc/f^C Xd j X* yU^ ^AccJ^ /\j^Xbt/*--^ c(xX. . X'yjCi^A io Aitz^ p\hp&\Ay- ; /yyuaX f^>h(nrzl • XXp<^ unXX^ (Lo,..y^^ ..aXr^- 5Zi \_ HzxAjtirx CUH. f-'ijv^ V I (l-'lc to K •k -•‘-s--» .tvWJiWyiftrtk i »•ip% • —Jg> , •• v' ' ■*■.y—‘rV • m__j^___2__~n>^ fir r nnfl «S *•« '^^ - s^ ■ . -'^\ »•' ^ - ' /» ^ * Vv!5^;;tf I-'-. •'>'■."■'• ‘fii •V ' •TVFf I »» t» t .. - •» 5 . > •»s'« **>* • •-• J. \ • ti€UAfS i^t^~ •>: «»>> iC to'':’:!; V>« ^ /'^y •ALC OATt aaiSi, .-ij.'i >ahtul Tvrr >A» t»4‘- •• o»“lUmOVtMENTS . f - '»• V '< a-' ^^umucm^ - «AHile MQ JS£ I/a. .X -* ^x "x SOkPI- ^jYQ. ^f9 ^y/5" y/f^_ rv. . ‘ ••■ t* ---------- ^■■r.« total f(j Q «T T»^•/ A^g : •. :• :.'..’>.::c^ 99^7V OAflMt .X X # /. ; >T.vjs^«^ . ‘ ^v 4;m kffik-< • ■ :'::.v«! . " ... *, - - V #. . IXTHA0 I * D«IVf1%AY 1a3«e* 7 133«S«7 aSMT FINISH 1334SE7 t ?34$«7 VLUMaiNG 13)4St7 •iiiUBINC 1334S47 t 334S47 t 334ft«7 ClAFaLilCE 1334S«7 w»f/n iiairr.1334S67 mm T IV«t 334S«7 WAiii TPD CEIL-1334$«7 *TRIM 1334«67 ce*^toai /»33«»« 7 ^ATIO 45 1 7 3 « 46 7 ^esccs 1734567 _1 7 3 4 56 7 1 7345E 7 /O^ /tf U ' ^.rn total value /Jof* IS, & •«« •• n- V: V • ■pi. yI V w’ Ao'J V O n- .V.fiiW ;,/V ’F'-'j,;..m Lw«^4«< lx 10 Ojz e«»-» Tsf 10 DU r 5-^^ D«X<'*5 7tlm^oci^$’f^i CoA«/f4t y»4^ vxv p^>S'^s roo ^Oo 4"' I ^osr fS'^oMP'b C4 Go lit r-- CKirm- Iv'ATK s"HV1:Y l-nK MAHl^AHA .J . M.KIS'AIIMAN <>I’ l.OT 1, BF.OCK 14, M i NN'l ! t -fJKA iU.ni Fr. MFNfJi'.j’in rnrmv, MiNrjri-c'TA o «4 Q ZZ n 2 A 7 S 2 < X xS 1 LEGAL OESCRIPTI ON LOT 1, BLOCK 14, MINNETONKA ni,Hl l-S This survey shows tl^e location ol hi .•>; i .-.t. i ti<j ho-iso in ii-l.itiori to the boundaries of the above .iesr-ribed ,Hof...rtv. it does not F>urport to show any othiH' i ni[>i ov.»r,.Hif •; o enct o.,clineiit . I hereby certify that this survey was i.repaKsi by ne er under ny direct supervision and that I ai*. a duly ieui‘;t<-ied i'i\-il Engineer and Land Surveyor undet th< laws of the St i*.-o( Minnesota COFFIN & GRONBEHG, INC. Mark S. Gronberq MN. |,ie. No. I2 7t', Engineers, Land Surveyors, PlanmH'; Long Lake, Minnesota Date Scale 5-15-91 r* = 30' Iron Marker Found Iron Marker Set Bearings shown are based upon an as nim. ,< dat U|ll . ?■ iV p- To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council City Administrator Bernhardson ^4; Froa: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator^^0^. % June 12, 1991 a Subject: #1653 Jeffrey Johnson, 3825 Cherry Avenue - Vacation of Public Right-of-way - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.12 - Vacation of streets, alleys and public grounds. The application involves the partial vacation of a 14* wide alley within the Crystal Bayview plat. The alley is unimproved. There is no record of the City's making any public use of the dedicated alley. As required by both the Orono zoning code and State Statute, the hearing notice has been published twice in the local official paper the weeks of June 3rd and June 10th. As of this date, the City has received no comments from adjacent neighbors notified within the 350* radius of the subject property. List of Bzhibite - A - Application ' Property Owners List Plat Map -Legal Not.' ce ’ Wetlands Map P - Map/Key of Ownership and Pattern of Development Adjacent to Alley G - Survey of Applicant's Property B C D E Beview of Application Please review Exhibit G. The application fails to note the reason for the filing of the vacation petition. In reviewing the survey, applicant's building envelope is intersected by the 14* alley. Any attempt to add improvements to the rear or south side of the house would require setback variances to a rear lot line defined along the north side of the 14* alley and not to the more southern portions of the land holdings of the applicant. These parcels are all legally combined as one homestead. By vacating the alley, applicant's rear lot line would now be to the most southern lot line. Staff has reviewed the partial vacation petition with the Public Works Director. He notes that at a limited 14* width, the City has no plans to install a public roadway. The alley does not provide access to an existing residence (review Exhibit F). He recommends the vacation and asks that drainage and utility easements be provided over the vacated portion of the alley. Gerhardson notes that municipal water will be provided to this area and that the dedicated alley may serve as suitable area for the location of future water lines. Zoning File #1653 June 12, 1991 Page 2 of 2 Staff has reviewed the pattern of ownership (review Exhibit P). Staff can confirm that none of the existing residence achieve access via the alley. Two of the developed properties own parcels to the north and south of the alley which includes the subject property. Other lots defined on the key show separately owned undeveloped lots owned in common ownership that are located both to the north and south side. As already noted abover we have received no comments from interested property o%#ners who wish to join in the vacation. Review Exhibit E, there is an extensive retention area designated as a wetland area on the map (review Exhibit E), major portions of which are currently owned by the City of Orono. The central location of the wetlands would also place severe limitations on the installation of a through road within the alley. City staff had originally considered a total vacation of the alley until the Public Works Director had expressed an interest in obtaining easements over the alley for future water lines. Gerhardson has also asked that the potential vacation be reviewed by the Park Commission to determine if the area is suitable for a bike trail. The application will be reviewed by the Park Commission at their meeting in July (July 2nd). If the Park Commission finds that the area is suitable for bike trail developmentr the City will ask for bike trail easements over the vacated alley. Options of Action - 1.Approval based on one or more of the findings noted below. Approval would be subject to applicant granting drainage and utility easements over the vacated portion of the 14* alley. It should be noted that applicant will receive only 7* of the vacated right-of-way within the west 50* of the vacated alley.Review Exhibit F, the City of Orono will receive the remaining 7* of vacated right-of-way. Review of the findings that would support the vacation: a.Width of right-of-way would not support development of roadway . b.Location of designated wetland within right-of-way of alley. c.Based on pattern of development and current ownership there is no use of right-of-way for access purposes. d.Public interest can be achieved with the granting of necessary easements. 2.Denial. Based on certain findings noted above that suggest a public use or Interest in the undeveloped or unused right- of-way. Zoning File #1653 July 3, 1991 Page 3 Additional Exhibit - H - Staff's Sketch Additional rfrntn and Planning Connlssion Reconmendation - The applicant questioned staff's recommendation to obtain drainage and utility easements over the vacated alley in addition to the request for a potential bike trail easement. The applicant noted the location of an extensive wetland to the iaunediate west that would require extensive filling if such a trail were to be constructed. As of this writing, the Park Commission has not met to review the proposed vacation application. Staff will present their findings at your July 0th meeting. The City Engineer and staff met out on the site and concurred that if water lines were to b* extended to serve the area along Cherry Avenue that the east/west route would be Cherry Avenue as opposed to the 14' alley. The City Engineer has recommended that 10' drainage and utility easements be granted along the newly defined south lot line (Exhibit H) and along the east side of the property to provide for a loop system for the water lines. By relocating the drainage and utility easements to 0OUth lot line of the property, we would eliminate any additional restrictions on building envelope. Staff has drafted the vacation resolution incorporating the necessary findings from the staff memo on Page 2. The City Engineer's recommendation has been incorporated in the resolution as a condition of approval. The resolution may be further amended upon the final action of the Park Commission concerning the need for a bike trail easement. r A RBSOLUTION VACATING OMDSBD PORTIONS OF A 14* ALLEY WITHIN THE PLAT OP CRYSTAL BAY VIEW, HEHIIBPIM COUNTY, CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA FILE 41653 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a m’jnicipal corporation organized and existing under the laws cf the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on May 24, 1991 Jeffrey J. Johnson filed a petition with the City of Orono requesting the vacation of certain portions of an unimproved alley originally dedicated in tha plat of Crystal Bay view, legally described as follows: That portion of a 14* platted alley that abuts the south line of Lot 3 and the west half of Lot 2, Block 7, Crystal Bay View, Hennepin County, Minnesota (south half of Section 08, To«mship 117, Range 23); and WHEREAS, after due published and posted notice a public hearing was held before the Orono Planning Commission on June 17, 1991 regarding said vacation and all persons interested were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the Planning Commission recommended approval of nhe requested vacation and the Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation, as proposed, is in keeping with the public interest in consideration of the following findings: 1.The existing 14’ width of right-of-way would not meet required standards for development of a public road. 2.The location of a designated wetland within the right- of-way of the alley would prohibit the total development of the right-of-way for access purposes. 3.Based on the pattern of development and current ownership there is no use of right-of-way for access purposes. 4.Any public interest in this unimproved right-of-way can be achieved with the granting of necessary easements* Page 1 of 2 •J'.. ^'•u. f |i,. ■. h.isb. NONr THBRBFORB BB IT RBSOLVBD, that the petition of Jeffrey J. Johnson is hereby granted by the Council of the City of Orono and that the portions of unimproved right-of-way legally described above are hereby vacated. The granting of the petition is subject to the following condition: 1.Upon vacation, and before this vacation is filed with Hennepin County, the applicant shall grant to the City easements for drainage and utility purposes 10' along the south and east lot lines. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held July 8, 1991. Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of __ » Barbara A.Peterson 6 Dorothy M. Hallin, Mc.yor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota mur.icipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 2 of 2 CITY OP ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICAT! PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address CAl'S. O^XTa^’Cj -^ Property Identification Nunber (P«I.D. "li H Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Phone (hone) Phone (work) Addr.ss 7^Rf:r City Zip OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone Address City Zic Date Prooertv Acouired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. r*, PEES - CONDITIOIIAL OSB PERMITS • Renewal Fee - 1/2 current Fee After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application $125.00 Residential accessory Use $150.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use r T T f »*• r Li i.' • •,*» fO rirr^rc / i I •W b Ulm i -r-.r -..- X \V VA'V' ,• ^ rru V 1 • “Lrr-T k. f fi. wl« $200.00 Land Alteration •75.00 ^:i'dC-c :'v: ■::i ni:z Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling •” 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of laJceshore •. r ' - .:r im T' / PRD/PID - see fee schedule APPLICATIONS _ _ _ $200.00 _ _ _ $250.00 $175.00 $ 50.00 $250.00 $100.00 Commercial Sice Plan Review (+ consultant fees) Vacation Easement Vacation Easement Vacation with Subdivision Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) Appeals Other - see fee schedule ntBSENT USB OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Reside"tial Ctr.er {specify )_ tIPnOH OF RBQOBST Describe request in detail: IIQOZBBD SDBMITXRLS List of owners withrn 350’ (you can obtain tSi.from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271). 4!Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). i-nH 8.Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) 1*land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades^. 4 Construction plan, if applicable (see staf. for requirements). ^ 7I As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate ^ist of any other persona you wish notified of this application. mov ovnrrrvvn •m STIPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A noSniea^ai^x 17* or smaller) for all _ _ Thm aoolicant and Property Owner must sign this application. JJlIJlSrr tharyour .ppliceticn ie not complete if the above rnformatron has aot been included, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ cirtifieatIon'brciMicirDep«tment that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ SI^applican\ hereby agrees to provide all information ^®2oi^r«^taff reouastad by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees tSa not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred S^evt^ orthl. ipplilatloh, and o.rti/ies that the information supplied is true and correct to ^the of^is/^r Jcnow^edge._ Applicant's signature ----- Date SHTwne^heMby ac)cno^e*dgeslmd*^grees to this application f antharlzed reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, 5^12?;, co^'^SloJ aembJrs, and Council members for purposes of investigation and Mritt^tlon wf ^is request. Ovner • s eigneture______ the City offices 25 <Jay» hej"* the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be mblm to attend a scheduled meeting, please maAe fn^ **^Zoi?ing nntborired agent attend in your place and advise the Building Office of this change prior to the meeting. m.»..f WV <.>Ar .1. mHUN DATE OS/ll/n MTCN OOS PAOP ADDA OMNER NAME TAXPAYER : NAHE/ADOR S8 OS-117-2S 5S 0001 05620 CHERRY AVE CARL A DECK ETAl MRS CHRISTINA BECK 5620 CHERRY AVE MOUND MN 555A4 KEMHPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0I#4ERS LIST 56 06-117-25 55 000. 05626 CHERRY AVE R 1 E HANSON RICHARD E A ELIZABETH HANSON 5826 CHERRY AVE MOUND m 5556<* REPORT NO. PI455A01PAGE 5 58 08-117-25 55 0005 05656 CHER^Y AVE ARTHUR C BRAMBILIA TRUSTEE A C BRAMDILLA 5858 CHERRY AVE MOUND MN 55564 i PROP ADDR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 56 06-1X7*25*55 0006 00056 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO KATHRYN M ENGLUNO ETAL K H NEVERS 9700 PORTLAND AVE S 6524 BLOOraNDTQN HN 55420 56 06-117-25 55 0041 00056 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED KATHRYN N ENOLUND ETAL K N NEVERS 9700 PORTLAND AVE S 9524 BLOONXNGOTN MN 55420 58 08-117-25 55 0007 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED KATHRYN M ENGLUND ETAL K M NEVERS 9700 PORTLAND AVE S 1324 BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 58 08-117-25 55 0042 00056 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED KATHRYN M ENGLUNO ETAL K M NEVERS 9700 PORTLAND AVE 5 i324 BLOOMINGTON m 55420 58 08-117-25 55 0040 05845 CHERRY AVE C L ANDERSON ETAL H/LIFE EST CARL L ANDERSON 3845 CHERRY AVE MOUND MN 55364 58 08-117-23 35 0059 05820 NORTH SHORE DR DEBRA L CULLEN DEBRA i CULLEN 5820 NORTH SHORE DR MAY2ATA MN 55591 •t ’•• ) t ^ 1 ♦•. : V ADDR.:r name TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 56 06-117-25 55 0060 05660 NORTH SHORE DR DANIEL J OHLAND DANIEL J OHLAND 5660 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND m 55364 58 08-117-25 53 0088 ALLAN C I TERRI L LARSON ALLAN C I TERRI L LARSON 1665 HICKORY HILL DR EAGAN 55122 58 06-117-25 55 0069 05825 CHERRY AVE JEFFREY J JOHNSON JEFFREY J JOHNSON 5825 CHERRY AVE MOUND MN 55564 PROP ADDR OmER NAME TAXPAYER ; NAME/ADDR 56 06-117-25 54 0040 05616 NORTH SHORE OR E 0 JOHNSON A P J JOHNSON * EU6ENE JOHNSON/PAULA JOHNSON 5616 NORTH SNORE OR NAYZATA m. 55591 56 06-117-25 54 0044 AODR 05616 . NORTH SNORE DR (MCR NAME E 0 JOHNSON A P J JOHNSON TAXPAYER . EUGENE JOHNSON/PAUU JOHNSON NAME/AOOR 5616 NORTH SHORE OR NAYZATA MN 55591. . ? • 58 08-117-25 54 0042 05818 NORTH SHORE OR E D JOHNSON A P F JOHNSON EUGENE A PAULA JOHNSON 5618 NORTH SHORE OR NAYZATA m 55591 56 08-117-23 54 0057 00056 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO JOHN T EIOEH ETAL JOHN T EIDEH 5766 NORTH SIK)RE DR NAYZATA MN 55591 58 08-117-23 54 0045 05818 NORTH SHORE DR E 0 JOHNSON A P J JOHNSON EUGENE JOHNSON/PAULA JOHNSON 5816 NORTH HOPE OR NAYZATA K 55591 r 58 06-117-25 54 0056 05766 NORTH SHORE DR JOm T EIDEH ETAL JOHN T EIDEH 5768 NORTH SHORE DR NAYZATA m 55591 A ^ * I- ' V V i • I .* • 0 • ■»•V .1 *» t-:f 1 ■* 4. r t 3. r r .«M OATf 05/31/91, • -iATCM 003 MOO Aom OmER NAME fAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR MOO AOOR QMER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOM .i 1"-. vr i »: M 17>117>23 21 0001 OSaOS NORTH SHORE DR JAMES A RONERS JAMES A RONERS 2A7S OUOOOOY AVE NAYZATA W4 55391 30 17-117>23 22 0012 01A35 SHAOYMOOO RO RALRH E HILLER ETAL RALRH E MILLER 1A3S SHAOYNOQO RO NAYZATA tM 55391 ( t ■ >?■ ; j. I HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INTWMATION SYSTEMPROPERTY 0»t«RS LIST REPORT NO. P1435A0IPAGE * ' * ■ • 38 17-117-23 22 0001 03895 NORTH SHORE OR LOREN R FRITZ ETAL LOREN FRITZ 3895 NORTH SHORE OR MOUND MN 55369 38 17-117-23 22 0002 03865 NORTH SHORE OR STATE LAND OEPT THOMAS R ■ COOKIE J SARENPA 1670 SHAOYMOOO RO NAYZATA MN 55391 •• t TOTAL BATCH 005 00022 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HErt^PIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATICN» TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLCDGE AND BELIEF. DATE ‘ t i: f I i . i * A. ,< 'J (*, -»* , ■c-V''o •' ■Y ; r •.\f- - ..*• •\ . A 4 's' > r ■ ••A ‘•m* I . ‘.* >« • im V•im - .1 \ \ \ \ / / •» m kti OhS»it *f" 7 -* /,«-• wrr n?)s*^ «’(I?) mjL (13) :• Z? C»i) * JU.1 ^ (10)^ K JUJL o (35) (30 |£lHi) r?" %&m I (») V (26) rm > RO •» ( ’5) . i P 4^ w (16) SS »•( 17) y» I IS •I ( 15)^! .►.t4 »* ^; t !.••* •“ • •* I *«r*‘V •'Ti• 5 #•' - ’• ftrJtf • * j**•** •* f71 4 'K 19) JOlJ___ .*• (20),, ^ \ • »122) (73)'«’ns ( 24) *• JUX ;•. jia,. * .1* ;|v I f ./f. r ft f f:r It’ fe b: oCITY OP ORONO - NOTICE The Orono Planning Conunission will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at 1275 South Brown Road at 8:00 p.m. on Monday# June 17# 1991 to consider the vacation of a portion of a dedicated right-of-way legally described as follows; That portion of a 14' platted alley that abuts the south line of Lot 3 and the west half of Lot 2; Block 7, Crystal Bay View# Hennepin County# Minnesota (the South half of Section 08# Township 117# Range 23). All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. The meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available for review in the City offices by appointment. CITY OF ORONO by Its Planning Commission / '7 ill / / Ajc/ y.-V Jeann^ Mabusth# Building & Zoning Administrator JAN/tln To be published the week of June 3rd and June 10th# 1991. *M <41 ^nnH'^b---ITii j , A I >> tnifii ini irti >m.m ti9 t ^ •;nt. Tl « ICit PiL*f7^v<<g /o/mc»C/" ^ — D'«.v«Io^'40 O — WSwd'€V« / 9p^0 ^^Hevx4.i# Nunleyic.4//^ c/t»^04^o \ \ \ \ ^ ^ I JL(«a.//y (►•/»#0 p**irc-€ /4 / Cct\n\9t)^ oujN^Asit^ L<fT ^ ^6iurte»r'4</^ 4#^»3 •*^-ji^An^y i A .A ^ A i • <ni 1 oo iim ^ f UD •cm MM/I \ C^Of^iyi li *M -La^nl y»\ .1 *•</cm Lo'ts o^cA^v- s, (o JU^S 6VJMC6 L oON er'f4i|« •« B ^ d/^lP ^W ••/J C ^ ^ ^ \ r§n A J ^m.ntU o€f>n N <r/» III s2 v cm •% ir" in ,i «l/rJi^ I U» IW >»/c«*f£f *••« e./" *Of my r "y-. t« hi j. f-; Minder Engineering Co.,Inc. ENGINEERS AND SURVEVORS lamo •uav^N^iMO CIVIU tMOtMtt BiNd C4I6-5C'*'- AVEMUE N. MIWNEAPOUS 17, MtNN. KE 7-3C37 80U.3 TtSTirsiO L*»«0 o C'M»''tilfit(>ifc'e »if UiiiF’rtey i: N* \ - \ \ \ \4- \ \ r. •^ / N.n • »v; > I !• Vi V •* / / I s» \ 'f J \ \ \ •%r* N c n; *s , • ^ J* <# • • . •** V f 49 * f ' « m •W -?w' / •* .V' -V '•■ y .r"7^, cT/'y. r^/ ^ HCRtftY CERTlfY THAT THIS 15 A TRUE ANO CO««lE.CT aEPRCSEMTATlOW Of K SuavEV OF THE BOOWDAfttES OF THE kANB^fKftOVC OESCftiBEO AHO OF THE LOCATiOM OP ALL BlMLDtNGS, !F AMY, 7HLRE0M , AMO AU. V^5l6LE tNCROACHMtMTS, ^ AMT^ FROM OR OM SAIO LAND. OMl? T»«j •Ajo : MINDER -eN6lME.ERlNQ CO.. INC. eMOi^CEB.^ •‘MO ^ SUO.vf ro^S >- .- \ tA t I II 1? t: r fl;.' »«t«K % To:Mayor Peterson & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Oa Proa:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:July 1, 1991 Subject: #1655 Elaine Pagonis - 2740 Shadywood Road Variance - Resolution Zoning District - LR-’B,Single family lakeshore residential, 1 acre, sewered A^lication - Request for hardcover variance to construct decks List of Bzhibits Exhibit A - Proposed Resolution Exhibit B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 6/18/91 Exhibit C - Memo and Exhibits of 6/13/91 Discussion Please review the memo of June 13, 1991. Briefly, the applicant requests a hardcover variance of 1.2% (518 s.f.) to construct two decks in the 75-250' zone. The memo of June 13 describes the recent history leading to this request, and notes that prior to the remodeling project that is nearing completion, 75-250* hardcover was about 30%. Final proposed 75-250* hardcover is 26.2%. Planning rn—ission Re dation At their June meeting. Planning Commission voted 5 to 1 to reconunend approval of the variance as requested, finding that due to the unique circumstances noted in the memo, the applicant is now in a position of either having to remove more square footage from an already minimal driveway, or remove an extensive sidewalk system constructed prior to applicant's apparent knowledge of theV'Was V - - - -- r e hardcover limitations for this property. Further, Planning_ » _ _J _ ofCooimisslon members suggested that because approximately half o the lot in the 0-75’ zone has less than 1% hardcover, the property generally meets the intent if not the letter of the hardcover ordinance. In a minority opinion. Planning Commissioner Cohen felt that there is no legitimate hardship. m An tg. f:- U- ••„. >; ,|f- ?:. €w k\ ^S^' f ^ n.Mu* •S - .I^-. ii?;;: i' i ■ § >, W 0^- i- f:;,.' • Zoning File #1655 July 1» 1991 Page 2 Planning Conunission included t**-: conditions in their motion for an approval recommendation: 1.Applicant should be placed on notice that no further hardcover increases will be approved for this property. 2.The applicant is advised that the only allowable underliner for any landscape beds proposed for the property is non-woven weed barrier fabric. Staff Re dation Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation. A resolution reflecting Planning Commission's recommendation is attached for Council review. lav !v V ■> ... ■■ f-' !'■ A RBSOLOTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MONICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION PILE #1655 WHEREAS, Elaine Pagonis (hereinafter the applicant") is of the property located at 2740 Shadywood Road within the Citj of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: That part of Tract "D", Registered Land Survey No. 420, Hennepin *'ounty, Minnesota lying northeasterly of the southwester1> 7.00 feet, except that part lying northwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the southwesterly line of said Tract "D", 21.51 feet southeasterly from the most westerly corner of said Tract "D" to a point on the north line of said Tract "D", 7.57 feet east from the northwest corner of said Tract "D". (hereinafter "the property"/; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to persiit the construction of decks which result in hardcover in the 75- 250* zone of 6,448 s.f. or 26.2% where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed. Minnesota: HOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1, This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1655. 2.The property is located in the LR-'B Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1991 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: Applicant is currently remodeling the existing residence. Such remodeling has Included additions to the residence. Prior to the remodeling project, hardcover in the 75-250* zone was approximately 30%. II- Page 1 of 6 L ‘ i4 I sA MfrWn it II • i ill;.. f.- Applicant's general contractor! in order to obtain a permit! provided a plan showing less than 25% fvnal hardcover in the 0-75' zone, which plan was approved by the City staff and the general contractor completed the necessary removals in a timely manner. Midway through the project, the general contractor ceased involvement with the project. The applicant proceeded to act as general contractor and had a new driveway and entrywalk constructed with no review by the City. When the property owner was notified that the hardcover now exceeded the limits agreed to previously, the applicant claimed she was unaware of any previously agreed to hardcover limitations but would present a plan for hardcover removals to meet the Code requirements. Applicant attempted to come up with a plan that would leave a functional driveway, allow for decks on the lake side of the house, yet not result in the need to remov.- the elaborate front entry sidewalks already completed. Planning Commission finds that the above noted circumstances, the fact that the proposed plan still results in a significant net decrease in 75-250' hardcover, and the fact that this is a large lot and while half of the lot is in the 0-75' zone, there is less than 1% hardcover existing or proposed in that zone, combine to provide adequate justification for granting of the proposed 1.2% hardcover variance. 4.The City Council has considered this application in luding the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on th<=^ health, safety and welfare of the community. 5.The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply gen« -.'ally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate Page 2 of 6 r" .*• ■y- ■y.* a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLOSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of decks attached to the existing residence which result in hardcover of 26.2% in the 75-250' zone where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1.The applicant is advised that any proposed landscape areas must be non-hardcover and the only allowed weed barrier is non-woven permeable fabric (do not use plastic or woven fabric ). 2.Hardcover in the 75-250' zone is approved at a level of 26.2%. All existing and proposed hardcover approved with this variance approval is recorded in the c. ^culation vorksheet and diagram enclosed with this resolution as Page 6, The current property cv>'er and all future owners of this property are placed on ic that hardcover shall not be increased above the currently approved level anc any proposed Improvements of this property that will result in additional hardcover must be approved by the City. Such Approval may result in a requirement for concurrent equivalent or greater removals of existing hardcover. All existing hardcover scheduled for removal as a condition of this resolution must be removed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction. 3.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one yeax of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 8, 1992). 4.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of Page 3 of 6 rr-' I ■;> i-f-' I tr t-. f- k*- ii-n, :i-.; f r- f' P ■ f'^* i w i-r v|V^/ the zoning code# shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein# and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself# his heirs# successors and assigns# hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. 1991. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 8th day of July# ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin# City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )8S. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of July, 1991, by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor a 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 6 fe . 11*1..J it. kt' i Ifc. I -•1'^ I I2'i-- i-. fe'4 W- iir I-r'fX’fv ?*•-i !■F?" I- &•■'•■ k'f'"- %■. i' tfe- CITT OF OROMO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay# MN 473-7357 ZONING PILE #1655 55323 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice; 6/18/91 TOs Elaine Pagonis 2740 Shadywood Road Excelsior# MN 55331 COPIES TO: TXFB OF AFFLICATIOBt Variance DATB OF MBBTlBGs 6/17/91 VOTE; 5 For 1 Against Flaanijig Coaed.seion recoBMends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below B0TB8 ABD 8FBCIAL CONDITIONS: 1.Applicant is advised that no further hardcover increases will be approved by this Planning Commission. 2.Any proposed landscape areas must be non-hardcover and the only allowed weed barrier is non-woven permeable fabric (do not use plastic or woven fabric). Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as City Council on Monday# July 8, 1991; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. I£ you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission alnutes# they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. lav m , >' ^ ■•i i Mayor Peterson 6 Orono Council rtembers Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson //. Froas Dates Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator June 13, 1991 Subjects #1655 Elaine Pagonis - 2740 Shadywood Road Variance - Public Hearing Soning District - LR-IB, Single family lakeshore residential, 1 acre, sewered Application - Request for hardcover variance to construct decks List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Letter of Request Exhibit E - Surveys Exhibit P - Hardcover Worksheet Exhibit G ^ Deck Elevation Views Exhibit H - 12-13-90 Inspection Notice Exhibit I - Remodeling Hardcover Approval Packet Fartlnant Facts - 1. *As recalculated by applicants surveyor ** Doe.^ not include half-built deck Vt-:...0175-250'Total A.Zone Area 23,384 s.f 24,601*— B.Allowed Hardcover 0 s.f.6,150 s.f.6,150 s.f. C.Original HC prior to remodeling 455 s.f. (1.95%) 7,400 s.f.t (30% +) 7,855 s.f.+ D.HC approved with April 1990 remodeling permit 419 s.f. (1.79%) 5,138 s.f. (21.18%) 5,557 s.f. E.HC existing on April 25, 1991 220 s.f. (0.94%) 6,024 s.f.** (24.49%) 6,244 s.f. F.Proposed hardcover 220 s.f. (0.94%) 6,448 s.f. (26.2%) 6,668 s.f. 6,668-6,150 - 518 s.f. variance request I I' I’ r r. i, k \‘ ii k~ .ri.iaiL- Zoning File #1655 June 13, 1991 Page 2 2.The applicant purchased this property approximately 1-1/2 years ago and in April 1990 hired a contractor to remodel the residence. At that time, hardcover exceeded the 25% limit. The contractor submitted a plan for hardcover removals that would yield conformance with the hardcover requirements and a letter from the property owner agreeing to the removals. The permit was issued, the removals occurred prior to the footing inspection and all seemed to be in order. 3.During the course of the project, the contractor and the property owner apparently did not see eye to eye on a number of issues, and the contractor ceased involvement with the project in midstream. 4.Last fall, the property owner, now acting as general contractor, had a new driveway and entrywalk constructed, with no review by the City. When the Building Inspectors discovered this work, the property owner was notified that the hardcover now exeeded the limits agreed to previously. The property owner was surprised and indicated she was unaware of any previously agreed to hardcover limitations, and when presented with the original Letter of Agreement, suggested that her contractor may have submitted that on her behalf without her knowledge in order to speed approval of the project. She agreed to present a plan for hardcover removals to meet the code requirements. 5.After a number of attempts to come up with a plan that would leave a functional driveway, allow for decks on the lakeside of the house, and would not result in the need to remove the fairly elaborate front entry sidewalks, applicant determined that the only way to accomplish this would be to request a hardcover variance. Oiscneslon This request is for 518 s.f. hardcover excess on a lot of about 48,000 s.f. Hardcover on the property has been significantly reduced from the original 7,855 s.f. overall, to 6,668 s.f. with this current proposal. It is possible that had the property owner had more involvement in the original hardcover discussions, the extensive front sidewalk may not have been built, or a variance application might have been commenced before the remodeling project got started. At any rate, applicant finds herself in a position of having to either remove driveway to a point where it may be only marginally functional, or remove a fairly complex sidewalk system in order to have decks, if no variance is granted. There were decks on the originally approved remodeling plan amounting to about 350 s.f. The current deck proposal is 424 s.f. Please review the applicant's Letter of Request and the attached exhibits. J r . 'f- IS.F., A: k If" '■ 0^. "ff' . }r«'- i;v r.-;->- Isir " V*' .»>■ f^'" V¥I |: .v S V"' K . h-:- Ff'H.ft;S0- K' ■■• ■ mKf’Va ■ Zoning File «1655June 13, 1991Page 3 Staff Re<indation If Planning Commission determines that the circumstances of this project and the resultant decrease in hardcover on the property in both 0-75' and 75-250' zones is justification for granting of a hardcover variance, then recommendation for variance approval would be appropriate. lav •n-'KOX.t. I *-><^ ^ ^ ^C LOtr ^-^4 j f. ^v: pi: W-a*'mm:"k-i,r kr b. ■■k I r:.fc fe’ kV*’' .■•ir-Cirr OP ORONO - variance application Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) #1 r-* J ■5 O -r.k.- • i_ . t c •.I i. i. r ;4. -W •’■- u u t '* PROPBRTT LOCATION Site Address ■<“r;j . -£: A ^ • r i • W' * V' V•" r..': . • Vi/* V'V Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) noCSl. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. jkPFuaurr Name Pi^C-C/VQ Phone (home) Address: ^UiOA^ _____ Phone (wor)c) City; ^fono_______ Zip; ^SS332^ ONNSR (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address:City:Zip; Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land IT USB OP PBOPBBTT Present Zoning District Present Use of Property C^r^sidential Other (specify) qp BBQUBST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail; Af>T^ ^^gc^S~--------- SBQOIBBD Lot Area Lot Width Setback Variances (Front ^ Hardcover r side Rear) I. Other •A:* . t.J r i? HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations; StC _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DBSCRIPTIOH OF OMUSUAL PROPERTY COHDITIOHS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: fTTTAOi- - - - - - - - --- -- - - - - - - - 2. 3. 4. RBQOIBBD SDBNmALS 1.Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8%"xll" for reproduction). Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8Vi"xll'’). Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8*j"xll"). Ag sn 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. 5. 6. 7. 8. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that voor ▼ariance application is not complete if the__above jjtformetXon not been Included. AFPLXCJOR'S SIGHATDRB 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 applicatiopr- .and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the .^est et his/her )cnowledge. Applicant's Signature Date s/jy/u / OMBB8 SIGHATDRB The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorises reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents^ Commission members, and counoil members for purposes of investiga tion and verification,^^, this request. DateOwner's Signature Applicant must have all su mittals 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 Coaaission and Council. If an applicant is Qjiable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorised agent attend in your place and to advise the Building « Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. •»A .i'. \Is ti’-i I • I"' .-•,A \ \. z\‘I \ A \N .1 ») 1^• Pori I7 1' h V^ tw •' \ItMiM A- >'C / / / ' (0 •»io q\ \\\ ICji :W ■,£ 'I I >^i/V ((•o/. / ' V # *•// ^/ y/ ?t* > " ^ i y^V 7 W W 2t ;i6 < 2^ t V • w a 4>V,. 'I i Iv / / »lS • V,' \/ LAKS MiNNeTOMKA 'y\ jt^i (■, »*' . . II-MM MTl':sK'‘mtcn ms >•MKM^AOM It/lt/Mw.;j5e- •'*" --------------ti ooos KO TAXPAVfi •f NMC/MNM ■'rs* ti-117-ss ;0t7S8 . SMMVNOOO . - 7MN. C CAKLSCN ETAL V PAU. C CAMLSON . ' . ri^STSS SHAOVNOOO PO *1'* EXCELSiaP m B5SS1 in‘ ,.!^ PMJP'siM ,'^^iTj'lMCI'NAM TAXPAtlP. OMSa .,^AMflESS UNASSXeNEO H FUZSCNHACKEP u' ;t)v.'JOSEPM PiPLEZSCHNACKEK E77S SHAOVNtMO M) . ' EtXELSZOII tW BSSSl . ■: ‘f/-* .< V, sr ti-iip-Es E4 oosi «: «E7M SNAOVMOOO RD __________Ui’^M H NZCNOILS ETAU *•, i.TAXPAVER /;,74n ZLUAN N NZCHOLLS -. NM/»oil)ftno swn«. >o».. « •• ‘ "f' •‘WA'' i V ^ •5»^,rffpilDP AOMl-____ _____ ,%,OMCR NAM|‘k 9jAICS n 'nxan 4*DCCf ISIOII tM ; sssn' 1 ■Pr . •:. r ' ■,' , W n*U7-tS 24 0041 MeTM ■ SHA0Y1 ' • jil^.TARPAVlR'. (. rAUCE L,OROCIC •'• NM«/AaOR;'4|t7M SHAOVNOOO ,:rjS^ENCEiszoR jm . snsz ^ j ♦; ‘i 1 ^ ■ f RO ^ \ .,n • • ‘I •• !• r <> » .n-117-U H 0041 • : tfflOC^IN COUNTY MOPfOTY INrOOHAnON SYSTTMPROPERTY (MCRS LIST 30 21-117-23 2^ 00036 ADDRESS UNASilGNED DAVID C COOK DAVID C COOK 600 H HILLSIDE DR HAYZATA MN 55391 30 21-117-23 24 0020 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIONEO JAHES 0 GINTHER ET AL JAHES 0 GINTHER 3131 JARTHOUTH AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 30 21-117-23 24 0o32 02720 SHADYHOOD RO J 4 0 KVAH JOHN C 4 BEVERLEE A KVAM 2720 SHADYHOOD RO EXCELSIOR MN 55331 30 21-117-23 24 0045 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED DONALD A LAYMAN ETAL LYMAN LUMBER CO 337 HATER ST EXCELSIOR m 55331 OMSS VAI SS IMASSZCNEB . :<OMCR NMC JOHN P -TNZNHESH;:. j J ■A»AV1R, .aj^JOHM P.THZItCSMi;^'.*' , • ; NIM/ABM^‘tS4S0 PLORZOA AVE N ' V*' ' i’(1,'«WAL^;av 15427. '. MME/AOOS KfiNANCY. tlPZELBEUCORN E7S0 SHAbV lecctLsioRiiM V IP.J* ’»• ‘V-.U ♦rK* 30 21-117-23 24 0062 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED PAUL R NUTT FRED C EDDONES 2740 LAMPHERE DR NEH NOPE MN 55427 30 21-117-23 24 0065 02740 SHADYHOOD RD ELAINE T PAGGNIS ELAINE T PAGONIS 2740 SHADYHOOD RD ORONO MN 55331 i * r *• *i'. report ND. PZ4SB49IPAGE 58 21-117-25 24 0020 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIONEO THOMAS J CASEY ETAL THOMAS J CASEY 278S SHADYHOOD RD EXCELSIOR MN 55551 ‘i ' ’-'Xi- 1 !•••I.» .I f*».,»•* 58 21-117-25 24 0050 ' . 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO ' THOMAS P LOME ET AL CO-TRUSTEES TRUST REmL ESTATE Ml NATL BK 6TH I MARqUETTE MPLS m SS480 38 21-117-23 24 0040 027AO SHADYHOOD RO HILLIAH A ANDERSnN HU LI AM A ANDERSON 2760 SHADYHOOD RO EXCELSIOR m 55551 58 21-117-25 24 0054 02771 SHAOVNOOO RO R 0 A H J OGLE lARD G t MARLYS J OGLE ?9i2 OAKLAND AVE SO MPLS MN 55407 38 21-117-25 24 0063 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO JOHN P THIMMESH JERRY C CLIFFORD 10516 CAVELL AVE S BLOOMINGTON FM 55458 I ' 10 ID ' I TOTAL BATCH 003 00017 •’I. I • ' ' ■ V .il- . ► •.1 <•I •*I tH »v {‘ V \ r*' / \ /v| / /\ \ \ \ \ \ \ ireii Jl i>ot^e ‘ .mlv-Jt.* 7“ ♦''le'hoiK •i^4.G0l square ♦eef \ \ \ tp- -. r''^lio^aL^e f'cr.i surJQce .s ^b\ < 2^1- hJtO sQjare ^eer X c C'^S \ V > \ \ V . -....... _ ... ..--., .. -r, .......... �\, . , 'II • I • / / /. "'· . . . ,· J 13 ---· -- .-.,. ..... • ;ll(ll'c• 13,JOl e 11)• ,. o,c: .: l I• . , : ..... __ u• , .., • ..-,au • '2, ♦ � ·-· .. .. ---� ... ., ,. ' --·-... 4--. HARDC3VE?. aLC:LA7;:.'i :iC h:<:h£ ScT3Ac:< z ':ne : (c:?.c:.£ :ne ; « ^ ^ ^ « ^W Existing HARDcsvEr. Zone A.House X s • * LENGTi:WIDTH . X X _ -X X B.Gar gs c.Driveway r\ 0.. Sidewalk E.Pa Dec.^lor' ^ p.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN BY PLASTIC SHEETING OF HooSS t-?S G.Other Total Hardcover in Zone - Total Property Area in Zone S • r I 1 .• ^ ^ .V S.r . 3 , S.F. ...; J SS s.-.• S S.F. S • F • 'i S.F.■b S.F. *II S.F. .. -^/e- - S.F. »S.F. m S.F. S.F. S.F. ^0 jesai- 2t/,(gOl S.F. A S.F, \(^J 1 . 100 % ^ • ^srthX. =£,2V/ si : 25.V % f: Ife' ■ f^oFtSef^ I • I--------\~V~^------<’!>- <Z^IO l-*i>TieH‘ I • -c -r- -.»r»'70-c ' 'y^lh MIX ^vr««»N# CTv^ ) •- ^ w-v •- :?^-i‘ f* - cmr OF ORONO INSPECTION NOTICE PERMIT NO_______ called in SCHEDULED completed date I7--IZ 1 -■ :^0 ADDRESS__________ OWNER '^r? wo>V £^(!xxx CONTR. k-^V ••••I TELEPHONE NO. I•• . •\t is •r.:i a ^ 01POOTIMO ttnuMtNO 09INSiA>TKM MMAU.BO. OSnNAL OrOCMO->SITE 07 OCMO—FINAL oimiMBiNowi lOPuiMamanNAL 11 MECHANICAL Rl 11 MECHANICAL FINAL ZVZi WOOD BUBNER/FIREPLACE 12 WATEB HOOK.UP 13 METEB SET/TURN ON 14 SEWER HOOK4;P 27 SEPTIC MAINT 15 SEPnc INSTALL 23 SEPTIC RNAL 16 WEU TEST PUMP 16 EXCAV/GRAOING/FILLING 19 LAKESHOREAVETLANDS tree removal ■E INSPECTION 06 PROGRESS 21 complaint 22 FOLLOW-UP 36.TRE CT it Wi ..: • ■iV- V L' m ^ • m •• ‘ I -t ‘e Mi I Ui j^NOKH . BATISf ACTORV: PROCEED 'C CONRKT WORK A PROCEED •k: •. ■. •f-.. □OORRCCr WORK, CAU FOR REINSPECT10N BEFORCCOVCRMHO □CORRKT UNSAFE OONOmON WITHIN___ MSPCCTORWHJ RETURN HOURS. r PROJECT COMPLETE Z ISSUE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ________temporary ________PERMANENT a STOP ORDER FOSTL j. CAU INSPECTOR Q INBPECnON REQLHRED. CAU TO ARRANGE ACCESS C PHOTO TAKEN Z OTATION ISSUED CaU forttwnoxt inspoetion 24 hours in advance. 473*7357 ■»t•7^’T f; I I I, w ,ric \ p V , i o\o <^cjkue; ^v... ''^NSC^tS'HO-^ < N ** ^^.Sh—•/N57'’47 W 200 0 Plot 7>o(* /D . R0A&V'/fO NQr-19 cs----,��,..., -)._0...\ '-c... � ,i:::, '\,..,_ a. -...,.A..t '--... ...,....,"-.J � 0 ;-\.A. c_ ".'\ � • � •. ") �--�. --<? --� .... �•---��� _J \r i- 1 ’. « 4 . *• I •: /r I ; . »s J' .% .» i ^ *• • • . k • • • •* i*t *• tV • •f I- «• • • • f ;k kik:^ . ///♦zeDCoU^2V70 ^ftAxyfbJOo^ *2-Vsn^<-XA*fc MA*c>ev g^c> O/C" ^(TSS J^OL» j.-C, //A^yS ”*/jt^ tfofTrtWff •-'>■*■••• ‘ .ll.**. 7£“'2.3T>'(fli C/<cC6/4.4Tl!C>*i.Y >Hy^C ^ zv^SS^.J/ s..^.\- • < • -t ^ycj /i<T70/^ <5\/rfL ’*■ To-^f/i^ FocTii^ e>^ p<(Utfvj*^ *+ SV2^ Ac«-^c:- Z-yo t“/S'ij” “' V-STS" 3 .C, •. ‘ V# 75'-lSt)' ^Ao>c»ueA, (^fAO/Oos.eCi (3> -7 V, /5- X io. / /O'*? ^/3.4r piftfoveD pe^ (S> (?D <S> (S>_ f^urio Blccji^ ?. T/<// 2, 2.yx/?.r' 4x7 <S>CCxoC. wAtUL "rxioy (2)........................1 X i.T3 ^ _^T9N^ fi-ttr: luAtC •2-/*/0 p ..l:>«\vj»rvsj>wY 2.»><73/(gr (3^ © /£? X ii— /O x2.?/z^ -20^ J » M3 ( ;t- j -V20 ^ -72. ^ -/oo " 5T / ro / >-20 .y •/•7fio ^ -l-Se.'a- ) -=■Jro 1 /vr J . V I ^ . .• - .• * 3'VI 1 * ^ST77 « •^ , I•* «« If 70g>S“ -S.^.--i‘ ' “ , .r -.’ : '. *• i •"!: <;rterr V .jti. .. • . . • . . . . -·--. .... .-.. . . .... . . . -..,. . � -.-. .. ''" . .. .. ·. . . • .. ... , . . .' I ,. . -. .' . . .. • I• , . .· .. . . . -. - I . ...... ' ·. • . : . ... :•t •' •• ' I • I . . . �e€ l.�a.!� s� ... . .., . . ------- --. - . --·. _ __.. ... --------. - ---. --. ---... -· ... -.. -. .. --------• -- , �.. I,♦, .. . · .. . . . . � B e �v�/rl e;,,x, I' , , r ,)C s, � oN oF-t)'L{v � ., . -. ·---. -----. .. .• ... ----.... . . -- V-ir-,.,;) e:xJ� j.J � -�u �s NeT I' . . ' 75'" -z..S"O' eµ s1,G.+ r 12,-of'o s�-=-70 e ':::" .._ �. -��V 4-c,...� = -11Y1 s r:: s: . 3 !\ S7.; s/i '-j I l-l-1 -1 -::--2-J. /8 /4 Olt!:.. � ., . . . . '• \•· ' , 'I\. ( � :=S/'3.ff:>-+1/l'IJ-��I t ( 1·:_·,;· .•• �-� < ,o�-� �--· -·-·.·· ··-;::r " .. ·-· -·--· --l: . ,: .. . ' . .S-0 s <; .c . � � &Ail-1--� 7 ! ,; f'..: J: � tt>EW�---·· __ ___ .. t , . fZi, (2-� rw,1--,=tr,�-� ' ). _.. ' . . . .' ---·-- �- :-. ---. ·---- r**-. • V •• ,t ... �A • CJ ' #ll J., ...• .-:. I 1•• I • Of.• ,, I • ' ,/' .• =-l= -----r--. --· - . .,... --- f l I. :r I / II I l \ " '",,,. ,,,0 • ✓. o/ '2/ ' '1 1/J i J f.j "'l -f l ". I I .,. , I .,,, , I-� 'I .' ,-� ,.. . ' .... , 0 r ,;-�? ' / I I -I � .. r-.... I J 3 / I • Toj FroBs Dates *w ot s Mayor Peterson and City Council Citv Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth^ Building & Zoning Administrar^j^ V' July 2, 1991 Curtis H. Green, 3220 Watertown Road (Lot 2, Blk 1, Senn A.^'’*tion) - Request for Single Access to New Build: Site % % ❖ . ition -Preliminary Plat Resolution -Final Plat Resolution List of Achibits - A - Applicant's Request B - Plat of C - Resoluti‘ D - Rasolutlo E - CMP 7-13 P - Applicant.ceptual Site Plan G - Staff's Sketch Review of Request - The Senn Addition was approved on the 13th of August, 1990. At the time of final plat approval the original Crystal Creek plat had been granted preliminary approval that proposed a western extension road abutting the north lot line of Lot 1. it was the intent of the City that this property would achieve future access via the east/west road of the Crystal Creek plat. In fact, the original final plat resolution included a condition of approval that would have required connection to that roadway at the time of its completion. The ■^p^xicant asks that condition be removed because of the expense involved with the installation of the proposed roadway 'n Lot 1 from Watertown Road. The bridge constructon alone was a major cost factor if it was to provide access for emergency vehicles. The resolution (Exhibit D) merely addresses the fact that Outlot A would serve for shared t -iveway purposes and ttat an easement would be granted in fa'^ jr of Lot 1 over Outlot A. Review the preliminary plat resolution #2700 (Exhibit c). Staff has high lighted the areas that reference the shared use of the driveway by both properties. The shared drive concept was understood and accepted by the developer throughout the review. Cook approved this location of the curb cut for the shared drive at Watertown Road finding the sighting distance adequate for 40 MPH zone. The requirement of a shared access is consistent with the City's review procedure/policy in the creation of new lots and with tiie directives of the Comprehensive Plan (review Exhibit E). 3220 Watertown Road Re: Request for Single Access July 3r 1991 Page 2 of 2 Glenn Cook has reviewed applicant's written comments and proposed site plan and notes that Mr. Green can achieve the same goal with the use of the approved curb cut traveling eastward to the drive that extends northward along the east lot line (see staff's sketch - Exhibit G). In reviewing staff's sketch, note that the septic test sites are also encroached by the proposed drive. If an access drive is proposed along the east lot line, applicant must provide additional septic testing confirming that a secondary septic exists on the property. Minor alterations in the roadway design may be able to salvage primary test site. Please review Exhibit A, Mr. Green reviews his reasons for seeking a new curb cut to the site. Options of Action - Denial. To deny the request for a single curb cut to serve the new building site located at 3220 Watertown Road based on the following findings: 1.Owner may redesign the building pad so that a drive entrancing from a more northern approach on the shared drive would consume less of the property with a long, winding driveway. Adequate plantings can be provided to shield Lot 1 from the higher elevation views of the new homesite. 2.It would be inappropriate for the City to grant a single curb cut to Lot 1 as the major consideration of the Senn subdivision review was the shared drive at Watertown Road that encroached the designated drainage area. 3.Approval of Mr. Green's request would establish a negative precedent in future review of other similar subdivision applications. 4.Mr. Green has not demonstrated sufficient or acceptable findings to grant a request. Conceptual approval based on Mr. Green's reasons and that Cook reaffirms proposed curb cut meets safe sighting distance for 40 MPH zone. To delay final action on Mr. Green's request for a single access drive to his building site pending receipt of septic test findings that confirm suitable area for a secondary septic site. !■ I b i: I' ,:rt' i i •••a »a» — -• .*—'-•• • z ': r ■;:?*.* '* r . .’ . 1 July 1991 Ms. Jean Mabusth, Planner City of Orono Orono City Hall 1335 South Brown Road Crystal Lake, Minnesota SS323 Re: Senn Addition, Lot 2 Dear Ms. Mabusth: I enclose a copy of the site drawing showing boundaries, topography, revised building site and relocated driveway to serve the new building site. This request is based upon the following reasons: 1.The building site is relocated for greater privacy, greater distance from Watertown Road, and the desire to lake advantage of distant views to the north west. 2.The garage, visitor parking and drive are removed from the anticipated views to the southeast from the residence elevated on the hill. We will plant out the drive to Lot 1. 3.The trees on this property are its major value to us. Retaining the pastoral aura of the site in one contiguous area of tiees, gardens, woods and walks is our objective. 4.The entrance at the current location is safer because of greater distance from the blind curve in Watertown Road immediately to the west. I will appreciate your review and submittal of this plan to the council, and 1 request their approval for the enhancement of this property and its development. Sincerely yours, HA^EL GRE^ AND ABRAHAMSON, INC. .7 Curtis H. G^n chg64m.gw Enclosure -- - PlupT tH^'oN o ////. ;'■ .. !' - y/v»< .,,1 •• I ( t /f » . I I i ••••. I * 'Vi '■ /' B- !(ST VWAf ERTQWN J^AD J?!; ■?c:yd.oiTlsrw^ c . . ^ V OBONO City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.2790 A RESOLUTION GRANTING preliminary approval for a plat at 3220 WATERTOWN ROAD PILE NO. 1506 WHBREASr Carol L. Scnn (hereinafter "the 33 1990 filed a formal subdivision application with the 'PProv”resiaenti.l plat cf property legally described tts follows: The east 10 acres of the 23 ^according^toquarter of Section 32, Township 118, Range 23, accorfling the government survey thereof, Hennepin County,» (hereinafter "the property") and; WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in •ecordance with Cod«,“ th^ *0?ino" Planning SliJialion held"a^ pSblie hearing on March 1 ’; ^j“^tion“ereall persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and tmvRPAS at their regular meeting held on April 9, 1990 the 0.-ono ^y"“ouncil c:nsiLled the subdivision applicatron of the applicants, noting the following findings of fact. 1 The property is located within the RR-IB Single family kr.l Residential Zoning t^rn^’each fewl'5acres of contiguous dry buildable land within ea y created lot. 2.The property contains a total of approximate 1> 8+ ac.es, 2.6 acres of which is considered as wetlands. 3.The proposed plat contains 2 lots each exceeding the 2.0 acre minimum lot area requirement. 4.Access to both lots shall be via a shared private driveway. 9 On March 7. 1990, Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning «d ^^n^rAdllnlstVstor, confirmed that both pressed lots have acceptable tested sites for prxmary and alternate sewage treatment mound drainfield systems. Page 1 of 3 i'fl"" City of ORONO Cl T V resolution of the city council NO. ORorfO o j,n« proposed configuration and overall design of the lots within the plat finds that each lot satisfies the lot standards of the RR-IB zoning district requiring no variances with the granting of this subdivision. Each lot 7.Minor portions or the private the designated wetland located at the 970 encroachment of V'e driveway will have a negligible impac^ on the wetland. PhillirA. Nelson of All Metro Land Surveyors, and the variance to Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 that approves the encroachment of the edge of a wetlands, subject to the following conditions. 1.outlet A has been created for shared driveway purposes and shall be legally combined with Lot 2.: 2.Owner of Lot 2 to grant driveway easement over Outlot A in favor of Lot 1. access from the north. 4.Prior to final plat approval, applicant shall enoineering plans for private driveway. Such plans to Include erosion control and design for wood \®®s support bridge. The City Engineer must approve such plans prior to any construction. FINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS The following list of final submittals must ^® 5® the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior ^®f“ - scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the months A.RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"*200*. Drawing to include: Page 2 of 3 [: city of OROINO . I V RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO :t90 ORONO m Lot lines platted per preliminary A.Nelson of All Metro Land Surveyors dated .anuary 16, 1990. b) Dedication of "drainaoe and c". vide along all perimeter property lanes and 5 each side of internal property lines. c)Dedication of 33' of right-of-way for Watertown Road . A)All wetland areas and drainageways within P^^t below the 970'elevation to be shown as “ai^ge^e.sLents to be dedicated on the pl.t drawings. B.LEGAL DOCUMENTS required; fli Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, documents affected by such interest. b)The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the prop y. c)Signed and executed drainage casement document for the drainage easements within Lots 1 and enclosed). C.PEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $500.00 a)Park dedication fee per current schedule. $200.00 for Lot 2 (there is no charge for . ’as there was an existing residence) b)Final plat fee » $150.00 c)Legal review and filing fees of $150.00 Adopted by the City Council 1990°' Minnesota at a tegular meeting held this^l^ay of April, it 9X rabelC-Jiayor allin. City ClerkPage 3 of 3 pi m ^ City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.2S4-; ORONO A RESOLDTION APPROVING THE PLAT OP SENH ORONO ADDITION PILE NO. 1506 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; ana WHEREAS# the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a two lot plat by Carol L. Senn, the subdivider; and WHEREAS# the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-IB zoning district finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow its use as a single family residence to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS# the subdivider has completed all requ rements of the platting regulations of the City,including; 1.Completion of all the •'iremer^-s c. ‘.esolution #2790, a resolution of the City gra..u.l .. inary approval of the subdivisi-tr.. 2.Dedication on the plat of Drainage and Utility Easements. 3,Dedication on the plat of Drainage Easements and the execution of a Flowage and Conservation Easement providing for limitations on the use of wetlands and/or drainageways described therein and shown on the plat as those drainage easements”. 4.Dedication on the plat of right-of-way for Watertown # Roftd • 5.Creation of Outlot A, created exclusively for shared driveway purposes. Page 1 of 3 h 0 city of OROiNO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO 844 ORONO Applicant has submitted engineering plans for the Drivate driveway that will serve Lot 1. Such plans includ ® control and design and specifications for wood plank/Steel support bridge. 6.Payment to the City of a Park Dedication Fee in the amount of $200.00. 7.Payment to the City for the lega 1 rey_ew and filing of the plat and easements in the amount of S150.00. HOK, TBBRBFORE, BB IT RESOLVED that the fS^oVono citv of Orono hereby approves the plat of Senn Addition^, Hennepin County, Minnesota; subject to the following condition: 1. Outlet The subdivider shall apply for the legal combination ofj^ ot A with Lot 2. 2.Owner of Lot 2 to grant driveway easement over Outlot in favor of Lot 1. 3 Prior to the issuance of a building permit for r;sidentiil construction on Lot 1, the City Engineer must approve the design and specifications will expand the creek providing access to Lot 1 via Outlot A. together with a certified original copy of this Resolution and executed copies of the documents noted above. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above I" that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 13th day of August, 1990. IjUUU in. City Cier^ Jam^s R. Grab Page 2 or 3 V City of ORONO RPSOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. b , CF^'JNOL.M STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss • TBANSPORTATIOr JUNE, 1980 U t-. kv1'^- II- 9. DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS AND RURAL STREET OR PRIVATE ROAD INTERSECTIONS WILL BE LIMITED FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY. Rural traffic speed is generally faster than that in urban neighborhoods requiring greater sight distances and a lesser number of intersection conflicts for the same degree of traffic safety. Joint use of carefully located private roads will generally be preferred over direct access onto public highways from separate properties. RURAL TRAILS ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE TOTAL ALTERNATE TPANSPORATION SYS'^EM. Rural trails offer access to the Hennepin Cou. ty park Reserve Lands from all areas of the City. Rural trails offer horseback riding as well as walking and bicycle opportunities. The City will encourage completion of the planned bike-hike trail system and the private development of rural trails connecting the public trail system with individual rural properties. The City will continue to restrict motorized use of trails within Orono as inappropriate to the trail s basic purpose and as incompatible with adjacent residential properties. THE CITY WILL NOT PROMOTE MASS TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR RURAL ORONO. The planned rural land use density cannot economically support public transit services. Existing bus routes pass through the rural area enroute between Long Lake, Waysata and urban Orono. These routes are sufficient to serve Orono's rural needs and will in fact provide additional rural service as the need for additional urban service increases. No new route locations are necessary as rural residents desiring to use transit services will use the established park and ride locations in Navarre and Wayzata. CMP 7-13 1?1.1 TO: FROM: DATS: Mayor and City Council Mark E, Bernhardson, City Adninistrat July 1, 1991 SUBJECT: City Administrator Search Profile Attachment:A.City Administrator Profile Draft/Sathe & Assoc. B.Memo to Employees Dated 7/2/91 C.Newspaper Notice ISSUE - Presen*- to Council review and dpproval of position profile for the city Administrator position. INTRODUCTION - At the Ji’ne 10, 1991 Council meeting Council upproved using Sathe & Associates for the position selection of city administrator. Subsequent to that Jim Brimeyer has met with the Council and department heads 'd developed Attachment A. Attachment B set a time for employees to give input into the process for City Administrator. Attachment C is a newspaper notice setting the time for the public. DISCUSSION “ The outline is presented for your review and approvaTI Mr. Brimeyer will be available for Council to give reaction and changes they may desire to the draft profile at; €s30 P.M. MONDAY, JULY 8, 1991 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 30 minutes prior to meeting A1.TERNATIVES 1.Accept. 2.Amend and accept. 3.Table. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that after Council makes any amendments that the position description be approved and authorized for use in screening candidates for the position of city administrator. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , Council approves the postion description for the position of city administrator to be utilized by Sathe & Associates during their search process. Ayes , Nays _. M- i:';' y • SiillH' 'ss()( i;tl('s. I IK'. DRAFT DRAFT ( ITV OF ORONO CITY ADMINISTRATOR CommunUv/CUY The City of Orono was incorporated January I. 1955 I ae C ily is located on the ^ northern shore of Lake Minnetonka about 15 miles west of Minneapolis. Of the City s 24.5 square miles of area, 50% is open water or marshland (with a total of 15 square miles in land area). Of Lake Minnetonka, 40% of the shoreline and 33% of the lake area is in Orono. The City of Orono is a third ring suburb in the seven-county metropolitan 1 win Cities area located on Lake Minnetonka, the tenth largest lake in Minnesota. Orono developed primarily because of its aesthetic qualities and because of its proximity to the metropolitan urban core. The City is primarily a residential community with a mixture of several types of housing together with a small comn.ercial district. The City totally surrounds two communities which are part of the original township and substantially surrounds a third community. Orono is home to many of the metropolitan aiea s top executives who have moved here because of the community’s natural amenities. The City provides a variety of municipal sci vices. These include police protection, street maintenance, building inspection, planning and zoning, public improvements, general administrative services, public water and sewer utilities and a municipal golf The City contracts fire protection from the neighboring cities of Long Lake, WayM a. Mound and Maple Plain. The City also contracts for engineering, legal and assessing professional services, and provides police protection and/or building inspection services, and/or animal control services to the Cities of Long Lake. Spring Park, and Minnetonka Beach. The City is in a strong financial position and because of its strong esidential base, Orono continues to have a ta.x capacity rate that is the lowest in the county for communities over 1,000 in population, despite the fact that the City is receiving no local government aid from the state for 1990 and only small amount of homestead credits. The City s credit rating was recently upgraded from Alt- A A The 1990 census for Orono showed a population of 7,213 with a per capita income of $23,5 00. School enrollment totals 2,175 students located in three facilities. The Organization The form of government is the Optional Plan A - Council/Admimstrator with five members, including a Mayor, who are responsible for appointing the City Administrator The City Administrator is responsible for the supervision of 40 full-time employees and 12-15 part-time seasonal employees. Of those employees. 17 are in the police department and ten are in public works. 7 he remainder are devoted to finance, administration and clerical support. {See organizational chart.) I c SUNSFi RtrysF Ri?^M’* m ••.01 ,-■—,.■._____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ . 1 M. • (.1 •‘..ll. •I(V> • I AX ‘..1(>h'MO ;V r- i t, I !•V rI t‘" ilfc Position Profile -2- The City has 43 miles of public sirceis. 15 iniler. of private streets, arul .^0 miles urulor state and county jurisdiction. Water is supplied by three vvells plus 100.000 Rallons ot storage capacity, and 828 of the residents are connected to the public water system. There are 1,668 connections to the sanitary sewer system and sewer treatment service is provided by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. Because of the rolling terrain, it is necessary for the City to maintain over .15 sanitary sewer lift stations. The City has ten parks totaling 45 acres including three swimming beaches. Fire ■‘rotection is provided by four other communities and the Cits contracts with thr communities for police protection and other assorted services The Post Hon areThe position is appointed bv the five-member Council. Four of the Councilmembcrs ar elected to four-year terms and the Mayor is elected to a two-year term The position is responsible for supervising 40 full-time em[>loyees and managing a gereral fund budget ofS3.2 million. Specific duties include: Supervising and directing the administrative affairs of the City, all departments and contractors. •Advise the Council regarding the policies, affairs, financial conditions, and needs of the City. •Recommend an annual budget to the Council *Carry out the policies, budgets, and directives of the C ouncil including any purchasing functions. Administer the personnel program of the City. Preserve the public peace, health, and safety of persons and property and see to the enforcement of the ordinances of the City and general law. Perform such other functions and have such powers as may be estaolished by law, ordinance, or resolution of the Council or as agreed to by the Administrator and the Council. Background/Experience Requires a B.A. Degree in Public or Business Administration plus a minimum of 5-7 years experience in a responsible management position. Particular areas of expertise should include public works, public safety, parks maintenance, and land use development. f 5: fi- f i' P’- t' Position Profile -3- Experience in dealing in the metropolitan area with particular empha'iis on dealing with the Metropolitan Council, the Department of I ransportation and other metro agencies. Demonstrated strong composition skills •Experience with or knowledge of working in a volunteer fire service operation Experience in dealing in a contract situation and providing municipal services on a contractual basis to other communities. •Experience in land use development, particularly as it relates to environmental issues. Experience in establishing and installing public facilities with particular attention paid to the impact on the environment. An appreciation for the rural atmosphere of Orono and a demonstrated comfort level with a "small town" environment. •Extensive experience with personnel relations, particularly negotiations, and the timely handling of grievances and disputes. Management Capabilities *Resolve grievance and personnel issues in a timely and cijuitable manner. Establish a clear chain of command. *Be comfortable with delegating responsibility and authority to department heads. •Establish expectations for staff and a basis for evaluating achieving the expectations. •Provide information to City Council being particularly aware of politically sensitive issues. Allow department heads to work with the City Council and develop a team approach to Council/Staff relationships. Meet with individual Councilmembers. per their request, as well as deal with Council on a group basis. Be comfortable in a "small town" appro.ach to affairs and dealing directly with citizens. r r* ---------■. . .. i-f. r. r’ t •‘i '■.t » h>x h y-> ■‘i .fa .fa- ‘^rx- Position Profile -4- Presenl information to Council, giving Council options along with a recommendation *High comfort level in dealing with a well-informed, well-educated citizenry. *Assist Council in explaining to the citizens the need for the public process and the "rules" of government. *Comfort level in dealing with a large variety of people and an orientation towards listening to citizen's concerns. Good command of the English language and good public speaking skills •Ability to handle several items at one time, taking an analytical approach to setting priorities. Strengthen communications between various departments and build a strong staff team. •Have a professional altitude toward public administration and encourage that professionalism among staff members. *Be approachable, open, listen to staff problems •Take an interest in each department and understand all phases of the operation •Be a coach to employees and assist them w ith their needs. •Assist Council in making the distinction between policy and administration, and have the courage to keep Council on track and in a policy making role. Community Priorities •Deal with MnDot and other metro agencies to upgrade the Highway 12 Corridor •Work with Council, staff, the architect, and the construction manager to complete the construction of the new public City facility including City Hall, Police Station and Public Works facility. *Work with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District in developing an appropriately revised comp.ehensive plan fo' that organization. *Develop and adopt a revised shoreland management requirement •Develop a plan which will encourage the installation of sanitary sewer in unsewered areas, particularly those which are environmentally sensitive. ♦Work with the contract communities to negotiate police contract services for 1992. ?!■) ■5A fef 5\ R" M,v J- 5 ’:-\ *. r f?- '(;■■i ¥f-I 'i. t:-- V Position Profile -5- •Work with the fire contract communities to negotiate fire services for Orono for the coming years. *Establish a community identity given the tact that the community is in three school districts and has seven zip codes. •Complete the discussion and implement the settlement of the annexation issue between the Cities of Long Lake and Orono. •Examine City staffing needs to determine need for additional staff •Deal with the issue of the development of lakeshore properties and the diverse zoning along the lakeshore. •Examine the feasibility of establishing an employee recoge on program •Examine the need for conducting a community survey and determine citizens' needs. •Update the transportation policy of the community in order to effectively address the issues of public versus private roads. •Assist the Council in establishing a redevelopment policy, particularly for residential areas. Assist in developing a storm water management and utilities plan for the City, particularly as it relates to the use of shoreland and properties along the lake. Review the City’s recycling efforts and determine the need for expansion and greater participation. Aanouacewent City Administrator - Orono, MN (Pop. 7,300). Starting salary J5I.000 - $56,000. Located in the western suburbs of the Twin Cities on Lake Minnetonka. Report to Mayor (2-year term) and four member Council (4-year term). Supervise 40 full-time employees and manage a general fund budget of $3.2 million. Provide standard municipal services plus police contractual services to adjacent cities and contract for fire services with several fire districts. Req. B.A. degree (M.A. preferred) in public or business administration, plus a minimum of 5-7 years experience in a responsible municipal management position with particular experience in public works operations, parks maintenance and land use development. Experience in a metropolitan area is desirable. Resume by July 26, 1991 to; Jim Brimeyer, Partner; Sathe & Associates Executive Search; 5821 Cedar Lake Road; St. Louis Park, MN 55416. AA/EOE ¥ r* ^ I r h-- A . kf**‘ [u*. !n.':Mrt; ' ■vi. ^4. I CITY OF ORONO ORGANIZATIONAL CHART ■;'■ ^r TO:All Employees raOH:Mark E.'*^ Bernhard son DATS: July 2r 1991 SOBJBCTx Etaployee Meeting - City Administrator Selection Profile Mr. James Brimeyer, Sathe and Associates has scheduled a meeting at which any interested employees may come and present ideas and ))ave related to the selection process for the next City Administrator. This meeting will be at: 4:00 P.M. JOLT 8, 1991 OROHO COOHCIL CHAMBERS cc:Mayor and Cotin cil Department Beads fel-. citizen input needed for CITY administrator SELECTION •n* dttoat of Orooo «• «i»I Ia tlM itliCtioil of tho #•’*'^^°i******^ia«nri*v July 8th it the Orono Cc acil t jSSodiiM win hold »win»» «>i>nucied by Jim Ctambon. Tho mouiiil wiU botin « ^J ^ selection proeeB. llom “ Si-^Sdir ““ pnontits^ B: i f p ^ • 1^-r J r 7191 . S TO* Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E, Bernhardson^ City Administrate^/ DATBs July 1, 1991 SDBJBCTs Acting Administrator \<>,v Attachment: A.Draft Resolution Regarding Appointment of Acting Administrator by Council B.Administrative and Personnel Rules 102 % ISSUE - Determination of acting administrator appointment FoTTowing effective resignation date of the current city adminietrator. INTRODUCTION - Attachment A represents a draft for the appointment of John Gerhardson to the position of acting administrator. DISCUSSION - As noted in Attachment B, when there is no administrator the acting administrator is an appointment by the Mayor with the cc*'currence of the Council. ALTERNATIVES 1.Appoint. 2.Amend and adopt. 3.Table for further discussion. RECOMMEND ATI ON - It is recommended that the resolution proposed be adopted by Council appointing John Gerhardson as the acting administrator. while I was City Administrator I have the authority to appoint the acting administrator, however, when I am no longer city administrator the acting administrator is appointed by Council as noted in Attachment B. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that Council adopt Resolution #_ appointing John Gerhardson as the acting administrator for the City of Orono until a new administrator assumes the position. Ayes_, Nays _. cc: Department Reads - - --. w.. i. 7291.3 A RBSOLUTIOR APPOmTING JOHN R. GKRHARDSOII AS ACTING ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE CITY OF ORONO WHEREAS, City Administrator Mark E. Bernhardson has given notice to Council of his resignation effective July 26^ 1991, and WHEREAS, the City of Orono has estabished an Administrative and Personnel Policyr and WHEREAS, Section 102 City Council Authority Subd 2 gives the Administrator authority to appoint an Acting Administrator from existing staff, and WHEREAS, Council approved a Letter of Authority/Acting Administrator appointing John R. Gerhardson as Acting Administrator at the February 24, 1986 Council meeting which outlines his responsibilities as follows: OPERATIONS “ Insure that the continued City operations of all departments continue. You have the authority to work with Department Heads to make appropriate operational decisions and insure continunity of operations. REPRESENTATIVE AT MEETINGS - Attend meetings that require attendance anJ act In those meetings including, but not limited to, regular weekly staff meetings, one on one Department Head meetings and Council meetings. POLICY DIRECTION - Work with CounciImembers to develop needed policy direction in which a conclusion is to be reached in a timely manner. SIGNATURES - Pursuant to authority granted by the City Council you have the authority to sign documents that require the City Administrator's action or signature together with signature of appropriate checks, provided that the other required signatures are provided. If GENERAL - That you perform other functions and tasks that will insure the ongoing operation of the organization within established guidelines^ but apart from a case by case authority, defer significant personnel actions or alteration of compensation. DURATION ~ This appointment can be amended, modified or revbie<Tat any time by the City Council upon appropriate written notice delivered to your office. ■OW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, John R. Gerhard son is hereby appointed as the Acting Administrator for the City of Orono effective July 27, 1991 and terminating when a new administrator assumes the position. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held July 8, 1991. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City cierk / / / / f ADMINISTRATIVE AND PERSONNEL POLICY SECTION 1. ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION 101.PURPOSE The purpose of this Administrative and Personnel Policy is to establish procedures as authorized by Section 2.18 of Orono City Ordinance so that the City may perform its functions n an effective and efficient manner. This policy will serve as a guide to administrative action concerning personnel matters, and provide the City of Orono employees and the public with a statement of the personnel program of the City of Orono. This policy supersedes the Administrative Organization Policy adopted by the City Council on January 26, 1976. The Administrative and Personnel Policy is intended to provide only general guidelines on City policies. It is not intended to be a statement of the terms of an employment contract between the employee and the City and is not intended to be a promise by the City to the employee that the provisions of this manual will be followed in all cases. The City retains the right to alter the provisions of this manual in writing or otherwise and without notice, as well as the right to vary the procedures and rules set forth whenever it deems such variances to be appropriate. Either the employee or the City may terminate the employment relationship at any time, for any reason. 102.CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIT'.’ 1.The City Council, as the elected legislative policy making body of Orono, is responsible to the citizens of the City.The Council shall appoint an Administrator who is responsible for the administration of the municipal government to serve at the pleasure of the majority of the Council.The Administrator,with the concurrence of the Council, shall appoint Department Heads who shall be responsible and accountable to the Administrator.All personnel shall be responsible and accountable to the Administrator as hereinafter set forth.In times of emergencies, the Mayor may supersede the Administrator if the Mayor deems such action necessary subject to the subsequent ratification or rescission by^a majority of the Council at the next regular or special Council meeting. 2.When the Administrator is absent due to business, vacation, illness, or other leave, the Administrator may appoint an Acting Administrator from the existing staff. The Acting Administrator shall so serve at the pleasure of the Administrator. Should there be no Administrator, the Mayor with the concurrence of the Council may appoint an Acting Administrator to serve at their pleasure. An Acting Administrator shall have that authority granted that person by the appointing authority. : ri. 2t Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E, Bernhardson, City Administrate DATS: July 1, 1991 ^^BJECT: City Facilities i4- COUNCIL MEETING JUL 2 8 1991 CITYOFORONO Attachment: A.City Facilities Memo Dated 6/21/91 (Memo Only) B, Updated Financial Information C, Publication Notice - HRA Hearing D, Notice - Request for Proposal - Construction Manager E, Draft Borchure/Boarman & Associates F, Draft Resolution Regarding Building Monies ISSUE - TT Present updated financial information to Council. 2.Present to Council the HRA publication notice for the July 22nd public hearing. 3.Update Council on the initial design meeting held July 2, 1991. 4.Indicate to Council the results of site negotiations. 5.Select a group of individuals to assist in interviewing construction manager candidates. 6.Present the initial draft of the brochure prepared by Boarman and Associates. 7* Further discuss direction for restriction of monies. 8.Establishment of a public information and hearing schedule. INTRODUCTION - At the last meeting Council directed publication of a notice for an HRA hearing on July 22, 1991. Attachment B represents financial updates primarily corrections that were presented last time. In addition Council directed staff to solicite for a construction manager with Attachment D j^^prasonting those requested with authorizing the consultant to begin the public information draft brochure. DISCUSSION - Issue #3 - Initial Design Meeting - The meeting was held with several issues discussed. The next meeting is July 16th at 5:00 P.M. - Orono Link 107L, with suppers to be provided. Issue 14 - Site Decision This will be discussed Monday evening. Issue -Construction manager selection - Attachment D is the V-. t- draft RFP for seeking a construction manager. As noted it is anticipated that interviews would be conducted the week of July 15th and selection at the July 22nd meeting, if feasible. It is suggested that the committee include; 2 Council, 1 Planning Commission, a Facility Committee member plus City Administrator, Public Works Director and 1~2 Building Inspectors. Issue £6 - Draft Brochure - Attachment E represents initial work on the boFchure. Issue #7 - Restrictions of Monies - Attachment F represents the draft presented last time regarding restric'-ions of money and it would be appropriate to see if this captures the essence of where Council would like to go. This could actually be structured in a number of ways once we know what the basic "rules of the game Council wants are." Issue #8 -Establishment of Hearing Dates - As noted in Attachment G the schedule tKat we are currently working from has some tentative dates and its a function when the brochure goes out we would like to establish dates either using the schedule or set up dates that are agreeable with Council. ALTERNATIVES Issues #1 - #4. 1.Accept. 2.Request further information. 3.Take no action. 4.Table. Issue #5. Construction Manager Selection. 1.Select persons for interview committee for construction manager. 2.Set interview date. 3.Table. 4.Take no action. Issue #6. Draft Brochure. (If available) 1.Accept. 2.Amend and accept. 3.Table. Issue ♦?. Restriction of Monies. 1.Indicate direction. 2.Discuss possible structure. 3.Place restrictive money in a possible trust 4.Take no action. t 5, Table for further discussion Issue #8. 1.Establish hearing dates. 2.Table for further discussion. RECOMMEND AT I ON - The following are recominended: Issues 1-4. Accept the information Issue #5 - Construction Manager - Direct staff and architect to solicit proposals for construction manager with interviewing the week of July 15th. Issue #6 - Amend as appropriate and direct Boarman to go ahead and prepare for publication. Issue #7 - Outline any change and objectives as embodied in the draft resolution together with any thoughts on structure. Issue #8 - Hearing Dates - Establish those hearing dates so that they can be included in the publication. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, Council accepts Info^atlon on t^^^ faci lities-Tnd directs the following people to be appointed to the construction manager interview panel. Director and Building Inspector PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by _, Council directs Boarman ft Associates to undertake publication and mailing of a draft brochure to the community. Issue #7 Council gives further direction on restriction on monies. Issue #8 Hearing Dates - Moved by _, seconded by _*Council directes that the following public Information meetings be held and and that a public hearing be on . Ayes , Nays —. cc: -^ack Boarman, 222 North 2nd Street, Mpls 55401 Department Beads 6:i^i fl^ I ■■1: k V;i TOs Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Berr^i^rdson, City Administrat OATS:June 21, 1991 SUBJECT: City Facilities Attachment:A.Handouts from 6/23/91 Workshop B.Draft Financial Layout Dated 6/21/91 C.Ehlers Associates Tax Impact Calculation Dated 6/24/91 {to be presented 6/24/91) D.Financial Sources Update Dated 6/21/91 E.5 Year Financial projections F.Draft Resolution Re: HRA (to be presented later) G.Draft Five Track Schedule June-August 6/21/91 H.Draft RFP for Construction Manager (to be delivered later) I.Draft Resolution Governing Building Monies ISSUE 1.Present to Council additional information regarding financing. 2.Determine if Council desires to authorize acvertisement for public hearing to determine if it will establish an HRA. 3.presentation for adoption of a schedule for next two months relating to: Site Schematic Design Construction Manager Financing Public Information Meetings 4* Determine if Council w.ll authorize staff transmitting Requests For proposals for construction project manager. 5^ Q@^0i^{i)xne if Council will authorize Boarman and Associates to prepare draft public information borchures. 6« Determine members for schematic design committee and set initial meeting dates. INTRODUCTION - At the June 20, 1991 workshop Council directed staff regarding financing plus a request for additional information regarding financing. They additiona1ly requested staff undertake process regarding establishment of an HRA. DISCUSSION issue #1 - Financial information - Attachments A the handouts p 1 us requested additiona1 information E represent requested at r' r-. the June 2i}, 1991 workshop. Attachment B lays out in graphic focin an example of how payments would proceed given the p3fsmetecs general ly discussed. Attachment indicates estimated tax impact using those parameters. Attachment D is an update of the financial sources originally presented last fall.Attachment E is an update of a multi year projection of general and other funds and some options as to revenues plus additional anticipated and possible expenditures. Issue #2 - HRA - Attachment F is a draft resolution for esTrS"! isTiminrirf an HRA plus a district for the environs of the current city facilities. issue #3 - Schedule - This is a draft/flexible schedule outlining major milestones and dates in tne various tracks. Issue #4 - Construction Manager - Attachment H is the draft RFP for seeTcirTg a construction manger. As noted in Attachment G it is anticipated that interviews would be conducted the week of July 15th and selection at the July 22nd meeting if feasible. It is suggested that the committee include; 2 Council, 1 Planning Commission, a Facility Committee member plus City Administrator, public Works Director and 1-2 Building inspectors. Issue #5 -Public Information Brochure -Jack Boarman has199UC? WJ •r A X w w —- - - - - - - -_ - - - - -- - - - - - esti'mated the preparation work on the brochure is $ 1,500^ with production, mailing, etc. about $1,500 for a total of $3,000.00. Issue #6 -Design Committee -Jack Boarman requested i sThment of a design committee of 5 plus staff. Mayor Peterson and CounciImembers Goetten and Butler. They additioally indicated they wanted two from Plannit ; Commission. It would be appropriate to formally appoint these and set meeting dates. Meeting #1 - July 1 at 5 p.m. or July 2 at 7 p.m. following police Chief profile screening Meeting #2 - July 16 at 5 p.m Meeting #3 - July 30 at 5 p.m ALTERNATIVES Issue #1 - Information 1, Accept 2,Discuss 3, Table Issue #2 - HRA 1.Authorize advertizing resolution. 2.Amend and discuss. 3.Make subject to Attorney review. J- 'S kI V h'. A P I :; ■• . p- -••V J-, 4.Table. Issue #3 - Schedule 1.Accept as a guideline 2.Amend and accept. 3.Table. Issue #4 - Construction Manager 1.Authorize solicitation of proposals for construction manager. 2.Table. 3.Take no action. Issue #5 - Public Information 1.Authorize expenditure from Building Fund. 2.Amend and authorize. 3.Table. 4.Take no action. 5.Set tentative public meeting and hearing dates. (See Attachment G/Schedule) Issue #6 > Design Committee 1.Formally select members. 2.Set meeting dates. 3.Table. RECOMMENDATION - The following recommendations are made; issue #1 - Accept the information after any questions. 12 HRA - Adopt the resolution for publication subject to City Attorney approval for publication the week of July 1st for a July 22nd public hearing. (July 5 publication date.) Issue #3 Schedule • Adopt as a guideline. Issue #4 Construction Manager - Direct staff and architect to solicit proposals for construction manager with interviewing the week of July 15th. Issue #5 Public Information -Authorize Boatman to prepare brochure for Council review and select dates for public information meeting and hearings. Issue #6 Design Committee - Establish membership and dates. PROPOSED MOTIONS Issue #2 - HRA - Moved by , seconded by , the Council adopts Attachment F as Resolution |to set a puBlic hearing for the July 22nd meeting to determine if the City desires establishment of an HRA for the City. Ayes , Nays iir^*1i*iriTi('ii -• .ii I >>■ Ir i h p- F\'K Issue #3 - Schedule - Moved by __, seconded by i3o^s‘XttacHrairTt"G the guideTTne schedule on June - August. Ayes __, Nays __. , the Counc i 1 Tacilities for Issue 14 - Construction Manager - Moved by _, seconded by the Counci 1 authorizes staff to seek proposals from qualified construction managers for use on the project. Ayes Nays Tssue i5 - Public information - Moved by _, seconded by —, the CouncfT iUth^tTies Boatman and Associates to prepare a draft brochure for review at the Council's July 8, 1991 Council meeting and establishes and as public information meetings and as a public heating meeting. Issue #6 - Design Committee - Moved by _, seconded by the dounci “appoints Mayor Peterson and Counci Imembers Goetten and Butler together with and _ _ and appropriate staff to a design review committee and sets _ _, _ _f and - - as its initial meeting dates. Ayes _, Nays cc;Department Heads Jack Boarman, 222 North 2nd Street, Mpls 55401 Carolyn Drude, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. 2950 Norwest Center 90 South Seventh Street Mpls 55402-4100 i.- pL. .i. iJrmo/jMaJT 5Al/ADH/SOOIICB aooBcn roil boildivc riiojbct MT1MTB8 M OF 12/90 Draft 6/90 Updata 6/91 6/90 BatiMtaa fund Balanca/ 12/31/90 Actual Fund Balanca Aatainad Bamin^a Ratainad Bamlnga OMaral road Boildiao rwid n^ooo.ooo 2t250,000 . .250,000 (Oparatiofia/Oiiraiarfad ) 100,000 fOparatioaa/anraaaraad ) toraanaiit luvroaaait 550,ooo BaaolviBf 11,039,070 2,221,550 1,313,536 101,674 662,531 00 66-76 Oapt rand 315,000 CaTailabla 91) 12/31/90 Cash Balancs $062,042 2,212,172 793,986 131,245 717,336 n/91) 12/31/91 Cat iMts Caah 0alanes $900,000 2,275,000 904.000 151.000 702.000 315.000 Avallabls for Projsct 6/90 Batlaats 6/91 Cstiaata $100-150,000 2.250.000 450.000 a) 45,000 315,000 (a) $3,160,000- $75,000 2,275,000 450.000 45,000 300-400,000 315.000 $3,460,000- rAt/MM/rOIIDIIIG Draft 9/90 update 6/91 1991 BAMd on 9/90 letiMtea Reaed on 12/31/90 Actuals 1992 Other funds *5 year eatlmate) 1993 1994 1995 Ctfzt3a 150f000 169,395 44,000 7.5 7.5 «r la ItasM te Mt ^46,000 167,395 OQTUT (M7 bend for it) 1*0.000 221,415 •^25,350 ♦60,750 “66,350 241,000 130,000 230,000 131,000 230,000 106,000 290,000 126,000 260,000 146.000 270.000 160,000 279,000 twaafar la ■apaailtaraa tfeaaafar aat 90,000 210,000 49,000 220,000 10,000 230.000 10.000 240.000 10.000 6,000 235.000 10.000 6,000 ;f- 90p000 106,000 126,000 146,000 160,000 184,000 id (300,000 aaarganey eoatlngaocy) •700,000 717,336 90,000 90,000 450.000 50.000 480.000 51.000 509.000 50.000 539,000 51.500 la m oat 300,000 m 490$000 300.000 490.000 20,000 480,000 22,000 509,000 24.000 535.000 28,000 558,500 UabimiM) S62.014 764,000 (270,771) otiMr earwat asMts 424.000 504,000 546,000 •r la SS0,000 530,000 540,000 550,000 560,000 traaafar oat 400.000 450.000 420.000 450.000 430.000 30.000 450.000 31.000 460,000 32,000 9424,000$307,014 okar$aa aaa prejaats > 20“30,000/yr) 9504,000 9573,000 $641,000 6. 641,000 570,000 480.000 33.000 $698,000 (*.'^I*.—“ 1 ! CITY of OR( RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ______ _ A RBSOLDTIOII PROVIDIHG FOR A PUBLIC HBARING ___ ON THB BSTABLISHMKNT OF A HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN THE CITY OF ORONO^ MINNESOTA NBERBASr Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.003 creates a Bousing and Redevelopment Authority in each city in this State and provides that such an authority shall not transact any business or exercise any powers until the governing body of the City, by resolution, finds that there is need for a housing and redevelopment authority to function in the City. MOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, that on the 22nd day of July, 1991 at 7j 00 o'clock p.m. the Orono City Council shall hold a public hearing at the City Council chambers in Orono, Minnesota, follo«ring which this Council shall consider a resolution making the following findings: (a)That there is a need for development and redevelopment within the boundaries of the City of Orono to improve the tax base and to improve the general economy of the City and the State of Minnesota; and (b)That areas within the City are potentially more useful and valuable than has been realized under existing development and that they may be less productive because of the lack of proper utilization and Investment, and consequently are not contributing to the City's tax base to full potential; and (c)That substandard, slum or blighted areas «3ci*t in the City which cannot be redeveloped without governmental assistance; and (d)That there is a shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling accommodations available "to persons of low income and their families at rentals they can afford; and (e)That there is a need for a housing and redevelopment authority to function in the City. i t F ■ *, • t'- I. i: t p r- CITY of ORONO . „ - J /RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _________________ All nor»ons interested are invited to attend the hearing, anf^J^e City layor is directed to cause this resolution to be published in the official newspaper of the City once no less than ten days nor more than 30 days prior to the date of the hearing. The motion to adopt the foregoing resolution was seconded by Council Member Butler; and upon motion being taken, the following voted in favor thereof: Council Members Callahan, Butler, Goetten and Jabbour and the following voted against the same: Mayor Peterson whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted June 24, 1991. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Ballin, City clerk *- To: Froa: Dote: Interested Construction Management Firms Mark Bernhardson, City Administrate^'^ July 1, 1991 Subject: Request for Proposal for Construction Tanagement Services The City of Orono is seeking proposals for construction management services for the construction of City Hall and Public Works Garage. The architect for this facility is Boarman/ Kroos, Pfister fc Associates, Inc. The successful construction management firm must have experience in planning, controlling, directing and evaluating all work relating to the project. Previous experience along with the ability to meet project schedule and control must be demonstrated. Proposals for consideration will be accepted until 3:00 p.m. July 15, 1991. Proposals and qualifications should be sent to: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 1335 Bro%m Road South Crystal Bay, MN 55323 The following schedule is provided for your information: July 3, 1991 July 15, 1991 July 18, 1991 July 22, 1991 RFP's mailed J-4 date for receipt of Rr 's Interviews of final candidcie firms Selection 6 approval of CM firm by City Council A description of the project follows; A campus building site at Highway 12 and Old Crystal Bay Road across from the Orono School. Project includes a 19,000 s.f. one-story with basement City Hall and Police facility. A public works garage of 29,0c0 s.f. as a one-story structure. Both projects are on the same site. The garage building will be built first with the vehicle storage portion completed with relative site work by the end of Oeceoiber 1991. Please submit 5 (five) copies of your response by July 15, 1991, at 3:00 p.m. The evaluation will be based on information contained in the proposal. It is our intent that a construction manager be selected as soon as possible to obtain the optimum from this firm as a contributing member of the Building Team. RFP for Construction Management Services July 1, 1991 Page 2 of 4 COMSTROCTIOH MANAGHENT GOALS: 1. 2. 3. To manage and complete the project within the defined time schedule. To manage and complete the project within the given budget. To manage and complete the project within quality anc program guidelines. SCOPE OP WORK OP CONSTROCTION MAMA \LL BE: 1. 2. 3, 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. Development of t.ie project buiget from information provided by the Owner 6 A/E. Design of the management plan and strategy based on the Owner's project parameters. Scheduling of project delivery from design through construction. Application of Value Engineering ir-luding direction in "constructability" a J "contractibi1 ity" isions. Formation of contract conditions to fa itate the use of the Construction Management project delivery system# format# and variation. Review of the contract documents pri*^r to issuance to bidders for proposals. Determinaton of divisions of work to facilitate the multiple bidding process. Solicitation of contractors and the identification of Owner direct purchase items. Survey and analysis of the labor pool and local contracting practices. Development of bidding competition to generate the most favorable pricing. Coomxmication with bidding contractors to clarify conditions and resolve discrepancies in bidding documents. Assist the Owner during * he bidding process to ensure that the receipt of proposals is pioperly conducted. Review of proposals to determine if those being considered are c<»nplete and in the Owner's best interest. Leadership in negotiations with contractors on behalf of the Owner. j Administrative assistance in the signing of contractors and the accumulation of required documentation. Organization and chairing of preconstruction Meetings with contractors. Development and implementation of the on-site construction schedule. Coordination of contractors at the site on a full-time bas:.s. Chairing of periodic project and progress meet! gs with contractors. Organization and administration of a contractor system for expediting material and equipment. Establishment and administration of a project reporting system. 111 RFP for Construction Management Services July 1, 1991 Page 3 of 4 22.Institution and coordination of the progress paym nt procedure for contractors. 23.Procurement and control of construction support requirement for the project. 24.Assistance to the Owner and contractors with respect to any labor relations efforts connected with the project. 25.Design and implementation of the project's quality management program. 26.Cost tracking and the administration of ‘he Owner's cost accounting program. 27.Assistance in the resolution of disputes arising from the performance of the contractors. RBSPOHSKS MOST IHCLODB THB FOLLOWING INFORMATION. ADDITIONAL INFORNATIONr IF DBSlRBDr NAY BB INCLDDBD IN ITOf 6. 1.Constiuntion Management Firm Qualification Statement. 2.Scope of services by phase (construction manager's appr'^ach to fulfilling the "Scope of Work by Construction Manager".) a.Design phase b.Pre*‘bld, bid and award phases c.Construction phase d.Post construction phase 3.Construction Manacement Approach (How do you propose to administer this project?) a.Value Engineering Cost control during design Project scheduling Bid phase administration: Marketing project to potential bidders Pre-qualifications of bidders Pre-bid meetings Bid review and interview prior to contract Contractor bonding requirements: Local bidders Effect on construction cost Number of bids proposed to be requested for project construction Relation to Architect in preparing Project Manual On-site project supervision Change order procedures Is any of your work force in any way related to contractors utilized in the actual construction of the project? Managment and coordination of final start-up, and testing occupancy activites 1.When do CM service terminate? b. c. d. e. f. h. i. j. k. f:' * P'■I- I! Ir tr''- ¥■tp' F.‘ i: RPP for Constr July 1# 1991 Page 4 of 4 ‘-.ion Management Services 4.Basis of compensation a.Fixed fee for Construction Management Services b.Percentage fee for Construction Management Services c.Additional services d.Reimbursable costs 5.References a.Clients b.Architects c.Trade Contractors 6.Additional Pertinent Information :4'i' •Vt - .i. r f.-- I i' t " h A RBSOLOTION GOVERNING BUILDING MONIES Staff* and HHBBBAS, it desires to do so in the most effective matter for its taxpayers, and WHBRBAS* the City has established a Building Fund of million dollars, and •msBKAS the City is doing the initial financing through a lease o«n Hoasin, and Redevelopment Authority, and NHSSKkS. the cash set aside in the Building Fund is used £oc helping deJtay the cost of the building, and MHERBAS, the Council determines it appropriate to have a S2 milliOTTprinlcpal balance in the fund upon completion of the lease purchase, and WHBBBAS, there is a need for certain interests from these moneys to support the General Fund, and WHBBBAS, the City Council does not want the principal used in any manner except listed help. MOW, THBBBFOBB BB IT RBSOLVED, that the Orono City restrictions: A The principal reduction from year to year can not be grealL than $I million - by number or years of the bonds. B.That part of the annual interest can be diverted to EfeVd-f^rarr^fC —b ‘hrb^r-roc%"rc%\^^ rl ■ f-. r f t I. I Fr s; if k C.That the principal and balances of interest will be used to reduce lease pyaments to minimize tax levies for that lease purchase payments. D.That the $2 million may include $303,000 separately held in escrow for final payment (?) E.That the $2 million will not otherwise be reduced in principal. and Council further resolutes that; 1.Conditions A, B and C can only be amended by a 4/5 vote of the entire Council and that 2.Condition D and E can only be amended by a unanimous vote of the entire Council, vacancies not withstanding. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a tegular meeting held June 24, 1991. Barbara A.Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk fTOs 1 Q ^"X T ^ • -/. L.Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator-'/' DATE: July 1, 1991 SUBJECT: Lake Use Committee 16. Attachment: A.LMCD Budget (Revised) Dated 6/26/91 B.LMCD Budget Memo Dated 6/13/91 C.Lake Use Committee Notice - July 9, 1991 D.Letter to JoEllen Hurr Re: LMCD Budget % Kr ISSUE - I, Present to Council the adopted LMCD budget to determine if^the changes made are acceptable or if the Council desires to submit a letter of objection in order to trigger a public hearing. 2.Present to Council the update of work by Metro Council staff regarding LMCD's comprehensive plan. 3.Set next Lake Use Committee meeting. INTRODUCTION - Attachment D was transmitted to the City's LMCD Representative and as a result of the LMCD budget meeting Attachment A was adopted. DISCUSSION - Xasue #1 - LMCD Budget - As noted LMCD did adopt a revised AdsHnistrative budget which reflects about a 9.4% growth which is slightly less than the original 10.4% growth. This reduction together with a reduced City share of Milfoil reduces Orono s increase from 11.2% to 3.4%. As noted the Council can object if they choose and this would be transmitted to LMCD. Issue #2 - LMCD Canprehensive Plan - James Uttley has redrafted portiolis ‘ofTh’e LMCD plan which LMCD Board will review at a meeting Monday. A meeting has been scheduled by LMCD for the cities regarding this on Wednesday July 17. It is anticipated a copy of the document will be available just prior to that meeting. It is my understanding that Mr. Uttley has taken a substantial different tact in these initial revisions. Issue #3 - The next Lake Use Committee meeting originally set for JulyTland then changed to July 23nd needs to be rescheduled and will be presented Monday night. ALTERNATIVES - Issue #1 *- LMCD Budget 1.Accept as presented r- V' V*^ I' '• k r-. ^;- ■-4: f- ■r. t::K r*’ k: k- :-'X S., C-- I&V* (■7 -’.■' 2.Express objections 3.Direct staff to transmit official notice of objection. 4.Take no action. 5.Table for further discussion. * Issue #2 - LMCD Comprehensive Plan 1.Accept as information only. 2.Indicate any objections 3.Table for further discussion. Issue #3 - Lake Use Meetings 1.Set a date. 2.Table to 7/22 to set. RBC r ^ ▼ I ▼ A -illDATIONS - Issue #1 - LMCD Budget - Absent the significant increase in esiployee benefits area# most other increases are not substantial. Given the 3.4% overall City increase, it may not be worth a significant fight unless substantial amounts are involved. Issue #3 - Next Meeting - Set a date for the meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by cc:Lake Use Committee Members Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Admin. k \ i t Ic. i'r:f'-.m i' gfi fe<%. Eh-' tv V- P':- '■•i f--'ft f I LAKE MINNETONKA CONS PRVArI ON DISTRICT ’ffevr June 28.191 %njl^ JOr^ W»S» TO:MI»in I)»' l‘ n M i ‘ ! [ ’ i ^l from : subject; Treasurer Jan Boswink el 1 992 l.MCD BUDGET Your LMCD Board of Directors is pleased to enclose its 1992 annual budget adopted at its regular meeting June 26.1991. Advance copies of a preliminarv discussion budget draft were submitted a month in advance to all municipaiitiesMay 31. As a result of this advan<-e budget draft distribution, municipal rnspoiise has been receiv.-d and given full consideration. Particular discussion centered over the future funding of the Eurasian water milfoil weed control program and its budget. The Board reconsidered its earlier position on private contributions. It recognizes that income source as a continuing potential. The reduction in city contributions is being made up by private contributions. The board further expects greater private contributions are available than budgeted, but will hold them as potential back-up to any other agency budgeted shortfall.It intends to make every effort to secure the required agency financi.al backing, particularly from Hennepin County. ^'N DNR and possib y other new agencies. Again, city support in this regard will be key to its s u f! r p r. n . Changes which have been incorporated are revenue : LMCD Communities Admn Levy Eurasian Water milfoil Program: City Con I ribu tions State & Regional Agencies Private Solicitation DISBURSEMENTS: Sa1arie s Employer Benefit Contributions Printing Legal Notices TOTAL ADMINISTRATION TOTAL admin . DISBURGEMT 1992 1992 Ad j Proposed Adopted X 109,422 107.230 3 0 0.00 0 63.000 -21 1 70.000 170,000 0 -0-17,000 o.t-co104,500 4 17.400 17,000 13 2.000 1.800 17 3.000 2 , 700 16 164.730 162.930 5 250.422 248,230 9 r I I. ■;.. LMCD Budget Transmittal, h 2Q '^1 P . 2 Hennepin Parks, while not ecognized in the actual dollar portion of the budget, contributes significant in-kind support by providing its new weed harvester, operator, fuel and all operating oiaintenance and depreciation for the 1*^91 operation, comparable support provided in 1990. In the event public agency response tails short of the budgeted $170,000. the weed harvest program will be re evaluated. This will be determined in advance of the 1992 program start in close coordination with member cities. The LMCD Board understands that several cities are willing to step up to the need to fund the l'^9j Eurasian water milfoil Meed control program over and abovi* the same allowance budgeted for 1991.It respectfully encourages those cities Milling to make this additional volunteer contribution to advise LMCD of its intent at an early date. Distribution of expenses, provided in the preliminary draft 6/18/91, were found to be distributed incorrectly due to a misunderstanding by using Assessed M.arket Value. The correct distribution is based upon Net Tax Capacity, which is the percent of property market value. This value varies among properties sucli as resident i,a I, commercial and industrial. It results in a revised amount for each city. We do point out that Net Tax Capacity was the distribution used in the 1991 budget. The attached excerpt LMCD's budget, funding and expense of the .MN Laws governing distribution is attached. LMCD Chair Dave Cochran joins with thanking eacii city council for its District’s funding requirements. the entire Board in thoughtful review of the XXX 409 of MINNES(JTA for I'S'JO Ch )‘>l. An : employees . The duties of the district may ^ esccutcd ^ cmplosces of the fminicipalities (.MN L 1967. c 907, sec 4| gubd. 2. EXPENSES. The expenses of ihe district shall ^ borne bv the municipalities. The portion of expenses of ^ district borne by each munic- yyaliiy must be in proponion to its n^ tax capacity provided that the nonion of jny ,,tie municipality mav not ^ more than ^ percent of i_he total expense or Jew than S200. IMN L 1967. c 907. sec 4; MN L 1969. c 272. sec 3| Sec. 54. II03B.6JSI FUNDING OF DISTRICT. Subdivision X. BUDGET. The board must, on or before Julv | each year, prepare and submit a detailed budget of the district s needs for the next calendar year to the tovemint body of each municipality in ^ distnct with a statement of the proportion of the budget to ^ provided ^ each municipality. The povemini body of each municipality in the distnct shall review the budget anc the board, upon notice from a municipality, must hear obiections to die budget . After the hearing, the board may modify or amend the budget Notice must be aiven to the municipalities of modifications or amendments. |M.N L 1967, c 90~, sccSI Subd. 2 MUNICIPAL FUNDING OF DISTRICT, (a) The governing bo.jy or board of supervisors of e.ich municipality m ^ district must prov ide t^ funds necessary ^ meet its proportion of Utc total cost determined ^ the boa.d (b)A municipality mav raise the funds by any means that the municipality has to rtise funds. The municipalities may each levy a tax not w exceed .00^42 ^c^t of taxable market value on the taxable property located in ihe disiitc* for funding the district. The lev'V must ^ within all other limitations provided ^ law. [cj Xhe funds must ^ deposited m the treasury of the district m amounts and at times as the treasurer of the district requires. (MN L 1967. < 907. sec b: MN L 1969. c 272, sec 4| Sec. 55 (I03B.64II REGULATIONS OF DIS I RlCI. Subdivision L AUTHORITY' AND EFFECT, (aj The dislric mai adojj njjej and regulations to effectuate the purpose of its establishment and the powers granted to the district. The rules and regulations have the ctrccl of an ordinance if declared ^ the board of directors of the district and stated m the rule or rcgul..tiqn. (c)The rules and regulations of the district may ^ enforced bv the d istrict bX iniunc on in addition w penalties under ihis section. |MN L 1969, c 272. see 6| Subd. 2, ADOPriON PROCEDURE. UJ IHIS 21 rcgula ion must ^ suitably titled. jOrickrlrd p«f»gr»ph noiM lilt Irxl youicrv| Ne» Unguate 1» Indicated b> ufuicflmc. delelionx b) Miikeou* f: i I LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1992 Administrative Budget REVENUE LNCD Communities Admn Levy EW Milfoil Program: City Contributions Other Public Agencies Private Solicitation Court Fines Licenses & Permits Interest Shoreland Rules, DNR Agreement Shoreland Rules, DNR Adron/Cons TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE 1990 1990 1991 1992 Budge t A c t u a 1 Budget Proposed 89.490 89.490 103,825 107.230 60.000 60,000 63.000 63.000 115.000 83.550 102.000 170.000 50.000 49.912 85.000 17.000 40.000 40.706 35.000 38.000 80.000 76.338 65.000 85.000 10.000 13.257 8.000 8.000 -0--0-4 5.000 20.000 -0--0-15.000 10.000 444,490 413,253 521.825 518,230 1 (Carry-over from 1991 Shoreland Grant Agreement DIGuURSEMENTS to be spent in 1 992) Administration Personnel Services Salaries 84.060 Employer Benefit Contr. 13,810 TOTAL PERSONNEL SERVICES 97.870 84,965 13.934 98.899 100.300 14.800 115,300 104.500 17.000 121.500 2 (Proportionate increase, plus one expense underestimated for 91) Contractual Services Office Lease Utilities, Janitorial Recorder, Temp Secy, Acctg TOTAL CONTRACT SERVICES 4.140 1.080 9,830 15,050 4,130 1 .386 7 . 4 4 8 12,964 0 . 600 1 . 500 6.575 17.675 10,130 -0- 5,550 15,680 3 4 5 3 (Lease subject to 4.5S annual increase) 4 (Items now included in new office lease) 5 (Eliminated temp lake inspector. outside acctg for . reports, now done in-house; audit done by outside contractor) Office & Administrative Office, General Supplies Telephone Postage Printing Legal Notices Maintenance, Office Equip Subscriptions, Memberships Insurance, Bonds Mileage, Expenses, Training TOTAL OFFICE & ADMN. 2.900 1,400 1.900 1 . 500 1.000 I . 500 210 . 500 1 . 300 210 3 1 1 5 4.668 1.430 3,100 1.675 2,270 933 25 5.024 1 . 704 20.829 5 2 19 3,075 1.475 2.280 1 , 500 500 3,400 210 050 360 850 5 2 23 3 . 500 2,350 4,000 1.800 2.700 1.700 200 200 300 750 6 7 8 9 1‘■' •K-.T- ^I '' 1 ft .. ^;v ■:?■ •ij-- 6 (Add third line for FAX and increased phone service demands) 7 (Anticipate more mail communicati ns with increase fees, underestimated 1991 budget) 0 (Anticipate more code amendments, public hearing notices for variances, new dock licenses: underestimated 1991 budget) 9 (Over~estimated computer maintpnance costs in 1991 budget) 1990 Budget 1990 Ac t ua 1 199 1 Budget 1992 P o p o s e d Capital Outlay Furniture, Equip. TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 2 . 500 2,500 2.914 2.914 3.000 3.000 2.000 2,000 10 (Provision for minor equipment upgrades) TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 130.630 135.606 1B5.825 162,930 Legal Legal Services Prosecution Process Service 18.000 13.500 1 .400 15.493 25.443 42 20,000 20,000 500 18,000 25,000 300 TOTAL LEGAL 32,900 40,970 40,500 43,300 11 (Prosecution underestimated revenue) in 1991 budget , expense re 1 a t ed to Consulting Services Long Term Management Plan Shoreland Rules Consultant 42.900 -0- 34.813 -0- 12,500 -0- 10,^00 TOTAL CONSULTING SVC 42,960 35.083 12,500 10,000 19 rrntisultinc service complete as Management Plan adopted in 1991) n (C«r“ from 1991 sLreland Grant Agreement consulting s.rvic. to be spent in 1992) Lalt'' Data Collection/Publication Aerial Survey Lake Use btudy Wetland Inventory Mapping Public Information Public Access Use Studies TOTAL COMMITTEES Contingency At approx. 5Z of Admn Disl TOTAL CONTINGENCY total admin . DISBURSEMENT -0--0--0-12,000 -0--0--0-1 , 500 15,000 2.083 5.000 3,000 5.000 -0-4,000 4,000 20,000 2,083 9,000 20,500 tuted on everyother year basis witn s, estimating cost c omparable to ot 12 . 900 1 .077 9,000 11.500 12.900 1,077 9,000 11,500 239,390 214.827 226.B25 248.230 -2 - 1, I h M. 1 h' 1990 Budge t 1990Actual 1991Budget 1992Proposed Eurasian Hater Milfoil (EWM) Heed Harvesting Program Barge Service Trucking Personne1 Admn. UC Ins, FICA Operation Supplies Contingency TOTA 2WM DISBURSEMENTS 62 68 39 25 10 205 -0- 400 175 170 355 000 100 5^ 6 5 49 21 1 90 -0- 4 00 284 769 260 -0- 7 13 114.000 32.000 45.000 31.000 16.000 12.000 250.000 114 32 45 31 1 6 12 250 000 ■j' )'.)0 000 000 OOO oc 14 14 (Adjusted 1991 and 1992 item to delete $13,000 chargeback to EWM bjdgot) in admn salary Shoreland Rules Shoreland Rules City Grant Agreement Reimbursement TOTAL SHORELAND REIMB -0 -0 0- 0- 4 5.000 45,000 20.000 20,000 15 15 (Carry over to 1992 budget) TOTAL C0MBINP.0 DISBUBSF.MF.NT = ; == = = 6/20/91 -3 - Balancr for 13 c i * »8/91 I \KE MINNETONKA CONSFR ATION DISTRICT D i 19 2 s t r i b u t i r •k *? t ' E .X p e n s e NET TAX CAPAC TTY *. OF I NFT TA. CAPAC I i 1 : DM IN .>HAR F. OF $107,210 Ewv SHARE OF $63.000 TOTAL SHARE OF $170 230 Oeepho vf;n 6,103.111 7.78 8.3-. ’4.901 1 3.244 Excelsior 2.3 30.3 31.1 . i 156 1.972 5.328 Gr iv^ood 1 . 24 / . 268 1 . 5.1 970 2.621 Minnetonka 67.249.<13 J 20.0 •V t»12.600 34.046 Mrka. Beach 1.728 . lot 2.13 ^ .284 1 . 342 3.626 Minnetrista 5.367 .482 t . 6 2 7.099 4.171 11 . 270 Mound 7,148 . 129 8 . 82 9,458 5 5 5 7 15.015 Orono 14.378.759 17.72 19.001 11.164 30.165 Shorewood 8.070.339 9 . 9 j 10.6o9 6.268 16,937 Spring Park 1.913.039 2 . Ih 2.531 1.487 4.018 lonka Bay 2.909,0 37 3.59 3.830 2.262 6.112 Victoria ^.362.547 2.91 i . 120 1 ,833 4 ,953 Wayza t a 8.&i6.260 10.87 11,656 6.840 18,504 Hood land 2.097.909 2.58 2.766 1 .625 4.391 Totals 132.131. 103 10< .00 107.230 63.000 170,230 Isss Mr.ka.( 6 7.2 9,9 5 9 1 6 A , 8 8 1 • * 613^1 T TO: PROH iiayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Adm: June 13, 1991 SUBJECT: LMC'J Budget inist rat//'^'^ DATE Attachment: A.Preliminary Budget Discussion Draft Received 6/3/91 B.City of Tonka Bay Letter Dated 6/12-'9l ISSUE -Determine initial reaction of the Council to the preTxminary budget of LMCD to be discussed at their June 26, 1991 Board meeting. INTRODUCTION - In the past LMCD is required by law to adopt a budget by July 1 for transmission to the cities. The cities then have 30 days to express formal objections to the budget, at which point the LMCD is required to hold a hearing con'^’deting that, but otherwise not. For the 1992 budget they have decided to prepare a preliminary budget for transmission to the cities to get initial reactions b< ^■'re they adopt a formal budget prior to July 1. A chment B outlines ronka Bay's concerns regarding the budget. DISCUSSION - The proposed budget increase for the general administrative levy to cities has increased about 5%. This increase of 5% is at a time that the cities themselves are facing levy limits that not increasing. In addition the other major item is that t LMCD has increased the contribution by the cities for Miltoil from $ 3,000 to $80,000,which is a 27% increase, as part of a pro ram to put full reliance of the Milfoil program on public sour es. While preliminary budget does not indicate how these translat' to specific community allotments but given the maximums given unc?r law to be charged Minnetonka again maxes out ■ 'd with this Orono would max out. Based on the inf~* 4tion Orono's contributions are as follows: 1990 - v^5,860 1991 - $29,175 1992 - $32,44L It is anticipated that Drone's LMCD Representative will be available for comments at ;ne June 7 '‘■h meeting to discuss this. Significant cost items relate to in *ase in personal services together with the undertaking of the area lakes survey study done about every 3 or 4 years. It is anticipated that the cost of the milfOi.1 program will rema: n the same for '92 as it has been in -t r'- i-i :•!h- t I I 91. ALTERNATIVES 1* Indicate any objections to the budget to stoff and or our LMCD Representative. 2.Preliminary agree to the budget as presented. 3.Table for further discussion 4.Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that any objections expres~3ed to the staff and/or LMCD Representative if she present regarding the budget particularly the following items: be i s 5% increase in contribution when cities are facing flat levey limits together with 5% incease in salaries Significant increase in public reliance for the Ifoil program ‘-’ithout any private contributions Funding the survey entirely out of 1 year without use of any reserves The City still has the right to formally object to whatever adopted with 30 days to seek a hearing. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , the Council indicate any concerns they may have with the budget to the LMCD Representative. Ayes _, Nays _. cc; Jo Ellen Hurr, 930 Partenwood Road, Long Lake LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVAriON DISTR 1992 Administrative Budget T 4.^4 P R E L I V 4 4 I N A R V REVENUE LHCD Communities Admn Levy EW Milfoil Program: City Contributions Othar Public Agencies Private Solicitation Court Fines Licenses & Permits Interest Shoreland Rules, DNR Agreement Shoreland Rules, DNR Admn/Cons. 1990 Budget : u s s 10 1990 Actual ORA 1 9<> . Budget 1992 P roposed 89.490 89,490 103,825 109,422 60 1 1 5 50 40 80 10 000 000 000 000 000 000 -0- -0- bO 83 49 40 76 000 5 50 9 12 706 338 13.257 -0- -0- 6 3 . 000 102,000 85.000 35.000 65 8 . OOO 4= .000 15.000 80.000 1 70,000 -0- 30 000 8 5.000 8.000 20.000 10.000 2 2 Administration Personnel Services Salaries iVflioEmployer Benefit Contr. iJ.oiu TOTAL PERSONNEL SERVICES 97,870 8 -4 . 9 6 5 13.934 98,899 100.500 W . 300 115,300 105.400 17.400 122,800 3 (Proportion,t. increase, plus one espense underest.oated for n) Contractual Services Office Lease Utilities. Janitorial Recorder, Temp Secy, Acctg TOTAL CONTRACT SERVICES 4 . 140 1.080 9.830 15,050 4.130 I . 386 7.448 12,964 9.600 1 . 500 6.575 17.675 10.130 -0- 5.550 15.680 4 5 6 4 (Lease subject to 4.5S annual increase) 5 (Iteji- now included in new acctg for quarterly ^ contractor) Office & Administrative Office, General Supplie. Telaphone Postage Printing Lagal Notices Maintenance. Office Equip Subscriptions, Memberships Insurance, Bonds Mileage, Expenses, Training TOTAL OFFICE & ADMN. 2,900 1,400 1 . 900 1 . 500 1.000 1 . 500 210 3.500 1,300 5.210 668 430 100 675 270 933 25 024 704 829 3.075 1.475 2,280 1 . 500 500 3.400 210 5.050 2.360 19,850 500 350 000 000 000 700 200 200 300 250 7 8 9 10 -V TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE 444,490 413.253 521.825 520. 1 (Introducing lOOS of Eurasian water milfoil annual revenue needs as a governmental responsibility, see attached exp anation. 1992) 2 (CaJry-over from 1991 Shoreland Grant Agreement to be spent in 1992) DISBURSEMENTS 2' +6 -IOC «■ +31 -0- -5; -3' -0- +: +1: 4-6 +5 -IOC -If -11 +14 +59 +75 4-33 +500 -50 -5 +3 -2 +22 V 7 (Add third line for FAX end ‘ 8 (Anticipate more mail communica lor.s *.. nnd.erestiin3t6cll991bucig6C) 9 (Anticipate «ore code ee.ende.ents. ‘ “ “ f veriences. new dock licenses: i”! ■;' 10 (Oeer-eetimeted computer meintenence cos., in 1.91 bu.g... Capital Outlay Furniture, Equip TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 1990 Budge c 1990 Actual 1991 Budget n 92 Proposed 9t e 2 . 500 Cf^C l 3,000 2.000 11 -33 2,500 2.914 3,000 2.000 -33 11 (Provision for minor equipment upgrades) TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 1====== 164,730 +6 L«m1 Legal Services Prosecution Process Service 18.000 13,500 1.400 15,493 23.443 42 20,000 20,000 500 18,000 25.000 12 300 - 10 +25 -40 32,900 40.978 40,500 43,300 +7 TOTAL LEGAL 12 (Pr.e.cuti.n underestimated in 1991 budget, eepens. related to revenue) Conaulting Services Long Term Management Plan Shoreland Rules Consultant 42,960 -0- TOTAL CONSULTING SVC 42,960 berry cvwi to be spent in 1992) 34.313 -0- -0-13 • 270 12.500 10.000 14 -20 ' - 35,083 12,500 10,000 -20 «me n t Plan Ag re eme n t adopted in 1991) consulting service -0--0-12.000 15 +100 \J -0-.1,500 +100 V/ 2,083 5,000 3,000 -40 -0-4,000 4,000 -0- H ■> f;: Lake Date Collection/Publication Aerial Survey Lake Use Study Natland Inventory Mapping Public Information ^000 Public Access Use Studies 3,000 90 000 2,083 9,000 20,500 TOTAL COMMITTEES •I- a r>n everv”other year basis with »::t:r-i‘,"::i:r':^tt:e:-rt::t toiperehiesa) -*•127 icxagvBvj^ K 19 qOO 1.077 1.077 9.000 9.000 11.892 11.892 +32 ^22 rOtAt ADMIB. DISBURSEMENT 239.390 214.827 226.825 250,422 +)0 V I %‘S. . y-. I- Eurasian Water Milfoil (EHM) Waad Harvesting Program Barge Service Trucking Personnel Adan, UC Ins, FICA Operation Supplies Contingency TOTAL EWM DISBURSEMENTS 1990 Budge C 1990 Actual 1991 Budget 1992 Pro po s ed a/ /e 6 2 6f 39 -0- 400 175 170 25.355 10.000 205,100 -0- 54,400 65,284 49,769 21,260 -0- 190,713 114 32 4 5 31 16 12 000 000 000 000 000 000 250,000 114.000 32.000 ^ 5.000 31.000 16,000 12.000 250.000 16 -0” 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U (Adjusc.d 1991 and delnce SU.OOO chargeback t'^ EWM budget) in admn salary Shoreland Rules Shoreland Rules City Grant Agreement Reimbursement TOTAL SHORELAND REIMS -0 -0 -0-45.000 45.000 20.000 20.000 17 55 55 17 (Carry over to 1992 budget) TOTAL COMBINED DISBURSEMENT 405,540 521,825 -0- 409 LA AS or MINNESOTA lor 19Q0 CU An : employees . The Jun*?s O disinci nuy ^ exgcutgd ^ employees of ihe municipalities. (MN L 196*. c 907. sec 4| Subd. 2^ EXPENSES. The expenses of tfie disinci shall ^ borne ^ the municipalities The ponion of the expenses of ihe dismci borne ^ each munic- IpaLty must ^ m propomon to ns net capacity provided that the portion of anv one municipality may not be more than 20 percent of the total expense or i^^nTzOO |MN L 1967. c 907. lec 4; MN L 1969. c 272. see J| See. 54. I103B.635) FUNDING OF DISTRICT. Subdivision I. BUDGET. The board musl. on or berore JuN I each year, prepare and submit a detailed budget of the districl ’s needs for the next calendar year 12 il!£ iQvgrnint body of each municipaliiv in the disinct wuh a siatemem 2f Use proDonion of the budtet to ^ provided ^ each municipality. Hje eovemina bodv of each municipality in the district shall review the budget and the board, upon notice from a municipality, must hear obtectiona to the budget, After the hearing, ihe board mav modify or amend the budget. Nonce must ^ ajven to the mumcicalities of modifications or amendments. (MN L 1967, c 907, sec S| Subd. 2. MUNICIPAL FUNDING OF DISTRICT, (a) The governing body or board of supervisors ot each municipality m the district must provide t_he funds necessary to meet its proportion of the total cost determined ^ the board, (b)A municipaliiv mav raise the funds by any means that the municipality ^ has to raise funds. The mumcipaliiies mav each levy a tax to CMggd W2£2 percent of taxable maricet value on the taxable property located in the district for funding the distnet. The levv must be NMthin all other limitations provided (cj The funds must ^ dcposiied in ihc treasury of the disinct m amounts and 3^ times » the treasurer of inc district requires. jM.N L 1967, c 907, sec 5; MN L 1969, c 272. sec 4| Sec. 55. J103B.641I R£CUL.\TIONS OF DISTRICT. Subdivision I AUTHORITV' AND EFFECT, (aj Jhe distnct mai adopt rules and regulations to effcctuaie the purpose of its establishment and the powers granted to th£ distnct (b)T he rules and regulations have the died of an ordinance if declared b^^ the board of directors of the distnct and stated m tfu rule or regulation, (£] The rules and regulations of ihe district may be enforced bv the district JjX tniunction in addition to penalnes under dm section. |MN L 1969, c 272, , . . see 6| Subd. 2, ADOPTION PROCEDURE. U1 nde or regulation inusl fee suitably titled. language la Ia4leatt4 6r underline, deletieaa by Mribeeui. IBcackeled paragraph wMea cite teal t*«ree«| V - v=-. .3 *x.c:a • •ex _-. V •—*1 # • « •• •* e •• ••a • ig. m mjt >•» .•V ;t%L^ . lT-~. •*'.•^ .J* *•*' ^ ^ a . a. 1 • •* •* •a. 4901 Manitou Road. Tonka Bay. Minnesot MAYOR June 12,1991 L.H. H#u9 •7994 COUNCIL Stt^ Johr>ton OOufiM iCtlltr John SonoioiH Mr. Gene Stromaen. Executive Director Lake Minnetonka Conservation District ADMINISTRATOR 9Q0 East Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 160 Wayzata, MN 55391 1 DivW Catiinar Dear Mr. Stromnen: The Tonka Bay City Council has recvintly had the opportunity to review the 1992 LMCD Budget. As a result of this review, we would like to make the following comments, questions and concerns: 1)c^urt mines - Revenues are up 3,000, however prosecution costs have increased $5,000 resulting in a net deficit of $2,000. Apparently the cost of prosecution was under-budgeted in previous years. Fact - The cost of prosecution has nearly doubled in the last two yea^s while the amount of court fines has decreased by $2,000 si e 1990. 2)Telephone - Increase of 59% from 1991 budget. Most of the increase is for an additio..al phone line. Are three phone lines for a staff of 3 1/2 really .lecessary? 3)Poeteae - This item is proposed to increase 75% for 1992. We feel this is excessive due to the fact that only $3,100 was spent for postage in 1990. Granted there was a 16% increase in postal rates, but if we take the $3,100 spent in 1990 and add 16% we come up with a more reasonable figure of $3,596. Given the current fiscal crisis, all government agencies are being encouraged to reduce the amount of unnecessary mailings by eliminating people from mailing lists, consolidating mailings, etc... The LMCD should also be expected to reduce, not increase, the i.umber of mailings and thus the overall cost of postage. A 75% increase in postage costs is unacceptable. Fact - The LMCD's cost of postage has more than doubled since 1990. 4)Printing - Here again we have a major increase (33%) in an area that we should be looking for ways to reduce the amount of printing that we do An inflationary increase would appear more acceptable, but $500 or 33% is not. 5)L«Q>1 Notices - The LMCD may have under-budgeted for this item in the past but they only spent $2,270 in 1990. Why then do they need $3,000 in 1992? Fact - The cost of legal notices has tripled since 1990. 6)Total amount of Office fc Administrative has increased 22% over the previous years budget.This type of overall increase is unacceptable given the present economic conditions. 7)Are Public Aeeeee Use studies mandated? Can they be done with existing staff? 8)<;;Qii^i«|gfp^Y “ If the total budget increase was 5%, why is the budget contingency set to increase 32%? Only $1,077 was used from last years contingency fund, where did the remaining $8,000 go? Shouldn't last year's contingency be carried over to the piresent year and the budget reduced accordingly? There should be a cap placed on the amount that can be cccumulated as a contingency. 9)Milfoil Program - Total disbursements in 1990 were $190,000. The amount budgeted in 1990 was $205,000. Where is the $15,000 difference? Also, why is the LMCD giving up on private funding thereby increasing taxes for each of the 14 cities? 10)Salarloa - We are concerned about the way the salary reviews were handled with no input from any of the 14 cities. The LMCD needs to keep in mi. *'• that any salary incre t«s effect salary negotiations with cui. own employees, including the police department. 11)smmai Contributions - The City of Tonka Bay is very concerned over the rapid escalation of our annual contributions to the LMCD Budget (see attached chart) .As you can see there has been substantial growth in the amount needed each year from 1986 to present. As you know we are very concerned about the loss of revenue that all local governments are experiencing and because of this and a growing discontent with the escalation of property taxes, we must do everything we can to hold our expenditures down as much as possible. Please forward our comments and concerns to the LMCD Board. We would appreciate a response as soon as possible. We would also hope that the IKCD Board will keep our concerns in mind when considering a final budget for 1992. Sincerely, CITY OF TONKA BAY Dave Canister City Administrator cc: LMCD mgmber cities LMCD Budget Tonka Bay Contributions Thousands 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 Annual Contribution A LAKE M'‘iNE~ONKA CC“iSz“ • at:C J _ i -*' 3- 7033 TPiC •I *■ i -j L.M.C-D. MEETING SCHEDULE June 19^1 JUM 4$ 1 - Saturday 8 Water Structures & Environment Committee 7:15 a.m., Board for Lake inspection tour Minnetonka B^at Works docks, Wayzata 7:30 a.m., departure, prompt Monday Lake Use Committee 4:30 p.m., Nor-»est Bank Building Wayzata 900 East Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 135 Superior Street, east entrance Advisory ommittee 5:15 p.m., LMCD office ?H60 Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata Wednesday LMCD Response to Cities' Praft of Proposed Changes to Long-Term Management Program : 30 p.m., Minnetrista City Hall Friday jsian Water Milfoil Task Force 8:30 a.m., Norwest Bank Building Wayzata 900 East Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 135 Superior Street, east entrance Wednesday LMCD jard of Directors' Regular Meeting 7:30 p.m.. Tonka Bay City Hall 5-31-91 (V ?' ‘ T-[?/ L m i i'i '••■••I0 Wl'-W P mk >,. i{yk P'Is I’r, -'^ f'”te:w ‘H-- £,»J, ■ V I" i: Sat Sun Mon 3 Ir Tue 4 Wed 5 ife'' Thu 6 Fri 7 iSi'-'. Sat 8 iS LAKE MINNE ’ONKA CC^JSERVATIC^^ DISTRICT 473-^033 events schedtlz June 19*^1 10:00 am 12:00 n 2:00 pm 00 n :30 am fOO am i.2'00 n 2:00 pm Lower Lake races Upper Lake races Lower Lake races Minnetonka Boat Works Ski Show, Wayzata Bay MN/WI Pro-Am Baas Tournament, North Shore Drive Marina Lower Lake races Minnetonka Boat Works Ski Show, Wayzata Bay Lower Lake races 6:00 pm Lower Lake races 6:00 pm Lower Lake races 6:00 pm Lower Lake races 6:30 pm Upper Lake races 6:00 pm Lower Lake races 6:00 pm Lower Lake -s 5:30 am 8:00 am 10:00 am 10:30 am 2: 0 pm , Lc pm Minnetonka Pass Classic Spray Island Minnetonka crossing, Wayzata Bay beach Lower Lake races Upper Lake races Lower Lake races -,u <iiFra hwater Foundation's J & B with a Splash, milfoil foundraiser, Excelsior Commons Sun 9 10:00 10:30 1:30 am am pm Lower Upper Lower Lake Lake Lake races races races Mon 10 6:30 pm Lower Lake races Tue 11 6:00 pm II •9 Wed 12 6:00 6:30 pm pm II Upper f Lake races Thu 13 6:15 pm Lower Lake race 9 Fri 14 6:00 pm It II t Sat 15 10:00 12:00 am n 19 Upper II Lake II T t :es (over) % t-f ?.V Y- tp I-:: L:., :3:, 'r *fe K... n- ‘It li: - -:t i;-'- I'- MVv, LAKE NIINNE'^Of'JKA CONSE^VA-^'ON DISTRICT LMCD Events Schedule - June 1991 Sun 16 6:00 am 10:00 am 10:30 am 1:30 pm Mon 17 6:30 r ’• Tue 18 11:00 am Wed 19 10:00 am 1:00 pm 3:00 pm 6:30 pm Thu 2U 6:15 pm Fri 21 6:00 pm Sac 22 Sun 23 5' ?l-91 American Scholarship Foundation bass tournament, Uawacosa Is^ Lower Lake races ■ Upper Lake races Lower Lake races Bay Park, Cooks Bay Lower Lake races M tt rt Upper Lake races 10:00 am 10:30 am 10:30 am ft M M M If If 10:00 am 11:00 am 1:30 pm 4:00 pm dusk Upper Lake races Lower Lake races ft ff It If f I If Mound City Days ski show, Cooks Bay Mound City Days fireworks. Cooks Bay Mon 24 6:30 pm Tue 25 6:00 pm Wed 26 6:00 pm 6:30 pm Thu 27 6:15 pro Fri 28 1:00 pm 6:00 pm 6:30 pm Sac 29 9:00 am 10:00 am 2:00 pm 2:00 pm Sun 30 ooam Minnesota Sailing Magazine sailboat show. Excelsior Park Tavern, Excelsior Bay Lover Lake races Upper Lake races Minnesota Sailing Magazine sailboat show, Excelsior Park Tavern, Excelsior Bay Lower Lake rcces Upper Lake rices Taverii, Excelsior Bay ^ I i-i. h I'-: t', fr f,.'’ LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DIsTRI'- May 31, 1991 to:LMCD Member Municipality Mayors City Council Members INFO TO: LMCD Board Members FROM:LMCD Chair Dave Cochran subject :Preliminary Discussion Draft. 1992 Administative and Eurasian Water Milfoil Budget We are oleased to provide the preliminary discussion draft of !!!;. I«2 bud^t fo? LMCD-S administrative and Eurastan water milfoil program. An initial budget draft was introduced at the LMCD board meeting. The board BEPORr'^ budget m.mb.r citie. have in being provided i. adopted and presented to the cities. This procedure being instituted this year to advance the comment opportunity• YOU will find a*»i;i»r.tive levY.a^^^^^ by taking the total combined note*th^rraJe*a l”;.t‘,?“arr-?:e”r:reru.‘rt:;s alr.a-dv^Lpportmg the over all operation control !p®piiaJ*thertforrshows^arincrease in the resources. The ^qqq come from other public :i:iri..*l;:n;c;rnj; requirement for increased fn; "-s«»n-r,rH;L:rircountY^to^b.^ ““ ?if;uo;ou!*b«iil!.'orour ^ take Minnetonka citiea. Thi. budg.t HAS not been adopted b, the LMCD Board.-ill^ ‘!tJ^“:o::»u“:"i.'up:r!a“In"vt:.rbefore or et thet time. s L I I' P U'- LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT //rT^QMajrO June 18,1991 to:LMCD Member Municipality Mayors City Council Members INFO to:LMCD Board Members LMCD Chair Dave Cochran .^ FROM: SUBJECT: 1992 LMCD Budget, Distribution o£ Expense Budget Concerns Expressed by City of Tonka Bay The attached draft of the 1992 Budget proposal illustrates the Distribution of Expense if the budget were adopted as presented in the 5/31/91 preliminary discussion draft. A comparison copy of the 1991 budget distribution is also provided. The City of Tonka Bay presented a written response 6/12/91 j ‘--wishtoto the preliminary budget discussion draft. ke Acknowledge their comments as follows. COURT FINES — The fluctuations in prosecution revenue and disbursements are being influenced by boating while intoxicated (BWI) citations. The low water years of 8b through *88 resulted in fewer than 40 each year. In 89 BWl’s jumped to 58, and in '90 to 93. This aggressive enforcement increases the caseload and accompanying prosecution costs. Fines proportionately increase, as was noted by the '90 results. Implied consent hearings add further to prosecution costs. The disbursement of this item is a measure Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol effective prosecution service. revenue and of an active backed by an TELEPHONE While two telephone lines can suffice, two professional staff members rely substantially on phone communication. Often these calls are extended. The added public expectation for prompt communications in hard copy make a FAX service a needed tool. This proposed increase, we believe, still speaks for itself. POSTAGE — The recommendation to screen lists to remove unnecessary mailings is appropriate. That will be done. LMCD's lists, except for fund raising purposes, a*"® modest in size at a few hundred at the most. Two-sided copying is also employed wherever possible. No unusual mass mailings are contemplated. Condensed copy is a so stressed. (the end) < ^ l'.- F- f" :r •r t Si- I- ii-.m- 1992 Budget Distribution of Expjense, Tonka Bay Reply, 6, 18/ 91 4) 5) 7) 10) 11) PRINTING -- Communications are often unpredictable. Our Tonka Bay colleagues are admired for their contaitiment. LMCD most likely could save on the budget in this area. LEGAL NOTICES -- The variable nature of this item causes us to be realistic. Only required costs are committed. OFFICE & ADMINISTRATIVE -- The increased obligations ev.'denced with the management plan study, low water issues, equipment updating from manual to computer systems, and addition of one prrfessional staff position to adequately address the code enforcement requirements did involve an interim 'spike in administrative costs. The 6X increase for 1992 address a return to normalcy. PUBLIC ACCESS USE STUDIES -- this minimal study is considered the foundation to monitoring the lake s ur.e pattern. CONTINGENCY FUND — The suggestion to carry-over the unused portion of the previous year is a valid suggestion and will be proposed to the board. MILFOIL PROGRAM -- The difference in revenue over disbursements is held in reserve. Private funding is intended to be continued, but directed toward research rather than the annual control program.It is also now apparent that fund raising in excess of $100,000 annually is not realistic within the personnel resources of LMCD SALARIES --Salary reviews are recognized as the responsibility of the LMCD officers and Board. It views compensation adjustments keeping in rrind its neighboring public agencies as well as general industry standards. ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS — The Board trusts that the cities recognize the notable change in funding investment for your Lake Minnetonka services was influenced by the environmental needs brought on by the Eurasian water milfoil infestation and subsequent control program, balance of changes we believe have been addressed in the foregoing comments. The We thank the City of Tonka Bay council and administration for inviting responses to these areas of concern and clarification. 4901 Manilou Read. TofiK3 £? i\. Minnesota 5533 1 •i ’ i ‘uy-t MAYOR June 12, 1991 COUNCIL tandiebtr law Johnson >M|iMKtiior Mr. Gene Strommen, Executive Director Lake Minnetonka Conservation District lOMI iMtf nistrator 900 East Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 160 li," I;i Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Mr. Strominen: The Tonka Bay City Council has recently had the opportunity to review the 1992 LMCD Budget. As a result of this review, we would like to make the following comments, questions and concerns: 1)<|!QUgt Fines - Revenues are up $3,000, however prosecution costs have increased $5,000 resulting in a net deficit of $2,000. Apparently the cost of prosecution was under-budgeted in previous years. Fact -The cost of prosecution has nearly doubled in the last two years while the amount of court fines has decreased by $2,000 since 1990. 2)Telephone - Increase of 59% from 1991 budget. Most of the increase is for an additional phone line. Are three phone lines for a staff of 3 1/2 really necessary? 3)Postage - This item is proposed to increase 75% for 1992. We feel this is excessive due to the fact that only $3,100 was spent for postage in 1990. Granted there was a 16% increase in postal rates, but if we take the $3,100 spent in 1990 and add 16% we come up with a more reasonable figure of $3,596. Given the current fiscal crisis, all government agencies are being encouraged to reduce the amount of unnecessary mailings by eliminating people from mailing lists, consolidating mailings, etc... The LMCD should also be expected to reduce, not increase, the number of mailings and thus the overall cost of postage. A 75% increase in postage costs is unacceptable. Fact - The LMCD's cost of postage has more than doubled since 1990. 4)Printing - Here again we have a major increase (33%) in an area that we should be looking for ways to reduce the amount of printing that we do. An inflationary increase would appear more acceptable, but $500 or 33% is not. 5)Legal notices - The LMCD may have under-budgeted for this item in the past but they only spent $2,270 in 1990. Why then do they need $3,000 in 1992? Fact - The cost of legal notices has tripled since 1990. 6)Total amount of Office & Administrative has increased 22% over the previous years budget. This type of overall increase is unacceptable given the present economic conditions. 7)Are Public Access Use studies mandated? Can they be done with existing staff? 8)Contingency Fund - If the total budget increase was 5%, why is the budget contingency set to increase 32%? Only $1,077 was used from last years contingency fund. Where did the remaining $8,000 go? Shouldn’t last year's conti jency be carried over to the present year and the budget reduced accordingly? There shf-uld be a cap placed on the amount that can be accumulated as a contingency. 9)Milfoil Program - Total disbursements in 1990 were $190,000. The amount budgeted in 1990 was $205,000. Where is the $15,000 difference? Also, why is the LMCD giving up on private funding thereby increasing taxes for each of the 14 cities? 10)Salaries - We are concerned about the way the salary reviews were handled with no input from any of the 14 cities. The LMCD needs to keep in mind that any salary increases effect salary negotiations with our own employees, including the police department. 11)Annuel Contributions - The City of Tonka Bay is very concerned over the rapid escalation of our annual contributions to the LMCD Budget (see attached chart) .As you can see there has been substantial growth in the amount needed each year from 1986 to present. As you know we are very concerned about the loss of revenue that all local governments are experiencing and because of this and a growing discontent with the escalation of property taxes, we must do everything we can to hold our expenditures down as much as possible. piaase forward our comments and concerns to the LMCD Board. We vould appreciate a response as soon as possible. We would also hope that the LMCD Board will keep our concerns in mind when considering a final budget for 1992. Sincerely, CITY OF TONKA BAY Dave Callister City Administrator RECEIVED JUN 14 199 LMCD Budget Tonka Bay Contributions Thousands 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 RECEIVED JUN 14 1991 I-.M.C-D Annual Contribution 0««phaven Bxcalsior 6r««nvrood Minnetonka Htka. Beach Ninnetrista Hound Orono Shorewood Spring Park Tonka Bay Tietoria Woodland Totals leaa Ntka. ^'Balance for ^13 cities '1:*. t - I- '1. ' ' f- ¥■ I'. ^ S/U/91 I LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1992 Budget Distribution of Expense Assessed Mkt Value • of total Assessed Mkt Value 278,174,400 95,908,500 52,232,200 2.941,370,170 67,630,900 234,226,100 8.09 2.79 1 .52 20.00 1 .97 6.81 337,355,800 589,295.500 353,840.300 67,710.000 9.81 17.13 10.28 1 .97 121.027,000 3.52 125,544.200 3.65 350.213,100 10.18 78.820.200 2.28 5,693,348,370 100.00 (2.941,370,170) 2,751,978,200 Admn Share of $109,422 (4) 8.852 3,053 1 . 663 21.884 2.156 7.452 10.734 18,744 1 1.248 2.156 3.852 3.994 11.139 2.495 EKM S hr e of $80,000 6.472 2.232 1.216 16,000 1 .576 5,448 7 , 848 13.704 8.224 1 .576 2.816 2.920 8.144 1,824 109,422 80,000 Total Share of $ 18'» .422 15.324 5.285 2.879 37.8«4 3.732 12.900 18.582 32.448 19.472 3.732 6,668 6.914 19.283 4.319 189,422 - i'BI Cv l-t {.Vv Lake Minnetonka Conservation District ♦Maximum of $33i365 6-20-90 1991 BUDGET ■ DISTRIBUTION OF EXPENSE 1 Net Tax Capability 7.of Total Net Tax Capability 7, of Budget Resulting from $33,365 Maximum to Minnetonka Share of $166,825 1991 Budget Deephaven $ 5,558,790 4.41 7.55 $ 12,585 ^:• f: •i Exceleior 2,525,823 2.00 3.43 5,710 1 h's Greenwood 1,116,512 .88 1.49 2,526 Minnetonka 67.212.: «l 53.26 *20.00 33,365 t- Hfnnetonka Beach 1,593,04<?1.26 2.16 3,605 Hinnetrlsta 4,767 ,430 3.79 6.47 10,784 t Mound 6,941,044 5.50 9.41 15,706 Orono 12,892,214 10.22 17.49 29,173 1 f Shorevood 7,197,406 5.70 9.76 16,207 f.r-vt Spring Park 1,922,112 1.52 2.61 4,349 L> •r- ?':■ Tonka Bay 2,694,546 2.13 3.66 6,097 Victoria 2,094,664 1.67 2.84 4,740 1'"11.F Wayzata Woodland 8,003,606 1,670,620 6.34 1.32 • 10.06 2.27 » 18,110 3,700 i Total $126,191,015 100.007.100.007.$166,825 vt- S*--**«^4*■•. i >• I & 1*^ I?t |V r rII m 62791.5 ^jpfOh'ifl^r C NOTICE OF MEETING CITY OF ORONO wofcice is hereby given that there will be a meeting of the Otono Lake Use Committee on Tuesday, July 9, 1991, 7:00 p.m. at the Otono Council Chambers. The purpose of this meeting to discuss shoteland regulations. i This meeting is open to the public. /s/ Dorothy M. Hallin City Clerk r r //o o'/ v% ^ v‘k./»•■ :V''^■!<v^^2^>// ». f. CITY of OR( MunictpAi OfRcts Post OfBcc Bov 66 Cr>5tai Ba>. Minncsou 55323 June 26r 1991 joBllen Hurt 930 partenwood Road Long Lake, MN 55356 Re: 1992 LMCD Budget Dear joEllen, On behalf of the Council, I want to express our issues related to the proposed 1992 budget. The Counci 1 basically supports Tonka Bay in the items listed in letter an specifically have voiced their opinions on the following: 5% Growth — Since roost of the cities are in a No Growth" 'nTode for the 1 992 budget it becomes difficult when other agencies ate looking at 5% increases. Council feels that it is appropriate that it be dropped least a 3% growth protection, if not lower, since the cities that ate over 2,500 will not be able to receive any additional property tax monies for 1992. Milfoil Funding - The City Council is very concerned about the iacTc of any budget indicating soliciting private donations together with the increase to the cities. It additionally is concerned that the amou.it put aside for other agencies, such as DNR and Hennepin County may not be realized and that the brunt of the orooram for '92 will come back upon the cities during a very tight budget year. We realize that the only other option is to get monies from the cities and/or privates would be cutting back the program and from a planning standpoint needs to be looked at immediately, if this budget goes forward rather than waiting until 92. The Council encourages seeking funding from Metropolitan • ifloificance and should help pay tor cne ut,. Additionally the suggestion of “volunteer Weed Eaters may have some merit in an economically tight time. ■jq XPI10NE>47>-7357 • FAX--ITV0510 'A '0^ i ‘V. Ct N' rSa i':- joEllen Harr June 26, _1?91 page 2 Basis Foe Allocation - Under the old enabling laws the pEOEation was based on assessed value witn a maximuni cap. The appaEent Eecodification changes that and uses the term "Taxable Matket Value" which is not the cutrent corapaEable to the old term of Assesseu value. To a degree this does shift the burden from cities with commercial property to those with residential. (It is thought that this should have been a technical correction and paralleled what happened in the Tax Bill, but apparently this change did otherwise.) The City Council did indicate that they continue to appreciate the r.--*ponsi veness you have provided as a representative of the Jity cn the LMCD Board and also expressed their appreciation t.iat other board members have become more responsive to issues of the cities within the last few months. Council looks on this as a hopeful sign for the Board's future. They do have other suggestions related to the upcoming program for LMCD for *92: Boad Safety and Education - The City still feels one of LMCD's primary missions is in the boat safety and education area and wanting to make sure that the District's efforts in the area of education plus legislative activity to seek licensing for the actual boaters would be a step in that direction. Council strongly encourages you, as our representative, to seek reductions in the proposed budget as outlined in both ours and Tonka Bay's letter together with other that may be submitted by the communities. work. Thank you very much for your consideration and hard cerely. E.Bernhardson City Administrator cc: Mayor and City Council Eugene R. Stroirjen, Executive Director LMCD altiA-n;..SA..iWta .... •TOs ' FBOM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator July 3, 1991 7 ;q'' SUBJBCTx Request for Reimbursement - 3572 Livingston <9 Attachment: A.Request for Reimbursement - 3752 Livingston -' Gerhardson Memo Dated 6/20/91 B, Cuff Letter Dated 5/29/91 ISSUE - Determine if Council desires to refund any monies to the o%mers of 3572 Livingston. INTRODUCTION - Council is probabl -' familiar with the history of combinati:n of this property. As noted in Attachment A, the $580.00 unit charge is part of an overall charge of $870 which was assessed over 15 years. The balance $290 was a front footage charge which was simply a function of the lot width and would have been there had the lots been combined prior to the assessment. DISCUSSION - Attachment B present the rationale for the refund as to the properties unusability. The situation can be viewed alternatively as one of the following: a.) What it would cost if combined prior or at time of assessment. b.) That the property sale price reflected the outstanding assessments. c.) That the property was acquired by the owner to forestall a separtate new owner building on the property. Any rebate would be appropriately offset by the monies owed to the City in the amount of $450.00 for their share of the engineering study on the storm water drainage. ALTERNATIVES 1.Refund entire request. 2.Refund principal and x: .erest on the unit charge of $580 for a total of $903 including I at share of interest and penalities. 3.Refund another amount. 4.Choose not to refund. 5.Offset refund by the owners share of the energineering costs. i.iv 6.Table. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended to consider the situation as if they were combined at the time of assessemnt and under that scenairo the refund for the unit charge plus penalities and interest would be up to $903, less the engineerin', amount. The net would be 453.00. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , Council authorize a refund for the unit charge plus penalities and interest of $903r less the engineering costs for a net refund of $453.00, Ayes , Nays cc: Karen Cuff, 3572 Livingston Avenue To: Dttto: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public works Director June 20, 1991 fl Subject: Request for Reimbursement - 3572 Livingston Avenue Attached for review and Council consideration is a request from Karen Cuff, 3572 Livingston Avenue, for a refund of sewer and water assessments for the adjacent property which they acquired through tax forfeiture. The property went tax forfeit in 1976 and ' Karen Cuff purchased the land from Hennepin County in 1982. At the time the Cuffs acquired the property there were outstanding special assessments for sanitary sewer and municipal water. The Cuffs have paid a total of $1,675.97 for those assessments and because they do not have total use of the property and because the property is a drainageway for the neighborhood, the Cuffs feel they should be reimbursed for the assessments they have paid. The following Is the formula and amounts of the assessments: Paid Levy#Description Amount (principal interest & penalties) Tm 3309 Lateral sewer 50' § 8.15 $295.84 1982 3302 Interceptor .15 ac § 110 12.24 1982 5383 Lateral water 50'§5.80 757.74 1983 5383 Lateral water 50*05.80 362.27 1984 5383 Lateral water 50*05.80 247.88 $1675.97 A unit charge of $580.00 for municipal water was also assessed at the time of the improvement and in included in the total cost above. Because there are so many different methoas for levying assessments, there is not a set procedure for handling these matters. I should be noted that with the formulas used for the above property and projects, and if the properties had been cosd>ined at the time of the improvements, the only cost that may not have been assessed is the $580.00 unit charge for the municipal water. SS., r •fev-m Mav 29, 1991 Honorable Mayor & Counc City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay. HN 55523 M 0^^ ^c Dear Mayor Pete»"son & Counci ' Memoe’^s; On July of 1990 I submitted a recuest fc'- a -e^uno o* tbe water and sewer assessments that 1 had oaiO for on LOt 17 PID #17-117-2343-0137. (now PID #17-117-2343-01501 This is my second formal request ^or a refunc these assessments. After your final decision to abanoon the Navarre Heignts storm sewer on Mav 2S, 1991, it became dear tnat tne City of Orono has maoe the dec’s'on to use th’S orooertv as a drainage site for the Nava^-e a*~ea. I feel that since this property had been owned by Orono, Hennepin Countv, and the state c“" Minnesota, tn-s orooe-t Should not nave been assessed ^or tnese improvements. Per Mary Sarcoa in the State Land Department of the fc 'owing pavaments we’"e made to Qrcnc following vears. ■' 345-3256' i n M3' • a t 1 ' 1962 1982 1982 1983 1984 $757.74 #5383 for resioentiai water main 295.84 #3309 for lateral sewer 64-iB 12.24 #3302 f-'^r Inprec san sewer 63 IB 362.27 #5383 for residential water main 247.88 #5383 for residential water main 1970LW! :970LW! I970LW! $ 1,675.97 Total assessments oa i d to Orono In my first request I made an error stating that 1,064.82 was for the assessments. The amount J1.06:.82 was tne amount of assessments that I had paid tne first vear tnat I had owned Lot 17.The amount o^ $;,f75.9'7 is tne total amount of assessments that 1 paid and I am requesting a refund on. Please place this on the agenda for your next Council meeting. Please contact me to confirm a date. If you need additiona" information dlease ^ee ’ free to contact me. 5incereiy. Karen Cu^f 3572 Livingston Av* Wavzatd. mn "5 * r. CCt Anthonv' C'l Mar^., £j-nnero3fr r July 27. 1990 City of Orono Attn: Oorthy Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 3 0 1880 55323 I'l' 'r- '1 H V ^r i Daar Oorthy. T i*m 5pnc;ina you the information thatPar our phone conversation. I aj ^ ® ^ water and sewer lines i h-.„ p.o .... 117-2343-0137 (now PID #17-117-234^-0150) _ ctare Land Deoar-rment 348-3256 all of thePer Mary Sarcoa in the Stare La , „of the following following payments were made to Orono m nay years. 1982 $757.74 #5383 for residential water^^in 1970LW1 1982 295.84 #3309 for letera. sewer 64-.B 1982 12.24 #3302 for Inorec is\n 'o'OLWl1983 362.27 #5383 for resioen-.al wa.er ^ n --^0^ 984 247.98 #5383 for resioen-iai wa.er mam U/OLWi $1,675.97 Total P,..„ ..n. •-.o.eP a ===y c.tn.s.«r Hit Slu.r'pe*...nd, .ro™ tn. c=un.y .=r forfeit land tax. I had originally pa?r'‘werr Slrr'°of'tne S:?cJ;:.*”rn~?“ne'or=pe«y.sa..35..e property) ^ hav. b.«n as...sad for the., inorovements. If you ne«) additional Information, el ease feel free to contac. me. Sincerely. fpIv r Karen 3572 Livingston Ave Wayzata. mn 55391 tv &• I ■i.’ P' ?■ I & i.;; ^■;. Il- «> r/ TO: PROM: DATS: Mayor and City Council 7191.5 .U^Tfj'NMark E. Bernhardson, City Administratoi^Y' ' July 1, 1991 VJ C/,y %/v ‘'6'^ /-7 6DBJBCT: Police Chief Selection ISSUE - Oa a % 1.Oetennine final selection process and dates for police chief selection. 2.Update Council as a result of the screening process. INTRODUCTION - At the screening conunittee's July 1, 1991 meeting ^ey se1ected 5 candidates for the final interview based on the infomation present by Sathe 6 Associates. DISCUSSION - Issue #1 “ Final Selection Dates - The final selection date procesiTltas been set: 3 PN - 8 PM TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 OROHO SCHOOLS LINK ROOM 107L The final interview will be with the Council and Selection Conmittee. The final Council decision will be made by the August 12, 1991 Council meeting. Issue 12 - Update on Committee Work - The final candidates names will be available for release after noon on Monday, July 6th. ALTERNATIVES 1* Set the dates. 2.Adopt the final process as presented 3.Table for further discussion. 4.Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that 23rd be set for the final process and tlie final process be adopted as presented. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that Council sets July 23rd for the final selection process and that the be set for final interviews with police chief applicants with final selection to be done by Council on , _, 1991. Ayes , Nays • I V . i'. fi cc:Acting Chief Cheswick Department Heads James Brimeyer» 5620 Cedar Lake Road, Mpls 55416 i'0. 1 J 7' U' iT r-- TOz PSONs DATS: % ■’291. _ Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk ^0. ^ July 2, 1991 SOBJBCTs Responsible Authority - Data Privacy % Attachment: A.Resolution #1197 Dated 0/23/80 B.Draft Resolution ISSOE - Appointment of responsible authority for purposes of meeting the requirements of the Data Practices Act. IMTRODOCTION - When the State established the Data Practices Act •Ach municipality was required to name a responsible authority for purposes of meeting the requirements of the Act and a designee to assist in its implementation. The responsible authority and designee shall administer the Act and establish procedures to insure that requests for Government data are complied with and a records retention schedule is also Implemented by resolution. DISCUSSION - As noted in Attachment A Melvin Kilbo was appointed as the responsible authority and Thomas Kuehn a*i the designee. Melvin Kilbo has retired and the City needs, to appoint a responsible authority. RBCONNBMDATION - It is recommended that Thomas Barrett, City Attorney, be appointed as the City's responsible authority and that Thomas Kuehn be the desingee. Attachment B is a draft resolution outlining such appointment. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by Council adopts Aaaolutlon #_a resolution appointing a responsible authority, a designee and assigns duties. Ayes _, Nays _. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Nark E. Bernhardson, City Admlnlstrato Forwarded recommending approval. This appointment is anticipated to continue until the new City Administrator and Police Chief are with the organization. cc: Thomas Barrett, City Attorney fciSfAIrtLAiri Ml (• ■•I resolution 8 1197 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING A RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY AND ASSIGNING DUTIES WHFRFAS the Minnesota Governrr.ent Data Practices Act, .. . ..stftutf; Sections 15.1611 to 15.1698 as aitended, requires th^ City appoint one person as the Responsible Authority to ^SministL the requirements for collection, storage, use and Si^Smit“ion of data on individuals, 90verns.ent da^a, and summary data, within this City; and WHEREAS, the City Council is concerned with the responsible use of City data and wishes to satisfy this concern by immediately tmointLg an administratively qualified Responsible Authority as required under the Act and assigning duties to that person. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA: Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 15.161 through 15.1698, as amended. 2 This" resolution implementing the Minnesota Governmen Data Practices Act shall remain in force and effect until modified by the City Council. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held August 25, 1980. Mary C. Butler, Acting Mayor William B. Van Nest, Mayor ; Attest: Walter R nson. City Aoministrator _ _k/N>t •._ _—♦ 'V ,1- I I ^■sr Ir' r. ■5: A RBSOLOTIOll APPOIMTING A RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY AND ASSIGNING DOTIES NHERBAS, the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 15.1611 to 15.1698 as amended, requires that this City appoint one person as the Responsible Authority to administer the requirements for collection, storage, use and dissemination of data on individuals, government data, and summary data, within this City? and WHEREAS* the City Council is concerned with the responsible use of City data and wishes to satisfy this concern by immediately appointing an administratively qualified Responsible Authority as required under the Act and assigning duties to that person. HOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP OROHO* NlNHESOTAt 1.The City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, appoints Thomas Barrett as the Responsible Authority and Designee Thomas Kuehn for the purposes of meeting nil requirements of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 15.1611 through 15.1698, as amended. 2, This resolution Implementing the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act shall remain in force and effect until modified by the City Council Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held July 8, 1991. ATTEST *Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Dorothy M. Ballin, City Clerk £?'•1^'n rv TOs FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat July 3, 1991 7391.4 \ \ <9 SUBJBCTs Municipal Board Process '•'0 ISSUE - Update Council on status of Municipal Board process. DISCUSSION - On June 19# 1991 the ong Lake City Attorney was preaente^~ information from staff. As of this date we are awaiting a reply. Staff will keep Council abreast of information regarding this matter. IIR m t ;* f 9't % I 'f 7191.7 Z'/ uTO* Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhar<- C ':; Administrate^'^ N DMTB* July Ir 1991 «s» SOBJBCTi Assessor's Contract Attachment: A.1991 Arrangements for Assessing B.Draft 1991-1992 Assessment Contract w, I o ISSUE - Determine If the terms for extension of the^contract for the~asse8Sor from 1 September» 1991 to August 31, 199-. INTRODUCTION - Attachment A represents the terms Assessor for the upcoming year. These represent a 2.7% amount in the contract between 1991 and 1990 contract. ALTERNATIVES 1.Accept 2.Indicate alternate terms. 3.Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council accept the Assessor's contract as presented. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _# seconded by , that Council adopts __ as the 1991-92 Assessing contract wi^ Rolf Erickson. Ayes ^0 Nays _. cc* Tom Kuehnr Finance Director y- I ' tr * -":'r 1 M :.-■» i ■•; ■T'. I:r V-' h' :>I'. ;- !•-;■ I#.' 'ist;M- .1 i TO:Mar k FROM;Pol f DATE:Jul y RE:1992 Mark Bernhar d = :n. Or.i.nc- 'Iitv Admi n : at r j c : ■' Term of Contract: September 1, r5'51 through August 31, 1992 Requested amount for 1991 Assessment;$67,800.00 Monthly Fee:S5,650.00 Uordinq of previous contract is 0. K.. u ■^-..^iL _^ Il ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made this 1st day of September, 1991, by and between the City of Orono, a municipal corporation hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and Rolf E. Erickson, hereinafter called "ASSESSOR". 1.Emp loyment, The City, which is a separate Assessment District in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota, does retain and employ the ASSESSOR to perform all functions required of local assessors by Minnesota state statutes, cooperate with the Hennepin County Assessor by supplying the needed information for each assessment year, and maintain a fair and equitable assessment for the CITY and its taxpayers. 2, Functions of Employment. Functions of employment shall include: 1)Effective communication with residents, business people, and city officials regarding agreement practices and policies. 2)Physically inspect and revalue 25% of the REAL property as required by law. 3)Physically inspect and value all new construction, additions and renovations. 4)Conduct valuation reviews prior to Board of Review. Approximate dates - March and April. 5)Attend Board of Review. Per Board request, make all necessary review appraisals. 6)Keep updated filed card file - current values, homestead and classification data. 7)Print, mail and post full year homestead cards Process midyear homestead applications. 8)Respond to taxpayer regarding assessment or 'r- !■ I U' r >=:i: * 5; l: f- 18) appraisal problems or inquiries periodically during contract term. 8)Ma)ce divisions and combinations periodically during contract term. 10)Initiate, for the taxpayer, abatement application periodically during contract term, as requested. 11)Malce appraisals for, testify or negotiate all district court or tax court filings, periodically during contract terms. 12)Post values from appraisal cards to assessment rolls. 13)Valuation of all parcels in the City each year. 14)Analysis of property sales 15)Preparing assessment runs 16)Reviewing properties at taxpayer's request. 17)Attend, not to exceed, three council meetings in addition to the Local Board of Review meetings. Provide when requested appropriate information and/or referral for persons requesting property appraisal related information. Such may in conjunction with the City be provided on a fee for service basis. 3.Performance of Services. The manner and the method used in the performance of services to be provided by ASSESSOR shall be under the exclusive control and direction of the ASSESSOR. The ASSESSOR in performance of services shall not (1) be required to maintain office hours, (2) receive retirement benefits, (3) health insurance benefits, and (4) any other fringe benefits. 4.Equipment . ASSESSOR shall provide: ^3r I h r i I 1)His/her own transportation as he/she deems necessary for performance of services. He/she has 2 telephone lines (1 incoming/1 outgoing) for his/her business and will provide the City with a FAX number if one is utilized in the business. CITY shall provide; 1)Necessary filing area for purpose of maintaining required city assessment records. All of the equipment and supplies necessary or required for performance of services set forth in th. Agreement, including a 1979 or later set of aerial photographs. Pay for all direct expenses, including those forms and supplies, film, aerials and other miscellaneous and homestead material and postage. 5.Compensation. The CITY agrees to pay the ASSESSOR for such services the sum of $67,800.00 for the period 1 September, 1990 to 31 August, 1991 payment shall be in 12 monthly installments of $5,650.00, commencing the last day of September, 1990, and continuing on the last day of each month thereafter through August, 1991. 6.Minnesota-Statutes. This Agreement has been entered into in consideration of the obligations and requirements set forth in Minnesota Statutes as the same apply to real estate assessing procedures. Both parties agree that any major changes in such requirements during the term of this Agreement shall necessitate a renegotir n of the compensation called for herein. 7.Representation by Assessor. 1)ASSESSOR represents that he/she is a Certified and Licensed Minnesota Assessor under Chapter 273 of Minnesota Statutes and that he/she is a qualified real estate appraiser? further, that lM he/she .will during all times this contract is in force maintain such licneses and qualifications. 2)ASSESSOR agrees to attend the Local Board of Review Meeting on a date selected by the CITY, plus attendance at not more than three other City Council meetings in any one year. 3)ASSESSOR certifies that he/she has appropriate liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000. 8. Effective Date of Agreement and Term. This Agree ment shall be effective as of September 1, 1991, and employment of the ASSESSOR to perform the services to be rendered hereunder shall commence as of September 1, 1991, for the performance of the 1991 real estate assessment, and continue until August 31, 1992; subject, however, to extension as hereinafter provided. Either party may terminate this agreement on 90 days written notice. 9. Agreement Extension. This Agreement may be extended from year to year on terms to be agreed upon by the parties hereto by the parties agreeing in writing to the same on or before the first day of of August each year thereafter. If this Agreement is not so extended and terminates according to its terms, ASSESSOR agrees to deliver to city forthwith such records in an up to date manner as he has in possession cor rning assessment of the CITY'S real estate. It being understood that such records are the property of the CITY. 10. Independent Contractor. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any i. anner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties hereto or as constituting the ASSESSOR as the agent, representative or employee of the CITY for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. ASSESSOR is to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. ASSESSOR represents that he/she has, or will secure at his/her own expense, all personnel required in performing services ■'n this Agreement. Any and all personnel of ASSESSOR or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required from the ASSESSOR under this Agreement, shall have no contractual relationship with the CITY and shall not be considered employees of the CITY and any and ui- r all claims that may or might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or other persons while so engaged^ and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against the ASSESSOR, his/her officers, agents, contractors or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the CITY, and ASSESSOR shall defend, indemnify and hold the CITY, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, coanission or court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the CITY including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave. Workers' Compensation, unemployment compensation, disability, severance pay and P.E.R.A. 11, Hold Harmless. ASSESSOR agrees that he/she will hold the CITY, its officers and employees harmless from any claims, suits or damages resulting from or caused by any act or omission of the ASSESSOR, his/her officers, agents, contractors or employees in the performance of the responsibilities provided by this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agre«nent the year and date above stated. CITY OP ORONO Mayor City Administrator ASSESSOR rr *r- r I’i" 7291.6TOsFRONs DATBs Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk July 2» 1991 •'/ % %/ SOBJBCTs Resignation - Laurie Scheff ler City Recorder ^ *0Attachment: A. Scheffler Letter Dated 7/1/91 ISSUE - 1.Accept resignation of City Recorder Laurie Scheffler. 2,Request authorization to seek replacement under contract conditions. DISCUSSION - As noted in Attachment A, Laurie's '•ast meeting will be the July 22« 1991 Council meeting. It is with sincere regret that we accept Laurie's resi^ation as City Recorder. She has performed her j a in a timely and profession'^manner. As a result of this resignation I request authority to seek a replacement to work under a contract. Prior to hiring an individual this will be brought back for Council approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , Council accepts with regret the resignation of Laurie ScnefTTer and wisher her and her family the Lest in their new home in St. Louis, Missouri together with authorizing staff to seek a replacement for the position to be brought back to Council for approval. Ayes _, Nays • TOt PMMs Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate Forward recommending acceptance. Alterativesfor both interim and (if needed) long term replacement will be presented at the Council meeting 7/22. r-' ■ k Laurie K. Scheffler 2347 Schoolmaster Circle Chaska, MN 55318 July 1. 1991 Dorothy Hallin. City Clerk City of Orono P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Jlt - 21991 Dear Dorothy, It is with much difficulty that I submit this letter of resignation to you. As I told you Friday, John has been offered a promotion with BFI. but it includes relocating to St. Louis, Missouri. My resignation will be effective following the completion of the minutes from the July 22, 1991 Council meeting.That will include the normal process of providing a rough draft and a final draft. I would like to take this opportunity to tell you how much I have enjoyed working for the City of Orono. I appreciate the changes that have been made to my position over the course of my employment. I am going to miss everyone very much. Sincerely Laurie K. Scheffler VL' .- r !■ k i Is- . Tb: Proat Dates Mark E, Bernhardson, City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director July 3, 1991 a 5f>> A--’ %K Subjects Source Reduction Resolution #New Construction As part of the ongoing Recycling and Source Reduction Program* it is necessary to consider recyclable materials for any new construction of new City facilities. I have attached a resolution for review and approval. I have also discussed the information in the resolution with Jack Boarman* the architect for the new City facility, and he has no problem with it. KecoBMendation To approve Resolution # approving the use of recyclable materials where appropriate during the construction of any new City facility. _ Moved _ _ _ _2nd to approveProposed Motion _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Resolution # approving the use of recyclable materials where appropriate during the construction of any new City facility. To: Mayor Peterson & Orono Council Members From; Mark E. Bernhardson, city Administrat Forwarded recommending approval. t'V u r. V; A RBSOLOTION PROMOTIIIIG THE OSB OP MATERIALS WITH RECYCLED CONTENT IN PDBLICLT PUHDBr CC’^-TROCTIOH AND RBNODELINJ PRC^ 3CTS h ks. e i •« f-i», WHEREAS, Hennepin County has developed a model policy to provide guidance to cities in the adoption of comprehensive procurement and specification policies for publicly funded construction and remodeling projects which give reasonable and appropriate consideration to materials with recycled content, and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Orono is in agreement with the Hennepin County recommendation of promoting the use of materials with recycled content in publicly funded construction and remodeling projects, and WHEREAS, The Hennepin County Funding Reimbursement Policy for the funding of recycling programs for 1991 has b^en adjusted from a possible maximum of 80% of eligible expenses to 70% of eligible expenses, and WHEREAS, an additional 10% funding is available to municipalities that have adopted, by July, 1991, a Procurement Specification Policy for Publicly Funded Construction or Remodeling Projects, according to and consistent with county requirements. HOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Orono hereby adopts the attached policy promoting the use ox materials with recycled content in publicly funded construction and remodeling projects in accordance with the model policy provided by Hennepin County. Page 1 of 3 .'-ii POLICY PROMOTING THE USE OP MATERIALS WITH RECYCLED CONTENT IN PUBLICLY FUNDED CONSTRUCTION & REMODELING PROJECTS In order to ensure that, wherever practical and appropriate, materials with recycled content are used in the construction or remodeling of municipal facilities for the City of Orono, the Council requires that: 1.Within twelve months, subsequent to the effective date of this policy, the Clerk of the City, or other designated person conduct a review of existing construction or remodeling projects and service specifications to determine whether such specifications promote or exclude the use of recycled products, reusable products, or products designed to be recycled, for use by department agencies, offices, boards, and commissions. 2.In the event that such specifications prohibit or otherwise exclude the use of recycled products, such exclusions or requirements should be eliminated unless the operating department or entity can reasonably demonstrate that the recycled product would be impractical, is unproven, or would not achieve necessary performance or design standards. 3.Within the same twelve month period, all City departments and agencies must make recommendations to the Clerk or other designated person to ensure that performance standards and specifications for products used in construction or remodeling of municipal facilities do not prohibit the use of products with recycled content. Departments are to initiate or recommend policy changes to ensure that specifications incorporate a requirement which promotes use of materials and products with recycled content wherever practical and appropriate, or they must reasonably demonstrate that either the performance requirements of the product will be compromised or that a product vith recycled content is impractical or will otherwise negatively impact health, safety or operai .onal efficiency. 4.Contractors bidding to provide products or services to the City must meet the intent of requirements described in Paragraph 3. 5.The City will cooperate with neighboring City, County and State governments in an effort to develop consistent and effective procurement efforts which promote the use of recycled products in construction materials wherever practical and appropriate. Page of 3 Ifr % 6. All related City departments and agencies will work cooperatively to further the purposes of the resolution. The City's economic development process will incorporate the "goal" of promoting the use of recycled material. 7, The City's Clerk, or other designated person shall submit an annual report, to be filed in the City Office, with a copy to e Clerk of the He..nepin County Board, which overviews the use of construction materials with recycled content which are used in the construction or remodeling of municipal facilities. 1991. Adopted by ti.e Orono City Council on the 8th day of July, ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTV OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on ^his 8th day of July, 1991, by Barbara A. Peterson 6 Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor * City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 3 fe ih-' % DATE:June 21, 1991 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator %'<A, Mel Kilbo, Chief of Police Longevity Step Increase Officer Dan Fischenich % On 7/1/91, Officer Fischenich will observe his 4th anniversary with the department. Officer Fischenich is eligible for a longevity step increase from $16,768 (1990) base rate to $17,271 (1990 base rate plus 3% longevity.) I recommend this step increase. TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate^^ Forwarded reconmending app’'Oval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by the Orono City Council formally authorize the increase from $16,768 to $17,271 (1990 base rate plus 3% longevity) effective July 1, 1991. Ayes _, Nays _. j V* TO: Dote: Subject: Mark E. Bernhardsori/ City Administrator John P. Gerhardson, Public Works Director July 3, 1991 % 0>Y % y % Salary Adjustment - Randy O'Brien - Maintenance Worker > Pecenty Randy O'Brien, maintenance worker, received certification in Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems Operations and most recently certification in Municipal Vs’ater Supply Maintenance and Distribution. As a requirement to reach Level 4 of group 5 of the Orono Compensation Plan* a maintenance worker must receive the above certification. Recommendation To adjust Randy O'Brien's salary to Level 4 of Grcup 5 effective April 4, 1991. Proposed Notion Moved 2nd to adjust Randy O'Brien's salary to Level 4 of Group 5 effective April 4, 1991. To: Mayor Peterson & Orono Council Members From; Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratoi^^^- Forwarded recommending approval. |. •i TOt IfROM: DATES Mayor and City Council Nark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator July 2, 1991 7291.7 SUBJECTS 1990 Financial Report Attachment: A, 1990 Financial Report Dated 6/13/91 (Memo Onl^ ^*|5( B.State Reporting Form Dated 6/25/91 C.Summary for Financial Reporting Publication ISSUE - 1.Provide an opportunity for Council to discuss with staff and our auditors questions they may have regarding the report. 2.Provide a copy to the Council of the required submission to the State Auditor of the City's Financial Reporting firm. 3.Presentation to the Council for approval of the annual summary financial report for publication as required by State law. IMTRODUCTION - At the June 24, 1991 Council meeting the Council was presented with the 1990 Financial Report and management letter under Attachment A as a cover. DISCUSSION > Issue #1 - 1990 Financial Report - The Council received this with the June^4th Council packet. It was Council's consensus that there Is no need to ask a represntative of the auditor to attend an upcoming meeting. Issue #2 - State Reporting Form - The City is required to provide sunnary Information on this State reporting form as presented In Attachment B. The figures derived in that form are taken from the 1990 Financial Report. Issue >3 - SiwMw^rv for Pxibllcatlon - State law requires that by July 30 of every year the City must publish a summary of its annual financial report In the format stipulated by the State In a local newspaper. Attachment C represents that summary for Council approval. ALTERNATIVES - Issue #1 1.Discuss and accept. i1KfS4iWr.rfnrnlift 'r-' •F !!.• i i^- fo f r,• r--' - p' r. p:'.' f/ t\. I K VI ' ?r-. Vf'- p-kI?. Ui iK IM Issue #2 1.Accept. 2.Discuss. 3.Table for further discussion. Issue #3 1.Adopt. 2.Amend and adopt.^ -, 3.Table for consideration at the July 22, 1991 Council meeting. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the Information of the State reporting form and adopt the summary for publication. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council approve the 1990 Summary Financial Report for puDlication} the 1990 State Financial Reporting Form; and the Independent Auditor's Report as presented in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended December 31, 1990. Ayes_, Nays _. ccj Tom Kuehn, Finance Director t: ■ I k.:- IP- %' fI V- '^' K, P-I ud- !S-;**:• £ U’:f- I % I' i'i," :v.‘■ Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Adnunistrat(^\^^ TO: FROM: DATS: June 13, 1991 SUBJECT: 1990 Audit Report y\c:{4 nterA/r A Attachment: A.1990 Audit Report/Malloy, Karnowski i Co. Dated 5/31/91 ISSUE - Present to Council the 1990 Audit Report to determine if there is a desire for the auditors to be available for the July 8» 1991 Council meeting to discuss the audit report further with the Council. INTRODUCTION - Annually the city engages an auditor to review its financial matters for that year. Attachment A represents the presentation for that. Based on the audit comments there are no significant items of concern. The note regarding Federal Drug Program is a standard one put in all of their audits. At this point the City is not required to do that because we do not currently receive any Federal grants. It is expected however, that the City, which has been looking at a policy, may well implement one within the next 12 to 18 months. ALTERNATIVES 1.Accept the report 2.Ask any questions. 3.Indicate whether it would be desirable to have the auditors at the July 8th meeting to discuss the audit report. 4.Table for further discussion. 5.Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the audit report and indicate if they would like to have the auditor present for on July 8, 1991. If there is not a specific request, this will not be placed on the agenda for July 0th. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , Council accept the financial report indicatingHTf it is desiraSTe to have this on as an agenda for July 8th with the auditors in attendance. Ayes __, Nays cc:Thomas M. Kuehn, Finance Director Malloy, Karnowski & Co. 410 park National Bank Bldg 5353 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55416 ~■iiiiil T r AU4X»38-0®(9-18-90) ATT A c /J- fifrhjT B I L \ I r- I k Iri I9- 1^ i|s! Office of the State Auditor City Financial Reporting Form Cities Reporting in Accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) c 3^ Office of the State Auditor 525 Park Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55103 (612)297-3682 City of Orono for th« Y»ar Ended December 31 . 19 .2^ «. to™... Mir™™. Sto..™ s™™ 6 74, .r. ,.,u,r ...n, ..to .h..o»r~. M MUM B *g«« WITH TMt mMlWWC ijTttTjMtllT TgT^tS. City Financial Reporting Form City of Orono For Stats Us* Only County of Hennepin City*owned Enterprise Funds — check those that apply. Q Water O Sewer □ Garbage □ Liquor □ Hospital □Nursing Home Other (specify) Golf Course □Electric ______________________________ Population OPS Coda Date Received Class Unqualified Opinion D Ves □ Mo Auditing Firm Net Tax Levy Special Assessments SECTION I - REVENUES . . c . ^ Thto taction ahouM induda all Qowwnmantal lund». .SP*:'*' r«v«nu«. debt serv.ee. capital proiects. and expendable trust funds Exclude nasc. ')OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (39( 36 Borrowing — Bonds Issued ................................................ 37 Other Long-Term Debt ................................ 38 Short-Term Debt .......................................... 39 Other Financing Sources (identify) .................................... 40 Transfers from Enterprise Funds end Internal Service Funds 41 Transfers from Governmental Funds 42 TOTAL REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 AMOUNT (omit cents) 1,637,670 mm 478^2 7 801 32.248 77,393 TAXES (31000) 1 Property Taxes (exclude HACA and DRA)............................................................. 2 Tax Increments (TIF) ............................................................................ 3 Franchise Taxes — identify (from Private Sector only) 4 Local Selee Taxes ................................................................................................. 5 Hotel/MotsI Tsxss ............................................................................ S(3rsvelTax ............................................................................................................... 7 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS (36100) (include penalties and interest) S LICENSES AND PERMITS (32000) INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES (33000) S FEDERAL — Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) 10 Other Federal Grsnu ............................................................. 11 STATE — Local Govornmsnt Aid (LGA).................................................................. 12 HACA (Homsstead and Agricultural Credit; include Taconne Homestead) 13 Disparity Reduction Aid (DRA) .............................. 14 Tsconite Relief end Aids ................................................. 15 Small City Development Grant (SCDG) .................................................. 16 Highways ............................................................................................... 17 Other State Grants and Aids ................................................................... If COUNTY —Highways ........................................................................................... IS Other County Grants ........................................................................... 20 LOCAL UNITS — Highways .................................................................................... 21 IRRRB Grants .............................................................................. 22 Other Local Unite Grants ................................................................................... CHARGES FOR SERVICES (34000) 23 (jeneral Government (irtclude auto registration filing fee) .......................... 24 PpUoo and Fire Contrecte .............................................................................. 26 Other Public Safety (include ambulance)....................................................... 26 Stroots and Highways .................................................................................. 27 QartMge and Other Refuse (enterprise fund accounting preferred) ............. 28 Libraries ............................................................................................. 29 Parks and Racrastion (include park dedication fees) .................................... 30 Aiipofts ......................................................................................................... 31 Other Sarvica Charges (include S.A.C.)......................................................... 32 FINES AND FORFEITS (36100) .................................................................... MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES (36200) 33 bMarast Earnings (savings and investments) . ........ 34 All Other Ravanuea (identify) F.ale/r.^nt:. .property.. ref/r.eim 4fi0 36 TOTAL REVENUES ....................................................................................................................... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 19.Q24 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 132,644 582.913 16 533 52.572 1^,219 IQfl.231 33 34 418,943 53.195 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 0^700 3, 591.J^ SECTION II — EXPENDITURES Thi. action .houW include .H 90v«nm««t.l fu«d. .ml .xp.f.d.bl. lfw« funds f.. GENERAL GOVERNMENT (41000)i 1 Mityor snd Council 2 2 Adminittration and Finance (Cleric^reas.. Dep Clerk, etc )_3 - 3 G^al Government - Other (city hall, elections assessing, audit, lega ^ ^ 4 Capital Outlay for General Government FUiUC SAFETY 142000) . . 5.5 Police— Current Expenditures (include police relief) e — Capital Outlay 7. 7 Ambulance — Current Expenditures 0 0 — Capital Outlay ...........9_ 0 Pir« _ Current Expenditures (Include fire relief).. 10 ] |10 — Capital Outlay ..................................11 . 11 Other Protection — Current Expenditures ...................12, ^2 — Capital Outlay .............................. , streets AND HIGHWAYS (43100)removal 13. 13 Street Mairrtenance and Storm Sewers 14. 14 Snow Removal ....................................................................15. 18 Street Enflineering ............................................................16. 1* £111 SJwLon-C.pit.1 Outlay ;l^ , d,.9K"rrn.'Cir ~ 121 Sanitation — Capital Outlay HEALTH (44100)22 Current Expertditures ..................................................................23 CipiUll Outlay .................................................................... CULTURE AND RECREATION (46000)24 Ubrariet — Current Expenditures 25 [6 Recreation & Parka — Current Expenditures (include Cable TV) ^7 >7 — Capital Outlay .......................................................................... MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES (46300-49200)28 Housing and Urban Redevelopment — Current Expenditures . 29 — Capital Outlay .............................................................3q economic Da«alopmant (InduOa busInMS loansi -31 Airports — Current Expenditures 33 - C-P^*** 0 “"*^ ...........1 Assessment Bondsi .........................34Principal Payments — Debt Service Funds (include Spec.__ ^ ......... 3g Principal Paymanta on Other Long-Term and Short-Term Debt Intorost and Fiscal Chargas ................................................................................................37 Pension Contributions (H not allocated) ...........................................................30 Inauranca (if not allocated).........39 All Other Current Expenditures ..............................................................................40 41 ^pital Projt-l Fund Outlay for Enterprise Funds (water, sevver. etc.).......... 42 TOTAL EXPENDITURES (at shown on combined statement^ OTHER FINANCING OSES (49300) 43 Principal Paymanta — Refunding Issues (payment to escrow agent) 44 Other Financing Uses (identrty) . V ^4 48 Transfers to Enterprise Funds and Internal Service Funds iS OSES 2 - amount (omit cents) 59.452 305^29 210. 17.R?7 998,311 82.894 159.414 261.692 24.54. 450^ 8, 376 12.762 6.98 96.855_ 31.613 48.12a 222. 300.000 174■424 77.134 59,121 ^ 436.401 88,700 1.528,101 is .e...>■.tA.-hW.'H r SECTION III - ENTERPRISE FUNDS OPERATING STATEMENT Uquor operations are roportad on a aaparata form. (AU 00037) (omit cants) 1 OPERATING REVENUES 2 OPERATING EXPENSES 3 OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) 4 NONOPERATING REVENUES (assessments. propRrty taxes, grants, interest, etc ) 5 NONOPERATING t .PiNSES (interest, etc 1 6 NET INCOME (LOSS operating transfers AOOmONAL INFORMATION 7 PROPERTY TAXES 8 FEDERAL GRANTS 9 STATE GRANTS (incl. homestead credit) 10 LOCAL GRANTS .................................. TRANSFERS: 11 Transfers In (from other funds) ........... 12 Trsnsfers Out (to other funds) ................ 13 CAPTTAL OUTLAY DURING THE YEAR 14 BORROWING — BONDS 15 INTEREST AND FISCAL CHARGES (included in (3perating Statefnent above) : 8 DEBT PAID — Bonds — Other Long-Term Debt 18 OUTSTANDING BONDED DEBT - END OF YEAR 19 AMOUNT OF DEPRECIATION (included in Operating Stateineni above — line 2) 20 ACCRUAL BASIS OF ACCOUNTING (yes or no) WATER 1 )<;i 565 SEWER 423.59^ GARBAGE GOLF 135,109 707.068 438.065 102.825 M6 ^07)(14. .174)32.234 103,503 160,406 1.026 76.299 72.777 (13.299)73,155 33.310 „ - —— ■ 334,060 199.327 7.918 — 75,566 72,777 — 1.163.570 1.136,430 _ 38.797 132,086 4,464 Yes Yes Yes Internal Sarvica 1 OPERATING REVENUES 2 OPERATING EXPENSES 3 OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) ............... 4 NONOPERATING REVENUES (assessments, property taxes, grants, interest, etc.) . . 5 NONOPERATING EXPENSES (interest etc) 6 NET INCOME (LOSS) before operating transfers additional INFORMATION: 7 PROPERTY TAXES ................................ 8 FEDERAL GRANTS ................................ 9 STATE GRANTS (incl. homestead credit) 10 LOCAL GRANTS TRANSFERS: 11 Transfers In (from other funds) ............. 12 Transfers Out (to other funds) ............... 13 CAPITAL OUTLAY DURING THE YEAR 14 BORROWING — BONDS ....................... 15 INTEREST AND RSCAL CHARGES (included in Operating Staiament above) ----- 16 DEBT PAID — Bonds ............................. ^7 — Other Long-Term Debt ... 18 OUTSTANDING BONDED DEBT - END OF YEAR 19 AMOUNT OF DEPRECIATION (included in Operating Siatatnent above — line 2)....... 20 ACCRUAL BASIS OF ACCOUNTING OMtO] imaf the ne«wa of otnar anu Isa funds. If thara era t<ot lh columns, anach a saoarata papa -3- IL r ■SECTION IV — DEBT STATEMENT TYP€ OF BONDS 1 GENERAL OBLIGATION 2 G O. TAX INCREMENT 3 REVENUE TAX INCREMENT 4 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT 5 G O. REVENUE (G O backed) 6 REVENUE ............................ 7 OTHER — idantifv (MSAH. etc.) 8 TOTAL BONDED DEBT 9 REFUNDING BONDS (also included m Debt Statement abov — lines 1 -7) OTHER LONG-TERM DEB^ 10 Inatalimant Purchase Contracts .... 11 Cartificatas of Irtdabtadnass ............ 12 Compansatad Absences ................. 13 Other Long-Term Debt (include Notes) 14 TOTAL OTHER LONG-TERM DEBT 15 SHORT-TERM DEBT outstanding BEG OF YEAR 1 Tnn.noQ ?■30Q■000 4 nOQ.QQQ 103,528 ISSUED DURING YEAR (*)16.999 PAID DURING YEAR 300.000 300,000 outstanding END OF YEAR 1 4nn noQ ? 300^0011 3.700,000 120.000 (*) Net change SECTION V -— LIABILITIES, FUND BALANCE AND RETAINED EARNINGS OOVf RNMENTAL FUNDS TOTAL UABIUT1ES etwiuinmo 265,329 STECUl MEVINUI fUMQS 16,349 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS 447,614 CAPfTAl PROJEaS FUNDS 178,787 total GOVEfMMENTAi FUNDS 908,079 OOVUINMiNTAL FUNDS - FUND EQUITY nMIAUNCE rmMH umm SfEClAl REVENUE fl DEBT SERVICE FUNDS CAPrrAL PROJECTS FUNDS TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS rOTAi uMMBiwootgwne .murmayir—. 120 527 2.654,iJ90 1.284/940_. 532,292 78S.7QJ 128,779 1 03Q 07fl I 2.6«;4 non n .284.940 I 661.171 914,480 5.639,2T_9 PROPRIETARY i-UNDS — FUND EQUITY mtma JDBJ9BI IFTBMK RJNOS INTIRNAI SERVICE EUlfOS NON EXPENOABU TRUST ^\inos total RHAINEO EARNINGS 322,554 —322,554 1.226.878 —-1.226.878 7 Q03 —-7.1 “^5.903 *Tn^iieW oontrlbutad capital SECTION VI - BUDGET AND ACTUAL COMPARISON OOVERNMENTAL FUNDS amen unruM. RfVtNUES Buocn UPENOITUKS ACTUAL utPENOrruRis GENERAL FUND 2,924,010 2,951,471 2.835,310 2,811,816 SFEQAL 131,160 136,604 177,760 177.027 -4- SECTION VII — FINANCIAL HEALTH 1 Cit *" • 'lovee Complement :e positions paid solely ^rcm enterprise funds. Special positions ch as seasonal workers are to be reported in the appropriate category, usually part-time employees. If you report "full-time equivalent positions, please note that fact. Number of Full-time Positions Number of Part-time Positions 8 2 Fringe Benefit Costs. City Employees Note: Do not include enterprise fund employees 432,061 This is (check one) ^ Estimated Actual 3 Total Payroll costs Including fringe benefits. City Employees S 1,553.803 Note: Fringe benefits include employer contributions for retireme n. FICA. employer paid insurance such as health, life and disability oenefits. and irtsurance premiums for unemployment and workers' com ensation. the value of post-retirement benefits and other benefits. Do not include enterprise fund employees. 4 Number of Building Permits Issued (Include all categories — residential, commercial and industrial construction) 5 Value of Building Permits issued (Include all categories as above) $ 15^821_578 6 Current year Tax collections as a percent of current year levy collected (Do not include delinquent tax) Note: Include all property taxes for all funds. 96 . 4 Th« city has adopted the Uniform Chart of Accounts issued December 1, 1981: Yes Sections I through VI of this report have been prepared from the audited financial statements of the city and include all transactions for all funds of the city for the year ended December 31, 19 .90— and is in conformance with the Uniform Chart of Accounts and Minnesota Statutes Section 477A.017. -/6/25/91 Offinr't Signmur*Ooto f 612 ) 473-735? NumD«r -5 - CITY OF ORONO ANNUAL SUMMARY FINANCIAL REPORT year ended DECEMBER 31, 199» 62791.9(3") c >: the Orono City Office at 1335 Brown Road South. Questions about this report should be d.-eoted to To;n Kuehn, Finance Director, telephone (612) 473-7357. The information presented is from the general P^tPose statements of the City for the year ended December 31, 1989e The right-hand column shows the percentage c .ang dollars between the two years. Revenues and Expenditures for General Operations (Government Funds) Revenues Taxes Special Assei ents intergovernme.jcal Revenues Charges for Services Other Total Expenditures General Government public Safety Streets Parks and Recreation Other Capital outlay Debt Service ,1r )■t Total Excess of Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Operating Transfers In (Out) - Net Fund Equity, Beginr'ng of Year i i.'.:Fund Equity, End of Year Total 1990 Total 1989 percent Increase (Decrease) $1,637,670 $1,211,541 35% 200,600 277,582 (28) 136,328 683,385 (80) 758,369 685,952 11 769,493 779,733 (1) 3,502,460 3,638,193 (4) 683,176 655,987 4 1,419,419 1,376,323 3 471,420 494,742 (5) 48,129 32,961 46 106,778 95,164 12 284,086 157,687 80 426,393 475,520 (10) 3,439,401 3,288,384 5 63,059 349,809 (82) 5,576,220 5,226,411 $5,639,279 $5,576,220 1% a ss =s ss s a » ass =s3ssass==S s S 3S fc. 62"91.10(87) c:ry OF ORONO KEY FINANCIAL HEALTH INDiCAT' RS ^990 1989 1933 Current population Gross Tax Capacity* Percent of property Taxes Collected Ci^y Revenues per capita (governmental funds) City expenditures per capita (governmental funds) Ratio of Bonded Debt to Tax Capacity (Excludes Revenue Bonds) Bond Rating 7,21:^7,379 7,2 1 $ 12,892,214 $14,351,809 :?107 ,414,670 96.4% 485.58 9 476.83 $ 10.86% Aal 96.4% 493.05 $ 445.64 $ 11.85% Aal 97.2% 456.73 459.65 1.89% Note (*) Gross Tax Capacity replaces assessed value c.3 the basis for extending taxes payable in 1989. (Net Tax Capacity payable 1990 and subsequent years). Beginning with 1989 t^'*- t'-rminology for Assessed valuations is replaced by Tax Capacity, which is determined in the same man. r except using “mailer p .centayes for each property class. ’m’ The complete financial report availabie at the Orono finance office includes the detail of this blished report. e'- r* *fe'. & .p i"' viS W fi- vi;: i r • U-h 5?>-sr p-!-"• h-■ S'.^.rv-r L'* ■ T' ■ Ife - >• fe; iTTY »F ORONO, MINNES<^>TA C onibtned Balance Sheet All Fund Typet and Account GrvHjpi %i December 31. 1990 (with Coitiptni*'''e Tola*i ■• of December 31. I9S9) Governmental Fund Typee Fropheury Fund Type Fiduciary Fund Type Account Gfoupi General Special Bevenuc Debt Service Capital Pri'iccl Enterpriae Afercy General Lonf-Term Debt General Fived Aearia Aimfll 10 bi pfoviM for ddiC atf¥lca . Tolnl mhU and $m aolta to financial auitmcnii W\.," cT-: •r I -i ' • 162,142 S 2,603.032 S 1,113,922 $7I6.0M 5 927.077 $$' 14.133 38.992 --196,658 - 7t,060 22,010 58,629 22,690 12,639 - 69.111 2,048 -■ - 299 24.824 948 17,695 - 389,290 93.875 208.678 - 34.31)--•- 5.163 6.405 30,775 5.978 5,326 - 76.932 --•- 65.107 13,066 383 383,244 • .--11.918 - 55.911 -•5,822 - 37,416 --•- *•16.317 4.406 -••• -----297.761 • -m -6,373.803 -■ 1.742.120 •.•-2,330 •- 1,544,711 !,2M,940 120,527 115.060 S K304.407 S 2.670.439 S 1.732.554 S >39.951 t 9.903,627 1 EaiiiHl A t TouU 1990 1989 6.122.957 S 6.072,091 250,4t3 205,114 194,021 242,103 71,166 64,166 41,766 61462 691,Ml 601,110 34,311 42.079 53,647 51,010 76.932 96,706 461,100 441.290 11,911 10401 61,740 74,043 37,416 41,990 16,317 16,930 4,406 4,334 297,761 277,265 7.911,514 7,191,329 1.742.120 2.101.744 2,330 10,141 I.2M.940 1405.655 120,527 103,526 115,060 314445 S 19.II3.9M l_19.631.200 (continued) Exhiliii A ICITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTACombined Balance Sheet • All Fund Types and AccounI Groups (continued)As of December 31 . 1990 (with Comperaiive ToUla at of December 31, I9S9) OovemmenUl Fund Types Fropnelary Fund Type Fidijciai7 Fund Type Account Groups Tolali (Memoftndum Only) General Special Debt CapiUl Lofif-Tcrm General General Reyenue Service Frotecl Enterpriaa Arency Debt Fixed Assets 1990 1989 s 1 s !76.932 S s \s $76,932 i 96,7a 52,575 16,349 677 1.054 6.7T»77,428 73.82.^ •':.a77 13,877 11,111 36.644 3,552 40,196 35.9U 61,063 61.063 42,744 .102,525 102,525 90,021 -89.800 89,800 126,251 43,Ui 10.466 53,647 51,091 29,199 9,538 38,737 38,431 _297.761 297,761 2TT,26^ -150,130 150,130 IS9.661 103,730 446,937 100,101 ■651,468 7f7,33 ‘ ---2.300.000 1.520.527 3JWJ27 4.103J21 26^,329 16,349 447.614 178,717 2.747.724 297,761 1,520,527 5,474,091 3,903,88 m ..1,544,711 1,544,711 1,383,98* ---5.606.471 --5.606,471 5,472,001 >*-322,554 .322,554 340,77 ---1,226,878 •-1,226,878 954,321 55,911 ----•55,918 51,671 76,932 *--•-76,932 96,70( --147,535 ---147,535 141,10 •384,857 -.384,857 355.00 -2,654,090 ---.2,654,090 2.635.81 •l,2l4,94u •••-1,284,940 1,385,65 120,527 ---120,527 103,521715.701 ♦128.779 •914.480 799.74 t.039.071 2.654.090 I.2S4.940 661.171 7.155,903 1.544.711 14,339.893 13.727 Jl S 2.670.439 $ 1.732.554 S 839.958 S 9.903.627 t 297.74!1 1.520.527 1ti-L.>9.631.201 ExhilMl A-3 r- if- % r.‘- r^’ §'■ I H I P 5. -: :-, . :■.•...; :‘V'i ' l;i- > I'.; - >• l_ 't'/,. CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Combined Sittemenl of Revenue. Expenditure!, tnd <'b*n|fc§ in Fund Balance All Govemmenial Fund Typei Year Ended December 31, 1990 (with Cornparaiive Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1989) Qmibm lor MfvIcM Ohi M Milo MlM)f Blew (itilokacy) of fovamio over cipenditures (< Tolil oM RaMKtaB micm (iiom) BlfiW (MkiMioy) of itvewe ud odicr Bnancinf iot ueei Eiiof yw SM mm to fiaioekl Memala Totolt (Memoranduin Only) General Special Revenue Debt Service Capiul Proicct 1990 I9S9 1.511.776 681 136.552 135,512 758,369 108.231 55.867 169.817 5 27 I 30.102 816 1.637,670 200,600 136,552 136,328 758,369 108,231 1,211^1 277.582 148.364 683.385 685.951 125,357 195.604 70.615 96,874 55,850 411,943 433.M7 13.966 2.000 --15,966 22,092 20.780 63.989 3.120 1.912 n.KU 49.093 2.951,471 136,604 32'.67l 88.707 3.502,460 3.636.193 683,176 613,176 699,967 1.419,419 .-1.419,419 1,376,323 471.420 .-471,430 494,742 48,129 -•41,129 32,961 31,613 .-31,613 36,922 75.165 .-75,169 96,242 82.894 177.027 24.165 264,016 197,617 .426.393 -426 J93 47SJ20 2.811.816 177.027 426.393 24.165 3.439.401 3.261.364 139,655 (40.423)(100,715) 64,542 63,059 349.809 51,700 30,000 81,700 2.638.381 (88.70(6 -..(88.70(8 (2.638.160 (88.700)58.700 .30,000 .- 50.955 18,277 (100,715)94,542 63,059 349,609 9M.I23 2.635.813 1,315,655 566,629 5.576.220 9.226.411 $ 1.039.078 S 2,654.090 1 1.214.940 $66U7I t 5.639.279 t 9.976.220 f-r f: I:r i CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Enterpnae Funds Combining Stalement of Reveouc. Expcaaet, and Changes in Retained Earning: Year ^"<***d December 31, 1990 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1989) Salet and coat of ailea Sales Cost of Saks Gross profit Operating revenue Metered water ades User diarfes Green Aks Equipment rental Other Total operating revenue Total gross profit and operating revenue Operatiag aaqienses Peraaonl aacvicas Salariea and wagm Retuemant contiibutioos Health and life insurance oonliibutioos Purchased water Sewer diaposal barges Profession sarvioes Operating and maintenance siqiplies light, and power Dspiaciation Rem and equipment Mainrenanra iad repaiia Administiative and ofeer eiqiense Administiativa charges from General Fund Communicatioos Office aeqpplies Printing, puhUshing, and advcrtumg Data pinrfasing Insurance Other ezpenaes Total operating expenses Operating income (loss) Golf Totals -68- Exhibit F-2 Water Onerstinj! Sewer ODcratiniz Course OoeratinK 1990 1989 $S $ 17,801 S 9.973 17,801 $ 9.973 15,832 9.936 -7,828 7,828 5,896 159,289 159,289 163,537 •401,342 -401,342 396,004 -96,710 96,710 80,376 -28,645 28.645 27.465 2.216 22.250 1.926 26.452 8.667 161.565 423,592 127.281 712.438 676.049 161,565 423,592 135,109 720,266 681,945 45,744 68,906 50,659 165.309 154,241 5,429 8,196 4,518 18.143 16,857 1,879 2,931 2.542 7,352 6.137 42.066 -42,066 42,603 .162,572 .62,572 163,274 2,401 3,486 1,390 7,277 7,607 9,287 4,563 4,482 18,332 15,539 20.332 14.737 2,137 37,206 37,685 38,797 132.086 4,464 175,347 171,299 .-6,328 6,328 5,856 23,141 19,451 7,673 50,265 53,383 1,000 1,380 1,260 3,640 3,210 1,227 1,116 1,236 3.579 3,482 47 88 303 438 317 ' J 156 2,356 2,605 3,412 2,548 5,924 -8,472 7,680 5,648 11,751 12,669 30,068 28,633 2.429 723 808 3.960 3.268 202.068 438.0M 102.825 742.959 724.483 (40,503)(14,474) 32,284 (22,693)(42,538) (continued) I I Exhibit ?-2 CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Enterprise Fund:, (continued) r^TpKining Sutement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes m Retained Earnings Year Ended December 31, 1990 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1989) NonoparatiBg revenue (expense) tts liomMWCC (itoa inteifund loans Om on mle of aaeea Total Donofwntiiif revenue (expense) Net income Goss) Credit for depraciatiao on contributed equity Increase in retained renings 'RetAiMd Beg inninf of year End of year Water Onfratine Sewer Oneratins Golf Course Operatine Totals 1990 1989 103,503 m m (74.975) (733) (591) 134.227 15.916 733 9,530 (72.188) m (589) 1.026 4* 238.756 15,916 733 9,530 (147,163) (733) (1.180) 83.848 16,612 977 9,530 (35.416) (977) (771) 1.769 27.204 87.629 1.026 115.859 75.572 (13.299)73,155 33.310 93,166 33,034 33.329 127.582 254 161.165 159.190 20.030 200,737 33,564 254.331 192,224 133.174 1.112.801 49.126 1.295.101 1.102.877 S 153.204 S 1.313.538 S 82.690 $1.549.432 i_1.295.101 -69- i TOt raoMs DATE: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, C^wj Administratorv^ \ July 3, 1991 V ^V SOBJBCTi Administrator's Information 1950 SHORELINE DRIVE - As you may have noticed the owner has disassembled the cabins at 1950 Shoreline and only has to remove the necessary debris and clean up the site as appropriate. HOLDING TANK - 315 CRESTVIEW - See attached memo. 360 AND 370 LEAF STREET - See attached memo. HIGHWAY 12 DAMAGE CLAIM - Quite some time ago the property owner at ^166 Waysata Bouelvard appeared before the City Council to coaiplaln about a mechanics lien being placed against his property as a result of the Highway 12 sewer and water project. The property oimer was not satisfied that the City was doing what is necessary to get the mechanics lien released. Both the City Attorney and myself have attemped more than once to resolve the matter but cannot get a response from the contractor's attorney. We are continuing to attempt to resolve the matter, but have been unsuccessful. See attached memo. NAY RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS > See attached memo. GOAL SETTING STATUS *> See attached memo. 7291.1TosMark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:July 2, 1991 Subject: Holding Tank - 315 Crestview Avenue This is a memo to advise you that the septic system serving the residence at 315 Crestview Avenue has been found discharging to the surface. The uniqueness of this situation is that the septic tank for this residence and the tile line discharging from it are in the City right-of-way of "Hill Street", an unused connecting link between Crestview and Tonka Avenue. The property has been for sale, and the property owner has been advised that the discharge must be eliminated. Staff reviewed the site with the homeowner and determined that the only potential area meeting setbacks for drainfield had soils that are poorly suited for drainfield use and that area is much too small for a suitable conforming drainfield. We have advised the property owner that he must install a holding tank within the property boundaries and meeting at least the minimum well setback. We expect this holding tank system will be installed within the next month. The holding tank system will conform to the City codes pertaining to such systems. A diagram of the property and the discharge is attached for your information. ; • - ttAsa• zoo • . -� ; _• "II. ...... . I • • � ... -� • �· • "I. ... ' . \ ' : : , • ! I • I • ! • • •. ' .. . • -·- •'\. .., 3/5 32.S I • I I I l I ' f ' I I .. ti ■ K- Tot Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Stephen Weckman, Septic Inspector Jeanne Mabusth, Building • Zoning Administrator Dates July 3, 1991 Subject: Failing Septic System - 370 Leaf Street This memo is to update you on the recent events regarding the •eptic system at 370 Leaf Street. Since the system was noted to be failing on May 2, 1991, the system has been pumped out once and the oimer claims that the system will be pumped out again this week. The alta has been inspected at least two times per week since the system Ifas discovered to be failing to determine whether there was a threat of surface flow to neighboring properties. To this day no evidence of direct flow to neighboring properties has been identified. City staff will be meeting with the owner, Robyn Stewart, next week i.x order to determine a short-term solution 'ntil the future Oi. the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project is known. lev I f I- gv'. i-- ■r ,4 i To:Street File Froa Steve Weckman Date:June 27, 1991 Subject: The row of rock in the driveway serving 360 and 370 Leaf Street In early June a row of rock was observed in the driveway serving 360 and 370 Leaf Street on the border between these two properties. Rock has been added to the ariveway frorr. Leaf Street to the eastern property line of 360 Leaf Street. ^ ^ rock has been moved to form a row at the T mmf Th© row Is appr ox ini31 e 1 y a foot tall and wid« and extends across the driveway leading to 40C Leaf Mr. Purchner, the owner at 36T Leaf Street, explained to me that the pile was erected to reuirect drainage that runs down the driveway towards his property. The row of rock is withi Mr. Furchner's property boundary. this obstacle without coming in contact with In the future I will be parking at 370 e walking next door to 360 Leaf street to avoid damage reet and my car. r t<iOO o**i Ta «o« C • IJOO trm»tr •cnvta. CoconAoo •0201 TlCI^MOMt 2OJ-«91*«t0O • lOOCtMTOUOT riWAWClA*. C» NTf* !•• •. t. •■COHO •▼•!tt Miami , fcosioa JJI Jt ios-fOO*ooio Tikico^itp •eo-iio*oet9 p C r '■ A M H A i K SC»-N0 8*»'C- l'-"j JCO ’9«p|a RUSSELL A. B lanch . Esq. D irect D ial i«!2) 334-2597 June 14, 1991 2 2 2 SC l; Srvicr Mf.*»C*^LAI«Mr«i»CS<MVA 1140a ”tvf»*»o«»i «ia-j^ Aoo9 ' itajjAait) 1 joo I iT*rST ^ f w 500 lAtir AT* 1 M ■ MO T o«) OC. 10009 *lcl^*«OMC 202 9«a 1700 rcw(CO^>i« a02 9«2'«79* BY gM FS' tl- i- ff H' A- II' A fr t '.f. IN: ^r I l\-A: . fL F POPHAM HAIK t400OMC Tasoii CtNTcn laOOtCvCNTCKNTM STItCrr OCMVSfl. COWOMAOO #0202 TKI.KPNONK lOa-293* 1200 TCI.CCOAICM 902-993 2I94 S C H O e < C M ft KAUFMAN. LTD 1300 jArr«*T To^t« 222 SouT^* N inth STAttT MlNNtA^Uil. Minnv »OT« 55402 4IOOCCMTIIU9T Financial . C i lOO ft K. SKCONO 9TMC1T Miami . Floaioa 22191 rCkSFMONC 209-920-0090 Ttl.«COFiC« 209*920*0099 R ussell a . blanck . Esq. .JIRECT Dial (612) 334-2507 - Was *<incton . D C 20009 Tf Lf ^HONC 202 942 0 700 Tfii^ccoi" t w 202 902 07V>9 tMiM June 18, 1991 BY FAX Robert R. Roos, Esq. 247 Third Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55414 Majestic Electric. In al. Our File No. 3643-108 Dear Mr. Roos: We are the attorneys for the City of Orono. We have j-QYiewed your correspondence dated May 21, 1991 to the City of Orono. In respoi .^e thereto, we have been attempting to contact counsel for lien claimant in an effort to negotiate an amicable resolution of this natter. The lien claimant's counsel has been completely uncooperative and unresponsive. Perhaps you may be able to prevail upon ’'*?r to at least open up the lines of coiuaunication. Please feel free to contact me upon receipt of this letter. Than)c you. Very t Russell A. Blanck RAfi/njc 1270 cc: Mr. John Gerhardson City of Orono is' m-'- m cpim it‘- !M&‘V;': CITY OP OPOMO SUMKAFY OF FECEIPT6, DIBBUPSEKBNTS AND BALANCES POP THE five months ENDED KAY 31, 1991 nciiniiNo 1/1/91 ENDING 5/31/91 ZNVtSTMZMT BALANCt CASH AALAMCB 1/1/91 RECEIPTS TOTAL BUDGET (C) 1991 TRAN8F IN INVEST SOLD irAl BarliB Bqpip Ootlar Bldf Cap Outly Ma at Aid Coaa Far Xapr Bar Zap Bead Zap toad ao Zap load az Zap load 15 taotar Coaa aatar Dabt 19 19 Saiir Coaa 19 liaor Dopt 19 lolf Coaraa Op Foolad Zav Trait Fuad 162.413 169,395 C 221,465 2,212,172 (1,253) 717,336 456,640 411,710 130,164 144,631 105,691 694,202 251,636 762,727 601,906 221,111 31,145 550,956 22,316 0 7,657 72,524 0 24,700 11,795 27,477 3,731 24,382 31,861 20,647 7,315 312,994 19,556 6,400 31,413 (b)3,040,260 44,000 25,672 86,100 169,640 560,000 83,030 24,200 103,200 17.000 89,740 191,950 15.000 133,560 500,310 13.000 211,710 126,630 7,110,145(7,110,145)240,723 0 9,319,966 fonu 7,110,145 114,569 1,423,417 5,415,400 25,672 TOfUia LIT n 7,914,399 261,096 1^660,947 4,157,790 TOTAL CASE BUDGET (C)% OF TXAMSP INVEST BALANCE ZHVEIT DISBUR 1991 BUDGET OUT PURCH 5/31/91 BALANCE 1,208,263 3,040,260 39.7%230,848 0 11,100 0.01 191,711 0 -0 39,984 61,350 65.2%189,130 8,559 102,690 B.3%25,672 2,250,465 107 560,000 .0%(1,360) 4,518 17,680 25.6%737,518 154,557 154,730 99.9%313,078 94,101 110,540 85.1%415,156 32,154 38,380 83.8%102,441 922 102,610 0.9%167,998 60,244 194,310 31.0%64,308 166,818 552,600 30.2%548,031 37,600 78,510 47.9%221,421 215,802 253,740 85.0%859,919 35,108 555,600 6.3%586,354 36,716 76,660 47.9%190,872 44,867 107,400 (a)41.8%16,391 240,723 8,390,580 (6,950,739)6,950,739 2,381,042 6,018,360 25,672 8,390,580 156,350 6,950,739 2,367,020 4,271,050 0 12,192,832 (8,499)7,477,921 OmiAL FUND aONNAlT - 19911 TOTAL 1991 CASH h INVE8TKBNT TO 4/31/91 17,107,019 KTONOl BODGET « OF BODGET NOTE (a) Golf oparatlfig fund budget doaa not include aaounta for purchaeea for raaala or aalea tax collactod/raaittad.The receipt! budget project! groaa profit - not total receipt!. Tame!0 1,657,240 0.0« Idomaa a Fisaita 30,764 121,300 25.04 ZitNEfOT. Bereme 46,731 110,700 25.94 dfe for Bert 310,139 770,500 49.44 Fiaie 20,471 111,150 17.34 Zito 11 Zaeeat.20,051 53,300 37.64 Trii. Fr OtlME Fuad!25,673 120,370 Otlir 1,067 16,700 48.34 fOTAIi IBVIVUB 532,603 3,040.260 17.54 NOTE (b) General fund revenue! recorded will not equal receipt! collactad due to receivable! billed In other eecountlng period! and non-revenue receipt!. HCTE (c) Budget eeount! include aeheduled tranafera, do not include fund balance uaea or edditiona. w> 1^'" •• OOM. •n •M tM n>- Iff?05/M/91 06/2S/91 ■fO *n -ISM -MO Cb^Kfciva (Pdorlty) 1 mar mi - 3o mkl m2 m OQU. AREA OUBCnVB OATES srans 1. '» wo (C)A.Rlgtway 12 1.OtilitiM Sauer ~ Pert li Detennim Route Order Plans and Specs Bid Construct 09/01/91 09/01/91 10A5/91 Hiter Systfli Installaticn 4/91-7/91 Main well operational 5/21/91 6/91 Sultci) cwerintcrln uell to Ottcn ttawr (9-12 sontte) 08/01/91 Authorized aweitlng locetlon dedsicsi Order Asseswwits (Sewer Pt II Plus Wall a Tower) Nsgotlatlcn on Dtilities (Long Uke - Hadlna) Ootnenoed water discusslcn 10/25/89 with Medina - Medina to Met with affected residents 1/90 to dianias (Potoitial new subdivision in Medina nay have an iqpsct on project.) . . . . .mm f|:-m. ►-r i-i tw M. *' - r- f fj- (>-.^. L 1 rft: ft S' ■>'::v ■-■■ : ";--i >.-ft moi QQAL ARSV OBJBCnVE CATES STATUS 1.OQ DKITY VBmamm ocntiiniad *S8 bio 2.Lcng Itan Gbrridor Ifpgrade Scoping Process*89 8XD •90 810 •91 810 (A) 12/91 6/91 Round meetings reduosd mmber of oorridors fron 5 to 3 Ehvircmntal Lipact Study 06/92 ttke sppropriate planning wtepm if needed in poten'^al omiidors 01/92 •90 810 3, 1992 Safety lUprwgnent Final Review 10/30/91 Detasmine financdng cf Qrono share of Isprovenents 03/92 Ubrk with ItiDOT cai rlght-of*saiy/fraitage roads Get fulling turn WXTV for fmtage roads as trade off for OQRtxol aoaaaa/right of 03/92 Id.^ of way aoguiaticiv9toDar OOnetrviction 92 1993 V. ■i ,v U 'f ■ 1'.^ ■''■-^■■'■: iff '■•■Lv • » . ■>~ V'- A7 • ' • QOKs MA 1.OQ *88 SID *89 8X0 B.Navarre Md^velopnent 90 810 C« Ocnaunity Tmaportaticn Plan *90 810 *91 8X0 (B) *87 STD *88 sro *89 810 D.Stoon MBter Plan *91 810 (B) OBJECTIVE Detennine beautifioaticn plan liiplcmentation if any for 1992 Detandne interest in Chrietmas lighting Acquire if apprqpriate Delivery • No earlier than Update capital project guidelines Bridge bending progrvn Status Update DATES 10/91 08/91 09/91 U/91 07/91 10/9: Public/Private street - review 07/91 policy Asoertair. available mapping 07/91 Develop RFP for study if appropriate fer Navarre area Zmg tern plan - Balance cf QCErajnity 1V91 8IATOS 3/12/90 TBbled for additional infozmatiai 4/7/90 Discussed possible inclusion in a long term Oenp Plan 6/91 Si^ge desi^ being explored 6/21/91 Request on Oxford presented to Ocundl Ocundl table to 9/91 7/3/91 Sta£f/&)gineering discusaing mapping project. F¥It f' mk1.oa (3QK. AREK. -1:»lY DEVBOMIfr Oontinusd •90 sro OoPBunity Develcimnt Directlcn and Progress OBJBCnVE A.) Lake Ose “ LKD cxnprehensive plan -take Use Omnittee *IPplesmt B.) Itork towards seivioe and ZMults oriented *No surprises” process CJ Conp Plan Response to Metro Council DATES STATOS 09/91 06/91 Ne*t 1«CD Cities meetinq 5/29/91 6A1/91 Ccmnittee held organizatloral neetlnq 6/27/91 Revlewoa Missicn Stataiwrt 07/91 ( ( MSk acAL Am 0BJ19LT1VB CATES S'ZMllS 2.mnxnmmjs ncncncn *90 810 A.Stufcte Bay *91 810 (C)Oetexnine assesanoit araa iiiterest 07/91 aigige an ifipniaar 08/91 Oonalder develc|iMit znoratarlijn 10/91 7/31/90 lettera a«t to area cwnera 9/24/90 ReipcnM liadtad* To use Interaatad neight)oni to aaaist. 1/22/91 AclkUticRal InfoDMtion trannitted to Ad Hoc groif). 3/25/91 - 4/8/91 CM realdent request •grace pesdod.* A/22/91 directs dtlsen Ocesdlttee to develcp cterge for 5/13 4/30/91 Staff prcirldee Info to OODodttae. Oamlttee charge to 5/13 e/10/91 OcBtiiittee requests additional direction. Tabled to 6/24/91 6/24/91 Oouicil directs digineer vfsdate feasibility and briiig bade basic areas and options. 6/10/91 Ooundl authorlzea brush chipping program as sub'.'^l' ite for burTdng/landfilling nf brar clients can get %ax]dchips. 2/91 1990 No inoenti^'es 28% /90 goal - 10% /91 goal - 16% for 1991 m m |S' 11:^'Vi mV-- .u ’’' AT-' •■■•' ■ •w>% m-j- mi-'Mk-I . p-te- sEi!'• Mn QQAL ARn OBJBCTPE DATES STATOS3.ORSMOZMIGNAL DEVBamir*90 810 A.1992 OMidl Goal Setting Ccyjmoe Ooi\ 07/91 10/91 *91 0X0 (C)B.1992 Budget Process Assesanent Boazd of Review Preliminary Budget guidelines 05/91 07/91 Ospleted 5/13/91 6/24/91 Presefited original guidelines to Ocxmcil/Staff Opital projects guidelines review 07/91 Preamt preliminary budget Preliminary mill levy adopticn (Truth in XBxaticsi) Hearing 08/91 09/01/91 12/91 Final levy adept! on 12/91 '90 010 C, 1992 Laglalative Plan D.rmm Building Staff CtMKdl 08/91 Kr*-1. -f*? i g.w, '.-f' P -'T» ^:r. •':»'.v> fer'4' ®riV. SM;.' »'R®Iw-- ■ ifesV':' ■ feRP-•, 2r.il' »U‘ Am OQAI. AREA (BJBCnVE □AIES sismjs4.SBWXCS GBJVBQT*90 810*91 810 (A)A.Facilities qpgrade i#Ilf ’V If CMartakcf) 6/20/91 CDundl directB staff on issusa offinancing, design develofmnt and publiciifiute6/24/91 CKnr^l sets RRA establiainnt Public Hsarlng for 7/22. Authorizes Bos men to develop public iiifooMticiie Bstsblishss desixig revise uamittes. Sets 7/2 as initial meeting. Directs solicitation of Oonstructicn Manager. Site soquisition# if any Desi^ Pinal plans/ooets Plans/flpedf i cations Financing Bid aMStde B.long Range Financial PoUcy Develop balance of policy 08/91 C.Business Strategy Plans Poliae * Update Golf Course -09/01/91 A r’-./C >■ M''**« |h:\;V" ^#ss ■ ..li'bfeA P?.- fe'>? *' ■/ f ^ ■El pffV'ivV; »i*. /«*-. pll*' ';■ /••rj.:» - i ^T- 'i t;’"" ' '■ OnL MBK OBJECTIVE DATES smnis4.S8PVIC2 nUVTO OantlnuedD.Servloe Esvlms 5. C. eI®*" '‘ tfMiM- Qigiraerlng aexvioes•90 CTO U/91 90 810 lagal services 09/91 •91 810 (B) •91 810 (C) E.Street Lighting P.Nbodhill Oountiry Club/ Detennine policy 03/91 07/91 •90 810 A* Oogpenasticn laplmmt Onplcyee Reoognitlcn Ponulate City employee develoiment &qpIoce perfosnsnoe incentive progran 07/91 00/91 07/91 91 810 A.Oa niceticus to DetexBdne Progno 6/20/91 Ttananitted letters to residents cn 06/93 Highway 12, Itaplenent 07-09/91 r r C c c. ( Hamm, 8 i: r • I i ^7 LIST OF LICENSES FCR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR MEETING OF July 8, 1991_ _ _ _ \' -^^ \ % % % Special Events Permit - ' -••< Rick Recker- Foot Race - Corn Days August 11. 1991 12:00 - 1:00 P.M. XUMiLa:f9dL-rjfij.:±xStiMi:4. Permit #; Fee: $50.00 PARADES * SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Phone Number Name; Address;^ ^) JLL ^-21 ’ C. *' CITr QF C.W z-y-Aj^ijrc .irrrrc 1313400000 01 4fV 50.00 CHECS Ti ^0.00 RE lEII'T-THAHK you S215490 cool fiOt 709:. 06/17/ City, State, Zip; S MN -- - - - - - - -- Location of Parade or Event; ^ UjL_— Quho^ L n • Ha ^ Person(s) and/or Organization(s) Handling the Event; St, (kcE^rcC C^yjCoM ^_____________________________ Date of Ev..^(it;S-ti-it Hours of Event: Reason or Purpose ! U Mn-t fxjo-r Kt-<uf Insurance Company;Amount Copy of insurance certificates to be submitted with this application. I am aware of all applicable State and other laws regarding parades ana special events and will abide by same. I also agree to hold the City or Orono harmless from all liabilities that may arise directly or indirectl-, •••om the parade or special event approved by the granting of this permit. G-'-l-'l! Signature Date Approved:Denied: rks: (sroas') 1 h«. fri W a Uoi C^iVTo £v)tMr X hAv To Tc T *1 Oi 5t~AmO Appt^ciiTTv, __ . __ i- ^0 Vovj Aajl A^V Scbco-noM iTiStag*. Tui fcJCAir \OT i; ^ r 06/23/91 PR: CB PRREGOR EMP • NAME 470204924 4716SI060 S0S662439 474563339 471840871 469044600 470500346 475443862 472503991 471729281 469526026 475989721 468821018 472529007 468701868 507585424 469686562 468420832 469087884 474667812 475380151 477500666 475444249 471569863 473141624 477647279 475246099 470118449 504260307 472500574 470584708 121262417 472045960 476018974 334506281 474822333 477028779 473108428 468909535 476783251 470700901 469848107 475382983 473746173 473609629 469629194 475569177 ABRAHAMSON. FREDERIC ANDERSON, BRUCE L BERNHAROSON MARK E BOBZIEN. SUE A BOSMA, JAMIE L BOWMAN, ERIK A BRAUN. ROBERT > BRINKHAUS. JOHN F CHESWICK. GARY 8 CHRISTIANSON, SALLY CORNICK. JAMES L DEMBOUSKI. JAY C ENGLISH III. IRVING ERICKSON, KURT R FISCHENICH. DAN T FRITZLER. iOHN M ^ OAFFRON,MICHAEL P QERHARDSON, JOHN R GOMAN, DAVID J GREGORY.JAMES D HALLIN, DOROTHY M HANSEN. STEVEN C HANSIN6.CAROL J JOHNSON.BRADLEY P JOSTROM.FOREST J KARNITZ.RICKY D KIL80. MELVIN H KLEVANN JR. PAUL J KNUTSON.CHARLOTTE A KUEHN, THOMAS M LINOSTROM, DAVID J MABUSTH.JEANNE A MCWHITE.ROBERT B MILLS J*. WALTER H MOROWCZYNSKl. JAMES NAAB. THERESA L NELSON, DAVID D OAS. DANIEL 0 OBEliAIGNER, SCO I T Q OBRIEN. RANDY L OMAN, LYLE E PALMER. GREGORY A OUAST. WAYNE A RATHBUN. BARRY J ROSS. JOHN A SKREEN, DALE S STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD -7 ■'•V/ % VTD CURRENT DPT GROSS GROSS 93 417.50 102.50 31 21272.04 1569.93 12 30977 69 2221.36 31 12441.23 958.72 12 6980.31 663.66 61 1064.00 560.00 93 245 .00 165.00 42 19762.35 1522 88 31 20800.00 1600 00 31 2500.23 200 27 31 21960 .12 1692.56 31 4655 32 1244 15 31 21249 40 1860 95 31 18694.93 1408 48 31 19366.21 1643.26 31 19764 96 1536.00 33 18067 .03 1392.25 42 24227 30 1830.71 35 381.88 137.90 42 17356.44 1558.85 12 15563.04 1199.28 42 14467.77 1219.97 31 6998.79 524 S3 31 20411.51 1408.48 93 662 50 82.50 31 5700 04 492.06 31 27844 60 2150 48 61 1270.00 400.00 15 12441.24 958.72 15 26518 73 2048.08 93 170 00 35.00 33 23297.59 1743.52 93 460.00 237.50 93 992.27 102.38 31 20814 74 1817.82 12 12594.03 958.71 35 2128.23 293.71 93 1124.75 214.50 42 12795.08 870.08 92 14551.46 1007.76 33 18301.37 1392.24 42 12557.02 921.27 92 17689 81 1533.02 92 15149.43 1177.18 93 154.88 115.50 42 14990.22 1381.10 93 15584.67 1200.96 iik- .-2 : • -:V A r • PR9«3 06/23/91 PR CB PRRCGOR EMP • NAME 101261716 472563051 474663296 470704904 475505292 481629499 500403192 477991539 STEVENS. BETTY 6 THOMTON. MARK R TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE TOMCZYK. MARK W VANG. BRUCE L VEE. LINDA S WALtERS, LINDA G WECKMAN. STEPHEN J YTD CURRENT DPT GROSS GROSS 93 1170.00 258.00 31 18547.33 1421.40 F 31 20620 70 1920.54 31 18S80 49 1487.71 33 15054.43 1199 29 12 10843.16 862.88 15 14310 46 1056.32 33 11606.37 945.12 58.507.14 07/31/91 PR CM PRREGOR 99 EMP • NAME 477361665 BUTLER. MARY C 469199026 CALLAHAN, EDWARD J 19324677 GOETTEN. J.DIANN 473646272 JABBOUR. GABRIEL 469605135 PETERSON. BARBARA A 6 •SSI DPT YTD GROSS CURRENT GROSS 11 1208.35 241.67 11 1691.69 241.67 11 1691.69 241.67 11 1691.69 241.67 11 2100.00 300.00 1,266.68 %tt’1991 CITY OF 090N0 CHECK NO. DATE 199015 199030 199030 199030 199030 199030 199030 199037 199037 199039 1990S4 199099 199099 199074 199074 199074 199074 199074 199074 199074 199074 199074 199074 199074 199074 199074 199074 1990'9074 199074 199074 199074 -V. •••.V' 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 AMOUNT 22.26 22.26 • 153.00 • 56.48 48.24 106.72 2,567.87 2,567.87• 381.11 381.11 * 246.00 41.00 287.00 • 912.25 100.00 302.14 150.00 142.34 187.50 1,410 3,624 305 134 45 464 2,949 00 40 24 76 00 40 63 675.00 225.00 132.25 90.00 588.48 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR A T 4 T ITEM DESCRIPTION TELEPHONE AUQIES MOBILE CHEF AUGIES MOBILE CHEF EARL F ANDERSON ASSC BARTON SAND/GRAVEL BIFFS INC BIFFS INC BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN RCSENE Ar» ROSENE ASf. ROSENE ACN ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN ROSENE ASN COFFEE/SANDWCH SANDWICHS SIGNS SAND 6 BIFFS 1 BIFF SUSPENSE APR ENQ ENG RETAINER APR BASE MAPS EXPENSE APR STAFF MTG STREET MILEAGE HILLSIDE WTR EXTENSN ENG APPLIC APR WELL • 3 CLOSE OUT ENG PUMPHOUSE 3 WTR MAIN LOCATIONS INSPECTIONS APRIL APR INSP PUMPHOUSE 3 LS 10/43 CLOSE OUT UPDATE SWR COMP PLAN REVIEW SWR UNIT CHRQ ADMIN APR INSPECTIONS APRIL LS 8 CLOSE OUT ACCOUNT NO. INV 74-4320-590-93 24.10 AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC 01-4340-059-14 24.10 AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC 01-4340-069-15 24 10 AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC 01-4340-129-31 32.50 AT <1 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC 01-4340-129-31 24.10 AT A T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC 01-4340-174-33 24.10 AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC 01-4340-249-42 74-4802-591-94 74-4802-591-94 01-4233-249-42 01-4232-290-61 01-4331-290-61 74-4331-590-93 01-1299 01-4304 01-4305 01-4305 01-4305 01-4305 01-4305 72-4305 72-4305 72-4305 72-4306 72-4306 73-4305 73-4305 73-4305 73-4306 73-4306 73-4531 000-00 200-41 200-41 200-41 249-42 840-71 840-71 437-85 437-85 549-91 436-84 437-85 433-81 569-92 569-92 433-81 434-82 569-92 07-08-91 PAGE 1 •P 0. 9 MESSAGE ••*-CKS •**-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS kiii f^r -« *ll»i CITY OF ORONOCHECK NO. DATE lltl24 07/02/91 119127 07/02/91 1 HHji ISHI tS|« J.Vr 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 '■*AAA A A AHr. .■• ^ 1M14SI199149 07/02/9107/02/91 B#T?' ■, 19915$ . 07/02/91 w.. r ff .199197 07/02/91 .‘ f u“ *' 199197 07/02/91 ffcp l'>\ 07/02/91 fe4|92«9vir ; 07/02/91 AMOUNT 12.438.39 * 353.70 353.70 • 6.50 • 22.50 22.50 • 105.00 105.00 • 5,500.00 5,500.00 ■ 6.50 CHECK REGISTERVENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION COCA COLA VENDING POP DAHLGREN SHARDLOW LL ANNEXATION EAST SIDE BEVERAGE BEER ROLE E ERICKSON JULY FEE ERICKSON/KURT PARKING 07-08-91 PAGE 2 ACCOUNT NO. INV, i P.O. • MESSAGE 74-4802-591-94 275.00 COFFIN GRONBERG REST POINT LA 01-4306-249-42 275.00 • 9.99 C0M4ERCIAL LIFE/QRP JULY INS 0l-4152-0'^r*-12 25.65 COM4ERCIAL LIFE/GRP JULY INS 01-4152- .9-15 16.85 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP JULY INS 01-4152-U1-31 3.40 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP JULY INS 01-4152-126-31 58.95 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP JULY INS 01-4152-129-31 6.99 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP JULY INS 01-4152-174-33 20.19 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP JULY INS 01-4152-249-42 1.42 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP JULY INS 72-4152-549-91 2.13 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP JULY INS 73-4152-569-92 .85 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP JULY INS 74-4152-590-93 145.42 • 23.28 CORNICK/JAMES GAS 01-4220-129-31 10.44 CORNICK/JAMES MEALS 01-4356-129-31 33.72 • 6.50 CUSHMAN MOTOR CO INC CHAIN 74-4232-590-93 01-4306-299-72 74-4815-591-94 01-4307-059-14 01-4381-129-31 81 A A -CKS •A 9 -CKS ***-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •« •-CKS -CKS -A w^''' .Ji-'i*:^:4*tA CITY OF ORONO ff CHECK NO. DATE V;, I .---i> HAAft Aft —‘ •'§ ■,. Wl^ - ^ I 07/02/91 ^:^!!25!■n.'07/02/91 07/02/91 r‘.07/02/9* fV.g;!**.****mr'-199303 -it '■> ■' ‘: ■fv.l '. -,-m W’i P»*“- ...... 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 j.o Jkv.r I. t I 199330 07/02/91 ,V. .;> mm 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 199390-'^“'07/02/91 '7- k V . /.-j-vv A; V ■:--iJ .* AMOUNT 6.SO • 9.82 9.82 • 59.00 65.85 125.75 • 35.80 35.80• 1.890.92 1.890.92• 8.50 8.50 • 261.00 28.35 289.35 • 150.75 150.75• 91.50 91.50 61.00 183.00 30.50 30.50 30.50 91.50 610.00 • 463.00 463.00 • CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION EXPRESS MESSENGER GLENWOOO INGLEWOOD GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD HAPPYS POTATO CHIP HENN CTY FIN D V DEPT PROPERTY TAX HENN CTY SHERIFF OPT HENN CTY SHERIFF DPT ICMA RETIREMNT TRUST IMS/MN IMS/MN IMS/MN IMS/MN IMS/MN IMS/MN IMS/MN IMS/MN INTL CITY MGMNT ASSN POSTAGE REIMB WATER CUP/DISPENSER CHIPS MAY ROOM/BOARD POSTAGE INSTALLS/STRIPSMAY BOOK FEE ICMA 6/10-23 MAINT MAINT MAINT MAINT MAINT MAINT MAINT MAINT MAIL HAIL MAIL MAIL MAIL MAIL MAIL HAIL MACH MACH MACH MACH MACH MACH MACH MACH ICMA DUES 07-08-91 PAGE 3 ACCOUNT NO.INV 8 P 0. 8 MESSAGE 01-3500-000-00 01-4231-099-17 74-4231-590-93 74-4802-591-94 01-4358-080-16 01-4321-040-13 01-4342-129-31 01-4358-080-16 01-4140-039-12 01-4340 01-4340 01-4340 01-4340 01-4340 01-4340 72-4340 73-4340 039-12 059-14 069-15 174-33 249-42 295-65 549-91 569-92 01-4380-039-12 •••-CKS •••-CKS ***-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS ••*-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS J f*. i:' 1991 CITY OF ORONOCHECK NO. DATE 119370 119391 199397 199397 199397 1I939T m 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 AMOUNT \*■ 'i/'.o >< ifea.v €-V--•_ _> 310.70 310 70 10 37 10.37 • 71.91 8.93 5.95 5.95 92.74 CHECK REGISTERVENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION JIM HATCH SALES CO KNUTSON/CHARLOTTE KUEHN-THOMAS KUEHN-THOMAS KUEHN-THOMAS KUEHN-THOMAS 1 '''119404 K-‘.‘ 07/02/91 62.58 62.58 • THE LAKER 1 - ft A ft A A • 07/02/91 23.24 LOQIS SUITE 300 07/02/91 9.53 LOGIS -SUITE 300 07/02/91 246.00 LOQIS -SUITE 300ff!!!25 07/02/91 153.75 LOQIS -SUITE 300f}|!i2S 07/02/91 159.90 LOQIS -SUITE 300J!!!25 07/02/91 791.11 LOQIS SUITE 300f!2!25 07/02/91 458.60 LOGIS •SUITE 300!!!i22 07/02/91 240.77 LOQIS -SUITE 300i!!12!07/02/91 54.06 LOGIS •SUITE 300J!M2f 07/02/91 944.96 LOQIS •SUITE 300 ■l!!!25 07/02/91 766.41 LOQIS -SUITE 300i!!122 07/02/91 333.68 LOQIS *SUITE 300i|f225 07/02/91 230.00 LOGIS •SUITE 300li94|S 07/02/91 115.00 LOGIS -SUITE 300i!!522 07/02/91 115.00 LOQIS -SUITE 300l!!!22 07/02/91 144.46 LOQIS *SUITE 300I2!!25 07/02/91 36.06 LOQIS •SUITE 300H!!23 07/02/91 34.50 LOQIS •SUITE 300‘2!!525 07/02/91 •‘337.07 LOQIS •SUITE 30022K2207/02/91 84.20 LOQIS •SUITE 30019943S 1-1^: ‘'AR4'*'***’ 07/02/91 . 4 80.50 5,358.80 • LOGIS SUITE 300 SUPPLIES MTG MILEAGE JUNE MILEAGE MILEAGE MILEAGE ADS COSGROVE LABELS SEPITC LABELS LASERJET 2P MNT VECTRA PC MNT DATA PROC MAY DATA PROC MAY DATA PROC MAY DATA PROC MAY LOQIS TRAINING LOGIS TRAINING LOGIS TRAINING DATA PROC MAY LOGIS TRAINING DATA PROC MAY LOGIS TRAINING 07/02/91 5.80 LONG LK FORD TRACTOR PARTS07/02/91 t 8.54 LONG LK FORD TRACTOR PARTS07/02/91 •‘890.31 LONG LK FORD TRACTOR REPR BACKHOE■07/02/91 27.80 LONG LK FORD TRACTOR REPR J DEERE07/02/91 , •4!;. •4 , Uv i »*, 16.26 948.71 • LONG LK FORD TRACTOR PARTS ACCOUNT NO. INV 01-4232-249-42 01-4356-069-15 01-4381-069-15 01-4381-174-33 01-4381-249-42 73-4381-569-92 01-4323-174-33 01-3500-000-00 01-4210-174-33 CLK 01-4340-039-12 01-4340-069-15 01-4340-069-15 MAY 01-4352-069-15 MAY 01-4352-129-31 MAY 01-4352-174-33 01-4355-039-12 01-4355-069-15 01-4355-129-31 01-4355-174-33 01-4356-069-15 01-4356-129-31 01-4358-174-33MAY72-4352-549-91 72-4355-549-91 72-4356-549-91MAY73-4352-569-92 73-4355-569-92 73-4256-569-92 01-4232-290-61 01-4232-290-61 01-4342-249-42 01-4342-249-42 74-4232-590-93 07-08-91 PAGE 4 i P.O. i MESSAGE •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS *•• _CKS 5*-.I .- >K t*'■ Ittl cm Of OROHOb-CHECK NO. DATE 119441 07/02/91 •••••• 191490 07/02/91 'T‘-i 07/02/91 199477 .;^994?7 119477 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 feb., 07/02/01 ■5 -1 . • 199490 199490i»s:■i.j* 07/02/91 07/02/9107/02/91 97/02/91 "niiiook: ' .y •■-■*f ■y 191499 07/02/91 07/02/91 mM-:. 199S22 07/02/91 4 t ■k K.L^;ax199939? J 07/02/91 ■ ’K*.. ^I"j K '■*V ^99932^^^;: , 07/02/91 ^ \ '*<n AMOUNT ..lb- .. '•v-'^vv-v SS.49 SS.49 • 11.11 19.11 • 4.571.00 4.571.00 * 54.70 106.44 27.30 190.64 * 893.20 893.20 ■ 41.79 11.08 4.03 187.86 244.76 • 202.30 13.62 215.92 • 25.30 25.30 • 15,236.75 15,236.75 • 115.20 CHECK REGISTERVENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION LONG LAKE TIRE SERV MABUSTH-JEANNE MALLOY KARNOWSKI CO MIDWEST BSNS PROD MIDWEST BSNS PROO MIDWEST BSNS PROD MIDWEST ASPHALT MINNEQASCO MINNEGASCO MINNEQASCO MINNEQASCO MN CELLULAR TELE MN CELLULAR TELE MTI DIST CO CITY OF MOUND MORAN MARK TIRE MTG AUDIT PAYMENT 83 OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES ASPHALT UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES TELEPHONE TELEPHONE PARTS 3 RD QTR FIRE CASE WORK 07-08-91 PAGE 5 ACCOUNT NO. INV. I P.O. I MESSAGE 01-4342-249-42 01-4356-174-33 01-4300-020-11 01-4210-069-15 01-4210-129-31 01-4210-174-33 01-4233-249-42 01-4324-099-17 01-4324-129-31 72-4324-549-91 73-4324-569-92 01-4320-129-31 01-4320-249-42 74-4232-590-93 01-4317-132-32 01-4306-129-31 •••-CKS •••-CKS •**-CKS •■•-CKS •••-CKS -CKS II II N -CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS -CKS i;T 1991 CITY OF 090N0 CHECK NO. DATE 119542 199592 119592 119592 199592 199592 199592 199592 199592 199592 199592 199592 199592 199595 ft 1 199592 •f ig .• ^*«K8 W A ■ ^>199597 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 '-.i '<■ ‘ w f \ AMOUNT 115.20 * 58.0b 58.05 411 317 152 10 6 15 6 15 7 960 160 114 2.188 .57 .83 .40 .86 .99 .92 .99 .57 .91 .35 .46 .26 .11 1.022.80 1.022.80 • 28.50 85.00 85.00 178.00 170.00 795.00 1.341.50 74.62 74.62 • 11.90 152.00 163.90 * 4.162.27 4.162.27 • CHECK REGISTER VENDOR MUNITECM INC NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE PPOO PROD PROD PROD PROD PROD OF OF OF OF OF OF MN MN MN MN MN MN OMAN/LYLE OTTEN BROS OTTEN BROS PUBLIC EMPL RET ASSN ITEM DESCRIPTION REPAIR UTLITIES UTLITIES UTLITIES UTLITIES UTLITIES UTLITIES UTLITIES UTLITIES UTLITIES UTLITIES UTLITIES UTLITIES ST LIGHTS PRINT WHEEL MAIN!TYPEWTR MAINT TYPEWTR MAINT TYPEWTR MAINT TYPEWTR TYPEWRITER MILEAGE STRAW/STAKES SOD STAKES PERA 6/10-23 ACCOUNT NO INV 72-4342-549-91 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 72-4324 73-4124 73-4324 73-4324 74-4324 099-17 129-31 249-42 249-42 290-61 290-61 290-61 549-91 569-92 569-92 569-92 590-93 01-4325-249-42 01-4210-129-31 01-4340-039-12 01-4340-069-15 01-4340-129-31 01-4340-129-31 01-4560-129-31 01-4381-174-33 01-4233-249-42 01-4233-249-42 01-2031-000-00 07-08-91 PAGE 8 •P 0 •MESSAGE •**-CKS •••-CHS •••-CKS ■. •-CKS . * •-CKS -CKS •* •-CKS •**-CKS w|frfl991 CITY OF (MONO CHECK REGISTER 07-08-91 PAGE 7 CHECK NO DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV •P 0. i MESSAGE r 199909 07/02/91 48.00 PACE LABORATORIES MICRO ANALYSIS 01-4306-174-33 48.00 • H»'.'■■ 07/02/91 26.05 PERRYS VENTURES INC CAR WASH 01-4341-249-42 ••••-CKS J«s«07/02/91 16.60 PERRYS VENTURES INC CAR WASH 01-4342-290-61 07/02/91 3.90 48 • PERRYS VENTURES INC CAR WASH 73-4341-569-92 **t4*il ?■ ^'?v^ntiii ir 07/02/91 827.00 PHYSICIANS HEALTH JULY INS 01-3872-000-00 07/02/91 756.00 PHYSICIANS HEALTH JULY INS 01-4151-039-12I{99|l 07/02/91 462.00 PHYSICIANS HEALTH JULY INS 01-4151-069-1507/02/91 294.00 PHYSICIANS HEALTH JULY INS 01-4151-121-3107/02/91 420.32 PHYSICIANS HEALTH JULY INS 01-4151-126-3107/02/91 946.16 PHYSICIANS HEALTH JULY INS 01-4151-129-31l!!HK -07/02/91 ,376.00 PHYSICIANS HEALTH JULY INS 01-4151-174-33l!!Hf 07/02/91 1.155.00 PHYSICIANS HEALTH JULY INS 01-4151-249-42 i ' ■■ 07/02/91 364.40 PHYSICIANS HEALTH JULY INS 72-4151-549-9107/02/91 546.60 6.149.48 • PHYSICIANS HEALTH JULY INS 73-4151-569-92 iiAAii 199621 i'.* >;% 07/02/91 3.390.00 3.390.00 • POLKA DOT RECYCLING JUNE FEE 01-4392-295-65 K"i;. iltSIS »k>/< 1^-; -. ■■ "V i . fl-WMIl i|:: 1MM2 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 »t »rr ' 07/02/91 • *1 * vt 1 -■^4'pfjjsn |:#£Ss 07/02/91 07/02/91 fe. 07/02/91 A^. '. I *' h'm Ad */ 521.10 56.90 56.90 521.10 1.156.00 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRAIRIE OFFSET PRAIRIE OFFSET PRAIRIE OFFSET ENVELOPES/LETTERHD ENVLEOPES ENVLEOPES ENVELOPES/LETTERHD 35.12 35.12 • SCHARBER & SONS INC 254.10 254.10 • REED VENDING REPAIR CANDY & CIGS 200.00 100.00 300.00 • LAURIE K SCHEFFLER LAURIE K SCHEFFLER CC MTGS PC MTG 4.000.00 SATHE A ASSOC INC ADH SEARCH 01-4322-039-12 01-4322-039-12 01-4322-174-33 01-4322-174-33 01-4232-249-42 74-4602-591-94 01-4306-039-12 01-4306-174-33 01-4306-299-72 ••*-CKS ***-CKS ••*-CKS •••-CKS •*»-CKS •••-CKS ifii ciTV or oiONo DATE 07/02/Sl r . CHECK NO h * ittin i'* ••••*• V;T ^’v :■•j ■■*,•> n ^UEi?3i ^S!8?}8 ' '*ill740 ^111741 j :tti7f4 fe- ••••Ha h-V ^'’■' 1 *'i 'kv ^ tills l‘f . ' ‘i '->*'* iIP*'l^'AL *te'.ilM17 kfeiiim 07/02/11 07/02/41 07/02/91 07/02/91 f 07/02/91 ^ 07/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 } 07/02/9107/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 f07/02/91 . :07/02/9107/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 :07/02/9107/02/91 ll: 07/02/91 7 r 07/02/91 AMOUNT .•r V A 39.so * 49.05 49.05 • CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION VILLAGE CHEVROLET REPAIR ACCOUNT NO. INV 333.00 SATHE A ASSOC INC POLICE CHIEF SEARCH 01-4308-299-72 333.00 * 24.23 SCHARBER & SONS PART 01-4231-290-61 24.23 • 475.00 STEVENS WELL DRILL CAP WELL 1949 FAG 24-4399-481-00 475.00 • 33.31 STREICHERS DOME 01-4232-129-31 50.00-STREICHERS REFND MOUTHPCE 01-4232-129-31 80.95 STREICHERS FLASHLIGHT 01-4232-129-31 73.26 • 3.75 DEmOUSKI/JAY PARKING 01-4381-129-31 3.75 • 5.20 THOMTON/MARK MILEAGE 01-4381-129-31 5.20 • 47.00 ULTIMATE AWARDS PLAQUE 90-3790-000-00 47.00 * 79.64 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-039-12 79.65 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-059-14 39.82 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-069-15 169.01 US WEST COr JN TELEPHONE 01-4320-129-31 79.65 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-174-33 63.14 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-175-34 79.65 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-249-42 11.95 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 72-4320-549-91 27.89 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 73-4320-569-92 79.98 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 74-4320-590-93 124.20 US WEST COMMUN ADV 74-4323-590-93 833.64 * 39.50 VESSCO INC HOSE 72-4232-549-91 73-4341-569-92 07-08-91 PAGE I •P 0. i MESSAGE •««-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •■•-CKS •-CKS •**-CKS ••*-CKS rP'-it'*■ ’nP cm or orono ^ CHECK NO. DATE ttr ' 07/02/91 07/02/91 ‘ lt«i42 07/02/91 1 ■B H H K H k" 07/02/91 P^IMITS 07/02/91 rk\ ISliiiri: ^ .^•••02 07/02/91 07/02/91 <i I, iOiS 07/02/91 07/02/91 I i»i .l-*wA •< i- I - »■ k-i . jt-; U 5. IM904 07/02/91 Sltio»:45^ = 07/io2/91 [■ feMOioo -s:.07/02/91 ; ; ). V 1IM07 r S ■1 W • V .’ 07/02/91 ^;31I9909 07/02/91 % tlfMOf If I**®*®* -V u: % iiv.iitoio Li ('•*',-,•■ ■ 07/02/91 . 07/02/91 r>> 07/02/91 AMOUNT 10.37 15.75 29.12 • 1.622.75 1.622.75 • 130.78 130.78 * 6.28 8.28 * 39.50 39.50 126.00 126.00 30.00 30.0060.00 230.00 230.00 9 9 99 99 19.65 19.65 88 88 40 40 140.00140.00 165.00 260.50 425.50 185.00 185.00 • li*« CHECK REGISTER \ ''OR ITEM OESCRIP. .ON WALTERS LINDA WALTERS LINDA WAYZATA-CITY OF WECKHAN STEPHEN WRIGHT HENN ELECTRIC BUTTERFIELDS FIRE A POLICE REPORT RANDY O BRIEN RANDY O BRIEN RUTTGERS BAY LODGE MINNETONKA BOATWORKS EAR W DAY A SONS RADISSON ARROWWOOD MINNESOTA QFOA DORSEY A WHITNEY DORSEY A WHITNEY MINNESOTA CLE MEETING MILEAGE 3RD OTR FIRE MILEAGE UTILITIES FLOWERS SUBSCRIPTION WATER CERT SEWER CERT AMEM CONF HORN PART ANNUAL CONF GFOA ANNUAL GFOA CONF AUDIT LETTER LEGAL CONSULT APR CONF 07-08-91 PAGE 9 ACCOUNT NO. INV. I P.O. i MESSAGE 01-4356-069-15 01-4381-069-15 01-4318-133-32 01-4381-174-33 01-4324-149-42 74-4343-590-93 01-4240-129-31 72-4356-549-91 73-4356-569-92 01-4356-129-31 74-4232-590-93 74-4232-590-93 01-4356-069-15 01-4356-069-15 01-4303-080-16 01-4303-129-31 0’-4356-129-3l •••-CKS •••-CKS A M A -CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS I fI 1981 CITY OF (MONO CHECK NO. DATE119111119913199913199913199913 198919 199919 *v.' I. r;« . «'-ih -Jf.v II' t ^ -i.. 07/02/9107/02/9107/02/9107/02/9107/02/91 07/02/91 07/02/91 f '■u.** AMOUNT c: •V \ *.m i V ■c- .'.V 50.59 50.59 *7.0013.0014.001.999.00 1.930.00 37.50 37.50 • CHECK REGISTERVENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 07-08'91 PAGE 10 ACCOUNT NO. INV. • P.O •MESSAGEHENNEPIN CO TREAS WELL93 RETAX 72-4383-437-85MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE ESQ CCWPANY •••-CKSJUNE SALES TAX JUNE SALES TAX JUNE sales TAX JUNE SALES TAX 01-3500-000-0001-3516*000-0072-2222-000-0074-2222-000-00 •••-CKS REPR CHIPPER BLADES 01-4342-249-42 •••-CKS 108.55 ITEN CHEVROLET REPAIR i 108.55 • 72,399.12 FUND 01 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 475.00 FUND 24 TOTAL PERM IMPROVE REVOLVING F 5,408.83 FUND 72 TOTAL WATER OPERATING FUND 7,235.72 FUND 73 TOTAL SEWER OPERATING FUND 3,315.92 FUND 74 TOTAL GOLF COURSE OPERATING FD 47.00 FUND 90 TOTAL 88,881.59 TOTAL 01-4341-249-42 •••-CKS k I', F>i. li^ 2: t fr ;k’ S?f" ?V'- b?P Kw- K:'. m ■'■ H r:i1 L' COUNCIL MEETING JUL 2 8 1991 CITY OF ORONO \ . rbrf, k I i :-• 'J % E^: k Is 1-: r' i' ^f’ A: f-A >!.■: E? I ^1 K i;fK W*CnLMEETTH6mHUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUL 2 8 1991HELD JUNE 17, 1991 EOLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present:Planning Commission Chair Charlie Kelley, and Planning Commission Members Jeffrey Johnson, Maureen Bellows, Ed Cohen, Charles Schroeder, an^ Sara Moos. Candace Rowlette was absent. The following represented the City Staff; Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Scheffler. Council Representative J.Diann Goetten was present, as was Councilmember Jabbour. (#1)ZONING FILE «1653-JEFFREY JOHNSON 3825 CHERRY AVENUE VACATION OF AN UNIMPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY-PUBLIC HEARING Jeffrey Johnson was present. At 8:00 p.m., Kelley opened the Public Hearing, and asked Mabusth to provide a review of application #1653. Mabusth summarized the information set forth in her memo dated June 12, 1991 pertaining to Mr. Johnson's request to vacate a portion of an unimproved public right-of-way. She used a plat map of the area to show the section of alley that would be vacated.Mabusth noted that the alley restricts the area in which any improvements can occur to the rear of the existing house. She advised that the Public Works Director is asking the applicant to provide drainage and utility easements over the vacated portion of the alley. This, however, would limit the building envelope because construction could not take place within the easement. The rear lot line would be redefined, reducing need for setback Variance." Kelley asked Mabusth if she could elaborate on the request by the Public Works Director to have an easement dedicated for a future bike trail through that area. Mabusth replied, "I have nothing further to add at this time.It is a recent policy of the City to have the Pa^k Commission review Vacations and Subdivisions to assist with their plan for a future bike trail.It is my understanding that this particular request would be reviewed by the Park Commission at their July 2, 1991 meeting." Kathryn Nevers, 3860 Cherry Avenue, stated that she and her son each own two lots on the south side of Cherry Avenue. She asked what impact Johnson's request to vacate a portion of the alley would have on their parcels. Kelley explained that Johnson's request would have no impact on the adjacent lots on the south side of Cherry Avenue. -1 - nvifTfw i;-. II:. 1^- w H-:J. Ifc h- 5*" 'u ■'■ ? ■ *» ki-nhi-/ S'* PI It: Wk- fC<'.11ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (#1)ZONING FILE #1653-JEFFREY JOHNSON CONTINUED Ms. Nevers asked if it would be the City’s intention to now vacate the entire alley. Mabusth explained that it would be a complicated process if the City were to initiate the Vacation of the remaining ^-^rtion of alley, in that the City would have to ask each property owner to grant utility and drainage easements. Nevers asked what the purpose is for Johnson's request to vacate the alley. Johnson replied, "One of the reasons for requesting the Vacation is that the alley does impact the building envelope. I had a choice of either seeking a rear setback Variance to construct a deck or a Vacation of the alley. I chose the Vacation because it would also resolve issues that relate to the location of the alley and legally combining the lots. I do take issue with the request for the drainage and utility easements. I would like the City Engineer to review that. If easements are located in that area, it would have the impact on the building envelope as the alley.The easements would unduly restrict building area. There is a wetland that would be located in the middle of the easement, which runs north and south. Also, there is already city water in North Shore Drive. The Public Works Director has indicated that a water line could be installed where the alley now exists to serve the properties on Cherry Avenue. However, it will be necessary to provide water to both sides of Cherry Avenue.A bike trail through that area would make no sense because of the wetland. The plat of this area is 100 years old. The City has found no use for the platted alley over that period of time." Co'incilmember Jabbour expressed concern about the fact that Cherry Avenue is closed off on one end, leaving only one way to access it.He also suggested it would be more efficient to vacate the entire alley at once, as opposed to having it done in a piece meal fashion. There were no additional comments from the public, and at 8:19 p.m., Kelley closed the Public Hearing. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Bellows, to recommend that Council approve the Vacation of an Unimproved Public Right-Of-Way. The applicant is t- make his appeal to the City Council regarding the issue of the drainage and utility easements.Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Johnson abstained. Motion carried. -2 - :. I ' I !fr. f;. !•;. ff *Cr ^y- . f i-r"v „e V«‘-'ri-jji. 1^' %' f b |: I t ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (#2)ZONING FILE #1604-CLAIR ROOD 2215 KENNOOD WAY CONDITIONAL OSE PERMIT/VARIANCE-CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Kelley noted that Clair Rood was present, and continued the Public Hearing on this matter at 8:20 p.m. Gaffron advised the Planning Commission that Mr. Rood had submitted the additional information requested by the Planning Commission at their May 20, 1991 meeting.He stated that the revised plans show the pillars and retaining walls, but do not show that pillars are also located on Mr. Rood's property adjacent to Navarre Lane. Mr. Rood indicated that he would prefer to have the pillars at a height of 4*} feet, rather than 3^ feet as required by the City. He intends to plant shrubbery in between the pillars that would be maintained at a height of four feet.He noted that there were several fences in his neighborhood that were six feet in height. Bellows stated that the elevations of the pillars and hedges shown on the plan do not depict the plans explained by Mr. Rood, nor does it show what actually exists on Mr. Rood's property. She said/ "The plan shows the hedges above the pillars. Mr. Rood has indicated that he wants the hedge 1/2 foot below the pillars. The plan shows that pillars are located along one property line when in fact there are pillars along two property lines. I am becoming concerned about this because each time a plan has been submitted, it does not show what presently exists on the property. We gave Mr. Rood very explicit direction as to what we wanted to see. We also indicated that v/e wanted the property to remain in as natural a state as possible. I am not sure that is occurring." Rood explained that he is requesting approval to construct the pillars 4*s feet, which is the height of the existing pillars. He stated that if the Planning Commission will not allow the pillars at a 4*j foot height, he would have to reduce the height to 3^ feet. Kelley stated that Mr. Rood is seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Variance for excavation and creation of a pond within a wetland area. Gaffron confirmed Mabusth asked if for the pillars/fence. »y's statement. 3d is now seeking a height Variance Cohen stated that request is not included in the application being reviewed in this Public Hearing. -3 - m I I ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 Con..ssion .ecus 0.1V on the applicLior before them. He stated that, in his opinion, he would like to see the area behind Mr. Rood's ■j that is what Mr. Rood is attempting to do. He asked Gatfron if the City Engineer has reviewed Mr. Rood’s plans. Gaffron replied, "The City Engineer has reviewed and approved the plans for the excavation and pond. With regard to the retaining walls, I’ve not received anything written from the City Engineer. However, the retaining walls will only have a height of 3H feet, which is fairly insignificant. Kelley polled the Planning Commission for their opinion regarding the Conditional Use Permit and Variance for the pond. Cohen stated that he would give a favorable recommendation for th6 Conditional Use Permit and Variance. Bellows stated that she had originally been in favor of Mr. Rood’s proposal, but now cannot separate the issue of the excavation, pond, and retaining wall project, from the pillars and hedge project. Kelley asked Bellows how she would view the project if Mr. Rood was required to keep the height of the pillars at 3H feet. Bellows replied, "I am trying to say that I am leery of the project. It seems to me that we are not being told what is actually going on out on this property. In my opinion, we should put some very tight restrictions on this, if it is the Planning Commission's consensus to recommen"* approval. Conceptually, I agree with Mr. Rood that clean up this property is necessary. However, I think there are real problems with the way this is being approached.” Kelley asked Bellows if she would prefer to revieii/ these issues in stages. Mr. Rood indicated that he had tried to present his plans in stages from the beginning, but was told to bring everything in at once. He said, "When I first started constructing the pillars, the City Building Inspector informed me that the structures could not exceed 3ij feet. I asked him if there were any height restrictions for the pillars I intended to place along the rear and side of my property. He informed me that pillars along the side and rear could be six feet tall. I constructed the pillars 3 five foot height and did not realize I would need permits. This was something new—the pillars were not classified as a fence, and did not fall under any other category. I have not done anything with the pillars for some time because I wanted to wait until the final grade is done to be sure that the structures -4 - h' ■ fev- ’>• n ys f I' S':K B r k4; f § r i t''-& 1“. |,r" ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (12)ZONING PILE #1604-ROOD CONTINUED are level with one another. I tried to put that project on the back burnerf but when I appeared two months ago, I was asked to bring in the plans for the' pillars. if the Planning Cor-nission would prefer to wait and address tne wetlands issue now, and wait on the pillars, that is fine with me." There were no comments from the public regarding this application, and Kelley closed the Public Hearing at 8t3/ p.m. It was moved by Kelley, seconded bv’ Cohen, to recommend that Council approve the Conditional Use Permit and Variance to excavate and construct a pond within a wetland. Kelley stated that his motion did not refer to the pillars which must either be constructed to meet the City's requirements or Mr. Rood mus . submit an application for a height Variance. Bellows stated that it has been past policy of the Planning Commission to ask for a comprehensive plan of all projects proposed for a particular property when there is more than one project taking place. She could see no reason to deviate from that policy at this time. Motion# Ayes-5, Bexlows, Nay. Motion carried. (#3)ZONING FILE #1644-LARRY HORK (NORTH SHORE DRIVE MARINA) 3222 NORTH SHORE DRIVE APPEALS-POBLIC HEARING Kelley opened the Public Hearing at 7:58 p.m. Mabusth explained that this issue has come before the Planning Commission, more on behalf of the City of Orono, than Mr. Hork. She explained that there is a difference between Staff's interpretation of the Sign Ordinance, and that of Mr. Hork. Staff interprets the Sign Ordinance to state that a sign must be attached to a principal structure. Mr. Hork is seeking approval of a permit to attach a permanent sign to an accessory structure. It was Planning Commission's interpretation of the Sign Ordinance enforced. consensus that Staff's is correct and should be The Public Hearing was closed, and no formal action was taken. («4)ZONING FILE #1646-TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH 2060 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT>PUBLIC HEARING Mabusth advised Kelley that Paul Phillips, a property owner residing near Trinity Lutheran Church, was present to comment on this application. Mr. Phillips indicated that he had no objection to the garage, but indicated that the light over the side entrance door -5 - i J -I'. V* ' ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (#4)ZONING FILE #1646-TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH CONTINUED itiay shine into the bedroom of the Orono Vvoodland Group home, suggested that perhaps the light could be situated elsewhere. He The Planning Cottunission took no action on this item. (t5)ZONING FILE fl647-GERALD BENOIT 3403 EASTLAKE STREET VARIANCES-PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Johnson, to table this item, as requested by the applicant. A 1 voted aye. Motion carried. (#6)ZONING FILE tl648-RONALD « JULIENNE PRINEAS 1920 SHORELINE DRIVE RENEWAL VARIANCE'PUBLIC RFARING It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Moo. , to recommend that Council approve the renewal of a Lot Width V<-‘»"iance, subject to the findings ind conditions outlined in Reso jtion #2829. All voted aye. Motion carried. (#7)ZONING FILE #1649-ELAINE PETERSON 1921 FACERNESS POINT ROAD VARIANCES-PUBLIC HEARING E.^ aine Peterson indicated that she was present, opened the Pu.blic Hearing at 7:01 p.m. and Kelley Gaffron provided a brief explanation of Ms. Peterson's application iiivolving side setback and hardcover Variances to construct a detached garage. He noted that the applicant is now asking that she be allowed to construct a 20 foot by 24 foot garage, rather than 20 foot by 22 foot au initially indicated Gaffron reviewed the hardcover existing and proposed hardcover information as outlined in his Ju?e 13, 1991 memo. Kelley asked Ms. Peterson if she intends to have a back-up area so it will not be necessary to back directly onto Fagerness Point Road, and if so, where it will be located. Elaine Peterson advised that a small turn-around area would be located directly adjacent to the house and would be created by leaving a portion of the gravel drive. Kelley asked Peterson if she had given consideration to attaching the garage to the house. Peterson indicated that she had considered various ways to attach the garage to the house, but could find nothing that would work within the limited area up near the house. Kelley believed that everyone living in this State should be entitled to a garage to protect their car from the elements. -6 - i-L r.^ ^■V 'f i. If-, 1. P’: U'’ ■•• ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (t7)ZONING FILE #1649-ELAINE PETERSON CONTINUED Cohen concurred with Kelley, adding that there is really nowhere else on the property to locate a garage. Cohen referred to notations in Gaffron's memo concerning the location of Peterson's retaining wall in relation to the neighboring property. He stated that, in his opinion, this issue should be resolved between Elaine Peterson and her neighbor. There were no public comments pertaining to this apolication, and Kelley closed the Public Hearing at 7:07 p.m. Kelley asked Gaffron if the hardcover calculations included the proposed back-up area. Gaffron advised that the hardcover calculations include all q£ the gravel area east of the sidewalk as shown on the survey. ^33 moved by Cohen, seconded by Moos, to recommend that Council approve the hardcover and side setback Variance required to construct a detached garage. Cohen stated that the hardship for the Variances is the need for a garage due to the weather in Minnesota, and the topography of the land at 1921 Eagerness Point Road. All voted aye. Motion carried. (#8)ZONING FILE #1650-HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION INTERSECTION OF COUNTY ROADS 15 » 51 AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE-PUBLIC HEARING Mabusth noted that there would not be a representative present on behalf of the Hennepin County Department of Transportation. Kelley opened the Public Hearing on this matter at 7:45 p.m., and asked if anyone from the public was present to express his/her opinion on this matter. Mabusth noted that she had received a telephone call from a concerned resident living near County Road 15. The resident stated that the City had taken the position that County Road 15 is a Scenic Highway, and it would do whatever possible to maintain that character.Mabusth confirmed that Hennepin County's improvement plans do not call for widening the road, it will remain a two-lane roadway. She referred to a resolution passed by Council which allows improvements to County Road 15 at intersections by providing turn-lanes.The project currently undertaken by Hennepin County involves safety improvements, which they hope will encourage use of the County Road 15 and 51 intersection, as opposed to Spates Avenue. Hennepin County submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit and Variance in light of the installation of storm sewer done in conjunction with the safety improvements.Mabusth further noted that the resident, to which she previously referred, had also raised concerns about the quality of runoff into the Lake, and -7 - )) • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (#8)ZONING FILE #1650-HENNEPIN COUNTY CONTINUED Whether riprap will serve as an adequate filter. The resident asked her to have the City Engineer verify the effectiveness of the riprap. There were no other comments or concerns registered in connection with this application, and Kelley closed the Public Hearing at 7:47 p.m. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Cohen, to recommend that Council grant a Conditional Use Permit and Variance to the Hennepin County Department of Transportation for improvements made at the intersection of County Roads 15 and 51 in the form o of a left-turn lane and installation of storm sev/er. All voted aye. Motion carried. (#9)ZONING FILE #1652-DANIEL AND BARBARA FLEISCHMAN 500 HANLON AVENUE VARIANCES-PUBLIC HEARING Barbara Fleischman was present. Kelley opened the Public Hearing at 7:10 p.m., and asked Gaffron to make his opening comments. Gaffron explained that the Fleischmans are requesting ~ide and rear setback Variances, as well as a lot coverage Variance to construct a deck. He reviewed the issues pertaining to Fleischman’s applications as set forth in his June 10, 1991 memo. Gaffron asked Mrs. Fleischman if the shed on the tax forfeit lot across the alley in fact belonged to them. Fleischman indicated in the affirmative. Kelley asked Gaffron to elaborate on the hist>. ,y of the tax forfeit parcel on the other side of the alley. Gaffron explained that this lot and Fleischman*s property had at one time been owned by the same property owner (several owners before Fleischmans purchased the property). At the time the Minnetonka Bluffs Sewer Project was put through, the City A5S0Ssed the lots on each side of the alley for half of the total, per unit assessment. Subsequent to that, the lot became tax forfeit and the half unit assessment charge was never paid. This property can only be purchased by an adjacent property owner, and is not deemed a separate, buildable lot. Gaffron added, "I have talked with Hennepin County regarding the parcel, and they informed roe that it is valued at $500.00. The lot could be sold to an adjacent owner for that amount, and the City would probably then attempt to hold an Assessment Hearing to recover the half unit assessment charge. It would be the City Council's decision as to whether or not such an assessment would occur.” Kelley asked Fleischman if she has any intentions of -6 ‘ L. • >-.'r K h- \i. % r S.'. Ki k'.'' ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (#9)ZONING FILE #1652-FLBISCHMAN CONTINUED constructing a garage on their lot. Fleischraan stated that they have considered purchasing the parcel across t’.e alley in order to construct a garage, but were not certain they could afford to pay the sewer assessment. She advised that they have no plans to construct a garage on their lot. Schroeder asked Gaffron if he is aware outstanding assessment charge is at this time. what the Gaffron estimated it to be n the area of $5,000 to $6,000, due to interest and penalty fees that have accumulated over the years. Kelley asked what would need to occur in order for the half unit assessment charge to be waived by the City. Gaffron stated that the Finance Department would bring such a request before Council for their consideration. He noted that under normal situations, it would not be possible for an assessment to be removed.However, in talking with Hennepin County, he learned that they have apparently removed (or inadvertently lost or erased) the City's sewer assessment. Cohen indicated that there seems to be a discrepancy in what the neighbors state will be the size of the new deck, and what the Fleischmans are proposing. Barbara Fleischman advised that the previous deck consisted of a three-tier design, and that the proposed deck will be slightly larger. Kelley noted that there is a difference of 5% lot coverage between what existed with the old deck and what it would be with the proposed deck. Gaffron clarified that his "existing" lot coverage calculations of 17% do not consider a deck on the property at all. He estimated the pre-existing deck to have approximately the same lot coverage percent as the proposed deck. Bellows asked if it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to include a notification to the property owner that they must acquire the tax forfeit parcel west of the alley i they ever intend to construct a garage. Gaffron suggested that the Planning Commission could include such a notification as an advisory statement in their recommendation to Council, but that this would not bind the property owners in any way. -9 - L' i- ■j r ■^v ! ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (19)ZONING FILE #1652-FLEISCHMAN CONTINUED There were no comments from the public, the Public Hearing at 7:18 p.m. and Kelley closed Johnson stated that he appreciated the opportunity to review this application before the deck became an after-tne-fact issue. Cohen asked Fleischman to state her hardship for the Variances she is requesting. Fleischman explained that the pre-existing deck was removed because of its unsafe condition.Two of the three entrances/exits for the house would otherwise have a five foot drop without a deck.She added that the lot is only 50 feet wide, but is located in a Two-acre Zoning District. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Moos, to recommend that Council approve the side and rear setback Variances to construct a deck, the hardship being the extremely small size of the lot and the existing configuration and elevation of the entry to the house in relation to the ground.Further, it is recommended, that the applicants be notified that 22% lot coverage is the (naximum that this lot should sustain.All voted aye. Motion carried. (#10)ZONING FILE #16S4-DEAN TERRY 2710 PENCE LANE VARIANCES-PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Johnson, to table this item, as requested by the applicant.All voted aye. Motion carried. (#11)ZONING FILE #1655-ELAINE PAGONIS 2740 SBADYNOOD ROAD VARIANCE-PUBLIC HEARING Elaine Pagonis indicated that she was present and, at p.m, Kelley opened the Public Hearing on this application. 7:23 Gaffron displayed a survey of Ms. Pagonis's property taken prior to any of the subject improvements being done. He reviewed the chronology of the various improvements to the property, and the hardcover statistics, as outlined in his June 13, 1991 memo. Kelley noted that the applicant is additional hardcover beyond the 25% allowed. asking for 1.2% Gaffron confirmed Kelley's statement, adding that the additional 1.2% increase will occur within the 75-250 foot setback area, and is due to the additional driveway area and front sidewalk. Pagonis noted that at one time, a portion of the driveway _1 g - r k.. h Sfc- fk' ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (#11)ZONING FILE #1655-PAGONIS CONTINUED existed in the 0-75 foot setback area, removed. but has since been Gaffron advised, that with respect to the hardcover percentages shown in his memo. Planning Commission should consider that the hardcover resulting from that portion of the boathouse that exists on land in the 0-75 foot setback, has been subtracted from 25% of « land area within the 75-250 foot setback area. Gaffron refe* ■ed Planning Commission to a June 12, 1991 letter of opposition that had been received from John Fiebelkorn (Ms. Pagonis's neig‘->bor). Kelley indicated that he would prefer to see the applicant maintain a level of 25% hardcover in the 75-250 foot setback zone, using her own discretion as to how to reach that percent. Johnson believed there to be several unique factors involved with this application. He said, "There is no encroachment inf* the 75 foot setback, and no encroachment into the average lakeshore setback.Approximately half of the lot is located within the 0-75 foot setback zone, and there is a large peninsula. There is an acre of property here, which I believe meets the intent of the Hardcover Ordinance." Bellows concurred with Johnson, that the applicant has done a good job in trying to ' •et the spirit of the Hardcover Ordinance. Kelley asked Ms. Pagoni *> if sue has plans to do additional landscaping around the house, noting that landscape areas have not been included in the hardcover calculations. Pagonis stated that she intends to put something below the deck where the walkout is located. Kelley referred to information given to the Planning Commission regarding Council's recent action which allows residents to use non-woven fabrics for weed control beneath lanascaped areas.He expressed concern about enforcing the use of non-woven materials, versus woven fabric or plastic. Gaffron suggested that Planning Commission's recommendation include a stipulation requiring the applicant to use non-woven weed barrier fabric under any landscape areas on the property. Kelley closed the Public Hearing at 7:40 p.m., in light of there being no indication of public interest in this application. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Moos, to recommend that Council approve a 518 square foot hardcover Variance, and that the applicant be placed on notice that furth -*r requests to -11 - i, t h ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (ill;ZONING FILE 11655-PAGONIS CONTINUED increase jardcover on this property v/iil not be favorably consider’o. Further, any additional landscaping on this prroerty should be done u: .ng non-woven fabric.flotion, Ayes-b, Cohen, Nay.Motion car'-iid.Cohen indicated that, in his opinion, hardcover in the 75-250 foot setback area should meet the required 25%. (#12)ZONING FILE #1657-NICK SIMONDS 2007 SUGARWOOO DRIVE DRIVEWAY REQUEST Nick Simonds was present, and referred to a letter dated June 8, 1991, which he had sent to Planning Commission members. He explained that the reason for the request to vary from the Development Standards is to preserve several trees that provide screening for the residence from the street. A curved driveway will also better facilitate access to the garage. Mr. Simonds noted that Sidney Rebers, Developer of Sugarwoods, and adjacent property owner, had no objections to his request. Kelley stated that ho had no objections to Mr. Simonds' request. Bellows disagreed, stating that, unless there is an extreme hardship situation, she could not approve a Variance from the original requirements.Bellows staced that there is not an extreme hardship in this case, and that curving the drivev/ay will preserve only two major trees, one of v;hich is an Elm. Johnson indicated that he concurred with Kel’ey. He asked Mabusth how far into the side setback area the driveway would encroach. Mabusth advised that the proposed driveway would be located 19* from the side lot line instead of the required 30 feet. Moos stated that her first inclination is to recfm .’•li approval of Mr. Simonds' request, but that she has rese * •-.>1 s due tc .he number of such applications that have, and pote ..•a.i> could come before the Planning Commission, Schroeder _ndicated that it seems this si luation arose during the construction phase when it became clear that the trees would have to be removed to construct a driveway with the required straight alignment. Simonds confir.ied Schroeder's observation, adding that the excavator is attempting to take the path of least resistance for installing the driveway. Schroeder stated that he agreed witn Kelley, and though the trees in question are not significant, they are a fairly large -12 - 1 i;- It f I ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (#12)ZONING FILE #1657-SIMONDS NTIHUED Size. Bellows said, "My concern is that if we give in on this request, for which there is not an extreme hardship, we are going to be hard pressed to do this again. The Developer insisted on constructing houses in this area that cannot realistically meet the requirements. It is not the fault of the property owner." Cohen and Moos concurred with Bellows. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Kelley, to recommend that Council approve the applicant’s request to construct a driveway that varies from the Development Standards for the Sugar Woods PRD. Motion, Ayes-3, Bellows, Moos and Cohen, Nay. Motion failed. OTHER V^ith regard to Council's recent action allowing the use of non~woven fabric beneath landscaped areas, Kelley expressed concern about the potential for an extreme scenario where someone does excessive landscaping in the 0-75 foot setback area. He indicated that from what he has read, there is nothing that would prohibit or limit the use of non-woven fabrics on the lakeshore. Kelley suggested that Council may wish to better define the extent in which the fabric can be used. Johnson noted that soil is not 100% permeable, especially clay soils. Gaffron asked if the Planning Commission and Council would like to have an ordinance which allows only a certain portion of lakeshore area to be something other than rass. Councilmember Jabbour stated that the 0-75 foot setback area should have nothing but grass. The Planning Commission, and Councilmembers Goetten and Jabbour agreed that further consideration should be given to this issue. (#13)PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT-ATTACHED ANTENNAS Mabusth explained to the Planning Commission that this item had been referred back to them for further direction. She asked the Planning Commission to consider whether the Ordinance Amendment should be expanded to not only address antennas in the B-6 and PUD Districts, but possibly those properties zoned Residential that are not used for residential use. Mabusth cited the watertower in Navarre as an example, noting that the proposed Amendment would not allow an antenna to be attached to that particular structure. -13 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (#13)ORDINANCE AMENDMENT-ANTENNAS CONTINUED It was the Planning Commission's consensus th it the Amendment be drafted to reflect that antennas can be a.tached only to a watertower, regardless of where it is located. Cohen indicated that he would prefer tc review each request on an individual basis. APPROVAL OF MINOTES It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Johnson, to approve the minutes of the May 20, 1991, Planning Commission meeting. All voted aye. Motion carried. PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE It was agreed that Maureen Bellows would attend the July 8, 1991 Council meeting as the Planning Commission Representative. ADJOURNMENT At 8:50 p.m. , the June 17, raeetinj was adjourned. 1991, Orono Planning Commission -14 - ■fi py1^- I [ i.- fk '«k TOs i •. MTIt All Employees Mark E. Bernhardson July 2, 1991 SUBJECTS Employee Meeting ~ City Administrator Selection Profile Mr, James Brimeyer, Sathe and Associates has scheduled a meeting at which any interested employees may come and present ideas and issues they have related to the selection process for the next City Administrator. This meeting will be at: 4sOC P.N. JULY 8, 1991 CROHO COUNCIL CHAMBERS W-. r^. W. I. ? I iUr LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVA\ __ 900 EAST WAYZATA BOIAE VAflO. SUITE 160 WAYZATA, NMNESOTAKS^ LatQ ^^/W»AT>70aj EUGENE *. STNOlMfEil. EXECUTIVE OinECTon JUN g g ISSI SATURDAY, AUGUST 3,1991 YOU AND YOUR GUEST ARE INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PUBLIC OFFICIALS LAKE TOUR AND LUNCHEON on LAKE MINNETONKA hosted by the LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT All Aboard at 11:30 AM Return to Port at 2:30 PM at the LAFAYETTE CLUB DOCK County Road 15, Minnetonka Beach (please observe designated parking areas) Please RSVP by Friday, July 26, including guest's name, 473-7033 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 473-7033 « •• •i ••u ■*^i '.o «■»ji’ ’>• E V E 1 T S s c July,1991 Mon 1 6:30 pm MYC X-Boat race Tue 2 6:00 pm MYC race -Main Wed 3 5:00 pm Bass Tournement 6:00 pm MYC race —Main Thu 4 10:00 am MYC race —Main 11:00 am UYC race -East 2:00 pm NYC race —Main Fri 5 6:00 pm liYC race -Main Sat 6 10:00 am MYC race -Main 10:00 am ’.VYC race -Big 2:00 pm MYC race -Main 2:00 pm UYC race —East Sun 7 10:00 am MYC race —Main 10:30 am UYC race -East 1:30 pm WYC race —Main Mon 8 6:30 pm MYC X-boat race Tue 9 6:00 pm MYC race -Main Wed 10 Thu 11 .. • • ■? - Frl Bay Bay 5:00 pm 6:00 pm 6:30 pm Bass Tournement - Goose Island MYC race - Main Lake UYC race East Bay All day practice for Flying Scott District Regatta 12:30 pm UYC X-boat race - Big Island 6:15 pm WYC race - Main Lake All day Flying Scott District Regatta 6:00 pm MYC X-boat race - Big Island ".i «4» • V*' ' - - -i.:-C ^^MO »13 All day Flying Scott District Regatta . .T"- ' ', r gyn 14 10:00 am Flying Scott District Regatta •\i*..1.»i •.',f.•.2:00,pm WYC race - Main Lake -•’V .. KrMiif .. ,g V'V " Mon 15 9:00 am MYC race - Main Lake (Mallory cup trials) •‘.T - - -- - A. •NW >«. ■ -1:00 pm 3:00 pm 6:30 pm • MYC race - Main Lake IfYC race - Main Lake MYC race - Main Lake If •M *"* II *»{1 . r A X ,-.V (continued) LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 473-7033 EVENTS SCHEDULE July. 1991 (continued) Tue 16 9:00 am MYC 1:00 pm II 3:00 pm tl 6:30 pm MYC r Wed 17 5:00 pm Bass 6:00 pm MYC 6:30 pm UYC Thu 18 6:15 pm WYC Frl 19 10:00 am WYC 1:00 pm 3:00 pm Sat 20 10:00 am WYC 10:00 am MYC 1:00 pm WYC 1:00 pm MYC 3:00 pm MYC •2:00 pm UYC Sun 21 9:00 am MYC 10:00 am WYC , 10:30 am UYC 1:00 pm WYC . 1:00 pm MYC : 3:00 pm MYC : Mon 22 9:30 am MYC . ■ Tue 23 9:30 am MYC . 6:00 pm MYC V Wed 24 5:00 pm Bass 1 .6:00 pm MYC 6:30 pm UYC fi Thu 25 6:15 pm WYC ♦Frl 26 6:30 pm UYC • Sat 27 10:00 am WYC 1 10:00 am MYC 2:00 pm MYC *’V».V»••» 2:00 pm UYC MYCSun2810:00 am 10:30 am UYC 1:30 pm WYC h Tue 30 6:00 pm MYC r Wed 31 6:00 pm MYC h ■ V (no f N- 6-28-91 MYC race - Main Lake (Malory Cup trials) II II MYC Laser race - Main Lake WYC race - Main Lake WYC Aquateniai Cup Regatta - Main Lake MYC Laser race - Main Lake F b: # I I*' Aa**«" »•-- - LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 473-7033 Monday 8 Saturday Monday Monday Wednesday Friday Wednesday 6-28-91 L.M.C.D. MEETING SCHEDULE July 1991 LMCD Board of Directors' review of partial draft proposal to Long-Term Management Program 7:00 p.m., #160 Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata Water Structures & Environment Committee 7:30 a.m., #135 Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata Meeting of Interested Board members to discuss litigation settlement in case of St. Albans Bay vs. LMCD. Meeting will be closed to the public. 8:00 a.m., #160 Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata Lake Use Committee 4:30 p.m., #135 Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata LMCD Response to Cities' Draft of Proposed Changes to Long-Term Management Program 7:30 p.m., Minnetonka City Hall Tentative; notice to follow Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force 8:30 a.m., #135 Norwest Bank Building, Wayzata LMCD Board of Directors' Regular Meeting 7:30 p.m., Tonka Bay City Hall LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT June 1991 900 fASI WAYZAfA BC'JLt VAPD SUitt '60 WAY^AfA MIMSE50TA S539I TELEW90N€ 8l2/473.r033 EUGENE n. STROMUEN EXECUTIVE OlNECTOR OMoiWMn 0M|hH woo*. iLM» Greetings, Charter Boat Licensee: We are pleased to present your 1991 charter boat registration for operatiorj on Lake Minnetonka. We encourage you to display this certificate on board your charter boat. Your charter boat operation is recognized by the LMCD Board of Directors as providing a valuable public access to the lake. It is pleased that you take the time and investment to attract public participation so that a wide range of people can enjoy this valuable lake resource. We continue to encourage your cooperation in a few key areas to make everyone's visit on Lake Minnetonka a quality and enjoyable e.xperience: 1.Please alert all pilots to maintain minimum wakes during normal charter operation, avoiding large wakes while en route at faster speeds to pickup points. 2.Please forward copies of any pilot license renewals that expire during the season. A self~addressed envelope is enclosed for this purpose. 3.Similarly, should your insurance coverage expire during the seasoti. that renewal certificate should be provided promptly. Recently the City of Wayzata advised the L.MCD that they will no longer be issuing permits for use of the Depot public docks. However. Charter Boat operators are still entitled to use the Wayzata Depot public docks as a Port of Call to pickup and leave passengers. The LMCD urges the following guidelines when using the Depot docks: Advise advanee“booked patrons to park in the Cit> s free municipal parking ramp at the rear of the Carisch Building between Bro dway and Walker streets. The Depot parking lot sh-uld not be used. Most city streets have time limits, limited parking and are not recommended for charter patron use. A. B .Advise catering services to avoid tying-up limite space while unloading, using the space only for the time during which .supplies are being moved to or from the charter boat (approx. 15-30 minutes). i.,'- k I-fe- m-k m Charter Boat June, 1991 Page 2 Licensees C .Check with the Wayzata Chamber of Commorco. 473-9595, regarding dock — use dates to avoid conflicts with chamber or city special events. A roster of the registered charter boats is enclosed for your information. We would also welcome receiving a small supply of any promotional brocliures to keep on hand for inquiries our office may receive. LMCD Chair Dave Cochran. and Lake Use Committee Chair Bob Pillsbury join in wishing you a successful charter season. Sincerely, LAjtC MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT achel Thibault Administrative Technician encJ certificate, envelope, charter roster c/enc: Hennepin County Sheriff’s Water Patrol City where berthed City of Port of Call c/roster: D. Cochran R.Pillsbury ■ilr M ■)Ur4Wr77m^i ,y.u7 Viffim(77 <‘t '. t No. 91-26 Year 1 OQ 1 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT CERTIFICATE OF CHARTER BOAT REGISTRATION CUnRAl. "c.If / OI Charter Boat registration certificaie, approved by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District on May i, I99i__________, is subject to the continuing validity of the charter boat ’s state inspection certificate, Hennepin County Sheriffs Water Patrol inspection requirements, pilot licenses, public liability insunuice, municipal certification for ports of call, and authorized berthing location. U\KE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT vkm mt LMit ^riQt^ •^ -- . B5 >s' /,#ilIf:j? '.'h % I■W "f I If ,'5 i: s»-a* mffm ife 'ft %®if fl ifl ea /# i 5._-* IbI’ 1 '«ts# ........... i. M OmO 4«|.|/|UT nO ••• m ft 4 r Length 70' 70* 56' 53' 53' 51' 51' 51' 51' 50' 55' 55' 55' 51' Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Capacity 150 + 13 crew 140 + 3 53+3 50 + 3 30 + 2 60+3 50+3 50 + 3 50+3 50+3 58+3 58+3 58 + 3 50 + 2 CHARTER BOATS ON LAKE MINNET0N10\ 19 9 1 Boat Name, Owner, Address, Phone Queen of Excelsior John Lamb In Queen of Excelsior, Inc. 10 Water St., Excelsior 55331 474>2502 Lady of the Lake H. J. (Hank) Serwat Lady of the Lake, Inc. P.0. Box 671, Excelsior 55331 929* 209 Wayward Whale Steven R. Lindstrom Private Parties Charter Co. Inc. 2526 Maple Lane, Roseville 55113 633-2162 Holiday Fair David M. Wlttmer Holiday Fair Inc. 3140 N. Harbor Lane, Ste. 130, Mpls 55447 553-1925 Seanote Randall Boler, Jon Kletzer SNC, Inc Seanote Cruises) 6939 Hoc.- .sin Valiev Rd, Edina 55435 944-7464 Hiss Minnetonka 11 William K_egan Minnetonka Charter Cruises, Inc. 7470 Market Place Dr, Eden Prairie 55344 944-5640 A1 & Alma's I A1 & Alma's II A1 & Alma's III A1 & Alma's VI A1 & Alma's X A1 & Alma's XI A1 & Alma's XII Daryl and Merritt Geyen A1 & Alma's Supper Club 5201 Piper Rd, Mound 55364 472-3098 Choral "C" Robert Burglund 7 Hawk Lane, North Oaks. MN 55127 631-2613 483-5622 (cont1nued) V f' i t- 'V ■i*: I. >■ »-f: Length 51* 51' 51' 51' 51' 51' 50’ 51' 43' 33‘ 6-24-91 Capacity 50 ’ 2 50-2 50+3 50+3 50 + 3 50 + 3 50 -» j 45 + 2 45 + 2 Zi 73' 10+2 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District CHARTER BOAT.’ ON LAKE MIHNETONKx (continued) Boat Name, Owner, Address, Pho*’ Godfather II Godfather III Larry Hork No»-th Shore Charters 3.' 2 North Shore Drive, W.iv aca * J Miss Deduction Bradley Hansen Chartered Leasing, Inc. ’885 W. Wayzata Blvd., Long Lake 55 \-6 Paradise Princess David Lawrance Paradise Charter Cruises P.0. Box 563, Excelsior MN 55331 Sunboat I Sunboat II Willard Morton Sunboat Cruises, Inc. 5100 Thirasen Ave., Minnetonka 55345 Why Knot ill William Keegan Minnetonka Charter Cruises, Inc. 7470 Market Place Dr, Eden Prairie 55344 Ualf Note Randall Boler, Jon Kietzer SNC, Inc. (Seanote Crulsus) 6939 Moccasin Valley Rd, Edina 55435 Elizabeth Ann Excelsior Bay Char' '-s P.O.Box 298, Exc'*U.or 55331 Silver Lining David Beddor Chi3 ter Cruises, Inc. 7951 Powers Blvd, Chanhassen 55317 Bighwire Michael E. Brozo Hlyhw'.re Cruises 1053 Lake St, Wayzata 55391 2. 471-BOAT 471-1618 475-3366 559-8058 47U-1380 944-5640 944-7464 474-1171 474-0231 475-2040 A.. I-)- - ••T»rLake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 • (612' 474 5539 DATE: TO; FROM: RE: JUNE 25, 1991 LMCCC MEMBER CITIES 'j|!M 5 J«nr.i£«r Watts, LMCCC Administrator 1990 FINANCIAL REVIEW Attached is a copy of the 1990 LMCCC Financial Stataaants report prepared for the Coeeiseion annually per Article VI, Section 4, of the Joint powers a9reenent. A copy of this audit is also belny sent to the State Auditor's office. At the March 1991 seating of the LMCCC, the firm of Babcock, Langbein and Coapany was selected to perform the 1990 audit, Babcock was present at the Executive Cossittee seating on June 18 to . lew the audit document for the members and to no. Mr. Babcock recomsended the Commission move basis of accounting. Staff was directed to accounting software package coats and bring back fino ^s to the Commission for further discussion. If you city council has questions regarding this document, please have them contact the city's caole commissioner(s) or call the Commission office Thank you 5 if W-'- I lAJCE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FINANCIAL STATEMENTS YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31. !9:A) AND 1989 'i %■ rmr * •’ • Sy \p' >!•' m %y^ 'V't LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION TABLE OF CONTESTS Independent Auditor’s Report nNANOALi Stetements of Assets. Liabilities and Funds-Cash Basis 1 "rX fe:'-: Ir h- V^'m ¥ a: .!• - fe; Babcock, Langbdn and Company CcraTted Puhik AccoaotMotg A Pmfeanotud Astocimtsoo MiiuKMpolis, Minoc9otM 55421 (612)7SI-9354 Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission Excelsior. Minnesota INDEPENDENT A UDITOR ’S REPORT We have audited the accompanying statements of assets, liabilities, and funds-cash basis of the Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission as of December 31,1990 and 1989. and the related statements of income and operating fund-cash basis, restricted funds-cash basis and cash flows-cash basis for the years then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Commission's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting prindpies used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall finandai statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opir'on. As described in Note 1. these finandai statements were prepared on the caab basis of accounting, which is a comprehensive basis of accounting other than generally accepted accounting prindpies. In our opinion, the finandai statements referred to above present fairly, in aN material respects, the assets, liabilities, and fund balances of the Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission as of December 31,1990 and 1989. and its income and expenses, operating fund balances, restrfcf'td fund balances, and cash flows for the years then ended, on the cash basis of accounting described in Note i. ~ Babcock, Langbein May 30.1991 d Company -1- A.r m I tT' If* :p-a,- 1- •h !!:.- *. :r-‘- >1’* ‘■/t- 7 , '■‘vV-- ‘1; Uc rk i' t* .:. ■r^.V •L. 'V L/4JCE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES AND FUNDS - CASH BASIS DECEMBER 31, 1990 AND 1989 General General Total (Memorandum Only) UABUmES, RESTRICTED FUNDS AND OPERATING FUND Cunvfil LiaMMas WlthhaW Tajwa Payable Raairfciad Funds RastricMd Fund Balances OperadngFund Operating Fund Balance Invastmants in General Fixed Assets Total UMties. Restricted Funds and Operating Rind -2- The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. ASSETS Fund Rx0d A$S6tS 199Q 1999 Currant Assets Cash $46.064 $0 $46,064 $30,740 Restricted Assets Cash 25.107 0 25.187 13,785 General Fixed Assets 0 19.055 19.055 11480 Total Assets $71.251 $19.055 $90.306 $64,005 1.241 $0 $1,241 $274 25.187 0 25.107 13,785 44,824 0 0 19,055 44.824 19,055 38,466 11 .460 71.251 S 19.055 $90,306 S 64,005 m-'nI \ h m St' ?.r ’i, tv..^ir: »' I- a.v Is: m.f piI- i S:‘ I:f:1^. LAKE MimETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION STATEI^IENT OF INCOME AND OPERATING FUND-CASH BASIS YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31. 1990 AND 19S9 INCOME Franchise Fees (Note 3) Total Income OPERATING EXPENSES Wages Health Insurance Legal Fees Oflice Supplies Telephone. Reproduction and Postage Dues and Subscriptions Confarences and Schoois Accounting Capital Outlay Inaurance/Bonds lilllWyV Auto Expense Miscellaneous Secretarial Service Payroii Taxes Advertising/Promotions VIdec Expense Pension Contribution Rent Operating Expense Operating incjme (Loss) OTHER INCOME Miscellaneous Income Interest Total Other Income Net Income (Loss) Transfer To (From) Restricted Funds-Net Operating Fund Balance. Beginning of Year Operating Fund Balance. End of Year ; Budget —3— Actual VariaiKe Favorable (Unfavorable) The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. fcjfa 1989 84.774 $84.774 $0 $43,022 84.774 84.774 0 43,022 48.000 42.691 5.309 34.704 2.880 0 2.880 0 2.000 1.260 740 1,162 2.000 1.590 410 1,802 1.650 1.598 52 1,345 1.000 1.213 (213)1,345 5.000 3.806 1,194 3.957 2.300 2,451 (151)3,832 1.000 760 240 0 3.500 5,250 (1.750)3,303 500 0 500 0 0 971 (971)466 450 226 224 602 2,000 449 1,551 1,036 7.000 2.747 4,253 2,682 750 0 750 0 0 500 (500)1,099 0 1,605 (1.605)711 6.000 1,200 4,800 0 86.030 68.316 17,714 58.046 (1.256)16.458 (17.714)(15.024) 0 5.030 5.030 3.285 4,000 6,443 2.443 5.352 4.000 11.472 7.472 8,636 2.744 27,930 25,186 (6,388) (18,573)(21.573)(3.000)26 38 468 38.468 0 44,830 22,639S 44,824 $22.186 $36,468 V J ----• • ■- tf-. rft'- “ir- ‘ <\ [f'- W'|€- m ;v3. i :A. " > 1:r ’ fe‘ V.^-: ■W^;h- ■'Wi m: ■‘■%■ T ‘ rji;'-' «>■•f V* m-- i ■•^.- i - Xil-in. :i-j [*'> • I n'^•,t■ ,»*vrA - LAKE MINNETONKA CABLECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION STATEMENT OF RESTRICTED FUNDS - CASH BASIS DECEMBER 31. Fund Balance Beginning 1990 AND 19S9 Add Deduct Fund Balance Restricted Fund Of Year ADOrooriations Exoenditures End Of Year Tape Stock S 0 $1,000 $767 $233 Office Equipment 0 5.000 4.715 285 Finandal/Triax 1,015 1,000 0 2,015 Technical Audit 7,000 0 0 7,000 Ugal 1,500 1,000 0 2.500 Studto Equipment 4,303 1,000 241 5,062 Misoeilaneoua Video (33)2,000 406 1,561 Access Equipment 0 7,000 3,761 3,239 Contingency 0 3,573 280 3,293 Total Restricted Funds $13,786 $21,573 $10,170 $25,187 -4- Tfw accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. .... §. fi'?:^V fe::.? *r-.- LAKE MINNETONKA CABLECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS - CASH BASIS YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31 1990 AND 1989 Cft/i Fhw$ from ^renting Activities N«t Income (Loss) IncTMse (Decreue) in Withheld Taxes Payable Increase (Decrease) In Restricted Funds Net Cash Provided (Used) by Operating Activities CMk Fhws ih» Investing Acdvioes Purchase of Equipment Total Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash Cash at Beginning of Year Cash at End of Year 1990 1989 27,929 $0 967 (521) 0 154 28,896 (367) (10.170)(3.368) (10.170)(3,368) 18.726 (3.735) 52,525 62.647 71,251 58.912 -5- The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. t V J &r' b-' >* fi>: C.J V i «' ,.*•**• ii- ■'... ff. & h-V I 1 f ^i* t; [S^"•f Cl' ■ H- ^ >'»' • t;" P '■ •V*-. Rr* H 'i. £ fe. .i;?-hbfe, LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEM UR 3L 1990 AND 1989 nfSI^g^firMt Accotmtiat Policies The Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission is a joint venture of fourteen (14) communities; Excelsior, Orono, Spring Park, Long Lake, Minnetonka Beach. Deephaven, Tonku Bay. Woodland, Victoria. Minnetrista. Greenwood. St. Bonifacius, Shorewood, and Medina, organized to control and regulate cable communications with the public in the respective cities. The financial statements of Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission havo been prepared on the cash basis. The significant policies folloved are described below. FundA .WlHiil To insure observance of limitations and restrictions placed on the use of resources available to the commission, the accounts of the commission are maintained in accordance with the principles of fund accounting, Tnis is the procedure by which resources for various purposes are classified for accounting and reporting purposes into funds established according to their nature and purposes. Separate accounts are maintained for each fund. Foted Assets Fixe.. • *'*^*ts used In governmental fund type operations (General Rxed Asstoi ^) are accounted for in the General Fixed Assets Account Group, rather than in governmental funds. No depredation has been provided on General Fixed Assets. All Rxed Assets are valued at historical costs or estimated historical costs if actual historical cost is not available. Donated Rxed Assets ar? valued at their <• ’.! fair value on the date donated. -6- i LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSIONNOTES TO FINANCIAL ST A TEMENTS FOP. THE YEAPS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1990 AND 1989 3.Revenues The Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission receives an annual franchise fee equivalent to five percent (5%) of all gros- revenues collected by Triax Midwest Associates. L.P. for a period of fifteen (15) years from date of inception. May 11. 1984. Revenues for ttie periods ended December 31,1990 and 1989 amounted to $84,774 and $43,0?2 respectively. The annual fee may be subject to renegotiation at any time after the fourth year of the franchise. If property grantee and City do not agree in negotiation, the ‘ranchise shall remain unchanqed -7- i;- s.' C», {'^A 0 c' C'tCNO JUL 3 1991 July 1, ir«»l aesociotlpn ofmerropolifan icibaitiimunicipalities Nr. Hark Bernhardson City Administrator Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN. 553^ Dear Mark: We want to know your views about what direction the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities should take during 1992. To provide you with a forum for your opinions and concerns, we are planning our sixth annual outreach Breakfast for you and other city officials in your area. The breakfast is scheduled for 7:30 a.m. Wednesday, July 18, 1991, at T'Wrights, 3310 S. Hwy 101, Minnetonka. It is located on the NW comer of Hw> lOl and Minnetonka Blvd. (Hennepin Co. 5), about 2.5 miles west of Interstate-494. Please R.S.V.P. to Carol or Nicole by noon Friday, Ju^y 12. These next 12 months promise to be anything but tranquil for cities. X'he governor and Legislature already have piit cities on notice that they better be able to prove that their finances are in order and are lean. In addition, cities a *o face a number of high stakes issues, such as: *a constitutionally dedicated Local Government Trust Fund; *light rail transit; and *metropolitan governance. This is not a formal gathering. We hope for, and expect, lots of give and take from you, because your opinions, concerns and advice will help shape AMN's policies and priorities for the 1992 session. We were successful in advancing the metropolitan position on major bills this legislative session because we spoke from a strong, unified platform developed from committee mee’. *ngs that encomo'^ssed all points of view to reach consensus. This breakfast also can be a forum for you tc tell us what you'd like to see AMM do by way of metcber services. We hope we are doing a good job representing you. if you have any suggestions for improving our services, we'd like to know. 183 unh/ersKy avenue east. st. pauf. minnesota 55101 (612) 227 '1308 W« hope you plan to attend th«? July 18 breakfast at T-Wrights. We would ask that managers make this information available for and extend this invitation to city courcil members. As always, if you have any questions, don't hesitate to call the AMM office. Sincerely, I' |f--> <2 j: Bob Long, AMM President St. Paul Council Don Ashworth, AMM Board Member Chanhassen Manager Tom Spies, AilM Board Member Bloomington Council r I- I [ii r -i*'- H MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 270 HELD ON JUNE 10, 1991 cmrnr(MOMO JO'^/UlU The regular meeting of the School Board of Orono Independent Scnool "itl 270 was held on Monday, June 10, 1991. -' or,tnct No. Present: David McKown Don Anderson Lucie Taylor James Franklin Jonn Maresh Peg Swanson Thomas Mich William Fenho 11 UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the consent ag-^’da was approved as follows: -approved the minutes of the May 13, 1991 regular meeting; -approved the minutes of the May 13, 1991 Board workshop; -approved the minutes of the May 21, 1991 regular meeting; -approved the appointment of Kristen S. Olson as a teacner in the middle school for tne 1991-92 school year; -approved the bills as covered by vouchers 069800 tnrougn 070150. Motion carried unanimously. Dr. Mich expressed congratulations to those faculty/staff who are retiring at the close of this school year and expressed appreciation to Diane Higgins, Evy Zacher and the committee for their work on the retirement brunch which was held on Friday, June 7. Or. Mich congratulated the Class of 1991, a group of outstanding young people who have achieved a great deal, on their graduation on Thursday, June 6. He stated that it is regrettable that a few members of the class chose to ignore proper decorum but that administration, as it has in the past, will continue to work on Improvement of the situation in order to bring the ceremony to an even greater level of respect/dignity. Or. Mich reported that the Orono Primary School and Schumann Elementary School have respectively selected the following year long themes which will provide a center upon which instruction can take place: "Orono Primary Flight 1991*92" Destination: Friendship, Destination: The World and Destination: The Past; Schumann Elementary School - "The Olympics". Or. Mich distributed information to the Board regarding the equity funding lawsuit ^d trial activities; and a follow-up letter from tne Minnesota Department of Transportation addressing the Board's concern regarding the study/plans for the Highway 12 Corridor. Or. Mich expressed congratulations to Emily Oressel, Erica Skoog, Caroline Brost and Megan Cassidy who participated, along with Principal Ron Gilbert, in the 5K Memorial Day Ronald McDonald House rut. I£i L-F- Dr. Mich expressed congratulations and appreciation to Judy Soukup, who will retire from the PIONEER this week. He thanked her for her many hours of dedi cated service to the school district which enabled parents and the community to be knowledgeable about the happenings in our district. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Jim Franklin, a letter will be sent to Chief Mel Kilbo, who will retire from the Orono Police Department on June ?7, expressing appreciation from the Board for his concerns about our kids, our schools and our community. Carried unanimously. Peg Swanson informed the Boar, that, as an outgrowth of the Chemical Health Committee, a group of people are actively pursuing the development of a teen center and she shared the mission statement and encouraged Board members to pro vide their I'yut. Narren Nelson, Orono Middle School Principal, provided the Board with infor mation on the summer school program and stated that approximately 353 students are in attendance. Mr. Nelson also reported on the work of tne committee that studied/reviewed after school activities for middle school students stating that this committee was formed as a result of the middle school study that was done in 1989-90. Mr. Nelson provided ♦le Board with information on the conclusions that resulted from the committee's work and answered questions from the Board for clarification purposes. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Don Anderson, the Board of Education adopted the plan for Inclusive Education Program as developed by the inclusive Education Program Task Force and as presented to the Board of Education. Connie Fladeland, Orono Primary Principal, provided the Board with information regarding the Inclusive Education plan and spoke to the process that will be followed for implementation of the plan. Motion carried unanimously. Board member Don Anderson left the meeting at 7:35 p.m. Lucie Taylor, chairperson of the Technology Committee, introduced committee mem bers Robin Kirby, Julie Palmer and Don Boylan who provided the Board with background information regarding the development of the report as well as infor mation concerning the following categories around which the recommendations are Structured: educational mission,administration, staff training, resources/faci1ities within and beyond the school and funding. UPON MOTION by Jim Franklin, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the Board of Education accepted the report and directed administration to begin the process of reviewing/studying the recommendations with the end result being an action plan for each of the recommendations. The consensus of the Board was that the Technology Conwittee should remain as an active coiwnittee as this is a process that needs to be continually reviewed/updated. Dave McKown stated that Lucie Taylor has agreed continue to serve or this coiwiittee and he thanked her for willingness to do so. Motion carried. Board member Don Anderson absent. Due to the fact that it was necessary for Jim Franklin to leave the meeting, the Board moved through the remainder of the new business and then returned to hear the curriculum committees’ reports and recommendations. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education received and approved the curriculum committees' reports,recommendations and directed administration to pursue implementation. Motion carried. Board member Don Anderson absent. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, tne Board of Education approved the 1991-92 hourly salaries of school age child care personnel as nego tiated by the Board of Education Negotiating Conwiittee. Motion carried. Board member Don Anderson absent. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by John Maresh, the Board of Education adopted State of Minnesota child care guidelines for the operation of the Orono School Age Child Care Program. Motion carried. Board member Don Anderson absent. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by John Maresn, the Board of Education called for bids for replacement of a portion of the middle school roof, final decision on sections to be replaced to be -.ude by the Facilities Committee, following June 18 bid date. Motion carried. Board member Don Anderson absent. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Fr nklin, the Board of Education called for bids for abatement of asbestos on a boiler at the senior high school, using the Institute for Environmental Assessment engineering firm for this project. Motion carried. Board member Don Anderson absent. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education called for bids on milk and related dairy products for the 1991-92 school year. Motion carried. Board member Don Anderson ab<^*>nt. l^ON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Peg Swanson, the Board of Education approved the 1991-92 Community Education budget as presented. Motion carried. Board number Don Anderson absent. r k. k 'i:': ■! itr- iH W-K % ►^1^' |. [■ii^■ f; ' .' |- 4I The Board heard curriculum reports in each of the following four areas: world languages, health, mathematics and social studies. Representatives from each of these committees provided background information on the development of their report/recommendations that the Board had received in their packets and answered questions from the Board for clarification purposes. Dr. Mich stated that the recommendations began as a result of the combined NCA process and the District's curriculum review cycle and with curriculum identification materials in place, the District is now in the position to have deliberate and systematic review of the curriculum. The attempt is also being made to establish a textbook purchase cycle along with the curriculum review schedule. Lucie Taylor, whose term of office ends on June 30, addressed tne Board as to values, comparisons, and responsibilities in education as well as her beliefs, hopes, and challenges for the future, not only for the Orono Schools, but for education at large. Mrs. Taylor stated that her family had chosen the Orono Schools for the education of their children and she commended the District for having an “awful lot of what is right about schools here at Orono, and we need to tell our story about what we do well." She stated that in essence she was saying, "Way to go, Orono." UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by John Maresh, the meeting was adjourned. Notion carried. Approved: Dave McKown, Chairman 1^. lifliiiiiaiiftii iiiiiwiii ■.t rii •4j«i E NEWSLETTER HMNM INOF r>f NDf NT SCHOOl DISTRICT NO ?78 ()kO\n S('H(K>| HnxRh M^Kttvvn. ( hajmciJi I)<»n *\ndersi»n \ u i- ( fcur JifTi hrankltn riraMirt" Luu le Id> lt>f (_ lerk it)hn Maresh f Peg SN^anson I >i"*sT' f If l^!n :i Mi 4"^ IIS^ 4“^^ iinM I |fj[SbUL NO 10 \ , I \ i • Juns and July spaed by much more quickly than do January and February. Nevertheless, the summer months are an important time for the School District. In fact, they are a crucial time. In addition to summer school, special programs, and the required summer maintenance, summer affords the School District time to attend to projects and goals Schools have a much higher density of people than just about any other enterprise. Summer is the window of opportunity for mqjor projects which simply can not be done at other times. This summer portions of the forty year old Middle School roof will be replaced. Over-layment of the High School parking lot is required. Painting, carpeting, loying new sidewalks, and the myriad of tasks which must be completed between the end of summer school and the start of a new year are on schedule. Summer ia also the time to attend to curriculum writing and planning. Small groups of teachers and administrators are spending time working to improve curriculum and studying school discipline practices The most important work of the summer is the hiring of new faculty members. Obviously this is essential to our schools. It entails the review of usually fitly to one hundred applications for each position. The application includes; resume, transcript, references Following conUurt with the references provided, selected candidates are invited to the school for an interview Additional references are typically contacted after the interview, and the selected candidate is recommended to the Superintendent for a final interview This summer we anticipate hiring about ter new faculty due to retirements, resignations and student population growth May this be a productive and pleasant summer for all of our students, residents and their families And may the summer months go by slowly Thomas B Mich, Ph D Superintendent School Age Child Care The Orono Kare for Kids is r.ow completing a successful year of extended day caro at the Orono Community Church The school age child care has just completed summer registrations, and we are accepting registrations for the 1991-1992 school year The Center is open from 6 30 a rn to 6 00 p m and the program is available for both morning and afternoon kindergarten children. Parents may send bag lunches from home or they may purchase school lunches We provide a program throughout the day that includes art, cooking, literature, game.-», outdoor play, conversations, field trips and resource visitors Our staff are highly qualified and are happy to welcome parents and visitors If you would like to receive our brochure or visit the Center, please call Jo Potter at 473 0855 for further information Oktoberfest Date Set October 5. 1991 is the day the fourth grade class of Orono will sponsor a carnival of fun and games celebrated as OKTOBERFEST on the school grounds There will be entertainment for every age group - primary thru high school students, parents and grandparents. Committees of fourth grade parents (1991-92 school year) have been meeting to work out details to provide games, fooa, German dance band, OKTOBERFEST garage sale, a silent auction, and raffle Donations for the silent auction, raffle and OKTOBERFEIST garage sale are being accepted. Please contact Kathy Gillum 471 0268 Donors will be acknowledged for their generosity This IS an event intended to bring the school and community together Proceeds will benefit the fourth grade Wolf Ridge Environmental Learning Program Show your support mark your calendars now for OKTOBERFEST, OCTOBER 5, 1991. Guidance at a Glance pint Tbat Datea Nprt Fall; N ov . 2, 1991 Registration Deadline 9/27.'9l ACR Oct. 26, 1991 Registration Deadline 9/27/91 Application packets for both tests will be available in the guidance office by the middle of August Junlnra; PSAT DATE SET The Preliminary Scholastic Aptitude Test (PSAT.'NMSQT) for juniors is scheduled for Tuesday, October 22. 1991. This spring sophomores were asked to consider whether they would like to take this test next fall and to reserve a test by signing up in the Guidance Office. The Educational Testing Service requires high schools to place their order by June 28. Please check with your son or daughter to see if they have signed up. If not, you may phone in a reservation by calling the high school at 473-5472 up until the June 26 deadline. The PSAT is a national test given only once a year to juniors. It is the qualifying test for National Merit Scholarship Competition, the largest of its kind in the country. It is also a useful opportunity to take a college entrance test in the junior year. Guidance Office The High School Counselors will be available by appointment during the summer. Please call 473-5472 to arrange an appointment. Orono High School Band Fund Raiser ia the Coke.*Siq>port ■ettilaff CoaiqtMiJ^ Thoy are eollectiag Bar •r COEB. TAB. MINUTB MAID. SPRITE. WlLCm «s4 MBLLOW VBLLOW. They sHU 10 SMilt iHr i«dk Mil. Tha money will be Mp SMiirlA* tAalarAlM for tha toor. hdp ly flaiipllfi ' ^' I.CIv Iha Bar 0*4a irbai tha abova listed You eaa Bi ar at IHaity Ltttheraa TbgsUwr with sfotir help wa can Butke •jr:.;.-. Orono School District Awards Night The followi g students were awarded Scholastic Honorariums at the Orono High School Annual Awards Night on May 21, 1991. Minnetonka Fruit Growers Assn. Awards Andrew Gilbertson, John Nash Maxwell Stowe, Meliaaa Wyatt Paul Schumann Award Jamet IVowbrid^ Orono Middle School Service Award Jeaaie Dorrel JoAnn Walmslev Award Lisle Soukup Orono Lions Club Awards Benjamin Anderson. Carrie Quast Deborah Olkon, Katherine Zanetti E.L "Bud" Shauyhnessv Award Tina Reynolda Orono RHupatinn Aaxngiation Award JiU Salo Wavrata Masonic VoTfech Awards Angela Gawron, Laurie Hite, Cindy Schlichting Bank of Maple Plain Award M^k Cl^stianaen Orono Music Awards Paige Scalf, Sara Veilleux Orono Coaches Association Award Victoria Roehl Gordon David Alston Award Jami Raiche Mniind Medical Clinic Award Andrea Butterfield .Maple Plain American I.^^on Auxiliary Award Susan Suavely Steve Senesac Award Jennifer Franklin Manle Plain Lioiya Club Awards slJeremy Jenniges, Rachel Larson. Erik Peterson Orono Hockey Boosters Award Peter Swanson Qrt»no PT A Award Carol Emmack G.T. ShaughnaMY Tbdd Whiteia Hamel Lion*AwrH« Antony Fisher, Melaalo Guctafson Lind Family Pmin^tian Award Kimberiy Bing Steven Thielbar Northwest Suburban Chamber af Cm Linnea Siveta Aaaid & iL Ihiolafi A kui I Cory Cederberg Orono Baxkethall Booatera ______ IVacy Johnson, Thomas Nash AttAcda Oulliaaow Awarda Heather Grmade Patrick is-T>acie Mardock, Braat MarauardL M Adt. Hekla SwitenkiMelander, Briaa Schmidt, QzB&ftJliitckliAKulid Heather Brown. Kathrya Daaielaoa. Melissa DettlolT, Ann Doherty. Juliaane Itelda, William Findley Griffiths, Jeffrey Marr, Stephanie Morrissette, Hilary Rose, Jodi Sohn. Kyle Swenson >4 I -V OROMO SCHO&L? CAL.E.’VOAR 6 12 19 E3 AUGUST 1 6 7 8 13 14 15 20 21 22 SEPTEMBER 2 9 16 23 30 9 16 23 30 10 17 24 4 11 18 25 5 12 19 26 6 13 20 27 NOVEMBER DECEMBER ¥nr* m.■1 'i ! 4 U 18 25 5 12 19 26 6 13 20 27 7 14 21 B 8 15 22 2 9 16 3 10 17 4 5 6 11 12 13 18 19 20 2:{ 2 i 2,>: ^•••«****« «••«••••« 3 10 FEBRUARY 6 MARCH 24 u 12 13 14 9 10 18 19 20 21 16 17 25 26 27 28 i ■ 2:t 2 1 !30 31 4 U 18 5 6 12 13 19 20 u.___ MAY JUNE i]^ OCTOBER 7 14 1 8 15 22 29 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 8 9 10 20 14 15 16 21 22 23 24 28 29 30 31 APRIL 6 13 20 27 7 14 21 28 1 8 15 22 29 2 9 16 23 30 3 10 I,—,■ ........................1 Ibacher workshop^inaerviM } 4 5 6 7 8 8 9 10 11 12 . V , » 1 U 18 13 14 15 15 16 17 18 19 ' 1 19 20 21 22 !1 22 23 24 25 26 ; "I<>. imHn . ^26 27 •eirllt 28 29 ;29 30 j ! 1 ! < i. yll|a>#pi-‘■i# ' la«*ilfce<yiIt, , .. A... t 1 f School not in session CSSSVJ VSVFMU| ^ student attendance End of semester A. ^ X /- t... a ■i-•*« 4b I I I j DATE------—..................ACTIVITY Auf. 26-30....................All Teacher Workshop - V- ....- •'-V 4*. ... 4* '-i '• % '9 ,, , jfc.,-.-. * ^1. ¥ aV••*«•«••••••*••»••••• 4••••••••••••••••••«a••••• •J.jawVr mJWkj Sept. 3 .................................CLASSES BEGIN Oct. 21 .V..............................Teacher Workshop .Nov. 88-29.......................Thanksgiving Break Doc. 23 -Jan. 3 .............................Winter Break Jon. 6........................................Classes resume iiue»v ■ V^A . . Jan. 17 ...............................................Semester ends Jan. 20................................Teacher Workshop Feb. 17 .......................... PresidenU* Birthday; Mar. 23*27 ...................................Spring Break April 17 ...............................Teacher Workshop May 25....................Memorial Day June 4........................................................Last Day June 5......................... Ikacher Worksht^ ^Conference schedules available at the individual school offices.» ,!1 r M '(' / (/ /\r, h ,4 oTAprll^mi Approved die ippointment of Neal J. Lawson as Assistant lo the Superintendent for Business Affairs effective July 1.1991. •Approved the appointment of Melanie F. DeLuca as Director of Community Education. •Accepted the resignation of Joanne Woyteke, high achool counselor, clTective at the end of the 1990- 91 school year. •Approved the request of Chris Locker, speech langiH^ teacher for a leave of absence beginning Ap^ 1.1991 for the remainder of the 199^91 achool year. •Apprm^ the request of Julie Klippert. speech language teacher at Orono Middle School, for a leave of absence following her matemit) disability leave which would be taxen .it the beginning of the 1991-92 school year. her returning to her position on NovnnK'r < W91 •Approved the resolution relating to the clt'cti< m >>f School Board Members and calling the f hu>' Disoia General Election. •Accepted the bid of American Pciro-Tcch a.s the lowest qualified bidder for removal and replacement of underground oil storage tanks at OranoHigh School. •Approved the call for bids on group term life insurance and long term disability insurance coverage. Regidar nraetini of AprB 22,1991 •Approved the request of Sarah McDemiuu. Orono Primary Sdiool teacher, for a leave of absence foUowtiii her maternity disability leave, the extended leave would be forihe remainder of the fall KHieaierof the 1991-92 school year •Accepted dv lU. Dunlap scholarship •CoMribuied $200 to the Orono Education Anociation 10 offiec costs of the recognitionAeiirement breakfast held at the end of the yw. •Approved the Piolicy Scries 3000 and 4000 and the accoriqwiying procethires for the Orono School District •'; Approved the resolutioo relating to the *mnination and non-renewal of the substitute laaching contract of Mary Lou Doherty. Approved the request of Kritteo Powell, middle adHiol lancher, (or a leave of abeenoe for the rim ■wneAer of the 1991 -92 school year. Approved the Policy Sates 3000 and .Ml .1991 and authorized Mr Fenholi^ for a third van. and baaed oo ' and die budget, to purchase the dnm. Approved dm miff development plan and as presenmd •Approved the Policy Scries 7000 and 8(Xj0.•Approved cenain maintenance and improvementprojects recommended by the administration. •Approved the call for bids on overlaying the existing high school parking lot and adding new blacktop to the gravel surface area and replace the existing lighting Regular meeting of May 21, 1991. •Approved the Mission Siatemcni/Instru(.uor.al G^s as presented •Revoked the contract with Amencan Petro-Tcch for removal and replacement of underground storage tanks. •Accepted the bid by Zahl Equipment Company for removal and replacement of utiderground storage tanks. •Approved a three year lease on the Ororw Community Church property for the school age child care program. •Gave Tinal approval to the 1990-91 budget and preliminary approval to the 1991-92 budget. •Accepted the bid of Hanus Bus Company, Inc for transportation service for the 1991-92 and 1992-93 school years •Approved the results of the school board election with David McKown and Martha Van dc Ven receiving the highest number of votes. Gymnastics Re^stration There is still time to register your children for any of the several programs that North Shore Gymnastics offers. For more information, a Summer registration form and a class schedule, please contact the NSGA office at 473 5514. Friendly Visitors Needed ,...S.V.• In your nran there are many homeoound aldw adults who an in need of someoiM willinc to tako the thne to offer iheni support and liataa. Yen can be that •emeene bjr becoming a Veluntaer Friandly VUItor threap the Senior Oatreaeb pfgrmm ef Senior CenummUiir Services. As a veluntear you «HI1 visit the elder adult at home who it lonely, depressed, or laelnlad.^ne fncndly visitor efIiMra a •raat aavioe by kaffdaf dtePaanior in contart teitt Oroliiotaide and prarldiaf a positive infloenea in their life. In additiea la the go^ that is done ftr Iha perom who is betetf vWladL nun visitor* find muk peraenal benefit in vetantoarlng. rfyou ere intereatad in learning more about thla program or would like to volunteer your time, plaun eentact Libby Haneen ot S3S4311. W-f ■ *■ n: ■'v r I. ’SCHOOL SUPPLIES • SCHUMANN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 19»1 • 1992 The teachers have compiled a list of supplies by grade level which we hope will guide you in purchasing supplies you wish to furnish for your child's school year. Pf KASF PITT NAlVrEfi ON AT.I. ITRMS lamilGABTEN Laffc school bag or tiackpack with name OM100101 (to use M SB tma) Tomis Shoes for gym me I Urge glue sUck I • 8 oa. book of white glue Creyoiu • t cotM Name on outer clothing Grade I 1 piece ofoil cloth OS's 241 1 small bot of listuet Tsmis shoes for gym use Paini shirt - ai old thin with sleeves cut short - namr acroee shoulder to No. 2 pencils (only send 2 ei s time) Crayone 1 cov ered plastic container • pint size for cUy 1 • I os. boak of while glue School box • ciger box tize - plastic tf pouibie 2 pockai fokkn NO TRAPPERS 1 old T-shin with name in large letters on bom A back (for gym A mueic laachar so ksm names) Magic nuvhars - WATER SOLUBLE ONLY opuontl 1 old lock (to uae at in arascr) 1 glue slick Scissor ■ poimad 2 sdeiu of modeling cky 1 box 1/2 ’ pepw fMSMMn 1 spiral notebook - wide niled I Ml of kaiaed wanied yvn • any color Wmarpaina ka Oib'Me • 24 cotail tfiosor - poimad 10Ne.2parv*ik liMlacetca lap* Saafkatamn 3 apM notabnnks-wkk ruled NO TRAPPERS i-r Tt 4 1 'It-,- *: ■ : : | for gym nee in large kam on hont A beck kng ekava thin widi nariM on back. WATER ROLUBLE ONLY ..Bl* U'ktIM 4«<e «r. « a«r.3 all for paaa^eacfls Mkfi'Aadrtiaii - Mflfllkla ■ ••■*.*«;:>' t W .*, ; • ■P*>.yT &.’a.mm * Gride 3 10 No. 2 per ill 2 red pencil, 1 blue pen Soft mtaen 3 ringed wide-lined piper 4 pocket foldcrt, 1 green Tennis shod for g>in use Flint shirt with name wriOoi icross beck shoulder Pliilic zipper pocket for pen & pencils 1 • 4 oz. bocile of white glue Crayons 24 courU Scissor pointed 1 sptiil notebook for Joumel Writing Colored pencils Magic markers WATER SOLUBLE ONLY • optionil Old T-shirt with name in large letters on front it back (for gym A muaic leacher to learn names) 1 ruler Bos of tissues ^ O TRAPPERS OR RINGED NOTEBOOKS (These are too Ivge to keep in desks or lockers) I IngTkdAiat Name on each individual item Large durable plastic school boa 2 pocket folders to carry papers 10 No. 2 pencils in SepL A January 1 large boa of tissues for classiuom use 1 - 4 oz bottle of white glue Erasers in Sept, ft January Tenrus shoes for gym use Crayons Markers WATER SOLUBLE ONLY • Sepc ft laa Wide lined spiral rK>iebook - Gr t 2 widedined spiral notebooks GR 2 3 wide-lined ^riral notebooks GR 3 I red felt lip pen Scisaof - pointed 2oyaocks-GRIft2 Aft shiit with rume across back shoulder in mteker Old T-shirt with name m large leoers on front ft back ( for gym ft music) 1 three subject notebook GR 3 for ft Social Si Kki I Ann Al l tnppt iFt 3 nng bindd wua wluie wide-lyiad papd (kioae baf) 12 No. 2 pencils 12c»lofed pencils Tamus shod for gym uae only r >•« ^ Nam Airt far gym v ; Pitiii shirt with name across shoulden 12 inch riikr (inch ft ccntiineicr) 3 iptral notabooki • widt bneiL no oolared PV*.^ 3-mg lippered pencil cast Set of oolored markers Black ft red fall ep oomcimg pans ‘•r- . . ... >w .#V.,^ V ■T -*■* 'p"'" ’- Sulior Membtrs fbr 1990-1991 L New Senior Members The Hrono High School Chapter of the National Honor Society 1990-1991 Seniors Jill BehrtT.j! ('r>r> Cederbt^r^ Ann Doherty Julianne Field- Laune Hite Kimbt‘rly King Stephanie Morrissette Jill Salo Rohm Sw’tenki fJuniors Malthew Alshouse Kathleen Fleming Kara Green lev Ned Hoseth Kelly Knappenberger Enk Remus Kelly Shaw Heather Brown Melissa DettlofT Carol Emrriack Angela Gawron Jerem,. Jenmges Je^rey Marr Deln^rah Olkon Peter Swanson Steven Thielbar Sara Beach Justin Grat>ek (’bri'^topher Hawkmson Jannda Johnson Dntta Parten Mark Rettinger Michelle Wong 3k k?! ) New Junior Members I NEWSLETTER iTiOli oreci 999 010 C0W«t*4 m>tkO iK>«TH UMOUMt !§)•• •v k ^ P.u. Br r r s T a f.u Non-Profit Org. U S POSTAGE PAID Long L^e. MN O'v NO 12 _—- 4 < 7291 . 2 TOt All Contract Fire Chiefs wmmt Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator OATIt July 2, 1991 SUBJBCTt Demolition Permits This memo is written to indicate that prior to any buildings being burned by your department that you insure ♦■hat the property owner has obtained the necessary demolition permits from the City of Orono's building department. fr- i ['I li-p cci NayoiT Petarson & Orono Council Members w m 1 'fx ixri 5 Lony Lake, MN 55356 • (612)476 2637 [ieSQw J’jly 1, 1991 'JUL 3 ISM Mayor Baroara A. Peterson CITY OP ORONO Municipal Offices P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay# MN 55323 Ret Highway 12 Upgrade Dear Mayor Peterson: I read with interest your letter of June 1991 to the Orono residents. As a taxpayer in Orono, and a representative of a company that (I believe) is still one of the major taxpayers in Orono, I support your position. Very truly yours. Robert P. White oc: Moit>ers of Orcxio Citv Coixicil / : ' ** - ’ , **** ♦ n‘ ' i ;;v,.’__. •V ■ •V. • ;v * •'-* •■ r'SSif!^? iii -’J 4, m L'i \ ' • ? lr..^‘- ►fr. r.' fc.. r ■" -•■ t...' , r'7 *^-r- ii.,...i,..|.,...„.,.|., ,,,|., Iftfj cecss NW *>fpg ,pjs>f^3 99 vog -Q-j uospjpi^ja^ ji^of O^OJQ ^0 KtSS NM ?)nn 0N01 »o vo« o d ionufiMOQ io Mifwmio i)m onoi •saiON taaNVHO' CALENDAR OF 1 OFFICERS COMMO EVENTS ^’TmMMn (MuroM 47»440a «Kify f - Al A Alms s Boat Ride VlnflHMMl:Ho General Membership Meeting JaN MMMlu (lunM RMty) 473-3000 6'6 p m OMoil 47vait AufMS? 9 « Queen Coronation ewfemke BiKa;Mtss Lor^ LaFe Jiny Ten (Ma to* at Long UM)473-7347 Aufual 11 - Paraoe toHato(WtolM*a*awCn—wn) 470-1267 Aiiguat 13 - Billy 8 LightfHXise CamO^pae General Membership Meetir^g 12 15pm - Com Days \^raptip OltfaaOMHt Tournament Oono God Course Pm P¥mmck a amoc > 473^74 Candy Rowiaai ftnumalwi Tours) 47S i7i4 V________________________________________________^s____________J \j y ■j^j n€ WIST CHAMBER NOTES* Long Lake Chamber of Commerce A1 & Alma’s Annual Boat Ride Tuesday, July 9th (.'ocktaiJ & Hors d'oeuvres Cruise $l5.00/person ('ome and join us for our Summer ScKrial Event’ Bnng your Employees and Family Memher?^ for a !2 hour cruise on Lake Minnetonka. The Br>at will di*part the dock at approximately l> ^X) p m Fch * reservations, please iTintact Jacki at 475-2219 Jkr Ti-r . . '• > ^4 4 . k •V Pfwlo Copi— • Omcrn SuppliM Prtntinq < UPS ShIppiPp •SiOCWur—« L«a»rt«Mcts •Cvt>0(il«W^o^ •BuaniMtCftrm •Typuptng •NOWPWH •EnwtQpM •nyar« •^N9Mmqinw¥ma n% Stuiftf P^itUmf 476-2635 >:3Vr tmnf «i 9fM% PMI or LONO UMf HM » tMVtAr* A.«0 • #0 K» I fnitnialioMi Toyra^ atAI rOR* (Jli 14 M«miOM^r«n44* W«T<4*« OffkT m tm l4*» tawi 6m *t»«TVM» Ohi^Uim JtiW iMiiVS «r1~J«I1 Com pays QUEEN CONTEST Don \ forget to get your names «n for tne M«Sb lohq l »,v»r'5psi Call JacKi at 175 2219 Wo ne^o to get this gomg so t»^ar i-ci< n contestant can have her poriMif ilone et'' PARADE You shoukj have received your »orm Nj« me i)ardJe *» )p ^ , recently It yc^u did not gel one anti eiani to he •' thp oaradP please contact t j at 47) 8864 GOLF TOURNAMENT Start gettir^ your foursomes toget*^**' *o' the AnrM>a< ''i. I't Tournament at Qrono Golf Course or SeptfjmOer tOth CIRCUS Don f forget - the Circus «s coming to town on AuguSi t 7th They will be oerforming urxler a Big 7eni at the Qrono S<’’louis Campus H should be great Put this event on your caierxiar if you POuW be rviHing to help <r the promoting ticKef soiling or 4ROrtung as a ticAet taher seller dor>oq the even! please call SuWivan at 476 64.06 FASHION SHOW Aoprf>«.matefy people en*cve<i *^e »ash.nn shnvy ^ 2'id at Wavzata Country uiuD '! was a great hoi^‘nr''r>g ^nr tujr sur-^n>er ♦uridra.ser and we hope that wp can douDie the umbe' of jtierxjees nent year Special thanks to alt of the modets 'n,aiTy cor»estants from previous years and coritestaols ♦rom th-s year who participated Also thanks to ffe orgam/ers Ev•^|yr^Haas Jacki Hoover Karen jacKS<?n Bernadette Cotlir>s Ninon Sullivan Laura Rettinger ai d Kathy Morgan K K '»an wr'o 'S director of prrxJuction at WCCO TV atterxled as a fTimmemator She *s a former Queen of the Lakes and a Coordinator for the Queen of me lakes pox^rar' Wn would Hsn like to thank Merry Thies an .nstrurtor n the independent S^/uk Strings program Fifteen of her students *rom 5 ’2 years oirl entertair^ (he crowd ALLSTAH •n» «• ★ •*» »»■ ELECTRIC »OC» •'!»»» •k. •>mm MW* Albrt* ^i lui It u 4 Ark ••• MS Vmi • t -«» • / MM* O ♦ ’ ' " iV • W -• 4 (QfTTLTBROS) S4--f9t MS) • »nc A04M .ovr. LA>ft *n •>42 ‘^ Nall* by, C-^tncii ••• S«M «**««*■«•»*■• t*M m»4 • M Mt4 t M« Wff t»S 0§%^m9 yitzpatricL ZnUtptimmt La t«r TyRR0«lilr»9 orrte« s«rvie«« Word eroc«aalfif fb *••«* ••*•••••♦# 4 » I #•111 4«i ( paiflaa Om*« "S'' LOMO LAKE GLASS INC MiM«%4 *MI A«a.» aitaiTaaNTM rfjww** •• »• »«MM tw< ».Af * ■«»>« M f *nSAII M fi WESTERN ORTHOPAtOIC SURGERY. LTD ‘.’00 .*antoi# O'.* Suit* 3*0 Si : outs r>Wi llAnn««au S54I6 (6121 5400015 ^gewt wrwtfr uiRoam «iT•»n u a MCMAM) ROUtN •0 so* •• t\*% uAMit. a I* OMC *•• *m MJM siEAr»r«*a mt M«*n u g«r»# shAvlik (6 ’2T 473 9300 9 j »• J»wRb ,.r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Planning Commission Chair Charlie Kelley, and Planning Commission Members Jeffrey Johnson, Maureen Bellows, Ed Cohen, Charles Schroeder, and Sara Moos. Candace Rowlette was absent. The following represented the City Staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Scheffler. Council Representative J.Diann Goetten was present, as was CounciImember Jabbour. (#1)ZONING FILE #1653-JEFFREY JOHNSON 3825 CHERRY AVENUE VACATION OF AN UNIMPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY-PUBLIC HEARING Jeffrey Johnson was present. At 8:00 p.m., Kelley opened the Public Hearing, and asked Mabusth to provide a review of application #1653. Mabusth summarized the information set forth in her memo dated June 12, 1991 pertaining to nr. Johnson's request to vacate a portion of an unimproved public right-of-way. She used a plat map of the area to show the section of alley that would be vacated.Mabuoth noted that the alley restricts the area in which any imn/ovements can occur to the rear of the existing house. She t ised that the Public Works Director is asking the applicant to provide drainage and utility easements over the vacated portion of the alley.This, however, would limit the building envelope because construction could not take place within the easement. The rear lot line would be redefined, reducing need for setback Variance." Kelley asked Mabusth if she could elaborate on the request by the Public Viorks Director to have an easement dedicated for a future bike trail through that area. Mabusth replied, "I have nothing further to add at this time. It is a recent policy of the City to have the Park Commission review Vacations and Subdivisions to assist with their plan for a future bike trail.It is my understanding that this particular request would be reviewed by the Park Commission at their July 2, 1991 meeting." Kathryn Nevers, 3060 Cherry Avenue, stated that she and her son each ovn two lots on the south side of Cherry Avenue. She asked what impact Johnson's request to vacate a portion of the alley would have on their parcels. Kelley explained that Johnson's request would have no impact on the adjacent lots on the south side of Cherry Avenue. -1 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991(11)ZONING FILE #1653-JEFFREY JOHNSON CONTINUED Ms.Nevsrs asked if it would be the C.ty s intention to n-/w vacate the entire alley. Mabusth explained that it would be a ccnplicated process if the City were to initiate the Vacation of the remainir.g portion of alley, in that the City would have to ask each property owner to grant utility and drainage easements. Nevers asked what the purpose is for Johnson's request to vacate the alley. Johnson replied, "One of the reasons for requesting the Vacation is that the alley does impact the building envelope. I had a choice of either seeking a rear setback Variance to construct a deck or a Vacation of the alley. I chose the Vacation because it would also resolve issues that relate to the location of the alley and legally combining the lots. I do take issue with the request for the drainage and utiJity easements. I would like the City Engineer to review that. If easements are located in that ar;a, it would have the impact on the building envelope as the alley.The easements would unduly restrict building area. There is a wetland that woul^^ be located in the middle of the easement, which runs north and south. Also, there is already city water in North Shore Drive. The Public works Director has indicated that a water line could be installed where the alley now exists to serve the properties on Cherry Avenue. However, it will be necessary to provide water to both sides of Cherry Avenue.A bike trail through that area would make no sense because of the wetland. The plat of this area is 100 years old. The City has found no use for the platted alley over that period of time." Councilmember Jabbour expressed concern about the fact that Cherry Avenue is closed off on one end, leaving only one way to access it.He also suggested it would be more efficient to vacate the entire alley at once, as opposed to having it done in a piece meal fashion. There were no additional comments from the public, and at 8:19 p.m., Kelley closed the Public Hearing. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Bellows, to recommend that Council approve the Vacation of an Unimproved Public Right-Of-Way. The applicant is to make his appeal to the City Council regarding the issue of the drainage and utility easements.Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Johnson abstained. Motion carried. -2 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 )> • I' ii. (#2)ZONING FILE #1604-CLAIR ROOD 2215 KENWOOD NAY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE-CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Kelley noted that Clair Rood was present, and continued the Public Hearing on this matter at 8:20 p.m. Gaffron advised the Planning Commission that Mr. Pood had submitted the additional information requested by the Planning Commission at their May 20, 1991 meeting.He stated that the revised plans show the pillars and retaining walls, but do not show that pillars are also located on Mr. Rood's property adjacent to Navarre Lane. Mr. Rood indicated that he would prefer to have the pillars at a height of 4^ feet, rather than 3S feet as required by the City.He intends to plant shrubbery in between the pillars that would be maintained at a height of four feet. He noted that there were several fences in his neighborhood that were six feet in height. Bellows stated that the elevations of the pillars and hedges shown on the plan do not depict the plans explained by Mr. Rood, nor does it show what actually exists on Mr. Rood's property. She said, "The plan shows the hedges above the pillars. Mr. Rood has indicated that he wants the hedge 1/2 foot below the pillars. The plan shows that pillars are located along one property line when in fact there are pillars along two property lines. I am becoming concerned about this because each time a plan has been submitted, it does not show what presently exists on the property. We gave Mr. Rood very explicit direction as to what we wanted to see. We also indicated that v/e wanted the property to remain in as natural a state as possible. I am not sure that is occurring." Rood explained that he is requesting approval to construct the pillars 4*j feet, which is the height of the existing pillars. He stated that if the Planning Comr-’ission will not allow the pillars at a 4*s foot height, he would have to reduce the height to feet. Kelley stated that Mr. Rood is seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Variance for excavation and creation of a pond within a wetland area. Gaffron confirmed Kelley's statement. Mabusth asked if Mr. Rood is now seeking a height Variance for the pillars/fence. Cohen stated that request is not included in tne application being reviewed in this Public Hearing. -3 - I p IF-> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (#2)ZONING FILE #1604-ROOD CONTINUED Kelley suggested that the Planning Commission focus oniy on the application before them. He stated that, in his opinion, he would like to see the area behind Mr. Rood’s home cleaned up, and that is what Mr. Rood is attempting to do. He asked Gaftron it the City Engineer has reviewed Mr. Rood’s plans. Gaffron replied, "The City Engineer has reviewed and approved the plans fo- the excavation and pond. With regard to the retaining walls, I’ve not received anything written or verbal from the City Engineer. However, the retaining walls '^tll oniy have a height of 34 feet, which is fairly insignificant. Kelley polled the Planning Commission for their opinion regarding the Conditional Use Permit and Variance for the pond. Cohen stated that he would give a favorable recommendation for the Conditional Use Permit and Variance. Bellows stated that she had originally been in favor of Mr. Rood's proposal, but now cannot separate the issue of the excavation, pond, and retaining wall project, from the pillars and hedge project. Kelley asked Bellows how she would view the project if Mr. Rood was required to keep the height of the pillars at feet. Bellows replied, "I am trying to say that I am leery of the proj»»ct. It seems to me that we are not being told what is actually going on out on this property. In my opinion, we should put some very tight restrictions on this, if it is the Planning Commission's consensus to recommend approval.Conceptually, I agree with Mr. Rood that clean up of this property is necessary. However, I think there are real problems with the way this is being approached." Kelley asked Bellows if she would prefer to issues in stages. rev ie\v these Mr. Rood indicated that he had tried to present his plans in stages from the beginning, but was told to bring everything in at once. He said, "When I first started constructing the pillars, the City Building Inspector informed me that the structures could not exceed 34 feet. I asked him if there were any height restrictions for the pillars I intended to place along the rear and side of my property. He informed me that pillars along the side and rear could be six feet tall. I constructed the pillars at a five foot height and did not r-ali^e I would need permits. This was something new--the pillars were not classified as a fence, and did not fall under any other category.I have not done anything with the pillars for some time because I wanted to wait until the final grade is done to be sure that the structures -4 - |fe' i 'V ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (12)ZONING FILE #1604-ROOD CONTINUED are level with one another. I tried to put that project on the back burner, but when I appeared two months ago, 1 v/as asked to bring in the plans for the pillars. If the Planninj Commission would prefer to wait and address the wetlands issue now, and wait on the pillars, that is fine with me." There were no comments from the public regarding this application, and Kelley closed the Public Hearing at 8:37 p.m. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Cohen, to recommend that Council approve the Conditional Use Permit and Variance to excavate and construct a pond within a wetland.Kelley stated that his motion did not refer to the pillars which must either be constructed to meet the City's requirements or Mr. Rood must submit an application for a height Variance. Bellows stated that it has been past policy of the Planning Commission to ask for a comprehensive plan of all projects proposed for a particular property when there is more than one project taking place. She could see no reason to deviate from that policy at this time. Motion, Ayes-5, Bellows, Nay. Motion carried. (#3)ZOMIMG PILE il644-LARRY HORK (NORTH SHORE DRIVE MARINA) 3222 NORTH SHORE DRIVE APPEALS-PUBLIC HEARING Kelley opened the Public Hearing at T:jc p.m. t . ' r Mabusth explained that this issut Mas come before the Planning Commission, more on behalf of tfe City of Orono, than Mr. Hork.She explained that there is a difference between Staff's interpretation of the Sign Ordinance, and that of Mr. Hork. Staff interprets the Sign Ordinance to state th«t a sign must be attached to a principal structure. Mr. Hork is seeking approval of a permit to attach a permanent sign to an accessory structure. 1r; e f It was Planning Commission's consensus interpretation of the Sign Ordinance is enforced. that Staff's correct and should be ft ■ft: •ft g- The Public Hearing was closed, and taken. formal action was (•4)ZONING PILE il646-TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH 20E0 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT-PUBLIC HEARING Mabusth advised Kelley that Paul Phillips, a property owner residing near Trinity Lutheran Church, was present to comment on this application. •; , Mr. Phillips indicated that he had no oojection .o the garage, but indicated that the light over the side entrance door -S - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 h I '.g' [!tvi 'ik:/ (#4)ZONING FILE #1646-TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH CONTINUED mdy shine into the bedroom of the Orono VJoodiand Group Home. He suggested that perhaps the light could be situated elsewhere. The Planning C'-mmission took no action on this item, (#5)ZONING FILE #lt47-GERALD BENOIT 3403 EASTLAKE STREET VARIANCES-PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Johnson, to table this item, as requested by the applicant.All voted aye. Motion carried. (|6)ZONING PILE 11648-RONALD « JULIENNE PRINEAS 1920 SHORELINE DRIVE RENEWAL VARIANCE-PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Moos, to recommend that Council approve the renewal of a Lot Width Variance, subject to the findings and conditions outlined in Resolution #2829. All voted aye. Motion carried. (#7)ZONING FILE #1649-ELAINE PETERSON 1921 PAGERNESS POINT ROAD VARIANCES-PDBLIC HEARING Elaine Peterson indicated that she was present, opened the Public Hearing at 7:01 p.m. and Kelley Gaffron provided a brief explanation of Ms. Peterson's application involving side setback ana lardcover Variances to construct a detached garage. He noted that the applicant is now asking that she be allowed to construct a 20 foot by 24 foot garage, rather than 20 foot by 22 foot as initially indicated. Gaffron reviewed the hardcover existing and proposed hardcover information as outlined in his June 13, 1991 memo. Kelley asked Ms. Peterson if she intends to have a back-up area so it will not be necessary to back directly onto Eagerness Point Road, and if so, where it will be located. Elaine Peterson advised that a small turn-around area would be located directly adjacent to the house and would be created by leaving a portion of the gravel drive. Kelley asked Peterson if she attaching the garage to the house. had given consideration to Peterson indicated that she had considered various ways to attach the garage to the house, but could find nothing that would work within the limited area up near the house. Kelley believed that everyone living in this State should be entitled to a garage to protect their car from the elements. -6 - t; ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (17)ZONING FILE #1649-ELAINE PETERSON CONTINUED Cohen concurred with Kelley, adding that there is really nowhere •'Ise on the property to locate a garage. Cohen referred to notations in Gaffron's memo concerning the location of Peterson's retaining wall in relation to the neighboring property. He stated that, in his opinion, this issue should be resolved between Elainu Peterson and neighbor. There were no public comments pertaining to this application, and Kelley closed the Public Hear’ng at 7:07 p.m. Kelley asked Gaffron if the hardcover calculations included the proposed back-up area. Gaffron advised that the hardcover calculations include all of the gravel area east of the sidewalk as shown on the survey. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Moos, to recommend that Council approve the hardcover and side setback Variance required to construct a detached garage. Cohen stated that the hardship for the Variances is the need for a garage due to the weather in Minnesota, and the topography of the land at 1921 Fagerness Point Road. All voted aye. Motion carried. (•8)ZONING PILE il650-HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION IHTERSBCTION OP COUNTY ROADS IS 4 51 APTER-THB-PACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE-PUBLIC HEARING Mabusth noted that there would not be a representative present on behalf of the Hennepin County Department of Transportation. Kelley opened the Public Hearing on this matter at 7:45 p.m., and asked if anyone from the public was present to express his/her opinion on this matter. Mabusth noted that she had received a telephone call from a concerned resident living near County Road 15. The resident stated that the City had taken the position that County Road 15 is a Scenic Highway, and it would do whatever possible to maintain that character.Mabusth confirmed that Hennepin County's improvement plans do not call for widening the road, it will remain c two-lane roadway. She referred to a resolution passed by Council which allows improvements to County Road 15 at intersections by providing turn-lanes. The project currently undertaken by Hennepin County involves safety improvements, which they hope will encourage use of the County Road 15 and 51 intersection, as opposed to Spates Avenue.Hennepin County submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit and Variance in light of the installation of storm sewer done in conjunction with the safety improvements.Maousth further noted that the resident, to which she previously referred, had also raised concerns about the quality of runoff into the Lake, and ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (18)ZONING PILE #1650-HENNEPIN COUNTY CONTINUED Whether riprap will serve as an adequate filter. The resident asked her to have the City Engineer verifv the effectiveness of the riprap. There were no other comments or concerns registered in connection with this application, and Kelley closed the Puolic Hearing at 7:47 p.m. It was moved by Bellows, seconde by Cohen, to recommena that Council grant a Conditional Use ?e. ut and Variance to the Hennepin County Department of Transportation for improvements made at the intersection of County Roads 15 and 51 in the form of of a left-turn lane and installation of storm sev/er. All voted aye. Motion ca'-ried. (99)ZONING PILE #1652-DANIEL AND BARBARA FLEISCHMAN 500 HANLON AVENUE VARIANCES-PUBLIC HEARING Barbara Fleischman was present. Kelley opened the Public Hearing at 7:10 p.m., and asked Gaffron to make his opening comments. Gaffron explained that the Fleischmans are requesting side and rear setback Variances, as well as a lot coverage Variance to construct a deck. He reviewed the issues pertaining to Fleaachman'8 applications as set forth in his June 10, 1991 memo. Gaffron asked Mrs. Fleischman if the shed on the tax forfeit lot across the alley in fact belonged to them. Fleischman indicated in the affirmative. Kelley asked Gaffron to elaborate on the history of the tax forfeit parcel on the other side of the alley. Qaffron explained that this lot and Fleischman's property had at one time been o\/ned by the same property owner (several owners before Fleischmans purchased the property). At the time the Minnetonka Bluffs Sewer Project was put through, the City assessed the lots on each side of the alley for half of the total# per unit assessment. Subsequent to that, the lot became tax forfeit and the half unit assessment charge was never paid. This property can only be purchased by an ad]acent property owner# and is not deemed a separate, buildable lot. Gaffron added# "1 have talked with Hennepin County regarding the parcel, and they informed me that it is valued at $500.00. The lot could be sold to an adjacent owner for that amount, and the City would probably then attempt to hold an Assessment Hearing to recover the half unit assessment charge. It would be the City Council’s decision as to whether or not such an assessment would occur.” Kelley asked Fleischman if she has any intentions of -0 - tuoAi Ir Iv tx i-> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 :i9)'/.ONTNG PILE tl652-FLBISCHMAN CONTINUED ns^r.cting a garage on their lot. Fleischman stated that they have considered purchasing the ,el across the alley in order to construct a garage, but were not certain they could afford to pay the sewer assessment. She advised that they have no plans to construct a garage on their lot. Schroeder asked Gaffron if he is aware outstanding assessment charge is at this tim^. what the Gaffron estimated it to be in the area of $5,000 to $6,000, due to interest and penalty fees that have accumulated over the years. Kelley asked what woi.ld need to occur in order for the half unit assessment charge to be waived by the City. Gaffron stated that the Finance Department would bring such a request before Council for their consideration. He noted that under normal situations, it would not be possible for an assessment to be removed.However, in talking with Hennepin County# he learned that they have apparently removed (or inadvertently lost or erased) the City's sewer assessment. Cohen indicated that there seems to be a discrepancy in what the neighbors state will be the size of the new deck, and what the Fleischmans are proposing. Barbara Fleischman advised that the previous deck consisted of a three-tier design, and that the proposed deck will be slightly larger. Kelley noted that there is a difference of 51 lot coverage between what existed with the old deck and what it would be with the proposed deck. Gaffron clarified that his "existing" lot coverage calculations of 17% do not consider a deck on the property at all. He estimated the pre-existing deck to have approximately the same lot coverage percent as the proposed deck. Bellows asked if it would be appropriate for the Planning Cesnission to include a notification to the property owner that they must acquire the tax forfeit parcel west of the alley if they ever intend to construct a garage. Gaffron suggested that the Planning Commission could include such a notification as an ad - ’ sory statement in their recomSMndation Council, but tnett .’s would not bind the property owners ^ny way. -9 - “• 1; ttefe ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEFTING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (#9)ZONING FILE H652-FLEISCHMAN CONTINUED There were no comments from the public, the Public Hearing at 7;i8 p.m. and Kelley closed Johnson stated that he appreciated the opportunity to review this application before the deck became an after-the-fact issue. Cohen asked Fleischman to state her hardship for Variances she is requesting. the Fleischman explained that the pre-existing deck was removed because of its unsafe condition.Two of the three entrances/exits for the house would otherwise have a five foot drop without a deck.She added that the lot is only 50 feet wide, but is located in a Two-acre Zoning District. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Moos, to recomniend that Council approve the side and rear setback Variances to construct a deck, the hardship being the extremely small size of the lot and the existing configuration and elevation of the entry to the house in relation to the ground.Further, it is recommended, that the applicants be notified that 22% lot coverage is the maximum that this lot should sustain.All voted aye. Motion carried. (flO)XONING PILE #1654-DEAN TERRY 2710 PBNCB LANE VAEIAMCES-PtlBLIC HEARING It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Johnson, to table this item, as requested by the applicant.All voted aye. Motion carried. (ilDSOHING FILE *1655-ELAINE PAGONIS 2740 8EADT1IOOO ROAD VARIANCE-PUBLIC BEARING Elaine Pagonis indicated that she was present and, at 7:23 p.m, Kelley opened the Public Hearing on this application. Gaffron displayed a survey of Ms. Pagonis's property taken prior to any of the subject improvements being done. He reviewed the chronology of the various improvements to the property, and the hardcover statistics, as outlined in his June 13, 1991 memo. Kelley noted that the applicant is additional hardcover beyond the 25% allowed. Gaffron confirmed Kelley's statement, additional 1.2% increase will occur within setback area, and is due to the additional front sidewalk. asking for 1.2% adding that the r he 7 5 -250 foot driveway area and Pagonis noted that at one time, a portion of the driveway -10 - F.- .^1^-, L ORONO PLAimiNG COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (IIDZOMIIIG FILE #1655-PAGONIS CONTINUED existed in the 0-75 foot setback area, removed. but has since been Gaffron advised, that with respect to the hardcover percentages shown in his memo. Planning Commission should consider that the hardcover resulting from that portion the boathouse that exists on land in the 0-75 foot setback, has been subtracted from 25% of the land area within the 75-250 foot setback area. Gaffron referred Planning Commission to a June 12, 1991 letter of opposition that had been received from John Fiebelkorn (Ms. Pagonis's neighbor). Kelley indicated that he would prefer to see the applicant maintain a level of 25% hardcover in the 75-250 foot setback zone, using her own discretion as to how to reach that percent. Johnson believed there to be several unique factors involved with this application. He said, "There is no encroachment into the 75 foot setback, and no encroachment into the average lakeshore setback.Approximately half of the lot is located within the 0-75 foot setback zone, and there is a large peninsula. There is an acre of property here, which I believe meets the intent of the Hardcover Ordinance." Bellows concurred with Johnson, that the applicant has done a good job in trying to meet the spirit of the Hardcover Ordinance. Kelley asked Ms. Pagonis if she has plans to do additional landscaping around the house, noting that landscape areas have not been included in the hardcover calculations. Pagonis stated that she intends to put something below the deck where the walkout is located. Kelley referred to information given to the Planning Cosysission regarding Council's recent action which allows l^snidents to use non-woven fabrics for weed control beneath landscaped areas. He expressed concern about e.orc.ng the use of non-woven materials, versus woven fabric or plastic. Gaffron suggested that Planning Commission's recommendation include a stipulation requiring the applicant to use non-woven %feed barrier fabric under any landscape areas on the property. Kelley closed the Public Hearing at 7:40 p.m., in light of there being no indication of public interest in this application. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Moos, to recommt.nd that Council approve a 518 square foot hardcover Variance, and that the applicant be placed on notice that further requests to -11 - I'' r'" I; I' Ml.. iS Ki, i\ I !i I c-:, '* ^ .My- 'f ■ ■I I’ P Kj %yl.f" ORONO PLANNING COHHISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (•11)ZONING FILE #1655-PAGONIS CONTINUED increase hardcover on this property will not be favorably considered. Further, any additional la-’scaping on this property should be done using non-woven fabric. Motion, Ayes-3, Cohen, Nay, Motion carried.Cohen indicated that, in his opinion, hardcover in the 75-250 foot setback -ea should meet the required 25%. (•12)ZONING FILE •1657-NICK SIMONDS 2007 SUGAMfOOD DRIVE DRIVEWAY REQUEST Nick Simonds was present, and referred to a letter dated June 0, 1991, which he had sent to Planning Commission members. He explained that the reason for the request to vary from the Development Standards is to preserve several trees that provide screening for the residence from the street. A curved driveway will also better facilitate access to the garage. Mr. Simonds noted that Sidney Rebers, Developer of Sugarwoods, and adjacent property owner, had no objections to his request. Kelley stated that he had no objections to Mr. Simonds* request. Bellows disagreed, stating that, unless there is an extreme hardship situation, she could not approve a Variance from the original requirements.Bellows stated that there is not an extreme hardship in this case, and that curving the driveway will preserve only two major trees, one of which is an Elm. Johnson indicated that he concurred with Kelley. He asked Mabusth how far into the side setback area the driveway would encroach. Mabusth advised that the proposed driveway would be located 19' from the side lot line instead of the required 30 feet. Moos stated that her first inclination is to recommenv approval of Mr. Simonds' request, but that she has reservations due to the number of such applications that have, and potentially could come before the Planning Commission. Schroeder indicated that it seems this situation arose during the construction phase when it became clear that the trees tfould have to be removed to construct a driveway with the required straight alignment. SiSK>nds confirmed Schroeder*s observation, adding that the excavator is attempting to take the path of least resistance for installing the driveway. Schroeder stated that he agreed with Kelley, and though the trees in question are not significant, they are a fairly ,’arge -12 - W'' r '■r T-. r i:H- i... P hf:bi I fp.I m i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (912)ZONING PILE 11657-SIMONOS CONTINUED size. Bellows said, "My concern is that if we give in on this request, for which there is not an extreme hardship, we are going to be hard pressed to do this again. The Developer insisted on constructing houses in this area that cannot realistically meet the requirements. It is not the fault of the property owner.” Cohen and Moos concurred with Bellows. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by KeDey, to recommend that Council approve the applicant's request to construct a driveway that varies from the Development Standards for the Sugar Woods PRD. Motion, Ayes-3, Bellows, Moos and Cohen, Nay. Motion failed. OTHER With regard to Council's recent action allowing the use of non-%#oven fabric beneath landscaped areas, Kelley expressed concern >bout the potential for an extreme scenario where someone does excessive landscaping in the 0-75 foot setback area. He indicated that from what he has read, there is nothing that would prohibit or limit the use of non-woven fabrics on the lakeshore. Kelley suggested that Council may wish to better define the extent in which the fabric can be used. Johnson noted that soil is not 100% permeable, especially clay soils. Gaffron asked if the Planning Commission and Council would like to have an ordinance which allows only a certain portion of lakeshore area to be something other than grass. Councilmember Jabbour stated that the 0-75 foot setback area should have nothing but grass. The Planning Commission, and CounciImembers Goetten and Jabbour agreed that further consideration should be given to this issue. (#13)PROPOSBO OROIHAHCE AMENDMENT-ATTACHED ANTENNAS Habusth explained to the Planning Commissior that this item had been referred back to them for further direction. She asked the Plannir'g Commission to consider whether the Ordinance AsMindment ** '**ld be expanded to not only address intennas in the ••9 and Districts, but possibly those properties zoned Residenti'.are not used for residential use. Mabusth cited the watert..,n Navarre as an example, noting that the proposed Amendment would not allow an antenna to be attached to that particular structure. -13 - i Hi: ORONO PLAHNING COHMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1991 (#13)ORDINANCE AMENDMENT-ANTENNAS CONTINUED It was the Planning Commission's consensus that the Amendment be drafted to reflect that antennas can be attached only to a watertower, regardless of where it is located. Cohe*i indicated that he would prefer to review each request on an individual basis. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was movad by Cohen# seconded by Johnson, to approve the minutes of the May 20, 1991, Planning Commission meeting. All voted aye. Motion carried. PLAHMIMS COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE It was agreed that Maureen Bellows would attend the July 8, 1991 Council meeting as the Planning Commission Representative. ADJOURNMENT At 0:50 p.m. , the June 17, meeting was adjourned. 1991, Orono Planning Commission -14 - V ■*"^1 •* ;i -V;; .-:V« k; >;rr K - J.,., hfe i: f.( w B •i: P £ ei. f- |- f'->; •.■: r ■^ - V LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT m HATER STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE AGENDA Saturday, July 13, 1991 Comnunity Room ^^135, Norwest Bank Building 900 E Wayzata Blvd (Elevator access for handicapped, use west entrance, Wayzata Blvd)JiL •2C1 ENVIRONMENT EurKian Hater Htlloil Task Force Report, Chair Reese i.0p*rations Progress , Weed growth rate and effect on schedule Funding Progress Additional Business 2a 3a HATER STRUCTURES 1.Chairiian Report *•?r?i ‘r::^^:;j"iti::r:?t :^n;"c::":-“cors::r‘rs2 sHoreun. Requirement s 2)Heclend inventories 3)Review license fees for 1992 increases 4)Procedures 2.Public Hearing Report: review report and recommend to the Board A.Nagel Setback Variance. 21095 Bvron Circle. St. Albans Bay, Greenwood (Revised survey to be provided by Nagel at 7/1. mtgl 3. B Multiple Dock Licensees *•irc:li!i!!"rp;o:“::‘i.p:r; :r"r:cooetRur,tio„r.po..tio»i.. 2)Request to make minor structural changes on dock Gayle's Marina multiple dock license renewal application, recommending approval subject to: 1)r#c#ipt of certifi€d dock stirvey ^ j 2)removal of posts marking channel to gas dock (see Code Sect. 2.07 Temporary Structures attached) . , ^ w RDP Partners/Upper Lake Minnetonka Yacht Club multiple doc license renewal application: recommending approval subject t provision of amenities per Order of 7/26/89 The Harborage Homeowners Assn, multiple dock license renews application: subject to approval of: 1)Variance order with certified dock survey 2)T.-por.rr Low Hater Variance - 34 ‘ (Dock installed before increase of water level above 920.0 ) C. D. A.Additional Business 7/3/$l LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT July 3.1991 to: from: subject: Member Municipalities Attn: Cl tv Administrator n LVS.CExecutive Director Cene S l r ommo Edited Cover Letter Accompanying 1991 Budget Edited 1992 Buage• O' X n e V- h ■ ir- •f.f' r: I■I t The Hiiiiiinum time between the June 2o adoption and June 28 mailing of the 1991 LMCD Budget resulted in some minor information corrections we >ish to make at this time before tha budget already provided >u is sent to your mayors and council members. It is poss-ole that you may have already made distribution, in which case yon may merely keep the nt(nched for your additional information.If not. please destroy the previously provided copies and substitute the copies being provided at this time. There is no change in the budget itself, excec-t the word "Adopted" is inserted budge t column. in p.a c e of "Proposeil" un<ler the 1992 The accompanying cover letter lias Iummi odifod to inriu<le the 1991 Budget comp.arisons lor the Mom*, i ti which hudgei changes were i nc o rpo r .a t ed from the Prelimimrv Review Dt*M provided May 28. The "Adj column has been eliminiied tlue to space limitations.It is .a •; i m|> 1 e pr<*c.*dure of dividing the budget item being compared by the adopted bu<lget figure to determine any percentage change a person m.av wish to identify. You will again note that the Ccmmunity Administrative Levy amount was reduced to a 1.2* increase over the I****! budget, compared to over 5* in the proposed budget.Salatv adjustments were reduced to AT compared to the proposed 5T. Over-all Administrative expenses were increase. reduced to a A.4T Should you wish LMCD r e p r e «j e n t .a t i on at a C i t v Council review of the adopted budget, please mnfict y..ur Board member and/or the exf*cutivo director. Thank you again lor your processinr <»f this budget data. XXX .Life % 6R-’ :’ V,v $I''- &■ I +-r I H' LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT June 28, 1991 TO ; from: Mombnr Munit:ipaliti»'S Treasurer Jan Boswinkel SUBJECT: 1992 LMCD BUDGET Your LMCD Board of Directors is pleased to enclose its 1992 annual budget adopted at its regular meeting June 26.1991. Advance copies of a preliminary discussion budget draft were •ubnitted a month in advance to all municipa 1 11ies Vay 31. g result of this advance budget draft distribution. Municipal response has been received and given full consideration. Particular discussion centered over the future funding of the Burasian water milfoil weed control program and its budget. The Board reconsidered its earlier position on private contributions. It recognizes that income source as a continuing potential. The reduction in cirv contributions is being made up by private contributions. The board further •xpects greater private contributions are available than budgeted, but will hold them as potential back-up to any other agency budgeted shortfall. It intends to make every effort to secure the tequired agen.-x financial bukiHG. particularly from Hennepin Countv. 'N DNR and possibly other new agencies. Again, city support m this regard will be key to its success . Changes which have been incorporate.! are: REVENUE: LMCD Communities Admn Levy Eurasian Water Milfoil Program: City Contributions State & Regional Agencies Private Solicitation S IDISBURSEMENT Salaries Employer Benefit Contributions Printing Lega1 No t ires TOTAI. administration TOTAL ADMIN. & CONSULTING j m ]1002 1992 Budget Proposed Adopted 103.823 109 . i22 107,230 60.00'80,000 63.000 102.000 1 70,000 1 70.000 R 3.000 -0-17.000 100.3 00 103.300 103.500 1 '4 . 800 1 7 . 400 17.000 1 . 300 2.000 1.800 3 0 0 I . ()()()2 . 700 133.823 1 6 . .7 30 162.930 226,823 230.322 238.230 r'r fi--- k---‘ r I- h-.PP' i-.i’ i ;; . w M: L r4-f- I4 m:. ■:‘ ■r , ir^.te », rl i ^?pv|!:: r ■ v.\,'•s LMCD Budget Tr a n sm 1 t t ;i I .6 28 'M . f . 2 Hennepin Parks, while not rerogni/P'l in the actual dollar portion of the budget, contributes significant in-kind support by providing its new weed harvester, operator, fue and all operating maintenance and depreciation for the 1991 operation, comparable support provided in 1990. In the event public agency response falls short of the budgeted $170,000. the weed harvest program evaluated. This will be determine.! in adv.arce of the 199i' program start in close coordination with member cities. The LMCD Board understands that several cities are willing to step up to the need to fund the 1902 r,irasi.an w.y.er milfoil weed control program over and .ibov. the s.ame budgeted for 1991. It respectfully encourages those cities willing to make this additional volunteer contribution to advise LMCD of its intent at an early date. Distribution of expenses, provided in the preliminary 6/18/91. were found to be distributed incorrectly due to a properties such as residential, commercial and It results in a revised amount for eacli ^ity.>e o p ^ out that Net Tax Capacity was the distribution used in the 1991 budget. The attached excerpt of tlie LKCD's budget, funding and expense >*N Laws governing distribution is attached. LMCD Chair Dave t:ochran joins with thanking each city council for its District's funding requirements. I !i !• entire Ho .I r<l i n th.jughtful review of the XXX B LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1992 AdninistraLive Budget REVENUE LNCD Communities Admn Levy EH Milfoil Program: City Contributions Other Public Agencies Private Solicit.ition Court Fines Licenses & Permits Interest Shore land Rules, DN < Aijreeinenl. Shoreland Rules, DNR Admii/Cons TOTAL GENERAL tUND REVENUE 1 990 1990 I 99 1 1992 Budge L Ac t ua1 Budget Adopted 09,490 89,490 103,823 107,230 60.000 60.000 6 3,000 63,000 1 1 5.000 83,550 102.000 1 70,000 50.000 49.912 8 5.000 17.000 40.000 40.70b 35.000 38,000 80,000 7b. n n b 5.000 85.000 1 0 . OOt)1 3 . J 5 7 0.000 fl , 000 -1) --0-4 ■) . 000 20,000 -0 --0-1 5,000 10,000 444,490 413,253 521,825 518,230 1 1 1 (Carry“ovcr Crrm Shorel.iii'l tjtiiH ARr<’,>i:;eiit to be spent in 1992) DISBURSEMENTS Adoii nistrat ion sonnel Services Salaries 84,Ob(^ Employer Benefit Contr. II.81U TOTAL »'ERSONNEL SERVICES 97,870 84 1 3 98 9 J4 899 100.500 U ,800 115,300 104.500 17,000 121.500 2 (Proportionate increase, plus one expense underestimated for *91) Contractual Services 1 ■’ Office Lease 4,1 .0 4.130 9 . bOO Utilities, Janitorial 1 .0 80 1 . 38b 1 . 500 Recorder, Temp Secy. Acetg 9 . 8 7 . 4 8 b . 575 i TOTAL CONTRACT SERVICES 15,050 12,964 1 7,675 10,130 -0- 5.550 15.680 3 4 5 3 (Lease subject to 4.5*. annual increise) 4 (Items now included in new office lease) 5 (Eliminated temp lake inspector, outside acetg for qu,irterly reports, now done in-house: audit done by outside contractor) Office & AdminintraiiVe Office, General Supplies Telephone Postage Printing Legal Notices Maintenance, Office Equip Subscriptions, Memberships Insurance, Bonds Mileage, Expenses, Training TOTAL OFFICE 6 ADNN. 2.900 '4.668 3.075 3.500 1.400 1 . 4 30 1.475 2.350 6 1 . 900 3.100 2.280 4.000 7 i . 500 1.675 1 , 500 1,800 1 . 000 2.270 500 2.700 8 1 . 500 9 3 3 3.400 1 . 700 9 1JC2 5 210 200 3 . 500 5.024 5.050 5.200 1 . 300 1 . 704 2 . 360 2.300 1 5,210 20.829 19,850 23.750 -I - s; - ’. Si^- tk'; . n;. r I' ■.i. iS^: 6 (Add third line for FAX and increased phone service demands)7 (Anticipate more mail commun i c a t. i on s with increased fees;underestimated 1991 budget) 8 (Anticipate more code amendments, public hearing notices for ■■ variances, new dock licenses; upderestimated l‘^91 budget) 9 (Over-estimated computer maintenance costs in 1991 budget) 1 990 Budget Capital Outlay Furniture, Equip TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 2 , ion 2,500 10 (Provision for minor equipment upgrades) TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 130,630 Laial Legal Services Prosecution Process Service 1n , ono 1 3 . 5U0 1 , iOO TOTAL LEGAL 32,900 1990 199 1 1992 Actual Budget Adopted 2.914 ) . 000 2.000 10 2.914 3,000 2.000 e s ) 1j5,606 155,825 162,930 15.49)20.000 18,000 25.44)20,000 25,000 11 42 500 300 40,978 40,500 43,300 11 (Prosecution underestimated in 1991 budget, expense related to revenue) Conaulting Services Long Term Management Plan S' ^relaml Rules Consultant TOTAL CONSULTING SVC 4 2.9 b 0 3 4. -0 - 0 1 3 2 70 -0- 1 2 . 500 1 o0 o1oo12 13 42.960 35,083 12.500 10,000 as M a II 1 g ome n l P 1 a n a d o p t e d in 1991) 13 (Carry over from 1991 Slioreland Grant Agreement to be spent in 1992) Lake Data Col led. ion/PubIicat ion Aerial Survey Lake Use Studv Wetland Inventory Mapping Public Information Public Accens Use Studies TOTAL COMMITTEES 1 5 m 20 -0- -0- 000 000 000 -0- -0- 2,083 -0- 2,083 -0- -0- : .000 4.000 9.000 12,000 14 1 , 500 3.000 4.000 20.500 14 (Aerial survey to be re-instituted on every-other year basis return of normal water levels, estimating cost romparatle to 84) CoBtiageacjr At appros. 51 of Admit Disb. 12,900 TOTAL CONTINGENCY 12,900 1.077 1.077 9.000 9.000 11.500 11.500 TOTAL ADMIN. DISBURSEMENT 239.390 Vi € "tv r:^ r 4:• ■> rv 5 i ^■: 5^. •: K II-w. ’:■■■' y.;-- fe 4-:. mi' Eurasian HaLcr Milfoil (F.WM) Need llarvestinc Program Barge Service Trucking Personnel Admn. UC Ins, FICA Operation Supplies Contingency TOTAL EWM D1SBURSE.VF.NT 14 (Adjustf i 1991 aiul 1992 item chargeback to EWM budge!) Shoraiand Rules Shoreland Rules City Grant Agreement R e i mbu r s emf m t. TOTAL SHORELAND RLIMD 15 (Carry over to 1992 budget) TOTAL COMBINED DISBURSEMENT 444,490 1 990 19 90 I? 91 1992BudgetActual Budge t Adopted -0--0-11^.. 000 114,000 b 2 . 4 0 f :■54.400 32.000 32,000 68.173 65,284 4 5,000 45,000 39.170 49,760 31.000 31,000 14 25,353 21,260 16,000 16,000 10,000 -0-1 2.000 12,000 205,100 I90.71 J 250,000 250,000 to delete $13.000 t •Imn salary -0--n -4 5.0')i‘20.000 “0 -0 -4 5,000 20,000 15 444,4 90 4 0 5 . S J 521,825 518,23 ^^^ ^IT 71 !rr ^ w « 31 •— — • * — 4/28/91 -1 - ijiSiri-nir iTi 1 1 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1 .8u'lge t Di s t r t bu t. 11 of E X p e ri s p NET TAX CAPACITY Z OF TOTAL NET TA.X CAPACITY ADMIN SHARE OF S107.230 EWM SHARE OF $63,000 TOTAL SHARE OF $170,230 0««phaven 6,303.113 7.78 8 . 34 3 4.901 13.244 Exealsior 2,538.336 3.13 3.356 1.972 5.328 CraanMood 1 .247.268 1 . 34 1.651 970 2.621 Hinnatonka 67.249.959 20.00 21.446 12.600 34.046 Mtka. Baach 1.728.106 2.13 2.284 1 . 342 3,626 Hinnatrlata 5.367.482 6.62 7.099 4.171 11.270 Mound 7 . 148 . 129 8.02 9.458 5.357 15.013 Orono 14,378.739 17.72 19.001 11.164 30.165 Shorawood 8.070.339 9.95 10.669 6.268 16.937 Spring Park 1.913.039 2 . 3b 2.531 1.487 4.018 Tonka Bay 2.909,837 3 . 59 3.850 2.262 6.112 Victoria 2.362.547 2.91 3.120 1.833 4.953 Waysata 8.816.260 10.87 11.656 6.848 18.504 Woodland 2.097.909 2 . 58 2.766 1.625 4 . 391 Totals 132.131.103 100.do 107.230 6 3Tddo 170.230 Lass Mtka.( 67,249.959 ) ialanea for 13 citias 64.881.144 4/2S/91 ii- ,v. lit f ll: OTYOfOffcvo / l^lSUOWlSi JUL s 1S91 CORRECTION July 3.1991 Dear City Official. The latter July 1.1991. conlains iacorrccl infonnaUon. The second paragraph should read: The hreakfMl is scheduled for 7:30 a.m. Thursday. July 18.1991. at T-Wrights. 3310S. Hwy 101. THInurmnlfa It is locked on the NW corner of Hwy 101 and Minnetonka Blvd. (Hennepin Co. 5). about 2J nyies west of Inientaie<494. It teCTffmily titled the day as Wednesday instead of Thursday. The date is correct We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. Sincerely. Nicole Debevoc AMM ReeeanAConuminications Director -- Luce Line CITIZENS TO SAVF THE LUCE LINE FROM HIGHWW \ ()Ll ME U NO. IJI LV iwi The Luce Line-Path Of Most Resistance! The beauty and screnit>' of the Luce Line Trail, one of the area's finest resources, is in serious jeopardy. Min nesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has proposed three routes for the extension of Highway 12. one of these, the south bypass, runs alon»^ side the Luce Line Trail. Instead of enjoying the peacefulness and abundance of wildlife along the Luce Line, imagine w alking or biking next to a major traffic anciy trans porting approximately 45.(Kk) trucks and cars dailv The Orono city planners had the sensitivity to appreciate the natural beauty resources of this area and the vision to protect it. To quote from the Orono Comprehensive Ran, which reflects the official position on the Highway 12 expansion: The basic goal of this plan is preservation... of our resources; preserv'ation of our distinct urban and rural lifestyles . . . open apace IS to be cherished and pro tected . . . transportation planning w ill be sensitive to local land use and en vironmental concerns . . . this plan is uased on understanding of Orono's unique location and environmental constraints, w orking with these fanors will improve our quality of life, ignoring them would destroy it. . .this means Iktle no need for expansion of any h^ways or roads in the future.* By working together, we believe we can eiimiru.'e the south route hi(^way afcemative al> >ng the Luce Luk from consideration by MnlXTT and save the Luce Line for future generations. We believe that a miimnum \iidth upgraded road in the current H’ghwa\ 12 location IS the most unobtrusne. cost effective and effluent solution with a shared iransporuitKin burden < •(! other local roads. Join us in workuig toward this alternamc. Please in.ike vuur thoughts known to the otilsuis listed in this newsletter. Together we can moke a difference. WRITE roiiw Background •MnDOT IS scriousis looking at thren: routes through Orono tor a maj< ir upgrade of Highwas 12 ("urrent route; north of 12 par.illel to (.'ounrs Road fi; and south ot 12 along side the I.ucc lane Trail. Orono Council’s official positiuti of no NEW’ roadbeds nor treewjs e.xprcssways through Orono is sup ported by the Orono Comprehensn e Ran. the Metropolitan (Council and its reskfencs. W ho We .Are arc a uroup ut Orono residents cornmincd m our mutuai desire to pro tect the Luce I.ine LraiJ from t! Highuav IJ expansion. Our mission IS to retain the Luce lane Trail in us natural, unsf^fiiled state as one ot our area s finest assets. \\c arc opposed to the addition of a fourth major east- uest corridor throu^^ Orono. More helpers are needed. Your fresh enthusiasm and ideas arc essential. 0\er the past few months ue have been v\orkmg intensdv to strengthen our position. Nou wc ALI. need to fxrcome V ocal and lx:uin a venting cam- pai^ to ei \lnl X) I and other officials know oui adamant opposition to a freeu av or expresswav along the Luce Line YOL can make a difference! Please contact these officials {names are listed in this newsletter) and let them know how you feel about the Highway 12 expansion through Orono and along the Luce Line Nanire Trail. I ' f i-,.' s i-':' r.y 1'- 1 I Our Mission Support Orono Official Position. Work towards getting the Luce Linc/south bypass off MnDOT maps. Work with surrounding com munities to direct MnDOT in selection of an acceptable extension of Highway 12. Share the transportation burden between all surrounding communities with minimal 4-lane upgrades on Highway 12. Support the north group in getting the north bypass off MnDOTs map. Save The Luce Line Committee Doug and Sandy Coleman 473-7236 Dodd and Ann Cosgrove 475-2717 David Fritz 4754)416 Ba and Helen Hardiel 473-6009 Sherokee Use 476-2804 What Can You Do Now? Do Y'ou Want A Highvsay Running Parallel To The Luce Line Trail? 1.Sign the p>etition form when vou are presented it and get additional signatures. 2.Write letters to officials named in this newsletter and encourage others to write also. 3.Volunteer your time—we need workers. Please send back the Volunteer Form or call Sherokee Use 476-2804. or .Ann Cosgrosc 475-2717. 4.Send money to help pay for mail ing. printing and consultant costs. Lcn and Charlotte Johnson 475-2835 Curt and Liz LeVang 476-4123 John and .Marla .Mcrideth 475-9026 Desyl Peterson 473-74% Jim and Nivin Stott 473-6888 Officials to Contact MINNKSO I A DKPARTMENT OP iRA.NsmR rvrioN (Mnixrn Ciommissioncr JOHN RILEY -III Iransporiation Bldg. 3^1.5 John Ireland Blvd. St. Paul. VIN 5.S155 296-3000 MINNESO I A DEf»AR T ME.NT OF I R ANSPOR FATION (MnDO H Project Manager STEVE H.AY 2055 N. Lilac Drive Golden Valiev. MN 55422 593-H535 CONSULTANT TO MnDOT LARRY DALLAM H N TB Suite 260 6700 France Avc. .So. Edina. MN 55435 920-4666 GOVERNOR Governor .AR.NE (2ARLSON 130 Capital Bldg. St. Paul. MN 55155 296-3391 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOL RCLS (DNR) ('ommissioncr RODNEY SANDO Box 37 500 Lafayette Rd. St. Paul, .MN 55155 296-fil57 SENATOR District 43 GEN OLSON (IR) 125 State Office Bldg. St. Paul. MN 55155 296-1282 RErRESLVrATIVE District 43-.A STEVEN SMITH (IR) 353 State Office Bldg. St. Paul. MN 55155 296-9188 COlTsTY COMMISSION District 6 (Commissioner TAD JUDE A-2400 Government (Center Minneapolis. MN 5.5487 348-3084 bt- ’•t'r iy i'^):f i<u i ’ 1^ s' '■hs' ------------1 Issues to Write About Dear: 1 (We) arc opposed to the proposed south bypass along the Luce Line. 1 (We) fed this way because . . . •Wetlands, a major resource would be destroyed. They provide water filtration and purification for Lake Minnetonka; reduce runoff and pro vide flood water retention. A highway along side the Luce Line would also have an adverse affect of the watershed into Lake Min netonka and other lakes. •Air and noise pollution caused by approximately 45,000 cars and trucks per day would degrade the natural beauty and serenity of the Luce Line Park as well as the countryside. •Oronoakeady accommodates three existing major east-west cor ridors—a fourth is beyond our reaponsiMlity. •Economic concerns—why build a new road when there is an existing highway that can be uppaded.^ The coat would be fiscally irresponsible. •A hi^iway/freeway adjacent to the Luce Line would significantly im pact widUfe and waterfowl: loss of wetlands and woocOands would destroy natural habitat. •The unique nature of the Luce Lme Tral provides a continuous strip of park that extends out from the metropolitan area. It is also one of the few remaining woodands near the metro area. •Orono's Comprehensive Plan sales: *the b«ic plan is preserva tion. . .ofouriesources.. .ofour diatinct urban and nxal tdesiyles ... open spaces are to be cherish ed and protected.* •Oono’soflfcial position on this inue n that there should be no new roadbed in Orono and that the preferred location for any upyaded higliwsy should be the current roadbed in Oroi». It is important that uc express our concerns for maintaining the peace and tranquiJitx of the Luce Line and for keeping Highway I’ on its current roadbed with minimal upgrading. Each letter is important in thi.s ef fort. Letters written in your ow n words arc the most effective. If MnDOT (the Vlinnesota Department of'Eransportation) doesn't hear from thousands of us, they!) assume that no one cares if they put a highw ay along the Luce Line—wc must show them that We Do Care! The Luce Line —Path of .Most Resistance! IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT The Cin of Maple Plain has endorsed the Luce LineAV'atertown Route for the Highway 12 upgrade. Here’s what you can do: VOLUNTEER FORM (PLE.ASE CLIP AND MAIL) NAME ADDRES.S CITY .AND ZIF PHONE C YES I want to help SAV E THE LLCE LI.NE in the following ways: _j Block captain to get info to my neighbors G Attend or host neighborhood meetings □Work at petition stands on the Luce Line C Miscellaneous tasks C Please accept mv enclosed donation pavable to: SAVE THE LL’CE LINE for $___________' Return to: SAVE THE LUCE LINE ^.O Box ii: ' - * Bav. MN 55323 f K‘' S'. .. P' 1;^" What New ProblemsCome with a New Road? If MnDOT were to select the south route along the Luce Line for the ex tension of Highway IZ, it would have a significant impaa on the north/south routes as well. It is projected by MnDOT that by the year 2010 roads such as Brown simI Old Crystal Bay would be drastically affected as follows: 1991 Curs 2010 Cars Par Dny_____Per Pay BROWN ROAD 1,760 7,850 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD 640 7.450 Thn traffic flow is in addition to the approximately 45,000 cars and trucks traveling along the Luce Lu)e daily. IP WE WORK DIUGENTLY. WE BELIEVE WE HAVE A GOOD CHANCE TO OBTAIN A ROAD FROM MnDOT THAT WE CAN ALL LIVE WITH. B FYI•MnDOT can keep the road to 150 feet through sensitive areas. .Actual routes can move north or south within . 500 foot section. •The cost projections published in the local paper for buying up each route were done by a citizens group in Long Lake. They are NOT official projections. •There are two groups from north and south Orono working together and separately to bener strengthen Orono ’s position. •Orono proposes to keep its share of the Highway 1Z traffic through Orono on the current corridor in Omno rather than building new roads through open or residential land. a)2.89 miles of Hi^way 12 already goes through Orono. b)1.2 miles of Highway 12 goes through Long Lake. c)The two cities share 1 mile of Highway 12. Orono ’s position docs not attempt to direct Long Lake in w here to put an upgraded Highway 12. That is Long Lake's decision. THE LUCE ONEprovides an unspoilednature trail for •walking and jogging •biking •cross country ski outings •horseback riding •enjoying nature and observing wildlife Imagine these experiences with 45,000 cars along side the Luce Line Trail for approximately five miles. Petition Drive Underway A major petition drive is underway in our neighborhoods and on weekends, on the Luce Line Trail. Ex pect a neighbor to stop by soon to ask for your signature. If you are willing to help, return the enclosed form or notify your neighborhood represenutive. (Please sign petition only once.) THE LUCE LINE- PATH OF MOST RESISTA :CE! TO SAVE THE LUCE LINE FROM HIGHWAY 12 SAVE THE LUCX LINE COMMITTEE • BOX 112 • CRYSTAL BAY. MN 55323 JUL 8 1993 'Ski.. r EE<ON THE LAKE '.I A PUBLICATION OF THE LMLOA II M VTt\ LMLOA GENERAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING | Followed by a "MILFOIL FORUM MONDAY • July 15th Old Log Theater - Excelsior 6:30 p.m. - Social 7:00 p.m. - General Meeting 7:30 p.m. - Milfoil Forum Forum Panel: DNR, Freshwater Foundation, LMCD, State Legislation, Alternative Methods. Sponsored by: Lake Minnetonka Lakeshor«.> Owners Association General Public is Invited >\4 m « o'- *•*.'.'gW«'.. -*. .♦ ••».••♦••■• ‘JP v._. X >\ *. * * '-,-■ -------. mm ^___ >>■ Keprtmed with pemiMion frooi the Star Tribune. Minneapolis, MN B ’I'': ter MESSAGE FROM YOUR PRESIDENT The outlook for the Lake Minnetonka shore line is good but there is still plenty of work to do. On the positive side, the lake level is up, our property tax rate will be decreased over the next two years, arul we now have over 500 members in theLMLOA! We have work to do in the following areas: #LMCD Long Range Plan LMCD appointments City Council seats 1 look forward to seeing you on the 15th at our general meeting and milfoil forum. Further property tax reduction ^Ifbil dean up Have a fun summer on the Lake! Don Cermanson, President THE LEGISLATIVE WRAP-UP ON PROPERTY TAXES by Tom Pokonosky ARE YOU HAPPY WITH THE LMCD? by Betty Bums Your LMLOA has supported Minnesota Fair Share both ph)rslcally and monetarily in their efforts toobtainaflatrateproperty tax for everyone. That was imH accomplished. They did however, have a ma)or role in acting a reduction in the 3% tier of die property tax capacity, 2.5% in 1992 and to 2% in 1993. For moat of us on the lake, that will mean a of more than one-third of your armual tax bilL Don'toountyoursavingsyetbeouse the higher vahiallon and Increased iriui rate %vill eat into this savtnfs conahterably. We win oondnue to work nvith Minnesota Fair Share In their efforts to drive for a fl it tax rate for everyone. It's the only fair method of property taxation for the State of MirmesoU. MILFOIL SURVEY RESULTS! LMLOA has learned that the terms for the 14 members of the LMCD Board of Diractors expire in September. This means thecitycoundl of each of the 14 cities surrounding Lake M inetonka will be ap pointing someone to represe I them (us) on the LMCD board or reappointing the present represen tative. The question before each of us as a lakeshore owner is — are you happy with the present board of LMCD- - - if not, it's up to you to contact yourdty council NOW with your suggestions for a LMCD representative or better yet, offer your time. Powers of the LMCD board are 1.to regulate the types of boats permitted to use the lake aiKl set service fees; 2.to regulate, maintain, and police public beaches, public docks, and other public facilities for access to the lake; 3.to limit by rule the use of the lake at various umes and the use of various parts of the lake; 4. to regulate the speed of boats on the lake and the condud of other activities on the lake to secure Fifty-five people leaponded to our survey in Febmary taiquiiing about beach clean up of milfolL AwtfBgi reaponas nrat fnrpirir up rrrrj'l—r*“T the safety of the public; days St $10 per time.contract with oiher law enforcement The LMCD Imm since dropped this project due agendas to police the lake and its shore; to ladk oflntereat Call the LMCD at 473-7033 for 6.to regulate the construction, installation, and additional inquiries.continued on pege 3 I—rn—ag—== ------------------------------------ THE LAKE* is pifollshed by the Lake Minnetonka Lakeshore Owners Association and it is paid for lOlBlybyilSiMtobOT* *ON THE LAKE'is mailed to aU lakeshore residents in November and Aprti. Mbrawy, July# and Sepletiter bsucs imilcd to LMLOA members only. Deadline for ne%vsletter artldei fo toe 19to o# tlw Bwnth pmjdlng^^^^ ^ ^ —»■-_______ ir»nudnlenance of permanent and temporary docksand moorings; 7.to regulate the construction and use of mechanitid and chemical means of deicing the lak.- and to regulate mechanical and chemical means of removal of weeds and algae from the lake; 8.to regulate commercial marinas and their related facilities including parking areas a ni tary fKilitics; 9.to undertake research to determine the con dition and development of the lake and to develop a comprehensive program to eliminate pollution. Expenses of LMCD; The expenses of the dis trict shall be borne by the municipalities. A municipality may raise the funds by any means that the municipality has to raise funds. The municipalities may each levy r tax not to exceed .00242percent of taxable marl^ valueon the taxable property located in the district fc r funding the dis trict TheLMQDmay be dissolved by the decision of tne governing bodies of three-<]uarters of the mu nicipalities in the district. The LMCD is governed by a board composed of one member from each of the 14 dties. Theterm (rf office of each board member b three (3) years. The current LMCD board members are as fol lows: tl«) i -AVA . <4 Douglas E. Babcock No David Bartos Yes Marvin B)orlin Yes fan Bossvinlod Yes Scott Carlson Yes David Cochran Yes Albert (Bert) Foster No James Grathwol No JoEUen Hurr Yes Thomas Martinson No Robert POlsbury Yes Robert Rascop Yes Thomas Reese Yes Robert Slocum Yes latx Spring Park Victoria Toidca Bay Mtka. Beach Minnetrbta Greenwood Deephaven Excebior Orono Wayzata Minnetonka Shorewood Mound Woodlaixi Now that «ve have the facts, we can make some dedaions as to how «ve want LMCD to represent the lake shore owners in the best interest of the lake. Please contact your city council now if you «vant d'ange LAKE LEVELS AND MCWDby Kathy Pyatt Minnehaha Creek Watershed Dbtrict controb the water level of Lake Minnetonka which affects all lakeshore owners. Ron Quanbeck assbtant dbtrict engineer of the Minnehaha Watershed Dbtrict set the record straight as to policy. The Gray's Bay dam b opened when the lake level b above 9M.6 feet sea level and the dam b closed when tne lake reached that level. The water levee b measured by a staff gauge which b located on the west side of the high way 101 causeway in Wayzata. June 25th found the lake level at 928.96 feet above sea level so the dam was opened to discharge 12 cubic feet of water p>er second. (Thb b less water than b lost on a typical July day through evaporation.) The dam will be dosed when the water level reached 928.6 feet which b 4.3 inches below current elevation. The 928.6 feet above sea level measurement b based on the old weir (wooden boards) that were in place in the dam area at the tiun of the century. When the lake level went above 928.6, water spill^ over the weir, so the highest level of the lake has been coruistent since the 1890's. The Watershed Dbtrict operates on a permit from the DNR and membership of the Minnehaha Watershed District board b composed of seven people, six uited by the Hermepin County Com- mbsioners ai^ one appointment from the Carver County Commissioners. The Watershed Dbtrict does not stop at the Lake Minnetonka bouitdary but indudes all areas where water flows into Miimehaha Creek. (Example; water flows into tributaries that flow into Miimetonka and then into the creek aiui on to the Mbsbsippi River.) The legal bouixl- aries of the district do not always follow the hydro- logic bourwlaries but are always dose. The MCWD board consbb of: Ch. - James Spensley Creek Resident V.Ch. - E. Woodrow Uve Lake ®*^ident John Thofttts - Carver County Rep. -Lake Resident Richard Miller Cre^ Resident Clarkson Luxlley Lake Resident Robert Erickson Lake Resident Thomas Maple Jr.Lake Resident The Mirmehaha Creek Watershed District b located at 545 Indian Mound, Way«aita - 473-4224 f ■SiftH 1m •? fo;,..P R- I rf.-r !■r. P- i# to' K a; I 'I: m. Sf- I^.‘-v' Lake Minnetonka Lakeshore Owners Association ONTHELAKE P.O. Boi 596 Excdiior, MN 55331-0596 TT>f(Hi DoNocFofwaid Addiesi ConecOon Requested Renun Pmufe Ouarameed ^f--V 'P ORONO illil BULK RATE U.S. POSTAGE PAID boelair* EOi •rmRNo ^ "II oq* M Bernharason Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay MN 55323 Mfll STAFF OPEN BOARD POSITIONS fl—iA" aaa DinC«nMfMon littjrBiiim CMKatt Bitty KiSion President Vice President ..orettry 474-9226 474-3779 471- 7415 472-4855 As the LMLOA has evolved, we have identi- Hed the need for new board positions. Please call Don Gennanson or Betty Bums if you wish to be part of this growing organization. I ^ i • « i -ImUCIOM 03 ONi Undtiroin Nawtmttr Kitfqr^ratt On Up XBchalric Adas. Coordinator Boy liptesentadve 0|Nn Manbenhip 0^MUfoU Social PuMic RdalkMis Op«i LMCD Op»MCWD C^mh Advertising LMLOA BOARD MEETING 474-4382 472-1505 474-7962 The LMLOA Board meets the first Monday of each month. The meetings are held at the Roger Fazendin offices, 1421 E. Wa)rzata Blvd, Wayzata and are open to an membership. If you wish to be on the agenda please call Marcia Midialdt, 474-7962 one week in advance of the meeting. taiMonowsId NmDWeed Legal Tax Tax 471-0100 4744365 475-1882 Keep those cards and letters coming in. We need your comments to grow!! LMLOA P O. Box 596, Excebior, MN 55331-0596 *& I^M»t il.to M%>k m*4 -M^MnM«r/»ia>k«. hi» “®f*4= if *- *—»tMXM --------r-Ttr kinAAi riwinMOMfc uimM ^ . M «*© P-'-j|l^pl||r '• ;’’Wf■•■ "i|l ^V, 'i CfS*'fer ;f ■V«:"■■'^■■' -^«S» * WETAlLtMEET I ,^Ki r c^c. c^r *•.«.•A-,rri. »~»<<..Mu.>HOiJL,;«aeMrA»«»cM)i»4:. V » ■ f i; .. \s^ t-r-fc*H^MT. 'fir k4*. r-o iiPl;'''’'#|?’-^-‘- ■-" ■■ ¥V- . *:,; ■ li:,,: Hi’ ,i!»' "■'4V ■ taSBRn wrti <?ry •W**CcMrtaM NAhls^ A*-1+tvi F*t» nAR,iL- W9 •»1M 4AMK Av*A'<,liUAirk*M* «*« MH. Umoj,: AV U A«»1-ANUM|»«. W 1 ■TUMB'lt.UJLY »c-frW **F»^^kOCi/k (IMAPCMini ah . ltiK»e«- FA 5«-t-FiBPfc »ntMJUHaifi Art. Uilb HU Mtciiff «»Ty.j ■*t. w^. A«*AS I.VA«*AS I.V IjSMb i TYTM MMU>/«M.ttr/ nVMC Ml X (tTAlp.1*. *Att; voy^T.LA-/*t-Kj$<,....................' :•/ I.2“*> Aui> riuLw oi^uc»a3 A*r>& vJttrtiM UkE'_ Of COMIMH-IOHCfi^ <UU»hi4m . *.‘lM*»TA«- *W OmMk. ivA nt UtWW t MKK. a 0 COFFIN {fcORONBERG.INa ENQIMEERSJ^D SUlWEYORS AND PLAN! ' . LONG LAKE, MN. .’...........■:......................................... ■*v; ; 4>!^ 'wMm )?.<. ¥ 0 : Iren mtfkwr OMCt rO$Tl AT LOW / ivMe d«t«B. ffMif. sp«i •l«»«tisn OttM; N*4n Ut LtMl line CO drovitii) b|r uthors. •“-rr-rmi f ■*' ■.*; .'' '^p ”^*4!^ : ,-i/?;%’'!■■••.; 7' /''lyp-n - ,1 ■• i ^ • ------' _\ %.X ‘S?, ^09X# ccRiiricMfor sMtti rot ,•MUM(\if MINI rMU'tlKH- M»ii««Ol« Cfwity. dtimtiau ■■ 7*:^ . I»ll»l Ot»CriDM»B ffij-ssMaif!;!,:!-'"- '• ™ saar!r";^!“" coffin « GiUMtus. iMc. o : ltu<i ari»|«.r &(c<l 04Ilia: Nimii*••••'*»»» ........ U*ria|iiM 4iv BUr?LjrviGTON NORTHERN; }-.\!l,ROAD in W. 11 ace ■ Add U |T coulli/ mZllT.'' h ■: t J," pvc V* .........------ rJ M��-� '-"" l .. IO·� .. ' ! � I I • ,· I 41 + . ..,J-/: 1�·, � ·I '_, '"'"\--,; ' • I ' I \ ._� \l'.:i! •• µ:i. 16', �.(,!.) . y •17 � : /te// ■41 •% _______________ — —Mr*4o'-o- enJSWcr?Dte ■'S^'X y ^f£>Th±^ <*lRW3eS ''■ SSi:g esyitSP ^ 'r rj;^“TVr e»gr^ciu75 ^L^L-VgryS;. e/A^rr <r^ _-!"ij= -ylL' l=<>‘ ^ .?-------S^V. '^ . •■t^cWS?we«ass»s^f Tracts A and B, Raglstared Land Survey No- 06, Piles of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin, and that part of Lot Six (6) lying Southwesterly of a line drawn across said lot parallel to and 105 feet Northeasterly from the Southwesterly line of said lot. Auditor's Subdivision Number 356, Hennepin Cotinty, Minnesota, according to the map or plat thereof on file and of record In the Office of the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Together with an easement for road purposes over the Westerly 20 feet of Lot 5, Auditor's Subdivision Number 156, Hennepin County,Minnesota. of the biwndarleB of above described property Hennepin County, Minnesota, and of the location of all buildings thereon.‘ and all visible encroachments. If any, from or c^aald land..^ Surveyed by me this 27th day of March ^j ) CAROARELLE fc ASSOCIATES, INC.b%- Phone: (612) 941-3031 State Reg, No.C.<~/r> mmm ^‘4 t, ; ; ".;-i f % *% -.:v :■■\ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR DARRYL & ELAINE PETERSON OF LOT 18, EAGERNESS HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA ^'TO'^ose.^ Ir^^rox<e.mei>tS 0wv\t.r5 a\on^ u>lV'^ ftlp'pTOVftV. H- 0) le- i«. f i.jt..f„.. >'■er,!). c,ru cornu I CBO.'lBfBC !3£ lonj i4kt. Hjf.*"J Pl«nn«r^ o 0iOenoi., Iron R,r»,r •'■'.............................................. COFFIN & GRONBERG. INC. engineers . UNO SURVEYORS. PLANNERS long lake . MINNESOTA eta8em«sb-;.'.r:...-.-. . , _..,...<lUnKrinr*-. ae- iail^itL.'^''-Tii‘ili‘fiiiiitrr''-'-'^^^^^^ lA CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR DAimYL & ELAINE PETERSON OF LOT 18. FAGERNESS r-- ■ 0 «■■«. corn, , MiwiHc ■« COFFIN & GRONBERG. INC. engineers, lanu sBBTeyors. planners LONG LAKE. MINNESOTA ,f-5•V/-Vs- L-»wi.x-J8«kM!e.aiV.i .imrnmm UKESHORE Gl WETLANDS ‘ REGULATIONS ORONO ORDINANCE FROHIEiTS EXCAVATION. FILLING. GRADING. DREDGING.TREE RE.MQVAL OR CONSTRUCTION CF ANY .KIND WITHIN 75FT OF ANY SHORELINE WITHIN 26FT OF ANY WETLANDS PERMITS ARE FtQUIRED FOR DOCKS.SEAWALLS.RIPRAP CITY OF ORONO _y SITE PLAN___ GRADING PLAIL ^TAPPROVED €m^»rro0»T » □ APPROVED \WITH Rf^/iSIONS □DIS, BY DATE, ’PROVED \WITH RJ(/iSI( / Aif«»C0WCK iMIHOIfAtS AS /AiOieATtlfe ««u fftforr 2. pe CcMH^C«r»& /KieA TO /lAWetfAC rtwC OF fbart^XA pDitTI#* /<»OtTfOA». •SH€^ ! Of ^ „.iJPDNo /«pricN- crgvBw fOK LCT 2-' mr^r- PasjUESr ey BO?EP, GUf«TCH.(3l!EBN' so^t£ I'-s^cC mtss^i eXlSTiNS.:E^f^pi»^cE’I ij I II ax I pr*XXf o'y'-E^/V rop. i£7r 2^-^H)—”(^^^HJB3T E*J?e^ dJK-t IS" H. - SO^LE l*-Sat-d*